Are consumer digital cameras useless for diving?

"nanook" <no_one@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:ajsd2354i7mljmfoefoee05v0q4c56fkid@4ax.com...
> The water in your examples seems pretty cloudy.

I'm in Melbourne. The water is cold and cloudy here and I can't say the
dives are that brilliant. I was getting pretty bored of diving until I went
on a recent trip to WA. Now I'm itching to go again.

> Here's some shot in Maui in 06 using a Canon SD500 with Canon's case
>
> Max water depth was about 30 feet (turtle in hole shot)

They just look awesome, that's the quality of photo I would like to be able
to take.

> Out of probably 150 to 200 shots, 20 or 30 were keepers of any
> quality.

That's a pretty good ratio, I was throwing away around 98% although I guess
it depends on your criteria and the number of shots you take of each scene.

> One thing the P&S do that the more expensive SLRs don't, is video and
> it makes a real difference putting together a DVD of the vacation.

That is one thing I've noticed is that the cheaper camera do take pretty
good quality video.

Michael

Michael C wrote:
> After having a look at the pics I'm kinda of the
> opinion that only a high quality camera with a full size lense (to let more
> light in) and a good external flash would be required to get acceptable
> photos.

http://www.camerasunderwater.info/op...nscorrect.html

BugBear

On Fri, 20 Apr 2007 14:31:35 +1000, "Michael C" <nospam@nospam.com>
wrote:

>"nanook" <no_one@nowhere.com> wrote in message
>news:ajsd2354i7mljmfoefoee05v0q4c56fkid@4ax.com.. .
>> The water in your examples seems pretty cloudy.
>
>I'm in Melbourne. The water is cold and cloudy here and I can't say the
>dives are that brilliant. I was getting pretty bored of diving until I went
>on a recent trip to WA. Now I'm itching to go again.

I live in Alaska, my daughter and I did our cert dives up here a few
years back in February (height of winter in the North Hemi)

Water temp matched air temp at 35 degrees F, which was actually a warm
day. Best diving up here is winter, the kelp dies off and no runoff
from the land to cloud the water. Downside is freezing your butt off
when the dry suit isn't.

After diving in Hawaii she won't even consider diving up here again,
although for bragging rights she does want to dive Antarctica.

I've used several Canon P&S with their uw cases. The next one will
probably have image stabilization, which should help with the
inevitable movement quite a bit. They will never equal a pro sitting
there for 20minutes with $5000 worth of equipment but that's not what
I'm looking for anyway. If the water is cloudy there is nothing you
can do, a powerful flash will just illuminate all the crap suspended
in the water.

[Kia06]

Most consumer digital cameras dont have the right capabilities to capture the wonderful essence of underwater. Its much more cheaper to just go and buy a digital camera suited for underwater, instead of forking out good money for one that doest work.

On Wed, 18 Apr 2007 23:06:27 +1000, Michael C wrote:

> I've noticed a couple of questions regarding dive cameras so thought I'd
> continue the trend. A friend spent $700 on a 6mp cannon camera with a dive
> case. I've noticed most of the pictures suffered from a severe lack of light
> and the camera automatically went to a long exposure causing many of them to
> be blured. Those that weren't blurred were quite dull. Only closeup shots
> were acceptable really. After having a look at the pics I'm kinda of the
> opinion that only a high quality camera with a full size lense (to let more
> light in) and a good external flash would be required to get acceptable
> photos. Is this true? I'm not a camera zealot if anyone is wondering as I
> quite happily take shots out of the water with a compact and reckon it is
> pretty good. I usually dive around the 18 metre mark.
>
> Here's some examples:
> http://mikesdriveway.com/misc/dive2.jpg
> http://mikesdriveway.com/misc/elizaramsden124.jpg


Consider rigging up an external strobe fired by the onboard flash and put
the camera in full manual mode. Set the shutter speeds and f/stops as per
the typical "point & shoot" camera. Stay 5 ft (+|- 1 ft) away from the
subject.

"soxmax" <soxmax_2000@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1176999685.228103.245540@y5g2000hsa.googlegro ups.com...
>I bought the FujiFilm Finepix F30 and associated underwater case. The
> F30 has an "underwater" setting. I think I paid a total of $480 for
> the package but that was the weekend following Thanksgiving last year.
> The quality is certainly not professional but it was worth $480 to me.
> One nice thing about digital is that you can take a thousand poor
> quality pictures (which I did) and it doesn't cost you a dime.
>
> http://soxmax.myphotoalbum.com/
>
> The photos are of diving in Tortola with a few of the Rhone wreck up
> to 80 feet depth. I think there is also a surface picture.
>
> Best Regards,
> Derek
>
Looks pretty good for a point and shoot. I JUST ordered an Olympus FE-230
with the underwater housing that's supposed to be good for around 100 ft.
It's supposed to have some kind of brightening circuit and antishake.
Looking forward to finally getting certified and trying it out. Out of the
housing the camera is a very thin 7 megapixel point and shoot, something
I've been looking for to supplement my DSLR on land.

Good price point, too. Camera is about $200 and the housing is about $145.

"Michael C" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:462617c1$0$16555$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.a u...
> I've noticed a couple of questions regarding dive cameras so thought I'd
> continue the trend. A friend spent $700 on a 6mp cannon camera with a dive
> case. I've noticed most of the pictures suffered from a severe lack of
> light and the camera automatically went to a long exposure causing many of
> them to be blured. Those that weren't blurred were quite dull. Only
> closeup shots were acceptable really. After having a look at the pics I'm
> kinda of the opinion that only a high quality camera with a full size
> lense (to let more light in) and a good external flash would be required
> to get acceptable photos. Is this true? I'm not a camera zealot if anyone
> is wondering as I quite happily take shots out of the water with a compact
> and reckon it is pretty good. I usually dive around the 18 metre mark.
>
> Here's some examples:
> http://mikesdriveway.com/misc/dive2.jpg
> http://mikesdriveway.com/misc/elizaramsden124.jpg
>
>

Get an external flash, I have a canon A70 3.2 MP camera with a Sunpak G
Flash. It is triggered by the on camera flash. I found by putting some
opaq tape over the front of the on-camera flash it cuts down on the
backscatter yet still triggers the external flash ok from the side. You can
see some pics I took in Rhode Island here
http://www.divewithjay.com/cgi-bin/d...rp=ftwetherill
Some bahamas pics with the A70 are on the bottom of this page
http://www.divewithjay.com/gallery/bahamas_2005.htm

Others have already given you a list of great advice. In addition to that
I've found that you can often adjust the white balance after the fact using
photo software but it's best to adjust it before shooting.

Jay

[Mr. Mach5]

Looks pretty good for a point and shoot. I JUST ordered an Olympus FE-230
with the underwater housing that's supposed to be good for around 100 ft.
It's supposed to have some kind of brightening circuit and antishake.
Looking forward to finally getting certified and trying it out. Out of the
housing the camera is a very thin 7 megapixel point and shoot, something
I've been looking for to supplement my DSLR on land.

Good price point, too. Camera is about $200 and the housing is about $145.

Wow that looks like a good P&S set up!