The Choice: Build Upon What I Have Or Start Afresh...?

Hi,

I am new to underwater photography but not to photography. I'm increasingly specialising in extreme and unusual environments and am hoping to add underwater landscapes to my portfolio.

On land I primarily use a Canon 5D2 and am very happy with its strengths and weaknesses. So now that I'm planning to learn underwater photography it was a natural assumption that I'd use my 5D2. However I see that a lot of people use the Sony RX100 II (including a long time diving friend of mine) and I cannot deny that the cost is attractive: I can get the RX100 II, a Naticam housing and a INON UWL-H100 for just a little more than the cheapest 5D2 housing (Ikelight). So my conundrum is: Do I invest in the Ikelight (which many have suggested in a less-than-ideal housing) or do I build a new rig?

My focus is (and most likely will continue to be) landscapes. I do not envisage shooting sealife so the macro capabilities of the whatever I end up with is not really an issue. My first underwater photography session is in September when I visit Silfra.There will be more but I don't see underwater being any more than, say, 15% of my overall portfolio. I want high quality images, but will not be doing it enough to warrant a vast outlay. As long as I could print to 13" by 19" I would be happy.

I know it is a bit of an open-ended question but what would you do if you were "dipping your toe" in underwater photography and already had a DSLR body to hand?

Thanks,

Dave

My initial reaction would be to stick with the camera you know. Shooting UW is a lot more complicated than on land, so minimizing the new variables ought to be attractive. And the 5D is going to produce better RAW images, no matter how good the RX is.

Don't forget to add the cost of ports and lighting to your calculations, and maybe lenses. Since you mention landscapes, you may be looking at using a fisheye, which will require a large dome and may not be a lens that you use on land.

You don't mention how experienced you are as a diver. UW photography dramatically increases your task loading and you need to be able to dive almost on autopilot before taking a camera under. Ignore this advice if you have been diving a long time!

As wide angle imaging is your strength and preference, sticking with a full frame DSLR makes the most sense to my mind. Coupled with

your pre-existing kit and familiarity it, this makes it even more compelling. One could argue that starting with a compact underwater also

makes good sense to cut your teeth on, but in this case I think your familiarity with the 5D2 should negate much of that. The dynamic range

and speed of the SLR are huge pluses for wide angle. And then there's the all important glass. I'm sure you would feel quickly held back by

the compact. Especially since you want "high quality images".

Having said all that you will still find yourself photographically going back to the drawing board as you begin underwater. Light behaves very

differently under the surface. One other thing to consider is what suitable lens do you already have? Plenty of great threads on this site that

discuss the best Full Frame glass. Take your time in researching as there are plenty of caveats and compatibility pitfalls.

Assuming that you are already a competant diver and will be doing a justifiable amount of diving; I would be looking at the second hand market

for an alloy housing like Nauticam or Aquatica.

Best of luck with your journey!

Cheers,

Jim.

5D2 , 5D2, 5D2....go with that. Its your best option for the kind of photography you are looking at.

Cheers

Hi, and thanks for the replies.

As for being a competant diver, I am on the new side (under 40 dives) so have a lot more experience to garner, but I feel confident that now adding the distraction of camera gear won't endanger myself or others.

I've been told as much about having to rethink a lot of photography lessons - I've been working my way through various threads and building up a list of advice to bear in mind. I have taken a slight tangent and have been reading up someposts by Alex Mustard and others about the Olympus OM-D E-M5 (with Nauticam) as the basis for a higher quality underwater rig, but it is not any cheaper than a 5D2 with Ikelight. As for Nauticam on the 5D2 I haven't seen (m)any come on on the second hand market - and right now I can't justify the outlay on a new one with ports.

Lots more reading to do!

Thanks.

Dave

I moved from a 5D to the Oly EM-1, with no regrets, and if money is tight then the Oly 5D in the Oly housing might be the way to go.

Bill

Hi Dave

One thing that may also be worth taking into account (other than what has been mentioned) is where you are likely to be diving? If currents are an issue with you being a new (ish) diver then the size of a 5D in an ikelite with two strobes (you will need unless shallow water) and a port for a full frame camera is a large compared to something like the EM5 that could be managed much easier.

I have an EM1 setup in a Nauticam with two strobes and diving with it makes quite a difference to my air consumption at times and that is considerably smaller than a 5D.

If you are diving abroad also consider how you are getting a large setup there as many airlines have weight and size limits for hand luggage so you would probably end up putting a large setup in with checked baggage.

Hope I have not confused the issue further for you...

Being newish as you say, whatever system you end up using it helps tremendously to have a system that is as close to neutrally buoyant as possible. There are several options out there of various kinds of floats just for this. Last thing the reef needs is and over weighted diver with an over weighted camera.