Housing Size Comparison - Ikelike Compact vs. Seatool DSLR (XTi or 400D)

[f3nikon]

The latter is 90% of the photography I do (less the tons of weight, since I dive dry locally). For my purposes, p&s would definitely not cut it, for the reasons I've already outlined. So when most of my shooting is of this nature, the only logical choice for me is a housed dSLR.

As well what I find of value or of benefit with a dSLR system matters really to me and may or may not apply to others. As I recall, the question of what a housed dSLR can do that a p&s cannot do was posed, and this is another thing that I've discovered in my experiences after having used both systems.

And speaking of dive trips to the Indo-Pacific, I'm off to Truk Lagoon with my D200 day after tomorrow for a couple of weeks of RB diving. I'll be sure to report in if I can, but I don't know what the internet access is like down there.

Good deal and have a safe trip to Truk, look forward on your report. Since you do shoot a lot of wide angles in would be nice see wide shots like this (I know its in the Red Sea):

AGPix: :: View Large Preview & Download Comp Images

From Mr. Roessler, I just don't see much dense coral gardens in this world of macro images. I believe Truk is known not only for its wrecks but also its soft coral growth.

 

[BurBunny]

Ok... take a look at the subject you had taken with a DSLR in a housing, the bubble coral and the hairy crab or the frogfish or the shrimps, how would the “shutter lag” impede the P&S from taking those shots?

Seems to me I mentioned more than just shutter lag as a benefit... like the better glass and focusing. The Orangutan crab was much sharper than anything I'd been able to get with my old Fuji F810, even with double stacked macro lenses. The sexy shrimp I gave a direct comparison - the DSLR shot was much more crisp. And you conveniently didn't mention the silverside shots where I compared the one I *finally* got with my Fuji vs. the ease (and better quality) shot I got with the DSLR 2 days later.

But maybe to your eye, there's no difference. Some people just don't have a critical photographer's eye and are happier with lesser quality images.

 

[Fastmarc]

Ok... take a look at the subject you had taken with a DSLR in a housing, the bubble coral and the hairy crab or the frogfish or the shrimps, how would the “shutter lag” impede the P&S from taking those shots?

With my experience so far with a P&S, this will be one of the main reasons why I am looking forward to moving to a DSLR. Can't tell you how much shots I think I have missed.

 

[Warren_L]

Good deal and have a safe trip to Truk, look forward on your report. Since you do shoot a lot of wide angles in would be nice see wide shots like this (I know its in the Red Sea):

AGPix: :: View Large Preview & Download Comp Images

From Mr. Roessler, I just don't see much dense coral gardens in this world of macro images. I believe Truk is known not only for its wrecks but also its soft coral growth.

I'm a big fan of wide angle photography, which is why the dSLR works for me so well. Macro is nice and can be quite stunning in the results, but to me, the real skill is in creating spectacular wide angle shots. Not to detract from macro shots, but I do find wide angle shooting more challenging. I'm looking forward to Truk - great wreck photo ops and I'm sure coral photo ops as well. But since I've never been there, I'm not completely certain what to expect.

 

[bladephotog]

I'm a big fan of wide angle photography, which is why the dSLR works for me so well. Macro is nice and can be quite stunning in the results, but to me, the real skill is in creating spectacular wide angle shots. Not to detract from macro shots, but I do find wide angle shooting more challenging. I'm looking forward to Truk - great wreck photo ops and I'm sure coral photo ops as well. But since I've never been there, I'm not completely certain what to expect.

Have a great trip Warren. I'll bet the money saved from not having to pay for gas fills funded this trip. Good luck and be safe.

Andy

 

[Warren_L]

Thanks Andy! T-1 and counting. RB sure saves on gas. However. Helium in Truk is going to be $5 a cubic foot. If I was going on OC, I'd be watching my money float to the surface with each exhale.....

 

[BurBunny]

I'm looking forward to Truk - great wreck photo ops and I'm sure coral photo ops as well. But since I've never been there, I'm not completely certain what to expect.

Expect to be blown away! Was there in April and loved it so much already have a charter booked for 2010 to go back. The wrecks are incredible, the history so accessible, but the growth and sea life is what really captured me. Gorgeous.

Have a great trip!

 

[f3nikon]

Seems to me I mentioned more than just shutter lag as a benefit... like the better glass and focusing. The Orangutan crab was much sharper than anything I'd been able to get with my old Fuji F810, even with double stacked macro lenses. The sexy shrimp I gave a direct comparison - the DSLR shot was much more crisp. And you conveniently didn't mention the silverside shots where I compared the one I *finally* got with my Fuji vs. the ease (and better quality) shot I got with the DSLR 2 days later.

But maybe to your eye, there's no difference. Some people just don't have a critical photographer's eye and are happier with lesser quality images.

Ok… so we are in an agreement that shutter lag is NOT an issue in this particular application. So a P&S could have easily taken these shots without any problems.

Onward to the next claim of benefits…image quality, first I did not conveniently overlook the last pictures because I thought they were shot by the same camera, I should have read the print, my fault.

Now here is where it gets very interesting.

You are associating the poor the image quality of the P&S camera image on the OLD camera itself.

Are you saying that your OLD Fuji has the same image quality as the 12 megapixel, larger sensor P&S of today?

Plus the part in your statement where you seem to think that the ADD-ON macro lenses STACKED will IMPROVE the image?

When in fact the opposite is true…the ADD-ON lenses will DEGRADE the image in terms of chromatic aberration and loss of contrast. Move your mouse around the problems listed under the engle and compare those two defects with your STACKED Fuji pictures.

Understanding Camera Lenses

Chromatic aberration - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Can you say chromatic aberration or purple fringing on your “sexy” shrimps body and tail or the loss of contrast (washed out colors) throughout the entire image! The silverside shots both looked bad.

Fuji, Canon and the rest of the gang had painstakingly design their native lens to minimize these issues…so what do you when you start stacking lenses that were NOT design for their lenses, that’s right DEGRADE the image!

And I have a lynch mob and their lackeys that to this day will not believe that the image is degraded at all! Were these the non-serious, no critical eye “photographers” you were referring too?

Then to prove that a native P&S camera is capable of taking high quality images I refer you to this website, which are NOT my images, but a fine examples of U/W images from a P&S without the STACKED lenses.

Canon Powershot A620 - a photoset on Flickr

Anilao Feb 2007 - a photoset on Flickr

The colors really pop and the over all image very sharp and these are from a 7 megapixel A620 Canon P&S camera! Your Fuji I believe is 9 mp!

 

[bobf]

I wonder how many readers of this thread either realize or remind themselves that f3nikon has used neither a digital p&s digicam or a dslr camera underwater. May I repeat, f3nikon has used neither!!!!!

Yet f3nikon feels he has credentials to comment on both pieces of equipment with regards to their attributes for underwater use.

F3nikon attempting to reach conclusions by comparing small jpeg image files online which may or may not have been altered in Photoshop is yet another example that magnifies his lack of knowledge of the entire process, from underwater image capture to Photoshop workflow.

...........What most are forgeting is that when shooting U/W the camera has to be very close to the subject one foot or less......................

I've felt for a while now that f3nikon's primary "contribution" to this forum was his ability to "force" those with actual experience to speak up, challenge his comments, and ultimately posting facts of underwater photography. In other words, f3 posts a blatantly incorrect statement such as the one quoted above from a thread last week, which in turn forces another member to correct his claim...........bottom line, the correct answer eventually gets posted, and knowledge is shared.

The problem with this scenario is when a factually incorrect post by f3 gets overlooked or forum members becoming tired of his antics (how many threads has f3 participated in that eventually find themselves in the mud?). So far no one has yet to challenge f3nikon on his assertion that an underwater camera must be within a foot of the subject. Was this post overlooked? Or are members becoming tired of the act?

BurBunny,

Thank you for the concise comparison. Thank you for the follow up comments. Thank you for sharing your experience and knowledge.

F3,

I appreciate your enthusiasm to share. But once again, please refrain from commenting on equipment and techniques you have no personal knowledge or experience with.

 

[f3nikon]

I wonder how many readers of this thread either realize or remind themselves that f3nikon has used neither a digital p&s digicam or a dslr camera underwater. May I repeat, f3nikon has used neither!!!!!

Yet f3nikon feels he has credentials to comment on both pieces of equipment with regards to their attributes for underwater use.

F3nikon attempting to reach conclusions by comparing small jpeg image files online which may or may not have been altered in Photoshop is yet another example that magnifies his lack of knowledge of the entire process, from underwater image capture to Photoshop workflow.



I've felt for a while now that f3nikon's primary "contribution" to this forum was his ability to "force" those with actual experience to speak up, challenge his comments, and ultimately posting facts of underwater photography. In other words, f3 posts a blatantly incorrect statement such as the one quoted above from a thread last week, which in turn forces another member to correct his claim...........bottom line, the correct answer eventually gets posted, and knowledge is shared.

The problem with this scenario is when a factually incorrect post by f3 gets overlooked or forum members becoming tired of his antics (how many threads has f3 participated in that eventually find themselves in the mud?). So far no one has yet to challenge f3nikon on his assertion that an underwater camera must be within a foot of the subject. Was this post overlooked? Or are members becoming tired of the act?

BurBunny,

Thank you for the concise comparison. Thank you for the follow up comments. Thank you for sharing your experience and knowledge.

F3,

I appreciate your enthusiasm to share. But once again, please refrain from commenting on equipment and techniques you have no personal knowledge or experience with.

And speaking of lynch mob from that narrow minded, beholden to their sponsor so they will sell you everything you don’t really need forum…

Its bobf to the rescue! And as a last resort when cornered… attack and discredit the messenger! LOL

One thing he fails to see is that I still have my OBSERVER hat on! If I had used a DSLR U/W or a brownie camera is irrelevant because its just fundamental photography knowledge that applies to ALL categories of “writing with light”

Plus the fact that anything I say can easily be confirmed on the World Wide Web, from which most of my statements are from!

You see this tread was also posted in that same narrow minded forum…unchallenged and the sheepeople there swallowed the bait hook, line and sinker!

The sad thing here is now the OP has an escape route and may not even answer my last question.

Note: I do use a film SLR U/W not a DSLR...the only difference is that the “D” stands for “Duped” into buying something that one does not really need…and I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express!