Underwater film cameras that have more than 36 exposures

[wtburton]

I know that sports photographers has 200 exposure bulk cannister reel things that they could shoot a ton of photos on at some point. I was wondering if anybody knew what that was actually called and if there was an underwater camera equivalent. I mean, its not like they could change film rolls underwater, right? It would seem like divers wouldn't want to surface every 36 exposures.

 

[eli griggs]

Yes, I've seen 250 bulk rolls in underwater housings, back in the 1980s and years on both side of that dateline.

I don't know of any names for these, other than various be makers of traditional scuba camera enclosures, but you could try asking a scuba club for a lead, there was one maker in the 1970's and early '80s that was mentioned most often back when I dived, but time and this late hours has robbed me of any recollection.

As I clicked 'close' I seem to recall the name started with I.

Godspeed and Good Health to All.

 

[AgX]

Interesting question, I myself never put up, as I am from a generation still savy on exposures...
A quick search did not bring up anything. But if someone could dig up photos of respective casings, that would be great.

 

[macfred]

U . S. N a v a l P h o t o g r a p h i c C e n t e r W a s h i n g t o n , D. C. 20390

Underwater Cameras, Lenses and Housings
All known available equipment is listed (1971)

https://www.asprs.org/wp-content/uploads/pers/1971journal/sep/1971_sep_975-978.pdf

 

[film_man]

Interesting interview of Doubilet here https://dan.org/alert-diver/article/shooter-david-doubilet/ The solution is simple it seems, you can have as many multiples of 36 exposures you want, just bring another camera...

I love my Nikonos but if I was diving (I only use mine on the beach, splashing about etc) I just can't imagine not using a digital.

 

[AgX]

Underwater Cameras, Lenses and Housings
All known available equipment is listed (1971)

A great resource!

Well, I thought, if there are such bulk-magazine casings, then they would be american.
A wrong assumption, as Rebikoff made such too (though likely 35mm cinematic). And the one for the Hasselblad 70mm set-up seemingly is the standard,big casing from Hasselblad.


However there is no casing listed that takes a standard 35mm SLR with standard bulk-magazine !


Now we only have to check the following 30 years....

 

[Bronson Dugnutt]

Maybe swing by this museum next time you're in Spain:

https://www.divephotoguide.com/unde...erwater-photography-vintage-camera-collector/

 

[macfred]

Now we only have to check the following 30 years....

--
Ewa-Marine comes to my mind - they have UW housings made of special foil in different sizes - maybe there is one to fit a SLR with a bulk film magazine (just like Nikon F2 and MF-1).

 

[AgX]

Ewa-Marine comes to my mind - they have UW housings made of special foil in different sizes - maybe there is one to fit a SLR with a bulk film magazine (just like Nikon F2 and MF-1).

I got one of their SLR PVC bags. No, they did not make such big bags.
But of course this would have been the easiest way to adapt to such form factor.

Maybe swing by this museum next time you're in Spain:

I already looked at a similar collection, in vain.


I guess what most of us had in mind is a case big enough to take a standard SLR with standard bulk magazine.

 

[Nicholas Lindan]

Bulk load a film that comes on an Estar/polyester/Mylar base. It's thinner and you should be able to get 1.5x the exposures on a cassette. Someone (Ilford ?) used to sell 72 exposure cassettes - if you can find the film they used then you may be able to bulk load your own 2x cassettes.

 

[AgX]

Problem is, there are hardly choices in 35mm at 50µm base...

 

[macfred]

I got one of their SLR PVC bags. No, they did not make such big bags.
But of course this would have been the easiest way to adapt to such form factor....

Thought of this U-FXP UW housing - it's listed for Canon and Nikon analog film cameras (among others) but I guess you're right - no capacity for bulk magazines ...

https://www.ewa-marine.com/products/photo/slr/u-fxp/

 

[macfred]

This one gives 72 frames from a 135-36 roll of film ...

 

[AgX]

Uses standard 35mm films and fits into an Ewa bag...

 

[film_man]

I wonder how quickly the ewa bag will rip as you try to advance the film with the metal crank.

 

[wtburton]

This one gives 72 frames from a 135-36 roll of film ...

View attachment 292255

I shoot with an ansco memo all the time. Half frame is great. Im not sure how great half frame would be underwater though, I feel like the detail would get a bit murky? I dont know if they make wide angle lenses for half frame cameras, or large cannisters.

I think the biggest issue with multiple cameras is having multiple flash units. Unless you brought one large dive lamp I guess? im not sure. I dont have any diving training yet but I was just wondering. I want to dive to the bottom of a river to recover rubble from the broad street station. I dont even know the exact spot yet but its apparently at the bottom of a river?

" https://www.phillyvoice.com/then-and-now-broad-street-station-fire-frank-furness/
An estimated 30,000 truck loads of the station's rubble were transported to help lay the foundation for a pier in South Philadelphia."

I liked the idea of underwater photography after scuba diving in the Greek sunken city, which was really cool, but my crappy underwater camera failed. This was the only decent shot I got out of it

 

[Sirius Glass]

Hasselblad with a 70mm film back in an underwater housing. A big dollar solution when a digital underwater will take many more photographs and in with new color balancing filter systems do a better job. Note that I am clearly stating the the Hasselblad film solution is not as good as the digital camera. Everyone can take the rest of the day off line.

 

[AgX]

I wonder how quickly the ewa bag will rip as you try to advance the film with the metal crank.

-) the bags are from thick PVC

-) the idea is to operate the lever by using a glove incorporated in the bag

Over the years that PVC is sweating out plasticizer...

 

[eli griggs]

Ikelite was the name of the maker I wanted to remember.

They were the best known housing maker I ever heard of and they made both Hasselblad and Canon, etc for 35mm brands.

If I recall correctly, a Hasselblad case ran $5000 - $7500 US back in the late 1970s into the 1980s and I believe they were guaranteed to perform to specs.

That last bit may be wrong, but I do no think so, no in dollars in that era.

I have a Canon for my $(&#&@/ G10, but build quality does no compare to the heavy, film camera cases they built for professionals.

I also had a Nikonos IV with a 35mm which I liked for skin diving but I sold it with an eye for a manual capable Nikonos V some time in the future.

If you go that route, get the 35mm and 85mm which are good above the water as well

Godspeed to all.

 

[wtburton]

Hasselblad with a 70mm film back in an underwater housing. A big dollar solution when a digital underwater will take many more photographs and in with new color balancing filter systems do a better job. Note that I am clearly stating the the Hasselblad film solution is not as good as the digital camera. Everyone can take the rest of the day off line.

Interesting. At first I was going to discredit this option for being audaciously expensive. You really want me to drop hundreds, even thousands on one of these? To take underwater? But I guess 100 exposure on 120 sized film would be wild. I dont see myself affording all of that plus dive equipment anytime soon though.

 

[eli griggs]

Seventy exposures with a Hasselblad A70 back, one hundred is a bridge too far.

 

[macfred]

Accorting to the Hasselblad UW housings made by Hugyfot:

... the housing for the Hasselblad was manufactured by Hugyfot for Hasselblad in Belgium in the 1970's. Not many of the units were made and they only support 3cameras: the 500c, the 500c/m, and the SWC.
There are actually two versions of this housing, one for the 500 series with a built in prism (and room for the 70mm back) andone for the SWC which has the same exact front section but lacks the prism in the rear
section and the ability to fit the 70mm back ... (from a thread at Photo.net)

 

[AgX]

But still this was a combo that came closest to what this thread is about, and as far we have established yet (Eli's statement aside).

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

It's been a lot of years since I dived. So you'll have to excuse my memory. When I used my Nikonos, I usually had a strobe light on it. The strobes batteries didn't last that long as I recall. Even without a strobe, I don't recall running past 36 exposures on a typical dive of one tank It takes time to shoot 36 shots. You have to re-surface to get air - a new tank to breathe. How much air do you have in your tank? What depth are you diving? The deeper you dive, the less air and time you can shoot anyway. I doubt if you're going to go past 36 shots. Use a high ASA like 200 film.

You can see my Nikonos IVa shots on my Flickr page linked below.
https://www.flickr.com/search/?sort...&tags=nikonos&user_id=55760757@N05&view_all=1

 

[Sirius Glass]

Interesting. At first I was going to discredit this option for being audaciously expensive. You really want me to drop hundreds, even thousands on one of these? To take underwater? But I guess 100 exposure on 120 sized film would be wild. I dont see myself affording all of that plus dive equipment anytime soon though.

My point is that a digital underwater camera [with flash?] is definitely the way to go. I mentioned Hasselblad because I usually go that route and because the Hasselblad route is so expensive when a underwater digital camera is the best solution.