Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Digital Photography > New Sea&Sea AquaPix DX-3100 Underwater Camera - POOR QUALITY PICTURES

Reply
Thread Tools

New Sea&Sea AquaPix DX-3100 Underwater Camera - POOR QUALITY PICTURES

 
 
Dan
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-23-2003
I just bought the new Sea&Sea AquaPix DX-3100 3-megapixel underwater camera.
I have a MX-10 that I have used for years and greatly enjoyed, but was
excited to move to digital. I took a number of simple pictures with the
camera and they all turned out horrible. Very fuzzy and pixelated. The
3-mega pixel captures on highest quality (lowest compression) setting look
worse than pictures taken with highest compression (lowest quality) on a 6
year old 1-megapixel fuji we have laying around the house.

Everything else worked fine (including the connection to the YS-25Auto
flash), but that doesn't matter if the pictures look lousy. My guess is
there are 3 possible problems (or combinations of the 3) (i) cheap CCD for
picture capture, (ii) electrical interference with CCD, (iii) bad
compression algorithm.

Has anyone else looked at this camera? I this representative of this model
or do I have a defective one that could be replaced?

Does anyone have a recommendation for an alternative digital camera solution
(including lighting) that would be in the $1000-$1500 range?

Thanks,
Dan

[Emailing me directly requires a switch from '.spam' to '.com' in my
address]


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Peter Lombar
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-23-2003
Hi Dan,
in $1000-$1500 range budget you have many possibility.
try here http://www.uwdigitalcamera.com/Engli...gitalindex.htm
You can also find a lot of useful information from experienced guys
here http://www.wetpixel.com/forums/ or http://www.digideep.com.

Good luck

/peter

"Dan" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> I just bought the new Sea&Sea AquaPix DX-3100 3-megapixel underwater

camera.
> I have a MX-10 that I have used for years and greatly enjoyed, but was
> excited to move to digital. I took a number of simple pictures with the
> camera and they all turned out horrible. Very fuzzy and pixelated. The
> 3-mega pixel captures on highest quality (lowest compression) setting look
> worse than pictures taken with highest compression (lowest quality) on a 6
> year old 1-megapixel fuji we have laying around the house.
>
> Everything else worked fine (including the connection to the YS-25Auto
> flash), but that doesn't matter if the pictures look lousy. My guess is
> there are 3 possible problems (or combinations of the 3) (i) cheap CCD for
> picture capture, (ii) electrical interference with CCD, (iii) bad
> compression algorithm.
>
> Has anyone else looked at this camera? I this representative of this

model
> or do I have a defective one that could be replaced?
>
> Does anyone have a recommendation for an alternative digital camera

solution
> (including lighting) that would be in the $1000-$1500 range?
>
> Thanks,
> Dan
>
> [Emailing me directly requires a switch from '.spam' to '.com' in my
> address]
>
>



 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
DrYak
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-24-2003

Certainly a 3-megapixel should deliver better results than a
1-megapixel. I would take it back and see if there was somehting wrong.
Otherwise, get a refund.

 
Reply With Quote
 
Allodoxaphobia
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-24-2003
On Sun, 23 Nov 2003 09:33:10 -0600, Dan hath writ:
> I just bought the new Sea&Sea AquaPix DX-3100 3-megapixel underwater camera.
> I have a MX-10 that I have used for years and greatly enjoyed, but was
> excited to move to digital. I took a number of simple pictures with the
> camera and they all turned out horrible. Very fuzzy and pixelated.


Was this "wet" or "dry" that delivered such lousy results?

Jonesy
--
| Marvin L Jones | jonz | W3DHJ | OS/2
| Gunnison, Colorado | @ | Jonesy | linux __
| 7,703' -- 2,345m | config.com | DM68mn SK
 
Reply With Quote
 
Jason O'Rourke
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-25-2003
Dan <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>I just bought the new Sea&Sea AquaPix DX-3100 3-megapixel underwater camera.
>I have a MX-10 that I have used for years and greatly enjoyed, but was
>excited to move to digital. I took a number of simple pictures with the
>camera and they all turned out horrible. Very fuzzy and pixelated. The
>3-mega pixel captures on highest quality (lowest compression) setting look
>worse than pictures taken with highest compression (lowest quality) on a 6
>year old 1-megapixel fuji we have laying around the house.


I wouldn't expect S&S to use crappy parts, so I'd first look elsewhere.
Bad unit. Bad user (!). Bad conditions? In very low light levels, the
noise level gets cranked up and digital doesn't do it as well.

Were you in clear waters? Murky ones?

Only a few runs in, I've been plenty happy with the S400 setup from
Canon. Still haven't picked up the strobe, but have been able to do
well enough in the warmer waters. I might even give it a try in LA
this week. If you can't get the S&S to work, Canon and Olympus have
lots of decent compact setups.

--
Jason O'Rourke www.jor.com
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
K850i 5 megapixel "camera phone" poor detail quality - should I beunimpressed? googlegroups@sensation.net.au Digital Photography 4 01-10-2008 11:15 PM
Poor reception, poor connection, and dropped signal =?Utf-8?B?dW51c3VhbHBzeWNobw==?= Wireless Networking 2 06-07-2006 12:54 AM
Poor Quality of Downloaded Pictures Jay Knerr Computer Information 2 12-24-2004 07:38 PM
Update on Sea&Sea AquaPix DX-3100 Underwater Camera PROBLEMS Dan Digital Photography 1 12-09-2003 08:16 AM
THE Difference Between Good Quality and Poor Quality Pictures! N.E.1. Digital Photography 4 09-23-2003 02:43 AM



Advertisments