Cheers dude. (8+)

Mark

Always a pleasure. I'll gladly be people's link-bitch. (8-D)

A 6m rated UW camera is not something I would take below 2m. The rating it has been given is based on a static pressure and not a dynamic one that would be far greater if it was knocked against a rock or pool tiles (though I doubt any public pool would let you use a camera for obvious reasons). However iirc you can't dive because of ear problems, so around the surface, or in heavy rain it would be a desireable feature.

A decent housing for my D90 would cost twice as much as the body for the housing alone. I would then need domes or ports and associated parts depending on which lens I was using. Housings are priced according to size and buttons, so a jump up from DX to FX will see a large increase in cost.

Yeah, I can't dive so if I used it in water it'd be snorkelling or just in shallow water.
As for waterproof housings "Waterproof housing down to 60 metres, available in June 2010 (available as an optional accessory) " so I'm guessing that'd be good for about 40 metres?

Mark

Oh, it also has a flash. (8+)

Mark

If you have a camera that itself has a rating of 6m, then if the housing has a rating of 60m I would quite happily take it close to 60m. If the housing leaks then the camera should still be protected. Catastrophic flooding from poor preparation normally occurs on the descent well before maximum depth is reached, even after only a few metres in many cases, and this camera would be ideal for that situation. Slight flooding during a dive generally isn't quite so bad and if you have a camera that isn't UW rated itself then if you often save it by holding it at an angle so water in the housing doesn't reach the camera, and a good tip in case of this eventuality is to stuff a couple of tampons in the housing.

Also the UW rating doesn't just come from the cameras/housing's ability to prevent water ingress, but from the strength of the button return springs as well. As you go deeper the pressure increases and the buttons effectively go soft, and then on to a point where they can be permanently depressed against the camera, rendering it useless. You can put on stronger springs but then at shallower depths and lower pressures you would need a lot more force for operation, and increase the chances of camera shake.

Well look at me learning stuff non-stop!

Can I just say in response to 'why would you want a P&S when you have a SLR' even though I have a SLR I find there are times when my compact is invaluable. I'd be lost without my little 'backup'.

Slightly off topic but its not often Pentax are mentioned in photog conversations. I just wanted to say I Heart Pentax. I'm not a fanboy by any stretch but my first SLR was a Pentax P30T (got nicked at Uni in 1999 ) and I've had a soft spot ever since. Maybe thats why I ended up with the Samsung/Pentax I have now?

I can see where a cheap UW camera may be a novelty Mark (remebmer the Nikons V?), but as for having a smaller, compact .... if you're seriously suggesting that your D3 is becoming a nuisance ...

The Nikonos was a little bit more than a novelty.

I have a compact (Canon PowerShot G9) which is used as a supplement to my DSLR.

Handily, it uses the same batteries as my EOS400D, and is the same RAW format. I can get shots with the G9 that would be impossible with the 400D.

I don't intend to use either under water, though.

I don't think I've ever even thought that, let alone said/typed it.
You'll have to go and badger someone else for their DSLR. (8+p

Mark

Well, I offered

There's an in-depth review of the camera in the OP here.

Mark