Guys,

I am jumping into this discussion about Full Frame for the last time just to share a very personal thought, without any intention of convincing anyone. As we always say, we agree to disagree: the great thing is that everyone is completely free to choose and use the system they feel best with in the water. There is no absolute truth to impose.

I find the video posted by @Christian K very insightful. @Alex_Mustard and @MatthewSullivan review what they consider to be the most iconic underwater photos, taken from the book celebrating 60 years of the Wildlife Photographer of the Year. What makes you think is that many of those photos, which we still consider absolute masterpieces today, were taken several years ago.

In the video you can see shots like Doug Perrine shark in the sardine run or Brian Skerry incredible encounter with the right whale. The cameras used for those shots were prehistoric compared to today. They had a fraction of the megapixels and a dynamic range that would make people laugh today. Yet, do we really think that any random photographer today, just because they bought the latest top model with 15 stops of DR, is able to take better photos than the ones David Doubilet took fifteen years ago?

Following this logic, photos in the future will always be better than those from the past. Yet the history of photography teaches us the opposite.

Often on forums we focus so much on the specs, and I completely understand that having the top technology is appealing. But I believe that in practical use, the technical differences between the various formats affect the final result only in a very small way. The reality is that our limits as photographers almost always arrive way before the limits of the gear. Very few people can really push the capabilities of the camera in their hands to the extreme.

Underwater, physics and water skills rule. You can have the most advanced sensor on the market, but if you do not know how to approach the subject properly, the water column will eat up your colors and contrast. If you do not know how to position your strobes correctly, you will get a flat image or a wall of backscatter, regardless of the size of the sensor.

Modern technology is fantastic because it makes our lives easier, drastically increases the success rate of our shots, and forgives mistakes that previously ruined a photo. But aesthetics, composition, and light management are not included in the price of the sensor.

Because of this, I believe that arguing over sensor format is a bit pointless. Let us enjoy the gear we chose, whatever it is, and let us focus on getting our housings wet.

Very well said

Yes, but

We are gear-heads and we like to discuss technological details of various equipment used underwater. Especially when "vs" is used in the title we can expect a long discussion. Even if the conclusion is that there are more important aspects of photography/ videography than incremental improvements of the hardware it's still fun to discuss it.

30 minutes ago, Nikolausz said:

Yes, but

We are gear-heads and we like to discuss technological details of various equipment used underwater. Especially when "vs" is used in the title we can expect a long discussion. Even if the conclusion is that there are more important aspects of photography/ videography than incremental improvements of the hardware it's still fun to discuss it.

Fair point. We're all here to learn, share and have fun with something we love. Enjoy!!!!!

Further to the points made by @Davide DB. In addition to my OM/Nauticam/Retra kit, I travel with a DiveVolk. While there is no substitute for planning and composing a picture with the little big rig, the iPhone affords a different sort of photography, as we all know from carrying them in our pockets so much of the time. The iPhone facilitates images like this one, of a guide excited by a little turtle at our three-minute stop. Had I taken the OM-1, it would likely have been turned off, arms folded in, ready to hand up to the boat; having the iPhone allowed me to grab a far-from-technically-perfect image which conveys what I find to be an evocative moment. It's long been said that the best camera is the one you have when you need it, and the mobile phone housings are, for me, a welcome addition to Gear Mountain.

5 hours ago, TimG said:

Very well said

🧐... we also need to provide a reason for the companies to sponsor our site! Such a discussion is, (un)fortunatly, only a couple of clicks away from the shopping basket.

(and that is part of the fun)

Edited August 27Aug 27 by Klaus
added last sentence

6 hours ago, Nikolausz said:

Yes, but

We are gear-heads and we like to discuss technological details of various equipment used underwater. Especially when "vs" is used in the title we can expect a long discussion. Even if the conclusion is that there are more important aspects of photography/ videography than incremental improvements of the hardware it's still fun to discuss it.

Of course! Do not take me literally. Besides, what else should we talk about between one diving trip and another? 😁

We can have other, more artistic topics such as Golden ratio vs Rule of thirds ("vs" is important) or Can we learn from Renaissance portrait painters for underwater photography? etc.

We can probably expect less active discussion.

Rembrandt and his underwater painting technique - should he have used 20MP brushes?

6 hours ago, Nikolausz said:

We can have other, more artistic topics such as Golden ratio vs Rule of thirds ("vs" is important) or Can we learn from Renaissance portrait painters for underwater photography? etc.

We can probably expect less active discussion.

Yes we can..... From my point of view pictures and photos are work of art, not a technical discipline.

Br Markus

TimG I agree . I love the images I made with a Nikon D200 and D300. It is all about some skill and experience with your tool after all. I was wondering what you thought of the D800 ? Was it a camera you fell in love with at the time?

On 8/27/2026 at 11:10 PM, Nikolausz said:

Yes, but

We are gear-heads and we like to discuss technological details of various equipment used underwater. Especially when "vs" is used in the title we can expect a long discussion. Even if the conclusion is that there are more important aspects of photography/ videography than incremental improvements of the hardware it's still fun to discuss it.

Yes, you can certainly be a gear head and it's fun to toss around various options and you can be just as much a gear head with m43 as FF. Interestingly all the moderator crew now shoot or have bought into m43 with 3 x OM-1s and a GH5 in use.

Having said all that Davide's post to me is a reminder not to succumb to paralysis through analysis and have constant FOMO about not getting the very latest and greatest. The sensors these days are so good there really is no bad choice and it comes down to other things like lenses that are available, battery life, native sync speed etc, things you can tick off, rather than subjectively staring at test images and noise plots and confusing your self. Make a decision and starting using your new tools!

Since this is deviating even more from the sensor format - here's today's counters from the Forums page on Waterpixels:

Photography Gear and Technique has 8.7 k posts.

Video Gear and Technique has 1.1 k posts.

Lights, Strobe, and Lightning Technique has 3.3 k posts.

I consider these categories as gear-related. Together slightly more than 13 k posts.

Photo/Video Showcase and Critique has 1.5 k posts.

Shooting Technique, Workflow and Editing has 607 posts.

One may consider these as a bit more "artsy". Together about 2.1 k posts.

So, it's a clear yes, we are gear-heads. Yes, this is what you can do when you're dry: Shopping - or at least think about it, until you face your bank account.

But >2k posts on more artistic topics is not too bad either. Plus there's the really nice running banner of pics on the homepage, not included in the count-up. We do have composition, appreciation and even discussions about conservation going on on the site as well.

On 8/29/2026 at 4:40 AM, tiger said:

TimG I agree . I love the images I made with a Nikon D200 and D300. It is all about some skill and experience with your tool after all. I was wondering what you thought of the D800 ? Was it a camera you fell in love with at the time?

Yeah, I really liked it. It was a pleasure to use and I got some terrific images from it. But..... I did find having to use a large domeport (230mm) for wide-angle images an utter pain for travelling. My partner found it an even bigger pain!

I used the D800 for about 4 years but decided the travel issues were getting just too much - and switched to a D500. This got me back to a 100mm dome (just tiny in comparison) and a Tokina 10-17mm lens. This was a brilliant setup and I missed nothing from the D800.

As you may have read in other posts I've made, I no longer see the point in having FF unless you have some specific reason for it. Having lost all my D500 gear, I've now gone for M43 in the rebuild.