I normally dive on a rebreather, and now that I am getting back into underwater photography I'm looking for a monitor that has a really long battery life to add to the Nauticam housing that I recently picked up secondhand so as the monitor will last as long as the rebreather. What are the options for monitors that last longer than 2 hours? And what else do I need to know about monitors when selecting one? Are there any articles or dummies guides to selecting a monitor?

Have you checked out this thread?
https://waterpixels.net/forums/topic/2417-list-of-underwater-monitors/

I currently use the Weefine WED-5 Pro on an A7SIII - i don't dive on a reb but regularly do two hour+ shallow dives for macro videography.
Depending on the brightness settings and how you use it (on all the time or not), I can confirm the WED-5 Pro lasts more than two hours. It's very bright and I usually have it on 30% to 50% display max here in sunny Okinawa.

The first day testing it with the camera I did 2x two hour dives, leaving the monitor on, display at 30%.
Monitor battery ran out 40 minutes into the second dive, so a runtime of 160 minutes at 30% .
Monitor output was 1080p, on almost all the time, in 26°C water. This is pretty good for a single 21700 battery.
Turning it off, when travelling for instance, would extend battery life further.

hope this helps!
cheers

Edited July 23Jul 23 by bghazzal

2 hours ago, bghazzal said:

Have you checked out this thread?
https://waterpixels.net/forums/topic/2417-list-of-underwater-monitors/

I currently use the Weefine WED-5 Pro on an A7SIII - i don't dive on a reb but regularly do two hour+ shallow dives for macro videography.
Depending on the brightness settings and how you use it (on all the time or not), I can confirm the WED-5 Pro lasts more than two hours. It's very bright and I usually have it on 30% to 50% display max here in sunny Okinawa.

The first day testing it with the camera I did 2x two hour dives, leaving the monitor on, display at 30%.
Monitor battery ran out 40 minutes into the second dive, so a runtime of 160 minutes at 30% .
Monitor was outputting 1080p, on almost all the time, in 26°C water. This is pretty good for a single 21700 battery.
Turning it off, when travelling for instance, would extend battery life further.

hope this helps!
cheers

Many thanks - I will check that thread out! The Weefine sounds like it will work fine!

On 7/22/2026 at 12:51 PM, CCRphoto said:

I normally dive on a rebreather, and now that I am getting back into underwater photography I'm looking for a monitor that has a really long battery life to add to the Nauticam housing that I recently picked up secondhand so as the monitor will last as long as the rebreather. What are the options for monitors that last longer than 2 hours? And what else do I need to know about monitors when selecting one? Are there any articles or dummies guides to selecting a monitor?

For this use case I would probably skip on Weefine and go for Shinobi in Nauticam housing with NPF-950 battery. I will last whole day with time to spare. So although I was recommending Weefine in the other thread now with this use case on hand I would advise against and go with Shinobi. You may even watch movies on extended deco stops 🤣

Another plus for Shinobi is its neutral buoyancy.

58 minutes ago, RomiK said:

For this use case I would probably skip on Weefine and go for Shinobi in Nauticam housing with NPF-950 battery. I will last whole day with time to spare. So although I was recommending Weefine in the other thread now with this use case on hand I would advise against and go with Shinobi. You may even watch movies on extended deco stops 🤣

Another plus for Shinobi is its neutral buoyancy.

Ability to watch movies would be a plus when doing my archaeological dives - over 2 hours of deco!

21 hours ago, CCRphoto said:

Ability to watch movies would be a plus when doing my archaeological dives - over 2 hours of deco!

Hehe good one!😅

When considering options some may advise "get Ninja, you can record and it is future proof". But no. Ninja has much greater energy consumption so it won't last nearly that long and besides with newer cameras external recording is a thing of the past.Although I did get weefine which works good for my main use case which is 4x a day 1 hour liveaboards I still keep my shinobi in case there is going to be R5C successor and housing with extended battery for it. Whole day diving without the need to open the case is really appealing thought :-)

3 hours ago, RomiK said:

Hehe good one!😅

When considering options some may advise "get Ninja, you can record and it is future proof". But no. Ninja has much greater energy consumption so it won't last nearly that long and besides with newer cameras external recording is a thing of the past.Although I did get weefine which works good for my main use case which is 4x a day 1 hour liveaboards I still keep my shinobi in case there is going to be R5C successor and housing with extended battery for it. Whole day diving without the need to open the case is really appealing thought :-)

Yes - doing over 2 hours deco each day - day after day... sucks...

One other question about monitors - what are the disadvantages of using a monitor vs a viewfinder underwater? Obviously battery life is one, but are there any practical differences between using a monitor vs a viewfinder for composition, going through menus etc.?

I often wonder about reflections in shallower water? Is that an issue?

58 minutes ago, CCRphoto said:

One other question about monitors - what are the disadvantages of using a monitor vs a viewfinder underwater? Obviously battery life is one, but are there any practical differences between using a monitor vs a viewfinder for composition, going through menus etc.?

Good question and It is not either / or. The use case is overlapping and also differs photo vs video.

For video the viewfinder is just a no - stability, scene control, surrounding awareness...

For photography from my standpoint monitor allows for faster framing on the fly and from difficult angles. See the picture below. Taken when swimming alongside the turtle with WWL-1B so 130deg FOV. Tried to get the sunball in the frame. Now imagine doing this with viewfinder - can't swim sideways really and most likely would end up in corrals.

Power draw is actually greater for viewfinder than camera monitor so it's another plus. Plus on some camera you can output over HDMI and have built in monitor disabled which further saves camera battery.

The only use case I find viewfinder better is a super macro as framing through viewfinder after creature is found is more precise and faster especially if subject is not stationary. Also manual focusing there.

33 minutes ago, TimG said:

I often wonder about reflections in shallower water? Is that an issue?

with 3000 nits on wed5-pro not a slightest

1 hour ago, TimG said:

I often wonder about reflections in shallower water? Is that an issue?

In the last iterations, no. All new monitors are 1000+ NITS and they have sunshades.

2 hours ago, RomiK said:

Good question and It is not either / or. The use case is overlapping and also differs photo vs video.

For video the viewfinder is just a no - stability, scene control, surrounding awareness...

For photography from my standpoint monitor allows for faster framing on the fly and from difficult angles. See the picture below. Taken when swimming alongside the turtle with WWL-1B so 130deg FOV. Tried to get the sunball in the frame. Now imagine doing this with viewfinder - can't swim sideways really and most likely would end up in corrals.

Power draw is actually greater for viewfinder than camera monitor so it's another plus. Plus on some camera you can output over HDMI and have built in monitor disabled which further saves camera battery.

The only use case I find viewfinder better is a super macro as framing through viewfinder after creature is found is more precise and faster especially if subject is not stationary. Also manual focusing there.

with 3000 nits on wed5-pro not a slightest

Many thanks - that's a pretty comprehensive reply. In my case I will be sticking with stills, but my neck issues mean that trying to get eye to viewfinder isn't as easy as it should be so a monitor will be my workaround - it doesn't sound like it will overly constrain me then.

A little but off-topic, but here is an interesting review from an UW phorographer, who was using a monitor for 5 months: https://theunderwaterclub.com/blog/underwater-stills-photography-with-an-external-monitor-pros-cons-and-verdict/?utm_source=scubaboard.com&utm_medium=community&utm_campaign=scubaboard-2026-07-external-monitor

1 hour ago, Architeuthis said:

A little but off-topic, but here is an interesting review from an UW phorographer, who was using a monitor for 5 months: https://theunderwaterclub.com/blog/underwater-stills-photography-with-an-external-monitor-pros-cons-and-verdict/?utm_source=scubaboard.com&utm_medium=community&utm_campaign=scubaboard-2026-07-external-monitor

Many thanks - will take a look!

Reading the article that @Architeuthis provided the link to - I think that a monitor will work for me - but I need a bit more info on this part from the article - "Back in the DSLR days, monitors were really practical only for videographers, because you would have to rely on the camera’s “live view” autofocus, which was painfully slow and unreliable. As a stills photographer, you needed to frame your images through the optical viewfinder, for the camera’s autofocus to perform at its best. "

How bad is it with a DSLR such as a Canon 7D? Having only ever used 35mm film cameras underwater, and the only digital camera I've used is on a mobile phone, so I've got no idea how bad what he is talking about actually is - or how big a problem it really is?

35 minutes ago, CCRphoto said:

Reading the article that @Architeuthis provided the link to - I think that a monitor will work for me - but I need a bit more info on this part from the article - "Back in the DSLR days, monitors were really practical only for videographers, because you would have to rely on the camera’s “live view” autofocus, which was painfully slow and unreliable. As a stills photographer, you needed to frame your images through the optical viewfinder, for the camera’s autofocus to perform at its best. "

How bad is it with a DSLR such as a Canon 7D? Having only ever used 35mm film cameras underwater, and the only digital camera I've used is on a mobile phone, so I've got no idea how bad what he is talking about actually is - or how big a problem it really is?

I think it means that you can use the monitor only when the DSLR is in "live view" mode, when the mirror is panned upwards and the sensor delivers the "live view", e.g. on the back LCD (or an external monitor). Not when you view through the lens via the mirror (what is the "normal" mode of operation of a DSLR).

All functions, especially AF, work only as good as they are in the "live view" mode (you can test easily by yourself with your Canon 7D, how happy you are with the "live view" mode; just use the back LCD, that would be mirrored by an external monitor, on some dives for framing and producing photos)...

It is also important to note that AF of the "new" mirrorless cameras is regarded on par with the top DSLR models (e.g. Nikon D850) only since Sony A7R5, Canon R5 and Nikon Z8 and newer models. Before these models, AF was regarded to be inferior compared to the top DSLRs (I have no idea where the 7D stands in this comparison)...

Edited July 30Jul 30 by Architeuthis

1 hour ago, Architeuthis said:

I think it means that you can use the monitor only when the DSLR is in "live view" mode, when the mirror is panned upwards and the sensor delivers the "live view", e.g. on the back LCD (or an external monitor). Not when you view through the lens via the mirror (what is the "normal" mode of operation of a DSLR).

All functions, especially AF, work only as good as they are in the "live view" mode (you can test easily by yourself with your Canon 7D, how happy you are with the "live view" mode; just use the back LCD, that would be mirrored by an external monitor, on some dives for framing and producing photos)...

It is also important to note that AF of the "new" mirrorless cameras is regarded on par with the top DSLR models (e.g. Nikon D850) only since Sony A7R5, Canon R5 and Nikon Z8 and newer models. Before these models, AF was regarded to be inferior compared to the top DSLRs (I have no idea where the 7D stands in this comparison)...

In live view mode the AF in DSLR world outright sucked as it wasn't using PDAF but contrast detection. Up until Sony came with hybrid translucent mirror and we know where it end up. With mirror up there was nothing reaching PDAF sensors. Do not remember which models if any from DSLR world introduced PDAF on the chip...