Domeport turning accidentally

Steve,

sorry to hear about your 5D. I hope your insurance turns out to be up to scratch.

My ikelite port hasnt been tested in such a way that it gave. I did slip one time on a rock, while walking to the water. The housing and maybe the port (a very big MD sized housing) took quite a hit. The camera tray (that is a slide in in these older housings) was loose, (as was the attached camera). After a dive with toilet paper instead of the camera it turned out alright.

Hey Steve,

I know Will Chen and his Ikelite floods, and if we're counting port leak / flood problems in this one thread 3 people of the "other" systems (including you) are sharing their experiences with supposedly "better" port sealing systems. You are correct no one is going to release repair data, flood problems etc. which is why these forums exist. But as with any forum out there on the internet, individual experiences and opinions are just that. Mine included!

If you read my posts, I said I do not intend to be sneering about design, personal product choices, etc. Same to Craig, my own relevance to the buoyancy arm issue is that if a housing mfr. knows what camera will be used in a housing, how much space is inside and wall thickness, blah, blah they should certainly be able to get their housings closer to barely negative. Not like a brick where then the end user (that would be you guys need to add more things to their rigs so you can go take pictures comfortably....That's all I meant in comparing feature sets of systems. This is an extremely old issue for anyone who had fellow shooters ownthe Nikonos RS systems. They were (are) bricks.....

I think I have posted over the years many helpful ideas to solve shooter's problems no matter what system they are using.

Am I biased to using Ikelite successfully for many, many years. Absolutely......Just like the Nexus, Subal, Seacam, Sea and Sea and everyone else here....

So use or don't use duct tape. It's your choice

As I've said, no harm intended.....

dhaas

P.S. - James, you're not supposed to feed the Lemon sharks. Anything! Including housings

For some reason the UW photography market just seems complacent about obvious failure points. My personal bias is that since that all of the systems seal and work if you treat them with kid gloves, the vendors have culpable deniability. They can always point to user failure as the cause of a flood. In my case, it was certainly my fault for not double and triple checking that the port hadn't inadvertently rotated out of position. However that doesn't mean that the design isn't flawed.

I completely agree. Port engineering isn't good simply because it can be made to work when handled properly, it's good when it works when handled in the expected manner. Engineers take expected usage into account but, sadly, our port systems (and sync cords) aren't really engineered. If this quality of work were in a more traditional industry, the engineers involved would be fired!

Sorry, Dave, you slipped in while I was posting.

I agree with you that housing manufacturers should take bouyancy into account. Some do while others consider travel size because that's what their costumers frequently (and foolishly) want. Sadly, it's more complicated than that because strobe and arm manufacturers are culpable too. It's amazing that such a small, light strobe as an Inon could be heavy in the water yet it is.

Since I glowed on the superiority of Nexus ports earlier, I will also say that they are very heavy. Nexus is one that targets the smallest possible size. That, combined with their heavy aluminum construction and heavy macro lenses, makes their rigs a beast sometimes. Bouyancy arms and port floats are helpful there.

There's a lot to be said for plastic ports as it controls cost and saves weight. I just wish that manufacturers would strive to make their port interfaces idiotproof.

David,

I would also like my Ikelite 20D housing with double DS-50 strobes (see signature) a little lighter under water.....

it is alright to use, but it lacks the neutral buoyancy of that Ikelite MD housing in the earlier post (coupled with an Ai flash). On the other hand, that needed the added weight in the handles

Sorry for the 5D

I have an Ikelite housing for my D200 and yet had no trouble with my domeport (it is the 6" so not much problems can happen with this - except if you accidently clip in the Oring... I have seen the gear of a friend half full with seawater... The D70 and the 105 (it was a macro port) went in the waste basket...)

But I had the following affair just a few weeks ago: we finished a dive at shaab abu dabbab, and were about to start the boatride back th shagra. We were putting the gear at rest, putting on the neoprene port covers and securing the tanks, when a friend of mine handed me his port cover (Ikelite houseing with the 8" big dome) and I wanted to put in on in a way I have been fitting mine for ages, adjust the bottom part of the neoprene to the portshade and fitting it on with a twist... Which turned out to be quite a problem, as the 8" dome comes off VERY easily with just a little twist... My friend just bought his gear a month ago and this was his first trip: you can image the poor soul's facial expression when he saw what happened! Anyway, he screwed on the port again, looking quite white, but we convinced him that nothing will happen, the port is secure... When we were just about to forget the incident, the skipper made a little mistake (the sea was quite rough that time) and in a second a wave swept through the zodiac and filled it halfway with water...

So cutting it short, my friend had quite a run to the diveshade when we reached the shore to check for any drops inside the house. Luckily he found nothing. But I learned for life that 8" ports come off quite easily and after reading this topic I shall recommend duct tape ))

Zook,

The shortest extension, necessary with Nikon 10.5mm or other super wide and short lenses requires closing the low profile port locks, then attaching the port with well greased o-ring and turning until it hits a stop. I mark my port from behind fully turned on at 12 o'clock. I also place a small piece of duct tape between the housing body and port so I can see if it has turned any.

I am not a big fan of stretching tight fitting port covers on in the water. In the situation you describe, I would put the cover on and secure the systems before taking off on any hard boat ride. Then steady it if possible.....

I've put my housing systems, complete with strobes and various ports on top of fins, life preservers, etc. in small bouncing boats.

The key is to LOOK at the housing and confirm everything is secure......Especially before dunking in a rinse tank once back to shore....

Good shooting

dhaas

Too all on this volatile subject.........

Glad everyone got to express an opinon! No flood is fun.....

Hope some good ideas were shared.......

Ah, I feel the love coming back

dhaas

I am not a big fan of stretching tight fitting port covers on in the water. In the situation you describe, I would put the cover on and secure the systems before taking off on any hard boat ride.

Absolutly true, probably I was not too clear, I was helping putting on the cover _on the boat, after the dive_ (doing this manouver in water would have led to serious problems )

zook

3)           SD FIXATION UNIT

 

              This new designed accessory can be mounted between the tripod screw of the housing and the middle fixation screw at the SD.

 

              With a few variable fixation holes it is possible to use different extensions. This system is easy to install and is an absolute secure solution to fix the SD port combination.

 

[/i]

 

So, there you go. We call it the SD Stabilizer and it is in transit from Austria at the moment. I'll post some pix when they arrive.             

Stephen, has this gizmo arrived from Austria yet? - I'm keen to see some pics

Steve

After I threw away one camera and my first 12-24mm zoom I took Frogfish's advice and use a large lump of gaffer tape (Duck tape). It doesn't stop it but it does give a clue to tell me if it has been turned.

I wish I'd read this before my trip to the Galapagos- lost my D200 and 12-24 on Day 4 after I caused my Aquatica dome to eject in 5 fsw.

NOTE TO SELF- the neoprene dome cover is useless if you flood the camera. It can wait...

I will experiment with an aluminum 'L' bracket attached to the housing bottom and velcroed to the back of the dome, and just go with duct tape or silicone self-sealing tape (thanks, loftus) on the macro port. I will also paint 'index' marks pointing 'up' on all ports / extensions.

Big T

I wish I'd read this before my trip to the Galapagos- lost my D200 and 12-24 on Day 4 after I caused my Aquatica dome to eject in 5 fsw.

Big T, I am so sorry that you too have been burned by Aquatica's poor port design. I definitely feel your pain. It is too late for us, but it begs the question if Aquatica will EVER fix the problem.

I should also point out that the neoprene port cover is great for preventing bumps, but I would definitely put it on after getting back on the boat. There are two problems with using it in the water. The first is that you can no longer tell if you have "accidentally" rotated the damn port. The second is that it doesn't have a drawstring, so if there is the slightest bit of current it will slip off and float away. This happened to me the very first time I used my dome port. Fortunately I was able to chase it down and grab it before it disappeared into the sunset. I suggested to Aquatica that they should add a drawstring to help secure it, like their competitors do. Like all of the other suggestions I have relayed to them, it too was blown off.

I also thought I would relay the trials and tribulations with regard to my insurance claim to replace my 5D. My policy (personal property rider on my home owner's insurance) does not cover replacement cost, like I thought. It covers "actual" value, which is defined as the replacement cost minus depreciation. I asked them what sort of depreciation schedule they use, and apparently, it is computed on a item-by-item basis. My insurance adjuster could not tell me how they decide what depreciation schedule to use. They simply consult their master "CES" database, which acts as some sort of Oracle. I had her look up a number of bits of camera gear and found that it amounts to around 8% per year.

This leads to an interesting point. When I set up my policy I listed the actual purchase price of each item, but they will never pay out this amount, so I am overpaying somewhat. For example, I bought my 5D for something like $3000, last year. This year a new one costs around $2600, so the insurance will only pay approximately $2400 (which is the depreciated value of the replacement cost). When I replaced the camera I am on the hook for the difference (which is the depreciation). They do pay the tax as well as the base cost. They also pay 100% of the repair cost of any part that is repairable.

Therefore, it makes no sense to pay for a policy that lists a "value" of $3000. They will never pay that much. By listing the original purchase price, you end up overpaying on your policy. Each year, the overpayment gets worse. As I mentioned earlier, I also lose my "haven't made a claim in over 5 years" discount which adds up to around $750. Overall, I am glad that I had insurance, but there were way more gotchas than I expected.

I am also waiting to find out about the hidden text in my insurance policy. I had to make a claim recently with Niksecure.

My Ikelite D200 with 105VR flooded. During the 2nd dive of an 8 day trip . At 25 meter, 20 minutes into the dive, I notice vapour on the inside of the housing. Within a minute I made arrangements with my buddy. Me aborting the dive, he continuing with another couple. By that time there was about a spoonful of water inside the housing; when I surfaced it was 80% full. Needless to say the camera and lens were destroyed.

To add to the misery, for the first time ever (400+ photo dives) I traveled without my backup body...

Oscar