Pro photographer; New to underwater; Need advice please.

Hi all,

I'm excited to "get my feet wet" here! (sorry, couldn't help myself)

I'm a full-time professional photographer, but have never really done anything underwater before. I have a housing for my Panasonic point-and-shoot and love playing around with it. While on a recent trip to Hawaii to cover a client's honeymoon (I'm a wedding photographer in real life, and believe it or not, I love it), I actually had some free time to snorkel with my Lumix.... I had an ablosute blast!

I currently own two Nikon D3s, two D2Xs (which are for sale if you know anyone), a D70, and a myriad of lenses and speedlights.

I'm very fortunate that several times a year, my clients take me with them on their destination weddings or honeymoons to fabulous locations in the Caribbean and South Pacific... and now I'm thinking I'd be a fool to not take advantage of such and do more of my new-found hobby-to-be.

Even though my budget would technically allow for a housing for one of my D3s, underwater photography would only be a hobby for now, so I'm not sure that makes the best sense.

I was going to convert my D70 to infrared.

As I'm selling my D2Xs, I was going to use that money to buy a D300 (which would be an adequate back-up replacement for my D2X) and a housing for it.

Ok, so my question (well, my first one anyway): What do you think the best option is? And if indeed I go the D300 route, what's the best housing for it? (I'll have questions about ports and lights later, but those can wait).

Thanks,

Corey

www.coreymcnabb.com

coreymcnabb.blogspot.com

Would you be happy without full frame?

If so your best bet would be to buy a used D200 and housing. A lot cheaper than new and a good setup. Or buy a used setup for your D2X. Of course you would have to keep the other D2X as a backup.

Otherwise I would house a D300.

Would you be happy without full frame?

 

If so your best bet would be to buy a used D200 and housing. A lot cheaper than new and a good setup. Or buy a used setup for your D2X. Of course you would have to keep the other D2X as a backup.

 

Otherwise I would house a D300.

Hey Dave,

Thanks for your reply.

I could handle not being full frame... I was fine using the D2Xs for years, though I admit I like having it on the D3s. That being said, I think my biggest question might be how these types of cameras are used underwater? More specifically, what ISOs are you using most often? I've shot with a D200 and like it, but if higher ISOs are needed underwater, then I think the D300 would perform better.

The D2X housings seem to be pricey comparatively speaking.

I see you have a Subal... is that the "best"?

Corey

Corey,

I use a D300 for underwater work and I'm very happy with it. Previously I used a D70 and so the D300 was a big step up. I don't have any experience with the D2X or D200 so can't compare. I expect that the D300 would be better than both.

I very rarely use anything other than the default ISO of 200. Lighting underwater is very different. Not only is available light significantly less than above water, the colour is very blue due to the water absorbing red (and yellow) light very quickly. While I have taken available light photographs underwater, I have never been very happy with the colour cast and use strobes whenever possible. Even with strobes, you want to minimise the amount of water between the port and the subject (and the strobes and the subject) and so I never need to go above ISO 200.

Choosing housings is like choosing cameras or cars - what is the definition of "best"? I have used Ikelite housing for a few years now and have been very happy with them. They are probably the least expensive. As I haven't tried other makes (Subal, Nexus, Sea and Sea, etc.) I can't comment on whether they are "better" than what I have.

one generally does not need high iso's underwater. between housing a D3 or D300 i see two main considerations: housing bulk/weight and lens choices. The larger & heavier D3 will require a larger & heavier housing, and trust me, these things get ridiculously cumbersome.

Lens choices are more subjective. One of my favs UW is the sigma 15mm FE, which is just a superwide on DX that focuses to macro proportions(the nikon 16mm does not). There is no equivalent for full frame, the 15mm becomes a full fisheye for which DX has the 10.5mm. People also rave about the tokina 10-17mm FE, a DX lens.

I would however love to try the 14-24mm on a D3 behind a big dome - but getting rectilinear superwides sharp in the corners UW is a challenge, hence the general preference for fisheyes. I have also heard some people say they miss the 60mm macro's FOV on film. But you do have the DOF advantage on DX for macro.

Personally I'd go for the D300. Cheers,

Chris

Hi Corey,

The housings most readily available in the US are Aquatica, Ikelite, Nexus, Seacam, Sea & Sea, and Subal. I prefer Aquatica because I think you get the most bang for the buck. Their port system is very complete and the least expensive of the aluminum housings. I use a D200 but I have had a chance to handle their D300 housing which is very similar: very compact, very good ergonomics (although this is a very personal think,) excellent fit and finish.

BTW, I visited your website, your wedding portfolio is exquisite.

With the D2X I will go as high as ISO 400. I don't like to go over 200 and prefer 100.

The D2X is a great camera UW. It is big and bulky though. This can be a real pain. Unlike most others I want good high ISO image quality. Light always being a limited quantity UW.

For compactness and better high ISO performance I just purchased a D300 housing. Haven't shot it UW yet. My hope is that it will give good quality images at ISO 400. Land use seems to indicate this should be.

Only a limited number of D2X housings were sold. I should think that you could get a used one at a decent price.

Hi Corey,

Welcome to a wonderful and totally addictive new hobby. Say goodbye to all your life savings now

The big difference between UW and land photo is not so much which brand housing you choose or what body you shoot. Of course therea re diufferences there, but it's is not the first choises to make.

The big consierations are the differences in underwater photography technicque vs land photo and in extension choises of lenses and strobes.

So before choosing housing brand and body, consider what the necessay investment in lenses and stobes will need to be and then think of the rest. YOu might already have the necessry lenses or you might need to complement your bag.

Reading old posts on Wetpixel is probably your absolutely best source for learing about the tecniques and also gear. I also recommend picking up a copy of Howard Halls and Brian Skerrys "Successful Underwater photography" to get an idea of what it is all about and what you will need.

In a nutshell - you'll need some lenses that can focus really close, wheter macro or wide angle and you'll need strobes to match the type of shooting you'll do. You'll probably be shooting at the wide and macro extemes and seldom if ever "normal" lenses and never telephoto.

So to answer your question on what the best housing is; depends on if money is an object after having made investment in the appropriate lenses and strobes... Housings are kind of like cars - do you care about getting from A to B? Get a ford focus (or an Ikelite or Aquatica). Or do you care about getting oohs and ahhs getting from A to B? Get a Ferrari (or a Seacam). Once you're out of the car (or out of the water), noone will even think of asking you how you got there/what gear you shot to get those images...

Of course, you will need the proper gear that will do the job. All the brands mentioned in the posts above will "do the job". However, the secret of getting great shots underwater is 99% perfecting you technique, learning as much as possible about your intended subjects, knowing what to look for, being infinetly patient and and putting in lots and lots of bottom time. Being both technically and artistically bent and having a slightly obsessive/compulsive personality certaily also helps!

Corey, before you start equipment shopping, here's some other things to consider:

You will find that your topside shooting "follows you underwater". For example, I'm a journalist; all my U/W stuff has a journalistic feel with edgy lighting, I don't make efforts at artsy. A colleague who's a studio shooter is always taking extra remote lights and balancing strobe output ,with these gorgeous evenly lit results that look like they stepped out of a stock prospectus.

If you make a living with cameras, you will eventually end up with a body that lives in the housing. Just the way it seems to work out. So get housing(s) that contain the body that's the res and format you need.

Spend more money on dive equipment and classes. You can't get the shot without the skillz (or without being there).

All the best, James

Hi Corey,

I shoot a D70 in a Sea & Sea housing. I like the housing a lot--sturdy, reliable--and will probably stick with S&S when I upgrade my camera. FWIW, friends who have other housings seem to have more leaks and other complaints. That said, no housing is waterproof if not cared for, so whatever you get you should plan on being REALLY diligent about cleaning o-rings, etc. All it takes is one stray hair for your expensive housing to become an aquarium, and your expensive camera to become a museum piece.

Sync cables seem to be the weakest link in the chain. They are prone to stresses and strobes have pins that are too easily bent. A tiny amount of water on the contacts means an electrical short and therefore a non-working strobe underwater--I know from experience--so make sure you keep everything nice and dry. I suggest a housing with a separate port for each sync cable. Mine only has one port, requiring a Y-cable to use both strobes. The Y-cable is not made anymore, so if mine goes out it will be hard to find. (I think I can use a TTL converter, but I haven't had the need to try that yet.)

Being a pro on land, you may find yourself frustrated underwater at the lack of control over everything, from lighting to subjects to keeping the camera still. A couple of photographer friends have often gotten out of the water and jumped up and ready to quit.

I echo what others have said about lenses: you'll shoot either macro or wide.

Can't wait to hear what your experiences are like and hopefully see some of your pics. Welcome to a new world!

Russell

Wow! Thank you all for such thorough posts.

I'm a member of several other photography forums and rarely in those are answers as deep... I suppose I should expect nothing less than from an underwater group.

You've helped confirm that I'll be going the D300 route. I sold one D2x today, and the other will hopefully sell soon. The D300 will be an adequate backup for my D3s topside and still be a good camera for underwater that isn't too big.

I saw a Sea & Sea D70 housing yesterday in person and it solidified for me that I don't want a housing for one of my D3s... too big.

So, now my search begins for a D300 housing, lights, etc. Historically, my theory has been "buy the best, and get back to work" so I'd like to stay close to that adage.

Marjo, I appreciate your car analogy. I don't want the "Ford Focus" level housing, and I don't really need a "Ferrari" housing (I've always been partial to Aston Martins myself). So using your analogy, I'd like to know my housing options in the Lexus/Mercedes/BMW level... having said that, I want the LS460/S-Class/7-Series, not the entry levels please, if there is such distinction in housings.

Several of you mentioned buying equipment based on my style. I'm as curious as you to see how my style of photography will translate underwater. I'm excited to explore that.

I'll be sure to check around this forum further for more inspiration and answers, but in regards to the comment above about investing in good scuba certification, is there one better than others... PADI, SDI, etc.? My local dive shop (in the mountains of North Carolina?!) offers both.

Thanks again and I look forward to hanging out here more in my spare time (spare time, what's that?)

Corey

Hi Corey,

I think you can even create yourself a new market here, doing underwater wedding photography. You have excellent website and some of the best wedding photography I've seen too. Obviously already have a great reputation, why not extend on that... First get your buoyancy skills sussed out, then with a little bit of practice you'll be sailing the oceans with your clients.

I know a two guys who were primarily topside shooters, doing a lot of work for National Geographic. Both took to underwater photography very well indeed. Check out www.timlaman.com, Tim stills says he's not really an underwater shooter, though he's had a few big stories in NatGeo and other big publications over the past few years.

Look forward to hearing how you get along with your new underwater rig. I hope your hobbie gets to take you to some even more spectacular destinations!

All the best...

Corey,

I'm a PADI instructor, so I'm partial to that system. However, all certification agencies will basically teach you the same information in terms of safety and skills. Some are more detailed than others, some are more recognized around the world...so there are definite differences in approach. I would say the most important thing is the rapport you have with the dive shop, because no matter how good the system is, if your instructor sucks you will not have as much fun. If you develop a good relationship with your local shop, you will have friends for life and an endless source of buddies and good customer service. I'm sure you experience the same with camera shops.

Having said all that: go PADI.

-Russell

PS - You have a wealth of good wreck diving off the coast in NC. It's one of my future must-do's!!

I'll be sure to check around this forum further for more inspiration and answers, but in regards to the comment above about investing in good scuba certification, is there one better than others... PADI, SDI, etc.? My local dive shop (in the mountains of North Carolina?!) offers both.

Corey,

I'd suggest chatting with whoever is going to be your instructor. Tell her/him that you are going to be taking up UW photography and you'd like a course that can take you deeper into buoyancy skills, if the instructor is really good, they may even get you in the water with your camera! It's not really about the agency, it's more about who's teaching you!

Here's an even better suggestion... Why not do your entry level open water course, somewhere close by where you live. Then go somewhere really cool and practice your UW skills, once your skills progress, take the camera down and you're off. Preferably choose somewhere with easy access shore diving, this way you can go when you like and as many times as you like...

Go forth and enjoy...

Wow! Thank you all for such thorough posts.

 

I'm a member of several other photography forums and rarely in those are answers as deep... I suppose I should expect nothing less than from an underwater group.

 

You've helped confirm that I'll be going the D300 route. I sold one D2x today, and the other will hopefully sell soon. The D300 will be an adequate backup for my D3s topside and still be a good camera for underwater that isn't too big.

 

I saw a Sea & Sea D70 housing yesterday in person and it solidified for me that I don't want a housing for one of my D3s... too big.

 

So, now my search begins for a D300 housing, lights, etc. Historically, my theory has been "buy the best, and get back to work" so I'd like to stay close to that adage.

 

Marjo, I appreciate your car analogy. I don't want the "Ford Focus" level housing, and I don't really need a "Ferrari" housing (I've always been partial to Aston Martins myself). So using your analogy, I'd like to know my housing options in the Lexus/Mercedes/BMW level... having said that, I want the LS460/S-Class/7-Series, not the entry levels please, if there is such distinction in housings.

 

Several of you mentioned buying equipment based on my style. I'm as curious as you to see how my style of photography will translate underwater. I'm excited to explore that.

 

I'll be sure to check around this forum further for more inspiration and answers, but in regards to the comment above about investing in good scuba certification, is there one better than others... PADI, SDI, etc.? My local dive shop (in the mountains of North Carolina?!) offers both.

 

Thanks again and I look forward to hanging out here more in my spare time (spare time, what's that?)

 

Corey

Hi!

Some comments on the housing: I just aquired a second hand Aquatica housing, and it just fells right. As mentioned earlier it is "middle class", in the BMW class if you want. So far I haven't used it much, but I am very happy with it. I have several buddies using Ikelite, and they are much mure bulky than the Aquatica (station wagon vs. sports car . This applies to all "plastic" houstings compared to aluminium housings. Unfortunately Subal, Seacam, ... are out of my price range. These belong to the top class, but are good no doubt about that. If you compare housings, take the ports into consideration. The housing alone is not all you need. E.g., the dome port for the Aquatica is around 420$, the dome port for Subal > 2000$ (I think). Sure, the Subal is made from glas, the Aquatica is acryl. Recently Aquatica introduced a glas dome port as well, that goes for 1500$. You see, lots of choices there as well ... just to add some to the general confusion I am just trying to clear up for myself a bit.

Regarding the "underwater photography" ... it combines two skills, diving and photography. You obviously bring the photography part from your professtion. So for the diving part please take some time and easy dive spots before you let yourself loose. Diving in principal is easy to learn, but diving with a camera is different. You will have to aquire the skill of buoyancy control to a high degree before you will be able to take good pictures and not harm the underwater life. You will have to dive upside down, on your back, etc. The control of your position in the water has to become a second nature for you, if you need to think of your BDC you are lost and will harm the environment or yourself.

Finally a warning ... diving and underwater photography is highly addictive, and there is no cure!

<snip>

I'll be sure to check around this forum further for more inspiration and answers, but in regards to the comment above about investing in good scuba certification, is there one better than others... PADI, SDI, etc.? My local dive shop (in the mountains of North Carolina?!) offers both.

 

<snip>

As so many will tell you, it's not the agency, it's the instructor.

The standards have become very diluted in the last decade, and the current standards are truly the "bare minimum". What you want is an instructor that teaches the craft and skillz of diving above and beyond the proceedures.

Because of the peculiar demands of photography, if I was in your shoes, my personal litmus test would be two questions (with no elaboration):

-Can you maintain trim to Tech 1 standards?

-Can you swim backwards?

A smile and solid yes without thinking about it, hang on to that instructor. If they ask "What's that?" or "What do you mean?", keep looking.

All the best, James

So to answer your question on what the best housing is; depends on if money is an object after having made investment in the appropriate lenses and strobes... Housings are kind of like cars - do you care about getting from A to B? Get a ford focus (or an Ikelite or Aquatica). Or do you care about getting oohs and ahhs getting from A to B? Get a Ferrari (or a Seacam).

I take exception with Marjo's analogy: Aquatica = Ford Focus. The implication being that Aquatica is of an inferior quality. Nothing could be further from the truth. The quality of all the aluminum housings is pretty close with the primary differences being subjective (OK Seacam owners calm yourselves.) With the exception of Seacam ( at 2 -3 times the cost.)

In addition, Aquatica's service and customer focus is outstanding. They're located in Montreal and they answer their phone when you have an issue. How many other housing makers offered their D200 customers an upgrade to the D300. Correct me if I'm wrong but I believe the answer is zero.

At the risk of sounding like an Aquatica ad it bugs me when someone equates them with being cheap - negative connotation. Yes you can spend more on a housing, but I wouldn't.