Jump to content

- - - - -

A "universal" DSLR housing??? Heard of this company?

  • Please log in to reply
12 replies to this topic

#1 NWDiver



  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1331 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Seattle

Posted 30 January 2010 - 07:48 AM

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?


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

#2 Paul Kay

Paul Kay

    Giant Squid

  • Industry
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1751 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:North Wales, UK

Posted 30 January 2010 - 09:04 AM

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?

Paul Kay,Canon EOS5DII/1DS3 SEACAM c/w S45, 15, 24L, 60/2.8 (+Ext12II) & 100/2.8 Macros - UK/Ireland Seacam Sales -see  marinewildlife

#3 jcclink


    Great Hammerhead

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 746 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:San Diego

Posted 30 January 2010 - 09:07 PM

Do you really want electronic controls on your DSLR housing? I'll stay with my mechanical housing I think - much more reliable long term.
Nexus D300, 10-17mm, 12-24mm, 17-55mm, 60mm, 105mm VR
S&S YS110's & YS27's

#4 Balrog


    Eagle Ray

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 346 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Poole UK

Posted 31 January 2010 - 03:15 AM

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.

#5 scorpio_fish



  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1415 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Dallas, TX

Posted 31 January 2010 - 04:16 AM

No one can guarantee forward compatibility, only backward compatibility.
"Me, fail English?.........Unpossible!"

#6 NWDiver



  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1331 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Seattle

Posted 31 January 2010 - 10:07 AM

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.

#7 Undertow


    Manta Ray

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 442 posts
  • Location:Bermuda

Posted 31 January 2010 - 10:29 AM

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.
D200, Aquatica, 10.5, sig 15, 12-24, 17-55, 60, 105
3x SB-105

#8 NWDiver



  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1331 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Seattle

Posted 31 January 2010 - 01:25 PM

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

#9 tdpriest


    Sperm Whale

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2179 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Solihull, UK
  • Interests:Diving medicine, warm water, scenery...

Posted 01 February 2010 - 02:51 AM

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.



#10 Udo van Dongen

Udo van Dongen

    Sting Ray

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 263 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Netherlands

Posted 03 February 2010 - 01:22 PM

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.


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

Nikon D800, D800E, Hugyfot housing, 15 mm fisheye, 16-35 mm WA, 105mm VR Macro, 60 mm Macro, Subsee +5 an +10 wet diopters, Inon Z-240 strobes (3x), Inon float arms, Nauticam armclamps, Bigblue and Inon focus lights.

check out more photos on the facebook

#11 aczyzyk


    Sting Ray

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 261 posts
  • Location:Warszawa, Poland

Posted 04 February 2010 - 01:23 AM

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.
Andrzej Czyzyk

D200, Sea&Sea DX-D200, Nikkor 10.5, Nikkor 105 VR, Tokina 12-24, 2xDS-125

#12 dzwiad



  • Member
  • Pip
  • 38 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Poland

Posted 04 February 2010 - 07:09 AM

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)

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.

#13 cristiansub



  • Member
  • Pip
  • 8 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Sestri Levante - Genova
  • Interests:Professional Photographer
    for work: still life, advertising and wedding.
    for fun: underwater, reportage.

Posted 05 February 2010 - 02:17 AM

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.

Sestri Levante - Italy