• 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

quick (angry) report on my 1s days with my new S95 and Patima housing in ambon

Discussion in 'The Canon Corner' started by funscuba, Mar 24, 2012.

  1. funscuba

    funscuba Barracuda

    # of Dives: 200 - 499
    Location: europe
    357
    23
    18
    My 1st time use with my Patima housing got water thru thebuttons at my 1st dive, I was like “what the f#% is this piece of crap”, didn’t get flooded butfew drops within the housing, even on the inside lens. So between the 2 dives Icleaned it and curiously nothing more came in afterwards, mystery of physics.Let’s wait and see after a certain number of dives.
    Concerning the S95, also1[SUP]st[/SUP] time use, after 6 dives with it I have to admit that compare tomy old Nikon P5100 that I sold last summer with it’s ikelite housing, I am deeplydisappointed, doesn’t even come close to my old model question of qualit)y (perhapsjust a bit), Iknow I am still at the beginning with it but the results are just “good to ok” forthis compact camera, was waiting for a serious jump in technology, that’s justmy opinion. The zooming on the pix at the viewing is a disaster, still my ownopinion. I shoot in jpeg for the info.
    So it’s simple, after my trip, it’s back to Nikon coolpix or whatever else it will be called, and I’llkeep the S95 as a back up, and will probably sell he patima housing to the canonone.
    Voila !
     
  2. slowhands

    slowhands Divemaster

    # of Dives: 500 - 999
    Location:
    779
    34
    28
    It could be condensation. If you load the housing in warm wet air, then cool it in the water, you can get fogging on the port glass and even a few drips as you report. I don't know if that's what happened, but try a Maxi Pad in the case to sop up any light amount of condensation.
     
  3. mantababe

    mantababe Nassau Grouper

    159
    3
    0
    sorry to hear bout the flood, i sympathize as ive just had two however, im surprised of what you say about the results of the camera [the nikon must have been some camera if it produced better pics] ive had the s95 for just over a year and think it is a great camera, just came back from 2 wks in egypt [apart from the floods] had a great time with the camera, these are just a few pics but ive still got loads to sort nuwebia_2012 Photo Gallery by theresa cloake at pbase.com im still very much learning with the camera but i shoot in raw [makes a really big difference to the pics] and on manual settings. what settings are you using?
     
  4. Layla

    Layla Solo Diver

    # of Dives: 500 - 999
    Location: North Carolina
    175
    2
    0
    May I suggest another go with the S95
    I absolutely love mine
     
  5. Interceptor121

    Interceptor121 PADI Pro

    4,313
    630
    113
    I do not understand this post. The Nikon P5100 has similar and in some cases better technical specifications of the S95 so how where you actually thinking of getting an upgrade?
    Even a G12 is not better than a P5100 and this is from a pure photography point of view. A canon G1X or another micro 4/3 would be a step forward but not a compact prosumer midrange such as the S95
     
  6. bvanant

    bvanant Loggerhead Turtle

    # of Dives:
    Location: Los Angeles (more or less)
    2,234
    360
    83
    Which technical specs are better (other than total MP). The P5100 doesn't shoot raw, has a smaller sensor, lower sensitivity, smaller screen, much poorer video, and smaller max aperture. To me at least, not even close and the P5100 costs more to boot.

    Bill
     
  7. Interceptor121

    Interceptor121 PADI Pro

    4,313
    630
    113
    We are talking about stills quality so the video or the bigger display are not really the issue

    Sensor size: the nikon has a 1/1.72" and the canon has 1/1.7" we are talking microns here

    Sensitivity: the camera have the same ISO and I would not shoot on any compact higher than 400 underwater
    The wider aperture is not really an issue underwater as you can only really do borkeh on a compact with diopters as the sensor is anyway to small and the depth of field is huge no matter what and in most cases you are shooting F5.6 and upper


    The fact that the op is complaining that there is no difference in the picture quality confirms that all the above are true and I bet that the Nikon has a better lens in terms of optical quality

    Features do not mean higher image quality
     
  8. Layla

    Layla Solo Diver

    # of Dives: 500 - 999
    Location: North Carolina
    175
    2
    0
    Maybe the OP could post some pictures to show why he thinks the camera is not good?
     
  9. Interceptor121

    Interceptor121 PADI Pro

    4,313
    630
    113
    I second that I would post comparable pictures outside the water so you can judge the lens without the water factor
     
  10. funscuba

    funscuba Barracuda

    # of Dives: 200 - 499
    Location: europe
    357
    23
    18
    Hi, sorry for the late reply, completely forgot bout this thread.
    Mantabe, I am using jpeg, not raw 'cause I don't have photoshop and don't know how to use it, and would need a laptop as I only use a netbook while on holidays.
    I did find the quality of jpeg much superior with my nikon P5100, I don't know, I am not too technical in this era, and as "interceptor121" stated :

    "The fact that the op is complaining that there is no difference in the picture quality confirms that all the above are true and I bet that the Nikon has a better lens in terms of optical quality

    and I am sure that would be the most adequate answer.

    I do admit that shooting in RAW would be a better solution.
     

Share This Page