retendokid
Registered
" If you take cameras in the water often enough, sooner or later, water will end up on the wrong side of the O-ring."
This was written by Stephen Frink (http://www.stephenfrink.com/sf-tips/cameraflood/) and I completely agree with him. And while I believe every precaution should be made to keep water from damaging camera equipment, I'm curious as to why no one on this thread questioned why the OP didn't have any equipment insurance. He ended up buying expensive new replacement camera body and lens, and got lucky that the housing didnt need replacement. Among seasoned photographers, like Frink, who have a lot invested in their UW rigs, none are naive enough to think that water damage can be permanently avoided. Equipment insurance would have saved the OP both money and frustration.
This was written by Stephen Frink (http://www.stephenfrink.com/sf-tips/cameraflood/) and I completely agree with him. And while I believe every precaution should be made to keep water from damaging camera equipment, I'm curious as to why no one on this thread questioned why the OP didn't have any equipment insurance. He ended up buying expensive new replacement camera body and lens, and got lucky that the housing didnt need replacement. Among seasoned photographers, like Frink, who have a lot invested in their UW rigs, none are naive enough to think that water damage can be permanently avoided. Equipment insurance would have saved the OP both money and frustration.