Canon waterproof housing for digital camera

Hi guys,

Does anyone know if the canon waterproof case if good for photography
when I do scuba diving? I dont know if it's cheap... look good but
maybe the case can broke easly. I have a good Canon S1IS digital camera
and it's better for my budget to buy that case instead a 1000$ kits.

I want suggestion.

Thanks
Patrick

<boulay.patrick@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1146595622.594548.316760@j33g2000cwa.googlegr oups.com...
> Hi guys,
>
> Does anyone know if the canon waterproof case if good for photography
> when I do scuba diving? I dont know if it's cheap... look good but
> maybe the case can broke easly. I have a good Canon S1IS digital camera
> and it's better for my budget to buy that case instead a 1000$ kits.
>
> I want suggestion.
>
> Thanks
> Patrick
>

I've just returned from a dive to the Blue Hole (and 26 other dives) in
Belize. I did every dive with my Canon Elph S230 with the Canon case. No
problems at all (even though the case is rated only to 100 feet and made it
down to 148 - no leaks or anything.)

pictures at
http://pg.photos.yahoo.com/ph/chuck_.../ph//my_photos
were all taken in early April with a Canon S410 in a Canon housing at
various sites in Cozumel.

I forgot a question.. can we connect an external flash with this case?

Thanks

As pointed out by someone else, there is plenty to trigger a slave
strobe but you dont need anything fancy. Just put the strobe on an arm
above the left side of the camera and there is enough spill to trigger
the slave.

<nospam@all.please.net> wrote in message
newsan.2006.05.03.23.26.22.666634@all.please.net ...
> On Wed, 03 May 2006 19:16:50 -0400, David In NH wrote:
>
>>
>> "pirate" <chuck@chopf.com> wrote in message
>> news:1146693100.008763.28700@e56g2000cwe.googlegro ups.com...
>>> As pointed out by someone else, there is plenty to trigger a slave
>>> strobe but you dont need anything fancy. Just put the strobe on an arm
>>> above the left side of the camera and there is enough spill to trigger
>>> the slave.
>>>
>>
>> The benefit to triggering the slave with a fiber optic cable is that you
>> can
>> then mask off the on-board flash. With the typical visibility we get here
>> in
>> the Northeast, we have so much crap in the water that the proximity of
>> the
>> onboard flash to the lens gives a lot of backscatter. The strobe, being
>> further away from the lens doesn't tend to bounce light back off the
>> particulate matter into the camera lens.
>
> Mine came with a translucent block that will soften the camera's
> flash for macro. Replace it with an opaque block and enough flash
> leaks to the side to fire the strobe.
>

If it works for you that's great. I don't think mine will work that way
because the triggering spot is at the front of the strobe and recessed
(since it expects the fiber optic cable).

Another issue we haven't brought up is that not all strobes will work
correctly with all cameras. Mine has a setting to trigger on first or second
flash since the camera does a pre-flash before taking the picture. (I think
it does this to set the exposure or focus.)

On Wed, 03 May 2006 19:33:08 -0400, David In NH wrote:

>
> <nospam@all.please.net> wrote in message
> newsan.2006.05.03.23.26.22.666634@all.please.net ...
>> On Wed, 03 May 2006 19:16:50 -0400, David In NH wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> "pirate" <chuck@chopf.com> wrote in message
>>> news:1146693100.008763.28700@e56g2000cwe.googlegro ups.com...
>>>> As pointed out by someone else, there is plenty to trigger a slave
>>>> strobe but you dont need anything fancy. Just put the strobe on an arm
>>>> above the left side of the camera and there is enough spill to trigger
>>>> the slave.
>>>>
>>>
>>> The benefit to triggering the slave with a fiber optic cable is that you
>>> can
>>> then mask off the on-board flash. With the typical visibility we get here
>>> in
>>> the Northeast, we have so much crap in the water that the proximity of
>>> the
>>> onboard flash to the lens gives a lot of backscatter. The strobe, being
>>> further away from the lens doesn't tend to bounce light back off the
>>> particulate matter into the camera lens.
>>
>> Mine came with a translucent block that will soften the camera's
>> flash for macro. Replace it with an opaque block and enough flash
>> leaks to the side to fire the strobe.
>>
>
> If it works for you that's great. I don't think mine will work that way
> because the triggering spot is at the front of the strobe and recessed
> (since it expects the fiber optic cable).
>
> Another issue we haven't brought up is that not all strobes will work
> correctly with all cameras. Mine has a setting to trigger on first or second
> flash since the camera does a pre-flash before taking the picture. (I think
> it does this to set the exposure or focus.)

My camera has a plethora of pre-programmed settings, but the
timing for the strobe is only right on full manual.

On 3 May 2006 14:51:40 -0700, "pirate" <chuck@chopf.com> wrote:

> As pointed out by someone else, there is plenty to trigger a slave
> strobe but you dont need anything fancy.

Damn, doesn't anyone use a hot shoe on a camera anymore?

http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-...?msg_id=00CSnG

All canon model can be plugged to a optic cable for the external flash?

Pat
David In NH wrote:
> <boulay.patrick@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1146612150.523469.76260@e56g2000cwe.googlegro ups.com...
> >I forgot a question.. can we connect an external flash with this case?
> >
> > Thanks
> >
>
> I use an external flash (a Sea and Sea YS-25). It is "connected" to the
> camera through a fiber optic cable. A black shield covers the housing over
> the flash. The shield is held in place with velcro and a connector in the
> shield holds one end of the fiber optic cable. The other end is attached to
> the flash. There's nothing that goes directly to the camera - the camera
> flash, although covered to reduce backscatter, triggers the strobe. A real
> simple and effective method.
>
> - David

Grumman-581 wrote:
>
> You talking about the Nikon RS? I heard that Nikon canceled it
> because of too many warranty claims on it leaking... Even for a Nikon,
> it was an expensive camera...

The RS (1992) was IIRC effectively a Nikon 8008 (1989), so in terms of
its electronics, it was already 3 years old by the time it made it to
the retail market. It was an improvement over other alternatives, but
it lost much of its size advantage vs. a conventional housed camera,
plus as you pointed out, Nikon took heat for its high price, but they
were probably semi-justified in doing so, since the rate of change in
photography electronics probably did not encourage anything close to
the decades-long lifespan of the Nikonos.

Insofar as its reputation for leaking, it really wasn't that bad. The
real underlying problem was that the Nikonos III and V were very
robust, so they could be neglected and/or abused and they still
wouldn't leak. RS buyers apparently expected this same level of
"abusability" performance from the RS, which wasn't present. For this
part, its probably more of a "blame expectations" instead of a blame
the hardware.


-hh