On Thu, 11 Mar 2004 23:12:05 -0800
Jim Brokaw <jbrokaw@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> on 3/11/04 3:16 PM, Winsor Crosby at wincros@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
>
> > For all your short handling experience with a Nikonos it cannot be
> > worse than an OM in an underwater housing. A used Nikonos may be
> > cheaper than a housing too.
> >
> >
> >
> > Winsor
> > Long Beach, California
> > USA
>
> This is just what I was thinking... although I don't know the depth limit
> for a Nikonos, but its got to be easier to handle at depth than a bulky
> housing. UW photography is already pretty specialized, so IMO you might
> as well get the 'real deal' stuff to do it with.
The thing is, that Nikonos'es aren't manufactured any more, and it seems
that thos which are on sale second hand these days are either extremely
costly or are in a "questionable" condition.....an UW camera can "flood"
too, which is as nasty as anything.
Also, they're rated to (IIRC) about 40m only.
>
> On the other hand, I've read where many consider digital to be a real
> bonus for UW pictures. You get color balance adjustments, the cameras can
> be setup to hold hundreds of images without needing to resurface and
> fiddle with film reloading (in the water... ugh!), and they are often
> pretty compact and set up for point-and-shoot operation.
>
> I doubt that they yield as good quality as well-taken slides, but UW
> housings are supposed to be pretty good accessory sellers for many
> prosumer digicams.
The "issue" there is, that (i) doesn't give slides and (ii) they're rated
to typically 30m (some a little deeper).
> Besides, if it leaks and gets wet, its just a digital, you'd be
> outdated in a couple years anyway... if an OM gets wet, its a lost
> treasure, and they just don't make them anymore...!
Good point, Jim, good point ;)
--thomas
The olympus mailinglist olympus@xxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe: mailto:olympus-request@xxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe
To contact the list admins: mailto:olympusadmins@xxxxxxxxxx?subject="Olympus
List Problem"
|