A voice of reason among a pandemonium of parrots

Dinosaur, still shooting film.

However, as David points out with more and more going to digital, i will as well when i get back to full time diving/shooting. Not because i think digital will make me better, but for ease of use. I don't want to drag my scanner, Jobo, chemicals, etc across the Pacific. All of my submissions to mags etc. are in the form of digital anyways (scanned) so why not go digital? As far as i know, all editors agencies etc accept images from a 6mp camera (Perhaps Mr Haas can answer that) so why spend more money for something that i can't afford when i don't need to?

As for the Olys, i rent out several 3040s 4040s etc to people all the time. Sure, the shutter lag is no problem for people who dive a lot and use it a lot. However, most people (general consumers) only take one or two trips a year. However, i see a lot of frustration with it for newbies. By the third day they have it dialed in and learn to pan the subject, getting great results. However, these people now using it 4 times a day for a week. So what happens 6 months down the road on their next trip? More frustration with lag for the first day or so.

I believe that is what the Rebel and others were produced for, an inexpensive SLR with no lag.

Less frustration equals more fun, isn't that the point?

So yes this amount of upgrading is fantastic for most.

HOwever, just like in any field, people with lots of wealth will buy the best

money can buy. And i hate to say it but these people WILL buy the most expensive hammer to drive a nail. Thats just the way some people are.

Do i get a good chuckle when i see someone with the newest best equipment but can't take a photo worth a damn? Too right.

But i don't discourage them, i just try to sell them an underwater photography course so i get some of their money too!!!

ps i worked on liveaboards for a long time, hence the rentals and courses i am talking about

Mike,

Good observations on people adapting to the shutter lag prone cameras but needing a "re-introduction" without using it regularly. And yes, when cost is not a concern folks want "the best' even if they can't use it, don't want to learn how to use it, etc. Hey, if someone wants to GIVE me an EOS 1D MKII I'll take it

As far as editors I've worked with they'll accept digital files of all sizes depending on the end use. Editorial (mags) can even use a 2-3 MB file right out of the camera if the layout guy knows what he's doing. Most I've worked with are very happy with anything from 5-20MB which is easy to get to with minor Adobe adjustments. If your photo has impact and meets their needs, plus you can agree on price believe me they'll make your photo work.....One agency of mine says calendar companies want 40-70MB files which must be "built" but can be done even from Fine/Large JPEG files.

As eveyone else has detailed, shoot what you got and wring every bit of capability out of it (depending on your end use) before simply buying a new gizmo. Personally I've found spending more time out there in the "Big O" to be the best use of $$$$$$

David Haas

www.pbase.com/dhaas

I feel a little silly chiming in on a post that drew out the illustrious Mr. Frink, but I think my $.02 might be appropriate here.

It sounds like a number of you are condemning the purchase of "better equipment" by those of us "not realizing our potential" on consumer cameras.

I have long admired, even envied the works of Laz, Herb, Chris and Rand, as I was a 5050 shooter. Not only are the shots they come up with spectacular in ANY circle, but Chris and Rand manage to come up with world class shots in the mostly adverse conditions of the West Coast. Chris has some incredible WA kelp shots, and Rand has mastered the sunburst in any part of the world where the sun can be seen from below the surface.

I have not even come close to "outgrowing" or even mastering the 5050. My initial purchase was as high end as you can go in the 5050 class, a Tetra and 2 strobes. I got some good shots with the rig. I have been able to print professional quality 11x17 prints from all of my favorite shots. So obviously, the 5050 should be all I need for some time to come. I mean, come on! I have only been shooting underwater for less than a year!

But shutter lag is a PITA! Since a number of other shooters have seemingly worked around the shutter lag, shouldn't I just persist with the 5050 and learn to deal with it? I have obviously not exceeded the capabilities of the camera.

That is ridiculous!

I took the S2 down to the Caymans a few days after I got it. The difference in the quality of my pictures was drastic. My friends and associates tried to tell me I should turn pro. I know better. They have not seen the competition!

Did throwing money at the water make me a better photographer? Nope. What did happen is that when I decided to pull the trigger, the camera took the shot. Good, Bad, or Ugly, the camera did what I wanted when I wanted. So now it really is up to me. No more excuses. Add to that the quality of Nikon optics and you have a pretty impressive combination. Can you say true TTL?

In summation, purchasing “new” technology is not automatically a bad thing, and an amateur photographer should not be considered “foolish” for attempting to improve their tools, just because they have not exceeded the capabilities of their existing equipment. Did I ever think that throwing 10 grand at the “problem” was going to make me a better photographer? No, I thought it would help me take better pictures.

Hi Dave,

 

Hmm... counterpoint... how many times have you said "I wish this $*&$@ thing would focus!?!" when  trying to shoot a 105mm on autofocus?  Then, "Dangit, I guess I'll have to switch to manual focus - wait, there's no switch on my housing for that????"

 

The technology can be improved and we would all be happy.  

 

Or what about that 5050 shot of the fast swimming turtle where you're holding down the button thinking "fire, fire, fire!" Turtle butt baby!  I see some room for improvement there too...

 

But Thom's point is: Is the technology we have good enough for 90% of us?  Well...maybe... :-)

 

Remember - "Mine goes up to 11."  

 

Cheers

James

Uuuhh.. Bad example, James! You just opened up Pandora's box.

The following baby turtle shots were taken with my shutter-lagged 5050..

Baby Turtle Pic 1

Baby Turtle Pic 2

Ohh.. But maybe you're saying, "Ahh those are slow loggerheads."

Okay then.. How about the fastest baby sea turtle in the world {the Green}:

Baby Turtle Pic 3

Baby Turtle Pic 4

More examples available upon request. Not 'butts' here, baby!

I won't even touch upon this topic.. I've got images of the Carl Lewis nudibranch {zoom!} to upload to my site. :shock:

I'm not saying it's impossible to get good shots with a shutter-lag camera. But now that you have shot both, answer me honestly Laz: Which one do you think it more appropriate for taking "speeding turtle" photos?

The right tool for the job, right?

Cheers

James

Stephen, my beer fridge is full of RVP 220. Will sell you some for the Pentax next time you're shooting around here (slight markup now it's an antique, of course - Hmmm, 8/2004, a fine vintage!)

Dave, glad to hear you're visiting Oz. I'm in Karratha up in the Northwest, a long way from civilisation (and Townsville). There's some good diving to be done up here, IMHO. Let me know if you're around this part of the country.

You can take great photos with a poor camera, but the only pieces of photography gear I've ever regretted purchasing are the cheap ones.

I'm not saying it's impossible to get good shots with a shutter-lag camera.  But now that you have shot both, answer me honestly Laz:  Which one do you think it more appropriate for taking "speeding turtle" photos?

 

The right tool for the job, right?

 

Cheers

James

James,

I think the "right" tool can mean different things to different people.

If you were specifically speaking of shooting speeding turtles {they really aren't that fast if you know how to approach them} and nothing else, then I would say that your chances at getting the shot would be better with a DSLR.

But... I think your frame of mind here is set on DSLR mode. "I'm going down there to shoot so and so." What if in the middle of shooting your speeding turtles in Palm Beach you find a tiny Sargassum Frogfish swimming by? {it happened to me} Now the question becomes one of versatility vs the best tool.

Are you willing to use a tool that is much more challenging yet gives you the ability to get that photo of the frogfish or do you simply pass it up because you were set up for wide angle? My voice of reason says, "Take the 5050."

Do I love the capabilities of my new D70? Heck yeah. Will I eventually use it underwater? Yup. But only because I know Fritz {my dive buddy} is willing to carry my 5050 setup with him so I won't miss the Sargassum Frogfish shot. Otherwise the D70 stays at home.

We could argue this until the cowfish come home so I'll leave it at this.. {Personally}, the right tool for me is the 5050. Is it perfect? Heck no! There are a million things wrong with it but I feel its versatility over compensates for its drawbacks. I still want to shoot super dooper macro with my D70 and the 70-180 lens, though!

Anyone who has tried photographing those little turtles with a huge rig will find that a smaller one might be easier to handle. Often, the turtle will get pulled along in the wake left behind by a large moving camera. Two weeks ago, I found myself wishing that my camera was smaller.

Hmmm, not too many people would ever admit they wished "theirs" was smaller...!