Carl wrote:
(snips)

> A LOT of companies are starting to come out with
> "inexpensive" housingsfor their cameras.  I guess
> it all depends on what you consider a "good" camera.

Indeed.

> FWIW, I consider the C-5060 or the C-8080 to be
> very good cameras.True, they're not digital SLR's,
> but that's another price tier or two upward again!

Yup.

Allow me to add another comment to the Olympus U/W digital saga.

Olympus, unlike most, if not all other, camera manufacturers have done
a deal with housing manufacturers, presumably in Japan. Notice how an
important new Olympus is very often offered pretty well conjointly
with a dedicated housing?

Since new cameras, particularly at this end of the market, are of
extreme interest to competitors there must be some pretty good secrecy
agreements between them.

Usually housing manufacturers might get the "first cab off the rank"
camera in order to design that housing. Particularly in the rapidly
changing world of digital photography, that's ludicrous. By the time
the housing is perfected the "latest" newest and best has hit the In Tray!

> C-5050 is in the neighborhood of $500 and is a nice 5 megapixel camera.
> The Olympus housing is around $200.  You can also buy an optional port
> for the wide angle lens, and a housing for the FL-20 strobe.

The housing might be labelled Olympus but I suspect that Olympus is
not, in fact, the OEM. Could be wrong there, don't think so.

> I would consider these prices are "cheap", especially relative
> to the"normal"housing prices that I've been looking at.

Cheap, yes. Shoddy workmanship, no.

The only other company that I know of recognising this (whether they
did so consciously or not) are Canon with their top-of-the-line EOS1
Rs which is encased in the same body, with much the same controls (but
of course augmented) as their original analogue EOS1.

The SeaCam housing for the latter is much the same as for the digital
version and allowed SeaCam to keep the original moulds and just change
the ingress controls. That should, I haven't checked, also go for the
likes of Hugyfot, Subal, UK Germany and the like. Oh, and no doubt
Ikelite. FWIW Ikelite and UK Germany (they're his initials) are, IMO,
best able to accommodate special needs.

All of these are at a significant price of course and not in the same
ball park, any way you look at it, as the Olympuses mentioned above.

The regret of most diver/photographers has always been that the latest
and best DOES mean a whole system change. Whether Canon's attitude was
intentional I know not but, let's face it, that all magnesium body of
the original EOS1 was a thing of beauty and a joy forever. So, if
there was no need, why change it?

Oh, if you feel that you might like one (and can afford it) only a
Kodak (no housing) also has a chip (its Faveon chip technology is
considered somewhat suspect by some) equivalent to 35mm film. The chip
size means that all those wonderful Canon lenses are exactly as
described, rather than limited by the size of the chip.

It's worth noting that, to my knowledge, at this time only those two
cameras have a chip equivalent to 35mm and are thus entirely
compatible with conventional 35mm lenses. No bad thing that.

Cheers,

Christian