Fantasea housing for G 15

Please register or login

Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.

Benefits of registering include

  • Ability to post and comment on topics and discussions.
  • A Free photo gallery to share your dive photos with the world.
  • You can make this box go away

Joining is quick and easy. Log in or Register now!

Chuckitall

Contributor
Messages
364
Reaction score
53
Location
Jupiter, Fl
Just bought a G 15 to replace S95. Any opinions on the Fantasea housing. Am prepared to go Fix or Nauticam, but Fantasea looks interesting. Anybody using it, thanks
 
I have had good luck with the Fantasea housing for the price I don't think you can go wrong. I just upgraded to the Nauticam na rx100 @ a hefty price.
 
I just picked one up and will be using next week in the Bahamas. Really like it so far.
 
I'm looking at the ikelite or Fantasea for the G15. Any idea which might be better? I was worried the ikelike would be bulky and might have some shadowing in the pic of not using a strobe because of the big lens shield. I wasnt sure if there was a difference between the TTL with the ikelite or the S-TTL in the Fantasea. Thanks
 
for wired TTL you need a top of range strobe. In terms of performance there is no substantial difference with optical TTL except the flash does not fire with true ttl and battery life is extended as consequence
 
The Ikelite housing will allow you to run a wired strobe, the Fantasea won't. The advantage of a wired strobe is that you don't wear down the battery of the camera in the housing. I'm not sure what Interceptor121 means by "Top of the Line" that's not true, you could use the Ikelite DS51 which is not a top of the line strobe. Ikelite also sells TTL Cables for Sea&Sea and other strobes. The housing came with a diffuser if you use the internal strobe to help solve the shadow problem, but in my opinion the internal strobes on all of these cameras are too weak to be of much use underwater in any case.

The ikelite housing also has the benefit/detriment of being clear. Benefit: You can see the o-ring and know that it's sealed well, I've have once or twice gotten something out of whack putting it together and looking at the o-ring could see it wasn't sealed and fixed the problem before the dive. Detriment: Some people would say it's not as durable, I've had the G9 one and now the G15. The G9 held up very very well, and I know several professional photographers using the IKELITE DSLR housings that have many 100's of dives on them with no issues...
 
Ikelite ds51=waste of money 75 degrees coverage and weak only good for macro
You may want to consider that for a compact camera wired ttl are rather uncommon and except ikelite nobody bothers offering a bulkhead on the housing anymore
The canon g15 also does not have ttl in manual and the semi automatic mode are a waste of time in any case
 
So as usual Interceptor121 and I will agree to disagree. The DS51 is much better than an internal flash period. Now that said I'd try and spend the extra money for a bigger flash, for instance I'd do a single DS160 over two DS51. The Sea&Sea units are good and compatible.

Most compact cameras don't have hot-shoes, so of course not many compact housings have bulkheads. There are advantages and disadvantages to both. Except for Porsche nobody put's amazing brakes on their cars either, it doesn't mean there aren't reasons for them.

Yes it doesn't have TTL in manual but I find the automatic modes to work quite well, and have gotten many good shots with them.
 
There is no point making a decision for a compact based on having wired ttl
To be honest the g15 is not even a good starting point as a camera
Any external strobe even an intova would be better than the internal strobe but there is a reason why you see many more YS-01 or S2000 instead of ikelite ds51
And an internal strobe with 75 degrees coverage is a waste of space any sensible shop would tell you to get at least a strobe with 100 degrees
But of course what do I know my pictures are much worse than those of rks
Just don't confuse the guy the fantasea housing is $150 cheaper and has access to all controls with the spare money he can get a better strobe instead of bothering for wired ttl and the camera will still take 240-300 shots before there is need to change the battery
A
 
Once again people talk smack without ever having used an Ikelite DS51 :) Or posting any photos to show they absolutely NEED 100 degree strobes ALL the time.

What a bunch of baloney by the most frequent poster who doesn't even reveal his real name......

The Canon 8-15mm F4L USM is about as wide as most shooters would ever use UW. Easily equivalent to many add on compact systems WA lenses.

Photos below taken last week as examples using said Canon 8-15mm F4L USM Fisheye lens and lit by a pair of the "only 75 degree" beam angle Ikelite DS51 strobes. OK, with diffusers they're listed as 79 or 80 degrees, who cares.....

I have tons more WA shots to blow this argument out of the water if anyone wants to debate :)

While the the recycle time via AA NiMH batteries won't match the DS160 / 161 they are more than up to the task if someone wants lighter smaller units.

Wired TTL versus Optical TTL is pretty much a non issue, just depends on what housing people choose.

YMMV............

David Haas
www.haasimages.com
 

Attachments

  • IMG_5725.jpg
    IMG_5725.jpg
    69.3 KB · Views: 84
  • IMG_5728.jpg
    IMG_5728.jpg
    66.3 KB · Views: 77
  • IMG_5737.jpg
    IMG_5737.jpg
    27.9 KB · Views: 74
  • IMG_5751.jpg
    IMG_5751.jpg
    52.7 KB · Views: 80
  • IMG_5753.jpg
    IMG_5753.jpg
    92.3 KB · Views: 68
  • IMG_5756.jpg
    IMG_5756.jpg
    65.1 KB · Views: 67
  • IMG_5759.jpg
    IMG_5759.jpg
    47.2 KB · Views: 77
  • IMG_5762.jpg
    IMG_5762.jpg
    112.2 KB · Views: 70
  • IMG_5768.jpg
    IMG_5768.jpg
    135.8 KB · Views: 67
  • IMG_5771.jpg
    IMG_5771.jpg
    56.9 KB · Views: 66
  • IMG_5774.jpg
    IMG_5774.jpg
    74.1 KB · Views: 79
  • IMG_5776.jpg
    IMG_5776.jpg
    65.5 KB · Views: 64
  • IMG_5784.jpg
    IMG_5784.jpg
    46.7 KB · Views: 67

Back
Top Bottom