Mark -
Thank you for a reasoned answer (and the kind words about my images as well - much appreciated). I understand what you are trying to say here and I agree with a lot of it (otherwise I wouldn't be shooting with a housed DSLR).
But to realize those advantages, you have to make a commitment to u/w photography and to overall diving skills. I also happen to be a dive instructor and I find photographers tend to go OOA or lose their buddies far more often than non-photographers. There is a fair bit of task loading with photography and diving, and this gets magnified big time with the additional drag and complexity of a housed DSLR rig.
Moreover, once you have that big box, in order to really utilize its potential, one has to go from being a "diver with a camera" to a "photographer on scuba" mindset. Only if they are willing to work a subject, spend some time optimizing lighting, etc. will they realize the benefits of a housed DSLR. Also, the additional complexity of the housing means it requires a lot of attention to detail - both pre and post dive - in order to ensure no screwups (and the list of potential screwups is enormous). Heck, I dislike EVERYTHING about my housed DSLR, except the images.
So IMO, realizing those benefits is not for everyone - if someone isnt willing to put in the effort, the housed DSLR's added potential will not be realized and it will only be a wasted expense.
I have written an article on this subject here - take a look and let me know your thoughts:
http://www.diveindia.com/uwphoto/dslr_or_compact.html![]()
But you are spot-on when you say this:
I was one of those people. I got my first u/w setup in 2001 - a 3MP Oly (top of the line!
) and a matching housing. Got lousy shots with it. Got a strobe with a compact, got better shots with it but missed a lot. Finally got a DSLR and put up with all its demands (and a 1+ year learning curve), and now I get satisfying images.
So in short - you are correct, we do agree... I am just qualifying my statements 
Safe diving,
Vandit

