Does anyone shoot Nikon UW and Canon above water (or vice-versa)?

I'm still trying to figure out what I want to do for an UW SLR system. I have a fairly large (~$12,000) investment in Canon lenses so I was (initially) under the assumption that I would be shooting Canon UW. However after deciding which lenses I would want to shoot UW (none of which I currently own) and deciding that I would be buying a new camera body for the underwater system, it has opened up the _possibility_ of switching brands for the UW system. At first I looked at the Olympus E620 with PT-E06 housing but I will be shooting macro most of the time and I want the Inon 45 degree viewfinder which is not supported with the Olympus PT-E0X housings.

Following the advice of the experts here of first choosing the lenses you want to shoot, recently it has become apparent that the lens I would really like to shoot with UW is the Nikon 105mm VR macro lens. The Nikon 105mm VR paired with a D90 camera seems to be a pretty compelling system for a reasonable price. Now if I can find a reasonably priced housing system for the D90 that supports the 45 degree view finder.....

I already shoot a different camera system UW (tetra 5050) and I have no issues going back and forth between it and my Canon SLR system so I don't _think_ I will have a problem switching between Canon above water and Nikon underwater.

I was wondering if anyone has contemplated doing this or if anyone is currently shooting both Canon and Nikon and what sort of advice they might provide?

PS: All my Canon buddies are like "Ewwwwwww". Of course their primary concern is probably if I were to go entirely to "the dark side" and they would lose free access to all my cool Canon lenses.

Hi onewolf,

I just have to ask - have you looked at just using a Canon body and Canon's excellent 100mm USM macro lens? The only difference is the VR - do you need it?

Cheers

James

Hi onewolf,

 

I just have to ask - have you looked at just using a Canon body and Canon's excellent 100mm USM macro lens? The only difference is the VR - do you need it?

 

Cheers

James

Have I considered using a Canon body and 100mm macro lens? Absolutely. That's probably what I will end up with.

Do I need VR? Probably not. Would I prefer having the option of using VR? Absolutely.

Do I want to consider all reasonable options before I plunk down $7000 for an UW SLR system? Yes.

Have I considered using a Canon body and 100mm macro lens? Absolutely. That's probably what I will end up with.

 

Do I need VR? Probably not. Would I prefer having the option of using VR? Absolutely.

 

Do I want to consider all reasonable options before I plunk down $7000 for an UW SLR system? Yes.

What Canon bodies do you have you could use? Backscatter is mounting the Inon viewfinders to Sea & Sea and others, Article here. Might be a slick way to go for you.

I'm curious, do the VR 105 folks typically use the vibration reduction underwater?

Cheers,

Steve

What Canon bodies do you have you could use? Backscatter is mounting the Inon viewfinders to Sea & Sea and others, Article here. Might be a slick way to go for you.

 

Cheers,

Steve

I have 50D, 30D, 10D, 400D, and 350D camera bodies, but I plan to purchase a new camera body for whichever UW SLR system I decide to go with. I plan to use a 100/105mm macro lens and Tokina 10-17 FE lens of which I have neither. Since I plan to purchase a new camera body and new lenses, I thought I should consider the possibility of using Nikon UW since they have a fantastic VR macro lens, and their 90D body has better ISO noise performance, better dynamic range, and better color performance than the Canon 50D (and T1i I presume).

I'm curious, do the VR 105 folks typically use the vibration reduction underwater?

Why wouldn't you? Relatively long effective focal length with high f-stop and relatively slow shutter speed = VR/IS is advantageous?

From a guy who use to travel with dual brands and lenses for different uses, I can tell you it's not easy. I had a D2H in a Subal ND2 housing and Canon 1D series for a while but airlines helped alleviate that housing situation and I stuck with Canon (and also hand carrying everything).

If you can tell the difference in performance from 50D and D90 without pixel peeping, then I'd say consider the options. Otherwise travelling with different lenses and chargers is just not worth the hassle. Think of backup as well. Are you going to buy 2 D90s in case 1 fails on a long trip? A 40D fits in the 50D housing etc.

Being stuck with a brand sucks sometimes but the playing field is pretty even now.

Why wouldn't you? Relatively long effective focal length with high f-stop and relatively slow shutter speed = VR/IS is advantageous?

Well, my first thought is that the couple of billion pounds of seawater around you makes a pretty good fluid dampner. I'm probably a worst case scenario. I have a medical condition called Essential Tremor. ET for short. Left side shakes like Elvis on crack. (Doc says it's no big deal) I think it's a result of the 60"s but I can't remember. I can't shoot on land at normal shutter speeds without being on a tripod. Underwater, whole different story. I have pretty good luck with the Canon 100mm and the 10-17 that don't have IS. (Canon's version of VR) I would also think about the fact that images are sharper shooting on a tripod if you turn the IS off. I was just curious if the Nikon VR would react the same way. A large percentage of the macro stuff you like is done at high shutter speeds and strobes where I don't see the VR advantage. On blue water macro shutter speeds? maybe.

To answer your original question. I think you'd have two possible issues. If your doing a liveaboard or long resort trip carrying and keeping track of two sets of everything to support both camera types could be a problem. Not to mention getting it all there. I'm assuming you'd want to carry the land setup for all the potential obove water shots. Two sets of CF cards, multiple battery chargers, maybe additional filters depending on what you carry. With the airline weight limitations becoming more severe it might be a consideration. I'm sure you could figure it out but I'm a firm believer in the KISS principle. The second issue I'd think about would be my ability to really nail the camera operation without having to take the time (and lost shots) to think about it. Seems like the ability to shoot instinctively might be hampered.

If I was you I slam that 50D in a nice housing and have a ball. But you gotta do what you gotta do.

Good luck!

Steve

Sorry to double up on Drew, he beat me to it.

I second just sticking with Canon and using the 50D for both. Use what you are familar with so you don't have to switch your mindset.

Tom

Ive done it in that I had an Olympus for underwater and a Canon for abovewater on a trip to Thailand, the housing for it wasnt out before I left. It wasnt too bad but one major advantage was immediately lost, ie having a backup camera if one went bung, and redundant doubling up on lenses that can be useful above and below water, eg the 17-70mmor equivalent for both systems.

If I was buying a 50D or a D90 from scratch I would probably choose the D90. I couldnt imagine getting a D90 if I already had a 50D and a large assortment of canon lenses, it just isnt that big a leap in practical terms other than video, you'd be much better off keeping the money it would cost to change over for whatever camera comes up next in my view or considering going full frame.

Otara

if you're serious about underwater photography outside the US, then i consider a backup body pretty essential. i have a pair of 20d's and depending on circumstances a 5d2 for shots from the boat, land touring, etc. i think using two systems is simply not worthwhile unless you MUST have the 14-24 on a full frame Nikon.

the 50D works well with the Canon 100macro which is a great lens. the only reason for VR is if you should shoot a lot of available light macro under water. on land i can see some advantage to the 105VR as an all-round lens, but certainly not worth mixing up systems.

.

Ok, I went down to the local camera store this morning and played with the Nikon D90 and 105mm VR macro lens for about 30 minutes. "Hated it" Nikon is clearly doing it all wrong.

At this point I've narrowed it down to (probably) the Canon 50D in a Sea&Sea MDX-40D housing or a Canon 500D in the 'mystery' housing. For some reason I just don't like the look/feel/usability of the Sea&Sea RDX-450d housing so I am trying to find an alternative for the 500D that can use the Inon 45 degree viewfinder, and also has a macro port that can use external/wet closeup lenses. Perhaps the Patima PDCH-450D (or brand new PDCH-500D) housing with Anthis/Nexus ports.

Thanks for all the opinions. They are greatly appreciated!

Doug

Nikon is clearly doing it all wrong.

LOL, Doug admit it, your just doing this to mess with our minds. Right? Good luck figuring out what you want to do.

Cheers,

Steve

It's reported that the 500D and the 450D have the same body with just some change in the function of a few buttons to accomodate the video? If it can be confirmed that the 500D does fit in the Seatool housing for the 450D than you can get that housing with the Inon 45 viewfinder. I would want to check this before a purchase.

Jeff

Backscatter does custom conversions for the Inon 45 with multiple housing types. So if you find a housing you really want that doesnt do it as standard, thats always an option.

Otara