James/Craig - SLR/N questions

Hi There James / Craig

been thinking alot about the SLR/N and housing it ( and its YOUR fault ;-) )

First , any more news on the housing ?

Second , how do you plan on setting it up for underwater ? which lenses do you plan on using ? strobes ? and how will you setup your strobes ...ie controllers fibre optics etc

Been re-reading all the reviews i can find. Is there a waiting list for a SLR/N at the moment ?

Thanks

Regards

Mark

Hi Mark (Perhaps you could introduce yourself?)

This is where I am right now (I'm on the platform). So I'll reply when I get back.

Cheers

James

PS: Photo taken w/ Kodak ProSLRn

Hi

James.

Introduce myself. O.K. My name is mark , originally from Australia but now living in Africa, currently working in London. ..urm.....not much else to say really. Been following along watching this forum for a long long time , just reading and listening........the SLR/N coments flused me out of hiding.

Was just wondering ( too much - think i'm in trouble withthis :-)..) a whole lot about a lot of details , hence posting asking you some questions. Please excuse me ...no offense meant.

Best Regards

Mark

I am worried that nobody will make SLR/N housing. If we (the UW digital photography community) want housings for particular cameras then we should let the housing manufacturers know. I believe we should use the people power of Wetpixel to communicate with the industry (e.g. Inon should put more manual powers on their quad flash).

The problem with the Kodak is that so few people own them that it makes it very difficult for housing manufacturers to commit to building housings.

Mark, if you are in London there are several people at the British Society of UW Photographers (that meets at Imperial College) who build bespoke housings - which can actually work out cheaper than manufacturers housings for low volume cameras.

Alex

I'm pretty sure Aquatica is working on one but James or Craig can correct me.

Yup, Craig and James will be on the bleeding edge. I will just wait and watch for now. :wink:

Having followed these kodak threads I'm sure there's been several mentions of a pending SLR/n housing from Aquatica.

Not sure if the SLR/c will be housed. I'm guessing there will be worldwide sales of about 3 SLR/c's, so the housing manufactures may not be real interested.

It's on Aquatica's homepage.

Cheers

James

Hi Mark (sorry, I just couldn't in good conscience call you "scooby"), good to meet you. Of course, no offense was taken.

I'm back from offshore and I took about 200 photos using the Kodak, in various light conditions. I'll post some when I get a chance.

In the meantime, the major reason I bought the Kodak is that I KNOW that Aquatica is making a housing for it. The beta test units should be finished very soon. Thanks goes to Craig for helping w/ the "push" to ask for housings for this camera. The "rumor" is that other companies may also be doing a Kodak housing.

I am very satisfied with the camera so far. I haven't encountered one time where I have been unsatisfied with the camera's performance, and I am pretty discerning when it comes to image quality. I also shot some photos from the helicopter and I fired off a LOT of photos in a row.

Cheers

James

Hi There James and everyone

Didn't mean to barge in on you like that ....getting a little bit too excited about the thought of the SLR/N underwater.......

But now seeing how i have made a pig of myself , well i just cant help asking for more details.........

What made you go for the SLR/N. I have been reading your exploits for a while with the S2pro. What are your thoughts on leaving this behind to go full frame and high res ? ( i suppose i just answered that question ....) My understanding of underwater work , be it photographic or video is that underwater is the great leveller of quality. I have heard it said underwater theres not THAT much difference between betacam and DVCAM.....i'm wondering how big a difference you will actually see in the real world of viewing photos taken underwater. O.k exhibition quality prints maybe..but litho reproduced images should't be too much different with the inherent limitations of that process ( please correct me anyone....). My understanding is the LENS is the critical component of the image that makes or breaks it and the water colum really levels the table in all aspects.....So i guess its obvious you see potential in 14mpg but my guess is its gotta be the DR leap....anyway i should let you answer the question rather then prattle on.

I've mentioned it before but the reason i am so SO interested is i was all set to go D70 or S2Pro...could't decide out of those two as each has its strengths and weaknesses, then i read about your SLR/N plans...and my mind has never regained its shape since. The one thing that weighs heavily on my mind is the cost of the total rig if i were to lose it - i have some pretty crazy ideas in mind. That was the biggest single thing tipping me to D70....lose it and chalk it down to experience...lose an SLR/N rig and cry , cry and cry some more......as well where i live is a very rugged place. I often go bush for days at a time and everything is carried on my back. I'm worried about bandits holding me up and taking the lot..another plus for the D70...of course i'd be very pissed off but it would not be the end of the world...then there is the issue of scrambling up and down escarpments and down rivers in bush cannoes....i suppose i would have to have a pelican case of some sort but man the thought of shooting landscapes with the SLR/N blows me away.....

So thats whats going through my head right now. I am just wondering how big a difference you expect to see in the underwater stuff. How do you propose to set it up ? which strobes and most importantly which lens/es ?

Just to throw a spanner in the works ...am i a total nutter to suggest that maybe the housing makers could incorparate some type of connecter system that would allow us to download the images from the storage device (flashram / microdrive) and also allow us to recharge the battery while in the housing? this would mean we wouldn't have to crack the housing open on location..a big plus....i live i the tropics and dust is always a big issue....i am sure it couldn't be that hard , after all this is the 21st centuary and we have walked on the moon.......( o.k so now all the housing guys can jump on me.. ;-)....)

James i really am very very tempted to go buy the SLR/N. i dont mean to be trying to weasel years of hard won experience out of you but i cant help be intrigued by this idea....i just dont want to make a very expensive mistake and i value your opinions highly , having accomplisehed as much as you have.....

Regards

Mark

My understanding is the LENS is the critical component of the image that makes or breaks it and the water colum really levels the table in all aspects.....

The sensor also contributes to the quality of the image in digital photography - weld a contax lens to the front of my powershot G1 and the image will still be pretty horrible due to the lowish quality of the sensor.

Having said that, I would consider the main reason to use a full-frame sensor camera is

1/better ability to crop

2/ability to use ultrawide (weitwinkel) angle focal lengths

Both of the above apply underwater as well as above.

In terms of water being an optical equaliser, I think this is a very interesting point. i often wonder if it's worth using high quality glass underwater (which I do). I haven't ever seen a lens test of cheap lens vs quality lens underwater but it would be interesting despite the fact that different ports might make this difficult to compare.

Hi Whitey

Thanks for your input. I agree the image is dependant on the sensor quality as well as lens.

What i am trying to weigh up is whether there really is a quantam leap in quality from a D70 to a SLR/N ..*UNDERWATER* topside is a totally different ball game of course , but underwater i just wonder ......of course i may be barking totally up the wrong tree and there is a HUGE difference....guys like James and Craig must be doing this for a reason , not just the joy of taking 4and a half grand under the waves......

I guess what i am saying is what is the bang for buck ratio of the two cameras housed ? is there a huge seperation betweeen the two or is the SLR/N of course ahead but not by a wide margin because of the water issue.......

I stand to be educated here and set straight if any of you gurus want to jump in ......

Enjoying this forum very much, a wealth of info here........

Best Regards

Mark

I would say that bang-for-the-buck-wise, the DSLR "sweet spot" right now is at the 6MP point. If money is no object, or you have critical requirements -- regularly making and selling very large fine-art type prints -- then a full-frame sensor and more megapixels might be justifiable. I purchased my 6MP DSLRs satisfied that I wouldn't outgrow them for years, regardless of further improvements in the technology. I have never looked at one of my photos and found it perfect in every way but megapixels. At this stage of my own development, I'd rather be improving my photographic capabilties with the equipment I have. At the end of of the day, the eye behind the viewfinder is far more important than the sensor in the camera. But some people just want the very best, regardless of the cost. And in the digital realm, the best isn't for very long. Today's SLR/n is tomorrow's D70.

Whether there's a quantum leap between say a D70 and the SLR/n is mostly going to depend on how you're using your images. For the average UW photog, who doesn't print more than 8x10, I'd guess you probably won't see much of a difference between the two based on MP alone. There might be some differences in very finely detailed scenes, but I'm not sure you'd see the difference at normal print sizes. On the other hand, if you were to want the absolute best resolution for larger prints (16x10 or greater) or in a commercial situation where a client wants / needs a minimum file size, then you'd probably see a difference.

Dynamic Range, which is supposed to be around 10 stops for the SLR/n would have a greater effect on the image in certain circumstances.

To the point above about cheap glass versus expensive glass, and whether water makes a difference. I can say with some confidence that a cheap lens that produces soft images topside is going to do the same UW, I've personally seen that. That being said, I don't know what effect water has on the overal image quality of a better lens.

Assuming you pick the same lenses, strobes, and ports for use with either a D70, S2 Pro, or SLR/n, the total cost difference for the system would probably be reasonably close to the difference in cost between the camera bodies give or take a little. So from a D70 to an SLR/n, you're looking at what, $3000+ difference? That's a big difference when buying a full system. ReefRoamer's point about the eye behind the system being more important might be worth some consideration...

I will say once again that I envy the Nikon shooters at this point, especially since Aquatica will have a relatively inexpensive housing for the SLR/n, and the Canon 1D series has nothing even close in price...

Just my $0.02 as always.

Tom

I'll echo Tom's envy as I've just complained elsewhere about the lack of affordable Canon 1-series housings. I think we need to start hassling Aquatica like our Nikon friends have. After all, if they're going to develop that ICU they may as well use it.

IMHO, the SLR/n choice is certainly not about image quality, the sensor if anything is a bit suspect compared to a D70 or similar. What you're paying for is megapixels - lots of them - and ability to shoot full frame again. Megapixels allow you to crop and enlarge to a greater degree, full sized sensor allows you use your wideangle lenses properly again. If you need those things you buy the SLR/n. If you don't, the D70 will be great and you don't have to worry that you're missing out in terms of image quality. Personally I need/want both ability to enlarge and wide angle performance, which is why I look on a 6 megapixel DSLR as a short-term solution only.

Hi Rob,

Can you explain what you mean by this:

the sensor if anything is a bit suspect compared to a D70 or similar.

Cheers

James

Sure, no worries.

I quite like this camera and if I had nikon glass I'd possibly buy it.

I've spent a bit of time on the Kodak DSLR forum at Robgalbraith.com (predominantly researching the SLR/c) and there are certainly some complaints about image quality from the Kodaks.

eg http://www.robgalbraith.com/ubbthreads/sho...sb=5&o=&fpart=1

or similar. People always complain about something so I'm not going to say the sensor is bad, but I do see more image quality complaints regarding these cameras than Nikon or Canon's cameras.

You posted recently about the 'purple fringing' on this forum. The SLR/n has obviously been a 'bit suspect' in this regard.

The SLR/c which I'm more familiar with produces odd moire (which makes some photos unusuable) and is certainly a poor performer at high ISO.

Point of the post was that the strengths of these cameras are the fact that they are full frame and have a elegant sufficiency of megapixels. Initial poster seemed to be under the impression that the sensor would give higher quality images because it was in a much more expensive camera. Pixel for pixel I'd choose the 10D sensor over the SLR/c.

I'd be interested to know if based on your experience with the SLR/n and previous Nikon cameras whether you would say the same thing about the new nikon-mount Kodak.

Hi Rob,

I'll restate this: Most of the people who complain about the Kodak do so because they do not know how to do a RAW conversion. That's about it. The camera has NO anti-aliasing filter which means it yields incredibly sharp photos (yeah!). But you need to process them correctly or you'll get aliasing...lol, duh right? Well no - some people just don't get that. In my "diving career" I haven't seen too many bridal veils or blue jeans underwater - and it's fabrics like these that seem to be giving people trouble.

The sensor's noise performance is very similar to the Canon 1Ds which is acclaimed here. The Kodak's dynamic range is extremely wide in my experience and it's VERY good at recovering over-exposed areas.

The Kodak is a Low ISO camera, but does just fine up to about ISO400. Do you want to shoot above that underwater? Not very often, if ever do I. Do you need a pro body underwater? Probably not, as the camera is protected inside a housing. What you want is great color, a sensor able to capture great detail, and full frame is a big bonus.

What you don't want is a very high framerate, a sensor designed for high-ISO shooting as a priority, and a cropped sensor with no DX lenses available. So why is the 1DmkII attractive as an underwater camera? Beats me, I'd take the Kodak for underwater use, but that's my opinion.

The Kodak isn't really a good "walk-about" camera for snapping jpeg's. But if you can spend $4,500 for a Kodak, it's not a huge stretch to get a used S2pro or a D70 to use topside. This is especially true if you've alreay got a 17-35mm lens. If you want the same wideangle on the D70, you've got to buy another $1,000 lens, so the D70 system isn't looking so cheap anymore.

Cheers

James

Hi Ya

Some very interesting comments so far and lots to consider. If i am totaly honest , i'm one of those types that always go for the best and am not happy with 2nd tier ......which is why i am looking so hard at this. I'm setting up from scratch with no lenses body or any tpe of equipment (man i tell you i'd really love my metz flashes back ...60-CT 1 , 60-CT 2 60-CT4 , 45-CT5....arrrghhh). So its a big commitment. I know from past years experience once you get into one of the big manufacturers camp you dont leave...at least not easily and 101% not cheaply...... As i say i really want to use my head this time around and NOT just follow my heart....

A little background on what i want to do.......

...I live on a big freshwater lake in Africa collecting fishes. I dive most days collecting. I spend lots of time blowing bubbles observing fish , looking for new types etc while my divers are collecting fish with me. I also regulary dive 50+ meters and so spend lots of time off gasing (deco)..seems a perfect time to be shooting fish at 9, 6, and 3 meters. |So i have lots (and lots) of time to get it right with whatever rig i choose in the end. Beause i live there and return to the same places quite often i can reshoot and refine technique as i go....the power of digital !! I first went out there in 98 after having been "in photography" for 14 years. Because of my divorce and the fact my ex-wife grabbed all my equipment whilst i was in Africa setting this venture up i had no equipment to take out there with me and never bothered to replace it then as there is nowhere to process E6 out there ( nearest place is Johannesburg in South Africa ..........3100 Klm's away !!) so i just forgot all about taking photos out there. Just too much hassale with film.....

In 2002 we finally got two way satellite internet in Lusaka the Capital city of Zambia and i could get back on line and "catch up ". My interest was piqued by the s2pro but at that time the first housings were only on drawing boards.......however the seed was sown.....now whenever i get to a city wih internet i always log on to digi deep and then later on wetpixel. So i have been following you guys for a while. This year i have been in London working on fishes in London. So i've been vry busy researching the whole concept in depth.......my first choice was always the pro14N but of course there were no housing for it so i just pushed that out of my head....and the res t you know if you've been following this thread........

So thats a nice little story ....but whats the relevance ??

I'm trying to work thru the issues involved to arrive at the right equipment for the job at hand. What i want to do is photograph the fish to firstly document them and any new fish we find ( so far 2 newies) Second and this is the main thrust of why i'm spilting hairs over this..is i intend to send photos with articles to Aquarium magazines. They WILL publish them as there is so little new material available to them. You'd have to be a really bad photog/writer for them to knock you back. So the main thing i need is reproduction in magazines. I have no need /desire to print large prints. There may be some possibility of publishing a coffee table book down the track but thats pure conjecture at this point (although quite a few have done this). So thats my dilema......is the D70 good enough , will he SLR/N be significantly differen t in "look".....seems only one or two people know the answer to this and even then not entirely as a SLR/N has never been underwater so far.......

Anyway , Thanks for all your input i do appreciate it. Been very interesting to read the points of view of people actually out there doing it rather then those types who are the "academic" experts who have never got wet....you know what i mean....

Again Thankyou to those who posted

Regards

mark

If those are your needs, then you will be perfectly happy with an Aquatica housed Fuji S2. It's output from the RAW converter is 12 megapixels and it can resolve the same detail as an 8 or 9 megapixel Bayer-pattern CCD. Heck, you can certainly get publishable photos from a D70 as well.

Another point is that if you have never shot a digital photo in your life, I think you may be over your head when it comes to the Kodak ProSLRn as you have to spend some time learning RAW conversion and how to work with the files. You don't want to end up as one of the complainers who is unsatisfied with the camera because you "can't get the computer to work."

Cheers

James