is it just me? it seems like Olympus is not making very many underwater capable

[anenomefishman]

cameras anymore.

 

[diver_dj]

It's just you.

 

[Storker]

OP without real content, no sensible discussion possible

--
Sent from my Android phone
Typos are a feature, not a bug

 

[Gdog]

cameras anymore.

Huh??

 

[drrich2]

In what category? Seems like the TG-4 is practically class-leading, judging from reviews I've been reading. Are you after a mirrorless, an SLR, or what?

Richard.

 

[anenomefishman]

In what category? Seems like the TG-4 is practically class-leading, judging from reviews I've been reading. Are you after a mirrorless, an SLR, or what?

Richard.

i am currently running an XZ-1. it is basically a 4/3s size/style camera that you cannot remove the lens on. would like something that is small underwater footprint with an olympus housing that is full manual that i can run with only using internal flash.

 

[Storker]

In what category? Seems like the TG-4 is practically class-leading, judging from reviews I've been reading. Are you after a mirrorless, an SLR, or what?

Anyone interested in UW photography knows that the Nikonos era is over and has been over for many years. More than 99% of the cameras used underwater for anything more than mere snapshots are topside cameras in an underwater housing. The number of serious cameras that can be used at depths exceeding snorkeling depth - unless they're inside a housing - can comfortably be counted on one hand.

Methinks the OP may have their residence under a bridge.

 

[anenomefishman]

Anyone interested in UW photography knows that the Nikonos era is over and has been over for many years. More than 99% of the cameras used underwater for anything more than mere snapshots are topside cameras in an underwater housing. The number of serious cameras that can be used at depths exceeding snorkeling depth - unless they're inside a housing - can comfortably be counted on one hand.

Methinks the OP may have their residence under a bridge.

dude i have 4 underwater olympus cameras and they all have underwater housings. they are all listed in my sig. maybe you didn't understand "underwater capable" in my OP. what i meant was that there are few new cameras these days that olympus makes that they have olympus underwater housings for. sheesh. get a grip.

 

[timz]

PEN is quite a nice camera to be used underwater.

 

[Storker]

maybe you didn't understand "underwater capable" in my OP.

Maybe. However, given the amount of content in your OP, I don't think that your interpretation was particularly obvious.

what i meant was that there are few new cameras these days that olympus makes that they have olympus underwater housings for. sheesh. get a grip.

By that logic, Canon and Nikon have never made an "underwater capable" dSLR. Nevertheless, quite a few UW photogs are using Nikons or Canons underwater.

Given the pretty good range of UW housings from Fantasea, Ikelite, Subal, Nexus, Aquatica, Sea & Sea, Nauticam et al. it seriously didn't occur to me that the lack of a housing made by the camera manufacturer could be the issue. Myself, I never considered the Olympus housing for my OM-D. Nauticam had better ergonomics (for me) and a better selection of ports.

And to topic, I think my E-M5 Mk1 still is a quite capable camera both topside and underwater, and if it suddenly died I'd seriously consider either the E-M5 Mk2 or the E-M1. Regardless of the availability of Olympus housings, since I'm quite happy with my Nauticam. Two control dials is a requirement to me, and a dSLR would be too big. Besides, I see some advantages to a mirrorless camera underwater.