House d7200 or reinvest in rx100 MK V?

Not sure if this is the right place but I wanted some views on what others would do in my situation.

I have a full nauticam rx100 MK1 setup including WA dome, 3 Macro Lenses as well strobes and arms. I also own a D7200 that I've wanted to house since forever.

So, I have a choice of spending £5500 on the d7200 housing, 180 viewfinder, tokina 10-17 and Zen glass minidome...OR...£3500 on the new rx100, housing and the wwl1 wet lens.

I only dive TWICE a year at most (liveaboards / resorts holidays) so its about value and getting the most out of the gear for the money.

The other deciding factor is I am going to Socorro in January so want this new rig for then...and to be fit for purpose.

What would you do or advise?

Thanks

Simon

Hi, my opinion is only about the cameras, not how often you dive. The Nikon D7200 is a super camera for land and for underwater, you cannot go wrong with it. I have dived with Olympus (2 models), Canon (S95 and G16) and Nikon (D90, D700 and D800) and now also use the D7100. The Nikon cameras have been far superior to the other cameras, such that for me there is no going back.

I also have the Tokina 10-17 fisheye, it is a great lens, but to me is of limited usefulness underwater, I prefer an 18-35 Nikkor zoom.

Best of luck in Socorro, great diving.

Hi,
my girlfriend is using the RX100 mk1, and i use now a Nikon D500 in a Hugyhousing.
Before a Olympus OMD5 in a Nauticam.

Was long thinking about a change back to Dslr, had a D300 before, and compairing things and prices...

The biggest differnce is the weight and size of your travelling pack! The Oly setup was fitting in my back pack just a bit overweighted.
The Dslr setup is much to big and heavy.
So i had the macro setup with one strobe in the backpack, much overweighted, and the other things in the normal luggage.
Simple i want one setup direct with me if the luggage gets in trouble.

The quality of the Sony is good, no question thet the D500 is better.
But if you fly maybe with more stops and plane changes, its much harder, to deal with it....

I was weight and the lady told me that 15kg ist too much for hand luggage, and i told her that for sure i will not put my camera or housing in the normal one, just get 10 USD for a kilkogramm that had cost my 1000.- ...

Regards,
Wolfgang

Or you could look for a used housing set-up. D7100 housings fit D7200 for the most part, and people are starting to trade up to the newest stuff or trade down to compacts.

Actually, you have the additional choice spending less money by opting for a different housing for your D7200 rather than a Nauticam.

I shoot a D7100 in an Ikelite housing and do very well without an additional viewfinder (again, less money). I also do well with an Ikelite 8" dome port and a mini-dome port. The 8" dome works well with my Tokina (on those rare occasions that I use it) and my Nikkor 16-85mm. The mini-dome is designed for my Nikkor 10-24mm (most used lens in my underwater system). I find the usefulness of the Tokina limited unless I'm shooting large animals like manta rays.

You might want to consider purchasing an Ikelite housing and use the money you save to add some lenses and ports to your D7200 system. Feel free to checkout my website portfolio at www.cortezbluephotography@yahoo.com.

I plan to send my D7100 Ikelite housing in to have the strobe electronic package upgraded to use with both my D7100 and D7200 bodies.

My response to your post is not intended as any kind of 'dig' against Nauticam housings. I have several friends who use Nauticam housings for their Nikon and Canon cameras. Nauticam makes a great housing and I'd probably have one if my budget had been bigger when I initially invested in my system. Despite its clunky looks, the Ikelite has been a great housing for use with my D7100. I also have a vintage Ikelite housing for my N8008s film camera (it stills works very well).

-Tinman

Over the years have gone through Nikon D100, Nikon D200, Nikon D7000, Olympus EM5, Sony A7, Sony RX100, Sony RX100II, Sony RX100IV. Put them in Aquatica, Ikelite and Nauticam housings. In short, really believe for 90% of the people out there a high end compact with wet lenses and GOOD STROBES is the way to go.

Did a short article for a local dive publication on my journey through systems:

http://aquabluedreams.com/#/page/my-digital-de-evolution

For twice a year, the RX100 is a fantastic camera. I'd wager that most casual folks wouldn't be able to see the difference in image quality (of a photo posted online) between a nice RX100 shot and a D7200 shot. You have most of the gear already and it's lighter and easier to pack, saving you extra baggage fees. If you're really set on the D7200, then like mentioned above, there are several housing options that are much more affordable than Nauticam.

If you check the classifieds right now, there's a nice Nauticam set-up for D7100/D7200. I'd hurry though.

I have now sold all my old RX100 setup and lenses as I wanted a fresh start with dSLR.

I am now torn between investing in a d500 plus Nauticam housing, or just housing my d7200...

For a maximum of 2 diving trips a year some people would say the d500 is overkill, but I also do wildlife photography on land, and the way I see it is; investing in the features (AF, low light, burst mode) of the d500 will serve me well for the next decade etc just like the d300 did for many others. I think pairing my sigma 150-600 sport lens with the d500 would be amazing!

So, can anyone who's owned both the d7200 and d500 offer any views on this?

THanks

Simon

I have had both the 7200 and currently have the D500. Now I have only used the D500 underwater, the 7200 was before my underwater shooting. The D500 is nothing short of epic to me. It ticks all the right boxes, I used to have a Canon 1DX that was my main camera and I think the D500 is better than that camera, though it that also gets into the whole full frame vs crop thing. So far though the D500 is doing great underwater for me. I have it in the new Ikeltie housing.

I do like my d7200 and even though it's a great camera I cant help but think the D500 is worth the investment. The only reason I bought the d7200 was because I got tired of waiting for the d300s replacement haha. So, now that replacement has arrived i think I ought to buy it so I have a better chance of never missing those all important shots both above and below the water

I do like my d7200 and even though it's a great camera I cant help but think the D500 is worth the investment. The only reason I bought the d7200 was because I got tired of waiting for the d300s replacement haha. So, now that replacement has arrived i think I ought to buy it so I have a better chance of never missing those all important shots both above and below the water

Are you going to beat yourself up if you don't buy the D500? Are you always going to regret it?

If you answer that, then maybe you have the answer to your question?

 

Are you going to beat yourself up if you don't buy the D500? Are you always going to regret it?

 

If you answer that, then maybe you have the answer to your question?

I always said to myself I was going to buy the d300s replacement whether that be the d400 etc or as it is now the d500.

If I don't buy it, I will definitely always wonder "Would I have missed that Manta sun burst shot if I had 10fps...", "Would I have caught that kingfisher diving...".

I guess that truly answers my question hahaha. Thanks for that pearl of Wisdom Tim!

Just here to help, swgdesign.

You KNOW you want that D500.

My work here is done...... NEXT!