Ziploc - A housing manufacturer for the horrifically cheap?

[Sparhawk13401]

I've searched the boards for this, and I can't believe it's never been asked before, but I can't find discussion on it.

Unless it's the stupidest question ever asked on the Scubaboard - in which case I'll be famous.

Has anyone tried just bagging a digital camera for shooting underwater <30'?

I'd expect that beyond 30' you'd get into mechanical problems due to the increased pressure, but for shallow, well lit stuff........maybe?

 

[horsediver1]

Two things that will go wrong first is condensation from temprature change. Another issue might be osmosis especially at depth even 10-12 feet

 

[Sparhawk13401]

Osmosis, eh?

I hadn't considered it......is a freezer bag a semi-permiable membrane?

 

[ScubaSteve]

Two things that will go wrong first is condensation from temprature change. Another issue might be osmosis especially at depth even 10-12 feet

A third problem would be that even if the ziplock were to keep the camera dry, the material in a ziplock is not truly clear. A camera lens (and port lens on a housing) is made to be perfectly CLEAR. If you take a picture through plastic such as a ziploc everything would almopst certainly appear blurred. Actually it might be an interesting effect to add to certain pictures but I am sure not for all.

 

[DennisS]

It looks like someone else had the same idea and refined it

ewa-marine : Home 

 

[Air One]

You should try Sparhawk, and then tell us.

My advice : for your first dives, go without any camera in the bag...

 

[Buoyant1]

You should try Sparhawk, and then tell us.

My advice : for your first dives, go without any camera in the bag...

Didn't I read somewhere that they give hamsters "housing rides"?:11:

Try it in a zip lock!

My guess would be that if you tired to use the zoom, it may foul the mechanism and prevent you from using it, not to mention the possibility of puncturing the baggie???

Try it with an old camera that you don't care about (or a borrowed one )

 

[Sparhawk13401]

You should try Sparhawk, and then tell us.

My advice : for your first dives, go without any camera in the bag...

:14: There's always a kid on the ground cheering on the kid on the garage roof.


Dennis - I've seen those bags on EBay - I figured this may be a poor-man substitute. Those bags do address the clarity issue Steve was talking about.

I'll have to take a bag into the pool....I kinda thought they'd be pretty clear - disapear magically even - much like a scratched gauge face magically becomes brand new underwater.

 

[Nemrod]

Once upon a time long, long ago when the world was new and fresh and we were not upon a quest for the Jabberwhocky (WMD) shiny and happy people could purchase nice oval masks with a chrome brass surround that was affixed with a single screw. Behold upon these favored citizens that it was found that they could place a cheap cereal box camera in the mask and then close the mask with a plastic bag affixed up under the chrome brass lens retaining ring thus rendering it suitable for great depths in yon pond or seabed.

Alas, in this world of complciation and grief and war and famine, cheap 2.95 masks have been replaced by more "efficient" and gooder versions costing more than my first motorcycle but without thine simple chrome brass ring on an oval surround.

N

 

[ScubaSteve]

:14: There's always a kid on the ground cheering on the kid on the garage roof.

COME ON!!! You can FLY

I'll have to take a bag into the pool....I kinda though they'd be pretty clear - disapear magically even - much like a scratched gauge face magically becomes brand new underwater.

I can honestly say I have never tried so you may be correct. The "blurriness" might actually be corrected by the water but I am too much of a pessimist to be hopeful. Make sure you follow the VALUABLE advice given and make sure the camera is borrowed and then post the results. I am curious (but not enough to try it with my camera).