Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Canon 20d
- Thread starter SpAtZ
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
If you think something is due out in April and you leave in March then you have no choice but to get the 20d. Regardless, that 20d is a nice camera and I wouldn't be sad if I had that and they came out with say a 20ds or 30d or whatever.
And this is coming from a true blue nikon user.
And this is coming from a true blue nikon user.
SpAtZ said:
The snorkeling is IMO quite good in the Galapagos. For the most part, the general terrain for the "good stuff" is NOT directly out in the sand, but along rocky outcropping that's the side edge of the beach...do a "sandy beach" entry, then head up the sides. You'll have shoals on one side and deeper water to the other, and this drop-off provides opportunities. Expect some non-colorful and colorful schooling fish such as King Angels. If you're as lucky as I was, you'll see turtles, sea lions *and* penguin. If its more sedate, there's "easier to hunt" less fast moving stuff such as starfish and Christmas Tree Worms.
Also, be aware that its generally only considered "safe" to swim with juvenile sea lions ... not babies and not adults. The adults are recognized by having a bigger bump type of forehead. Rely on your guides to point out the difference.
If you get a chance, go through your itinerary for where it says that you'll have "swimming/snorkeling" opportunities (ie, which island, plus a beach name if possible) and PM them to me. I'll see if any of them match in our travel diary, and what the specific site was like to see if I can offer specifics. For example, here's an image of Pinnacle Rock on "Bartolome"...almost every cruise comes here and climbs up to the top of an old vocano cone here to get this view:
The beach here on the right hand side is also sometimes used for a swimming beach for the tourists...but what most of them don't know is that one of just a few Galapagos penguin colonies is very close by (caveat: or, at least as of a few years ago, there was one close by).
As you can see in the photo, it looks like Pinnacle Rock is almost separated from the rest of the island...there's just a low saddle connecting it to the rest of the island. There's two beaches visible in this photo. Both are used for tourist swims, but if you're on the (from our perspective) right side beach, this means that Pinnacle Rock anchors the one side of the bay you're in...and if you swim out from the beach along the (as you face out) left side, you'll be heading out the side that Pinnacle Rock's. My recollections are that its perhaps 150 yards and sheltered water.
If you keep going out, the water's a bit less sheltered, so you'll need to be a good & confident swimmer, but if you swim "around the back" (from this perspective) of Pinnacle Rock, its another ~150 yards or so until you get to the area where there had been penguin. In addition to this being a long swim from shore, penguins are *wicked* fast swimmers, and they skim just under the surface, which makes them hard to spot - - as such, your odds of photgraphic success are very low.
As to the question of "is it worth investing in a dedicated snorkeling camera?", that's a tough call. I would suggest looking at the expense versus the total sum cost of the trip...if its proverbially 0.003%, its a far easier decision than if its 10%. This might be a decent application for a couple of disposable film cameras, as these will generally be fixed-focus and won't have any shutter lag, which simplifies things quite a bit. I've really not done enough snorkel with digital P&S to get a good grasp on how to deal with the autofocus+shutter timelag challenges.
BTW, the one thing that I would *not* do is put a dSLR into an "Ewa-Marine" bag. Its simply not worth risking that much gear to a proverbial ziplock bag.
Finally, the water's chilly. If you have your own 3mm wetsuit, take it. If you don't, see if the cruise company you're using has wetsuits (I think most of them usually do). Wear one, because they provide good flotation when snorkeling if/when you get fatigued, plus the cool water temps will suck the life out of you pretty quickly. For our scuba diving, I wore a full 7mm "Farmer John" (a style that has a double-thick layer over the torso...that's a full half inch of rubber), and one of the guys onboard was actually wearing a drysuit.
-hh
SpAtZ said:
Oops! Forgot the strobe question.
Short answer is "No".
Longer answer is: "No, unless you're an above-average freediver".
Reds will disappear from your shots, but you can use the Mandrake technique in photoshop to rebalance them, because at snorkeling depths, you haven't lost all of the reds yet.
-hh
SpAtZ said:
Honestly, get a Fuji waterproof disposable film camera. None of the point and shoots are really waterproof.
HTH
Jon'sLightBulbs said:
I don't disagree with the advice (disposable film), but for point of clarification, there's P&S's that are really waterproof, and then there's P&S's that claim to be "waterproof", but the real world translation is that they're only good enough for the backyard swimming pool.
Personally, I'd not trust one of the "swimming pool" ones out snorkeling in saltwater, for two reasons:
1) Its probably easy to go deeper than its max depth rating
b) Over time, saltwater will damage the camera's 0-ring seals, and on all amphibious designs (including my Nikonos), there's "non user servicable" o-rings. You extend their life by faithful freshwater rinsing (but never any soap or chemicals!), but salt crystalization buildup will eventually cause them to leak, so the only recourse here is to send the camera out for service.
For reference, this service costs me around $150 for my 35mm Nikonos V, and I do it every 2-3 years. I'd not be surprised if such service doesn't even exist for digital P&S's, under the rationale that they'll be obsolete by the time its needed.
Enough about the 'swimming pool' cameras.
For the "true" (dedicated) UW amphibious cameras and/or housings for land cameras, these are good usually to 130ft deep, so they're more than enough for snorkeling. These usually cost $100-$200 (plus the P&S camera), and this is the type of system that I've used for <2 hours of snorkeling for which I made my comments about autofocus/shutter lag challenges.
The other way to protect a land P&S is with a "thick ziplock" waterproof bag. These typically are $50, and I'd probably be willing to risk a $200 digital P&S in one of them, but not a $1000 dSLR. I'd also have generally low expectations, since they're often not set up well to manipulate the controls through the bag.
Finally, all of these protective systems have to provide access to something somehow (even if its just batteries and flash media), so they're going to have to have one or more o-ring seals in them. O-rings require some basic knowledge and TLC to learn how to prevent basic operator error from flooding the camera immediately...in theory, a single human hair accidentally left laying across an o-ring can comprimise the seal enough to cause a flood. Since salt water and electronics don't mix, the reprocussions are that the camera could be a complete loss.
Hence, the bottom line is that until you really know what you're getting into, and you're ready to deal with it (time and cost), just use a disposable
-hh