You are right Carlos, definitely an option indeed!!!
RDX housings are all acrylic ones and should be compared in size/options with Ikelite housings (they were actually build to compete with them) it is a pity Sea&Sea might never have an MDX-D90 to compare. Its a big mistake on their side I believe.
I guess the new handle has something to do with buoyancy control/structural strenght on these new RDX housings...
I prefer smaller housings, better to travel and to operate underwater, but that's only my personal preference.
Even with your intent of designing a more neutral housing, I see lot's people diving with Aquatica with loads of buoyancy devices, personally I have never used them with my Sea&Sea or Hugyfot housings, but that again might be a matter of personal preference.
Just to update the info to our members on sizes, comparing 2 machined aluminum housings for the same camera now:
AD90 x Hugyfot D90 (no handles involved)
21.6 x 20.8 in width (Hugy is 8mm thinner)
17.1 x 16.0 in height (Hugy more than 1cm shorter)
13.3 x 12.5 in depth (Hugy is 8mm thinner)
Your AD300 seems a lot more in tune with the compactness I like.
But the numbers from the AD90 are not what I would expect from a machined housing, with such tech invloved I think we can reduce the thickness of the housing, reduce the air bubble and maintain buoyancy control, that is heavily affected by the port system anyway... Hugyfot seems to have achieved that. Anyway I haven't seen any complains about the MDXs or Hugys being too negative. I use an MDX-D300 with the OLD aluminum arms and the smallest domes/ports, and I don't feel the system to be heavy, but again I like it a little negative, specially for macro work.
The best thing about Aquatica AD90 is being there, and the availability of sellers and service. That also counts when you choose.
I have never used the new AD Aquatica series, but visually I guess they could have a better finish if machined out of an aluminum block They look A LOT like my old NX80, thus my misconception.
But from my experience, knowing at least 3 people with the new Aquatica D300 housings, the preciseness level of the commands (and the rate of turns need to action them) is a good bit better on Sea&Sea housings that said from Aquatica users. What most of them (and even some Sea&Sea users!!!) also say is that they feel Aquatica housings are stronger, but since we don't have crash-tests for housings that's difficult to quantify.
I know that because where I come from in Brazil, on our National Competitions we see housings from different makers (but for the same camera) side by side and we talk/experiment a lot all the difference.
It is good to have direct contact with the industry in this list, it shows a big service focus from Aquatica, but I would not expect any different answer from you as well. Anyway, thanks for pointing out the flaw in my observation.
I have no data from people using Subal, Nexus or other housings. It would be nice to hear their comments.
Anyway, thanks for dropping by... I REALLY wish someone from Sea&Sea Japan would do the same!
and it's rated to 90m...
