If Nikon wanted an UW advantage why not a new Nikonos?

[Ardy]

I too wish I could buy a camera dedicated to subsurface use. I would hope it would require a whole new set of glass so I could double up my lenses. I hope it is about the same size as my existing DSLR so I could carry another case if I wished to take any top side shots. Most importantly, to function smoothly at depth and bring to the game all the benefits of a modern DSLR (Large LCD, dual card readers, good sensor and mirror action) I would hope it would be painfully expensive.

I am with you on this one. I too wish I could buy the latest $3,000 DSLR with more gismo's that do nothing more for me and only dedicated pro's will get the use out of. Then the new $5,000 housing has to be slightly different to the previous model forcing an upgrade to both camera and housing. Still the big advantage is that you can still use your old and slow glass you have had for years. Then you look at your flicka friends UW photo's and try to convince yourself that humping a 5kg lump of iron around gets you better shots than someone who paid $2,000 for their total set up (excluding flashes), that weighs about 1.5kg and with great video that you don't have.

I get it I am with you on this one!

Mind you Erik I looked at your shots and some of them are excellent but that is nothing to do with a DSLR, more to do with your skill.

 

[bvanant]

Having shot the RS since it came out until the first of last year, for over 2000 dives:

The cost was less than an F3/F4, housing, ports, and lenses.
The guts could be replaced after a flood. I only had one catastrophic flood, and that was near the end, and I had second body and 50mm lens, so I didn't bother to fix it.
I could get two complete systems with strobes in my carry-on bag.

What has replaced the Nik V is point and shoots in plastic housings. And because of the instant feedback, the folks using them are getting much better pictures than in the film days.


Chuck

I think that might have been true for a Subal housing but my remembrance (dim at best) is that the RS was a lot more money than shooting say a Nikkormat in a Ike housing. In any case I think Nikon only made them for 4 or 5 years then gave up partly due to the high number of floods they fixed for free. I think if you look at say a Nex-5 in an Aquatica or Nauticam housing you have about the same size/weight for a lot better technology.

Bill

 

[Doubler]

I haven't gotten over lending mine to a friend who thought you could change the lens underwater and isn't the Sea&Sea brand an attempt at "Underwater Dedicated". Seems to me I saw a dome that used the old Nikonis lens.

 

[scuba e]

Damn you Ardy. You cant compliment someone who is having some fun at your expense!

I am sorry, i was being a bit snotty at your expense. But there was some truth to it. I bought my lenses used and the camera is a D90. The strobes are from my old point and shoot system. I got a smoking deal on the housing. Truth be told, because funds are limited and I search for deals I put my rig together for under 5K US. It does not justify the attitude but just brings up a point, i could not afford to do a dedicated UW rig and a topside rig if it were not for the housing concept.

A dedicated UW rig would be very expensive as it would not sell. How many people do you know that dive compared to those that have cameras? The big names (Nikon, Cannon, Etc.) cant afford to put the design into a sealed, modern unit for the small amount of sales they would get in the long run. It's a very small market that would require major engineering changes.

You bring a valid point and I understand your wants but I just don't think it is economically viable.

 

[Chuck Tribolet]

One of the best features of the RS was the view finder. No problem to see the whole screen with a mask on, and angled 15 degrees from the vertical. That kept you face out of the sand shooting macro on your belly, and still let you use your other eye to keep an eye on the big picture of what was going on shooting wide-angle. To get anything similar in a housed camera, you needed an F3 or F4 with the sports finder accessory.

I'm surprised that the makers of the add-on finders for housing don't make a 15 degree. It's either 0 degree or 45 degree.


Chuck

 

[Ardy]

To get anything similar in a housed camera, you needed an F3 or F4 with the sports finder accessory.

I'm surprised that the makers of the add-on finders for housing don't make a 15 degree. It's either 0 degree or 45 degree.


Chuck

Hi Chuck I agree review finder. I used to hump an F4/action finder in an Aquatica to all parts of the globe? Not a lot of fun and when I look back at the shots well, they wouldn't grace a 50 dive newbie with a compact these days. I planned to scan them all but the workload is huge and the ability of the scanner very poor.

A nikonos digital with all the ability of some of the Panasonic/Olympus camera's plus the extra Nikon magic would be very attractive to many people and not just divers. The waterproof compacts are selling well - why wouldn't a Nikonos retro shift a large number of sales?

 

[Ardy]

Damn you Ardy. You cant compliment someone who is having some fun at your expense!

I am sorry, i was being a bit snotty at your expense. But there was some truth to it. I bought my lenses used and the camera is a D90. The strobes are from my old point and shoot system. I got a smoking deal on the housing. Truth be told, because funds are limited and I search for deals I put my rig together for under 5K US. It does not justify the attitude but just brings up a point, i could not afford to do a dedicated UW rig and a topside rig if it were not for the housing concept.

A dedicated UW rig would be very expensive as it would not sell. How many people do you know that dive compared to those that have cameras? The big names (Nikon, Cannon, Etc.) cant afford to put the design into a sealed, modern unit for the small amount of sales they would get in the long run. It's a very small market that would require major engineering changes.

You bring a valid point and I understand your wants but I just don't think it is economically viable.

Hi Erik - $5k for a D90/housing is what I guessed I could get a new one for in 2008 but I owned the lenses. I would not buy an Ike housing so I guess I could have made a saving their.

I bought an Olympus E-520 with Olympus housing and port for $2100 and then a 50mm macro lens for $350. Great set up that works well and doesn't weigh as much as the D90/Aquatica. Having said that I do not have the same blind faith that I had with the Aquatica but all has been well for over 3 years.

Stop taking good photo's and I will stop the compliments! Simple really.

 

[Ardy]

I haven't gotten over lending mine to a friend who thought you could change the lens underwater and isn't the Sea&Sea brand an attempt at "Underwater Dedicated". Seems to me I saw a dome that used the old Nikonis lens.

NEVER EVER LOAN A UW CAMERA TO ANYONE............................... Many full stops.
Friends loaned a Nikon and Aquatica to someone and they forgot to close the air breather valve. Dived the whole dive with it and said it stopped working shortly after start of the dive so just carried it around.

 

[Chuck Tribolet]

Ardy: Blame the quick feedback of digital, not the F4.

and if you are serious about scanning, get one that has a slide feeder. I acquired a feeder for my LS-4000 cheap
from a friend who bought it to scan his late father's slides. It makes the whole job a LOT easier. If you have
a Nikon scanner there are two feeders: SF200 and SF210. Get the 210, it has an adjustable gate opening that
greatly reduces the misfeed ratte.


Chuck

 

[TheYellowSubmarine]

I just upgraded to an DSLR from my compact system.
I almost never took photos except underwater. Now that I have a DSLR, I'm suddenly loving above water photography and I'm glad I don't have a dedicated underwater-only system (the D7000 is heavy enough!).
So before I got the DSLR, I would have wanted a Nikonos underwater system, but now I'm glad I have to have the versatility