Underwater Photography Question

Forum for Internode's budding photography fanatics

Moderator: Design Mods

Underwater Photography Question

Unread postby Disco LT » 14 Aug 12, 12:58 pm

Hey everyone, I know there are some fans of photography out there so I'm wondering if you might be able to help me out! We're going to Fiji in November and intend on spending a lot of time in the water and taking pictures, and I think it would be really cool to be able to take some pictures under water..

Has anyone got any experience with point and shoot digital cameras with the clear plastic housing that you can buy that allegedly makes them waterproof, or is it just foolhardy without spending big bucks?
Image
Disco LT

User avatar
Forgotten What The Sky Looks Like
 
Offline
Posts: 2771
Joined: 10 May 11, 6:40 pm
Location: New South Wales

Re: Underwater Photography Question

Unread postby Nemesis_22 » 14 Aug 12, 1:57 pm

*Knuckle crack time.* All right, lets do this.

Underwater photography is, in simplest terms, a **** of a thing to get right. For quite a few reasons.

Firstly, however, lets break down the possibilities, and then I'm going to ask you some questions.

You can either buy a housing for your current camera. This is, in point of fact, actually one of the more expensive ways to go. Depending on the camera you have, the housing can actually be pretty damn expensive, and I'd recommend getting a reputable one or one with a lot of believable recommendations. If it is not, you could get a case that is either slightly wrong or not as waterproof as the package says. Either way it is a disaster. Each case is a custom fit for each camera, as the dials, buttons and the like are, pretty much without fail, in different places on every single camera. So you have to get the specific one.

The second option is getting a camera that is already waterproof. Spend around $400 (at most) and you should get a camera with a decent depth (say ten meters). There are, however, going to be problems, that few people touch on. And they all have to do with the complex parts of photography.

The problem comes down to light. The deeper into water you go, the less light you get. The less light you get, the more the camera needs to push up its ISO to compensate. The more it has to push it up to compensate, the more grain you get in the photo. Either that or blurry images. Flash won't carry as far underwater either, unless its a very powerful one.

At ten meters down, for example, the amount of usable light is significantly reduced. Even direct sunlight above you will get lessened considerably. It will slow down your shutter speed as a result, and you are going to be more prone to getting poorly focused or flat out blurry shots, or taking far too long to focus the shot, losing the shot you want.

How you get around this is not exactly simple.

First, for the optimum result, you want what I call a direct pass lens - in other words, a lens system that is set with the sensor directly behind it. Most waterproof cameras have the lens set in a corner. This creates two problems. First, it is INCREDIBLY easy to get a finger in the photo, and two, the setup of the lens array involves mirror bouncing. It has a habit of losing light along the way, meaning you are already on a backwards footing. You want to get the ISO down on a compact camera as much as you possibly can at all times - they very rarely do a good job at higher ratings, unless its one of the better brands. For example, Panasonic and Olympus do underwater compacts, and have for some time, but they are truly awful when it comes to their noise reducing algorithms compared to, say, Canon. Canon has in fact, I believe, come up with an underwater camera. It doesn't have a direct pass lens, however, and I've not gotten to use it yet, so it might be a bit sub par. The other one is one by Olympus (also one I've not yet seen) which, despite being a poorer ISO performer, does have a direct pass lens and a very, very low minimum aperture of just f/2.0.

I should probably mention that. You want a lens with the best, lowest aperture possible. It means you get less in focus at a time, but it also means more light passing through the lens (aperture being the thing that controls depth of field and amount of light hitting the sensor, affecting shutter speed to match the amount of light).

You can get some good results if you look around. Gopro is a good one, but can be expensive for the best results, and they tend to mostly do movie. They are tough as nails however.

The best result would be an SLR, of course, with a proper diving rig. But getting all that will probably mean delaying the trip for a couple of years to pay for it all. They get fearfully expensive for the good stuff.

But asking some questions first -
What do you have?
What are you prepared to spend?
How good a result do you want? (Photo album, basic snaps, framed picture, professional).
Image
Nemesis_22

User avatar
NWN DM
 
Offline
Posts: 2551
Joined: 23 Mar 04, 9:48 pm

Re: Underwater Photography Question

Unread postby Disco LT » 16 Aug 12, 4:50 pm

Big reply Nem! I was thinking of this .. but none of the specs mean anything to me, I'm very much just a point and click photographer .

Pentax Optio WG-1 Waterproof/Shockproof Digital Camera - Black - 14 Megapixel
Image

OR

Panasonic Lumix TS3

Image

What do you have?

Zip, I don't actually own a compact camera so I'm looking for something that I could take anywhere (camping, fishing, on holidays etc without taking up much space but still take decent pictures.

What are you prepared to spend?

I'd really love to spend no more than $250 on a digital camera

How good a result do you want? (Photo album, basic snaps, framed picture, professional).

I'm very much not a photographer.. a few pictures for the photo album, facebook, maybe a framed one if one turned out really good.
Image
Disco LT

User avatar
Forgotten What The Sky Looks Like
 
Offline
Posts: 2771
Joined: 10 May 11, 6:40 pm
Location: New South Wales

Re: Underwater Photography Question

Unread postby Nemesis_22 » 16 Aug 12, 8:50 pm

Going by your answers, the two choices you've highlighted are in fact good ones.

The FT3 is probably the better one of the group in that price range. I don't have much familiarity with pentax, sadly - not a brand I've ever worked with - but the FT3 is pretty solid for the price bracket. You can get better of course, but not within budget.

Oh, and don't forget. If you get something worth $300 or more, and take it with you before you go, you can claim the duty as a refund at the airport, as long as you bring it, the receipt, and the single item is over $300. I think its about 9% back or so, so thats worth considering as well. Good luck, and have fun on the trip!
Image
Nemesis_22

User avatar
NWN DM
 
Offline
Posts: 2551
Joined: 23 Mar 04, 9:48 pm


Return to Photography

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

x

#{title}

#{text}