dsmeltz Loc: Philadelphia

That seems to sum up the bulk of the good advice.

DAhalestorm Loc: Green Valley, Arizona

I would like to thank everyone for your excellent, and much appreciated advise.

tomad Loc: North Carolina

Hi Dave, I was an underwater photographer for 20 years using a Nikonos film camera. I saw and handled housed 35mm cameras and they seemed to be very cumbersome compared to my rig. I suggest you get the Sony RX100 for your underwater work. It is also a great pocket camera for land shots. It has proven to be a great underwater camera (according to several articles I've read) and housed it is not a lot bigger than my Nikonos camera. There are several housings available. See the links below...

http://www.uwphotographyguide.com/sony-rx100-iv-housing-guide
http://www.uwphotographyguide.com/sony-rx100-review

nikondoug

You do not need a camera housing, just purchase a underwater camera, they are not that expensive. Go to Adorama and B&H and do a search for underwater cameras. You will find Olympus, Sealife, Fujifilm, Ricoh and Nikon cameras in the price range of $200 - $800.

dsmeltz Loc: Philadelphia

The OP is scuba diving not snorkeling. The depth could easily exceed the rated limits of underwater cameras. This is why even Olympus make a housing for the TG-5. The TG-5 is rated to 15M while scuba depths go to down to more than twice that. Even student divers may exceed 15m.

kymarto Loc: Portland OR and Milan Italy

Some things to consider: generally you will want as wide a lens as possible. Longer lenses do not work well underwater because water is not as clear as air, and so at distances of more than a few meters things get very indistinct. Different lenses require different ports on your housing. You cannot use an extreme wide angle with a flat port, for instance, and with a dome port you need ot focus on the dome and not on the subject, so you need to be very careful to buy the right port for the right lenses.

Second, you lose all color after a couple of meters of depth. You will need special corrective filters to at least balance things so that what you shoot is not just pure blue. Those filters are pretty useless under 10 meters, so if you are shooting deeper, you will need an u/w strobe, or better two--one on each side of the camera.

I shot u/w video professionally for a documentary in Palau, and we used a Sony mirrorless. At this point, from perspectives of cost and ease of use, your better bet is to use a small mirrorless such as the Sony RX 100. It also includes stabilization, which can be helpful, and gives you a zoom lens, although not particularly wide at the wide end. You can get "wet" wide angle attachment lenses that will give you a pretty decent angle of view, and can be attached and taken off underwater.

kymarto Loc: Portland OR and Milan Italy

They generally have maximum depths of 10 meters--not enough for scuba diving generally speaking.

Silversleuth Loc: San Francisco Bay Area

I've got two Nikon D200's and two Nauticam housings with ultra lite arms and two Nikon SB 105 strobes if your interested. PM me for details & photos.

::Ed::

lamiaceae Loc: San Luis Obispo County, CA

Film, used Nikonos Underwater Camera and a lens or two. Remember underwater the effective focal length is different.

Peter LeesburgVA

Dave, I lived in SE Asia for three years and did a moderate amount of diving (~140 dives) taking both still and video photos. The camera is probably the least expensive part of your gear in underwater photography. The camera enclosure will probably run you $1500 to $2500. The strobe (flash for above water photographers) with jointed holder will run you $1000 or more. Many people prefer two strobes if you can afford it. Then you'd best put aside at least $500 to transport your camera and gear in a waterproof case plus spare o-rings, screw drivers, and vacuum grease to seal your camera securely. Before you place your camera in your underwater enclosure the first time, or you have to replace an o-ring seal, you'll need to weight the camera enclosure and make certain it seals completely at the bottom of at least a 10-12' pool for half an hour. Cameras do not like water...trust me. If you are thinking of using an on-camera flash to save money you had best be certain that the water in which you will be diving has minimal to no suspended particulates. On-camera flashes reflect light from suspended particles--which are very common--and can ruin an otherwise decent photo. Underwater photography requires a LOT of practice, patience, and honest evaluation so that you learn what works and what does not. Capable underwater cameras are bulky and expensive if you haven't already arrived at that conclusion. That said, they can provide a wealth of enjoyment after dives and years later. Oh yes, did I mention that condensation inside an enclosure can be a killer if you try to dive in a hot humid environment and then plunge your encased camera into relatively cold water? The boat you dive in "should" be equipped for divers which includes a large water filled container to submerge your camera before dives for a good 30 minutes so that you do not experience condensation underwater. Some people believe in placing desiccant packages inside the enclosure to absorb moisture. I was never a fan of this approach, but some people seem to believe in it. Once you settle on equipment you really need to become familiar with it by using it in the water. My suggestion is that you do so at or near the surface with a mask and snorkel. If you are new to scuba diving I suggest you get at least 20 dives experience underwater without any camera. Being a safe diver requires a lot of skills and when one or both hands are occupied with a very expensive piece of hardware that may or may not be neutrally buoyant, it does not give you the opportunity to focus on being a safe diver. I started out with a Nikon D200, ports for a 50mm lens, flat port for a 60mm macro lens, and a port for the 18-70mm general purpose lens, an Ikelite housing, and a single strobe on an articulated arm. Attached is a photo of a blue ring octopus taken in Indonesia... I wish you the best of luck and enjoyment in whatever approach you select. Capturing memories while diving can be very rewarding.

carl hervol Loc: jacksonville florida

! got an under water camera from BH for around 15.00 and the darn thing works great and it good for 100 feet its worth try and you not spending 150.00 +dollars + it 4 k

Bfree2 Loc: Grants Pass, Or

How about renting a camera and underwater case a few times. That way you can evaluate the setup, how you like it, and truly would you use it enough to fully enjoy the investment. That’s how I’ve decided on which car to buy, and I’m currently looking into renting a lens for a up coming trip this summer.
Just my two cents.

Peter LeesburgVA

If renting an underwater was an available option I would have gone that way. When I lived in Asia that was not an option. Instead I spoke to people who had underwater cameras and then decided based upon what was available.

dsmeltz Loc: Philadelphia

One week car rental of a $30,000 car is around $150-$200 or around 0.5 - 0.7% of the purchase price. Rental of photographic equipment for a week is around 7.0 - 10.0% or the purchase price. Rental to try out is not a good economic path for photography equipment. Photography rental works when you are a pro who needs a particular item for a special job and you can deduct the rental as a business expense.

DAhalestorm Loc: Green Valley, Arizona

I really appreciate all of the comments and suggestions. A lot of food for thought.