58
By fmylife. / Monday 29 November 2010 18:02 / Canada
Add a comment
You must be logged in to be able to post comments!
Create my account Sign in
Top comments
By  FYLDeep  |  25

I would think that a good camera would live up to a promise like that, particularly if it was made for underwater shooting. This makes me think that your camera was a piece of shit anyway.

Comments
Reply
  CANNIBALx  |  0

yea not really. the little brother sounds nasty..I know little kids don't really know about germs but sticking your hand in a toilet and flushing it over and over sounds disgusting. anyway OP, I'm gonna go with FYL even though the camera was obviously shit since it stopped working.

Reply
  xNephilim  |  18

Well, it is said that the toilet is cleaner than... Nevermind, I forgot what the other thing is. But it does make sense. People always think toilets are so nasty, because of the urine and stuff, which leads to them cleaning it more often... It's not that bad, actually. Oh well, it's still nasty.

Reply
  persianjr1  |  7

I agree but you should kinda thank him cause I'd like to find out that way instead of going like on a once in a life time scuba trip and screwing up the memory with a bad camera. so it's is a 1/2 FML. haha

Reply
  bamagrl410  |  31

22, yes. Exactly. 41, typically waterproof cameras aren't meant to be submerged in water like that. It just means they can have something spilled on them or things of that nature and still work. Or at least the ones I've seen are that way.

Reply
  wwerulez14  |  6

No. When you purchase something like that that they say is "waterproof", they mean if it falls (a very short distance) into a very shallow puddle and you take it out quickly, there SHOULD be no problems with it. Nothing of that nature is ever very waterproof on it's own. If you want it to be truly waterproof, you need one of those clear casings, that are actually made to be underwater. So if OP tries to claim that it wasn't waterproof and tells them what happened, they will laugh and hang up. Instead, you should strangle your brother, and say that you're testing his ability to breathe.

Reply
  kurato  |  6

@2 no, that camera is waterproof. The reason it broken is because the 6 yr old testing it in the toilet, the flushing put the camera in motion that bat around the toilet. The camera isn't shock proof, normal water resistant have a limit on how deep it can go. The deeper it is under water, the more pressure there will be on the camera. But this just my theory, maybe it was false advertising. Just my 2 cent. p.s if my theory are correct, manufacture will put warning: water resistant camera "warning, do not flush the camera" XD

By  icraziie  |  0

at least he was kind enough to test it out for you .. should probably thank him for proving it's a waste of money .. but fyl you should still have warranty and can replace .

By  FYLDeep  |  25

I would think that a good camera would live up to a promise like that, particularly if it was made for underwater shooting. This makes me think that your camera was a piece of shit anyway.

Reply

the seal can handle pressure of still water, but can't handle something like rushing tide (or a toilet flushing) my underwater camera (a $479.00 camera) broke while i was trying to take tide shots.

By  perdix  |  29

Ralph Nader can die now. His successor has been born! You might want to tell your asshole brother that your down vest is bulletproof . . . problem solved.

Loading data…