[timb64]

I took a look at the Nikon AW130 as well. It goes down to 30 meters without a separate housing. But it's a small-sensor, one-stop-slower-at-wideangle (compared to my TG-2), JPEG-only camera. Still, I think it might be something, because I don't want my camera to get in the way of diving. The less bulk, the less it does that, I think.

I don't know how much reliance you place on being able to take RAW shots in your general/above water photography but if you do to any extent,I think you will find JPEG-only quite limiting,both in terms of colour correction and exposure issues.

To a certain extent the whole bulkiness issue diminishes once you have conquered good buoyancy control under water.I would suggest until you have this skill nailed you didn't ought to be thinking about u/w photography as you've got enough on your plate

Just out of interest, how many dives have you done?

[starbase218]

I don't know how much reliance you place on being able to take RAW shots in your general/above water photography but if you do to any extent,I think you will find JPEG-only quite limiting,both in terms of colour correction and exposure issues.

To a certain extent the whole bulkiness issue diminishes once you have conquered good buoyancy control under water.I would suggest until you have this skill nailed you didn't ought to be thinking about u/w photography as you've got enough on your plate

Just out of interest, how many dives have you done?

9 in total. I took the TG-2 with me on my last dive only as we "only" went to 14 meters. I could just put it in a BCD pocket, no problem. That probably won't be possible with an underwater housing.

My arms are usually on my back when I dive. I also like it that way.

[Nass]

Yeah I'd echo this. Expect colour correction and exposure correction afterwards, leave yourself as much PP flexibility as possible. Maybe worth researching underwater filters too, some other guy was using that and his results were markedly better than mine. Especially when you don't have a strong underwater strobe - the cams I had used onboard flashes, they're a bit "nil points" for my taste...

[Biro]

Did the OP ever make a decision? I would suggest buying either a used RX100 or perhaps a discounted grey-market example off eBay (just make sure the video works in your region) and supplementing it with something like this, which is quite inexpensive compared with similar housings.

Polaroid Underwater Housing for Sony Cyber-shot PLWPCRX100 B&H

Notice that the housing is also available for a number of Canon PowerShots.

[starbase218]

I'm actually chasing after a used RX100 right now. It sells for 200 euros. I could get a Meikom underwater housing for a price similar to that Polaroid.

[starbase218]

Well, I got the RX100. Paid 210 euros for it. Looks brand new. I like it very much so far. Don't have the underwater housing yet though.

[starbase218]

I have a question. There are some Meikon housings for sale on eBay, but when I limit the results to objects within the EU (so I don't have to pay taxes etc) all I find is housings for the RX100 II. I however have the original RX100. Has anyone tried fitting the RX100 inside the housing meant for the RX100 II?

I also ask this because I might upgrade in the future anyway.

[starbase218]

After some more searching, I found that a housing for the RX100 was also available on the British Amazon website. Exchange rates against the Euro are very favorable currently (I wonder why ) and the seller shipped to The Netherlands. So I ordered it. It should even be delivered tomorrow. And I won't have to pay taxes or customs fees.

So, no housing for the MkII. But this only costs me about 135 euros. Since I paid 210 euros for the camera, it is 345 euros in total. I reckon that's a good price compared to the performance I'll be getting. I might still upgrade to a newer version in the future. But I'm not going to worry about that for now.

[timb64]

After some more searching, I found that a housing for the RX100 was also available on the British Amazon website. Exchange rates against the Euro are very favorable currently (I wonder why ) and the seller shipped to The Netherlands. So I ordered it. It should even be delivered tomorrow. And I won't have to pay taxes or customs fees.

So, no housing for the MkII. But this only costs me about 135 euros. Since I paid 210 euros for the camera, it is 345 euros in total. I reckon that's a good price compared to the performance I'll be getting. I might still upgrade to a newer version in the future. But I'm not going to worry about that for now.

You will also find the Sony a great backup camera for when you are too lazy/travelling too light to lug around your SLR kit!

[starbase218]

You will also find the Sony a great backup camera for when you are too lazy/travelling too light to lug around your SLR kit!

I already have. I took it to "Delfsail", which is a festival in The Netherlands featuring tall sailing ships (e.g. the Russian Mir and Kruzenshtern), and had a blast with it. Sometimes I did wish the lens would be slightly wider, but then I wouldn't want to give up the long end. For this kind of camera, I think 26-105mm is right on. (the same range as my 17-70 )

Seriously, I also have the Pentax Q10, but now I'm starting to think, why bother? The sensor is so much smaller, and I can just take the RX100 in my coat pocket. I could do the same with the Q and the 02 zoom, but it's more cumbersome since it doesn't retract.

[timb64]

The pocketability is a real boon.I recently spent some time in Phnom Penh,where street crime is a notorious problem and my SLR spent the time safely locked in the hotel safe and I took the Sony out tucked in the pocket of my shorts.