D3 Housing choices NEXUS or AQUATICA

[ozmarlin 0]

I have a D3 with 14-24 lense and have been thinking of getting a housing for it.

 

Yesterday I held the aquatica D3 with 9inch dome with my 14-24 and it looks very solid and large. Holding it up out of the water was like going to the gym. Thanks to Peter from SCUBAPIX for this.

 

I have an order in the pipeline for a NEXUS D3 housing with SEAOPTICS.

 

What are the tradeoffs between a 9 inch AQUATICA dome and the 6inch NEXUS or SUBAL dome

 

Issues like image quality ? optics ? travel weight ? water resistance ? easy of scatching ? ergonomics of controls

 

I am sure their are many more as well.

 

The aquatica has a lockable dome port. Great, except you use it with an extension ring and it can still come undone.

 

I found viewing some of the d3 controls difficult in the aquatica, not to say they would be better or worse in other housings or underwater.

 

I like the idea of the NEXUS clear plastic backplate so you can see whats happening in the housing.

 

The Aussie dollar has crashed 30% recently and I think the NEXUS YEN option is more affordable than the AQUATICA USD at the

moment. I am still waiting on firm and detailed quotes from both suppliers. At the moment I am still researching both housings. but am also open to suggestions of other manufactures.

 

I like the SUBAL ergonomics but hate their customer service see my flooded d300 post and cost is very high except I already have all the ports.

 

Many of my local dive buddies have had good experiences with the NEXUS d200 / d300 housing.

 

thanks in advance

[colinrobson 0]

I've been going through the same decision making process on getting a housing for the D3 - although I dont intend to use the 14-24 lens. Like you I have some Subal ports but the cost of the Subal D3 housing is enormous in the UK. I was tempted by the Auqatica but decided it was too heavy for international flights. I eventually decided on a Sealux housing. I can get a housing and selection of ports and extension rings for less than the base cost of a Subal housing and its a similar weight at 2.75 kg. See http://www.sealux.de/s1e.htm

If you are dead set on using the 14 - 24 you might still consider Subal as they have brought out a port specifically for it.

 

Colin

[james 0]

I just recently tried the Aquatica megadome and I thought it was very good. The housing + dome was heavy out of water but very good once buoyant.

 

Cheers

James

[Viz'art 24]

Just a head's up to let you know that due to a high demmand (which was confirmed at the DEMA show as well) we are coming out (soon) with a serie of inexpensive port adapters that will allow Subal, Seacam, Sea & Sea and Light & Motion ports be used on Aquatica Housings, this is to help user who wish to migrate from other manufacturer to our line of housing.

[scorpio_fish 5]

Just a head's up to let you know that due to a high demmand (which was confirmed at the DEMA show as well) we are coming out (soon) with a serie of inexpensive port adapters that will allow Subal, Seacam, Sea & Sea and Light & Motion ports be used on Aquatica Housings, this is to help user who wish to migrate from other manufacturer to our line of housing.

 

 

But the 9" dome port is a primary reason to switch. It is a thing of beauty. I mean other than packing it. The image quality of the 10-17mm behind this port has provided the best quality I've experienced in a wide angle setup.

 

Please come up with a new aperture knob. The replacement knob that came with the big dome has terrible ergonomics.

Edited November 11, 2008 by scorpio_fish

[Warren_L 0]

The Aquatica D3 housing with the 9.25" Megadome is the setup I currently use. Both with the 16mm fisheye and 14-24mm wide zoom. With the 14-24mm, the large dome is a definite must for corner sharpness, and you'd have to shoot at f/8 or smaller. Not an issue with the 16mm fisheye.