Moving up to a dSLR?

My wife did not like my d200 in an ikelite case. First she missed the screen. Now I loved the viewfinder because I really couldn't see the screen clearly but the Nikon has a built in adjustment that allows me to see through the top of my prescription mask. My wife has no such problem. She can easily see and compose on the Olympus 5050's screen.

Typically she holds the camera well out in front of her and composes on the screen. In addition to no live screen on the d200, like most dSLR underwater rigs, is a two handed setup. In many cases my wife shoots with one hand on the camera and the other balencing herself. Se claims that she can get the camera a couple of feet closer to the fish without scaring it that way plus she claims she can get a shot from an angle wher her body just wouldn't fit.

Then she hated the twin 8" UCLS arms holding the Ike Ds-125 and she was simply unable to get the hang of it. She longed for the simple "bendy" are found on digicam strobes like the Reefmaster.

Finally the rig was too big. It was really heavy on land and unsuitable for her to walk into the water in places like Bonaire where shore diving was the norm.

Small, light, automatic, one-handed, easy strobe control was her requirements.

The solution was an Olympus E330 in an Olympus housing with an Ikelite Ds-50 strobe ttl controller and a UCLS tray with a single handle and articulated (bendy) arm. The entire rig weighs only 9 pounds. (The 5050 with an identical arm and INON d180 strobe is about 5 pounds.) The Olympus e330 housing is quite a bit larger than the Olympus 5050 housing but the entire rig is an easy one-handed setup that comes across only slightly larger than the 5050 because the tray and arm is identical.

The e330 has a live screen. My wife can compose on the screen, then shoot with no shutter lag. The add-on ttl board controls the DS50 strobe. Essentially, my wife can shoot as many digicam shooters do now (one-handed), not as most dSLR shooters do (two-handed).

The setup is very good for fish portrates and macro shots. The Zuiko 14-54 lens is a HQ (high quality) lens and much better than the SQ (standard quality) Zukio 14-45. This lens is housed in a flat port to minimize size. For serious macro shots the HQ Zuiko 50mm lens in another port is an alternative.

Wide-angel is another matter. Olympus does make a Zuiko SHQ (Super High Quality) 7-14 which is an incredible lens and is housed in a dome port but this setup would probably require dual strobes. It would take supurb wide angel pictures but would not be a compact, one-handed rig.

Unfortunately, the rig has a dSLR cost. I will post pictures of the rig and the exact cost when I receive the rig and underwater shots in comparison to the Nikon D200 when I return from Bonaire (Labor Day)

Wide-angel is another matter. Olympus does make a Zuiko SHQ (Super High Quality) 7-14 which is an incredible lens and is housed in a dome port but this setup would probably require dual strobes. It would take supurb wide angel pictures but would not be a compact, one-handed rig.

 

Unfortunately, the rig has a dSLR cost. I will post pictures of the rig and the exact cost when I receive the rig and underwater shots in comparison to the Nikon D200 when I return from Bonaire (Labor Day)

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Interesting post. Somehow, I thought this camera would have more takers for underwater use, given it's small size and live preview (appealing to former digicam users), but somehow it doesn't seem to really have taken off.

As for the 7-14mm, it has an angle-of-view of 114º at the wide end, which is only marginally greater than the coverage of a larger strobe, with a diffuser (typically 110º). To keep the setup compact, you could look into an Inon Z240 strobe, which is light and yet powerful.

I had a look and a hold ( not dive ) of the E33O package at an Olympus presentation.

While I was pleased to see the support that a large camera manufacturer is giving to the underwater world , it was a real dissapointment to see that they are still neglecting any form of strobe compatability except their own. I my view the bulkhead design is too light in construction to stand any sort of serious use.

This combined with the expense of the lenses and ports will put this out of contention for most serious user's.

Hi Tom,

Thanks for sharing how you put together a light DSLR system. Please allow me to ask some questions - not meant to be a challenge.

What does your wife get with this system that she didn't get with her 5050? Or with a newer consumer digicam with less shutter lag?

It sounds to me like she's shooting a prosumer system, just with a bigger setup. She's got a "fixed" 28-105 type lens, just like what you'd get on a compact. She's composing off the LCD, which from what I understand from trying the 330 at Fry's is not optimal.

Having used the 330, would say the image quality is THAT much better than a compact to justify the cost and size?

When I started my wife off w/ a DSLR, I too got her a compact system. It consisted of a UK Germany housed Canon D60 with single strobe and 50mm macro lens. This was a very compact setup that could be shot with one hand, however, I bet it cost more.

Cheers

James

PS, coming back and having thought about this some more, I get it! It's a way to "sneak" her into the more complicated system with all the growth potential for later - without her noticing! I hope she doesn't see this thread Tom :-)

James-

If my wife gets nothing more than zero shutter lag and zero raw write time lag she will be happy. That's what she wanted-a 5050 with zero shutter and write lag. However, I believe she will get more:

1-My understanding is that one can use either the screen or a viewfinder underwater. For macro shots with narrow depth of field, setting the camera to center focus and placing the viewfinder's center spot on the critter's eye is indicated.

2-Tropical1 (digital diver) says that his e330 takes pictures as good as my d200 (or at least I will have trouble telling the difference). That simply isn't true with the 5050.

3-I don't know about newer digicam shutterlag. I can say that I know about the raw write time on the 5050 and know the e330's buffer will come in very handy taking the second picture.

I do not agree that the Olympus housing is "too light". It looks very well designed and constructed to me. It is true that the cost is not much less than my Nikon d200/Ilelite setup.

Tom

All-

I spent two weeks diving in Bonaire. I dove the D200 and Ginnie dove the Olympus E330. I posted several comparitive shots on digitaldiver.net 'D-200 vs E-330 Shootout". This is my summary:

From digitaldiver.net:

"This experiment is put on hold until December when I have a new flask/modeling light/targeting light for the Olympus e330. I dive on the Truth boat with club members and will try to get their impressions. In the meantime my observations are:

1-The E330 in an Olympus case does, in fact, create a smaller form factor that can be effectively used like a digicam (one handed), will fit in smaller places and is much easier to use. However, the case is not as robust as the Ikelite. In particular, the external ttl add on device is seriously exposed. For shore diving the E330 setup was much lighter on land and much easier to handle entering and exiting the water.

2-As setup the e330/50mm configuration has problems autofocusing and the shots seem to have a greenish tint that could not be fixed in RAW. More research is needed here. This problem did not appear with the 14/54 lens which produced excellent midrange pictures.

3-The viewfinder on the e330 is just fine and perfectly usable. The live view is an advantage for people who can see it underwater. Shots composed with live view, however, are typically not focused in an exact location (the fish's eye for example) to the extent that a viewfinder shot is. (This could be overcome with photographer experience)

4-For macro, the lack of a 105mm like the Af105VR Nikon is somewhat limiting. The magnification plus the excellent autofocus speed and accuracy of the D200/Af105VR setup, often with a diopter, provided the opportunity to photograph macro shots where the subject won't stay still."

Further comments for WetPixel

For digicam shooters I can categorically say that the picture quality of the Olympus E-330 is dSLR-like. Digitaldiver.net members preferred E330 shots about equally to the D200.

If you are willing to switch to a viewfinder then I think a Nikon D200 (or D-80) or the equivilent Canon in an Ikelite case is a better choice because of lens flexibility and case robustness. (Price is about the same)

If you really want a small form factor and like composing on the screen, however, with the Olympus housing and a single small strobe, you can use this camera like a serious digicam (5050 w/INON D-180 strobe for example).

If you are a serious digicam user thinking of moving up you should not discount the small size and live screen of this configuration. It is a serious advantage and one a traditional dSLR shooter won't understand.

Tom