[Q] Waterproof Digital Cameras
 

Anyone aware of a waterproof digital camera with at least a 10x zoom?

[Q] Waterproof Digital Cameras
 

Eric wrote:

Anyone aware of a waterproof digital camera with at least a 10x zoom?

No, the Pentax 33WR and announced-but-not-yet-available 43WR both have
37-104mm equivalent zoom, which is about 3x. They may have digital zoom,
but I don't believe DZ is useful, so I don't pay any attention to it.

http://creekin.net/cameras.htm

The Minolta Dimage A1/A2 have 28-200 equivalent zoom, which is over 7x,
but are not water-resistant.

[Q] Waterproof Digital Cameras
 

Bill Tuthill wrote:

Eric wrote:

Anyone aware of a waterproof digital camera with at least a 10x zoom?

No, the Pentax 33WR and announced-but-not-yet-available 43WR both have
37-104mm equivalent zoom, which is about 3x.

Yes, this is what my research has turned up as well. Unfortunately, a 3x
optical zoom isn't really worth it, imho.

I guess I shall wait a bit longer until someone does make the camera I
am looking for.

They may have digital zoom,
but I don't believe DZ is useful, so I don't pay any attention to it.

Yes, I agree, a Digital Zoom is not useful.
I only care about optical zoom.

[Q] Waterproof Digital Cameras
 

On 4-May-2004, (Eric) wrote:

I guess I shall wait a bit longer until someone does make the camera I
am looking for.

Are you including waterproof housings for digital cameras in your search?

Mike

[Q] Waterproof Digital Cameras
 

Michael Daly wrote:

On 4-May-2004, (Eric) wrote:

I guess I shall wait a bit longer until someone does make the camera I
am looking for.

Are you including waterproof housings for digital cameras in your search?

No. I have one for my current digital camera and find it rather
annoying.


--
== Eric Gorr ========= http://www.ericgorr.net ========= ICQ:9293199 ===
"Therefore the considerations of the intelligent always include both
benefit and harm." - Sun Tzu
== Insults, like violence, are the last refuge of the incompetent... ===

[Q] Waterproof Digital Cameras
 

I haven't heard of a "waterproof" digital camera with at least a 10x
zoom. It's difficult to keep a water tight seal on a zoom. For this
reason, most "waterproof" cameras have a fixed focal. There are
"water resistant" digital cameras with a zoom.

(Eric) wrote in message ...
Anyone aware of a waterproof digital camera with at least a 10x zoom?

[Q] Waterproof Digital Cameras
 

I'd like to ask a silly question in this thread.

From my personal experience, even the 3x zoom can give me blurred
pictures from my boat. I can only assume 10x would be worse.

Unless you are paddling in a super-wide boat in very calm conditions.
In which case I don't see the need for waterproof. Granted you could
be taking photos in the rain, but I doubt it.

So what is the advantage of a 10x zoom waterproof digital camera? I
have to assume I am missing something.

- Eric

[Q] Waterproof Digital Cameras
 

Eric Nyre wrote:

So what is the advantage of a 10x zoom waterproof digital camera? I
have to assume I am missing something.

I really don't consider anything less then a 10x zoom to be worthwhile.
One doesn't have to use the full 10x zoom.

The 10x zoom would be available when one is not in a kayak.

Being waterproof means it is relatively safe to take it while kayaking.

I do not wish to own both a camera with a 10x zoom which is not
waterproof and a camera with less then a 10x zoom which is waterproof.

I find the waterproof cases to be annoying.

--
== Eric Gorr ========= http://www.ericgorr.net ========= ICQ:9293199 ===
"Therefore the considerations of the intelligent always include both
benefit and harm." - Sun Tzu
== Insults, like violence, are the last refuge of the incompetent... ===

[Q] Waterproof Digital Cameras
 

Anyone aware of a waterproof digital camera with at least a 10x zoom?

10X, get real. People think that a zoom lens is magic, it's not.
On a 35mm camera "normal is a 50mm lens, so a 10X zoom would have a 500mm
focal length. Check out a 500mm lens on a camera with interchangable lens,
it's huge, and a lens that zooms from 50mm to 500mm would be even bigger.
Also most zoom lens get "slower" (that is; they gather less light) at
their longer focal length. In an automatic camera that means a slower shutter
speed and a greater chance that the camera will shake and ruin the photo during
exposure.
Finally the greater magnification also magnifys any shake you impart to
the camera. Many ,probably most, people will have trouble holding the camera
with a large zoom still enough to be very useful, that's on dry land, in a
kayak the problem would be even worse.
Better to buy the waterproof camera that's available and learn to take the
kind of photos that it is suitable for taking.

Arthur

[Q] Waterproof Digital Cameras
 

Eric wrote:

Yes, this is what my research has turned up as well. Unfortunately,
a 3x optical zoom isn't really worth it, imho.

It is very difficult to design a 10x zoom, especially one with good
optical performance.

The current Tamron and Sigma 28-200 lenses are quite good, and can be
placed on a Canon or Nikon or Pentax DSLR such as the 300D or D70 for
an equivalent focal range of of 45-320 or 42-300 respectively. You
could buy a Ewa-Marine waterproof case for lotsa bucks.

The more-than-10x Tamron and Sigma 28-300 lenses are much less good.
I have seen results from the Tamron and wouldn't buy one myself.
Best 10x zoom would be the Canon 35-350, which retails for $1500.
Seems like Canon announced a new wider-angle 10x zoom but I can't
remember any details.

[Q] Waterproof Digital Cameras
 

On 3-May-2004, (Eric) wrote:

Anyone aware of a waterproof digital camera with at least a 10x zoom?

What pixel count are you looking for? For example, I know of several
(not waterproof) 2Mp cameras with 10x lenses. However, if you upgrade
to 5Mp, 4x zoom, you get roughly the same effective resolution if you
use digital zoom. You'll still end up with a housing though.

Mike

[Q] Waterproof Digital Cameras
 

Bill Tuthill wrote:

Eric wrote:

Yes, this is what my research has turned up as well. Unfortunately,
a 3x optical zoom isn't really worth it, imho.

It is very difficult to design a 10x zoom, especially one with good
optical performance.

I have no cause to doubt that.

However, I would doubt that it will remain true indefinitely.

I was mostly just wondering if technological advancement and consumer
demand had made it possible to design a 10x zoom, waterproof digital
camera at a price I am willing to pay (= $500). It would appear the
answer is 'no' for the moment.

[Q] Waterproof Digital Cameras
 

Eric wrote:

Bill Tuthill wrote:

Eric wrote:

Yes, this is what my research has turned up as well. Unfortunately,
a 3x optical zoom isn't really worth it, imho.

It is very difficult to design a 10x zoom, especially one with good
optical performance.

I have no cause to doubt that.


Optical lens design is a mature technology. There will undoubtedly be
incremental advances, but designing a 10x lens that has decent optical
performance is difficult. Designing one with good optical performance is
essentially impossible. (You can argue about what "good" means.)



However, I would doubt that it will remain true indefinitely.

I was mostly just wondering if technological advancement and consumer
demand had made it possible to design a 10x zoom, waterproof digital
camera at a price I am willing to pay (= $500). It would appear the
answer is 'no' for the moment.

[Q] Waterproof Digital Cameras
 

Dan wrote:

Eric wrote:

Bill Tuthill wrote:

Eric wrote:

Yes, this is what my research has turned up as well. Unfortunately,
a 3x optical zoom isn't really worth it, imho.

It is very difficult to design a 10x zoom, especially one with good
optical performance.

I have no cause to doubt that.


Optical lens design is a mature technology.

Ah...'everything that can be invented, has been invented'.
Sorry, will never believe that...


--
== Eric Gorr ========= http://www.ericgorr.net ========= ICQ:9293199 ===
"Therefore the considerations of the intelligent always include both
benefit and harm." - Sun Tzu
== Insults, like violence, are the last refuge of the incompetent... ===

[Q] Waterproof Digital Cameras
 

On 5-May-2004, (Eric) wrote:

Dan wrote:

Optical lens design is a mature technology.

Ah...'everything that can be invented, has been invented'.
Sorry, will never believe that...

Dan is essentially correct. There was a big revolution in lens
design when computers suddenly became cheap enough to allow lens
designers to crunch through lots of lens optimization to produce
a good lens. Before that, designing by hand was hit or miss.

Another big improvement was the use of computer controlled machinery
to produce quality aspheric lenses cheaply.

Incremental improvement in glass will let us creep along with better
lenses. If there's going to be a revolution in lens design, it will
have to be the result of some awesome new material. Working with
existing materials and just running computer programs has pretty
much run its course.

Significant improvements in lens design technology itself? - not
likely!

Mike

[Q] Waterproof Digital Cameras
 

Michael Daly wrote:

Significant improvements in lens design technology itself? - not
likely!

I can't help but to think that our increasing ability to manipulate
individual atoms will offer significant improvements in all
manufacturing processes.

But, if you and others wish to believe that it is impossible to offer a
waterproof, digital camera with a good 10x zoom, I cannot stop you - I
simply won't believe you. Mind if I take special note of this post for
potential use in the future?



--
== Eric Gorr ========= http://www.ericgorr.net ========= ICQ:9293199 ===
"Therefore the considerations of the intelligent always include both
benefit and harm." - Sun Tzu
== Insults, like violence, are the last refuge of the incompetent... ===

[Q] Waterproof Digital Cameras
 

Eric wrote:
Michael Daly wrote:


Significant improvements in lens design technology itself? - not
likely!


I can't help but to think that our increasing ability to manipulate
individual atoms will offer significant improvements in all
manufacturing processes.

But, if you and others wish to believe that it is impossible to offer a
waterproof, digital camera with a good 10x zoom, I cannot stop you - I
simply won't believe you. Mind if I take special note of this post for
potential use in the future?

The problem is that you're looking for cutting edge performance ("good"
10x zoom) and compact size in a niche market product (waterproof
cameras) AND you want it at a low price. Don't hold your breath! Nearly
anything is possible if you're willing to pay for it (Nasa could
probably build you the camera you want), but you're not.

The real question is: "Do you want to take photos now, or are you
willing to forego that while you wait for the "perfect" camera, which
may never materialize?" If we all waited for the "perfect" boat, none of
us would be paddling, would we? We all have our "Holy Grails", but at
some point, reality has to take over.

In digital cameras, the emphasis is on resolution, capture speed and
image storage capacity. There has been tremendous "trickle down" of high
end features into affordable cameras. Unfortunately, "waterproof" is way
down on the list of features that consumers demand.

Typically, consumers who want high zoom ratios (or think that they do)
are less interested in in image quality and aren't willing to spend
thousands of dollars to get a good, albeit bulky, lens. People who are
serious about photography either eschew high zoom ratios or accept the
weight, bulk and price of a good lens and accept that it's not going to
be waterproof. Consequently, it could be 5, 10, 20 or more years before
the product you want becomes available, if it ever does.

So you have a choice; you can have a 10X zoom in semi-bulky,
semi-expensive, not waterproof package, or you can have a lower zoom in
a small, inexpensive waterproof package. Or you can wait for your "Holy
Grail".

Since a high zoom ratio is not practical on the water anyway, your best
bet is probably to use a compact, waterproof, low zoom ratio camera on
the water and carry a digital SLR with a high zoom ratio lens (or a
small selection of lenses to cover the range you want) to use on land.
And don't forget to bring a monopod or tripod.

[Q] Waterproof Digital Cameras
 

Brian Nystrom wrote:

So you have a choice; you can have a 10X zoom in semi-bulky,
semi-expensive, not waterproof package, or you can have a lower zoom in
a small, inexpensive waterproof package. Or you can wait for your "Holy
Grail".

I have already stated I will wait for the 'essentially impossible'. I
don't consider not spending money on a product I really don't want to be
a bad thing.

--
== Eric Gorr ========= http://www.ericgorr.net ========= ICQ:9293199 ===
"Therefore the considerations of the intelligent always include both
benefit and harm." - Sun Tzu
== Insults, like violence, are the last refuge of the incompetent... ===

[Q] Waterproof Digital Cameras
 

On 6-May-2004, (Eric) wrote:

I have already stated I will wait for the 'essentially impossible'. I
don't consider not spending money on a product I really don't want to be
a bad thing.

This tells me that you're not interested in the photographs, you're only
interested in the gadget. Otherwise, Brian's advice is what most folks
would accept.

Mike

[Q] Waterproof Digital Cameras
 

On 6-May-2004, (Eric) wrote:

I can't help but to think that our increasing ability to manipulate
individual atoms will offer significant improvements in all
manufacturing processes.

You watch too much Star Trek. We can only manipulate individual atoms
on an extremely small scale. Manipulating atoms on the scale of
something like a camera lens is not possible now or in the immediate
future. Have you got any idea how many atoms there are in a single
lens element, let alone an entire assembly?

But, if you and others wish to believe that it is impossible to offer a
waterproof, digital camera with a good 10x zoom,

It's possible. But not for less than $500. And as Brian points out,
there's no market for such a camera. Take a look at the market for
waterproof film cameras: Nikonos, Sealife, Sea&Sea, a few others
that are dive cameras and Minolta and a couple of others that are
snorkling cameras. Pentax and a couple of other water resistant
cameras and a pocketful of cheap throw-away cameras. None with a
serious zoom lens. Only the Nikonos is a "serious" camera and
when it was made, it was around $500 for the body alone and AFAIK,
only fixed length lenses were available.

Folks that needed something fancier than those cameras opted for
underwater housings to protect a conventional camera - an option
you've rejected.

I cannot stop you - I simply won't believe you.

Believe what you want. But some of us keep our feet on the ground.

Mike

[Q] Waterproof Digital Cameras
 

Michael Daly wrote:

On 6-May-2004, (Eric) wrote:

I have already stated I will wait for the 'essentially impossible'. I
don't consider not spending money on a product I really don't want to be
a bad thing.

This tells me that you're not interested in the photographs, you're only
interested in the gadget. Otherwise, Brian's advice is what most folks
would accept.

Noted and previously rejected.

[Q] Waterproof Digital Cameras
 

Michael Daly wrote:

On 6-May-2004, (Eric) wrote:

I can't help but to think that our increasing ability to manipulate
individual atoms will offer significant improvements in all
manufacturing processes.

You watch too much Star Trek.

Indeed I do.

We can only manipulate individual atoms on an extremely small scale.
Manipulating atoms on the scale of something like a camera lens is not
possible now or in the immediate future.

I will agree, but with the caveat that I am not familiar with what is
happening behind all of the tightly closed doors where such research is
going on.

Have you got any idea how many atoms there are in a single
lens element, let alone an entire assembly?

Yep. Doesn't concern me.

I am willing to wait until the camera I want to purchase is made
available to me. I have no desire to own a camera just for the sake of
owning a camera. If this means I won't be able to take pictures, that's
fine...I have gotten along without one up to now and will continue to do
so.

I am curious, why are people so invested in my immediate purchase of a
waterproof, digital camera?

I have made it perfectly clear what I am willing to purchase and that I
will not settle for anything less then what I am looking for...yet,
people keep on telling me that I am wrong and I should follow their
advice instead.

You're welcome to continue to tell me I am wrong, but keep in mind that
one nifty definition of insanity is to perform the same action over and
over and over again, expecting a different result.

[Q] Waterproof Digital Cameras
 

"Eric" wrote in message
.. .
Bill Tuthill wrote:

Eric wrote:

Yes, this is what my research has turned up as well. Unfortunately,
a 3x optical zoom isn't really worth it, imho.

It is very difficult to design a 10x zoom, especially one with good
optical performance.

I have no cause to doubt that.

However, I would doubt that it will remain true indefinitely.

I was mostly just wondering if technological advancement and consumer
demand had made it possible to design a 10x zoom, waterproof digital
camera at a price I am willing to pay (= $500). It would appear the
answer is 'no' for the moment.

My take is that the market is going in the opposite direction. First, as
others have pointed out, there's optical degradation (or high price - think
about how much you had to pay for anything more than a 3- or 4-x SLR zoom
lens) associated with the high-numeric zoom lenses. Then, with the collapse
in memory and CCD chip costs, more and more megapixels are making the zoom
less critical. Where the 10x zoom in my floppy-equipped Sony was critical
to its usefulness, I'll just take the output of my next 3x zoom, 4 megapixel
camera and crop it. Better control, better picture.

I think the days of the hign-zoom lenses are past. Megapixels are cheaper,
and they don't share the same kinds of aberations that come with optical
extremes.

Fred

[Q] Waterproof Digital Cameras
 

On 6-May-2004, (Eric) wrote:

I am willing to wait until the camera I want to purchase is made
available to me. I have no desire to own a camera just for the sake of
owning a camera. If this means I won't be able to take pictures, that's
fine...I have gotten along without one up to now and will continue to do
so.

Then you clearly don't want a camera and we're wasting our time trying to
help you.

people keep on telling me that I am wrong and I should follow their
advice instead.

Let me put it this way. You're not wrong, you're a fool.

Mike

[Q] Waterproof Digital Cameras
 

Michael Daly wrote:

On 6-May-2004, (Eric) wrote:

I am willing to wait until the camera I want to purchase is made
available to me. I have no desire to own a camera just for the sake of
owning a camera. If this means I won't be able to take pictures, that's
fine...I have gotten along without one up to now and will continue to do
so.

Then you clearly don't want a camera

Message-ID: t
Date: Wed, 05 May 2004 00:31:08 GMT
No. I have one [a waterproof bag] for my current digital camera
and find it rather annoying.

I'm curious, how could I not want a camera when I already own one with a
waterproof bag for it?

What I don't want is to waste my money on something I essentially
already have. I am only willing to purchase another digital camera when
my current one either can no longer be used or someone makes a
waterproof, digital camera with a good 10x zoom.

My original post was clearly and solely asking if a waterproof, digital
camera with a 10x zoom existed.


and we're wasting our time trying to help you.

Yes, that is quite clear since in order to help me you would have to be
aware of the product I am seeking. Since you are not (because it does
not exist yet), there hasn't been any point to your posts.

[Q] Waterproof Digital Cameras
 

Eric wrote:

Brian Nystrom wrote:


So you have a choice; you can have a 10X zoom in semi-bulky,
semi-expensive, not waterproof package, or you can have a lower zoom in
a small, inexpensive waterproof package. Or you can wait for your "Holy
Grail".


I have already stated I will wait for the 'essentially impossible'. I
don't consider not spending money on a product I really don't want to be
a bad thing.

If you know that what you want doesn't exist, why are you wasting our
time? Trolling will not ingratiate you with people here or anywhere else
on the web. Why don't you email camera manufacturers instead of wasting
bandwidth here?

[Q] Waterproof Digital Cameras
 

Michael Daly wrote:

We can only manipulate individual atoms on an extremely small scale.

Uh...that kind of goes without saying, doesn't it? ;-)

[Q] Waterproof Digital Cameras
 

Michael Daly wrote:

Let me put it this way. You're not wrong, you're a fool.

Actually, he's a troll. It's time we stopped feeding him. Let the
schmuck wander off and play elsewhere.

[Q] Waterproof Digital Cameras
 

hey yall if you go to Ritz camera and look for the sealife reefmaster dc-300
,3.3 megapixel camera it can take snap on sealife lenses . i dont have any
idea what magnification said lens is but it might be worth checking out .
"Michael Daly" wrote in message
...
On 3-May-2004, (Eric) wrote:

Anyone aware of a waterproof digital camera with at least a 10x zoom?

What pixel count are you looking for? For example, I know of several
(not waterproof) 2Mp cameras with 10x lenses. However, if you upgrade
to 5Mp, 4x zoom, you get roughly the same effective resolution if you
use digital zoom. You'll still end up with a housing though.

Mike

[Q] Waterproof Digital Cameras
 

here is a link to the reefmaster
website.http://www.reefmaster.com/accessories/index.html
looks like a good camera to me.
"tom" wrote in message
. ..
hey yall if you go to Ritz camera and look for the sealife reefmaster
dc-300
,3.3 megapixel camera it can take snap on sealife lenses . i dont have any
idea what magnification said lens is but it might be worth checking out .
"Michael Daly" wrote in message
...
On 3-May-2004, (Eric) wrote:

Anyone aware of a waterproof digital camera with at least a 10x zoom?

What pixel count are you looking for? For example, I know of several
(not waterproof) 2Mp cameras with 10x lenses. However, if you upgrade
to 5Mp, 4x zoom, you get roughly the same effective resolution if you
use digital zoom. You'll still end up with a housing though.

Mike

[Q] Waterproof Digital Cameras
 

Yes, I'm sure nano will completely rewrite the laws of physics.

I'm waiting for the 27 mph, easy-to-paddle kayak, myself.

;^)


On Thu, 06 May 2004 04:27:05 GMT, (Eric)
wrote:


I can't help but to think that our increasing ability to manipulate
individual atoms will offer significant improvements in all
manufacturing processes.

But, if you and others wish to believe that it is impossible to offer a
waterproof, digital camera with a good 10x zoom, I cannot stop you - I
simply won't believe you. Mind if I take special note of this post for
potential use in the future?

[Q] Waterproof Digital Cameras
 

Brian Nystrom wrote in message ...
Eric wrote:

Brian Nystrom wrote:


So you have a choice; you can have a 10X zoom in semi-bulky,
semi-expensive, not waterproof package, or you can have a lower zoom in
a small, inexpensive waterproof package. Or you can wait for your "Holy
Grail".


I have already stated I will wait for the 'essentially impossible'. I
don't consider not spending money on a product I really don't want to be
a bad thing.

If you know that what you want doesn't exist, why are you wasting our
time?

If I new it did not exist before I posted the question, I wouldn't
have asked the question. I have kept my eye out for such a camera, but
left open the possibility that I missed something.

I now know (or am sufficiently confident) it still does not exist
since the knowledgeable people here haven't been able to point me to
one.

People have merely wasted their time attempting me to convince me to
purchase a product I have time and time again clearly stated I am not
interested in. I do not know why they have done this and personally
find it rather weird, but then USENET is a strange place.

Most likely, sometime at the start of next season I will again ask the
same question in case someone has come across something that I have
not. If I happen across a camera that fits my stated parameters, I
will likely post a reference to it here.

Why don't you email camera manufacturers instead of wasting
bandwidth here?

I have done that as well for the ones I am familiar with...however, I
would not claim to be aware of every camera manufacturer.