Help! Urgent feedback needed for Aquapix by Sea and Sea

[diverdeb001]

Has anyone tried this camera yet?? I'd like to hear how others feel about it. I've tried it on land and the pics are very grainy. Could they get any better underwater?? Compared to my other digital camera , (Kodak 3.1 mega pixels) there's a big difference in quality comparing pics taken of same object in same light above water. I'm very worried. db

 

[ShoalDiverSA]

Has anyone tried this camera yet?? I'd like to hear how others feel about it. I've tried it on land and the pics are very grainy. Could they get any better underwater?? Compared to my other digital camera , (Kodak 3.1 mega pixels) there's a big difference in quality comparing pics taken of same object in same light above water. I'm very worried. db

Hi Deb,

I replied to you on a previous thread. Have you had a look at the pictures I posted?

Other Thread

They are very grainy and, frankly, unattractive to the eye.

I have seen similar thoughts on Digital Diver.

Digifish pretty much sums it up too.

I would be interested to hear other opinions, particularly from more impressed people. I have seen the comment that this camera's image quality is worse than the average 1MP camera. Your mileage may vary.

Cheers,

Andrew

 

[diverdeb001]

Thanks Andrew: I did see the pics before but had forgotten about them. I am just sick about this camera. I had been so excited about it. I may take it back and see if I can exchange it for something else. deb

 

[Dee]

Deb, if at all possible, I would return the camera. It's not going to get any better. Depending on your budget but there are good Olympus or Canon cameras/housing choices out there to fit in most budgets.

 

[ShoalDiverSA]

...I may take it back and see if I can exchange it for something else. ...

Deb,

Sorry to hear that you had bought it already. I assumed that you were doing some pre-purchase research.

When I saw the grainy photos that this camera took, I asked my father to find out from his dive shop what the image quality of the other Aquapix cameras they had sold was like. I thought that it was a problem with his camera only. Then I started reading reports like yours on the 'Net and realised that it is a problem with this camera.

I must agree with Dee that you should try to cut your losses and return the camera. Quite honestly, I cannot see why this camera cannot be returned to the shop where you bought it, as it is not performing as claimed, ie. comparable to other 3MP cameras. If I were in your position, I would return it and not take any nonsense from the LDS about it. It is not the fault of the LDS, but Sea & Sea and the product should be returned to them as faulty. At most, I foresee the possibility of the LDS charging a handling fee, which could be fair. Sea & Sea have created a dud with what is essentially a design flaw and the onus is on them to correct the problem, or continue stockpiling returned cameras. You bought the camera in good faith based upon the claimed performance and specifications, and it has not performed as claimed. The fault is not yours, but rather Sea & Sea's - why should you then keep this camera?

Please don't take the camera underwater to test it if you haven't already - it won't get better. Testing it underwater will also probably make it more difficult for you to return it. Pack it neatly back into its original packaging with all the o-rings, grease, manuals and the rest and pay your LDS a visit.

I wish you all the best for the successful return of this camera and the purchase of a new one. Good luck!

Cheers,

Andrew

 

[justleesa]

good luck with the exchange!
Lisa

 

[diverdeb001]

Thanks for the input everybody. My LDS will take it back. He's been great. But.. he wants me to try it underwater first as he has been told it will perform better underwater than out. I'm going to take it to the "Y" and try it in good lighting and clean water and then make my decision. I had thought about an ikelite houseing for my Kodak camera originally but they change the models so often I decided aginst it. My camera isn't being made anymore and it's only a year old. thanks, deb

 

[ShoalDiverSA]

It's a pleasure.

The camera will appear to work better underwater, though I am not sure in a pool environment. This is due to there being so much inherent noise in the subject matter. A reef is not homogeneous in its colours or textures, so the noise this camera generates will "disappear". But if you want to take good quality photos, the camera ruins the image for you. They are great for display on the Web, but will appear grainy if printed on photo paper. Horses for courses.

If you would like, I can send you more photos taken on the reef with this camera.

Cheers,

Andrew

 

[ShoalDiverSA]

Had to show you this photo. It is a great photo which, IMHO, was ruined by the camera. I have posted it on my Grove Street album.

Note: The image is 850kB or so. Long download (and upload!) for dialup.

Cheers,

Andrew

 

[ShoalDiverSA]

...But.. he wants me to try it underwater first as he has been told it will perform better underwater than out. I'm going to take it to the "Y" and try it in good lighting and clean water and then make my decision. ...

Hi Deb,

Just curious - how did the trial go and what did you decide?

Cheers,

Andrew