Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Sony RX100 in Nauticam housing back from Malapascua


  • Please log in to reply
14 replies to this topic

#1 albatross911

albatross911

    Clownfish

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 20 posts

Posted 26 October 2012 - 04:35 AM

I just came back from the trip to Malapascua with the camera in the new housing and here are some of the shots taken, only cropped. Macros were shot with the Inon close-up lens, using it for the first time so the short focus range is difficult to handle. Shot many movies too but that will take a bit more time to process and upload, so stay tuned.

http://s138.photobuc...mview=slideshow

#2 Interceptor121

Interceptor121

    Great Hammerhead

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 733 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Weybridge, UK

Posted 26 October 2012 - 05:26 AM

Great selection of critters

I guess you only had one UCL165?

Check my video, pictures and blog

YouTube Channel

Flickr Sets

Blog


#3 kc_moses

kc_moses

    Eagle Ray

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 324 posts

Posted 26 October 2012 - 07:40 AM

Hmm..... the depth of field for some of the macro is quite strong, did you stack your Inon 165? I'm in the process of research closeup lens, and the short focus range is one of the complain I read. Care to share how difficult it is to get focus, like do you have to move a few CM, or a few inches?

#4 albatross911

albatross911

    Clownfish

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 20 posts

Posted 27 October 2012 - 10:48 PM

Yes I only had one UCL 165, so no stacking. With it on the focus is good at about 15-20cm between subject and the lens front, then maybe 2-3cm back and forth. As I'm using a close-up lens and the whole setup for the first time, I often forgot about this and found it difficult to achieve focus, particularly during video capture. However overall it gives me much better results than my previous setup so I'm very happy with it, just need more practice.

I missed it when the thresher was the closet to me as I was switching from photo to video but it was not recording! Guess I didn't press the Record button right or pressed the Menu button instead, which I found myself doing it quite often...

Edited by albatross911, 27 October 2012 - 10:49 PM.


#5 albatross911

albatross911

    Clownfish

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 20 posts

Posted 07 November 2012 - 05:15 AM

Finally I have finished my video highlights. Hope you like it!



#6 kc_moses

kc_moses

    Eagle Ray

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 324 posts

Posted 07 November 2012 - 07:35 AM

Nice closeup! The video is a bit soft, I think it's because you ran it through stabilzation software, caused the cropping and the pixel has to be enlarge to fill the gap. Did you shoot in 1080p?

#7 SPP

SPP

    Wolf Eel

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 101 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 07 November 2012 - 08:42 AM

Thank u 911, nice one.
I have the 165 but never try it UW.
Can u zoom in while using 165 UW ?
.

#8 Interceptor121

Interceptor121

    Great Hammerhead

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 733 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Weybridge, UK

Posted 07 November 2012 - 12:48 PM

Thank u 911, nice one.
I have the 165 but never try it UW.
Can u zoom in while using 165 UW ?
.

You should zoom indeed that is the whole idea so don't need to be right on top of critters
The macro of this video is good there seem to be lack of white balancing in most of the wide angle scenes?

#9 albatross911

albatross911

    Clownfish

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 20 posts

Posted 07 November 2012 - 05:07 PM

Nice closeup! The video is a bit soft, I think it's because you ran it through stabilzation software, caused the cropping and the pixel has to be enlarge to fill the gap. Did you shoot in 1080p?


Thanks! Yes I shot 1080p and used stabilization in FCPX a lot. Since I'm not doing this for a living, and my target audience are mostly non-divers, what is important to them is a comfortable viewing experience than a technically perfect video. Also sharing this online would compress and degrade the quality anyway. Shooting macro with the close-up lens make it very jerky even with Active SteadyShot mode. I had a tripod on the setup for the first 2 days but found it more a hindrance than help, as it makes it difficult to go into small spaces for the small critters. So I did not use it the rest of the trip.

#10 albatross911

albatross911

    Clownfish

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 20 posts

Posted 07 November 2012 - 05:12 PM

You should zoom indeed that is the whole idea so don't need to be right on top of critters
The macro of this video is good there seem to be lack of white balancing in most of the wide angle scenes?


Yes I zoomed and most of the time all the way to the tele end. It worked great on this setup but still trying to get used to the short focus range. Particularly those critters that move quickly like cuttlefish it's hard to keep the constant distance so it can focus correctly.

Yeah I didn't do custom white balance as I did not have a white/grey board and also as you said it's not easy to do in video mode. The wide angles were mainly the thresher sharks which I almost shot entirely video. Only the last day I tried some photos when they were quite close.

Overall I'm very happy with the results from the RX100 and as I improve my skills should get better and better!

#11 Interceptor121

Interceptor121

    Great Hammerhead

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 733 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Weybridge, UK

Posted 09 November 2012 - 12:46 AM

Tremendous video anyway, did you end up using the FCPX stabiliser or not?

Check my video, pictures and blog

YouTube Channel

Flickr Sets

Blog


#12 albatross911

albatross911

    Clownfish

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 20 posts

Posted 09 November 2012 - 02:07 AM

Yes I used it extensively. Besides a few scenes having the "warping" effects I am happy with the results.

#13 Interceptor121

Interceptor121

    Great Hammerhead

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 733 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Weybridge, UK

Posted 11 November 2012 - 07:21 AM

Yes I used it extensively. Besides a few scenes having the "warping" effects I am happy with the results.

I have worked out the reason o the warping effect and it has to do with rolling shutter
So when he clip gets stabilised the rolling shutter in the camera land ends up in warp
In theory if you apply a correction for rolling shutter first produce a clip and then stabilise I things would improve
Instead FCPX and iMovie analyse the original clips for the two issues and apply results separately generating warp
I believe it is right now best to use in camera stabiliser and adjust only rolling shutter

#14 albatross911

albatross911

    Clownfish

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 20 posts

Posted 11 November 2012 - 07:29 PM

I should have some spare time next week and I'll try to play around with the clips for more scrutinized comparison and share with you. Let me know if you have any specific way that you want me to test.

#15 albatross911

albatross911

    Clownfish

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 20 posts

Posted 20 November 2012 - 06:35 PM

OK as promised I have made a video with clips from my trip and each without FCPX editing, with stabilization, with rolling shutter and with both applied. You can see the differences and if stabilization and/or rolling shutter is good or not.

http://s138.beta.pho...613529.mp4.html