I was just curious if anyone had ever used an underwater housing for a digital camera? My wife and I are going on a cruise next week and I'd like to try some snorkeling pics with my Canon S3 IS.
I've never used one myself, but I did see that Laurie Excell used them for some pictures that are on her blog. She used the an EWA-Marine housing on her D300 in these pictures. You might want to check with Canon to see if they make a housing for your camera. Laure also used the Canon WP-DC21 housing which fits the G3, so there may be one specifically for your S3.
B&H shows these: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/4 ... using.html (Uberfancy, mucho dinero) My guess is that since the S3 is twice removed from current production, not that many companies are making them anymore.
That one is rated for 200ft, which is overkill for snorkeling pics. I'd probably go with the EWA-Marine housing unless Canon makes one for that camera.
Unless you're going to do a whole lot of underwater photography, I would recommend that you buy a single-use underwater film camera. You can easily find them near places where you rent snorkeling equipment and they're not too expensive. When you're done, just drop the camera off and have the film processed. You can have the negatives scanned or scan them yourself if you want digital.
They're not all that bad. But like I say, buying a housing for your digital camera won't pay off unless you're going to do a lot of underwater photography. Or you can pay maybe $10 plus processing to get some shots that are good enough for a few memories of your trip. [This attachment has been purged. Older attachments are purged from time to time to conserve disk space. Please feel free to repost your image.]
I took these pics in Australia with a disposable. I was hoping to get clearer shots. http://www.hcmpics.com/album/honeymoon/ ... index.html
At Castaway Cay I used a disposable to try to get some shots of the underwater scenery (especially the nautilus, of 20,000 leagues under the sea ride fame). I was quite disappointed, basically it massively under exposed everything. I always used to wonder how they were using a fixed exposure camera to get a wide range of exposures. Now I know. They accept that it might underexpose and just let the processors try to fix it in post. The result being that I got murky, grainy images. Even though I was in shallow, clear water in full sunlight. To me that's the payoff of a housing. I probably wouldn't use it much, but at least I'd get adequate pictures out of it. The disposable camera was reasonably inexpensive, the processing doubly so, but the results weren't at all satisfying. I'll see if I can get some of them scanned. I'm actually thinking the solution for me might be to get a waterproof point and shoot. The fact is that I can most likely get one of those for less than I'd pay for a housing for my DSLR. There aren't many to choose from, there's a particular Olympus model that seems to be about the only real choice except for a number of no name brand cheap setups, and that particular model has a reputation for having poor focusing among other things. But it's small, convenient, and sufficiently waterproof for snorkeling. And I'd get a camera that I could use as a normal point and shoot as well, plus on water rides or in the rain.
check b&h, they have about 9 or 10 kit choices of camera and housing for less than seperate, i did not end up choosing any snorkeling excursion options on our upcoming westbound panama so i did not purchase, i would most likely have gone for a kit as it would have let me upgrade my P&S and go underwater all at the same time
I should mention that from what I've read, it appears that underwater housings can end up requiring a lot of extra maintenance. The seals aren't good forever, you have to replace them at scheduled intervals otherwise the first warning that you may get of them failing is your camera being immersed in salt water. The same is probably true of the Olympus waterproof camera I mentioned, I'm sure it has seals that require regular maintenance. I'm not saying it's not worth it, I used to know someone who was taking photography courses at college. She put on an exhibition of prints she'd made in the ocean, they were amazing. I've always wanted a chance to produce work like that. It's just that it's always a rude shock to pick up something and then discover the extra baggage that comes with it.
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/5 ... Canon.html link to one of the canon kits at b&h, yes you do have to do careful gear inspection prior to entering the water, and regular maintenance, but shame on anyone who doesn't respect the gear enough to do this anyway o rings run about $5 and are good for about 6 months, silicone lube is $1 a tube, maybe 3 tubes a year if you are diving a lot so it doesn't appear to be a maintenance nightmare or a financial drain, at least not a serious one, it looks like i could go underwater with a regular seal replacement schedule year round for less than a large cheese pizza costs here, and the swimming would do more for me than another pie would
Next time I get a P&s I will probably get a waterproof one. I think it would be cool to have that option even If I didn't use it all that often. Maybe photography could get me to swim more.
