• The Canon Rumors Forum has officially been shut down as of July 10, 2026.

    All data will be deleted on September 16, 2026.

    the ad free experience will return by July 17, 2026.

6d for underwater photography?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Sort by date Sort by votes
J

jimjamesjimmy

Sep 27, 2012
94
0
5,296
#1
Im an experienced scuba diver whos shot a fair amount of pics on a few point and shoots , and ive been in the market for a FF camera for a little while with the intention of taking it underwater to take photos pf waterscapes larger sealife and reefs etc.

do you think the 6d would be good for this? ( just about my budget range)

plus points good in lower light, fairly small. image quality (im sort of guessing here lol)

what do you think?

id really appreciate your opinions. cant really see my self getting a 5d 2 for some reason, just seems to old now!
 
#5
although i do love a sarky comment every now and again, useful advice would be more appreciated.

im expecting the 6d will go down to around 1600 sometime in the new year, when ill be in the market. Forgot to mention ill be using it above ground to, as a travel camera upgrading from an old 350d!
 
Upvote 0
#6
neuroanatomist said:
Probably quite good for that use, once Ikelite et al. come out with a housing. Of course, the housing will likely be almost as much as the 6D, more including the lens port.
Click to expand...
Yep, this is an important thing to consider, if $2000 is your budget, the 6D won't work because to actually take it underwater, you'll need $4000+. This also presumes you have a lens that pairs nicely for that purpose.

The -3EV focusing could be really useful, but, beyond that, I'm not sure you'll see a big increase over the 5dII. What you may be able to do is find better deals on the 5dII and underwater housings, since they would be getting phased out.
 
Upvote 0
#7
yes yes, the budget is for the camera only. I know it costs a lot for a whole package but it really is my biggest passion. i only really need one or two prime lenses for what i want to shoot aswell.

Your probably right regarding getting a good deal on the 5d2 and housing. though like a lot of people who are thinking of upgrading to a FF just cant quite commit to buying something thats 4 years old already. which i know shouldnt matter. The better low light aspects make the 6d v interesting. especially as light reduces so much the deeper you go down!

i guess ill wait for the reviews to come in.
 
Upvote 0
#9
But on the plus side, you will only need to purchase a 6D and a single lens :-)

Whilst not able to enjoy scuba diving any more, if i were, then i would stick with a single 100mm f2.8 macro L to go with the body. Ideal budget would be for 5D3 but that would increase the housing budget equally so :o

Yep, single body + lens permanently attached with housing would be a good move - with a strobe or two attached for good measure ;)
 
Upvote 0
#10
eventually id love to shoot lots of macro stuff too, quite into corals in particular!

but i just love shooting wide open blue seascapes, imagine a 1dx and an L lens oshooting a wall or drop off, be amazing! i love epic photographs!

but ill have to stick with the little 'budget' dslrs for now !
 
Upvote 0
#11
think about the G1X plus canon underwater case - in Uk terms you could do that for £700 now say $900 or so i guess. I think a SLR with quality case would be £4000 perhaps and quality better no doubt but 5 times better - I doubt it
 
Upvote 0
#12
Take this with a grain of salt as I have only investigated purchasing underwater housings - I have never done it myself.

My opinion is it's not so hot of an idea. The most practical reason is the housings themselves are major purchases. For my purposes I was looking at a sport housing for my 5D3 + 16-35 2.8 II + 8-15 fisheye. The total cost for the housing + lens ports was about $3500. However a sport housing only goes to about 30 feet down (fine for my proposed uses). An actual underwater housing will be well over $4k when you add the lens ports. You may also have to budget in strobes.

So needless to say once you buy a housing you'll want to use it for awhile. Once you upgrade your camera you'll need a new housing. IMHO that is a reasonable risk for a camera like the 5D3. Even when a 5D4 or whatever comes down the line three years from now, it will still be a decent camera and very capable for underwater shots.

I do not believe the same is the case for the 6D. It hasn't even been released yet and it is already behind the times. In particular the AF is ancient. Remember that you can't change your focus points down there so you need to either use MF or full AF. From my few experiences under the water I would want AF - so I would also want to take a camera that can do well there.

I know this just adds more to your budget, but given how much you will be investing you'll want to know that your equipment stays relevant for awhile.

If you'd really like to shoot something now, you may want to look into one of the specialized P&S cameras for underwater photography.
 
Upvote 0
#13
to be honest i dont really go in for the whole 100 AF points needed school of thought, unless i was a sports photojournalist or something i dont think its necessary. i think you can do a lot with fixed focus distances and one point focusing, especially underwater.

but is the 6d really out of date even before its been released?
 
Upvote 0
#14
Recommend you look at your new underwater camera as a complete system. Depending on the type of images you want to make, the lenses, ports and strobes can get pretty expensive, much more money than a body. Folks who grab their camera and kit lens and put them in a plastic housing tend to be disappointed with the results.

Shooting underwater is very different than on land. To capture the images you probably have in your mind’s eye you’re going to have to get very close to limit the amount of water between the subject and the camera. This means a wide angle lens like the Canon EF 8-15mm Fisheye or a Tokina 10-17mm on a crop camera is the way to go. These lenses require relatively pricey domes to get great corners. For macro shooting the 100mm macro is the way to go in clear tropical water. The new one focuses a little quicker than the non L older version.
We know that photography is all about the light and that is even more important underwater. One good strobe is enough to get you started but you’re going to want two eventually, especially if you love shooting the wide angle stuff.

The 6D looks like a nice body for underwater use with the cautionary exception of the low sync speed. 1/180s is a touch slow to capture those great sunray images everyone loves. It’s possible but harder than using 1/250s on a 7D for example. The 5D II & III is at 1/200s so a touch better. Just one of many things to consider. If you travel long distances to dive and shoot it’s pretty common to carry two bodies just in case. Saltwater and electronics don’t exactly get along.

If I was you I’d seriously consider a 7D or 5D Mk II and pickup a used high quality aluminum housing for it. (Aquatica, Nauticam, Sea & Sea, etc) Spend the money now on lenses, ports and strobes that you can grow with. When the 6D comes out, and the housings finally start to ship, or the MK III comes down a little, you will be in a great position to make an upgrade choice in a year or two. If you’re living right the new 7D MkII will come out with the controls in the same place and your housing will work with the new camera. (OK, wishful thinking)

Most importantly, spend the time to go to one of the top level shops that specializes in underwater equipment. Have them put a whole system together and price it for you. Lay your hands on the different housings and spend some time with them. Feel how your hands lay on the controls. When you’re at a 100 ft and the shark is circling in to see what you’re up to it’s no time to have to look to find the damn shutter speed dial.

Good luck!
Steve
 
Upvote 0
#16
thanks Steve w for taking the time to reply with such great advice!

why cant i get it out my head i need a FF camera! i was gonna get a housing for my 350d once apon a time but the housings would have cost more than the camera back then! but yeah 7d 250 flash sync is way better than 180

Im ashamed to say i never really gave the flash sync speed as much thought as ishould have, being a mostly natural light photographer myself on the surface.

is 180 not good enough?, i suppose i better get into a underwater forum for this kind of in depth talk!

i really had my heart on a 6d :(
 
Upvote 0
#18
Steve above is a very experienced underwater shooter.

One thing to mention is high ISO is less important than you'd think for a lot of underwater photography, as most of the time you're using strobes to provide light for your main subject rather than relying on ambient light alone. Which is also why higher sync speeds are so important. The other issue is floods which are most likely when early on with underwater DSLR as a friend of mine just found out. Getting the most camera for your buck can leave you with no ability to replace it if the worst happens.

And finally there are some real advantages to APS-C underwater, not least is access to the Tokina 10-17mm, one of the most popular underwater lenses around. The EF-S 60mm macro is also a fantastic all rounder.

Wetpixel would be one place to try to find out more. It also depends whether above water or below water is your major priority.
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

J
  • Locked
on the verge of buying, just need some final moral support
Replies
42
Views
21K
Artifex
A
Top Bottom
Home
Forums
Media
Menu