Camera choice

Hi all,

I have recently sold my Nic V and am considering the G2 with Ike housing. Any comments and suggestions pro and con would be appreciated ,specifically regarding macro capabilities.

While I do not use a G2 (I use an Oly C4040), I would point out that the Ike housing does accept aftermarket macro lenses (By Sea and Sea and INON) . . .

Mike

Hi,

I just started shopping for a camera for mixed U/W and dry-land fun. I think I've narrowed it down to the Oly C-4040. Can you push me over the edge? How do you like it? Would you buy one if you got to "do-it-all-over-again?"

Thanks.

~Todd

I'm very happy with it, though I would take a hard look at the new Nikon Coolpix 5000 if I were shopping today (megapixel envy and Compact Flash envy!). The main advantage the Olympus had at the time I got it was the inexpensive housing (I got the housing for well under $300). At the moment, the Olympus line still has the most support from housing manufacturers and accessory designers. However, the competitors are beginning to catch up. Now that I'm in, I plan to get a new strobe and possibly a more robust housing for my Oly. NExt digicam will probably be an SLR . . .

Mike

Ive been impressed with these Canon models. I like the picture quality better than equivalent Olympus models ( I own a 3040) and the Canon displays are better in low light. The Canon cameras consistently show up on "best of" lists. I was very hard pressed to see anything on the Oly display on a late afternoon/evening dive. The canon cameras crank up the display image in low light. I've not been diving with these Canon models. Just my opinion with some dry hands-on.

Dave - wetpixel.com

Got a few pics up, from my first trip using an digital camera underwater - G2 in Ikelite housing.

None of them are quite up to snuff compared to my film slr, but for a first try, maybe not too bad.

http://www.pbase.com/derway/kona_underwater_g2

These are about 1/10 actual, full resolution.

Shooting them is a lot more fun than postprocessing!

Comments sought, and welcome.

Did I overdo the contrast??

The G2 has a lot going for it, underwater, in comparison to other P&S digicams.

None of them are up to snuff if you are used to even a 10 year old film SLR, but

they are a lot of fun, with instant feedback even while still underwater.

Hey Dave - any of these good enough for photo of the day??

Don

Hi Don,

Great shots! I could tell that it was Hawaii right away, without even reading the header. "Achilles Tang...must be Hawaii"

What strobe did you use with your setup? I noticed the G2 has a hot-shoe. Can you connect it to a TTL strobe?

Cheers

James Wiseman

Hi Don,

Great stuff. Makes me want to go back to Kona right now. Eric is doing the galleries and dpotd these days. I forwarded him your link. Keep em' coming.

Dave

Nice shots Don.

What output file format did you use?

I've been thinking about replacing my C3000

with a G2. To me, the biggest advantage the

G2 has over a C4040 is the Canon Raw output

mode. For color post processing, it should be

better to start with the raw output and not

have the camera do a "white balance" before

you get the bits. It may also have better

dynamic range than the 8 bits/color

tiff or jpeg output. Although with

the small CCD, the signal-to-noise is lots

worst than the 12 bits in the raw output.

Has anybody seen dynamic range tests for this

camera?

Herb

[Edited on 1-23-2002 by herbko]

Hi y'all. Thanks for the nice comments.

In answer to some questions:

All shots were in Aperature priority mode, asa 50, flash forced on, raw mode, converted with breeze browser, mostly to 8 bit tif, and a bit of contrast, color, sharpness adjustment in photoshop.

I was using the Ikelite housing, and a single Ike ds50 strobe, with the digital optical slave. I tried a dive with the diffuser only, (no external strobe), and got a couple of decent shots, but after being used to a film SLR, with dual Ike SS200 strobes, I couldn't get used to the lack of illumination!

I didn't try to use the hotshoe, since no manufacturer supports true TTL over it yet.

Half the shots were in single focus mode, which is incredibly frustrating, since the LCD freezes during auto focus, and often as not, the water/fish/me movement would have the subject out of the AF spot before it finished.

Half the shots were in continuous focus mode, which avoids the LCD freeze, but seems to take a longer time to actually do the focus, (I guess since it has to spend more CPU time refreshing the screen, between AF steps).

So both modes are sometimes frustrating, in different ways, to use in this application, (but I am comparing to an n90s film SLR).

It is *very* annoying to half press the shutter, and still not have a focus lock, and then the fish or critter has gone out of reach, and the shot is lost, and the shutter still has not triggered!

The devil is always in the details.

But, it is a good tool, and the instant feedback while underwater makes up for a whole heck of a lot - especially learning to keep the histogram display on the after shot review, to know if you got the exposure or not.

The LCD clarity and brightness is a huge plus.

I agree totally that the Canon Raw mode is the way to go - no loss of detail due to jpeg, and the full res files are only about 3-3.5 meg each, compared to the 12 meg it takes to convert them to tif first. This makes lossless images in camera completely usable, (85 images in a 256 meg CF card), whereas cams that use tif for their lossless image mode can only get about 20.

How does the Oly 4040 compare, in detail, for auto focus - does the LCD freeze during AF?

Regarding the nikon cp 5000 - no raw mode, lousy lens, (see the review on dpreview, where the G2 actually gets signficantly more resolution, because the cp5000 lens is so bad) - but if the nikon focuses better/faster under low light, low contrast conditions, it might be worth looking at.

For me, I think I'll jump to a digital SLR, once they become a bit more affordable, like 4+ mpix for less than $2k.

Hope this helps.

Don

Wow, thanks for the report Don.

I can comment on the coolpix 5000.

It has an f2.8 lens. "Topside" people say this camera has slow glass and not a "strong enough" telephoto lens.

For underwater use, I say "WOOHOO!!!"

I don't know abou you guys, but I almost NEVER shoot at f2.8... do you?

Underwater, who wants telephoto??? The coolpix 5000 has a 28 mm lens! I love it! This camera has just about the perfect zoom range for underwater. Not to mention that Nikon makes a NICE 19mm lens for this camera. I can't wait to take it underwater.

Plus, you can switch to a macro shot w/ the press of a button. Who would have thought 10 years ago that you would be able to shoot macro AND relatively wide angle on the same dive????

Cheers

James Wiseman

The problem with f2.8 (and f4 at the 85 mm equiv zoom end), is that the ammount of light coming in, when wide open is less. So auto focus is effected.

The problem with the cp5000 is that it is priced a lot higher than the oly 4040, or G2, and has much a much worse lens.

The G2 is f 2.0 wide, to 2.5 tele. The 4040 is f1.8 to f2.5 or something like that.

The G2 has noticeably better image quality than the 4040 or the cp5000.

But - the nikons sure do have nice macro. And if their autofocus kicks ass, it would make up for a lot of other drawbacks.