AmbergrisCaye.com Home Forums The Cayes Ambergris Caye diving buffs camera question

Vowel, lol, you're funny. I think you are the one that is full of hot air, or is it passin gas...

But you're right, I would not suggest a expensive camera to a snorkeler either. I never seen or read in the first post that they were snorkelers.

You crack me up, LOL...

I will admit that you are correct about the film speed versus light. My original thought was to go with a more light sensitive speed to enhance the photos. Didn't work out. The camera specifies either 100 or 200 only. I stopped worrying about f stops when I went point and shoot 20 years ago. I put the film in and snap the picture and don't try and think it to death.
As for you, planning another trip to AC? I seem to recall you made one trip a few years ago, found just about everything to be unsatisfactory and not up to your standards. Funny that you keep haunting this message board and presenting your opinions as more factual than others opinions.
Have a nice day.

Have a nice day yourself

What a worthless argument, hahahahaha hahahahah ahahaha ahahahahah hahaha hahah

Oh, I don't know. Anybody learn anything? I did. Maybe I should have gone Liberal Arts and taken a photo course. Anyway, bumping heads with an immovable ego is always a challenge.

Well... at $1,800.00 for a starter kit...they damn well better be better than mine!

Idaho Diver,
I'm sure you pix are just super!..but, before you get all caught up in your passion (photography), why don't you go back and read a little closer what the needs of the person asking the question are.

This person states that they thought the single use cameras were "great". The only real problem they had with the little single use cameras was that thay couldn't go to depth.
Now do you honestly think somebody that is completely happy with the single use cameras is wanting to go out and drop $1,800.00 on a "starter kit"???

More than likely, not. See, I tried to answer the person's question with the best answer for THEM...not with the best answer for me (or you for that matter).

No. The Reefmaster isn't the best camera out there. Far from it. I'll be the first to admit that...but it didn't sound like they were looking for the best camera out there. They just wanted something that would let them bring a few snapshots home and the Reefmaster is perfect for that. It takes better pictures than single use cameras because it has a flash and it can go to 150' so it won't flood like the single use cameras.

Yss. The Reefmaster can take good pix without using an external strobe(camera's flash only) at 60' in Carribean waters. I've done it. Granted, probably a smaller percentage of my photos come out lookin like National Geographic photos than yours with your Nikonos. I would post them but I don't have a scanner or a website to post them on....and I'm not going to go to all that trouble just to prove a point to you. You can believe me or not, I don't care either way. Come to the Lake Conroe Fundraiser Shindig and I will show them to you. You can criticize them there.

Not everbody needs to "WOW" the whole world with their photos. Some folks just like to flip through them with friends.. and when they do this their fond memories and good times come right back to mind. They would rather experience their trip with their own eyes and minds rather than spend their trip peering through a viewfinder and then recalling their trip later in photographs. For some folks, a few snapshots are just fine.

I didn't lay into you because you are so anal about "quality" photos... so why don't you return the favor and don't lay into the rest of us because we're not....fair enough?

I'm sure your photos are lovely. I'm not taking that away from you. It's just that not everyone cares so much whether or not they get award winning photos...and reading the original question, it just seems that since this person is quite happy with the quality of single use cameras, they probably don't want to shell out $1,800.00 for your starter kit. I could be wrong on that, though, so I would say that it is good that you showed them that option. I was just giving them another option. That's all.

This much I know to be true....you only have a split second to photograph fish under water, before the view differs.

Our educated family photographer, gets on our last nerve, we yell "take the picture already".

Loved the lively debate, tho.

Zagnut said among other things: "See, I tried to answer the person's question with the best answer for THEM...not with the best answer for me (or you for that matter)."

seashell replies: Sadly, trying to answer the person's question with the best answer for THEM, is often discouraged on this board.

To Zagnut and any others that would try to answer questions with the best answer they can give FOR THE PERSON ASKING, I say please keep up the good work!

i'm all for an amusing and informative topic such as this one. thanks for the smiles and the info.

Hey Zagnut, where did one of your last posts go? Did you delete it? Did the censorship button pushers do it?

Sphincter isn't it? Besides it was Bobber who indicated I was anal.

I will agree with much of what you said above, (if they don't have the skill it won't happen) but any way, you are NOT going to get a colorful photo at any depth from a box type camera withOUT added light, (I haven't used those red filters so I can't speak about those)

The need for light... the primary purpose of a strobe underwater is to reproduce the subject's color. At a depth of 10 ft. the red content of the subject will begin to be absorbed by the water, resulting in a photograph strong in blue cast. (orange and yellow is not far behind)

This phenomenon, know as 'selective light absorption' increases as you go deeper underwater and go further from the subject. Think about it for a second, if the light leaves the strobe and hits the subject 8 ft away and reflects back another 8 ft to the camera, has the colors already started to be absorbed by the water? Using a strobe will effectively restore the lost color to your photographs and create better contrast if used properly. Have you ever been in a grandstand and noticed all the flashes go off all over? Even onland most flashes don't do any good after 30 ft. (underexposed or blurry because the camera decided it needed more light)

No I am not an expert, I have thrown away more pics than you can imagine. I started underwater photography about 13/15 years ago with an old Nikonos-III and no strobe, (loaned to me). The underwater lighting needs are very much different than a land based SLR or today's digitals, so to compared what you learned in "I also took a couple of college courses in black and white and in color photography as required for my art degree." don't hold much water in underwater photography. But keep talking your Sphincter is starting to blow...

One last word for you Zagnut, if photography is a 'enigma' don't squeeze the shutter... you may not like what you find...

I'm glad some of the regular readers found this thread amusing and informative, just consider what most are doing here. You recite what he said/she said, a lot of misinformation...