I want to know the basics

[Mark]

As there is no information in the basics sticky I thought I'd ask some basic questions.

At this moment in time I have no intention of using a DSLR underwater. I wouldn't mind having one to play with out of the water.

So questions...............

What are the advantages of a 6mp DSLR against a 6mp compact?
Are the lenses interchangeable between makes?
What is the best all-rounder to go for & why?

Cameras like the Nikon D70 are going cheaply 2nd hand now, but they are only 6mp, is it worth saving a few pennies up to get something like a 10mp Canon 400D Nikon D80 or even the D200?

Or should I just buy some random old cheap thing on ebay that produces crap results so I wouldn't want to take it underwater?

[KenByrne]

A 6Mp Dslr will generally produce better pictures than a 6Mp compact. The reaso for this is the sensor size. All Dslrs have sensors have a larger sensor area than compacts, the only exception I'm aware of is the Sony DSC-R1 which has the same size sensor as a Dslr. A larger sensor means larger photosites which means a better ability to collect light. This is why the Nikon D70 has a minimum ISO of 200 and most compacts have a maximum ISO of around 400. The D70 can produce pictures with very little noise at ISO 200 and in my opinion is very usable up to ISO 800 while most compacts create very noisy pictures at ISO 400.

Another advantage of DSLR over compact is that they respond faster. When I turn on my D70 it's ready to take pictures, no waiting while it initialises. When I press the shutter release it take the picture so I can capture the peak of the action.

You can't preview the picture you're about to take on teh LCD of a Dslr, well there's 1 Olympus where you can. This is a minor disadvantage to a Dslr, particulary underwater as there are some places you can place a compact and see the LCD that you'd never get a bulkier slr let alone be able to look through the viewfinder. However is most circumstances I'd prefer the optical viewfinder of an slr to a live LCD.

Generally speaking the lenses are not interchangable between makes. Each manufacturer has their own mount. Fuji and Nikon use the same mount and the new Sony uses the old Minolta mount. There's the 4/3 system that Olympus use and I think some others but I don't know who. Third party lenses are available from manufacturers like Sigma, Tokina, Tamron and Cosina they are generally available in a variety of mounts but once bought they are tied to that make of camera.

Do you prefer Ford or Vauxhall cars? Canon or Nikon or whoever it's much the same question or maybe more like do you use Windows or Mac as people can get pretty heated about it. I don't think there're any lemons if you choose one of the big brands. I have a Nikon D70 the reason I use Nikon rather than Canon is historical. I had a Nik V the best underwater camera available at the time. When I changed to a housed slr I bought Nikon because I got TTL flash exposure with the same strobes I used on the Nik V. When I bought digital I bought Nikon as I already had the lenses. I'd probably buy Nikon again because I like the ergonomics of the cameras but I like the look of the automatic sensor cleaner on the new Canon 400D so I'd consider that.

6Mp is enough for most uses. It blows up to at least A3, I haven't tried anything bigger yet. Bear in mind that the Mp is an area so the D70 is 3008 x 2000 pixels and the D80 is 3872 x 2592 so in terms of how big you can print not as much difference as you might think. I does mean you can crop and maintain the quality of a D70.

If I was buying now I'd probably buy a D80. Reviews I've read basically say that a D80 is 95% of a D200 at 50% of the cost. I've read the reviews and don't think I'd miss any of the D200's extras and the D80 is less bulky which I think is an advantage when travelling.
Even though I know it's not really necessary I'm tempted by the extra 4Mp but more than that I think the D80 is probably a step up from the D70 in technology just because things are improving all the time. That said I think the D70 is a great camera. It's the best camera I've ever owned my previous favourite was my Olympus OM4 which cost me about £500 in 1984 so take inflation into account and even the D200 is cheap by comparison.

If it's only for surface use and you want to save money I'd also look at the D50. For me the biggest disadvantage to using this camera underwater is the lack of a second control wheel. This means that changing apertures requires pressing a button while turning a wheel. My Nikon film slr worked this way and I know from experience that it is no problem on land and a real pain underwater.

[Cussy]

Ken
Good reply.

I've been thinking seriously about getting a D80, not just for underwater, but also for top side. So here's a nice simple question for you; which lens to go for? I intend getting a 200 or 300mm for what I want to do topside, but what is the best lens to get when (or more likely, if) I buy one? There are plenty of internet sites that will bundle the body only and almost any lens you can think of.

And another question: you've got Ike housing. So if I went Ike route, does that limit the strobes I can use?

Cheers
Rob

[KenByrne]

Underwater I'd start with a macro lens. I use a Sigma 50mm an alternative is the Nikon 60mm Micro. When I first bought my film slr and housing I used the kit lens which was a 28-80 zoom. I've got some good shots with this in the Red Sea but found it hopeless in the UK because even with a +4 diopter behind a dome port it just doesn't focus close enough. Generally speaking macro is easier than wideangle underwater so start with macro to get some great shots right from the off. Of course if you're into wrecks and that's what you want to photograph then wideangle would be the priority and you'll probably want to get into wideangle at some point whatever your interests. probably worth thinking about how you use your current camera.

For wideangle I bought the Nikon 12-24 zoom and it's a great lens but I now think the cheaper 10.5 fisheye would have been a better choice for underwater. The 12-24 is great for landscapes and interior shots topside so it is more versatile and there are occasions when I'd probably prefer the 12-24 underwater to a fisheye. I've now ordered a Tokina 10-17 fisheye zoom which I'm looking forward to getting my hands on. I'm thinking of this as an almost exclusively underwater lens.

With an Ike housing you can use Sea & Sea Strobes and Nikon Strobes you just need to buy the right Ikelite Cable. With Ike strobes you'll get TTL on an Ike housing. I've just bought an Ikelite DS51 and found that even with my non-ttl D70 housing I get the flash ready symbol in the viewfinder, the flash fired is recognised in the exif data and the camera shutter speed is set to a maximum of 1/500 when the flash is turned on.

Incidently I bought a Nikon 70-300 zoom for topside use. At £100 it's good value but if you want a real quality lens then you do need to pay more.

[TimIngmire]

Just to add to the good stuff from Ken above, when buying a camera think about what it is you are going to shoot eg. I've seen some absolutely fabulous Macro shots from a Fuji F810 so that camera with close-up lenses works perfectly for that. I've not seen many good w/a shots with the same set-up. If most of your shots are of wrecks then is a quick responding SLR really necessary?

I definetly agree with starting with macro as balancing strobe and ambient light in WA is tricky. However, if you're happy shooting ambient then give it a go - it really does simplify things and allows you to concentrate more on the composition.

As for topside lenses, I tend to use the 12-24 and the 70-300. However, Nikon have launched what appears to be a cracking lens in the 18-200 which will happily be a single solution and replace the other lenses. It's not cheap but it is cost effective compared to buying several other lenses.

HTH

Tim

[KenByrne]

I'd forgotten about the 18-200 on the market. I think the Sigma 18-200 is worth a look with or without image stabilisation.

[Mattdiver]

I wrote an article on the pros and cons of moving up to a DSLR last year in Scuba Diver Australasia. The article can be found online here:
underwater.com.au | Article | Issue #1:2005 - The Big Leap

[simonmort]

we seem to get carried away with mp size,and file size some times.
Have a nikon d1h for above water pictures.images taken with this camera as 300kb 2mp files, print into stunning images (A3 images).
Camera purchased from a sport photography company second hand.Alot of the guys in the press room say the camera operating code and software very important,not to get carried away with the mp size.

[Jules]

I have been looking at DSLRs (and before ANYONE asks , no I will not be taking it underwater, not with my record), i'll be sharing it with my 16 year old daughter

I am looking at Canon because my sister has one and has a nice selection of lenses that i can boorrow.

Anyone any thoughts on which model to go for? the EOS 400 is going for sub £400 as it has a £50 cash back offer at present. But i understand that is superceded by the 410. All the reviews say it's a small body which is good for people with small hands.

Also what lens would you go for and what accessories would you consider to be most important?

jules

[buchhawk]

Originally Posted by Jules

I have been looking at DSLRs (and before ANYONE asks , no I will not be taking it underwater, not with my record), i'll be sharing it with my 16 year old daughter

I am looking at Canon because my sister has one and has a nice selection of lenses that i can boorrow.

Anyone any thoughts on which model to go for? the EOS 400 is going for sub £400 as it has a £50 cash back offer at present. But i understand that is superceded by the 410. All the reviews say it's a small body which is good for people with small hands.

Also what lens would you go for and what accessories would you consider to be most important?

jules

Hi Jules
You will never get a camera if you keep waiting for the next one.
I would get a 40D if I had your money lol.
Or look out for a 30D they should be a few cheap ones about by now, they have a much better build and weather proofing than the 400D, could come in handy with you <ggg>.
Nothing wrong with the 400D though.

As for lens. How longs a piece of string £££££££££££££s
If you get the kit lens with the camera ( 18-55 ) not the best, but ok for about £40.

A EF 24-105 f4 L IS USM would be a nice walkabout lens but £555.99
The EF 17-40 f4 L USM £408
the EF 100mm Macro f2.8 USM is a cracker £316.99
Forget the big white one
If you want the cheaper stuff give me a shout
Ken