12 replies to this topic

[NWDiver]

Came across this at another site. Possibly a decent "universal" DSLR housing. It would be nice not to have to get a new housing every time a new body comes out. Anyone heard of this outfit?

http://www.easydive.eu/eng/leo.html

Edited by NWDiver, 30 January 2010 - 07:53 AM.

[Paul Kay]

Well they mention port compatibility with 'Igloo' ports. I DO remember Igloo housings back in the days of Nikon F100s and F90s. Perhaps there is a link with Igloo?

[jcclink]

Do you really want electronic controls on your DSLR housing? I'll stay with my mechanical housing I think - much more reliable long term.

[Balrog]

It has to be said that, although somewhat more remote from the water interface, all DSLRs use electronic controls on the camera. The limited number of control penetrations may even result in a more reliable housing.

I think this is a good way forward although I would want to see more system maturity and features before personally investing.

Edited by Balrog, 31 January 2010 - 03:27 AM.

[scorpio_fish]

No one can guarantee forward compatibility, only backward compatibility.

[NWDiver]

Have always chosen Mechanical over Electronic and agree the controls look a little cheesy. But again love the idea of one housing that could take different cameras and not having to drop big cash every few yrs.

[Undertow]

the biggest problem is the lack of a magnifying viewfinder. the pictures show just a plastic window on the back. to me this is a deal breaker: try to look through your camera's viewfinder from 3-4 inches away, can't see squat.

[NWDiver]

Agree, but reading I think there assumption is everyone is going to "live-view"

[tdpriest]

One strobe bulkhead and no optical bulkhead suggests that this is aimed at the lower end of the market, as well as the caginess about ports and the absence of a magnifying viewfinder: a pity, really, as the construction looks quite impressive in the photographs.

Tim

[Udo van Dongen]

I had one of these in my hands last week at the BOOT show in Duesseldorf. I really like the idea of a universal housing and as long the camera physically fits and if can be remote controlled and it can be used in this housing.
The housing felt quit rigid and it's less bulky than an Ikelite, although the finishing is IMO somewhat shabby; for example, the electronics in the housing are cased in plastic and mounted with velcro. The maximum amount of controls will be 6 buttons on each side (12 total), which could be just sufficient.
Indeed a magnifying viewfinder is missing and i'm affraid you'll have to make your composition with live view. But maybe that works, i have no experience with that on a dSLR.
But i see a future for this type of housing: if it's finished better and with a replacable rear window that holds a viewfinder, two strobe sockets instead of one and some port adapters so you can use your own ports, it could be an interesting option and save you a lot of money in the future. Off course it needs to be reliable and usable and that will be a matter of time i guess. I could sacrifice 'some' ergonomics if i'd never had to buy a new housing anymore...
I realise that most uw shooters do not want to change what they're used to and neither do i, but on the other hand i think it's quit ridiculous that you have to spend 1000s of bucks with each new camera body that you buy although physical differences can be very small.

Udo

Edited by Udo van Dongen, 03 February 2010 - 01:24 PM.

[aczyzyk]

I have seen one of them last year. The concept is interesting but I am not 100% convinced.

I could get 2 brand new Ikelite housings or 2 seceond hand Sea&Sea for the same price. Also there is some fee when you change camera model (you need to send it back to be reprogrammed).

I'm not sure it will last forever. I mean, maybe 3/4 type cameras will get good enough to be an option (in very light tiny housing great for travel) or something completely new comes along.

For the moment I will stick with my current strategy to get second hand housings. That means I always stay one generation behind, but that is good enough for an amateur.

[dzwiad]

I have tried one of them before my aquatica purchase.

3 problems:

1. You cant feel the camera trigger, it is ok with video camera but not with dslr
2. Only les than dozen controls can be programmed so you cant change the curtain sync or white balance underwater if you want exposition compensation etc
3. it is more bulky and heavier than my ad700 (so try to air travel with it now)

Pros
it is well built, lens ports are good,
you buy it once then it lasts for longer, at least 2 camera changes,
with some luck you can use 2 different cameras

Edited by dzwiad, 05 February 2010 - 02:25 AM.

[cristiansub]

Well they mention port compatibility with 'Igloo' ports. I DO remember Igloo housings back in the days of Nikon F100s and F90s. Perhaps there is a link with Igloo?

The site of the old company "Underwave" is off line.
I Have an Igloo housinge with some ports, and the italian company "Isotecnic" www.isotecnic.it make a modify for use the housinge with Nikon D80, D90, D200, D300, D700.
The modify housing work very well.

For the Easydive housing I have see and test in air the electronic control but I don't like it, you don't feel the shot button and there is a button for AF and an other for the shot.


Hello,
Cristian.