Underwater housings
- Thread starter Poppy
- Start date
- Messages
- 419
- Name
- Dave
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Yes, have very deep pockets!!!
Price wise, your looking at around 1k for top of the range, if it was me, I wouldn't use anything cheaper with my camera inside!
And example.. http://www.bristolcameras.co.uk/p-ikelite-underwater-housing-for-canon-eos-450d-500d-6871-50-.htm
Price wise, your looking at around 1k for top of the range, if it was me, I wouldn't use anything cheaper with my camera inside!
And example.. http://www.bristolcameras.co.uk/p-ikelite-underwater-housing-for-canon-eos-450d-500d-6871-50-.htm
- Messages
- 1,149
- Name
- Peter
- Edit My Images
- Yes
If you wanted it for scuba diving you'd need a heavy-duty housing which is pricey but for the stuff you're talking about I've seen some great waterproof solutions from ewa-marine
- Messages
- 1,149
- Name
- Peter
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Those are scuba housings! I've got an Ikelike housing for my 40D but it'd be overkill for getting some shots of surfers!
- Messages
- 419
- Name
- Dave
- Edit My Images
- Yes
But if shes doing white water rafting etc where there's a chance of ending up in the water I'd want something pretty heavy duty.
- Messages
- 17,486
- Name
- Hugh
- Edit My Images
- No
there is, but scuba housings are also bulky and heavy. For surface work I'd go for a EWA-Marine bag as above. White Water rafting you're not going to go below 2m depth often and most of the time you'll be looking for surface protection only
Try www.camerasunderwater.co.uk for supply.
Last edited:
- Messages
- 17,486
- Name
- Hugh
- Edit My Images
- No
a reality check though. A 450d costs a simdge over £500 but those housings cost £1k+. If the worse came to the worse you could afford to replace your 450d twice before spending that much on a housing. For underwater I'd agree but not for surface sports
- Messages
- 419
- Name
- Dave
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Ah I didn't see them!
Nod
Tootles
- Messages
- 49,728
- Name
- Nod (UK)
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Most of the depth ratings for housings, watches etc are based on static water pressure - throw in some turbulence and the actual pressures can be way higher than the depth may suggest.
Way better to be well over specified on a housing than for a drop or 2 of sea water get into the housing.
- Messages
- 17,486
- Name
- Hugh
- Edit My Images
- No
A EWA-Marine bag is rated to 20m. Most underwater photographers wouldn't recommend them past 6m but thats cause of useage issues not leakage. You're not going to get pressures anywhere near 20m at the surface or to a couple of meters depth on what will be a fairly shallow dunking.
To suggest an over specified housing, of twice the value of the camera, and rated to 60m and that adds nearly 4kg in weight for surface sports is way expensive overkill.
As a final point, those scuba housings also need a port for each lens, and if you don't know how to maintain you're more likely to leak anyway. Unneeded expense and complexity
Last edited:
- Messages
- 4,085
- Name
- Leigh
- Edit My Images
- Yes
calumet do some sealed bags with lens housing for DSLR's - i got one for my birthday and on a 5D FF it was a tight squeeze to get it in - but for £70 it might be worth having a bash at that. Defo not for underwater stuff, but a few splashes won't be a problem.
- Messages
- 1,149
- Name
- Peter
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Another vote for Camera Underwater - they're a great team.
And don't underestimate the bags - I've got friends who have taken them scuba diving and they've been fine.
- Messages
- 113
- Edit My Images
- No
- Messages
- 233
- Name
- Simon
- Edit My Images
- No
Good luck with the insurance claim when you tell them you took you camera under water in a £70.00 bag...
[QUOTE but it'd be overkill for getting some shots of surfers![/QUOTE]
I'm sure Poppy doesnt mean Surf pics from the beach...
Guy I know who does this says his motto is never take any kit into the water with you that you cannot afford to lose - because you will lose it eventually.
SJ
[QUOTE but it'd be overkill for getting some shots of surfers![/QUOTE]
I'm sure Poppy doesnt mean Surf pics from the beach...
Guy I know who does this says his motto is never take any kit into the water with you that you cannot afford to lose - because you will lose it eventually.
SJ
- Messages
- 17,486
- Name
- Hugh
- Edit My Images
- No
Good luck with the insurance claim when you tell them you took you camera under water in a £70.00 bag...
but it'd be overkill for getting some shots of surfers!
I'm sure Poppy doesnt mean Surf pics from the beach...
Guy I know who does this says his motto is never take any kit into the water with you that you cannot afford to lose - because you will lose it eventually.
SJ
Why do people think these bags don't work?. More to the point why would you spend £1,300+on a scuba housing for a £500 camera to use it only on the surface ?
And most insurance policies won't cover any watersports with your camera so its a bit of a moot point, but those that do only specify no deeper then the housing rating.....so I think on the surface, with a 20m rated bag you'll be lucky
I'm not sure where you got the overkill quote from?
Last edited:
- Messages
- 10,765
- Name
- Jonathan
- Edit My Images
- Yes
My Ewa's rated to 50m. Cost me about 40 quid on eBay. Works very nicely though some controls can be trickier than I'd like.
I also have a cheap Chinese bag which seems watertight but is a very snug fit on the D3 and I've never got it wet for real.
I've used hard housings and I've used soft housings. For extreme sports near the surface I'd rather use a soft housing since hard ones are very heavy out of the water and you can't really tell if a bump has caused a leak or not.
This is the Ewa - http://peoplebyryan.com/?s=underwater
I also have a cheap Chinese bag which seems watertight but is a very snug fit on the D3 and I've never got it wet for real.
I've used hard housings and I've used soft housings. For extreme sports near the surface I'd rather use a soft housing since hard ones are very heavy out of the water and you can't really tell if a bump has caused a leak or not.
This is the Ewa - http://peoplebyryan.com/?s=underwater
- Messages
- 233
- Name
- Simon
- Edit My Images
- No
Overkill quote was from the 4th answer down. learn to read mate.
SJ
SJ
Why do people think these bags don't work?. More to the point why would you spend £1,300+on a scuba housing for a £500 camera to use it only on the surface ?
And most insurance policies won't cover any watersports with your camera so its a bit of a moot point, but those that do only specify no deeper then the housing rating.....so I think on the surface, with a 20m rated bag you'll be lucky
I'm not sure where you got the overkill quote from?
- Messages
- 17,486
- Name
- Hugh
- Edit My Images
- No
you could learn to use the quote function properly 'mate'.......and then it'd just link back up to it, and of course you're obviously incapable of replying to the rest of my post, or reading and replying a bit much too mate
- Messages
- 233
- Name
- Simon
- Edit My Images
- No
I love you Hugh.
- Messages
- 17,486
- Name
- Hugh
- Edit My Images
- No
that's cool Simon, but it'll have to be unrequited and I know how tough that can be....sorry about that
- Messages
- 233
- Name
- Simon
- Edit My Images
- No
That friendly enough for you Fabs...
- Messages
- 17,486
- Name
- Hugh
- Edit My Images
- No
Simon,
I'm not sure how may initial reply to this post offended you. It was not intended to, but I'll apologise anyway. I've replied again if you'd like to continue the discussion
Insurance with EWA bags isn't really an issue, most of the policies out there won't normally cover watersports, but those that do specify an 'appropriate housing'. Cost of the housing doesn't really come into it and I think with a bag specified to 20m you'd be lucky using it on the surface in the event of a claim.
I'd also question the wisdom of buying a top end housing for surface water sports. They cost (by the time you've added ports and everything else do included in the price) more than twice the value of a 450d. The economics of that are overkill, when a EWA bag will keep you camera dry. I wonder why people think they don't? - the useage issues with them come from compression at depth making it difficult to work controls at 6m plus, something you're unlikely to do photographing any surface sports. Even if they turbulence etc pushed you to that depth you'd be busy sorting yourself out and not taking photos.
If you felt a hard housing was appropriate for this, wouldn't you be better buying a mid range housing, like a Nimar, rather than a high end housing where you're paying for a heap of features (such as the ability to add TTL strobes) to your setup your never going to use?
I'm not sure how may initial reply to this post offended you. It was not intended to, but I'll apologise anyway. I've replied again if you'd like to continue the discussion
Insurance with EWA bags isn't really an issue, most of the policies out there won't normally cover watersports, but those that do specify an 'appropriate housing'. Cost of the housing doesn't really come into it and I think with a bag specified to 20m you'd be lucky using it on the surface in the event of a claim.
I'd also question the wisdom of buying a top end housing for surface water sports. They cost (by the time you've added ports and everything else do included in the price) more than twice the value of a 450d. The economics of that are overkill, when a EWA bag will keep you camera dry. I wonder why people think they don't? - the useage issues with them come from compression at depth making it difficult to work controls at 6m plus, something you're unlikely to do photographing any surface sports. Even if they turbulence etc pushed you to that depth you'd be busy sorting yourself out and not taking photos.
If you felt a hard housing was appropriate for this, wouldn't you be better buying a mid range housing, like a Nimar, rather than a high end housing where you're paying for a heap of features (such as the ability to add TTL strobes) to your setup your never going to use?
Last edited: