Hi All, Are there any records of paddlers struck by lightening, as distinguished from sailors in boats with lightening rod masts, etc.? We are not even paddling aluminum watercraft. Our paddles are usually wood or fiberglass. Thanks, Chuck Sutherland *************************************************************************** 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/ ***************************************************************************
I heard, that the fact that since most boats are is either made of plastic or have plastic components such as paint, gelcoat and similar materials, develop eletrostatic charges when moving through the water. That could attract lightening... Heike *************************************************************************** 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/ ***************************************************************************
Chuck wrote: - >Are there any records of paddlers struck by lightening and >We are not even paddling aluminum watercraft. >Our paddles are usually wood or fiberglass. G'Day Chuck, If there are no such records then two of us had a fair chance of making one yesterday if we hadn't got off the water. At the storms peak, which lasted half an hour in our location, there were about 5 strikes a minute, with no time between some of the flashes and thunder that I could measure. This was a hell of a storm - with hail larger than golf balls in some places - lot of damage. I was using a carbon fibre paddle. Kayaks are insulators coated with a conductor, water. Not only that but humans are good conductor being mainly composed of salty water. And of course there are carbon fibre paddles! Michael Daly recently measured one as having a resistance of roughly 40 Ohms and Dave Kruger also gave a compelling description of the behaviour of materials in a lightning strike (Paddlewise Digest 2096). Some times a calculated risk degenerates into a "drunkards walk" gamble. All the best, PeterO *************************************************************************** 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/ ***************************************************************************
The boat that PeterO paddled - Feathercraf Kahuna - is pretty much aluminum (frame), with sythetic skin around which doesn't help much, being very thin. Such object may be doesn't attract lightning, being very low, but is not protected from not only direct strikes, but from close strikes as well (they may get you through surface of salty water, albeit with reduced power). Fiberglass or playwood kayak is probably more safe. Alex. ----- Original Message ----- From: "skimmer_at_.enter.net" <skimmer_at_enter.net> To: <paddlewise_at_paddlewise.net> Sent: October 25, 2003 8:48 AM Subject: [Paddlewise] lightening strikes > Hi All, > > Are there any records of paddlers struck by lightening, as > distinguished from sailors in boats with lightening rod masts, etc.? > We are not even paddling aluminum watercraft. Our paddles are usually > wood or fiberglass. *************************************************************************** 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/ ***************************************************************************
Lightening generally passes through thousands of feet of air between the cloud and the ground. Air is a excellent insulator. Don't be under the impression that a fraction of an inch of plastic, wood or fiberglass will effect the lightening in any manner. There is nothing you can put between yourself and lightening that will provide any additional insulation. Wood, plastic or fiberglass will make absolutely no difference to the lightening. The only possible form of protection is providing a better path for the lightening than your body. This is the principle of a lightening rod. Many people know that it is safer in a car than outside. Most people assume that this is because of the tires. This protection is provided by the metal shell of the car which provides a better conduction path than your body. The tires are almost irrelevant (although steel belted radials may make a difference). The insulation provided by rubber tires would be vaporized instantaneously and would not effect lightening that can course through miles of air. If anything an aluminum framed kayak will be safer than a non-conducting boat. If you tuck down into the cockpit, you will have something like a Faraday cage which may provide some modest protection. The boat would probably not survive a direct strike, but possibly you would be alive to swim out of the skin. Nick On Saturday, October 25, 2003, at 07:42 PM, alex wrote: > The boat that PeterO paddled - Feathercraf Kahuna - is pretty much > aluminum > (frame), with sythetic skin around which doesn't help much, being very > thin. Such object may be doesn't attract lightning, being very low, > but is > not protected from not only direct strikes, but from close strikes as > well > (they may get you through surface of salty water, albeit with reduced > power). Fiberglass or playwood kayak is probably more safe. > >> Hi All, >> >> Are there any records of paddlers struck by lightening, as >> distinguished from sailors in boats with lightening rod masts, etc.? >> We are not even paddling aluminum watercraft. Our paddles are usually >> wood or fiberglass. > Nick Schade Guillemot Kayaks 824 Thompson St Glastonbury, CT 06033 USA Ph/Fx: (860) 659-8847 http://www.guillemot-kayaks.com/ *************************************************************************** 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/ ***************************************************************************
Nick Schade <nick_at_guillemot-kayaks.com> put it well, and succinctly: >> Lightening generally passes through thousands of feet of air between the cloud and the ground. Air is a excellent insulator. Don't be under the impression that a fraction of an inch of plastic, wood or fiberglass will effect the lightening in any manner>> [much snipped] I no longer have the post I made a month ago or so detailing how the local electric potential influences ___where__ lightning strikes. That is perhaps the main way to decrease your risk: avoid places, postures, and gear that will enhance the chance lightning will strike on you or near you. As Nick says, the "insulating" value of anything you might have about won't help you __if lightning strikes you__. But, you can do something about __not__ being the place where lightning strikes. Some examples of don'ts when lightning is about: Hold a stick or other object vertically (especially anything metallic). Park your fanny under a lone tree. Stick out above the ground or water in wide open spaces (... aaaak! that's what paddlers do!) Why avoid these "don'ts?" Because conductive objects, including ourselves, as Mike Edelman points out, which are attached to ground ("grounded") are part of the charge redistribution system that occurs as the electric potential builds up prior to a strike. If your noggin is the highest thing around (especially if it is sharply pointed like mine is), then it becomes a point of higher electric potential, and the point where a strike is most likely to occur. If caught in the open on land, crouch or cower, and place something dry and insulating between you and the ground -- the latter will help minimize your electric potential, minimizing the chance you will get hit. (But, as Nick says, that Thermarest pad will get zapped just as you will, __if lightning strikes you__.) Another don't is: Place yourself in/alongside the path the ground current is likely to follow. What's ground current? It is the flow of electrical charge within the earth which occurs as the lightning reaches earth. If your body becomes part of that path, you'll get zapped. This is probably what happened to the kayakers in the cave/bunker. Other incidents of injuries and deaths to persons taking shelter in a cave on a hillside have been recorded. Protection from ground current is enhanced by insulation from the ground -- another reason to park yourself on the Thermarest. For paddlers on the water, the upshot is: Does not matter terribly much what you wear or hold (excluding metal), so long as you do not form a "peak" in your vicinity, and what you hold does not, either. Of course, there is always the concept of sacrificing one of your taller companions by coating him/her with aluminum dust and having that person stand tall about 25 meters away ... but I digress. On the water? Just cower and low stroke to land -- on the water you are the tallest thing around unless surrounded by sailboats or powerboats. -- Dave Kruger Astoria, OR *************************************************************************** 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/ ***************************************************************************
On 29 Oct 2003 at 6:42, Dave Kruger wrote: > On the water? Just cower and low stroke to land -- on the water you > are the tallest thing around unless surrounded by sailboats or > powerboats. If paddling to shore is not reasonable and the lightning is close, being able to stay in a balance brace means the highest thing will be half the beam of your kayak. However, if lighting stikes nearby, I don't know is surface currents in the water will get you - is it like on land? Mike *************************************************************************** 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/ ***************************************************************************
Mike wrote: - >However, if lighting stikes nearby, I don't know >is surface currents in the water will get you - >is it like on land? G'Day Mike, I like the idea of the balanced brace, but how long could you keep in that position? Longer than me I'll bet! My take on this is theoretical and idealised so take it with many grains of salt and I wouldn't recommend using it to guide your actions in a thunderstorm or even to persuade yourself to get out of the boat or brace. I'ld just get off the water if at all possible. The "ground" potential near a lightning strike in the open sea would possibly drop off faster with distance from the strike, than on land. If the ground potential drops off faster then so too should ground currents. In the sea surrounding the strike successive layers of ions and counterions in the water might neutralise the field more rapidly than in soil where the reduced ability of ions to move could limit this effect. In soil the energy would be dissipated by other mechanisms such as ohmic heating, which generally takes place over much greater distances. However, if you were in the water between a strike and a large conductor, eg a jetty, or a large boat, then you could be at risk from current flow between the strike and the conductor. One reason for this would be that the conductor could electrolyse ions which could flow between the conductor and the strike and disrupt the polarisation layers. Would really like to be corrected on any of this if people can see flaws in the reasoning. All the best, PeterO *************************************************************************** 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/ ***************************************************************************
I am looking at getting a waterproof digital camera. One that takes my eye is the Pentax Optio 33WR http://www.dpreview.com/news/0309/03090301pentax33wr.asp At face value it looks like an ideal camera for paddling, but has anybody else used one? I would like to hear an independent review from a kayaking perspective. Cheers Grant *************************************************************************** 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/ ***************************************************************************
I don't know about the Pentax, although it seems to be billed as "water resistant". I have a Canon S300 with a Canon made waterproof housing. This works very well, I've had it dragging in the water beside the boat after being tossed around in surf and it is hold up well. The housing is relatively inexpensive and provides full access to all controls. The S300 is an old model now, but newer models such as the S400 have similar housings available. Nick On Friday, October 31, 2003, at 03:45 AM, Grant Glazer wrote: > I am looking at getting a waterproof digital camera. One that takes > my eye > is the Pentax Optio 33WR > http://www.dpreview.com/news/0309/03090301pentax33wr.asp At face value > it > looks like an ideal camera for paddling, but has anybody else used > one? I > would like to hear an independent review from a kayaking perspective. Nick Schade Guillemot Kayaks 824 Thompson St Glastonbury, CT 06033 USA Ph/Fx: (860) 659-8847 http://www.guillemot-kayaks.com/ *************************************************************************** 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/ ***************************************************************************
On 31 Oct 2003 at 21:45, Grant Glazer wrote: > I am looking at getting a waterproof digital camera. One that takes > my eye is the Pentax Optio 33WR > http://www.dpreview.com/news/0309/03090301pentax33wr.asp At face value > it looks like an ideal camera for paddling, but has anybody else used > one? Wow, that looks like a good little camera! I have no experience with that one, but Amie has the Pentax 105WR film camera. It has proven to be watertight under paddling conditions over the years. Pentax has proven their ability to make a camera that can handle water. The JIS7 rating (1m depth for 30 min) on this digital camera means it should hold up to splashing and even rolling. I have a Canon A40 with underwater housing. The advantage of the housing is that it provides physical protection for the camera. The big disadvantage is that the housing is quite bulky and doesn't fit anywhere. This Pentax, OTOH, at roughly 3x3x1.25 inch should fit into some PFD pockets and into knee tubes or other storage areas. Unless underwater photography is a priority, I wouldn't worry about getting this camera for Kayaking. Pentax's reputation in this area is sufficient for me. I'd judge it on the photographic performance alone. Mike *************************************************************************** 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/ ***************************************************************************
Some sample pictures have been posted over at www.boatertalk.com, here's one sample set http://www.newdawnimaging.com/NRG%2010_26/index.htm Apparently it was taken on a rainy day, but it should give some idea how the camera works. Geoff *************************************************************************** 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/ ***************************************************************************
According to the press release, the Pentax Optio 33WR should be released right about . . . NOW! So I doubt anyone on the list has had an opportunity to use one yet. But if it has the same water resistance as the Pentax IQ 105WR, it should be a winner, especially considering Pentax will display it submerged in water. Chuck Holst *************************************************************************** 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/ ***************************************************************************
Grant Glazer <grantglazer_at_clear.net.nz> wrote: >> I am looking at getting a waterproof digital camera. One that takes my eye is the Pentax Optio 33WR http://www.dpreview.com/news/0309/03090301pentax33wr.asp At face value it looks like an ideal camera for paddling, but has anybody else used one? I would like to hear an independent review from a kayaking perspective. >> No experience with it. But, the rating is the same one for "waterproof" VHF's (some failures noted in some models of VHF's), I believe. About as good as you'll get, short of a full-on dive camera. Same rating as Pentax's discontinued Zoom 90-WR (see below) No price mentioned in the review, but bundled with ACDSee (easy to use, quick editing/image manipulation software) could be a good value for someone wanting to dive into digital with a paddling focus [yerk yerk]. As a comparison, I've been using an Olympus D-520 Zoom (2 megapixels) which uses an f 2.8 - 4.9 zoom lens, but is not waterproof. I carry it inside a Pelican Micro Case (Model 1020) which just fits the camera. [Note: the seals on these small boxes are subject to compression: store the box open and check its integrity with am immersion event sans camera.] Clipped to a deck line, it's pretty quick, but not as quick as a camera that can sit naked on the deck. Picture quality on my Olympus seems limited by the number of pixels, and/or camera shake inherent to taking pictures from a bobbing kayak, not the lens. But, at 3.2 megapixels, could be the lens becomes limiting in image quality. No connection to Pentax (or any merchandising of camera gear), but this looks like a good choice: very compact, decent zoom, and ACDSee bundled with it. I love my old Pentax Zoom 90-WR, which is a better choice for better-quality photos (lens limited, definitely), but the Optio 33WR would be a much better snapshot choice, in digital, anyway. Buy it, Grant, and report back (I'll chip in twenty bucks!). -- Dave Kruger Astoria, OR *************************************************************************** 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/ ***************************************************************************
On Fri, 31 Oct 2003 08:23:02 -0800, "Dave Kruger" <kdruger_at_pacifier.com> said: > Grant Glazer <grantglazer_at_clear.net.nz> wrote: > > >> I am looking at getting a waterproof digital camera. One that takes my > eye > is the Pentax Optio 33WR > http://www.dpreview.com/news/0309/03090301pentax33wr.asp At face value it > looks like an ideal camera for paddling, but has anybody else used one? > No price mentioned in the review, $349.99 (USD) apparent list price. http://www.digitalcamera-hq.com/pentax-optio-33wr-reviews.html claimed a (somewhere on the web) low price last week of $289 -- Kirk Olsen kork4_at_cluemail.com *************************************************************************** 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/ ***************************************************************************
[Moderator's Note: Content unaltered. Excessive quoting (including headers/footers/sig lines/extraneous text from previous posts, etc.) have been removed. Please edit quoted material in addition to removing header/trailers when replying to posts.] > Grant Glazer <grantglazer_at_clear.net.nz> wrote: > > >> I am looking at getting a waterproof digital camera. One that takes my > eye > is the Pentax Optio 33WR > http://www.dpreview.com/news/0309/03090301pentax33wr.asp At face value it > looks like an ideal camera for paddling, but has anybody else used one? Yes, I checked out the camera. They say it is water resistant, not waterproof and resolution is only 3.2 megs. Not really that great if you want quality pictures. Kirby www.CoastalWatersRec.com <http://www.CoastalWatersRec.com> every trip, a new adventure! *************************************************************************** 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/ ***************************************************************************
I just purchased a waterproof housing for my Olympus 5050. I paid less than $150, and while bulkier than a water resistant camera, it is good to 130 feet and has all the functions of the camera accessible through the housing. In addition, it floats unless the included weight is attached. Olympus has inexpensive housing for most of their digitals. cu *************************************************************************** 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/ ***************************************************************************
> Buy it, Grant, and report back (I'll chip in twenty bucks!). > > -- > Dave Kruger > Astoria, OR If I can get 10 of you to make the same pledge, I promise to write a VERY full review..... Geoff *************************************************************************** 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/ ***************************************************************************
If you are looking for reviews of digital cameras (some that are waterproof, some with housings, some just regular cameras) - I'd suggest looking at these two sites: http://www.steves-digicams.com/ (looks a bit hokey but good info) http://www.imaging-resource.com/ No connection with either - just find their info accurate and thorough when it comes to digital cameras. Both provide many pages of info including comparison images (same shot) for each camera. The 2nd site gets more technical. Both have 'summary' pages for each camera if you want the short version. Here's another link to sites specializing in underwater digital photography equipment: http://www.steves-digicams.com/digresources.html#uw Keith *************************************************************************** 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/ ***************************************************************************
On 31 Oct 2003 at 14:54, Keith Wrage wrote: > Here's another link to sites specializing in underwater digital > photography equipment: > http://www.steves-digicams.com/digresources.html#uw Bill Tuthill, a r.b.p regular has maintained a list of cameras that are suitable for paddling. http://creekin.net/cameras.htm Unfortunately, he doesn't seem to have updated it in a while. Mike *************************************************************************** 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/ ***************************************************************************
> No connection to Pentax (or any merchandising of camera gear), but this looks > like a good choice: very compact, decent zoom, and ACDSee bundled with it. > I love my old Pentax Zoom 90-WR, which is a better choice for better-quality > photos (lens limited, definitely), but the Optio 33WR would be a much better > snapshot choice, in digital, anyway. > It is hard to beat Pentax WR90 (or even its successor - don't remember, is it WR 95?) in a bang-for-the-buck papameter. 90-s are discontinued - good! I've got mine used for $70, and had occasion to dunk it into water, which didn't affect performance. Optical features are very good too. Next WR model has some minor drawbacks - again, don't remember whether it is lens aperture or somethins else, - but still should be fine for that price (200 or so). *************************************************************************** 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/ ***************************************************************************
> It is hard to beat Pentax WR90 (or even its successor - don't remember, is > it WR 95?) in a bang-for-the-buck papameter. I just got a WR90 for about $32 on ebay. I've only put one roll of film through it, but I'm impressed so far, and considering that's the price of 2-3 disposables that I've been using in the kayak, it's hard to go wrong. Geoff *************************************************************************** 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/ ***************************************************************************
Thanks everybody, I have been using a WR105 for the last few years now and can't fault it apart from being slightly bulky (less then the 90WR though) and having to wait for the film to be used up before developing. The Optio 33WR caught my eye since it is Pentax's digital version of the WR105 and had the same water resistant rating. I brought the WR105 after reading all the comments on Paddlewise and I figured I should do the same for the digital. Again thanks and now I just have do the tough part and hand over the plastic card ! Cheers Grant *************************************************************************** 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/ ***************************************************************************
[Moderator's Note: Content unaltered. Excessive quoting (including headers/footers/sig lines/extraneous text from previous posts, etc.) have been removed. Please edit quoted material in addition to removing header/trailers when replying to posts.] > Grant queried: > I am looking at getting a waterproof digital camera. One that takes my eye > is the Pentax Optio 33WR > http://www.dpreview.com/news/0309/03090301pentax33wr.asp At face value it > looks like an ideal camera for paddling, but has anybody else used one? > would like to hear an independent review from a kayaking perspective. Another digital camera that is waterproof or has a housing is the Sony Cybershot. You can purchase a waterproof housing for any of their cybershot cameras and can go down to a depth of 30ft. But who cares about that. Does work very well though it is extra. This is what I have and it works very well. Kirby www.CoastalWatersRec.com <http://www.CoastalWatersRec.com> every trip, a new adventure! *************************************************************************** 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/ ***************************************************************************
Has anyone tried the Sony DSCU-60 - roughly $250? Only 2 megapixels but for on-screen use - and prints up to 4x6 it would be fine. Neat little package, appears shaped to fit in PFD pockets well - also handy one-hand operation. http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/specs/Sony/sony_dscu60.asp K *************************************************************************** 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/ ***************************************************************************
On 31 Oct 2003 at 19:49, Keith Wrage wrote: > Has anyone tried the Sony DSCU-60 - roughly $250? Never used it, but perusing the spec sheet at the link shows it uses AAA batteries. The best NiMH AAA are only 750 mAh or about one third the capacity of AA. That will make for fewer shots - I'm guessing about 100 per charge compared to the 300+ my Canon gets. Minor nit if you don't like carrying lots of batteries. The flash seems mediocre even by digital point and shoot standards. The other thing is the fixed focal length at 33mm effective - that's a relatively wide angle. With only 2 Mpixels, you won't have much room for blowing up to recover to the equivalent of a longer lens. Nice try Sony, but I'd keep looking. Mike *************************************************************************** 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/ ***************************************************************************
[Moderator's Note: Content unaltered. Excessive quoting (including headers/footers/sig lines/extraneous text from previous posts, etc.) have been removed. Please edit quoted material in addition to removing header/trailers when replying to posts.] > Keith asked: > Has anyone tried the Sony DSCU-60 - roughly $250? Only 2 megapixels but > for on-screen use - and prints up to 4x6 it would be fine. Neat little > package, appears shaped to fit in PFD pockets well - also handy one-hand > operation. > http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/specs/Sony/sony_dscu60.asp If your looking for an under $300 Waterproof Digital Camera you might want to take a look at the Sealife SL121 Reefmaster DC200 it's 2megapixels and you could also use it for underwater use as well if you're into diving or think you might drop it for an extended trip in the water. I purchased it online after seeing pictures and reviews for under $300 including shipping and extended warranty. I still use my 4megapixel in calm conditions where I can stop and take it out of my deck bag, but I always have this camera right on my deck ready for a quick picture. I love that it will take the rechargeable AA batteries I already have and uses compact flash cards so I don't have to worry about running out of room on long trips. Only 2 drawbacks... 1. When water gets on it, I have to have something to wipe it with, I need to start carrying a cleaning cloth as I don't paddle with any natural fabric on me.. making it hard to clean off. 2. If you are not fairly still you may not get a sharp picture, I am glad for auto preview so I can see if I got the picture I wanted. This problem I find happens with most cameras out there and not many people mention it, even the other digital cameras I own do this unless I start manually modifying my settings. If you want to see some example of paddling pictures I posted a few unmodified ones (so these are exactly what the camera takes) http://www.thepikes.org/paddlewise/ or feel free to email me as I have plenty more. *Ally *************************************************************************** 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/ ***************************************************************************
another handy reference: http://www.pricescan.com/digiphoto/scripts/Q08010100.asp usual disclaimers apply. Paul *************************************************************************** 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/ ***************************************************************************
Grant Glazer <grantglazer_at_clear.net.nz> wrote: >I am looking at getting a waterproof digital camera. One that takes my eye >is the Pentax Optio 33WR >http://www.dpreview.com/news/0309/03090301pentax33wr.asp At face value it >looks like an ideal camera for paddling, but has anybody else used one? I >would like to hear an independent review from a kayaking perspective. I drive a truck and don't get to read my paddlewise threads very much, so I hope I'm not just repeating something others have already said, But have you looked at getting a regular camera, and then purchasing a waterproof bag for it. There are two very good reasons for this: First, a waterproof bag is also sand proof, and, if there is anything more detrimental to a camera than water, its sand. Second, It opens up your options for cameras. I really wanted a camera with a high optical zoom, and, at least when I was looking, I couldn't find any water proof camera's that fit that bill. I choose the Olympus C-700 (I think that serires is up to the 750 now) digital with 10x optical zoom, and got a bag for it. With this combo, I've taken some really great pics on my kayaking trips. The two companies that I know about that make water proof bags for cameras that you can take a picture through is Aquapac (www.aquapac.net) and Ewa-marine (www.ewa-marine.com) Aquapac makes two sizes, and one of the two fits most non SLR cameras. They are light weight, very reliable, and degrades the picture quality very little as long as you make sure the bag is tight against the lens while taking the pic. The company also has excellant customer service. Its disadvantage is that you can't use a flash through it. If you want to get a little more expensive, you can go with an Ewa-marine case (as far as I know this is your only option if you have an SLR camera), that has a glass lens to take the pic through. these bags are generally fairly specific to a type of camera, so you would need to make sure they have one for the type of camera that you want to buy, but the company has a fairly wide selection, so chances are good that they have one that fits what ever camera you choose whether it is digital or conventional, SLR or point and Shoot. The biggest disadvantage to these bags (other than price - you could easily pay as much or more for the bag as you do for the camera) is there bulkiness. On a side note - if you're willing to spend this much, I think the Olumpus C-750 is a great camera for kayaking. Namely because it is such a small camera to have a 10x Optical Zoom. You will appreciate that much zoom the first time you try to take a pic of some sort of wild life that you either can't or would prefer not to get very close to, but still want to be able to tell what it is later :-) It has plenty of other great features to appreciate as well though. *************************************************************************** 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/ ***************************************************************************
[Moderator's Note: Content unaltered. Excessive quoting (including headers/footers/sig lines/extraneous text from previous posts, etc.) have been removed. Please edit quoted material in addition to removing header/trailers when replying to posts.] rmagill9_at_netscape.net wrote: > But have you > looked at getting a regular camera, and then purchasing a waterproof bag for > it. I have the Aquapac and it is plastic. I tried using it while in calm conditions down a river and the plastic would not stay straight and kept distorting. It was also quite difficult to keep the plastic completely smudge free when water got on it. If you were going to go with a bag make sure it has glass for the lense. Unless you already have a digital camera you want to use with it the EWA ones the cost can get pretty high as they start at just under $100 and run up to and over $400. *************************************************************************** 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/ ***************************************************************************
Grant Glazer <grantglazer_at_clear.net.nz> wrote: >I am looking at getting a waterproof digital camera. One that takes my eye >is the Pentax Optio 33WR >http://www.dpreview.com/news/0309/03090301pentax33wr.asp At face value it >looks like an ideal camera for paddling, but has anybody else used one? I >would like to hear an independent review from a kayaking perspective. I drive a truck and don't get to read my paddlewise threads very much, so I hope I'm not just repeating something others have already said, But have you looked at getting a regular camera, and then purchasing a waterproof bag for it. There are two very good reasons for this: First, a waterproof bag is also sand proof, and, if there is anything more detrimental to a camera than water, its sand. Second, It opens up your options for cameras. I really wanted a camera with a high optical zoom, and, at least when I was looking, I couldn't find any water proof camera's that fit that bill. I choose the Olympus C-700 (I think that serires is up to the 750 now) digital with 10x optical zoom, and got a bag for it. With this combo, I've taken some really great pics on my kayaking trips. The two companies that I know about that make water proof bags for cameras that you can take a picture through is Aquapac (www.aquapac.net) and Ewa-marine (www.ewa-marine.com) Aquapac makes two sizes, and one of the two fits most non SLR cameras. They are light weight, very reliable, and degrades the picture quality very little as long as you make sure the bag is tight against the lens while taking the pic. The company also has excellant customer service. Its disadvantage is that you can't use a flash through it. If you want to get a little more expensive, you can go with an Ewa-marine case (as far as I know this is your only option if you have an SLR camera), that has a glass lens to take the pic through. these bags are generally fairly specific to a type of camera, so you would need to make sure they have one for the type of camera that you want to buy, but the company has a fairly wide selection, so chances are good that they have one that fits what ever camera you choose whether it is digital or conventional, SLR or point and Shoot. The biggest disadvantage to these bags (other than price - you could easily pay as much or more for the bag as you do for the camera) is there bulkiness. On a side note - if you're willing to spend this much, I think the Olumpus C-750 is a great camera for kayaking. Namely because it is such a small camera to have a 10x Optical Zoom. You will appreciate that much zoom the first time you try to take a pic of some sort of wild life that you either can't or would prefer not to get very close to, but still want to be able to tell what it is later :-) It has plenty of other great features to appreciate as well though. *************************************************************************** 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/ ***************************************************************************
>They say it is water resistant, not waterproof and resolution is only 3.2 >megs. > >Not really that great if you want quality pictures. Kirby, Not sure if I agree with the above. 3.2 MP is more than enough to take great photos providing the camera is high-quality. According to all that I've read about digital photography, unless the aim is to produce prints larger than 8"x10", an increase in pixel resolution is hardly discernible. Of course I'm not a professional phtographer. I have been using a Canon A70 w/ marine case while kayaking throughout the summer. I have found the quality of pictures to be excellent. The camera has been easy to use and comes with quality software. It also offers a great deal of manual control, although I must admit that I most often use the automatic setting. The one drawback of this camera for paddling is size. It's a bit larger than the smaller compacts and when inside the marine case just doesn't seem to fit anywhere. That said, another size factor to consider is that some people are just not able to comfortably use the smallest of the cameras (especially while paddling.) The Canon S400 is an excellent camera but I didn't feel comfortable holding it in one hand (which was one of my criteria). The Canon marine cases can be had for less than $200. Regards, Jeff jkayak_at_sopoint.com http://mail2web.com/ . *************************************************************************** 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/ ***************************************************************************
[Moderator's Note: Content unaltered. Excessive quoting (including headers/footers/sig lines/extraneous text from previous posts, etc.) have been removed. Please edit quoted material in addition to removing header/trailers when replying to posts.] >Jeff commented: >According to all that >I've read about digital photography, unless the aim is to produce prints >larger than 8"x10", an increase in pixel resolution is hardly discernible. This may be true as long as you do not use your photo editing software to do any cropping. If you crop your pictures to improve them, the required pixel count can increase significantly. DON *************************************************************************** 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/ ***************************************************************************
[Moderator's Note: Content unaltered. Excessive quoting (including headers/footers/sig lines/extraneous text from previous posts, etc.) have been removed. Please edit quoted material in addition to removing header/trailers when replying to posts.] When you are grabbing shots in a moving kayak framing isn't always what you would do on dry land with a tripod. Usually you grab a larger image than what you really want and then crop it in the computer. The part of the image that I actually use is frequently half or less of what I shot. The vast expanse of the outdoors also leads to quite a bit of cropping. With the 105 - 115 mm max focal length of most compact cameras it is sometimes hard to get close enough to what you are shooting to fill the viewfinder. That being said, I use a Canon S30 with Canon housing and have no complaints with the image quality even after cropping. This is a 3.2 MP camera. Images of my backcountry Yellowstone trip on Shoshone Lake are at http://www.siue.edu/~rwashbu/Page.html These were all taken with the camera. *************************************************************************** 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/ ***************************************************************************
" This is probably what happened to the kayakers in the cave/bunker. Other incidents of injuries and deaths to persons taking shelter in a cave on a hillside have been recorded. Protection from ground current is enhanced by insulation from the ground -- another reason to park yourself on the Thermarest." Agreed Dave, just to reinforce your point, the accepted posture to assume when sitting out an electrical storm in a cave or overhang while climing/mountianeering is to stay away from the walls and sit on your pack, rope or other non-metal gear - completely - don't lean on the rock, and keep your legs and feet up as well. Given the choice, the current traveling through the wet rock above will encounter the dry gap of the cave/overhang and look for the path of least resistance, which would be you if you are in the circuit. So stay out of the circuit. If a cave is not available, you should sit on your pack a few feet away from the wall (out of the path of a strike from above), but not too many feet (no specifics given) to avoid becomming the highest local object. Another interesting tid bit to illustrate the contra-intuitive nature of electricity: When the local power company came to service the transformer in my yard, the guy first blew up his thick rubber gloves with a breath of air and held them tightly closed while squeezing, checking for even a pin hole in the rubber. Give electricity a micro-inch and it will take your life. Carey *************************************************************************** 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/ ***************************************************************************
----- Original Message ----- From: "Dave Kruger" <kdruger_at_pacifier.com> > Nick Schade <nick_at_guillemot-kayaks.com> put it well, and succinctly: > > >> Lightening generally passes through thousands of feet of air between > the cloud and the ground. Air is a excellent insulator. Don't be under > the impression that a fraction of an inch of plastic, wood or > fiberglass will effect the lightening in any manner>> [much snipped] > > I no longer have the post I made a month ago or so detailing how the local > electric potential influences ___where__ lightning strikes. That is perhaps > the main way to decrease your risk: avoid places, postures, and gear that > will enhance the chance lightning will strike on you or near you. As Nick > says, the "insulating" value of anything you might have about won't help you > __if lightning strikes you__. But, you can do something about __not__ being > the place where lightning strikes. I did some research on this about 10 years ago for my newsletter, looking at articles and interviewing NOAA people and the US Coast Guard as well as talking with some kayaking gurus. What seems to have emerged as an area to avoid is an immediate band on either side of an open shoreline, such as a beach. No consensus of how wide the band but certainly 50 to 100 yardson both sides of the water's edge. It had something to do with this area being a transition zone. So the advice was that if you feel you can't make it to shore without getting caught in that zone then to just stay out in the water beyond it. If you can get into shore and further inland especially among a thick stand of trees then that would be you best bet. At that point do all the good things suggested such as with cavers and mountain travelers, i.e. crouch down low on your feet or knees and hunker down with your arms tucked in low and your head lowered and be on your spread out PFD for some level of insulation. (we once did this on a paddle when lightning started striking in the vicinity. There we were a group of about a dozen paddlers keeping some separation between us and with all our asses almost pointing up to the sky. Someone who was oblivious to the danger of lightning came wandering down the path and must have thought it was some religious cult or strange people plucking worms from the ground a la what birds do. :-) There was also some discussion by the experts (who all admitted that nothing about lightning was truly predictable) that if in a boat you can create a zone of security. Basically the area that is reasonably secure is the radius of a circle half the height of a grounded pole or mast at its center. The grounding would be a copper wire hanging over the side (or through the bottom of the boat) at some depth into the water. I am not certain how well it would work in a pitching kayak where the wire could come out of the water. However, just having a kayak under sail with a mast way up there in the sky and not grounded would not be a good idea. Oh, BTW, if you were to find yourself out in the open on shore in that band area mentioned above and had no time to make it further into shore, lying prone or inside your kayak would be better than nothing. ralph diaz-- ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Ralph Diaz . . . Folding Kayaker newsletter PO Box 1365, Highland, NY 12528 Tel: 845-255-7742; E-mail: rdiaz_at_ix.netcom.com "Where's your sea kayak?"----"It's in the bag." ----------------------------------------------------------------------- *************************************************************************** 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/ ***************************************************************************
Ralph wrote:- >What seems to have emerged as an area to avoid >is an immediate band on either side of an open >shoreline, such as a beach. G'Day Ralph, I wondered about the zone near the shore. One might expect to see evidence such as molten sand patches or an increased frequency of stricken trees at the shore edge. As many trees in Australia show evidence of burning this would be hard to assess over here. Did the argument apply to rivers as well or just open water? All the best, PeterO *************************************************************************** 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/ ***************************************************************************
Michael Daly" <michaeldaly_at_rogers.com> wrote: >> If paddling to shore is not reasonable and the lightning is close, being able to stay in a balance brace means the highest thing will be half the beam of your kayak. However, if lighting stikes nearby, I don't know is surface currents in the water will get you - is it like on land? >> I don't know. I suspect yes, but wonder if anyone has done testing of this. -- Dave Kruger Astoria, OR *************************************************************************** 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/ ***************************************************************************
>>. One might expect to see evidence such as molten sand patches or an increased frequency of stricken trees at the shore edge. As many trees in Australia show evidence of burning this would be hard to assess over here. Lightning often hits beaches, and the intense heat often produces melted sand (i.e. glass) tubes called fulgurites. There is a huge one in the Museum of Natural History in NYC which spreads out and branches to a depth of about 6 feet and maybe 10 or more across. I don't know whether it's still on exhibit, and I have seen fulgurite fragments in other museums. Joe P. *************************************************************************** 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/ ***************************************************************************
Joe wrote: - >Lightning often hits beaches, and the intense heat >often produces melted sand (i.e. glass) tubes called >fulgurites. G'Day Joe, Is the colloquial name "sand dollars" I seem to remember a John Steinbeck story in which beach sand melted by lightning strikes is mentioned and for some reason the phrase "sand dollars" springs to mind. All the best, PeterO *************************************************************************** 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/ ***************************************************************************
> Lightning often hits beaches, and the intense heat often produces melted sand (i.e. glass) tubes called fulgurites. Once I saw a TV-docu about a group of scientists in the southwest US (??), in an area where much lightning takes place. hey got prepared sand banks and all around lightning rods and study the structure of these fulgurites. Lightning scientifics. *************************************************************************** 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/ ***************************************************************************
[Moderator's Note: Content unaltered. Excessive quoting (including headers/footers/sig lines/extraneous text from previous posts, etc.) have been removed. Please edit quoted material in addition to removing header/trailers when replying to posts.] > PeterO queried: >Joe wrote: - >>Lightning often hits beaches, and the intense heat >>often produces melted sand (i.e. glass) tubes called >>fulgurites. > >Is the colloquial name "sand dollars" I seem to remember a John Steinbeck >story in which beach sand melted by lightning strikes is mentioned and for >some reason the phrase "sand dollars" springs to mind. The sand dollar is Echinarachnius parma. See http://octopus.gma.org/Tidings/sanddollar.html C *************************************************************************** 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/ ***************************************************************************
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thu Aug 21 2025 - 16:33:35 PDT