Wetpixel Live: Full Frame vs Cropped

by adamhanlon Monday, July 27th, 2020

Regular contributor Alex Mustard and Wetpixel Editor Adam Hanlon discuss a hot topic among underwater photographers on Wetpixel Live: Whether full frame or cropped sensor cameras are better for capturing underwater images?

If you are enjoying Wetpixel Live, please subscribe to the channel and you will get notifications about new episodes as they are released. Please feel free to let us know if you would like any specific topics to be covered in future episodes.

Hi Adam, thanks for answering my comment. My thoughts came when during a Corona lockdown I had time to think about a new camera and housing...

And they come from my very personal perspective: 1 or 2 dive trips to the tropics per year (maybe less during the last couple of years) and the occasional weekend trip to the North Sea / Netherlands

So what I found (Nauticam housings) NA D500 EUR 3,250 / 3kg vs. NA-EM1III EUR 1,850 / 2kg or NA-EM5III EUR 1,550 / 1.4kg (without tray & handles?)

Yes, the Nikon D 500 for sure is a great camera in the hands of those who really know how to get everything out of it. But for the average amateur an OM-D EM1III or EM5III MIGHT ! be an option,

And Lightroom / Photoshop is your friend, anyhow :-)

Posted by Joerg Malke on 2020-08-11 03:50:10

Hi Jock. Thank you for your comments. This episode was specifically comparing full frame to cropped sensor cameras...and as i am sure you are aware, we both felt that the best option was the cropped!

I think it is hard to compare digital SLR use to mirrorless (Micro 4/3s format or any other) unless you have used both systems. SLR cameras still offer significant advantages over mirrorless for underwater shooters, although the performance gap has narrowed considerably. Can you get amazing images with both? Of course, but it is currently easier to do so with an SLR.

What has also narrowed is the price difference, with the Nikon D500 (arguably the best underwater camera around) being around the same price as many mirrorless bodies.

The size/weight argument is also moot, as the bulkiest part is always the housing, and the difference in size between most mirrorless and small SLR housings is not significant. Like for like, housings are also a similar price.

This is almost all a digression from the video however, which set out to compare two the SLR systems only. We do chat about micro 4/3 lens options in other episodes too.

Posted by Adam Hanlon on 2020-08-06 07:37:04

Hi Adam and Alex, thanks for your thoughts on sensor size and related topics.

You adressed professional and "competition" photographers, but what about the huge crowd of amateurs out there (I belong to them)?

IMHO a M43 system - which you do not mention in your video - is a good, if not perfect option for this group: Cheaper housings, cheaper optics (amateur and pro level) and, very important, smaller size (drag in a current, moving around...) and weight (travelling...) of the rig.

I used to shoot with an RS for a long time and changed to Olympus OM-D when slide films became too expensive and/or hard to find. Never regretted it, even if the WA corner sharpness cannot match the RS fisheye or 20-35mm zoom.

My digital pics are "good enough - for me! I can blow them up to poster size easily, (but how many of those posters can I hang on my walls???). Nowadays, zillions of pics are only viewed on a computer screen and then have a miserable live on drive D: or elsewhere.

So, just my opinion, the money one can save with a 43 system could be invested in a UW workshop, which probably will enhance the images more than using a FF system.

But this could be discussed endlessly, maybe it's just a matter of personal preferences.

Greetings from Germany,

Jock

Posted by Joerg Malke on 2020-08-06 01:04:28