SCUBA-SE Archives

November 2001

SCUBA-SE@RAVEN.UTC.EDU

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
John Nitrox <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
SouthEast US Scuba Diving Travel list <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Thu, 15 Nov 2001 12:53:48 -0600
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (58 lines)
At 09:47 PM 11/14/01 -0500, Lee Bell wrote:

>Christmas is around the corner and I've been comparison shopping for a
>digital video camera with still camera capability.  At the moment, the units
>I'm considering are the Sony TRV30, Sony DCR-PC110 and Canon Optura 100 MC.
>As near as I can tell from the specs, all three choices have megapixel still
>capability and all seem to be available for roughly $1,200 U.S.

         Even at 3 megapixels, digital cameras don't come close to analog,
and to my mind Sony made a mistake when they decided to develop their
consumer digital camcorders as dual purpose cameras.  Sony's SC 100, which
Stan Waterman looked on with approval, was the last camera Sony made which
made acceptable video in low light, uw situations without the addition of
video lights.  Now we have a situation in which you have to haul video
lights on every dive trip which makes quite a load with  battery packs, a
recharger, (ballasts for some), arms, a tray, a housing for the camera,
more battery packs and rechargers for the camera, a discharger, blank tape,
etc., and you still don't get acceptable still images.  Sure, they're
better than vid caps, but they're not as good as images from the better
still digital cameras and certainly not good enough to make 8X10s.

         Sony's PC5 with the addition of an AB Sea Photo housing made a
very small package without any pretensions of capturing still images, but
one still needed lights.  Unfortunately, Sony also dropped that one into
the oubliette.  I was thinking about getting it last summer, but with a new
digital video capture card and Amphibico lights, suddenly the price was up
around $5000 and I still haven't learned to edit with the card I already
have.

         Anyway, you might want to get a subscription to Computer
Videomaker or a similar magazine to familiarize yourself with what's
available and talk to the various housing manufacturers, who are generally
very happy to tell you at great length why their housing are better than
their competitors.  Some of them, like Light and Motion, will sell you a
whole package while with others you'll have to get your camera and lights
separately, but all of them will give you bountiful advice.  I think I'm
going to wait a bit longer before I get into digital video, but when I next
get my fins wet I will hunt discounts at Camera World of Oregon or Helix
with whom I've had good success rather than 47th Street Photo, Cambridge,
or Adorama with whom I've had difficulties.  BTW, don't forget to
investigate the benefits of dome ports vs. flat ports, the Kelvin
temperature of the lights, the merits of mechanical vs. electrical
connections in housings, and how long the battery packs will last
underwater.  In my experience they fail faster underwater and have memory,
even the nickel metal hydride ones, no matter what the housing
manufacturers tell you.
Well, it's time for me to be quiet before my irritation with Sony really
comes out.


DPTNST,


John


.

ATOM RSS1 RSS2