with waterproof housings do they still transmit?

They're radio units, so I'm sure they do. On the other hand, water wreaks havoc with radio waves, scattering them all over the place, so your range will drop really dramatically. Even the water content in brush and other foliage will take a big bite out of their range.

above water yes, under not so much... I use them to trigger a remote flash for surfing and they hit about 80% of the time, set waves can block the signal enough to make them miss.

Optical would be simpler.

grrr..

cgardner wrote:
Optical would be simpler.

How? Assuming that the camera is underwater and the lights are not, and the camera is in an underwater housing, how is optical a better solution for triggering the lights?

shatterkiss wrote:
cgardner wrote:
Optical would be simpler.

How? Assuming that the camera is underwater and the lights are not, and the camera is in an underwater housing, how is optical a better solution for triggering the lights?

There are lots of ways to solve the problem, but we really don't know what the problem is exactly. This is a a classic case of someone asking a technical question of a forum, without any clue what they are actually trying to do. For example why do you automatically assume that the lights are above water and the camera under?

I did underwater photography for many years (my first serious camera purchase in 1969 was a Nikonos II and I later used a Nikonos V with u/w flash) so my assumption was the OP was asking about a situation where both camera and slave flash were underwater in waterproof enclosures.

Most u/w camera enclosures, while equipped with waterproof connectors for an attached flash, are not designed to accommodate a PW sticking up in the hot shoe. So with multiple flash the u/w a flash attached to the housing usually triggers optical sensors on any slave flashes used.

In the case of where flashes are above water and the camera under optical could work with the simple expedient of putting a sensor like a Wein peanut on the end of a long PC cord attached to one of the flashes (or a PW transmitter) and dangling it in the water where is can see the trigger flash from a u/w flash attached to the housing. Silicone or epoxy could be used to make the Peanut / cord connection waterproof.

Another alternative in swimming pool type of scenario where the camera was in a standard u/w housing would be to keep the PW transmitter above water with the lights, connected to the housing with a long PC-cord. Granted its not a completely wireless solution, but with the simple expedient of putting a float on the cord it would hang vertically out of the way.

Chuck

Fresh water or salt? Salt water attenuates RF much more than fresh does ...

Andy

I've assisted a photographer who used both flash and camera separate from each other underwater. They worked fine except that water dramatically reduces range so you couldn't get too far away before it would stop working. Not that you'd want to get that far away anyway because water really knocks light down.)

oobie wrote:
I've assisted a photographer who used both flash and camera separate from each other underwater. They worked fine except that water dramatically reduces range so you couldn't get too far away before it would stop working. Not that you'd want to get that far away anyway because water really knocks light down.)

good to hear. i'll be using a SPL camera housing for my 1dsmk2 and 15 mm fisheye. the flashes are 580's in two waterproof pvc tubes- going to give it a test here soon.