Digital Photography Underwater

This is our page devoted to digital underwater photography. In it we will track the progress of digital imaging and how it relates directly to underwater photographers. This page will be updated regularly as digital photography evolves so bookmark it now (and please keep coming back to check out the latest news).

We recommend you visit our partner site PhotoTests to check out which digital cameras currently have housings available. It is the only place we've seen where you can find this information!

Whether you are a newbie (looking for your first system) or a pro this page will run through the main issues surrounding the adoption of digital underwater systems and how they relate to your requirements. Read the page through to get the full picture or use the links below to jump to specific topics.

• What digital can, and can't do
• Functionality
• Picture Quality
• Cost issues
• Should I buy an U/W digital system?
• Conclusions

What digital can, and can't do

The first, and obvious, point to make is that merely owning a digital system will not make you a better underwater photographer. The problems unique to underwater photography will still be there - effects of depth, lighting etc. Whether your latent image is chemical in a film emulsion or 0's and 1's stored magnetically on a media card the art of the photographer to capture that image will essentially not change. Exposure, composition, and strategy will still have to be learnt!

For this reason our photo course will not be getting a rewrite. There is digital specific advice throughout already (as there is for SLR and compact camera users). However, it probably will eventually get a new chapter to cope with all the new stuff you'll have to learn!  

Digital cameras do undeniably promise productivity advantages for underwater photography. Instant feedback is the most obvious one. This is bound to assist the learning curve which, with underwater photography is probably not a curve anyway, more like a dogtooth! This is because previously you go on a trip and shoot, then you come home get the film processed, learn from your mistakes before going on another trip (older and wiser!). Instant feedback is bound to accelerate learning but, grasshopper, true enlightenment is elusive and does not happen overnight!

Another feature underwater photographers have been dreaming of forever is of not being limited to 36 shots per dive. With digital (and an IBM microdrive) you can get 1000 hi-rez shots per digital ‘film’. Get yourself a rebreather and your own recompression chamber and you can stay down photographing for a long, long time.

But there is an equal, and opposite, side to every argument. You will probably run out of battery power long before you run out of shots!

Picture Quality

Before we get carried away with technology for technology's sake a few words of caution. The trouble is that we expect anything digital to be better. Digital phones are better, digital TV is better - but digital photography was overpriced and a distinct underperformer for a long time where it really counts - on your eyeballs. 

It is still true that if anyone says 'upgrade to digital' in the context of photography they are either mistaken or want to sell you some kit!

In terms of resolution, contrast, color saturation film picture quality wins hands down. However, when the mantra is ‘good enough’ either system will give most people a decent 6x4 print. It is only when you require larger prints that it matters. Let's face it though, most of us want a nice BIG print to hang on the wall to remind us of the underwater environment.

For pro's the issue is more clear cut. Digital is no good (yet). If your aim is to see your work on the front cover of a diving magazine (and who wouldn't) only film will do. At magazine quality (300dpi) the file sizes are just not big enough even with high end DSLR's.

Underwater photography levels the playing field. The beginner is just as likely to get that stunning shot of Great Whites mating (or whatever) as a pro is. But, if don't have enough pixels in your camera then it doesn't matter how great the shot is!

The position with regard to resolution is unlikely to change. Whenever digital improves, traditional film will do too. However, we can expect the same sort of progress with digital photography as we do with computers - double the processing power every two years, with prices halving. In this situation you will reach a point when digital can deliver resolution at the price of todays' high-end 35mm SLR cameras. So, maybe it's a question of when, not if.

Functionality

Perhaps the issue of resolution is of secondary importance to underwater photographers. "Will the kit work underwater?" is what the real question is.

Sometimes there are great cameras and poor housings. Are there technical difficulties that UW housing manufacturers cannot solve (with their limited budgets)?

Remember, these facts are still imperative…

• Underwater Photography is wide angle photography
• Underwater Photography is flash photography

And, unfortunately, digital is not strong in either category…

Wide angle photography Underwater

For the serious underwater photographer (using an SLR) the 20mm lens is king. Nearly all magazine and book published U/W pictures are shot using this lens. Why? Because the first rule of underwater photgraphy is - get rid of the water! i.e. get close to the subject.

Trouble is – on a Nikon Digital SLR a 20mm lens becomes a 35mm lens. This is because the CCD sensor used by Nikon is physically smaller than 35mm film.

So, you've got to buy a new set of lenses then!

Nikon will be bringing out new lenses for the new format. Of particularly relevance to underwater photographers is the 12-24mm digital zoom - it's equivalent to 18-30mm.

So, you've also got to buy a new set of ports for your new set of digital lenses then!

The only U/W relevant positive effect of the smaller CCD is greater depth of field. However, this was not a problem to begin with for wide angle (but could improve macro).

The housed consumer compact digital camera sector of the market is another story. The angle of view problem is probably not such a tough a nut to crack as it can be solved with the addition of a supplementary lens. However, will the lens mount be compatible with existing systems? No, I didn't think so!

Flash Photography Underwater

Nearly all (95%) of underwater photography uses flash – supplied by the good old common or garden TTL strobe unit. TTL is a system that works out the exposure for you (more accurately than you can) and (much quicker than you can) makes the correct settings for you. Nikon has dominated our sector of the market – due in no small part to having become the adopted standard for TTL strobes.

It’s a fair assumption existing SLR shooters will want to stick to what they know, and keep using their existing Nikon lenses and Nikonos TTL underwater strobes.

Exposure with flash is the greatest problem area for beginners and advanced U/W shooters alike. Current film based technology is impressive. Even in the hands of a novice you are guaranteed 100% correct exposure from a 35mm SLR like the Nikon N90/F90 with any TTL strobe that claims to be Nikonos compatible.

Traditionally flash exposure is calculated from the light reflected off the film surface. However, it is technically more difficult to get good flash exposure results from a reading off a CCD. I am guessing here but that is probably why digital SLR’s just plain won’t dedicate with existing underwater strobes.

So, a new digital strobe and housing then!

Compacts are worse! No TTL at all and no prospect of anyone ever making one. The problem is compounded by the fact that most people wanting to get into U/W photography buy the camera first, then the housing. Have you seen how many cameras are out there. It used to be the familiar names (Nikon, Canon, Kodak, Fuji) but now you have Sony, HP, Epson and so on.

There are some universal workarounds. Sea & Sea’s solution is a strobe with 12 power settings! You’re supposed to take a test shot, compensate this dial, then hope your subject comes by again!

More irritations…

• You can’t see the preview CCD screens in bright light and can’t use them to accurately judge exposure (as Sea & Sea would have you do).
• The viewfinders are generally smaller than on film cameras.
• Shutter lag - there is a delay between pressing the button and firing.
• Lack of contrast – particularly shooting against the sun

Cost Issues

As a pro I use whatever is best for the job. I shot over 20,000 images last year for www.StockPhotography.co.uk online photo library (land shots) on a Fuji S1 digital SLR camera. These were edited down to 5,000 images that found their way onto the online catalog in no time at all.

No way could I do that on film. It would have taken 416 hours of scanning (at 12 hi-rez scans per hour, my best average). Then the PhotoShop retouching. So, no arguments, digital = productivity.

If I had shot on film it would also have cost me a fortune - $3,552 to buy the 555 rolls of film needed, and half as much again for processing! My digital ‘film’ cost nothing. Just delete it and use it all over again!

However, it's a well known fact that U/W camera systems get an average of two weeks per year use. Balanced against the much greater initial outlay such users will not be better off.

Plus, another major U/W photo fact of life - Housings Flood.

It is inevitable that you will experience a flood. I’d sooner lose a compact 35mm than a compact digital camera. I’d sooner lose a 35mm SLR than a digital SLR! Many underwater photographers carry two cameras so that a flood should not put them out of action - which obviously doubles the costs.

Digital cameras will be more disposable than film cameras in that you will probably get a new one every couple of years (as people do with their computers). This will also increase costs as you will also have to buy a new housing at the same time.

Likewise, if you experience a housing problem two years down the line don't expect you will find a replacement. There are too many new models continuously being introduced so the lifespan compared with say a good pro SLR will be reduced.

Value Comparisons

Now the Underwater Photographic equipment industry will not thank me for pointing out that they will be pushing the technology because new models power the market to make them more profits.

Normally I don’t begrudge them. Underwater Photo kit is slow moving, low volume manufacturing. Anything that means more underwater photography is a good thing.

But there is too much mindless consumerism in the World - like buying a Sony Playstation 2 when you already have a Playstation 1. In the case of U/W digital you pay the Playstation 2 price to get an equivalent of a Gameboy!

Looking pretty in the catalog and having loads of buttons are not good reasons to buy. With a housed consumer compact you are, in real technological terms, on a par with say a Bonica Snapper and below the much derided Sea & Sea Motormarine system. Yet in monetary terms you pay a premium of a factor of ten!

Currently digital underwater reminds me of the level of kit a decade ago. What else can you call it? If you don’t have 100% reliable TTL then it’s a step backwards. If you can’t see through an SLR viewfinder what’s the point of having an SLR?

Should I buy an U/W digital system?

Whether, or not, U/W digital is for you rather depends on what you want to do with your photography and what your starting point is.

For beginners the price difference is not that great so why not? If you're a bit of a 'techie' anyway and are happy with the idea of never being published in National Geographic then you might as well. If you are just not happy with technology then steer clear!

If you're serious about your U/W photography (or think you might be one day) it's a different story. Shoot slide film on SLR. If you have deep pockets shoot both!

I know from my retail experience that buying your first underwater camera kit, whether digital or film, people will still make the same two mistakes. So I will repeat the same advice.

Don't...

• buy a system two days before your diving trip!
• buy a housing for a camera you already own, buy a system based on a judgement of the merits of that U/W system as a whole

Conclusions

If the digital U/W setup you are looking at is not able to cope with wide-angle photography nor handle TTL strobe exposure it’s probably not worth bothering with. There are just not enough benefits to the underwater photographer to warrant lashing out a few grand more than on an equivalent traditional system. The problems will be ironed out but I, for one, don't want to be an earlier adopter and have to pay to fuel the evolution of U/W digital!

I think, and readily admit this is a personal view, that the situation can be summed up thus…

Digital on land, Yes – digital underwater – not yet.

It is interesting to see our Reader Survey on this subject (below) if only to see that digital guys vote more! Either that or everyone has already got one.

Benny Sutton Editor