Jump to content


ktwse

Member Since 03 Aug 2007
Offline Last Active Mar 08 2012 12:52 PM
-----

Posts I've Made

In Topic: Olympus OMD E-M5

29 February 2012 - 02:49 AM

Tom, you wrote that "The very definition of recreational diving is that it is no decompression". And this definition is by whom? By PADI, NAUI and SSI, yes, by CMAS, no. Even CMAS 2* do deco dives FYI (down to 40m).


That definition is actually by most agencies, including both IANTD and GUE, both of which I have training with.

In essence, since we all dive for fun, everything we do is "recreational" in a sense, but when you look at the Rec vs Tech distinction, then deco - and to a lesser extent - overhead environments is what makes the difference.

This is my very point: different places, different concepts! And in Europe recreational diving is down to 60m with deco. It is different in the US and in many other places but maybe you can open up a little bit and understand that from a European point of view not making the housing of the E-M5 capable of 60m is a missed opportunity.

And if you want to talk about divers with PADI + TEC trainings to stay strictly in a US environment then it is the same anyway: there are more and more persons going for TEC courses if I can trust what I see (more and more training agencies and more and more dive shops proposing PADI + TEC) so it means that more and more divers are getting qualifications to go beyond 45m and therefore will regret that the Oly housing stops at 45m and will buy from someone else.


Even with more people doing that training, there's still at least 20 purely recreational divers to every tech diver. I should add that I'm from Sweden - where we have a lot of deep wrecks and where - should you happen to be part of the tech community - all you see are tech divers. Still, even here, most divers are recreational and don't have training to go beyond 40m.

Tom

In Topic: Olympus OMD E-M5

27 February 2012 - 01:18 PM

I was simply reacting to your definition of recreational diver (you mentioned specifically that recreational diving stops at 40m) as I found it not applicable to Europe where a lot of divers are CMAS and for CMAS recreational diving oes to 60m. It does not imply that diving is different in Europe or better, it is just a fact.


You yourself wrote that "if you are CMAS 3* you can dive down to 60m with deco stops". The very definition of recreational diving is that it is no decompression. If you add deco stops you are doing tech diving. Besides, while CMAS is the major organization in some European countries, I'd say that a combination of PADI and strictly technical organizations is more common.

50m+ wreck divers is a minority, a niche. For Olympus to cater specifically to this group wouldn't make sense. As Phil mentioned, a lot of divers take these housings far deeper than their ratings so they should be able to handle it. My guess is that Oly simply doesn't want to guarantee it in case something should go wrong.

Tom

In Topic: Olympus EM-5

11 February 2012 - 01:12 PM

Haven't read any comments about the new 12-50 lens. It's got a macro feature that provides 0.72x magnification (compared to 0.38x for the 14-42). Sounds like that could be a cheap solution to get close to 1:1 (with a diopter). Turn off the macro feature and you still have a very versatile lens for e.g. fish portraits. Now, overall size is only about 5mm more in diameter, 5mm more in length than the 9-18 at it's widest (and thus longest) setting. Would be interesting to see if this lens will fit in the housing as well..

Tom

In Topic: Best bang for the buck: strobe or better camera?

25 March 2011 - 03:40 PM

Thanks for the reply.

My complaints with the Sealife are mainly that it is slow to take pictures/focus, video isn't great, and photo quality is only OK (kind of noisy, low dynamic range). I would love to use my wide-angle lens too (9-18mm). Of course all of these things are a bit lacking on my Sealife when compared to my GF1!

I've also never used an external strobe underwater before, so it's hard for me to know whether I'll like using one or not (obviously better results, but makes the kit considerably larger).


A strobe does tons for IQ and while it may seem like it adds both complexity and bulk (well, that's what I thought), it's actually very easy to get to grips with, and under water you won't notice it. I'd suggest doing both but given your budget constraints I would suggest going for the strobe now, and upgrading the housing later. Then you'll get a chance to get to grips with the stroe with a camea you already know and once you can house the GF1 (substantially more expensive than getting a cheap strobe btw), it'll feel natural to use the strobe with the camera - one new thing less to worry about.

Tom