Jump to content

Aquapac


Peter Mega

Recommended Posts

Definitely not in the second one, only the Sma/SQMV at a squeeze will fit in that. I don't have a UM to check with, but a TRX900 with a Block 26 antenna just fits in the newest one (top) - so I'd say the UM with block 26 antenna would be too tall to fit without the antenna being bent.

Edit: I think you'll need this one http://store.aquapac.net/connected-electronics-558-30.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Definitely not in the second one, only the Sma/SQMV at a squeeze will fit in that. I don't have a UM to check with, but a TRX900 with a Block 26 antenna just fits in the newest one (top) - so I'd say the UM with block 26 antenna would be too tall to fit without the antenna being bent.

Edit: I think you'll need this one http://store.aquapac...ics-558-30.html

Incorrect.

I own three of this type and they fit my 2020 transmitters, which are larger than UM400. The fit is snug, but it keeps the whole size of the thing down (they are awkwardly sized anyway).

The previous version of the same size is much, much tighter. I've had them from hire companies and found it incredibly difficult to extract the TXs from. They seem to have changed the design slightly and made them roomier.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Incorrect.

I own three of this type and they fit my 2020 transmitters, which are larger than UM400. The fit is snug, but it keeps the whole size of the thing down (they are awkwardly sized anyway).

The previous version of the same size is much, much tighter. I've had them from hire companies and found it incredibly difficult to extract the TXs from. They seem to have changed the design slightly and made them roomier.

Okay, great. I must have some of the older design. Cheers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Pete

I have the 548 and really they are only dunk proof. Had too many leaks to safely use submerged. The two openings double the risk of a leak.

If you haven't bought call and I can sort you out.

Chris

The website specs say the same thing - submersible for short periods only. I always put the transmitter in a non-lubed condom as well.

What's your solution, Chris?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't use submerged. I wouldn't trust a condom to do what the aquapac can't do. Also remember the Tx will not transmit under water. At risk of quoting "it depends"

Oh, the condom is only there for if a tiny leak makes it in the aquapac. Which has never happened, and I've only employed them for 'risk of dunk' shots, not 'definitely in the water' shots. If that was happening, I'd be looking at hiring a MM or WM. Or, you know, booming from a boat/pontoon etc.

I use Zax radios - so even if they don't transmit underwater, they can still record. (as long as they don't get fried!!)

Thanks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, What do we do if we need to submerge to tx underwater? I'm going to shoot a doc about a big waves surfer, in places like Jaws, or Pipeline, and I'm researching how to record the surfist while he rides the waves. I thought about having two aquapacks around a Zaxcom ZFR100 recorder, but for sure they'll be crushed under huge waves, so would they work in such a situation?

Thanks

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...