Please help with final camera decision- Have researched for 2 weeks prior to posting

[Mark Derail]

You really want to do videos longer than 23 minutes without edits? Then get a true video cam.

I got the Sony NEX5N for the outstanding pics, and will stitch together multiple videos into a longer one as necessary.

If I was to video a wedding or some such long affair, cheap video cams below 300$ do the job in 720p.

However, the Pan GF2 is no slouch camera, but it also might have a video lenght limitation in hires video capture. Many cameras that are not dedicated to video, have to use an on-board buffer to create the compressed version to then dump to an SD card. The SD card, being 100x slower than on-board RAM, creates a queue effect.

So I would try before you buy. Just bring some SD cards with you to Best Buy and hog a demo GF2 for half an hour to an hour.

In store we tried the various video modes of Canon & Olympus (4/3's) versus the 60 frames of the Sony NEX5N, which just blew us away.

EDIT: there are various video modes for 720p & 1080p & 1080i
==> What's wanted is FPS, which will vary between 24, 30, 60 - depending on the camera - 60 being superior for live action - won't make viewers seasick.

 

[Neuroll]

That's a good point about the video length, I never thought about it that way. I will definitely be taking an SD card back to best buy to test the video on the 5N and GF1, I'll report back tomorrow.

 

[Neuroll]

Happy Holidays everyone! I'm definitely sticking with the NEX 5N, after additional research and playing with all the cameras in store I just cant get over the quality of the Sony. I plan on purchasing the camera in 2 weeks then the housing a little later. ill let you know how I like it. Thanks for all the help

 

[bullshark]

First things first: this is not an "investment"; its an expenditure. Investments make money and gain value over time.

You're going to have 3K in the housing by the time you're done. Add up the ports, add a tray, add strobe arms and parts and then add sales tax and shipping.
There is just no point to this without a pair of strobes. No. One won't do. Hideous blue shadows will ruin every picture to some extent, and WA will not be an option because of backscatter. YS-110a's or YS-01's minimum. That's another ~1200.00. If you don't care that your pictures are crappy then go ahead and shoot with one strobe, occasionally a macro shot will work out OK but for get anything else.

You'll get over the quality of the Sony once you learn something about lenses. The std ones available for Nex are seriously mediocre. They're slow, color-fringing and distorting. F 2.0 is twice as bright as F/2.8, which is twice as bright as f/4; the 16-55 sony is F3.5 (Bleh) and it has equally limiting aperture minimums. We won't even talk about Bokeh. It may have a big ol' sensor, but better than three times the light will getting through to the smaller LX5 sensor, which by the way, has plenty of resolution to produce 1080 video(A giant step down from photo resolutions).

The APS-C sensor is nice for video, but if that's what you want, get a video camera. If you want 1080 video and snapshots, you should look at the LX-5, a leica camera in a panasonic box that takes stunning video through a super-sharp F/2.0 LEICA lens. The LX-5 won't bust your budget either. The whole thing including the housing will fit in the palm of your hand. IMO the only people that should seriously consider the NEX are are the old-timers with drawers full of Nikkonos lenses, which can be mounted to the nauticam housing with a special port. Those are among the finest U/W lenses ever made. It would be worth the expense just to get those lenses back in play.

One thing you don't know: You have no idea if you are any good at U/W photography. Most people aren't. Most people are simply terrible. U/W Videography is real interesting until you find out how much time it takes to edit all that crap footage into something that won't make all your friends stab themselves in the eye with dinner forks, or puke from motion-sickness. You can't research talent or book-learn it. It takes days, even weeks to put together a good 10 minute motion video.

The terrible truth is that you absolutely *must* be a skilled and knowledgeable photographer *before* you go underwater. Next you have to be a super-skilled diver and be well studied in the habits and behaviors of fish; otherwise you won't be able to get close enough to shoot them, or be in the right place at the right time. That's one of the reasons giant DSLR rigs are so popular. See, you can make up for a lot of faults shooting with an image processing super-computer; lit by strobes big enough to melt small cars you can shoot at f/22 and 1/1000. Anyone can take a picture that way and have it come out OK. Add in auto-bracketing, and you might get something interesting even if you suck.

That said, I think M 43 is a better solution with with lenses from Leica, Panasonic, Oly and others. When the camera is outdated the lenses will move on to the next generation. More importantly they can be fine lenses to begin with. If you stay with the same housing maker, the ports will move with them. Multiple vendors make this solution the future.

E-P3 or E-PL3 focus as fast as DSLR...has anyone mentioned focus speeds for the NEX? They're pretty good as I understand it but not in P3 ballpark. No Image stabilization either. Whats' the recycle time on the NEX flash? No matter how fast your strobes, you won't be able to shoot faster than that flash cycles.

I really like the NEX myself but I haven't bought it because of it's very limited support. It took Sony (over?)two years to come out with any improved lenses (which there are no ports for) and no telling when they will release more or what they will be like, or if anyone will supply ports for them (when). M 43 is different. The makers can spend on tooling for a port for a good lens knowing that the port , like the lens, will be useful on the next generation camera. The geometry won't change and it will work for lots of cameras. The 8mm fisheye port will work for the 8mm lens no matter what camera they make the housing for. So nauticam (or whomever) can tool up a port for 8mm fisheye (for instance) starting with the Panny XYZ. If they later make a housing for the Oly ABC, or the Nikon 123, the same port will work fine. They won't have to retool anything on the port or make any new gears or doo-dads. That makes them very happy.

If you really want it, I get that, but in the end I bet you'll wish you hadn't. It will be a fine household camera and fit in a shirt pocket with that 16mm prime.

Just sayin'

 

[Neuroll]

Thanks Bullshark, that makes a lot of sense. I have been watching videos from the lx5 today and they look really good but at the same time the m4/3's cameras are making the decision even more confusing because they have the ability to change lenses. In your opinion do you think the wet lens options for the LX5 would be sufficient for wide angle and macro as opposed to the interchangeability of the m4/3's cameras? I am eager to get a camera soon because I have recently gotten certified and have been seeing some great wild life and cant capture the memories. Thanks for all the help, Oh bullshark one last thing- if I get a m4/3' I am leaning toward the Panasonic GF2 what are your thoughts on that camera?

 

[RonFrank]

Read the reviews on Digital Photography Review. All the 4/3 cameras are similar. Dpreview will give you a non-biased review as to what is good about each camera along with side by side image comparisons. One thing to consider the OLY housing for the E-PL2 is around $600. Not bad.

Image quality is based to a very large degree on the sensor size. The 4/3 sensor is smaller than APS sized sensors but dwarfs the tiny sensors found in most PnS cameras.

Sensor sizes currently have many possibilities, depending on their use, price point and desired portability. The relative size for many of these is shown below:

​

Looking at the above diagram you can see why it's important to have a bigger sensor. Those smaller sensors are A LOT smaller (1/9 the size or less compared to APS) which makes a big difference in image quality, especially when it comes to noise and higher ISOs. Remember if you crop an image it looses quality, and then a tiny sensor starts to really fall apart. Likewise turning up the gain (ISO) really impacts the image quality using tiny sensors.

Good Luck

 

[bullshark]

Thanks Bullshark, that makes a lot of sense. I have been watching videos from the lx5 today and they look really good but at the same time the m4/3's cameras are making the decision even more confusing because they have the ability to change lenses. In your opinion do you think the wet lens options for the LX5 would be sufficient for wide angle and macro as opposed to the interchangeability of the m4/3's cameras? I am eager to get a camera soon because I have recently gotten certified and have been seeing some great wild life and can't capture the memories. Thanks for all the help, Oh bullshark one last thing- if I get a m4/3' I am leaning toward the Panasonic GF2 what are your thoughts on that camera?

I don't want to be too condescending, but I think new divers should concentrate on learning to dive, and I think cameras are a much bigger distraction than most people realize. I like the LX-5 a lot. For you (or even for me) the camera alone will be sufficient with no strobes, and no wet lenses. I logged better than 500 dives before I started carrying a camera and had better than a thousand before I started carrying one with strobes and to tell you the truth, now I wish I didn't. It changes the way I (we) dive. There is a *reason* that I often don't have a camera with me when I find the coolest thing I've ever seen: I wasn't too busy screwing around with a hunk of electrons to pay attention to the dive.

The really cool thing about a great camera like that, is that because of the short lens barrel, the cameras built in flash combined with a diffuser is perfectly adequate for macro and close frame shooting. The really brilliant part is that when you are not shooting, you clip it off and forget about it. You can enjoy the dive. You can get the wet lens for WA sometime down the road, but keep in mind that it will demand a pair of strobes. It can come later because all the stuff you have to learn about U/W photography can be learned with just the handheld P&S. When you learn how to produce a fine picture with a compact camera, you'll make scary good pics with bigger equipment, should you decide to go that way later on.

On review though I see that the LX5 is HD, but not 1080. It is 720p just like Apple tv (c:. That's really pretty good though. It is especially fine in low light (ring any bells) and the F 2.0 leica lens can't be beat. The lens is also 24mm (equivalent) zoomed in which compares to a 12mm on M43 while it 3.5x zooms out to 84mm (108) it optically equivalent to a 42mm(54) M43. You don't change lenses you just push a button. With the wet lens WA , your ears will be in the picture by acccident.

There is another cost to the interchangeable lense versus something like the LX5: When you're set for macro you're set for macro. When youre set for WA, You're set for WA. The LX5 goes to Macro just by pushing a button. The P&S is much more flexible.

I have to update my prior post to say that it looks like Nauticam (at least) is pretty commited to the Nex line. They now have a housing for the Nex 7, and it appears that the ports they made for the Nex 5, will work on the 7. The lenses are still pretty mediocre compared to whats available on M43, but the Nex 7 shows that the platform is expanding; with Nauticam at least. I just have to say on a value basis that 3000.00 in a housing is a lot of money for a $700 camera with limited lenses.

All that said, I currently like the Pen E-P3, but not enough to buy it. I continue to be disappointed by, and suspicious of these cameras and their inability to produce film speeds and slower than ISO 200. They apparently have a noise problem with their software that they can't overcome or else they won't uncork it with the plan to use it as a buy-up feature in the P4 or 5 or whatever. My lowly G11 does ISO 80, and even ISO 50 with CHDK firmware installed. Why aren't these cameras offering lower filmspeeds? I don't think they can get the noise down. The P3 display has 50% more pixels the the PL3, but unfortunately Oly is not making a housing for it...10Bar is though.

Is everyone else waiting for Canon or Nikon or Samsung or Fuji to Throw their hat in the M43 ring?

BTW: don't believe DPReview stats for the Olys. It says that they all do ISO100 in manual modes. Unfortunately Olympus does not agree. :-(

Of the Pannys, I get dizzy looking at the models and don't know why they have so many G/GF/GH/GX, differing sensor quality seems to be the case, with the GX1 being way ahead there. They too only go down to ISO160 except the GF2 (according to DPReview) goes to ISO100. You'll learn sooner or later that U/W Photography is a noise nightmare and lower ISO is always to be preferred for any shot you can get it on.

I have been researching these choices for over a year. I was all set to buy up from my current set up, but just writing these replies I see it would be a mistake. I may well choose to upgrade my compact rig to an LX 5 myself.

BTW: The Leica "D-LUX 5" and the Panasonic "LX5" are exactly the same camera. You will find a 300.00 price difference because the Leica includes Adobe Lightroom. You'll want that for sure, too.

 

[scottcb1]

1st there is big difference in Photography / Cinematography ! Even though todays digital equipment can do both THEY DO NOT do both equally well. So what is your priority? Still shots can be washed to look good with editors, wideangle motion with proper lighting / filters is going to be challenge at all levels of experience even after washing.

If new start small, get experience, trade/sell beginner equipment [easy with new cert. divers every day], then dig in "deep pockets" for advanced equipment. Just basic common sense really, unless you are going Pro-commercial right-off why waste $$$ ?

Been doin-it-deep since '78, have traded only 4 times since. Professional U/W Imaging Instructor since 1981.

Scuba-Scott

 

[PatW]

I want to echo some of Bullshark's comments.

First off underwater photography is very challenging from a technical viewpoint. I have heard it expressed as shooting in the rain with a visibility the length of your garage in bad light. The bad thing, is the conditions are often worse than that.

Secondly, you need to know your photography. On topside, is so much easier. Underwater, you camera is in a box and all the controls are worked by buttons on buttons. It is harder to see the viewfinder or screen to frame your shot. Your working of the camera has to be close to being hard wired. Topside, if you get a bit confused, you can always pull your manual out and review something. That is not happening underwater.

Third, skill as a diver is critical. I did not start underwater photography right off. I waited until my diving skills got decent. But photography is a whole different world. The ability to control your depth and location are far more important. As a diver looking at something, a few inches one way or the other is not an issue. A few inches is critical as the diver. To get photos of some critters that are the least bit wary, you have to be able to watch their reactions and move in carefully so as not to spook them. You have to do this while lining up your shot and making your settings.

I have been shooting a G11 with an Ike housing. I found that wide angle is really important. Also having a strobe is critical. It is a blue world down there if you are at 60' or deeper. You need to bring your own light to see color and you need to get close. Two strobes are better. Using two strobes gives more even illuminationn and it seems to cut down on backscatter.

I would also second Bullshark's comments about lens quality. One of the things that happened in Nikon cameras is that when people were using 6 mega pixel cameras, the lenses looked fine. But as the pixel count went higher, the lens problems became apparent. The larger sensor sizes and pixel counts on the new cameras are enough to require quality optics. The qualities and limitations of the various Canon and Nikon DSLR lenses are well documented and appreciated. I have not seen that much on the newer mirrorless lenses. But they are much smaller than the DSLR lenses and packing performance into a small piece of glass is hard. The high performance lenses that Nikon and Canon make are often called "big glass" because a big honking lens can be made that will give superb optical performance. You just are not going to get such a thing in a smaller lens. That is not saying that these lenses can not give great performance under the right circumstances. They probably can. But you can not expect a small glass zoom to give the performance of a large prime DSLR lens. Now that being said, one of the top underwater DSLR lenses is the Tokina 11-17 fisheye. It is famous for its optical limitations but these limitations are generally not a problem underwater and/or people accept them because of the versatility of the lens.

Oh well, the above paragraph was a bit much. The thing is that diving alone can be challenging. Photography alone can be challenging. Photography underwater is far more challenging that photography topside. Putting diving and underwater photography together is just about challening squared. I enjoy it. But I think many people find that it is far more than they want to fool with. I don't know what your inclination happens to be. You sort of have to be a bit of a "nut" to like underwater photography. It really isn't for everyone.

 

[Neuroll]

That's some great advice everyone, I do appreciate it. As far as just starting out diving I am a beginner, however I have been in the water my whole life spear fishing with my uncle and have dove with him many times(not deep) growing up. I've got being neutrally bouyant down pretty darn good and have practiced numerous times adjusting my position as if I were taking pictures. I am obsessed with the wild life underwater and that's what drives me to want to get a great camera to capture all those neat looking critters.
I also have several friends who are land photographers professionally and have been teaching me how to implement the various manual controls. Even with all that said all of you still have valid points and have gotten me to scale down what I hoped to originally purchase. I do think I am going to end up with a panasonic gf2 which I can get with a 10bar housing for just over $1000 or go with a canon s100 and ikelite housing which will be about $850. I know many like the LX5 but reading the comparison the s100 has better low light performance but the LX5 does have better video. I just really hate going down and seeing so many cool things and not having a camera to take pics sucks and I really hate making expensive decisions like this on my own which why i turned to all of you for your help. Thanks again oh one last thing I'm leaning towards the gf2 because of the performance and that a hack is being worked on now for better bit rates and video quality.