|
Users viewing this topic: none
|
|
Login  | |
|
Sealife SL330 camera not recommended - 1/27/2013 12:22:28 PM
|
|
|
uphillklimber
Posts: 5533
Joined: 2/17/2005
From: Bryant Pond, Maine
Status: offline
|
I had opportunity to use a sealife SL330 camera for diving, snorkeling and land pics. I have to say I was very disappointed with the underwater picture quality. That is/was perhaps the number one reason for it's purchase. A close second is to use it for kayaking, which I would still recommend. Found it online, delivered for $139.00.
Here is how it performed. On land, decent shots, some zoom capability, didn't have to worry about it getting wet or dropped. . Snorkeling, it was so-so. There is a dive or snorkel feature, which I missed sometimes and used sometimes. It just didn't seem to matter. I did get some good and great pictures with it, but I missed or blurred a great many, including some I very dearly wanted. My old canon dinosaur in a case, did a much, much better job, with very few blurred pictures and the picture quality was what I'd expect. The sealife did have one advantage, however. There is no lag time from when you press the button, while the canon has some lag time. I did get some pics, but I am very disappointed in what I missed.
My photography style. I did 600 pics with the canon, well over half land pics, and the sealife have 700 pics, perhaps 3/4 of which were water pics, and I got far more usable pics from the canon. Typically, I expect about 10% "usable" pics, with maybe 3 or 4 out of a 1000 to be wall portrait quality. To be fair, I always shoot 2-4 pics of everything and pic the best out of that. So I am already throwing away 2/3 of my (free digital) pics, so take this from where it is coming from. Many of my pics are on the move, either me on the boat, or the fish trying to get away from me. They never seem to pose for me. And then there are currents, sunlight at my back, but not making a shadow, and what the fish decides to do. I am very happy if I get 10% usable given the conditions, and how I just shoot, shoot, shoot.
But all things being equal, I'd take my old canon over this sealife for underwater pics. One of my shipmates had a PC with a card reader, and you could see the quality was way different, so I used my canon to finish out the trip. It turns out my dive buddy had returned his sealife, and is using a canon D-10 for snorkeling and another canon with a case for diving (forget the model number).
_____________________________
Lovin life,
Bob
|
|
|
|
RE: Sealife SL330 camera not recommended - 1/28/2013 10:26:39 AM
|
|
|
reefhugger
Posts: 8900
Joined: 8/25/2004
Status: offline
|
In general I'm not a fan of Sealife, but I that's mostly because I prefer to have the capability of manual settings and not auto everything and modes.
Big thing though for u/w photography, regardless of how simple or advanced your camera is, if you can't get close to your subject and stay still while you take the shot, you're likely to get out of focus and blur. If you're diving and there's any current, or you haven't mastered your buoyancy skills, being able to approach slowly, get in the right position, hold it to set up your shot and take the photo is something that comes with a lot of patience and practice. I started u/w with Nikonos cameras. When it was film and you only got 36 chances, and the end result was what you shot (not Photoshop or similar to clean up or save or color correct the mediocre shots), I think people took a lot more time really learning and paying attention to how to frame, what settings to use, lighting, etc., Now with digital and all the point & shoot cameras that have a 101 different modes and scenes, if you have a big enough card and enough battery power, you can just bang away with little regard for setting up a good shot. Between luck and some editing skills with your favorite photo program, you can get a good number of decent shots.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Sealife SL330 camera not recommended - 1/28/2013 5:12:58 PM
|
|
|
uphillklimber
Posts: 5533
Joined: 2/17/2005
From: Bryant Pond, Maine
Status: offline
|
Okay, I want to be sure I am being fair here. I did get some good pics underwater with this camera, but lost way too many. Land shots were good. In fact, this totally seems like a kayaking camera. Water won't hurt, and getting tossed around in the kayak isn't an issue.
_____________________________
Lovin life,
Bob
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Sealife SL330 camera not recommended - 1/29/2013 4:20:26 AM
|
|
|
uphillklimber
Posts: 5533
Joined: 2/17/2005
From: Bryant Pond, Maine
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: barata
Sorry to hear about the Sealife, glad we got the Panasonic instead. But MORE TO THE POINT - how was the trip?? Are you sold on sailing now? Where'd you go, what'd you do?? Did you hit the Baths? What about the Willie T? Snorkle the Indians? Enquiring minds want to know!
I see you posted on my trip report, so you already know the answers!! Off to work now.
_____________________________
Lovin life,
Bob
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Sealife SL330 camera not recommended - 1/29/2013 6:00:59 PM
|
|
|
uphillklimber
Posts: 5533
Joined: 2/17/2005
From: Bryant Pond, Maine
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: barata
Sorry to hear about the Sealife, glad we got the Panasonic instead. But MORE TO THE POINT - how was the trip?? Are you sold on sailing now? Where'd you go, what'd you do?? Did you hit the Baths? What about the Willie T? Snorkle the Indians? Enquiring minds want to know!
Well, I enjoyed the sailing a great deal.
Did the baths.
Visited the Willie T
Snorkeled the indians!
_____________________________
Lovin life,
Bob
|
|
|
|
 New Messages |
 No New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/ New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/o New Messages |
 Locked w/ New Messages |
 Locked w/o New Messages |
|
Post New Thread
Reply to Message
Post New Poll
Submit Vote
Delete My Own Post
Delete My Own Thread
Rate Posts
|
|
|
Printable Version
