Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Thoughts on a g7x set up...

g7x recsea ys-d1 inon uwl-100

  • Please log in to reply
21 replies to this topic

#1 nickthegreeek

nickthegreeek

    Clownfish

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 28 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:uk/malta

Posted 22 February 2015 - 12:08 PM

hi all, looking for a little advice from the experts....

 

i have always been a keen macro shooter but would like to try a bit of wide angle reefscape stuff without breaking the bank. as a dive instructor ive always had a pretty tight budget (!) but have managed results im very proud of with very simple canon g series set ups using a couple of DIY solutions for magnification and lighting. now i want to put together a new system and im very tempted to go for the g7x...

 

the new sensor is bigger than some of the recent budget dslr's and reviews generally seem to be pretty good regarding image quality and focus speed etc. im confident that if i include a subsee or other type of magnification that the macro will be as good as, or better than, previous g series cameras but what im interested in is trying my hand at some wide angle stuff without having to spend dslr amounts of money...

 

here is the kind of set up i was thinking of...

 

canon G7 X

 

recsea cwc-g7x housing (cheaper but still has the 67mm threaded port for external lenses)

 

1 or 2 x sea and sea ys-d1 strobes (might seem extravagant for the set up but seems sensible for future proofing)

 

subsee +10 or similar

 

inon uwl-100 or similar wide angle wet lens

 

possible dome unit for wide angle lens (how necessary is this??)

 

i would welcome any advice regarding this set up particularly where the wide angle capability is concerned. does anyone see any obvious problems with the set up before i financially cripple myself? all help would be greatly appreciated....

 

thanks, 

 

nick



#2 Alex_Tattersall

Alex_Tattersall

    Great White

  • Industry
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 948 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:UK

Posted 22 February 2015 - 10:06 PM

Hi Nick. I’d be a little wary of the G7X if I were you, it does not behave like most other compacts so needs some consideration. If you are thinking of going wide angle, the G7X is particular in that its lens is shorter when at its widest. The result of this is that if you screw a wide angle lens to the front of the standard port, you are left with a large air gap between the camera lens and the port glass with a result that the corners of the image become very soft and out of focus with heavy vignetting around the borders of the image. The alternative is to zoom in which then means you lose much of the benefit of the wide angle lens.

 

Nauticam have overcome this issue by offering interchangeable ports for this camera, a shorter port for wide angle and a longer port for macro. When you have the short port installed, you cannot zoom in beyond about 40mm as the lens extends and hits the glass. This does mean that you lose flexibility that you would normally expect with a compact camera but you do end up with good image quality for both wide angle and macro. As far as I’m aware, other manufacturers do not offer a similar solution.

 

We have sent a setup to a French magazine, Chercheurs d’Eau, who are currently running tests with the Nauticam, Isotta, Recsea and Ikelite housings for G7X with a variety of wide angle lenses so this will be worth watching.

 

16620671085_ce066ef71e_c.jpg

 

 

If you are looking for flexibility to change from wide to macro underwater, I’d still personally think the Sony RX100 Mk2 is the winning choice for underwater. This camera though does not perform well underwater for white balancing and the flash recycle time tends to be longer than the Canon. 


www.flickr.com/photos/alextattersall

www.nauticamuk.com
www.uwvisions.com
Exclusive official importer of Nauticam products into the UK and Ireland

#3 nickthegreeek

nickthegreeek

    Clownfish

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 28 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:uk/malta

Posted 23 February 2015 - 11:05 AM

hi alex. thanks for a very informative and understandable answer, though now im right back at the drawing board...

 

its the great white balance function and the exceptional macro that has always kept me loyal to canon....

 

in your opinion does the short port solution mean that the results from the g7x match up to the rx100 II in terms of wide angle capability? would it be as 'wide'?

presumably the image quality is similar between the two cameras....

 

also the nauticam housing is double the price of the recsea and thats before ive added the cost of the extra port at $180...

 

all this leaves me wondering if i shouldnt just go for a low end dslr like canons 100d + ikelite or something.



#4 nickthegreeek

nickthegreeek

    Clownfish

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 28 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:uk/malta

Posted 23 February 2015 - 11:22 AM

oh maaaaaan. was just sneaking a peak at your flikr. so many lovely raja pictures. i worked up there most of last year. most beautiful diving ive ever done.

 

also noticed one labeled 'g7x wide' was that taken with the short port system? i mean, it looks great, is there any way i could see more examples?

 

please excuse my cheekiness....



#5 Interceptor121

Interceptor121

    Sperm Whale

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1854 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Weybridge, UK

Posted 23 February 2015 - 12:29 PM

Alex is spot on and still have some Sony RX100 Mark II housings on stock that together with the camera make a very appealing set up for wide angle

 

I don't take many still but some examples are here

 

https://www.flickr.c...57645375379256/


Check my video, pictures and blog

YouTube Channel

Flickr Sets

Blog


#6 Vondo

Vondo

    Wolf Eel

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 158 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Illinois

Posted 23 February 2015 - 12:40 PM

Hi Nick,

 

I just jumped ship to Olympus (E-PL5 and EP-PT10) after a long time with Canon. The housing is not much bigger in any particular direction than the Canon G10/12/15/16 housings. I've been really happy with this switch so far. The camera is much more responsive. You might consider that before thinking about even a small SLR and the Ikelite box.



#7 nickthegreeek

nickthegreeek

    Clownfish

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 28 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:uk/malta

Posted 24 February 2015 - 01:12 PM

thanks interceptor, the shots are beautiful particularly like the sunburst and the mermaid shot. very cool. are they full quality when uploaded to flikr or compressed at all?

 

you think the above set up would work but with switching the camera? would also be interested to hear any other set up suggestions...

 

vondo, thanks also,was thinking about mirrorless systems a little too, quite interested to see if anyone is going to make a housing for the soon to arrive canon m3.... 

 

alex do you know if nauticam are planning to make one?



#8 Vondo

Vondo

    Wolf Eel

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 158 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Illinois

Posted 24 February 2015 - 01:23 PM

As a Canon SLR enthusiast for years now, I would have liked nothing better than for Canon to get serious about mirrorless. While the M3 body is clearly a step in the right direction (but not available on my continent), the lens selection is severely lacking and not worthwhile for underwater, IMO. There looks to be a decent WA option, but for macro, nothing. 

 

I think the APS-C image circle required by the body may be a hinderance to making something truly smaller than the APS-C SLRs as well.

So I wrote off Canon's mirrorless options for now.



#9 nickthegreeek

nickthegreeek

    Clownfish

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 28 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:uk/malta

Posted 24 February 2015 - 01:36 PM

yeah i was thinking similar but there is an adapter to fit the normal canon ef (?) lenses though i guess this might cause problems with fitting inside ports and stuff...

 

i guess we'll see but i cant find any reference to a housing for the m3 anyway!



#10 Vondo

Vondo

    Wolf Eel

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 158 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Illinois

Posted 24 February 2015 - 01:56 PM

yeah i was thinking similar but there is an adapter to fit the normal canon ef (?) lenses though i guess this might cause problems with fitting inside ports and stuff...

 

i guess we'll see but i cant find any reference to a housing for the m3 anyway!

 

I would assume you'd need a port adapter to attach an SLR port to a mirrorless housing. I assume then you will, like the camera, have a very big lens/port attached to a much smaller body/housing. Might as well have an SLR for the 60 or 100mm EF macros.



#11 Interceptor121

Interceptor121

    Sperm Whale

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1854 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Weybridge, UK

Posted 25 February 2015 - 12:36 PM

thanks interceptor, the shots are beautiful particularly like the sunburst and the mermaid shot. very cool. are they full quality when uploaded to flikr or compressed at all?
 
you think the above set up would work but with switching the camera? would also be interested to hear any other set up suggestions...
 
vondo, thanks also,was thinking about mirrorless systems a little too, quite interested to see if anyone is going to make a housing for the soon to arrive canon m3.... 
 
alex do you know if nauticam are planning to make one?

Flickr uploads from lightroom are not full quality but for a good quality not outstanding monitor
Some of the shots are taken at 1/2000 shutter forget about doing that with an mft or SLR is a prerogative of leaf or electronic shutters
In the compact realm for stills there is nothing better compared to mft the rx100 performs just below em5/em1 major limitation is super macro but for wide angle is actually a more flexible set up

Check my video, pictures and blog

YouTube Channel

Flickr Sets

Blog


#12 leepix

leepix

    Wolf Eel

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 174 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:JAX FLA
  • Interests:Ships, boats and diving

Posted 27 February 2015 - 10:11 AM

Hi Nick. I’d be a little wary of the G7X if I were you, it does not behave like most other compacts so needs some consideration. If you are thinking of going wide angle, the G7X is particular in that its lens is shorter when at its widest. The result of this is that if you screw a wide angle lens to the front of the standard port, you are left with a large air gap between the camera lens and the port glass with a result that the corners of the image become very soft and out of focus with heavy vignetting around the borders of the image. The alternative is to zoom in which then means you lose much of the benefit of the wide angle lens.

 

Nauticam have overcome this issue by offering interchangeable ports for this camera, a shorter port for wide angle and a longer port for macro. When you have the short port installed, you cannot zoom in beyond about 40mm as the lens extends and hits the glass. This does mean that you lose flexibility that you would normally expect with a compact camera but you do end up with good image quality for both wide angle and macro. As far as I’m aware, other manufacturers do not offer a similar solution.

 

We have sent a setup to a French magazine, Chercheurs d’Eau, who are currently running tests with the Nauticam, Isotta, Recsea and Ikelite housings for G7X with a variety of wide angle lenses so this will be worth watching.

 

16620671085_ce066ef71e_c.jpg

 

 

If you are looking for flexibility to change from wide to macro underwater, I’d still personally think the Sony RX100 Mk2 is the winning choice for underwater. This camera though does not perform well underwater for white balancing and the flash recycle time tends to be longer than the Canon. 

 

Alex I want to get back to doing CFWA, and just got a Pany 8mm FE.  Since that needs a special port for Oly housings, would you suggest me putting it on anohter m43 body, like Pany CX7?



#13 Alex_Tattersall

Alex_Tattersall

    Great White

  • Industry
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 948 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:UK

Posted 08 March 2015 - 12:49 PM

Leepix,

 

Do you mean you have camera and housing already that you want to use?

 

Alex


www.flickr.com/photos/alextattersall

www.nauticamuk.com
www.uwvisions.com
Exclusive official importer of Nauticam products into the UK and Ireland

#14 Humu797

Humu797

    Wolf Eel

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 131 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oahu, Hawaii
  • Interests:Scuba, photography, film photography, current events, progressive politics, science, medicine, ADA issues, service dogs.

Posted 12 March 2015 - 01:27 PM

Alex is spot on and still have some Sony RX100 Mark II housings on stock that together with the camera make a very appealing set up for wide angle

 

I don't take many still but some examples are here

 

https://www.flickr.c...57645375379256/

Some really nice wide angle stuff there!



#15 Interceptor121

Interceptor121

    Sperm Whale

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1854 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Weybridge, UK

Posted 17 March 2015 - 11:58 PM

Some really nice wide angle stuff there!

Thank you
The camera performs very well and as I can use relatively wide aperture such f/4 I can shoot low ISO and decent shutter speeds
I think this bridges the gap with other cameras where you need to push two stops on the aperture and end up with higher ISO

Check my video, pictures and blog

YouTube Channel

Flickr Sets

Blog


#16 thatdylanguy

thatdylanguy

    Sea Wasp

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 2 posts

Posted 10 April 2015 - 06:55 PM

Alex,

 

 

You said people should be a bit wary of the G7X. If one were to look at the G7X in a Nauticam housing, does your opinion change??

 

I've currently got a RX100II in an Nauticam housing with SMC and am unimpressed with it for macro. I find that there's a sort of middle ground where it's near impossible to capture things that are too small for wide angle, the minimum focus distance blows out to 1M+ if you try to zoom in at all from 28mm, and the subject may be too big for the SMC (and the working distance of the RX100II and SMC is extremely short, which is an issue for some skittish critters). I find often there's no good way to shoot things like mantis shrimp or large nudi that are too big for the area of coverage with the SMC, etc..

 

Would the abilities of the G7X plug this gap?? I understand it does far better macro than the RX100II.


Edited by thatdylanguy, 10 April 2015 - 07:03 PM.


#17 Alex_Tattersall

Alex_Tattersall

    Great White

  • Industry
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 948 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:UK

Posted 19 April 2015 - 02:11 PM

Sorry, I just saw this. I’d be tempted to get a less powerful diopter such as the Subsee +5 and keep the SMC so you cover more bases without the cost of changing your housing. The G7X certainly has a better macro mode than the RX100ii but comes with the issue of changing port for wide angle, not a problem for me being used to shooting DSLR but may be an issue for people used to the flexibility of compacts and their interchangeable lenses.

 

You’ll always find a compact to be a challenge for skittish critters, some things are simply not possible, all setups are about understanding and living within the limitations and making the most of the opportunities the setup offers. This is true of the most expensive setups as you limit yourself to subject matter, or the way you deal with photographing that subject matter, by lens choice.

 

That said, I personally prefer the interface of the Canon over the Sony, find its usage more intuitive and fractionally more ergonomic, and find the macro mode and the white balance far superior to the Sony. IQ seems much the same.


www.flickr.com/photos/alextattersall

www.nauticamuk.com
www.uwvisions.com
Exclusive official importer of Nauticam products into the UK and Ireland

#18 Interceptor121

Interceptor121

    Sperm Whale

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1854 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Weybridge, UK

Posted 19 April 2015 - 10:39 PM

The g7x and the rx100 have the same sensor. The issues with depth of field are exactly the same for that reason. The only difference with the canon is a shorter working distance that will give you slightly better magnification. As an rx100 user I have experienced myself that even for portrait work I need a +3 diopter this should be less of an issue with the canon but you will still be 40cm at full zoom that is quite far. Diopter wise you still need an intermediate one (sub see 5 or Inon ucl-165) and another lens for super macro (subsee 10/smc/cmc/Inon ucl-100).
For the rx100 I have covered this in my blog the most versatile set up is Inon ucl-330 + ucl-165 with this you can cover shooting ranges between 30 cm and 7 cm. a single subsee 10 is frustrating as you can tell. For me changing from the rx100 to the g7x is not an upgrade. I may agree on the ergonomics but I the canon battery life is so poor for underwater use its really useless

Check my video, pictures and blog

YouTube Channel

Flickr Sets

Blog


#19 Alex_Tattersall

Alex_Tattersall

    Great White

  • Industry
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 948 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:UK

Posted 20 April 2015 - 04:25 AM

Useless? Massimo!

 

If I didn’t know you personally, I’d think, who is this character that keeps making these strongly-opinionated sweeping statements?

 

I was able to do a 107 minute night dive with the Canon G7X using the internal flash to trigger Z240s (albeit set to minimum output) and the battery was not nearly dead at the end, is that useless?

 

The battery life was a total non-issue for me, so much so it didn’t occur to me to even mention it in the review. I’d probably get a second battery though, but then I would with any camera.


www.flickr.com/photos/alextattersall

www.nauticamuk.com
www.uwvisions.com
Exclusive official importer of Nauticam products into the UK and Ireland

#20 Interceptor121

Interceptor121

    Sperm Whale

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1854 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Weybridge, UK

Posted 20 April 2015 - 05:38 AM

If you shoot with the strobes in manual and put the internal flash to minimum you can get 150 shots. Use ttl or press the video button and that becomes much shorter.
Either way the macro benefit on the rx100 is only magnification and a reduced working distance but still not so much he can do without two diopters so i would not consider the g7x an upgrade.
If you have no camera now and really want a canon as only shoot stills it may be an option.
Also with the short port does it take a fisheye or not? If not that's another draw back

Edited by Interceptor121, 20 April 2015 - 05:41 AM.

Check my video, pictures and blog

YouTube Channel

Flickr Sets

Blog






Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: g7x, recsea, ys-d1, inon, uwl-100