last summer the side door of my Olympus TG6 broke and unfortunately the local Olympus repair is quite bad (don't even respond to phones). I am in a dilemma on what to do next:
Get a new or used TG6 from ebay and use what I am using the last couple of years (~400€, but not easy to find a used camera in good shape)
Right now I am leaning towards 1. or 2. , but I am also thinking of the RX100VI larger sensor and manual controls helping me with some subjects underwater (mainly when I need shutter priority mode which the TG6 lacks). Of course as we are talking about snorkeling and no more than 5m diving size of the setup does play a role and I already feel a bit uncomfortable with the larger housing idea.
Thank you in advance
Yannis
Best thing might be to mail it, in its original box if available, to Olympus in Japan, with nice letter to the President, they may send you a new replacement.
The domed housings would certainly work, but you still only have a 25mm lens which in underwater terms is not that wide. You could consider one of the cheaper housings like the olympus housing and a wet lens which will get you something in the range of 14-18mm equivalent lens field of view. You could also do this with the RX-100, I would lean towards and RX-100V as it will work better with wet lenses. Something like an INON UWL-100 would work well with either camera.
The wet lens and Olympus housing would be more compact than the the ikelite housing with dome and probably less buoyant as well.
On the topic of another TG-6 - presumably without a housing? It is only a matter of time until it will flood. The seals are supposed to be replaced annually to keep them watertight. The doors seals can be maintained, but what seems to go is the seals under the buttons, they appear to be a membrane seal and they will eventually fail. A housing is a better long term prospect.
11 hours ago, ChrisRoss said:
The domed housings would certainly work, but you still only have a 25mm lens which in underwater terms is not that wide. You could consider one of the cheaper housings like the olympus housing and a wet lens which will get you something in the range of 14-18mm equivalent lens field of view. You could also do this with the RX-100, I would lean towards and RX-100V as it will work better with wet lenses. Something like an INON UWL-100 would work well with either camera.
The wet lens and Olympus housing would be more compact than the the ikelite housing with dome and probably less buoyant as well.
On the topic of another TG-6 - presumably without a housing? It is only a matter of time until it will flood. The seals are supposed to be replaced annually to keep them watertight. The doors seals can be maintained, but what seems to go is the seals under the buttons, they appear to be a membrane seal and they will eventually fail. A housing is a better long term prospect.
One of the reasons I am leaning towards the Ikelite housing + Dome is to use it with the FCON-T02 for some split photography. I know its a photography kind that wears off pretty quickly but none the less its very beautiful when done nicely.
I can get the same result also with the RX100 Ikelite housing and a dry lens, but cost is around 800€ and size is also bigger.
10 hours ago, Yannis76 said:
One of the reasons I am leaning towards the Ikelite housing + Dome is to use it with the FCON-T02 for some split photography. I know its a photography kind that wears off pretty quickly but none the less its very beautiful when done nicely.
I can get the same result also with the RX100 Ikelite housing and a dry lens, but cost is around 800€ and size is also bigger.
Splits may be interesting but as I understand it you are shooting ambient light and typically the nice looking splits use strobes to bring out the colours in the underwater part. Without strobes the UW section will often be quite flat and dull unless you are in particularly shallow or clear water. I suggested the wet lens option as the INON wet lens is quite a bit smaller than the dome on the ikelite housing option and could be purchased for not much more than the ikelite plus dome.
I have both the TG-6 with Olympus housing and UWL-400A wide angle wet lens and the Ikelite with dome and FCON-T02. They are both good for snorkelling, taking wide pictures with zoom capability . The wet lens option is a bit negatively buoyant and the Ikelite a bit positive, but not too much, and both are compact. The buttons on the Olympus housing are slightly easier to use whilst the Ikelite is more robust.
The first two pictures are with the FCON-T02 in Ikelite housing with dome and the second two are from the UWL-400A and Olympus housing. With patience it is possible to get some sort of split shot with the wet lens. This was with the bayonet attachment which drains water quickly - without it and using some way to tape up the join between the wet lens and housing would probably work better.
2 hours ago, John E said:
I have both the TG-6 with Olympus housing and UWL-400A wide angle wet lens and the Ikelite with dome and FCON-T02. They are both good for snorkelling, taking wide pictures with zoom capability . The wet lens option is a bit negatively buoyant and the Ikelite a bit positive, but not too much, and both are compact. The buttons on the Olympus housing are slightly easier to use whilst the Ikelite is more robust.
The first two pictures are with the FCON-T02 in Ikelite housing with dome and the second two are from the UWL-400A and Olympus housing. With patience it is possible to get some sort of split shot with the wet lens. This was with the bayonet attachment which drains water quickly - without it and using some way to tape up the join between the wet lens and housing would probably work better.
Thanks for chiming in John, to my eye the 3rd shot with the UWL-400 looks quite a bit crisper however the diver is quite soft and the second shot with the coral also looks a little soft in the background - is this typical performance? It looks like the depth of field is a little lacking.
Hi Chris, my fault - the original file sizes are over 5MB but wouldn't upload. Those are less than 200KB each. The main point was to illustrate the field of view and limited ability to take split shots. The split shot with the wet lens is the only one I have and it was a wide aperture. This picture is 3MB with the UWL-400A wet lens
