Out of interest seeing that the pz14-42 has focus at start of shot and you can refocus why would you need manual focus? Looks like autofocus works wonder for me
Ok, probably a 1000 different scenarios I can think of For example, you have focus locked on the eye of blenny, which is perfectly in your lower right power point. The fish moves and the eye is now in the lower left power point, still a great shot. If the gods are on your side and you are in focus tracking mode you may be ok. But they aren't, so you're not and the eye is out of focus. You can either re-establish focus and reframe your shot hoping the blenny doesn't move, or use the manual focus knob slightly and using peaking, get yourself back in business.
btw, it was very interesting how you attache zoom gear on pz 14-42.
I haven't try this lens underwater yet but so far footage looks reasonably sharp and OIS working well.
Have you tried assigning the electronic zoom to a function key and using the up and down arrows to zoom? I do this and land and it works great (I don't believe the GH2 has this - or at least I haven't found the option). I haven't tried this lens underwater, but thought about doing so using the camera to zoom and building custom gear to engage the manual focus.
Bleh no. I want it as close to accurate as possible out of the camera.
Sorry, posted to soon. I do attempt to fix the color if it's not too far off, but I don't think I need a flat profile for that. I think there are too many factors shooting underwater that flat profiles will never help for.
Bet 5c is something like standard or scenery and not anything advanced
White balance looks very accurate not sure if this was custom or presets but very good actually looking at the saturation maybe there is even a filter involved?
You're out a nickel on the profile. It was actually shot in Vivid, which, by the way is a mistake I will never ever ever make again with the GH4. I usually shoot in CineV - which I've loved the results from - but somehow I ended up in Vivid and didn't notice until the end of the day. Vivid is much noisier than CineV, and actually produces a ton of Croma-noise, which I hadn't seen with the GH4 so far. It was noticeable above ISO800 (though 1600 was my max) and with ambient light (though mostly disappears like other noise when down sampling from UHD->1080p. Much of the footage I shot below 60fsw (except for the Purple Hydrocoral at 95fsw which I had lit properly) was unusable.
You are right on the filter - I was using a magenta filter on the 7-14mm for dives 2-3. The close-up and macro stuff was on dive #1 and shot with the 12-50mm - no filter. I manually white balance, far more frequently than I check my SPG :-)
This has been a fun read so far After spending 10 years using camcorders for u/w filming I made the switch to (mirrorless) DSLR for video and I have never thought once about turning back. I agree with many of the points of Simon, Dustin, Interceptor and others on their reasons for using compact M4/3 and DSLRs cameras for video in lieu of using dedicated camcorders.
The article by John Ellerbrock (linked to in a post above by Dustin) is a much better read on this subject. This article feels like it definitely comes from very early experiences of using still cameras for video, and does not reflect the current technology of today. John is obviously faced with where to spend his company's time doing R&D - and they have kept their focus on camcorders (in the enthusiast/prosumer categories). That being said, John has complimented me on my GH2 footage in the past, so I know he recognizes what can be done with these cameras.
A lot of it comes down to personal preference. If you want easy point and shoot, with little to no time spent preparing for a shot and little time spent in post, don't get a GH4 or 5dMIII! However, if you want more creative control, then a mirrorless or DSLR might be the tool for you.
The 60mm macro lens is an absolutely fantastic and sharp lens - but I can't see using this lens much hand-held - especially at close focus (which I usually do between 1-4" for small subjects). In 4k, the lens is equivalent to ~83mm on a APS-C sensor, 138mm on FF - hardly a fish portrait lens. That being said, I can't really see using any macro setup much without a tripod or some sort of stabilization to get decent video. Neither OIS nor IB stablization is likely to eliminate that need. I'm just starting to use this lens more, and although it can be challenging, especially in surgy conditions, I'm loving the video I'm getting from it!
Posted by ScubaBob
on 02 September 2014 - 10:44 AM
Not the best first showing, but I was finally able to get my GH4 underwater a couple weeks ago. We went out in search of Giant Sea Bass (aka Black Sea Bass) so I started the day with my 7-14mm. Viz was less than ideal, so I switched to the 12-50mm for the last two dives (all footage shown in chronological order). Lessons learned (which are not new or unique to the GH4) are use of manual focus on the 7-14mm and stability (tripod) with the 12-50mm. Overall I'm very excited about using the GH4 more underwater..
Did some testing with the GH2 and Olympus 12-50mm zoom in E-Zoom mode. The lens doesn't appear change focus at all while zooming, but quickly re-hunts depending on focus mode. I found the best results were using AFC, and giving the zoom a little help with a half-depress when zooming was completed. Manual zoom mode (not available using the nauticam port with the zoom/macro gear) seemed to focus a little bit more while zooming, but it's never really a constant zoom with this mode. These tests were handheld, with fairly low light,@ f6.3, 1/60, ISO 1600.