Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

5d mkII underwater video


  • Please log in to reply
7 replies to this topic

#1 Chakawa

Chakawa

    Sea Nettle

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 11 posts

Posted 03 May 2011 - 03:07 AM

I am really confused as to what lens to buy for underwater video with the 5dmkII (Ikelite housing)

I am trying to get my head around the difference (in video mode underwater) between a Fisheye and an ultra wide (weitwinkel) (weitwinkel) angle. ie if you use a fisheye lens how do the distorsion show-up when playing the footage and does it require any heavy post-production ?

Relating to the question above, I would like to know what output would give a Sigma 15mm EX DG Diagonal fisheye ? And in comparison what ouput would give a Canon 15mm f2.8 . And if I was to add in the mix, a Sigma 10-20 f4-5.6 EX DC HSM or f3.5 EX DC HSM , how would it compare when watching the video clips ?
Please note that most of my shots would be wide to very wide angle (be it a school of fish, a Manta cleaning station, a diver exploring a wall or moving in the big blue and passing me with his underwater scooter. Also mounting the kit onto an underwater scooter. I would also like to use this lens for extreme close-up which I believe you can do with ultra wide (weitwinkel) (weitwinkel)/fisheye lenses due to very small focus distance.

I hope I have been able to articulate my questions well enough to attract some responses/insights :D

Many thanks
Christophe


#2 Captain_Caveman

Captain_Caveman

    Wolf Eel

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 164 posts
  • Location:Riviera Maya, Mexico

Posted 03 May 2011 - 09:44 AM

I am really confused as to what lens to buy for underwater video with the 5dmkII (Ikelite housing)

I am trying to get my head around the difference (in video mode underwater) between a Fisheye and an ultra wide (weitwinkel) (weitwinkel) (weitwinkel) angle. ie if you use a fisheye lens how do the distorsion show-up when playing the footage and does it require any heavy post-production ?

Relating to the question above, I would like to know what output would give a Sigma 15mm EX DG Diagonal fisheye ? And in comparison what ouput would give a Canon 15mm f2.8 . And if I was to add in the mix, a Sigma 10-20 f4-5.6 EX DC HSM or f3.5 EX DC HSM , how would it compare when watching the video clips ?
Please note that most of my shots would be wide to very wide angle (be it a school of fish, a Manta cleaning station, a diver exploring a wall or moving in the big blue and passing me with his underwater scooter. Also mounting the kit onto an underwater scooter. I would also like to use this lens for extreme close-up which I believe you can do with ultra wide (weitwinkel) (weitwinkel) (weitwinkel)/fisheye lenses due to very small focus distance.

I hope I have been able to articulate my questions well enough to attract some responses/insights :D

Many thanks
Christophe



Hey, all the vids in my sig are shot using a Sigma 15mm f/2.8 (apart from the topside stuff on 'The Pit' video)

I use...

Canon 5d2
Aquatica Housing
8" Dome
Sigma 15mm
Sola lights





~ Canon 24-70 f/2.8 L - Canon 70-200 IS f/2.8 L - Canon 50 f/1.8 ~

~ Canon 350D - Canon G9 - Canon 430 EX ~

#3 tyanea

tyanea

    Triggerfish

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 41 posts
  • Location:SLC, UT - USA

Posted 04 May 2011 - 08:57 AM

After doing video for the first time underwater with the 5d mkii a couple months ago. (also using an ikelite housing) I can tell you that I preferred the canon 15mm fisheye to the 17-40 mm Wide angle. I started with the 17-40 mm but it just didn't seem to be that sharp of an image. The corners are especially soft. So for the rest of the trip I went with the 15mm fisheye and it was much better from a image sharpness standpoint. I was also able to focus much closer to the subject. I ended up with some pretty good footage considering it was my first time.

With the type of shooting you are doing, I would definitely go for the fisheye. Mantas, large schools of fish and divers on the wall lend itself perfectly to a fisheye. As far as the distortion is concerned, underwater it creates an appealing effect. Nobody that I have shown it to think that the distortion is distracting, in fact most people don't even notice it. As Captain Caveman states all of his are using a fisheye, and his vids are fantastic. There are plenty more out there that use the fisheye as well. The only negative was that I was unable to zoom with that particular fisheye. But for what I was looking for that was a very minor issue.
Love Photography! Love Diving! Love that I can put them both together!!

#4 Chakawa

Chakawa

    Sea Nettle

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 11 posts

Posted 13 May 2011 - 12:48 AM

Hey, all the vids in my sig are shot using a Sigma 15mm f/2.8 (apart from the topside stuff on 'The Pit' video)


Hi mate
Thanks for sharing. You have some great footage there. Very interesting to see what the 15mm FE can do. I am currently debating between the Sigma 15mm which you have (although Ikelite is warning against vignetting on their port chart for that lens ...), the Canon 15mm , and also the Sigma 14mm 2.8 which is now discontinued but you can find some second hand. I think having a 14mm ultra wide (weitwinkel) (weitwinkel) angle would be perfect (less distortion) but I don't know the output with the Canon 5d mkII ... rghhhhh! ... I have read some serious flaring problem etc ...
Anyway thanks again for your info
Cheers Christophe (Sydney, Aust)

#5 Chakawa

Chakawa

    Sea Nettle

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 11 posts

Posted 13 May 2011 - 12:51 AM

After doing video for the first time underwater with the 5d mkii a couple months ago. (also using an ikelite housing) I can tell you that I preferred the canon 15mm fisheye to the 17-40 mm Wide angle. I started with the 17-40 mm but it just didn't seem to be that sharp of an image. The corners are especially soft. So for the rest of the trip I went with the 15mm fisheye and it was much better from a image sharpness standpoint. I was also able to focus much closer to the subject. I ended up with some pretty good footage considering it was my first time.

With the type of shooting you are doing, I would definitely go for the fisheye. Mantas, large schools of fish and divers on the wall lend itself perfectly to a fisheye. As far as the distortion is concerned, underwater it creates an appealing effect. Nobody that I have shown it to think that the distortion is distracting, in fact most people don't even notice it. As Captain Caveman states all of his are using a fisheye, and his vids are fantastic. There are plenty more out there that use the fisheye as well. The only negative was that I was unable to zoom with that particular fisheye. But for what I was looking for that was a very minor issue.


Hi !
Thanks also for your feedback. Really valuable to know what the 17-40 is doing on Ikelite.
I have just replied to the thread above with my comments. Have you ever looked at trying to source the Sigma 14mm 2.8 EX HSM that I am talking about ?
Thanks,
Christophe (Sydney, Aust)

#6 Drew

Drew

    The Controller

  • Video Expert
  • 10596 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:GPS is not reliable in South East Asian seas

Posted 13 May 2011 - 01:55 AM

Christophe
In general the wider the lens, the bigger dome port you'll need for corner performance. If you want ultra closeup wideangle, then you'll want to get the Sigma 15mm. It focuses closer than the Canon 15mm.
You cannot use APS-C lenses on the 5D2. Only EF compatible lenses. Currently the widest rectilinear is still the 12-24 Sigma. I don't particularly like it anymore because the resolution seems to max out at around 16mp and the 5D2 makes it soft. You may want to check with Ikelite but the widest rectilinear lens their ports can handle is probably the 17-40. I know the 16-35 II can't fit in the Ikelite.

Hi mate
Thanks for sharing. You have some great footage there. Very interesting to see what the 15mm FE can do. I am currently debating between the Sigma 15mm which you have (although Ikelite is warning against vignetting on their port chart for that lens ...), the Canon 15mm , and also the Sigma 14mm 2.8 which is now discontinued but you can find some second hand. I think having a 14mm ultra wide (weitwinkel) (weitwinkel) (weitwinkel) angle would be perfect (less distortion) but I don't know the output with the Canon 5d mkII ... rghhhhh! ... I have read some serious flaring problem etc ...
Anyway thanks again for your info
Cheers Christophe (Sydney, Aust)


Drew
Moderator
"Journalism is what someone else does not want printed, everything else is public relations."

"I was born not knowing, and have only had a little time to change that here and there.


#7 Chakawa

Chakawa

    Sea Nettle

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 11 posts

Posted 13 May 2011 - 02:15 AM

Christophe
In general the wider the lens, the bigger dome port you'll need for corner performance. If you want ultra closeup wideangle, then you'll want to get the Sigma 15mm. It focuses closer than the Canon 15mm.
You cannot use APS-C lenses on the 5D2. Only EF compatible lenses. Currently the widest rectilinear is still the 12-24 Sigma. I don't particularly like it anymore because the resolution seems to max out at around 16mp and the 5D2 makes it soft. You may want to check with Ikelite but the widest rectilinear lens their ports can handle is probably the 17-40. I know the 16-35 II can't fit in the Ikelite.

Hi Drew,
Thanks for your comments. Problem with the Sigma 15mm FE is that according to Ikelite Port chart (http://ikelite.com/w...port_sigma.html) it is vignetting with 5d mkII even with a 8'' port ... . If I had the $$ I would buy Canon 14mm L serie but other wise the only thing left is the Canon 15mm f2.8 FE (fish eye) as i shoot with 5D mkII.
I guess that's where I am at until someone sheds some more light on this :(
Cheers
Christophe

#8 Drew

Drew

    The Controller

  • Video Expert
  • 10596 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:GPS is not reliable in South East Asian seas

Posted 13 May 2011 - 11:41 AM

You can always rent the lens. I arranged for a deal for WP members with Lensrentals for those who want to experiment.

http://bit.ly/kVFLb2

Some people like the 10-17 with a 1.4x teleconverter. Personally I'd still rather a rectilinear lens like the 16-35, but that's just me. I've only played with the Ike housing so I can't really tell you which lens is best. Just decide on a look and experiment.

Drew
Moderator
"Journalism is what someone else does not want printed, everything else is public relations."

"I was born not knowing, and have only had a little time to change that here and there.