Housing Size Comparison - Ikelike Compact vs. Seatool DSLR (XTi or 400D)

[bigfrog23]

Plus the fact that aluminum housings will corrode (saltwater) where the finish is chipped away.

First off all aluminum housing have sacrificial anodes that rust instead of the housing and can be easily replace. Plus aluminum oxide which is what is formed when aluminum rusts is much harder than the original aluminum and slow rusting to the point were it almost stops.

When I was referring to placement of controls i was not talking about how they lined up in the housing, i was referring to the ergonomics and placement of the controls. for me it is important to be able to change shutter,aperture and zoom in and out with out having to like more that a finger off the handle, something i could not do with Ikelight housing.

Originally posted by f3nikon
R&D is not where most of the cost is being eaten up it’s the cost of making a custom molding or tooling for an aluminum housing.

First, a mold for metals is much more expensive than a mold for Plexiglas, the machining cost about the same but the finishing on the aluminum housing eats up more of the cost.

i was not trying to say that most of the cost was being eaten up by R and D i was just trying to say that it cost more to design and build a housing out of aluminum is more than the cost of building one out of plastic.


Originally posted by f3nikon

Are you also saying that a camera maker like Canon is selling a higher end P&S like the G9 with a 12 megapixel sensor then slapping on a low resolution lens? Because if this were true I guarantee you there will be a bigtime lawsuit!

And you said “SLR with a good lens” not DSLRs? Because some of the AF lenses for DSLRs are made of plastic…plastic lens body and lenses from China! Now I do know that my manual focus Nikon ED lenses are all glass and metal.

as i said before most 10 and 12 mp P&S most have plastic lens and small Sensor chips both have negative on the quality of the picture. this means that even though you might have a 12 mp P&S, the lens will not have enough clarity to take full use of the 12 megpaixels. this has to do with the lpm of the lens being lower than the lpm of the c-mos or ccd chip. it is something that your average consumer will not notice especially with fixed lens cameras because one will never be able to compare two lens on P&S

PS have come a long way in the past few years some now have APS C sized sensors and descent glass lenses but even those are not as sharp as an DSLR with equivalent MPs and a good canon L series lens or nikon equivalent.


in the end it com down to personal preference and what you will be happiest.

 

[BurBunny]

Let's get back to the original purpose of this thread - and I can address that because I was the OP after all. It's the size. Yes, gentlemen, size matters. And sometimes it's a smaller "tool" which is the right fit

This was not a P&S vs. DSLR thread. This was to answer those people who asked me just how large was the SeaTool housing compared to a compact housing. Since the compact housing I had was my Ikelite F810, that's what I used. No, that's not the smallest compact housing out there, but it's a pretty good representation of a very common sized housing for a large number of compact cameras. Gudge's addition of comparing to the Ikelite XTi housing was a great addition to give further comparison. I think the size issue was pretty well addressed.

Now, as to the cost of the SeaTool. As I said in my original thread on the SeaTool and switching to DSLR (the "I was an Idiot" posting referenced in my first post on this thread), I'd been putting aside funds for awhile knowing eventually I was going to make the switch. The SeaTool was a bit more than originally budgeted, but it was also the first housing system that made me WANT to switch. It was a combination of the right camera/housing at the right time (when I was frustrated by the limitations of my former compact system - I'd grown to where those limitations were hampering the shots I wanted to take). Yes, the cost made me hesitate, for about 10 seconds. The housing felt too good and I was having FUN again. I couldn't stand the feel of other housings I'd held previously.

But there were other things which made the smaller size "worth" the cost to me. I have tiny hands with disproportionately short fingers. Arthritis which makes hand fatigue a factor in any camera decision - reaching for buttons is painful on a long dive trip. I often travel alone, so being able to pack and carry all my own gear - size AND weight - is critical. Are these factors universal to others? Certainly not! But for those who have similar considerations, SeaTool can be worth the additional cost.

Understand that I like Ikelite products. Obviously I owned an Ikelite housing and had not a single issue with it. Took award-winning pics with it, two of which are now postage stamps in the Turks & Caicos and others which have placed in national contests - and NOT in a dedicated compact camera division. I will forever keep the last email Ike wrote me shortly before his death about an option we were trying to engineer for compact housings. Thinking of him still makes me acutely miss him and his contributions as a person and manufacturer. I'd always thought I'd have an Ikelite DSLR housing - until I held them. They simply don't feel right for me. But they work for many of my friends who absolutely love them - the housing itself AND the terrific pricing. Some truly prefer the Ike design and buoyancy and would likely choose them even if they weren't the lower priced option. Neither SeaTool or Ikelite is "better" - they serve different needs with different solutions, and thusly have different costs. That's what a free market is all about.

There have been some excellent posts on this thread. Thank you to those who "got" what this was all about and understand.

BTW Pakman - your estimate is darned close for the production dome - it's rated at 170mm.

 

[f3nikon]

The reason that a housed DSLR is going to be a HARD sell is because of the threads next to yours...Gilligan and Ed, execllent images taken with a P&S/Compact/Rangefinder cameras in an OEM housing, one of those P&S is even an older 5mp!

So as a future buyer kicking some tires... what can the Housed DSLR do that the P&S cannot? And I am not looking for a "it just feels right" answer.

 

[pakman]

The reason that a housed DSLR is going to be a HARD sell is because of the threads next to yours...Gilligan and Ed, execllent images taken with a P&S/Compact/Rangefinder cameras in an OEM housing, one of those P&S is even an older 5mp!

And maybe you ought to take a page from Ed and Jim's book and try showing by example instead of your usual rant against expensive housings and strobes.

oh wait, you have...

http://www.scubaboard.com/forums/3217874-post5.html

 

[f3nikon]

And maybe you ought to take a page from Ed and Jim's book and try showing by example instead of your usual rant against expensive housings and strobes.

oh wait, you have...

That line does not work and it never did because you ignored this:

“So as a future buyer kicking some tires”

I have my “consumer shopping around for an U/W outfit” hat on!

So before I start overindulging my $4.25/hour that I make toiling away at the Golden Arches, I want to make sure I get the correct outfit for my needs and not some over used lines from a used car salesman. :no

And the question still stands:

"What can the Housed DSLR do that the P&S cannot?"

 

[Warren_L]

Out of curiosity, what is the widest angle of view one can get with a p&s system (without running into vignetting issues, that is)?

 

[f3nikon]

Out of curiosity, what is the widest angle of view one can get with a p&s system (without running into vignetting issues, that is)?

Give the man a cigar! Because that was the best question/answer I have seen so far. Yes, the P&S cannot go as wide as the DSLR without using some add-on lenses. But as I noted in this tread most shots are not that wide anyway.

Note: He also gave a honest to the point answer about the different types of gears on a DSLR housing.

 

[bladephotog]

Give the man a cigar! Because that was the best question/answer I have seen so far. Yes, the P&S cannot go as wide as the DSLR without using some add-on lenses. But as I noted in this tread most shots are not that wide anyway.

Note: He also gave a honest to the point answer about the different types of gears on a DSLR housing.

I shoot nothing but wide angle. Seriously, this debate has been beaten to death. It's completely off topic here anyway. Start another thread if you must endlessly debate this. I'm not sure why you even want to hear why, or why not, a DSLR is better than a P&S. You already have your mind made up. Go buy a P&S and be happy.

Back on topic. I think the Sea Tool housing is super sweet. I'd love to have one. But right now the Ike fits my budget. The fact that it comes set up to shoot TTL is a bonus. The TTL works great for my type of shooting.

Will my next housing be an Ike? That depends on whether or not I'm going deeper than 200 fsw by then, what my budget is, and how much I plan on traveling.

I have small hands also so the Ike is a little more challenging for me. Honestly though publishers don't care what housing I use. They look at the photos and they're either good enough to publish or not. It's pretty simple.

 

[Warren_L]

Well, let's go with this for a moment. My one and only p&s camera was the Oly C5050, so this is really the only system I can confidently speak towards with reference to p&s cameras. I realize there may be some sizing difference between this and the Ikelite compact housings, however, they both accept add-on wet-mate wide angle lenses.

With the 5050, the add-on WAL was reasonably wide, but for sure, my dSLR with 10.5mm lens gave me a significantly wider angle of view. As I do a lot of wreck photography and often in conditions with limited visibility, having as wide a field of view as possible is critical to the quality of lighting I am able to achieve. When I compare some of my wreck work from the p&s system to my dSLR, there is a significant difference in two areas.

First, the ability to get closer with the dSLR afforded me better quality of light from my strobes. With less water to deal with, the strobe lighting was more effective and there was overall less particulate matter to deal with.

Second, I noticed that there was some vignetting occuring with the p&s as well as a lot of softness around the edges (which I would have to crop out). This may very well be a function of the specific p&s camera and wetmate lens combination I suppose, since I don't have a point of reference to other p&s systems with similar lenses. With my 5050 I had an INON UWL-100 type II, which was the one recommended for the Oly housing I was using.

Side by side, the p&s camera with add-on wetmate lense is definitely smaller in size than my housed dSLR (Nikon D200 with Aquatica housing), however, in my opinion, not significantly so to create any major inconvenience. Because my photography centers around wreck photography, the one single feature that is most important to me is having a wide angle of view, I ended up going dSLR and have no regrets. I just found that the p&s system, while it was able to capture some great quality images, just wasn't able to do what I wanted it to do all the time. As much fun as macro is to me, there isn't much around where I live worthy of macro, unless you want to see up close shots of zebra mussels or sand....

 

[f3nikon]

"I'm not sure why you even want to hear why, or why not, a DSLR is better than a P&S."

I did not say "better" I said "What can the Housed DSLR do that the P&S cannot?"

Meaning if the P&S can do even 50% of what the DSLR can at a 1000% less of a cost why go for the DSLR U/W?


"You already have your mind made up. Go buy a P&S and be happy."

Thats not so that is why the " I am an idiot" thread was opened in the first place.