JohnD

In case my thoughts are of interest or help to anyone deciding on a new camera, I thought I would share my thoughts: As I mentioned in an earlier post, I am considering moving from a D500 to a mirrorless camera. My primary reason is the enhanced capabilities of the electronic viewfinder, due to some recent eyesight issues. Using the LCD on the back of D500 when underwater is frustrating now. I would like the ability to do pretty much everything through the viewfinder including reviewing shots. I am also interested in what apepars to be improved focus accuracy and speed. Otherwise, I am happy with the DX format and the D500 in general and that influences my choices. Every camera option besides Nikon involves a variety of adapters and extensions and other bits and pieces, and at a minimum I would likely have to purchase a Canon 8-15 and some macro lens to replace what I have now. There are issues with some of the Nikon brand alternatives, especially in APS-C, including flash sync speed, viewfinder brightness and clarity and focus speed. Also, I intend to continue using Nikon for above water photography due to an extensive collection of lenses, so staying in the same system will simplify things some. But I am not thrilled with the Z50II. Comparing Nauticam housing sizes, and looking at the Canon R7, Sony A7RV, A7Cii, A6700, Nikon Z50, Nikon Z6 and Nikon Z8, the difference from largest housing to smallest was generally within 1-2 inches in any dimension (L, W, H). In some cases, the difference was less than 1 inch or so in any given dimension. The leading non-Nikon contender is the A7RV. The Z8 housing is .6” longer, 1.33” wider, and 1.4” taller than the A7RV. Not a stunning difference. Yes, I could save size by going to a different housing manufacturer, but I doubt that I would do so. Staying with Nauticam allows me to keep using my current vacuum valves, handstraps, M10 ball mounts and handles, and saves me from trying to adapt or buy new ports or adapters. It also allows me to use the Nauticam angled viewfinder Housing size is a factor for travel, but by the time we add ports, strobes, arms, focus lights, etc., it is hard to really shrink a system without going to M43 or a compact, or perahs the A6700. I have done the M43 thing before and am happier in a larger format. When Dave Hicks reminded me that I could always shoot a Nikon Z8 in DX, and I thought about the lenses and ports and zoom rings I already had, and the land-based lenses I intend to keep, it made a lot of sense to stick with Nikon and whether Nikon will ever produce a D500-grade DX mirrorless is unknown. So, barring any sudden epiphany, I think the way to go for me is a Z8, on which I can use my 8-15 lens in DX mode in the 100 and 140 ports I already have, and even use the Kenko 1.4 if I want. Or I can use the 8-15 as a fixed 15mm in FX mode in the 140 dome, although I suspect the corners may be iffy. I will add a WWL-C for use with the 24-50 Z lens and that will be my primary “easy button” for Caribbean wide angle. I can continue to use my 105 and 60 lenses in the ports I have or upgrade to the Z105 and perhaps use my current port. I suppose I could alos use my 10-24 and other similar lenses, but I have mostly abandoned traveling with larger domes…just too much hassle. There is a rumor that Nikon is working on an FTZ adapter that would work with the older “screw drive” lenses and if that happens, it would open up some other fisheye options I have in a drawer, although there may not be much real utility in that. And Nikon is having a sale. Comments welcome.

Disregard. I found the thread. Don't know how I missed it the first time.

I intend to use the viewfinder,that is one of the motivating factors for mirrorless. I don't anticipate significant battery issues but I see nauticam now offers the ability to charge some cameras through a housing bulkhead and I assume I could take one of the power bricks and replenish the battery during a surface interval even in situations where opening the housing might be unwise.

I do have a Kenko 1.4 that I use with he D500. Do you know which versions work with the z8? I just tried a search but did not find what I needed.

You make a good point, Dave. If you don't mind, tell me about image review using the z8 through the viewfinder. One of my interests in the mirrorless is the ability to review and image quickly without using the LCD.

A small update to my original post. I have been out of the water for months due to a sinus infection requiring surgery (be careful about swimming in fresh water pools on small south pacific islands). But I am going to be doing a test dive in a pool in a few weeks and then hopefully back diving soon. Anyway, I have had months to think about the camera situation and here is where I have landed: I would like to stay with Nikon because of the lenses I have that will work with an FTZ, and I also have Nikon bodies and lenses for above water photography. But, I think either Canon or Nikon will be producing a "D500 grade" mirrorless crop sensor camera in the next year and I will likely "upgrade" (more of a cross-over, really) to one of those. It sort of seems like Canon is more interested in the concept that crop sensor cameras are not just cheaper smaller cameras for those who are not ready for full frame than is Nikon, and if that is so, a Canon camera is a distinct possibility. The reason for my conclusion is that I get the sense that my favorite underwater lens does not work as well as I would like on the Sony system and the A6700 fails to tick a couple of boxes for me. I absolutely love the Nikon 8-15 on DX and would be happy with the Canon 8-15 on aps-c, so that is driving my decision. That said, none of this is inscribed on a stone tablet and my opinion may change with time and new products from Nikon, Canon or Sony. Until then, the D500 works fine.

I see no sign that the major manufacturers have any interest in fisheye lenses, at least in the near future. It also seems that the performance of DSLR fisheyes on adapters is OK at best. I wonder if, as more and more people use mirrorless cameras, we will end up moving away from fisheye lenses underwater, at least at the hobbyist level as opposed to the professional and hardcore enthusiasts. I am not stating a position, just thinking about this. A canon 8-15 lens is about US$1200 and a Metabones V is $400. Add whatever extension rings and a port are needed, along with sales tax and we are talking about $3000 for an "OK" lens that many say is bested by a WWL and a kit lens. Don't get me wrong...I am very fond of my 8-15 Nikkor on my D500, but in mirrorless land, I wonder if we are heading in a different direction and fisheye lenses will just be a thing of the past?

I don't own the Sony or any Canon lenses, so this is really just academic interest, but wondering which adapter works best to use a Canon 8-15 on the Sony, and how good the focus speed an accuracy really are with any of the adapters, or if it is just a lost cause.

I don't have a personal problem with lithium, but cannot legally pack them in luggage unless installed, so sometimes a minor hassle to carry. I fly to dive. I do end up with several lithiums anyway, but using the superchargers and eneloop pros I can get through quite a few shots before needing a change. I guess its kind of a "don't fix it if it isn't broken thing." That said, I am usually near the front of the line for new toys. On the rechargeable battery side of things, I have managed to get almost everything to USB-C and that makes things simpler. I am looking forward to seeing the lithium pack and evaluating if it is something I "need."

Finally got the new Retras wet this past week. Performance not night and day different from my earlier pair of Primes, but the pro Max are obviously brighter than the Primes. I think I am probably just going to use the superchargers as the "standard" most of the time. Now that I have had them in the water and they worked great, I will be putting the Primes up for sale. Interested to see what the rechargeable battery pack is like, but I try to minimize lithiums so unless there is a compelling upside, I may not switch.

I have not been to Coz for several years, but used Jeremy Anschel (Living Underwater). He would come to hotel to pick up gear, rinse and store it each day. His boat is a small 8 person max boat, fast enough to get to the distant sites. He is or was also one of the operators that would pick up at the small pier in town. Surface intervals on the beach or at a beach club. Has a camera rinse tank built into the boat.

I had not. I just looked at the XT-5 (online) and it looks interesting, but the system does not look very desirable for CFWA, with no fisheye lens available. Maybe there is an adapter I don't know about.

Thanks for the suggestion, but that would be too big a step “backwards” for me. I actually have a TG6 and Oly housing, and I use it on boats, beach, etc. But, the camera’s limitations would make underwater photography less enjoyable for me. Over the years I have moved from compact cameras to micro four thirds to APS-C and have appreciated the improved dynamic range and more flexible cropping options of the slightly larger format and improved performance of the more sophisticated cameras. Like everyone, I would like a smaller and lighter system, but am not willing to give up the benefits I found with the DSLR. Although I would like to reduce size and weight a little, I don’t yet want to sacrifice the features I enjoy. Of course, that means any size reduction would be limited. But I can dream…. I am just not willing to give up a 45-degree viewfinder, reduced shutter lag, interchangeable lenses and the tech advances that incorporated into more expensive (and larger) cameras. Since I will use a bracket, arms, buoyancy and two strobes, even a TG6 becomes much larger but without adding the things that I enjoy about the larger cameras. We all want a camera that that is light and small to travel with but offers the features and benefits of a D850 or A1 or whatever. If I had to buy something new tomorrow, I would likely decide between an A6700 and a Canon R7. Although I found myself looking at the full frame options, I would really rather stay with a cropped sensor. I also use my Nikons for wildlife and nature photos and have a variety of long and landscape lenses that would work fine with an FTZ adapter, so it would probably be wise to stick with Nikon. Although probably unlikely, I am hoping some interesting APS-C Nikon might appear, preferably in a size to compete with the A6700 and R7. The problem will likely be that the manufacturers tend to view the APS-C as "lower level" cameras that should be released at lower price points and therefore do not always use the latest and best tech in them. But I can live with that if need be.

For those of you who use the Cinebags SG, do you take as your larger carry-on that goes in the overhead compartment, or as an underseat bag? Do you have any contingency plan in the event an airline insists you have to check it?

The blue is a 90L The yellow is 66L.

Ok, well I learned something then...

I believe you want the UW Technics trigger if available for your camera. I have no personal experience with the trt trigger but have seen mixed reviews. I don't believe nauticam supports HSS

True on the size, but being a little OCD, it would nag at me if there was an option. And I guess there is and I missed it...

Thanks. Somehow I missed that.

For travel, I use a hardshell case, like a Pelican or Nanuk. Carry-on restrictions and gate agent hassles make it very stressful to try and carry housings and such on planes. I also have to take often multiple flights on different size aircraft, frequently with more than one airline. Dealing with all of that causes a lot of stress. Camera and lenses and sometimes a valuable nauticam wet lens will go with me on the plane in an "underseat' bag that no one ever hassles me about. I do have a carry-on sized Pelican roller that I use on occasion, but it can only hold housing and strobes or housing and a small port or two. I know Tim has had success carrying stuff onboard using a Cinebags Grouper case, but I don't have his charm and would have it taken by gate agents and I doubt it would survive the cargo hold. To and from boats I use a waterproof duffel. The blue one is large enough for housing with a WACP-C, the yellow one is smaller and works fine with a 100mm or 140mm dome or a flat port. I have layer of neoprene on the bottom from an old wetsuit and on the boat can either close it up or drape a microfiber towel over the rig, which will keep it wet. The bag also serves as rinse bucket later. I tried a Cinebags and something similar, and then a soft cooler, but they took a up a lot of room in luggage and did not work well to carry on planes. These offer no real impact protection but are easy to pack and fairly light. if I want more protection I can pad the gear with a towel or neoprene vest or whatever. nullnull

I agree on the pixel count and format. I still think that except perhaps for really large prints, APS-C continues to have more benefits than limitations. I am going to stick with the D500 for now, and watch the mirrorless developments. Rumors of an R7 II (or whatever) and a D500 equivalent mirrorless are interesting and if this is true, could keep the format alive and could me to "upgrade" later in the year or next year. APS-C is a good format choice for underwater and for wildlife, which appeals to me, and also sports. Increasingly, I am pulling back from a FF Sony idea. I love the tech, but don't really want a 61MP FF frame sensor camera. If I had to buy right now, I guess it would be the R7 or A6700, but I am holding off for a while. Although my NA D500 is not a small housing, I enjoy being able to use a 100mm dome on it with the 8-15 and have the zoom range instead of just 8mm or a circle, and I can easily add the 1.4 TC which gives a different perspective. The Tokina 10-17 does pretty much the same thing, of course. I suspect the rumored new Sigma fisheye won't be ideal, or perhaps even viable, but it would be great to see a good, underwater-suitable fisheye that does not need an adapter for the camera world.

Does anyone know if the Retra neoprene covers the same size as the previous ones? The strobe body on the new strobes are longer. I am about to order a new set of bumpers because of the changed design, and am wondering if I should "upgrade" the neoprene sleeves. Or are the new bumpers longer so the neoprene still fits right?

Hard to say why, but I have a hard time getting very enthused. From what little I have read, the EVF could be better, and I have heard some complaints of inconsistent focus. I have some concerns about Canon's refusal to allow third party lenses, but it is still a consideration.

I am not too concerned about the Tokina. I have the Nikkor 8-15 which i believe will work will work with the FTZ adapter. In reality, I suspect you guys are right. I would like an electronic viewfinder, primarily to get away from trying to assess a shot in the LCD on the back of the camera, and I would like something a bit smaller, but we all know that does not usually work out well. Tiny difference for a lot of money. I realize that neither a small size reduction nor the viewfinder will improve my photos, or get photos I am missing. But I thought it might make the process more enjoyable. What really started me on this was the idea of an A7CII or an A6700 for the smaller size and electronic viewfinders, but after some research I see a lot of issues and expense that dampened my enthusiasm. If that Z90 materializes, I suspect the housing size won't be any smaller than I have so that means only an electronic viewfinder and the cost of the viewfinder, housing and other bits and pieces would make that a huge price for some convenience. It's that same thing that many of us go through. I want a camera the size of a TG6 that functions like a Sony A1. I am going to wait and see if there is anything in the next several months that really grabs me. Probably. Edit: I did the M43 thing for several years. Perhaps things have improved, but I was never completely happy with that system, (except when packing and traveling) although my son "adopted" my stuff and seems to like it.

Thank you for the input. I am still undecided. I have seen rumors of a Nikon Z90 (a mirrorless D500) perhaps coming out. If it materializes, I doubt it would meet my size and weight dreams, but a crop sensor Nikon would allow me to use some of my current favorite lenses and ports and save me from some of the cost and research time associated with moving from a N120 mount Nikon to a N85 or N100 Sony. And I actually view full frame more as a negative than a positive, so there is that. But also still seriously considering the Sony, probably the A7CII or the A7RV and mostly because it seems to have the best tech and smallest size. I feel a bit conflicted because I read where the Canon 8-15 does really well on the Sony and then another person says they are disappointed with its performance. No matter how great all the new tech in the Sony may be, the system is only as good as its weakest link. I suppose the rumored Sigma 15mm FE could change that. I would be interested to hear if anyone tries or has tried the Nikon 8-15 on the Sonys, using a Monster adapter. It would be nice not to have to buy another 8-15, if I could figure out the right extension to use.