• Welcome to ScubaBoard


  1. Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.

    Benefits of registering include

    • Ability to post and comment on topics and discussions.
    • A Free photo gallery to share your dive photos with the world.
    • You can make this box go away

    Joining is quick and easy. Login or Register now by clicking on the button

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

Discussion in 'The Nikon Niche' started by Ardy, Mar 15, 2012.

  1. chris196

    chris196 Nassau Grouper

    # of Dives: 200 - 499
    Location: Austin, TX
    182
    28
    28
    Maybe Nikon could be like Olympus and actually sell a quality OEM housing to go with some of their cameras.
    Now there's an idea.
    How many V1 housings do you think they'd sell if they had something equivalent to the Oly PEN housings for $600.
     
  2. Ardy

    Ardy Solo Diver

    # of Dives: 2,500 - 4,999
    Location: Australia - Blue Mountains
    965
    95
    28
    Bloody heaps of them. I am in Bali at the moment diving Tulamben and my buddy has a D7000 in an Aquatic housing and it ain't as good as they used to be. He has spent a lot of time adjusting it (engineer) so that it is not so loose.

    Still I have to rush macro dive just to the right of the wreck in 10 mins - it's a tough life.

    See you suckers later!
     
  3. DesertEagle

    DesertEagle Manta Ray

    742
    24
    18
    I can't even remember when Nikon last had an OEM-branded housing. It would be great if 10Bar or Ikelite makes a J1 or V1 housing. The Nauticam housing looks great but $1600 is too much.
     
    Last edited: Apr 5, 2012
  4. slowhands

    slowhands Divemaster

    # of Dives: 500 - 999
    Location:
    779
    34
    28
    It just got too expensive. The Nikonos R was the end of the line, with autofocus. Discontinued around 2001. Selling for $2000 for the body, maybe more or less on the used market. You can house an F100 for a lot less and have a wider selection of lenses, if you must have film.

    There was a product liability issue too. It seems that the strobes could explode if Nicad batteries in them got wet, a not uncommon event. The battery cap needed to be vented to prevent this. That is essentially the difference between the SB103 and SB105, cap vented for overpressure.

    I don't know for sure, but I would bet the thinking went something like this: Hey, we're getting sued because these darn strobes explode and it's bad for the Nikon name. We're not selling many anyway. Let's get out of the business and concentrate on our traditional SLRs. Another possible example of runaway lawsuits, but it's not gonna change.
     

Share This Page