TimG

Yeah, they do indeed

Great to have you with us, Daniel. A warm welcome to Waterpixels. We hope you really enjoy the forum. Best wishes.

Yeah, can understand your thinking for sure - and those wet optics sounds pretty cool and they point to Nauticam. If you're likely heading down the Z6/Z7 route, I'd suggest a close look at the Z8. I was diving with a serious u/w photog recently who had switched to one (in a Subal housing but, urgh, with a 230 dome) and he was happy with it. It's the latest technology, as opposed to the Z7II, and has the larger file size than the Z6III (if you're going All In, go All In!). But, yeah, budget stretch.......

Hi Kristian Chris and Dave make some excellent points. Given the total cost/weight of an FF package with all the bits and pieces, the additional cost and weight difference between the Z6III and a Z8 becomes negligible. Both packages are big beasts. Chris makes the point about what you plan to do with the images. I agree with him whole-heartedly that FF is not necessary underwater unless you are planning to produce very big prints or serious high-end commercial sales. I had a Nikon FF system (D800), really got fed up travelling with huge amounts of bulky gear (and the complaints from my partner whose baggage allowances was also being swallowed up) and switched back to APS-C and the D500. That was 8 years ago and I'm still using and loving it. There is no way that the old technology is limiting me. I sell loads of images - as Chris writes - as JPEGs. It is much easier for travelling although there is still significant bulk. I don't regret the system downgrade (?) for an instant. And I admit to being a lover of the latest shiny toys. (I've got a Z9 and Z6III for topside) I do think though that there is one important point the guys havn't mentioned and that is "desire"! Beware of Buyer's Regret. I'd suggest the last thing you want is to spend, say, $12k and after 6 months start to regret that you didn't spend $15k and get the system you really hankered for. Been there, done that. If cost is not the deciding factor, think about what would really give you the most pleasure to own and use. If its an FF system with all the bells and whistles and you understand the downsides, then why not...... Good luck with the choice. Not easy for sure.

Definitely viewfinder!

Hey Connor! Welcome to Waterpixels. Great to have you with us and we hope you really enjoy the forum. Best wishes

Hi Narced Diver! Great to have you with us. A warm welcome to Waterpixels. We hope you really enjoy the forum. Best wishes

Argh. That’s so annoying and sadly typical!

Annoying. Makes sense of course to stick with Sony if you have a lot of their gear. I know nothing about Canon setups. For Nikon users the Z8 seems to be the new black.

Can you do the equivalent of a system reset?

Hi Naef! Great to have you with us. A warm welcome to Waterpixels. We hope you enjoy the forum. Best wishes

The size of the focus point isn’t something I’ve ever thought about. I’ve been through lots of Nikon DSLR iterations - D100, 200, 300, 800 and 500 - and have always found the focus point to be small enough to sit on the subject’s eye. Is this Too Big FP an issue more widely?

Sounds a cracking trip!

Hey lidas Welcome to Waterpixels. Great to have you with us. We hope you really enjoy the forum.

Hi jjmochi I’m a long, long term LR user and could offer a couple of thoughts: As Chris suggests, I do wonder if Adobe just reckon data storage is cheap - just get more. That said, Apple data storage ain’t cheap. (I can hear @makar0n chuckling). So when I switched from a Mac with 3TB to a new machine, I didn’t want to pay the huge increase in bigger SSD costs. I now run the LR prog on my MacStudio but all the image files (approx 56,000 pretty much all RAW files plus TIFFs and Panos totalling about 1.8TB) are on an external 4TB SSD. I’ve experimented with the program on and off the Studio but found this current combination works best. The only issue I find is that if you do a full search of the images, it can take a little time till all the actual images are visible as you scroll through the search results. I only keep 3-4 iterations of the LR backup - which is held on a different external drive. These go back maybe 3 months which, to me, is plenty. However large your collection, I’d suggest keeping everything in just one catalog unless you can make a very clear divide between very different elements of work. But even then, I’d hesitate. Being able to search the catalog globally seems to me one of the great features of LR. As Chris comments, tracking down exactly what data is where can be a little tricky with LR. But I’ve found using the combination above has kept me out of despair.

I don’t disagree with Alex at all - I wouldn’t dare. But my point is that greater DOF is easier to achieve with smaller sensors. The artistic use of apertures is always a given.

That's helpful, Susanne. I'm a very keen macro shooter. For me DX/APS-C format has worked best and I switched back from FF to APS-C from a Nikon D800 to D500. Better depth of field for macro and, importantly I found, much easier to house wide-angle and get away from huge domes with the travel issues involved. But I don't shoot video. For shooting stills, I'm not convinced by the need for FF underwater - although I use FF all the time topside. The guys make good points about HOW you intend to use the images. I sell a lot but print very little. It'd be good if you are clear on that. Of course video doesn't involve much printing! One point I would make, I found a 45-degree finder indispensable for macro. It allows you to get lower, on the bottom if necessary, but still be able to see the viewfinder clearly. Definitely worthwhile. And then if you are serious about macro, get a snoot and strobes that work well with a snoot, ie the focussing light is in the middle of the strobe with a circular flash tube. I use the Retra Pro Max and Retra LSD and have found this a terrific macro combination. It's my macro workhorse. Retra also has macro reducing rings which I find really useful. Here are a couple of examples:

….. and you get more depth of field in macro photography with a non-FF format. Wide-angle lenses generally provide sharper edges too with non-FF.

Near unlimited budget, Susanne. I’m sure folks can suggest from $1000 to $100,000……. to an extent depends how serious you are on video. A very rough ballpark would be helpful.

I was talking to someone recently who had gone through the move to the Z8 from a high end Nikon DSLR. (Can’t remember which now) but he didn’t see a significant difference. Very interested to hear John’s take.

I hope you choose ones that have been washed well…… 🤣

Great to have with us, Sabrina. A warm welcome!

Hey John, without hijacking this thread, I’d be very interested to know how you’re getting on with this. I've used a trusty D500 since 2017 and other than being able to see immediate playback in the viewfinder, I’m not sure of the advantages of the Z8 and can see some disadvantages. It’d be an interesting thread to start if you were so inclined?