I had Nikonos IV which I highly recommend for seakayaking and white water canoeing which was one of the few pieces of equipment that Î never worried about so long as the O Rings are properly maintained and the camera is not subjected to unreasonable abuse. It served well till its departure to the bottom of a white water river several years ago. It is probably still down their just waiting to have its film developed. I believe Chuck Holst mentioned its good optics and rugged construction along with the lack of focusing aids. It defintatly operates easily underwater and is nicely balanced for that but above water requires a bit of thought but the results are worth it. Then I switched to the snapshot Canon A1 underwater camera which served well for several years till a year ago when it developed intermittent problems which led to me finally giving up on it a week ago. I got a Pentax 105 WR a year ago which I don't think has since been replaced by a slightly different model. I don't think this camera is not considered as submersible but I and a friend that got his at the same time have taken it kayaking and canoeing frequently and I know mine has been hit by a fair number of waves (but no rolls) and so far shows no signs of damage. Due to the delicate nature of o-rings I would suggest keeping it away from sand since the seals around the lens are not user serviceable. I am pretty happy with the image quality and exposures it gives. As for waterproof ratings, if I recall correctly, that is measured in lab conditions where the pressure is increased gradually. In the real world I believe it is correct to say that a device (camera, VHF, etc) coming into forceful contact with the water, such as wave hitting it, is far more likely to breach the seal than gradual submersion to many many feat deep water. On a final note, I speaking as a past professional photographer, do NOT like autofocus cameras for most uses. (The Canon and Pentax mentioned above are AF.) Problem is that if at the precise moment that you want to take the picture, if the camera's electronics judge it to be not yet sharply focused, it will not "release" the shutter. Some cameras have a decent override function (which first must be engaged) while others offer you to pre-focus on an object at the same distance, while others have a distance setting that automatically locks the lens at the dist mark and allows a near instant shutter release. So if you can find an old Nikonos or other camera that does not have the AF, I would go for it instead. It is also less to break. my 2 cents, Bob Chicago .......................................................... Robert Brubaker "Hitch your wagon to a star." Ralph Waldo Emerson http://home.earthlink.net/~rbrub .......................................................... *************************************************************************** PaddleWise Paddling Mailing List - Any opinions or suggestions expressed here are solely those of the writer(s). You must assume the entire responsibility for reliance upon them. All postings copyright the author. Submissions: PaddleWise_at_PaddleWise.net Subscriptions: PaddleWise-request_at_PaddleWise.net Website: http://www.paddlewise.net/ ***************************************************************************Received on Tue Jan 07 2003 - 14:46:58 PST
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thu Aug 21 2025 - 16:31:02 PDT