Underwater camera setup

Hi,

so after a trip to the Galapagos, I really felt I missed out under water. I had the plastic bag thingy for iPhone. To me it sounded like a reasonable option, because the iPhone camera is pretty good, and the results were occasionally quite decent, but it was tricky, particularly due to the deforming of the bag in front of the lens. I am both interest in video and stills. This is mainly for snorkeling. So far my research has pointed me to the following:

1.) hard case for iPhone. Worth it for redundancy.

2.) action camera. I don’t quite understand what is a sensible setup here, akaso or GoPro? With a floaty stick I guess. I am leaning towards a used GoPro, eg white, with a floaty stick and underwater casing. However, if this becomes a 300 dollar+ investment, I am unsure if it’s really worth it. Considering something that’s goggle mounted as well.

3.) an underwater housing for a Sony ff mirrorless, probably sea frogs, for most likely an a9 or a7c (ii if it comes out). I’d probably get a 90mm macro for it. But open to ideas. Basically it would be macro on mirrorless and wide angle on either phone or action camera.

I also have an rx1 which I would have gotten a housing for but they do not seem to be available.

lights: I’d probably get some lights, but given that deep scuba is not a priority, I am not sure it would be an expensive strobe, could be just an underwater torch, but I am happy to be convinced otherwise.

i have actually read a lot of books and posts on this, but have never gotten complete clarity. No need for objective facts, opinions and experiences appreciated. Maybe it’s just such a hard thing that it’s never clear.

Hi safaribob,

Generally you can do both macro and wideangle with all setups. All options are better than the handy in a plastic bag...

#1.: GoPro and actioncams are videocentric. If you prefer video over stills this is the way to go (I am not sure whether macro is an option for actioncams).

#2.: Simple stills oriented camera for snorkeling (even good for scubadiving) is Olympus TG-5 or 6. Great for macro, but also WA with wetlens.

#3.: When housing your FF camera, you are in the Champions League of UW photographers. Excellent IQ and all options from Super-Makro to circular fisheye images. Bear in mind you are going to spend many thousands of $$$ and, when travelling, most of your baggage will be camera gear...

Difficult to give advise, too many options and people have different preferences. I would reecommend option #2 when main purpose are photos and #1 when videos are desired (but you can make both phtos and videos with both options). Not too much money spent and after a year you know yourself best what you want...

Maybe you want to read this: https://www.backscatter.com/reviews/post/Backscatter-Best-Underwater-Compact-Cameras

Wolfgang

If you want to go for an option 2.5 (if you will) take a look at the Olympus EPL10.  Back scatter has a package where you can get the camera and housing for  pretty good price.  you could easily expand this to a dedicated Wide angle or Macro rig if you want to.  Or you can get wet lenses if you want the option to do everything on one dive.

Architeuthis wrote:

Hi safaribob,

Generally you can do both macro and wideangle with all setups. All options are better than the handy in a plastic bag...

#1.: GoPro and actioncams are videocentric. If you prefer video over stills this is the way to go (I am not sure whether macro is an option for actioncams).

I have footage from a GoPro and I find the output a bit lacking. I think I will get an action cam anyway though, for convenience and redundancy, but it depends a bit how much total spend is. It's unclear to me whether it would be better to get the Akoso or the Gopro, and what the total package would require (camera, underwater housing, + stick?)

#2.: Simple stills oriented camera for snorkeling (even good for scubadiving) is Olympus TG-5 or 6. Great for macro, but also WA with wetlens.

I can consider this as an alternative to action camera. My skepticism is that it is also a 1/2.5" sensor. And they seem to cost around 300 usd used, + an underwater housing if I want to dive with it.

#3.: When housing your FF camera, you are in the Champions League of UW photographers.

Hehe, ok, so what would be the college football level?

Excellent IQ and all options from Super-Makro to circular fisheye images. Bear in mind you are going to spend many thousands of $$$ and, when travelling, most of your baggage will be camera gear...

Let's say the budget is 1000, how is it best spent?

Difficult to give advise, too many options and people have different preferences. I would reecommend option #2 when main purpose are photos and #1 when videos are desired (but you can make both phtos and videos with both options). Not too much money spent and after a year you know yourself best what you want...

...so after 4 years, I still don't know what I want.

Maybe you want to read this: https://www.backscatter.com/reviews/post/Backscatter-Best-Underwater-Compact-Cameras

Will do!

Wolfgang

Dann-Oh wrote:

If you want to go for an option 2.5 (if you will) take a look at the Olympus EPL10. Back scatter has a package where you can get the camera and housing for pretty good price. you could easily expand this to a dedicated Wide angle or Macro rig if you want to. Or you can get wet lenses if you want the option to do everything on one dive.

I think picking up a "vintage" ILC with housing could make a lot of sense, but from what I could see it would be 650 for the housing alone, at which point, presumably, just getting a housing for my sony gear would make more sense.

kelpdiver wrote:

How did you find the currents at Wolf and Darwin?

I did the eastern circuit, Genovese, Kicker rock, Corona Del diablo, and "everything" in between

When you shift from the iphone or gopro to a housed ILC, or even a compact with a dual strobe system, you add a tremendous amount of drag, and when the current is really ripping there, your mask is at risk of being pulled off.

I am more a swimming with the tide kind of guy.

The camera will take some knocks against the rocks. It can be really tough there. It will also markedly increase your air consumption. I also wouldn't really think of it as a macro destination.

Probably true

Without considerable dive counts elsewhere, I would stick to the gopro route, and the most recent models for their stablization capabilities. Older models will just produce vomit inducing videos. No on the mask mount - again the current. Attach to a coil that you clip into your d-ring.

In the bigger picture, when you're considering the entire range and unsure what you want to do, a trip that offers instructions and rentals would be a winning route. Every purchase is an expensive one, and usually with a huge immediate depreciation, though if you buy your first one in the deep used market, it is less painful. (my first ILC system was a Canon 20D in 2008).

As you discovered, the baggie housings are very limiting.

Agreed.

My first and only trip to Galapagos was in 2013. My wife came in on the low end for experience (60 dives)

That's more than I have done in my life!

, but a 2 for 1 deal was hard to pass up given how expensive that destination is. As a result, I often left the 20D with its 8" dome on the boat and just carried the gopro 3 on a mount with 2 solas. I needed to be able to help her if necessary with minimal distraction. But even without that, I would have often made that choice. Chasing out from the wall at Darwin to chase a whale shark requires speed, and the opportunities were few that week - 4 in total I think. A slower moving diver might miss it entirely.

A place like Cocos or Socorro is a bit easier on the current, and it's no longer the big penalty. But you still learn to trail the camera in your right arm so it sits in your slip stream when you're kicking into it.

Noted.

n/t

kelpdiver wrote:

SafariBob wrote:

I am more a swimming with the tide kind of guy.

My first and only trip to Galapagos was in 2013. My wife came in on the low end for experience (60 dives)

That's more than I have done in my life!

So with all respect, you don't want a big housed camera if your dive experience is low double digits and you're happy doing it as an occasional vacation activity. Expense aside, it will be frustrating and a bit dangerous for you and the reef. And if you do it only rarely, you relearn the wheel each time. Even I, with ~40 dives per year, expect the first day to be a loss.

I have snorkeled or dived in Koh Tao, Bali, Gili, Kauai, Big Island, Roatan, San Blas, Bocas, Galapagos and Great Barrier Reef and maybe the baggy gave the wrong impression, but I have used UW film cameras, compacts, GoPro and now the iPhone.

> I have footage from a GoPro and I find the output a bit lacking.

Which model is this, if you can recall?

6 or 7.

Early generations (I used the Hero 2 and 3 in the mid decade) were astounding compared to what compact cams could do for video at the time, but required a color filter to tone down the blue/green overload, and the lack of IS required a very stable hand to shoot steady video. I had 600+ dives and could manage this while still doing the acts of diving, but my wife struggled.

it's challenging for sure. Especially snorkeling.

When we moved to the Hero 7, the IS did wonders for her, which is good as she determined that she was not crazy about the bulk of the G7XII compact system we got for her. It also seemed questionable that the red filter was still called for.

We just got the 10 during the holidays. $400 for the camera, two batteries, 50 more for the dive housing. You can get the Hero 9 for a bit cheaper, and it would offer nearly the same upside.

But does it really make sense to spend 400 on a GoPro, instead of putting that money towards housing for a large sensor camera? Honestly I kind like the idea of something a bit more hefty for the stability

We have plenty of lights already. Normally she carries two 2500 lumen solas. These days you can get video oriented lights between 2500 and 4000 lumens for a cheapish price (~200-400each). Strobes are much brighter, but have a much steeper learning curve.

Yes, I was thinking something around ~3k lumens.

Still performance was terrible in the 2/3, but quite acceptable in the 7 for casual shooting. If you find after a few trips that the performance ceiling is too low, that would be a time to consider going spendier. Or as I suggested in the prior post, look at renting instead. Buying good equipment only makes sense with a minimum dive frequency.

Maybe. One reason I never rent camera gear is that the learning curve means you never get the familiarity required for great results.

My frustration is a little bit that, I mainly shoot wildlife, and if someone asked me what is a way to get decent wildlife photos for ~ 1K usd, I could point them towards that canon 100-400 I + a legacy body (such as original 6d), with maybe a couple of step up options to show.

But I am a bit at a loss what is the equivalent UW setup. What gives you the potential for great shots, but maybe not with max hit rate.

I'll pass on some experience.  Might help guide you a bit.  I'm not sure if the camera you want exists these days, particularly at your price limit.  I'd strongly consider used whatever you do, but that too has its own set of issues.

I used a series of Canon point-n-shoots for years, each with its own dedicated Canon housing.  Small enough to dangle from a wrist strap.  Internal flash with a small snap-on diffuser on the housing.  Effective strobe range about 1-3 feet.  Nice thing about these rigs were that they cost under $500 new, for camera and housing.  I still have a working s120 somewhere.

I ended my run of those kind of cameras with a Sony RX100 II, basically a point-n-shoot with a bigger sensor.  I put it in a Nauticam housing and added dual strobes. The only thing that made that rig particularly better was the strobes.  After years of using the Canons without flash, I felt I pretty much had all the green fish shots I ever wanted.

These days that whole class of camera doesn't really exist anymore, or is much more expensive.  But you might find something like the RX100 used for your budget.

Flash - it changes everything.  Can't imagine free diving with it, but can't quite imagine shooting stills without it.  Having an external flash - much less two - hanging off a camera completely changes how you have to dive with it.  Can't really just drop it and let it dangle from a wrist anymore.  And it adds enough drag to really slow you down as well.  (When I needed to move faster or battle current, I'd turn the rig sideways with one strobe by my ear and the other between my legs to cut drag.)

But, stills really need good lighting, and that mostly means strobes at any depth.  Boosting ISO doesn't help when the colors in the light aren't there to start with.  You need to add it.  Video, another story.

In 2016 I moved to a full frame housing for my Nikon D810.  When mention is made that your travel gear will be made up of mostly camera, there's a lot of truth in that.  I have over 40 pounds of dive camera gear, and that's just two lenses and two ports for those lenses.  It's a load above water, and it's significant below water as well.  I can't imagine free diving or surf shooting with anything near this size.  I can't even lift it half out of the water to do over/under shots.

PHXAZCRAIG wrote:

I'll pass on some experience. Might help guide you a bit. I'm not sure if the camera you want exists these days, particularly at your price limit. I'd strongly consider used whatever you do, but that too has its own set of issues.

thats probably true. But I am happy to keep the camera out of the price equation as long as it’s a full frame Sony.

I used a series of Canon point-n-shoots for years, each with its own dedicated Canon housing. Small enough to dangle from a wrist strap. Internal flash with a small snap-on diffuser on the housing. Effective strobe range about 1-3 feet. Nice thing about these rigs were that they cost under $500 new, for camera and housing. I still have a working s120 somewhere.

i have used the Casio uw cameras back in the day.

I ended my run of those kind of cameras with a Sony RX100 II, basically a point-n-shoot with a bigger sensor. I put it in a Nauticam housing and added dual strobes. The only thing that made that rig particularly better was the strobes. After years of using the Canons without flash, I felt I pretty much had all the green fish shots I ever wanted.

i understand the strobes are important to add back in the reds.

These days that whole class of camera doesn't really exist anymore, or is much more expensive. But you might find something like the RX100 used for your budget.

i have considered this option, but I don’t really want to use the rx100 above water, so I think I will go with mirrorless.

Flash - it changes everything. Can't imagine free diving with it, but can't quite imagine shooting stills without it. Having an external flash - much less two - hanging off a camera completely changes how you have to dive with it. Can't really just drop it and let it dangle from a wrist anymore. And it adds enough drag to really slow you down as well. (When I needed to move faster or battle current, I'd turn the rig sideways with one strobe by my ear and the other between my legs to cut drag.)

yes. This is the crux of the challenge as I see it. Will probably start with a 3000 lumen torch or video light.

But, stills really need good lighting, and that mostly means strobes at any depth. Boosting ISO doesn't help when the colors in the light aren't there to start with. You need to add it. Video, another story.

right

In 2016 I moved to a full frame housing for my Nikon D810. When mention is made that your travel gear will be made up of mostly camera, there's a lot of truth in that. I have over 40 pounds of dive camera gear, and that's just two lenses and two ports for those lenses. It's a load above water, and it's significant below water as well. I can't imagine free diving or surf shooting with anything near this size. I can't even lift it half out of the water to do over/under shots.

i will need to cut some corners weight and cost wise. Especially size

edit: I will probably start with a seafrogs and an 8 inch dry dome

-- hide signature --

Phoenix Arizona Craig
www.cjcphoto.net
"I miss the days when I was nostalgic."

RX100 is mirrorless, so I don't see what you mean there.  Mirrorless with interchangeable lens?

If you go full frame, the size of things gets enormous.   Here is me holding my 230mm dome port when I first got it.

SafariBob wrote:

Architeuthis wrote:

Hi safaribob,

Generally you can do both macro and wideangle with all setups. All options are better than the handy in a plastic bag...

#1.: GoPro and actioncams are videocentric. If you prefer video over stills this is the way to go (I am not sure whether macro is an option for actioncams).

I have footage from a GoPro and I find the output a bit lacking. I think I will get an action cam anyway though, for convenience and redundancy, but it depends a bit how much total spend is. It's unclear to me whether it would be better to get the Akoso or the Gopro, and what the total package would require (camera, underwater housing, + stick?)

=> Do nor forget lights. Natural light will be abunand when snorkeling, but when scubadiving you will want artificial lights.

#2.: Simple stills oriented camera for snorkeling (even good for scubadiving) is Olympus TG-5 or 6. Great for macro, but also WA with wetlens.

I can consider this as an alternative to action camera. My skepticism is that it is also a 1/2.5" sensor. And they seem to cost around 300 usd used, + an underwater housing if I want to dive with it.

=> Clearly better cameras exist. If you look at reviews (e.g. the one from Backscatter that I linked), it is astonishing how good UW photos taken with TGs can be when the photographer is experienced. I believe this is a very good entry into UW-photography and after some personal experience you yourself know best what fits to you. In case you want more than snorkeling, you need at least one good flash too...

#3.: When housing your FF camera, you are in the Champions League of UW photographers.

Hehe, ok, so what would be the college football level?

There are several levels below Championsleague (but well above #2):

=> Compact cameras ( am not a friend of them for several reasons, too long to discuss here)

=> Mirrorless interchangeable lens cameras with MFT sensor (technically already pretty good, regarded the optimum by many)

=> DSLR with APS-C format sensor. Highly rated here is Nikon D500 (IQ a little better than MFT, but outstanding AF)

Excellent IQ and all options from Super-Makro to circular fisheye images. Bear in mind you are going to spend many thousands of $$$ and, when travelling, most of your baggage will be camera gear...

Let's say the budget is 1000, how is it best spent?

=>

For 1000 bucks you get #1 or #2 with some acessoirs. Even when buying second hand (a good option), the budget is too low to get a complete rig that fulfills your ambitous desire. Housing your Sony A7Riv (I see from your gear list that you have one) in a cheap plastic housing is a good way to get rid of it by flooding and to be ready then to buy the A1.

=> Seriously, if I were you, I would go for a second hand TG-4 or 5 with UW housing, tray and flash. This will not break the bank and is a good entry...

=> Another option may be to get a second hand Nauticam housing with port for your A7RII (this also may fit your budget). You may, however, soon find out that you are not willing to drag around the heavy gear. In case you are resistant to this, you certainly will find out that you want additional lenses and ports for WA and Macro, not to speak about flashes - 1000 $ is then an illusion...

Difficult to give advise, too many options and people have different preferences. I would reecommend option #2 when main purpose are photos and #1 when videos are desired (but you can make both phtos and videos with both options). Not too much money spent and after a year you know yourself best what you want...

...so after 4 years, I still don't know what I want.

=> UW photography is different from surface. You experience so far is Galapagos with I-phone in a plastic bag and you know now this does not fit your demands. The next rig will be also for probing. I suggest not to make a mega-investment at this stage, an entry level rig will be a big leap already (see above)...

I can highly recommend this book for getting closer to UW-photography, great information for beginners (but you should already be experienced on the surface), but also experienced ones: https://www.amazon.de/Underwater-Photography-Masterclass-Alex-Mustard/dp/1781452229

Maybe you want to read this: https://www.backscatter.com/reviews/post/Backscatter-Best-Underwater-Compact-Cameras

Will do!

Wolfgang

Architeuthis wrote:

SafariBob wrote:

Architeuthis wrote:

Hi safaribob,

Generally you can do both macro and wideangle with all setups. All options are better than the handy in a plastic bag...

#1.: GoPro and actioncams are videocentric. If you prefer video over stills this is the way to go (I am not sure whether macro is an option for actioncams).

I have footage from a GoPro and I find the output a bit lacking. I think I will get an action cam anyway though, for convenience and redundancy, but it depends a bit how much total spend is. It's unclear to me whether it would be better to get the Akoso or the Gopro, and what the total package would require (camera, underwater housing, + stick?)

=> Do nor forget lights. Natural light will be abunand when snorkeling, but when scubadiving you will want artificial lights.

yes. I see that now.

#2.: Simple stills oriented camera for snorkeling (even good for scubadiving) is Olympus TG-5 or 6. Great for macro, but also WA with wetlens.

I can consider this as an alternative to action camera. My skepticism is that it is also a 1/2.5" sensor. And they seem to cost around 300 usd used, + an underwater housing if I want to dive with it.

=> Clearly better cameras exist. If you look at reviews (e.g. the one from Backscatter that I linked), it is astonishing how good UW photos taken with TGs can be when the photographer is experienced. I believe this is a very good entry into UW-photography and after some personal experience you yourself know best what fits to you. In case you want more than snorkeling, you need at least one good flash too...

not entirely convinced that tg is better than iPhone in a hard case, apart from better controls, but I am leaning towards it being an overall compelling package, unless GoPros software, stabilization and auto editing is somehow useful. I guess that’s why people say GoPro for video.

#3.: When housing your FF camera, you are in the Champions League of UW photographers.

Hehe, ok, so what would be the college football level?

There are several levels below Championsleague (but well above #2):

=> Compact cameras ( am not a friend of them for several reasons, too long to discuss here)

=> Mirrorless interchangeable lens cameras with MFT sensor (technically already pretty good, regarded the optimum by many)

=> DSLR with APS-C format sensor. Highly rated here is Nikon D500 (IQ a little better than MFT, but outstanding AF)

sure. And I have briefly looked into used alternatives if that makes sense. Slightly uncomfortable diving with the r4, but from what I gather the risk is limited.

Excellent IQ and all options from Super-Makro to circular fisheye images. Bear in mind you are going to spend many thousands of $$$ and, when travelling, most of your baggage will be camera gear...

Let's say the budget is 1000, how is it best spent?

=>

For 1000 bucks you get #1 or #2 with some acessoirs. Even when buying second hand (a good option), the budget is too low to get a complete rig that fulfills your ambitous desire. Housing your Sony A7Riv (I see from your gear list that you have one) in a cheap plastic housing is a good way to get rid of it by flooding and to be ready then to buy the A1.

you think the seafrogs are that bad?

=> Seriously, if I were you, I would go for a second hand TG-4 or 5 with UW housing, tray and flash. This will not break the bank and is a good entry...

I am convinced it is a very good entry level option, I am less convinced it offers so much beyond the iPhone, and that it really produces great output.

=> Another option may be to get a second hand Nauticam housing with port for your A7RII (this also may fit your budget). You may, however, soon find out that you are not willing to drag around the heavy gear. In case you are resistant to this, you certainly will find out that you want additional lenses and ports for WA and Macro, not to speak about flashes - 1000 $ is then an illusion...

this is a bit along my initial plan. Unfortunately the a7r2 is at the bottom of lake placid without any housing or diver.

Difficult to give advise, too many options and people have different preferences. I would reecommend option #2 when main purpose are photos and #1 when videos are desired (but you can make both phtos and videos with both options). Not too much money spent and after a year you know yourself best what you want...

...so after 4 years, I still don't know what I want.

=> UW photography is different from surface. You experience so far is Galapagos with I-phone in a plastic bag and you know now this does not fit your demands. The next rig will be also for probing. I suggest not to make a mega-investment at this stage, an entry level rig will be a big leap already (see above)...

I can highly recommend this book for getting closer to UW-photography, great information for beginners (but you should already be experienced on the surface), but also experienced ones: https://www.amazon.de/Underwater-Photography-Masterclass-Alex-Mustard/dp/1781452229

Maybe you want to read this: https://www.backscatter.com/reviews/post/Backscatter-Best-Underwater-Compact-Cameras

Will do!

Wolfgang

Hi Safaribob,

#2.: Simple stills oriented camera for snorkeling (even good for scubadiving) is Olympus TG-5 or 6. Great for macro, but also WA with wetlens.

I can consider this as an alternative to action camera. My skepticism is that it is also a 1/2.5" sensor. And they seem to cost around 300 usd used, + an underwater housing if I want to dive with it.

=> Clearly better cameras exist. If you look at reviews (e.g. the one from Backscatter that I linked), it is astonishing how good UW photos taken with TGs can be when the photographer is experienced. I believe this is a very good entry into UW-photography and after some personal experience you yourself know best what fits to you. In case you want more than snorkeling, you need at least one good flash too...

not entirely convinced that tg is better than iPhone in a hard case, apart from better controls, but I am leaning towards it being an overall compelling package, unless GoPros software, stabilization and auto editing is somehow useful. I guess that’s why people say GoPro for video.

=> I am not able to say anything concerning I-phone UW, I very seldom take a photo with my handy, even over the water. I doubt, however, that you can make macro and supermacro with an I-phone, the TGs can do this already without further modifications (check carefully before going this route, whether such add on optics is available for UW for the I-phone). In addition very good wet lenses (add-on lenses) for WA exist for TGs (also here check whether you can make WA with I-phone). TGs deliver raw files, very important for post-processing (no idea what format an I-phone delivers). A draw-back of TGs is they do not have manual mode (= very essential mode for UW), but UW-photographers share tricks how they can set the camera what to do...

(For me personally, the small sensor, the inability to change lenses and the lack of manual mode is the dealbreaker for TG, I never owned one)

Let's say the budget is 1000, how is it best spent?

=>

For 1000 bucks you get #1 or #2 with some acessoirs. Even when buying second hand (a good option), the budget is too low to get a complete rig that fulfills your ambitous desire. Housing your Sony A7Riv (I see from your gear list that you have one) in a cheap plastic housing is a good way to get rid of it by flooding and to be ready then to buy the A1.

you think the seafrogs are that bad?

=> It is up to everybody how think about such housings and good if someone is happy with them - I certainly do not want to hurt someone's feelings here, it is just how I personally think. Fact is that my wife had a similar housing for her Olympus EPL5 (the original Olympus housing, now AOI), which she succeeded to flood - total loss of camera and lens. Minimum requirement for me would be a vaccum system for safety (maybe available for Seafrog). In addition, there are several other reasons why I prefer Aluminium housings (in my case Nauticam) housings:

1. When you ever had a Nauticam housing in your hands and you feel all buttons and levers are organically at your fingertips (e.g. "dhumbfocus lever"), you never will want to go back.

2. Nauticam has a large collection of ports/domports and UW optics, like WAPC, WWL1, CMCs, SMCs etc. ... . I am not sure wich ones could be used with potential adapters on plastic housings. IF it would be possible (probably not) and you would build up an entire system based on plastic, it is like building your house on sand. Some manufactureres build their own domeports, but I have read here that e.g. the Meikon domeports are optically drash. What is the point of using such a domeport together with the latest FF camera model?

3. Already in the mid-term time range the alu housings are more economically. They represent an entire system (comparable to a lens mount of camera companies) and when you update to a new camera model, you just acquire the camera plus pure housing. The rest of the system stays the same (domes/domeports/extensions/wetlenses). When Olympus made the plastic housings for their cameras, they managed to create three different port mounting standards, so it was depending on luck, whether one could continue to use ports when changing the camera model. I am not sure how upgradeable third party housings and ports are in this respect, but I am reluctant to make an investment there...

Wolfgang

SafariBob wrote:

as long as it’s a full frame Sony

i will need to cut some corners weight and cost wise. Especially size

edit: I will probably start with a seafrogs and an 8 inch dry dome

Why are you so hard pressed to get a full frame Sony? you could get a Sony apsc for significantly less initial investment.

SafariBob wrote:

Dann-Oh wrote:

If you want to go for an option 2.5 (if you will) take a look at the Olympus EPL10. Back scatter has a package where you can get the camera and housing for pretty good price. you could easily expand this to a dedicated Wide angle or Macro rig if you want to. Or you can get wet lenses if you want the option to do everything on one dive.

I think picking up a "vintage" ILC with housing could make a lot of sense, but from what I could see it would be 650 for the housing alone, at which point, presumably, just getting a housing for my sony gear would make more sense.

Where are you getting vintage from? the Olympus EPL10 4 years newer than your A7rii and its 4 months newer than your A7riv.  You clearly are a Sony F@n B*y and dont want to consider anything else.

You would rather get a cheap housing for your sony than invest in a good uw system thats not sony.

Architeuthis wrote:

Hi Safaribob,

=> I am not able to say anything concerning I-phone UW, I very seldom take a photo with my handy, even over the water. I doubt, however, that you can make macro and supermacro with an I-phone,

The iPhone 13, which I do not have, can allegedly do this.

the TGs can do this already without further modifications (check carefully before going this route, whether such add on optics is available for UW for the I-phone). In addition very good wet lenses (add-on lenses) for WA exist for TGs (also here check whether you can make WA with I-phone). TGs deliver raw files, very important for post-processing (no idea what format an I-phone delivers).

There is a feature to provide this in iPhone I do not use.

A draw-back of TGs is they do not have manual mode (= very essential mode for UW), but UW-photographers share tricks how they can set the camera what to do...

Would you need manual for hot lights?

(For me personally, the small sensor, the inability to change lenses and the lack of manual mode is the dealbreaker for TG, I never owned one)

I share your perspectives.

Let's say the budget is 1000, how is it best spent?

=>

For 1000 bucks you get #1 or #2 with some acessoirs. Even when buying second hand (a good option), the budget is too low to get a complete rig that fulfills your ambitous desire. Housing your Sony A7Riv (I see from your gear list that you have one) in a cheap plastic housing is a good way to get rid of it by flooding and to be ready then to buy the A1.

you think the seafrogs are that bad?

=> It is up to everybody how think about such housings and good if someone is happy with them - I certainly do not want to hurt someone's feelings here, it is just how I personally think. Fact is that my wife had a similar housing for her Olympus EPL5 (the original Olympus housing, now AOI), which she succeeded to flood - total loss of camera and lens. Minimum requirement for me would be a vaccum system for safety (maybe available for Seafrog). In addition, there are several other reasons why I prefer Aluminium housings (in my case Nauticam) housings:

thank you so much for these insights, very interesting. OEM housings have always seemed the most attractive to me, so very interesting to get alternate take on this.

1. When you ever had a Nauticam housing in your hands and you feel all buttons and levers are organically at your fingertips (e.g. "dhumbfocus lever"), you never will want to go back.

I feel like ergonomics is something that I at least to a certain extent can sacrifice (for cost effectiveness). People always complained about sony, but for me it was fine.

2. Nauticam has a large collection of ports/domports and UW optics, like WAPC, WWL1, CMCs, SMCs etc. ... . I am not sure wich ones could be used with potential adapters on plastic housings. IF it would be possible (probably not) and you would build up an entire system based on plastic, it is like building your house on sand. Some manufactureres build their own domeports, but I have read here that e.g. the Meikon domeports are optically drash. What is the point of using such a domeport together with the latest FF camera model?

This is really good information. I hadn't thought of it this way, as a "system" in its own right. I agree that since the housing is in the optical path, it's optical performance becomes a concern, and again something I hadn't really considered. If it really is so poor as to negate the benefit of a good sensor, then that changes things.

3. Already in the mid-term time range the alu housings are more economically. They represent an entire system (comparable to a lens mount of camera companies) and when you update to a new camera model, you just acquire the camera plus pure housing.

I think I would rather just maintain a legacy body, at least for 10+ years than bring new and fancier bodies into the deep.

The rest of the system stays the same (domes/domeports/extensions/wetlenses). When Olympus made the plastic housings for their cameras, they managed to create three different port mounting standards, so it was depending on luck, whether one could continue to use ports when changing the camera model. I am not sure how upgradeable third party housings and ports are in this respect, but I am reluctant to make an investment there...

This makes sense, and again, thank you!

Wolfgang

Dann-Oh wrote:

SafariBob wrote:

Dann-Oh wrote:

If you want to go for an option 2.5 (if you will) take a look at the Olympus EPL10. Back scatter has a package where you can get the camera and housing for pretty good price. you could easily expand this to a dedicated Wide angle or Macro rig if you want to. Or you can get wet lenses if you want the option to do everything on one dive.

I think picking up a "vintage" ILC with housing could make a lot of sense, but from what I could see it would be 650 for the housing alone, at which point, presumably, just getting a housing for my sony gear would make more sense.

Where are you getting vintage from? the Olympus EPL10 4 years newer than your A7rii and its 4 months newer than your A7riv.

I don't mean vintage for this specifically, but I am willing to consider other system and bodies if the overall cost savings make it worth while

You clearly are a Sony F@n B*y and dont want to consider anything else.

You would rather get a cheap housing for your sony than invest in a good uw system thats not sony.

I am already invested with bodies etc. in sony, so using existing gear saves me the cost of acquiring new bodies. I think their 200-600 lens is amazing, and certain other emount lenses like the 12-24 f4 and 35-150 f2-2.8. But I also like other manufactures, including Olympus, Nikon (z9 & 400 2.8 tc), canon (r5, 100-500), Leica M cameras. Love the Olympus color science!

Where I think Sony could improve is the excessive segmentation (6 different lines of full frames) and lack of firmware updates (apart from real time tracking on a9 and pdaf on adapted lenses on the gen 2s).