Pt-E06

I just received my wife's new PT-E06 housing for an Olympus E-620 from Ryan and Co. It is a VERY nice looking housing and the price was below $1000. The camera was just a bit more than $500. People looking to upgrade from a P&S should seriously consider this route.

The Olympus 14/54 lens has essentially the same characteristics as the Sigma 17/70 once you correct for sensor size and the OLY flat port is large enough to get both semi-wide and decent macro from the same lens. I was able to get the lens on Ebay at a reasonable price and the port, while expensive, isn't rediculous. I'm guessing $3K for camera, port, lens and housing or about 2/3 the cost of a G11 in a FIX housing.

Now I'm not suggesting that i will toss my D-300 nor do I expect Meister to give up his 5D for this rig but somehow I don't think a Canon G11 is really in this camera's class.

Regards,

I have just helped a friend upgrade from is Olympus E-520 + PT-E05 and housed Olympus flash to a Olympus E-620 + PT-E06 + twin Olympus UFL-2 strobes. He wanted to go this way because he is used to the Olympus menus and settings and he could use both is Olympus 14/54 and 50 macro lenses and ports.

I have tried to suggest him that he should consider also selling is old rig and switch to either Canon or Nikon, where you have the flexibility to use a wider proprietary and third-party lens range as well as a wider choihe of strobes providing reliable TTL (I personally do use TTL execept for w/a action shooting), but I failed to convince him mainly because of the higher price of these rigs.

I do agree that the Olympus PT-E06 is a nice looking housing at a reasonable price and I certainly prefer its look and feel over the Ikelite and Sea&Sea RX range, nonetheless I feel that the Olympus E-system is a "closed" system, in the sense that you are forced to buy Olympus products (strobes, cables, housing, ports, lenses) and their UW product range is not as comprehensive compared to the Nikon or Canon field.

That being said, I think is unfair to compare a P&S high-end camera UW camera system like the Canon G11 with Fix housing and fish-eye dome to a four-thirds "mid-range" UW camera system like the Olympus E-620 ..... I have not even sure that the final bill would be lower if you take into consideration macro and w/a port, macro and w/a lenses, twin UFL-2 strobes, tray, handles and arm systems.

My point is that if you want to have a "good", "affordable" and "compact" system the Canon G11 is the way to go, while if you want to use a "superior" SLR system you should look at the various solutions in the Nikon and Canon fields, paired with a number of third party housing and a coulpe of Inon Z-240 strobes. The Olympus E-system is someway in the middle, is not particularly "affordable", has the same bulk as a Nikon or Canon SLR system, and its overall performance is just a tad superior to the Canon G11 and by far lower than a Canon or Nikon system, even if compared with mid-range camera bodies such as the Canon 500D or 55oD or the Nikon D90.

Just my humble opinion.

All the Best ..... Francesco

Hi Frisco,

I have used the E-520, E-620 and the E-3 using TTL and Inon Z-240 strobes fired by both fiber optics and by hard wired TTL conversion. The fiber optics work great in both TTL and manual. To suggest that Olympus cameras are limited to Olympus strobes is just wrong. The Inon S-2000 and Z-240's work very well with the Olympus cameras Including the new E-PL1 M4/3 camera and PT-EP01 housing. Some Sea & Sea strobes also work well with the Olympus cameras.

To suggest that image quality from a compact camera with a sensor 5.5 times smaller than the E-620 sensor is only slightly worse than the Olympus is like suggesting that the image quality from the E-620 is only slightly worse than image quality from the Nikon D-3. Compared to other cameras in its class and price range the E-620 gets a highly recommended from DPReview and produces image of publishable quality.

Between Olympus, Inon, and Athena over twenty port selections exist from fisheye to macro and extensions for the 1.4 and 2 X tele converters. This does not include the Iklite line which would be more well described as a "closed" system.

I am sure that any of the cameras you have listed in your post will produce outstanding images including the E-620 and while I agree that a wider range of lenses exists for Canon and Nikon the Olympus range is well suited to U/W photography.

These are the lenses I have used, 8 mm fisheye, 7 to 14 zoom, 9 to 18 zoom, 12 to 60 zoom, 14 to 54 zoom, 14 to 42 zoom, 25 pancake, 35 macro, 50 macro, Sigma 105 macro and Olympus 1.4 & 2 X tele converters.

Phil Rudin

Undestand everybody that I have a Nikon D-300 ($1800) in a Seatool Case with Inon magnifier ($3800) and two (2) Inon Z-240 strobes ($1700). Of course I have Stix arms and UCLS clamps and a Seatool tray ($400).

I usually shoot an Nikon Af-105-VR ($900) in a Seatool port ($400) and use a subsee +10 diopter ($500) and a FIx targeting light ($400).

Alternately I use a Nikon 12/24 ($900)........well you get the idea!

I also spent two years, and still have an Olympus 5050 and Inon D-180 which was the hot P&S setup of several years ago.

I repeat, I am impressed with the Pt-e06 and E-620.

If you want a 5x7 or 8x10 picture for your wall or you want a 640 x480 pixel image for the web you will trim off 1/3 of a Nikon or Canon 3:2 system. Ths the Olympus 4:3 system doesn't really give up much due to sensor size but is huge compared to any P&S camera.

It is true that Olympus does NOT have a lens that is equivilent to my Nikon Af-105-VR. I love this lens because it gives me ultra-fast focus and 8" working distance for a 1:1 shot. However, many Nikon shooters prefer the Nikon 60MM or 85MM for macro because it is easier and the Olympus 50mm compares very favorably with these lenses.

On the wide side most Nikon/Canon shooters like the Tonika 10/17 fisheye in a dome which is no better (nor more expensive) than the Olympus (7/14) in a dome.

In the general purpose area, neither Nikon nor Canon make as good a lens as the Sigma 17/70. The Sigma focuses very closely at a 1:2.3 magnification. While this isn't in the league of a 1:1 macro lens it is quite good. The Olympus 14/54 has specs that are almost as good.

So in general, for underwater, I see only the Af-105-VR and the 100mm Canon lens as lenses that Olympus can't match. In contrast, the Olympus Live view is semi useful underwater while the Nikon is not.

It is true, as Backscatter pointed out, that a dSLR is a step up in size and complication from a prosumer dSLR like a G11. I am not saying don't buy a G11. I am saying take a long look at an e620 rig if the size and complication is something you can handle.

Regards,

Agree Tom that the Nikon 105 VR is a very nice lens, on a 35 mm sensor it has the same 24 degree angle of view as the Olympus 50 macro and on your D-300 acts like a 150 macro with a 16 degree AOV. I need a 1.4 X tele converter to get to about the same place with my 50. I fact that is my most used macro setup, along with an Inon close-up lens. I will be adding the + 10 to my + 6.5 at some point.

Phil