Do we need another UW Housing manufacturer?

I have been pondering the idea of entering the business of manufacturing and marketing UW housings for SLR cameras for some time. I have always been astounded by the depth of information available on this board so I thought this would be a good group to try to get several types of information from. First to establish my bonafides I am currently a manufacture and a machine shop owner. I am partners with my brothers in our business endeavors and I would need to get them on board if we were going to proceed with this project.

I am indeed a dreamer. But some of my dreams have assumed substance in the past. Here are links to websites describing some of our current products.

www.jbrake.com

www.fluidampr.com

www.VibratechTVD.com

www.buffaloturbine.com

www.HBPLLC.com

www.CattcoUSA.com

I would like to hear the opinions of those who would care to share them on whether the industry needs another UW Housing manufacturer? Does any one know how many Housings are sold by any of the top manufactures for a popular SLR camera? What are the most important features a Housing should include?

The existing housing manufacturers are fairly secretive about the numbers they sell. I would guess that most housing manufacturers make between 50-250 housings for a popular model of DSLR. With perhaps the largest producing company(ies) making up to 1000.

If you are considering entering the market make a housing with a large throat - so that you can offer adaptors to take other manufacturers ports etc. Perhaps the biggest obstacle to a new housing manufacturer would be that folks already have investiment with particular brands.

When this subject comes up on liveaboards most UW photographers tend to agree that the main gap in the market is providing quality and a much more aggressive price. Most housing manufacter is done by small companies and is skill and labour intensive - which is why most housings costs more than the cameras! Part of the reason for the price is that most of the housing manufacturers are in countries with high manufacturing costs (Europe, N. America, Japan). It seems obvious to most underwater photographers than a housing machined and built in China could be marketed significantly cheaper than we currentl pay. But then again what do underwater photographers know about manufacturing. This one knows bugger all!

Alex

Quite a number of years ago I looked into the idea of manufacturing housings. I discussed a variety of ideas with several machine shops and showed them several existing housings including one or two from manufacturers who no longer exist. The feedback that I got was that some existing manufacturers have one big advantage over newly starting out manufacturers - the experience of building several models and having learnt by that experience. This is something which I have since seen in several designs which feature design 'faults' or 'poorer features' than offering from more 'mature' manufacturers who have learnt that its best not to use certain ideas which whilst perfectly good in theory, are not so viable in practice. In the end I decided that the disparate knowledge requirements required to build housings of a sufficient calibre to be properly marketable were beyond those that I was prepared to pursue and (thankfully) I gave up the idea.

Today the market for housings has almost certainly grown BUT so has the turnover in designs!

Depending on what you are already designing and building and existing profitabilities, I'd look very long and hard at the idea of producing a housing in the current market. In the UK there appears to have been a shift towards design in the UK, but far eastern build in many sectors, as this makes best economic sense (as it probably does in other countries). I would suggest that to enter an already increasingly competitive as well as relatively small market requires very careful consideration and my first thought would now be to look at it in terms of commercial reality before anything else. If you have really good, innovative ideas as to how to build a very high quality housing which can be sold at a modest price (as Alex's post comments) and contains all the features needed by experienced underwater photographers, then you are on to a winner. If not then I'd be very hard headed about doing the sums before going any further.

If I could dream a housing it would...

1. be around $1500 including the port

2. the ports would be versatile covering as many lenses as possible. (New port for every new lens becomes expensive and travel prohibitive)

3. have some kind of upgrade path for a new camera...ie Manufacturer gives a handsome credit toward the purchase of a housing for the newer camera.

4. All parts for the housing could be purchased.

5. Solid customer support.

6. A service department to handle refurbusing/rebuilding

7. whistles and bells on the housing as options

Do you really want a challenge...make a full-frame DSLR camera that doesn't need a housing. It would sell like hot coffee.

One area you might consider, though I have now idea whether it can be done cost-effectively, is making accessories, and custom pieces for UW housings. For instance there are several strobe arm manufacturers out there who provide machined, anodized components for an astounding variety of strobes and housings - allowing one to add all sorts of components. Yet, spend much time around UW photographers and you'll see all kinds of mini-customization to their gear - handles, spotting lights, wet connections, different grips and so on. Perhaps by talking with various folks you could come up with a line of problem solving pieces. Once you have experience with the problems of producing components that can stand up to salt water you can look at the housing business.

One idea for an item that I might be popular - custom adapter rings to allow one set of ports to work on a different housing (e.g. I have Aquatica ports for the old Aquatica 8008 housing that don't work with any new Aquaticas - although I haven't tried recently I was unable to find any way to use these on any newer housings from any company - anybody know if that's possible today )

Just a thought for the end of the day.

Rinjani

i think you need to offer something that the others dont if you want to compete

examples

-price point below 1000 including port

-comes with extentions that make 1 port compatible with many

-bulit in 4-5inch lcd with battery pack for all these new slrs with live view

-make one housing compatible with multiple similar cameras(20d/30d...ect)

-as mentioned before port adaptors

-send product for review to sites like this for free advertising

-improve sealing in a way that can be advertised

-smaller and lighter housings

you dont have to have it all....just something new

Do you really want a challenge...make a full-frame DSLR camera that doesn't need a housing. It would sell like hot coffee.

Now if I could just have somethign that would use my 15mm Nikonos lens

Given the fast turn over of digital camera bodies, I would look at machining housings out of solid as opposed to casting. Consider 2 or 3 generic bodies and then digitize individual cameras for internal cavity and control configurations. Base it on a "same as, but ..." design. I would not machine a unique port attachment into the housing. Bore a standard opening and sell adapter rings to enable the buyer to attach their existing or other manufactures ports to your housing. Also, many housings are advertised as to their compact designs. While this is good, it also contributed to a some times very negative set up underwater. Design some type of varied bolt on secondary floats to be able to neutralize under water boyancy.

Have a look at the Jonah housings - they tried to do much the same thing a few years ago - modular machined from solid body, compact size, and affordable price. They made their own ports however.

I expected them to be a big hit, as they entered the market at the perfect time - however for whatever reasons - they were not.

Cheers

James

Have a look at the Jonah housings - they tried to do much the same thing a few years ago - modular machined from solid body, compact size, and affordable price. They made their own ports however.

 

I expected them to be a big hit, as they entered the market at the perfect time - however for whatever reasons - they were not.

 

Cheers

James

Poor quality control and reliabilty were major issues for them.

Underwater photographers seem to be very ready to accept a cheaper price but not so willing to accept the cheaper product ( and service and support ) that comes with it.

I wish you luck entering this market. There is definitely room for more competition, but the big problem is the rapid lifecycle of cameras, the large number of systems you need to support, combined with the small market. This means that any given design will only last a couple of years before the next great camera comes along and makes the design obsolete. This implies that the total manufacturing run of any given housing will be small making it hard to achieve economies of scale needed to drive the price down. If you want to distinguish yourself, you need a new approach. The thing that kills existing housings is that when a new camera comes out, the manufacturers feel free to change the form factor and button placement.

I think that to succeed, you need one of several approaches. One is to design a traditional style housing and drive the parts cost down enough that you can compete on price. Another is to offer some new feature that no-one else offers. The other way is to "future proof" your design so that you can quickly adapt to new cameras without a huge expense

I think that there is an opportunity right now by breaking with the traditional design and eschewing the mechanical actuator and going to electronic controls as is common in video housings. One benefit to the user is a more ergonomic design, but the benefit to the housing designer is that you are not so closely tied to the whims of the camera manufacturer as to button placement. This is part of the future proofing I was referring to.

And whatever you do, make sure that you deal with some of the obvious design flaws of many current housings. In my experience this includes:

* A simple way to balance the housing. I would include some sort of sliding counterweight system as is common in video housings

* A simple port lock that prevents "accidental" floods

* Robust o-ring system that doesn't flood in the rinse tank. This means don't rely on suitcase clamps which "seal better" at depth. The seal should be just as robust in the rinse tank as at 100ft. This is simple to achieve with the traditional face seal described in the machinist's handbook. A side benefit is that it would be less likely to capture dirt on shore dives, and would allow the use of compressed air to clean the salt water out of hidden spaces.

* Strobe connectors that don't corrode.

Lastly, and most importantly, LISTEN to your customers. There are a lot of smart people on this board with thousands of man years of experience. You and your staff, will have at most a few tens of man years. If your customers tell you something is a problem, there is a problem. I know that I have fed back a number of simple, inexpensive, design improvements to my housing vendor and all of them have been ignored

It seems obvious to most underwater photographers than a housing machined and built in China could be marketed significantly cheaper than we currently pay.

let me talk to my mainland china contacts... you guys don't mind some lead paint on your housings, right?

Silliness aside, I always thought of camera housing manufacturing having high initial capital costs (milling machines, pressure testers, etc) and high ongoing R&D costs. Wonder how much the labor part plays into it. But as someone mentioned, the maddening pace that the leaders Canon and Nikon come out with new camera bodies is probably the biggest challenge as it's always a crapshoot on whether a new model will have the same dimensions/ controls.

I second the recommendations to provide adapters to people so they could use existing ports/ dome. I believe some of the lesser known, nitch housing manufacturers are doing this to a degree. This could avoid a lot of R&D as people could be using known extensions/ dome/ port/ lens combinations. Focus/ zoom rings could be universal (except for those fat lenses in thin ports...).

For once I feel partially qualified when I post up here. By day I am an Design engineer in a small company with a background in both Electronic and Mechanical. I have also 'sold' a couple of designs to a UK dive company and get a (small) royalty cheque every now and again.

If you look through the posts here there is a common thread, price. Most users seem to be fairly happy with their brand selection, yea the occasional gripe on weight, balance or ergonomics but in general - happyish.

Once the purchase decision is made there seems quite a bit of loyalty built up, partially due to significant investment in accessories such as ports and domes etc, ( sounds like my last milling machine where the tooling cost more than the mill ).

That added to the low volumes and high product turnover will make this a tough market to break into without cutting your margins bare on price.

However - there are a couple of areas of the market that may be attractive - Rinjani is well on the right track, the cost of ancillary items in this game is high. There are also gaps where some vendors are not offering say dome ports on their housing. Putting a few of these options together would also be a lead into the market place.

Paul C

I would like to thank each of the responders for posting their ideas. Words fail me as I attempt to express my humble gratitude for the quality and completeness of the ideas posted herein in response to my request for information.

Alex Mustards estimates of the size of the market are of particular interest. I doubt that he is off by much even given the great uncertainties involved in making any such guess. Several posters discreetly point out the size of the undertaking and the value of the intellectual property of the existing manufactures.

The amount of engineering, drafting, programming, machining, preparation, assembly and quality control to jump into this market as a housing manufacture are not to be taken lightly.

C4jesus mentions the possibility of building a camera which dose not require a housing. While this is far beyond my capabilities, clearly it is not beyond the capabilities of Nikon or even cannon or Olympus, this must be a nightmare of every housing manufacture. If Nikon were to introduce new state of the art digital camera in the Nikonos V this would have to have a huge negative impact on all of the housing makers.

If anyone has further ideas or thoughts to add please feel free to add them.

C4jesus mentions the possibility of building a camera which dose not require a housing. While this is far beyond my capabilities, clearly it is not beyond the capabilities of Nikon or even cannon or Olympus, this must be a nightmare of every housing manufacture. If Nikon were to introduce new state of the art digital camera in the Nikonos V this would have to have a huge negative impact on all of the housing makers.

The last time it happened was with the Nikonos RS. For some it was the best ever underwater camera. Others stuck with their housings since the RS's Autofocus was already out of date by the time it was lauched. And that was in the days of film. These days the pace of camera development is so fierce that an amphibious SLR would be outdated even faster.

Alex

p.s. For amusement, I have attached a picture of an RS lens on my D2X. They mount OK and I took a photo, but the AF and aperture don't work which renders the setup pretty useless. The reason I did this was that I am curious about mounting a UW-Nikkor 13mm AF from the RS on a D3X (a camera that does not yet exist) - although that plan won't work.

Not to put a damper on the idea, but it would be an uphill battle. Where would you start? Which camera will be the one that gets prototyped? Will you cast the pieces? How much for the initial tooling/molds? How many will you mold at a time? How much time will it take for initial CNC programming for milling and drilling?

How about parts molding? (handles, levers, etc.)

Existing manufacturers have been down the road before and have a tremendous advantage. They've even survived the initial mistakes of the digital transition. They know the right tradeoffs between tooling costs vs. production costs. Subal, Aquatica, et. al. never have to design a new handle. They know if an new 8up handle mold will be worth the per unit cost savings vs. a 4up mold.

If the product life cycle were longer, the risks would be far lower. The possibility that you could be better at it than the current players would be higher.

What you need to do is take baby steps into the market by finding a niche. Make machined aluminum port adapters. Then sub out the manufacture of glass port material. Machine and assemble the ports. Sell quality ports that work with your port adapters so anyone could buy your ports and they could be used with any housing brand.

Alternately, you could target cameras not currently supported by most housing manufacturers.

Alternately, you could approach an existing manufacturer and offer to become their US manufacturing operation. This eliminates the front end investment.

Find a video housing manufacturer and start a joint venture with them to develop still camera housings. They understand all the nuances of the manufacturing process.

Just some quick thoughts.

Note: in a previous life I was an executive of a low to mid volume manufacturer of very expensive metal clad circuit which involved sophisticated CNC milling and drilling machines. I could tell you what it was for, but then I'd have to kill you

How about instead of building housings, specialize in ports. Be the Sigma and Tamron analog in the underwater housing market. I think there's a sizable demand for ports not offered by the all the housing makers. I would buy a smaller dome and smaller macro port for my Aquatica housing if such were available.

You can do what the lens makers do and sell your ports in all the popular housings or make adapters for the other housing to fit your mount.

How about instead of building housings, specialize in ports. Be the Sigma and Tamron analog in the underwater housing market. I think there's a sizable demand for ports not offered by the all the housing makers. I would buy a smaller dome and smaller macro port for my Aquatica housing if such were available.

 

You can do what the lens makers do and sell your ports in all the popular housings or make adapters for the other housing to fit your mount.

Some good points. Take a look at what the Japanese company Athena does. They make some great optical glass domes and ports for a number of housing. Their glass domes are now rebadged by S&S and I understand other housing manufacturers outsource their services.

Another good example of a small, focused housing company is Seatool. While I don't use any of his products (I have seen a few of them though) I think Kenji Ohmura has done excellent job filling in a niche for compact video and DSLR housing. He's been pretty selective on which DSLR's he's covered (Canon XTi and Nikon D200 - smart choices IMHO).

http://www.fisheye-jp.com/english/index.html

http://www.seatoolusa.com/

Not to side track your housing venture-as I have 3 or 4 brands in the closet. But what I think your bigger market and need is a better strobe. We all use them at least 2 -3 strobes per diver -I think i have at least 10-15 around. This is an area that has lots of sales numbers as well as huge room for improvements, They could be cordless(wireless) as well as charge without cords(like razors)also be small and powerful and be more field serviceable. Oceanics where king back in the days I started-(80s) then as time went by some small companies came and went , Stobes got huge and heavy- now smaller and lighter is the trend. The market is larger for strobes I feel and so is the improvements needed. Just my 2 cents. Mark

what i would really like in terms of u/w housings: cheap

how about filling that niche that is sorely missing in the housing industry? if i were to go into this industry, i would make cheap housings, cheap enough for a typical dive shop to have 2 or 3 available for rental. everyone's got a DSLR now, but the housings are so expensive.

coming from Singapore where the typical exec earns about US2k, shelling out 1.4k for an ikelite takes a lot of diamond rings for the wifey. it'll be great if there are low cost housings available for sale, or for dive shops to rent out.

so how to be cheap?

perhaps you can take the approach of ikelite and use polycarbonate instead of aluminium. make a big plastic box generic enough to fit 3 or 4 different camera models, and make them fit by having the controls in the right place. for domes and ports, perhaps you can use existing ones or have adaptors that allow people to use whatever they have.

the rationale is that a dive shop can have a housing for 2-3 camera models, and maybe just 1 set of ports for rental.

if it's cheap enough, i don't care if its ugly! don't need a big black S&S chick magnet when you don't have money left for the dates!

sidenote: maybe its time south-east asia had its own housing manufacturer... who wants to invest? heh