Exactly. The point of reviews is to analyze housing's strong and weak points. So far many have concentrated on the weak points because it's a glaring omission. No housing or brand is perfect and people have to choose what suits them. I don't think anyone has disparaged Seacam, although words like insulting may be harsh, but I think it's more a reaction to Seacam's choices.
So you use a D7000 seacam housing? Generally I think seacam housings rock, im only talking about this specific D7000 housing and the choices seacam made for it. I think it should have had more control buttons. But it's all seacam's choice, and I hope it turns out well for them.
Thats just the thing, the original poster (JACohen) is obviously not that happy for the reasons he stated. Having to drill your own buttons is a bit annoying Knowing him im sure he'll succeed and end up with the exact thing he wanted
I see this thread as feedback to seacam. I dont think seacam is a bad brand or anything, quite the contrary. They're probably the #1 housing brand quality wise.
I think this thread has been rather level headed. There aren't any silly car analogies (yet!)
Chris, if $/features were a concern, I doubt many would consider a Seacam right now, especially for the D7000. However, for some, there are features which it worth that premium. I bought Seacam for a reason and I've bought Ikelite as well. I did a comparo for the 5D2 and the Ikelite couldn't fit the 16-35 II in their housing, and that lens is a staple for WA for Canon. Things like that and the vast availability of extension rings, quality accessories like S180 viewfinders, controls etc bring much more value than can be put down in $ terms.
I understand that a aluminium housing is more sturdy, may be smaller and good a glass dome should provide a better image quality,
but for the same price of this seacam i will buy the Ikelite housing (with all buttons!), macro and dome port, D7000 and lenses.