Sony RX - 100 or canon 100d

[mattia_v]

The RX100 has a lot going for it, but you can achieve your photographic goals with either. Over/under shots should be easier with a larger dome an an ultrawide zoom lens for the 100D.

I prefer the compact size and flexibility of my rx100 setup, but that's very personal. My skill is still the limiting factor for most of my shooting, though extra lighting might help.

 

[dantes]

Thanks so much! Totally agree with you - Id love to have the compact size of the RX100. With a 1.8 lens, it's hard to beat. But then again things in the water might be hard to capture with such a narrow depth of field.

 

[mattia_v]

Thanks so much! Totally agree with you - Id love to have the compact size of the RX100. With a 1.8 lens, it's hard to beat. But then again things in the water might be hard to capture with such a narrow depth of field.

This is where a wideangle wet lens and a smaller sensor on the rx100 help; for the same subject distance and angle of view, you'll get more depth of field at f/1.8 from the Sony than from the Canon. Little need to stop down much beyond 4.0 to 5.6 or so for any wideangle shots with the rx100, and 1.8 will work fine in a lot of settings, particularly more distant subjects.

 

[rob1967]

Thanks so much! Totally agree with you - Id love to have the compact size of the RX100. With a 1.8 lens, it's hard to beat. But then again things in the water might be hard to capture with such a narrow depth of field.

Dantes, don't forget the Sony RX100 is a 1" sensor, so it is smaller than APSC. Larger sensors have better low light performance than smaller sensors. f/1.8 is very bright on a full frame lens, but just ok on a 1" sensor. To get an idea of light gathering ability and depth of field, multiply the aperture by the crop factor to get full frame equivalent. The 1" sensor has a crop factor of 2.7, so that f/1.8 would behave like f/4.8 on full frame, so not really all that extraordinary.

If you don't believe me, have a look at this video:
or this:
Both cameras are good, but 1" sensor compact vs. SLR are really apples and oranges. Both are good cameras. APS-C has better image quality no doubt, but the 1" sensor is almost as good to the point that most people can't see the difference. Low-light performance is great when shooting natural light, but for those of us using strobes, it is not really a major consideration underwater. I am usually shooting f/16 or thereabouts on my APS-C Canon for macro. I might open up to f/8 for wide-angle. For wide-angle, larger sensor is better, but for macro, the differences are not as much.

 

[dantes]

Wow. Learned a lot. Great advice. Will give the D100 a try next week and see the results. Now to figure out how to do the over/under shots....

 

[mattia_v]

That video is pretty terrible and misleading on a number of levels. But since this isn't dpreview I won't get into it.

Suffice it the say that the 1" sensor in the rx100 series punches well above its weight, bother overall and per pixel performance, and that the APS-C sensor in the Canon is bottom end of the modern sensor generation where dynamic range is concerned.

I shoot sony FF, Oly m43, and the rx100, each has its strengths. For me, the 1" sensor cameras strike a compelling balance of quality vs. size for underwater shooting.

 

[dantes]

Was trying to do over/under water photos yesterday... but I think this dome is also not big enough. Or do I need a wider angle lens?

Im using the Canon 100D with this housing: Ikelite | DLM200 Underwater Housing and Canon Rebel SL1 Camera Kit

With the 18-55 lens.

Thank you

 

[tarponchik]

I think it was someone else here saying there was a huge difference in iq and wasn't me. The point I am making is that to the eye contrast dynamic range and color depth are more relevant than sharpness unless you print an image at large size. I don't run comparison sites but I know my own equipment very well and I regularly compare my shots with other people rigs. On a recent trip I have had the pros and even the nauticam distributor saying that the gap between the rx100 and the micro 4:3 was not visible on screen and you needed to go to a good cropped sensor to be worth it. I think those two images demonstrate it pretty well. On the same trip there were also smaller sensor compacts and the difference instead showed significantly. This canon entry rig looks very interesting for training and you can start building you lenses and port knowledge before going to something or expensive but to say that there is a huge difference with the RX100 once this is used at its best seems not true. It so it seemed to 3-4 random people I asked to compare those images. Sometimes people blame their camera for their average pictures and once they upgrade they are forced to learn so it leaves a bitter feeling when sOmeone else pulls out great shots from a less expensive rig. But that just demonstrates that ability goes a long way

Underwater shots have low dynamic range because the sunlight is dimmed and dispersed. It is like shooting landscapes on an overcast day. Just look at the histograms, they are all narrow, unless this is a close up taken with a flash. What you see is a processed image and this depends on the camera and camera settings. To add contrast, I always expand dynamic range in LR by dragging the whites to the right as much as possible w/o getting overexposure, and blacks to the left until I see some underexposure. It is pretty much the same with the color.