Canon 40D housing

**Gill Envy** · 18th February 2008, 17:05

Quote: (Originally Posted by grunzster)

Do the stock houses only accept RAW?

I thought they'd take TIFF too?

I'd think that with the minimal compression on the highest quality, highest res jpg, you should be able to convert to TIFF, and it would be acceptable.

the last time we had one of our photographer friends "crunch" the numbers, the JPG to TIFF conversion didn't add up. It does seem a bit wacked to me that the focus is so much on file size, which does not directly correlate to resolution.

Every once in a while my wife and I take a photo that seems worthy of submission but I"m leery of investing so much more time and money and hassle to have a large enough file size. If we do make the jump, the 40D is what everyone is pointing us to, but it's probably way more than we need.

grunzster · 18th February 2008, 18:56

That's a new one! Minimum file size!!!

It's also strange, because depending on how many colors and which colors, two images of the exact same size could have very different file sizes.

**NEDIVER** · 27th February 2008, 01:58

Quote: (Originally Posted by grunzster)

That's a new one! Minimum file size!!!

It's also strange, because depending on how many colors and which colors, two images of the exact same size could have very different file sizes.

I think you are referring to the aperture software.....with that being the case, you have minimum file size only after the original file is created.

That being said, if you make a color adjustment with, lets say, hue or saturation, you only create a very small file that performs that adjustment from the original file.

So in reality, what you have is a data base filled with only "negatives" or "original files". All of the different adjustments and versions that you create from the original are only minute command files, taking up hardly any space. As apposed to creating an entire new picture and saving it again for each adjustment and each version, as with PS. Those who have used, or are using PS clearly see their memory diminishing very quickly with each new saved version.

I hope that helps clarify what I was attempting to state.

TM

**Gill Envy** · 27th February 2008, 06:25

I was referring to the fact that some stock houses have a minimum file size for submission, basically requiring a raw format origin from a high end camera.

We get surprisingly nice macro shots with such a simple set up as the SD 900's with the cannon stock housings, diffuser and built in flash, every so often I'd like to submit one to a stock house but can't because of fill size is too small (the SD's don't produce raw), even though they are 10 megapixils and prety high rez.

the quandry for us is: will the jump up to something like the 40D with the added expense, hastle, bulk and risk be worth it, when we are happy with what we are doing with a much more compact and managable camera that takes pretty nice pictures as it is. If it would allow us to submit an occasional photo to help support the habit it just might be worth it and of course the 40D would probably take our photography to a whole new level.

here is a flickr set of some photos from a trip last spring (The Underwater Jungle Of Ambon Indonesia - a photoset on Flickr), they were shrunk to fit on flickr but it gives you an idea of what can be done with a camera that fits in the palm of your hand, and even in a housing that can still be wielded with one hand or even forgotten about in between shots.

g

Quote: (Originally Posted by NEDIVER)

I think you are referring to the aperture software.....with that being the case, you have minimum file size only after the original file is created.

That being said, if you make a color adjustment with, lets say, hue or saturation, you only create a very small file that performs that adjustment from the original file.

So in reality, what you have is a data base filled with only "negatives" or "original files". All of the different adjustments and versions that you create from the original are only minute command files, taking up hardly any space. As apposed to creating an entire new picture and saving it again for each adjustment and each version, as with PS. Those who have used, or are using PS clearly see their memory diminishing very quickly with each new saved version.

I hope that helps clarify what I was attempting to state.

TM

grunzster · 27th February 2008, 11:40

Quote: (Originally Posted by NEDIVER)

I think you are referring to the aperture software.....with that being the case, you have minimum file size only after the original file is created.

That being said, if you make a color adjustment with, lets say, hue or saturation, you only create a very small file that performs that adjustment from the original file.

So in reality, what you have is a data base filled with only "negatives" or "original files". All of the different adjustments and versions that you create from the original are only minute command files, taking up hardly any space. As apposed to creating an entire new picture and saving it again for each adjustment and each version, as with PS. Those who have used, or are using PS clearly see their memory diminishing very quickly with each new saved version.

I hope that helps clarify what I was attempting to state.

TM

I was just making a generalization that if you take 2 files, same exact image format, same compression settings if any, same resolution, etc. that they could be significantly different in size depending on other factors.

Ryan · 27th February 2008, 14:23

There is a trend in Japan to pop up the camera's internal flash for simple macro shots that is becoming popular. I have done some testing, and this technique forces me to use higher iso or more open f-stops than I'm comfortable with, but can see the attraction for a compact, easy to use setup.

Seatool's 40d housing is built this way.

Seatool Housing for the Canon 40D with Pickup Viewfinder [st.40d.pu] - $3,199.00 : Reef Photo & Video!, The Underwater Photo Pros

**Gill Envy** · 27th February 2008, 14:42

thanks Ryan, that looks like a cool housing. It would be nice to have that internal flash option for those times when you just don't feel like lugging all the extra strobes.

g

Quote: (Originally Posted by Ryan)

There is a trend in Japan to pop up the camera's internal flash for simple macro shots that is becoming popular. I have done some testing, and this technique forces me to use higher iso or more open f-stops than I'm comfortable with, but can see the attraction for a compact, easy to use setup.

Seatool's 40d housing is built this way.

Seatool Housing for the Canon 40D with Pickup Viewfinder [st.40d.pu] - $3,199.00 : Reef Photo & Video!, The Underwater Photo Pros

**NEDIVER** · 2nd March 2008, 23:20

Quote: (Originally Posted by Gill Envy)

I was referring to the fact that some stock houses have a minimum file size for submission, basically requiring a raw format origin from a high end camera.

We get surprisingly nice macro shots with such a simple set up as the SD 900's with the cannon stock housings, diffuser and built in flash, every so often I'd like to submit one to a stock house but can't because of fill size is too small (the SD's don't produce raw), even though they are 10 megapixils and prety high rez.

the quandry for us is: will the jump up to something like the 40D with the added expense, hastle, bulk and risk be worth it, when we are happy with what we are doing with a much more compact and managable camera that takes pretty nice pictures as it is. If it would allow us to submit an occasional photo to help support the habit it just might be worth it and of course the 40D would probably take our photography to a whole new level.

here is a flickr set of some photos from a trip last spring (The Underwater Jungle Of Ambon Indonesia - a photoset on Flickr), they were shrunk to fit on flickr but it gives you an idea of what can be done with a camera that fits in the palm of your hand, and even in a housing that can still be wielded with one hand or even forgotten about in between shots.

g

Gill,

First of all, NICE PHOTOS!!!! I have never been there and I am very jealous!

yes, yes and yes, when you are dealing with a compact camera like the SD 900 that you refer to, you have a smaller area that the original picture is projected onto, therefore your file size will be smaller, even though it is 10mp the "film size" or now the photo receptors makes a huge difference in the file size. the bigger the more detail.

The 40D will give you a much larger array of photoreceptor cells, but is still smaller than traditional 35mm film. This is why if you purchase a DSLR you need to calculate in the magnification factor, it is slightly different in each manufacturer. for the 40D this is 1.6X. Just keep this in mind when buying lenses, for example, a 100mm lens is actually like taking a picture with a 160mm lens with a traditional 35mm film camera.

There are cameras much more expensive than the 40D that have a true 35mm receptor. I love the 40D, I previously owned the 20D and it is well worth the upgrade. You will be able to take RAW photos and convert them to DNG files very easily if you wish for export.

I have yet to get an underwater housing for this, however I think I have narrowed it down to the see&see. I will post results once I make this purchase.

If you are debating on the size of the 40D or other DSLR's vs your point and shoot, that is personal preference. if decide you like point and shoot, you may want to consider the Canon G9, I am going to pick one of these up as well. It allows RAW format, however the files will still be smaller than the DSLR. But you could get the G9 and housing for less than the 40D alone.

I am not sure if that helps, but I hope so.

Tom

RBailey · 3rd March 2008, 05:13

Hi,

I've got the 350D in the Ikelite hosuing and love it but I'll admit I'm biased.

I'll only comment with respect to Ikelite

Plus -
- Biggest plus is eTTL circutry so that the camera will give correct exposure data to the external strobe. (Also with plus and minus compensation on "ideal".) Good if you are lazy, however if you already have expeince of manual strobe control may think you don't need it (or realise how usefull eTTL is

).
- Price
- Range of housing and support.

Minus -
Depth rating is on 60M. Whilst you might feel you'll not be doing complex photography at depth yet the deep side will beckon soon enough.

In your initial post you also mentioned the 6.5 frames per second any external strobe will not be able to keep up with this rate. The eTTL exposure control actually errors (over exposes) if there is not enought time between shots.

I Don't have S&S so can't comment on what they can offier but know they are well loved housings as well.

Cheers,
Richard B.

**NEDIVER** · 3rd March 2008, 11:01

Quote: (Originally Posted by RBailey)

In your initial post you also mentioned the 6.5 frames per second any external strobe will not be able to keep up with this rate. The eTTL exposure control actually errors (over exposes) if there is not enought time between shots.

Cheers,
Richard B.

Richard,

Thanks for sharing the info about the over exposure with continuous shooting with the strobes. That is very interesting. I pretty much chalked up the fact that I would not be able to get the 6.5 fps any where under water. In fact the 40D can not achieve this with normal flash.

It still is a great feature that comes in handy at the Red Sox games

. It also allowed me to get some great in-flight shots of a humming bird this past November while I was in Antigua. I was really impressed, especially since I got the camera only two days before the trip. It is very user friendly.

Just one question you raised that I was wondering if you could answer....what is the "down time" between your shots with your EOS Rebel set up with the ikelite system while being able to maintain some quality control on your exposure?

thanks in advance,

Tom

18th February 2008, 17:05	#11 (permalink)
Gill Envy Shearwater Copis Diver Current Rebreather/s: Other CCR Other Rebreather/s: Evolution Other CCR Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: seattle Posts: 1,255	Re: Canon 40D housing Quote: (Originally Posted by grunzster) Do the stock houses only accept RAW? I thought they'd take TIFF too? I'd think that with the minimal compression on the highest quality, highest res jpg, you should be able to convert to TIFF, and it would be acceptable. the last time we had one of our photographer friends "crunch" the numbers, the JPG to TIFF conversion didn't add up. It does seem a bit wacked to me that the focus is so much on file size, which does not directly correlate to resolution. Every once in a while my wife and I take a photo that seems worthy of submission but I"m leery of investing so much more time and money and hassle to have a large enough file size. If we do make the jump, the 40D is what everyone is pointing us to, but it's probably way more than we need. __________________ Gill Envy ...Because I wasn't born with gills! ><(°>><(°>><(°>><(°>><(°>><(°>><(°>><(°>
(Online)

18th February 2008, 18:56	#12 (permalink)
grunzster New Member Current Rebreather/s: Not Bought Yet Other Rebreather/s: Not Bought Yet Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: NJ Posts: 28	Re: Canon 40D housing That's a new one! Minimum file size!!! It's also strange, because depending on how many colors and which colors, two images of the exact same size could have very different file sizes.
(Offline)

27th February 2008, 01:58	#13 (permalink)
NEDIVER Sic Semper Tyrannis Current Rebreather/s: Evolution Other Rebreather/s: Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Nashua, NH Posts: 120	Re: Canon 40D housing Quote: (Originally Posted by grunzster) That's a new one! Minimum file size!!! It's also strange, because depending on how many colors and which colors, two images of the exact same size could have very different file sizes. I think you are referring to the aperture software.....with that being the case, you have minimum file size only after the original file is created. That being said, if you make a color adjustment with, lets say, hue or saturation, you only create a very small file that performs that adjustment from the original file. So in reality, what you have is a data base filled with only "negatives" or "original files". All of the different adjustments and versions that you create from the original are only minute command files, taking up hardly any space. As apposed to creating an entire new picture and saving it again for each adjustment and each version, as with PS. Those who have used, or are using PS clearly see their memory diminishing very quickly with each new saved version. I hope that helps clarify what I was attempting to state. TM
(Offline)

27th February 2008, 06:25	#14 (permalink)
Gill Envy Shearwater Copis Diver Current Rebreather/s: Other CCR Other Rebreather/s: Evolution Other CCR Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: seattle Posts: 1,255	Re: Canon 40D housing I was referring to the fact that some stock houses have a minimum file size for submission, basically requiring a raw format origin from a high end camera. We get surprisingly nice macro shots with such a simple set up as the SD 900's with the cannon stock housings, diffuser and built in flash, every so often I'd like to submit one to a stock house but can't because of fill size is too small (the SD's don't produce raw), even though they are 10 megapixils and prety high rez. the quandry for us is: will the jump up to something like the 40D with the added expense, hastle, bulk and risk be worth it, when we are happy with what we are doing with a much more compact and managable camera that takes pretty nice pictures as it is. If it would allow us to submit an occasional photo to help support the habit it just might be worth it and of course the 40D would probably take our photography to a whole new level. here is a flickr set of some photos from a trip last spring (The Underwater Jungle Of Ambon Indonesia - a photoset on Flickr), they were shrunk to fit on flickr but it gives you an idea of what can be done with a camera that fits in the palm of your hand, and even in a housing that can still be wielded with one hand or even forgotten about in between shots. g Quote: (Originally Posted by NEDIVER) I think you are referring to the aperture software.....with that being the case, you have minimum file size only after the original file is created. That being said, if you make a color adjustment with, lets say, hue or saturation, you only create a very small file that performs that adjustment from the original file. So in reality, what you have is a data base filled with only "negatives" or "original files". All of the different adjustments and versions that you create from the original are only minute command files, taking up hardly any space. As apposed to creating an entire new picture and saving it again for each adjustment and each version, as with PS. Those who have used, or are using PS clearly see their memory diminishing very quickly with each new saved version. I hope that helps clarify what I was attempting to state. TM __________________ Gill Envy ...Because I wasn't born with gills! ><(°>><(°>><(°>><(°>><(°>><(°>><(°>><(°>
(Online)

27th February 2008, 11:40	#15 (permalink)
grunzster New Member Current Rebreather/s: Not Bought Yet Other Rebreather/s: Not Bought Yet Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: NJ Posts: 28	Re: Canon 40D housing Quote: (Originally Posted by NEDIVER) I think you are referring to the aperture software.....with that being the case, you have minimum file size only after the original file is created. That being said, if you make a color adjustment with, lets say, hue or saturation, you only create a very small file that performs that adjustment from the original file. So in reality, what you have is a data base filled with only "negatives" or "original files". All of the different adjustments and versions that you create from the original are only minute command files, taking up hardly any space. As apposed to creating an entire new picture and saving it again for each adjustment and each version, as with PS. Those who have used, or are using PS clearly see their memory diminishing very quickly with each new saved version. I hope that helps clarify what I was attempting to state. TM I was just making a generalization that if you take 2 files, same exact image format, same compression settings if any, same resolution, etc. that they could be significantly different in size depending on other factors.
(Offline)

27th February 2008, 14:23	#16 (permalink)
Ryan New Member Current Rebreather/s: rEvo Pelagian Other Rebreather/s: Not Bought Yet Inspiration Classic Sport Kiss Classic Kiss rEvo Pelagian Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: On the edge of the gulf stream! Posts: 72	Re: Canon 40D housing There is a trend in Japan to pop up the camera's internal flash for simple macro shots that is becoming popular. I have done some testing, and this technique forces me to use higher iso or more open f-stops than I'm comfortable with, but can see the attraction for a compact, easy to use setup. Seatool's 40d housing is built this way. Seatool Housing for the Canon 40D with Pickup Viewfinder [st.40d.pu] - $3,199.00 : Reef Photo & Video!, The Underwater Photo Pros __________________ www.ReefPhoto.com 877-453-8927 954-537-0644
(Online)

27th February 2008, 14:42	#17 (permalink)
Gill Envy Shearwater Copis Diver Current Rebreather/s: Other CCR Other Rebreather/s: Evolution Other CCR Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: seattle Posts: 1,255	Re: Canon 40D housing thanks Ryan, that looks like a cool housing. It would be nice to have that internal flash option for those times when you just don't feel like lugging all the extra strobes. g Quote: (Originally Posted by Ryan) There is a trend in Japan to pop up the camera's internal flash for simple macro shots that is becoming popular. I have done some testing, and this technique forces me to use higher iso or more open f-stops than I'm comfortable with, but can see the attraction for a compact, easy to use setup. Seatool's 40d housing is built this way. Seatool Housing for the Canon 40D with Pickup Viewfinder [st.40d.pu] - $3,199.00 : Reef Photo & Video!, The Underwater Photo Pros __________________ Gill Envy ...Because I wasn't born with gills! ><(°>><(°>><(°>><(°>><(°>><(°>><(°>><(°>
(Online)

2nd March 2008, 23:20	#18 (permalink)
NEDIVER Sic Semper Tyrannis Current Rebreather/s: Evolution Other Rebreather/s: Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Nashua, NH Posts: 120	Re: Canon 40D housing Quote: (Originally Posted by Gill Envy) I was referring to the fact that some stock houses have a minimum file size for submission, basically requiring a raw format origin from a high end camera. We get surprisingly nice macro shots with such a simple set up as the SD 900's with the cannon stock housings, diffuser and built in flash, every so often I'd like to submit one to a stock house but can't because of fill size is too small (the SD's don't produce raw), even though they are 10 megapixils and prety high rez. the quandry for us is: will the jump up to something like the 40D with the added expense, hastle, bulk and risk be worth it, when we are happy with what we are doing with a much more compact and managable camera that takes pretty nice pictures as it is. If it would allow us to submit an occasional photo to help support the habit it just might be worth it and of course the 40D would probably take our photography to a whole new level. here is a flickr set of some photos from a trip last spring (The Underwater Jungle Of Ambon Indonesia - a photoset on Flickr), they were shrunk to fit on flickr but it gives you an idea of what can be done with a camera that fits in the palm of your hand, and even in a housing that can still be wielded with one hand or even forgotten about in between shots. g Gill, First of all, NICE PHOTOS!!!! I have never been there and I am very jealous! yes, yes and yes, when you are dealing with a compact camera like the SD 900 that you refer to, you have a smaller area that the original picture is projected onto, therefore your file size will be smaller, even though it is 10mp the "film size" or now the photo receptors makes a huge difference in the file size. the bigger the more detail. The 40D will give you a much larger array of photoreceptor cells, but is still smaller than traditional 35mm film. This is why if you purchase a DSLR you need to calculate in the magnification factor, it is slightly different in each manufacturer. for the 40D this is 1.6X. Just keep this in mind when buying lenses, for example, a 100mm lens is actually like taking a picture with a 160mm lens with a traditional 35mm film camera. There are cameras much more expensive than the 40D that have a true 35mm receptor. I love the 40D, I previously owned the 20D and it is well worth the upgrade. You will be able to take RAW photos and convert them to DNG files very easily if you wish for export. I have yet to get an underwater housing for this, however I think I have narrowed it down to the see&see. I will post results once I make this purchase. If you are debating on the size of the 40D or other DSLR's vs your point and shoot, that is personal preference. if decide you like point and shoot, you may want to consider the Canon G9, I am going to pick one of these up as well. It allows RAW format, however the files will still be smaller than the DSLR. But you could get the G9 and housing for less than the 40D alone. I am not sure if that helps, but I hope so. Tom
(Offline)

3rd March 2008, 05:13	#19 (permalink)
RBailey New Member Current Rebreather/s: Evolution Other Rebreather/s: Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Dubai Posts: 5	Canon 40D housing Hi, I've got the 350D in the Ikelite hosuing and love it but I'll admit I'm biased. I'll only comment with respect to Ikelite Plus - - Biggest plus is eTTL circutry so that the camera will give correct exposure data to the external strobe. (Also with plus and minus compensation on "ideal".) Good if you are lazy, however if you already have expeince of manual strobe control may think you don't need it (or realise how usefull eTTL is). - Price - Range of housing and support. Minus - Depth rating is on 60M. Whilst you might feel you'll not be doing complex photography at depth yet the deep side will beckon soon enough. In your initial post you also mentioned the 6.5 frames per second any external strobe will not be able to keep up with this rate. The eTTL exposure control actually errors (over exposes) if there is not enought time between shots. I Don't have S&S so can't comment on what they can offier but know they are well loved housings as well. Cheers, Richard B. __________________ Dive Planning = Jump in, swim around a bit and come back up again.
(Offline)

3rd March 2008, 11:01	#20 (permalink)
NEDIVER Sic Semper Tyrannis Current Rebreather/s: Evolution Other Rebreather/s: Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Nashua, NH Posts: 120	Re: Canon 40D housing Quote: (Originally Posted by RBailey) In your initial post you also mentioned the 6.5 frames per second any external strobe will not be able to keep up with this rate. The eTTL exposure control actually errors (over exposes) if there is not enought time between shots. Cheers, Richard B. Richard, Thanks for sharing the info about the over exposure with continuous shooting with the strobes. That is very interesting. I pretty much chalked up the fact that I would not be able to get the 6.5 fps any where under water. In fact the 40D can not achieve this with normal flash. It still is a great feature that comes in handy at the Red Sox games . It also allowed me to get some great in-flight shots of a humming bird this past November while I was in Antigua. I was really impressed, especially since I got the camera only two days before the trip. It is very user friendly. Just one question you raised that I was wondering if you could answer....what is the "down time" between your shots with your EOS Rebel set up with the ikelite system while being able to maintain some quality control on your exposure? thanks in advance, Tom __________________ -Tom- "slow is smooth, and smooth is fast" TM "Insanity is repeating the same thing over and over again, expecting different results" Albert Einstein
(Offline)

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode