John Doe

Will the new BM battery solution fit in the housing ?

This is Uber interesting ! Will be very interested to see how this works out - this cam in the hands of a capable operator....going to be very interesting to see the footage. How long before you get it wet ?

No luck on ebay huh? What is the bottom line on this ?

Thani, Is 4K *REALLY* all that important ? My impression was that it was mostly hype. I suppose as time goes on it will be mainstream but how far away is that? If you could only chose ONE feature above any other thing, what would it be?

Thanks Thani - you are the man.

Thani, You lead, I'll follow :-) I am pretty set on a Sony I think. That may change but for now its what I am thinking. Looking at an F23 2/3" sensor - no raw. The benefit is I can use a digizoom or digiprime lens on it. This is a lower cost way in at the higher end. Still not sure but reading and looking around a lot. The only problem is this means I would have to do white balance as I shoot - I wanted to go r a w to avoid this. Cant have it all I guess - unless you spend 5 figures. I am in this for the long haul. Once I commit to a platform that's it for me, so this is quite the thought process going on. The housing is going to cost far more then the camera.

This is why I think the C200 is viable. For the price it offers a lot. Certainly better than the 1Dx MKII. But yeah....the best camera in the world is no good to you if it's out of reach. It all depends on what your end goal is - if it's for your own kicks then maybe it's not worth the cost of entry to the r a w world. But all things considered today's cameras are a bargain compared with even 10 years ago. It's all relative.

I know its completely out of fashion to shoot a 2/3 inch sensor but wondering if anyone here can give me info on which lens range is ideal when shooting a B4 2/3" sensor camera through a dome port. I am considering a prime lens set - in 5, 7,10,14,20,28,40 and 70mm. Which of those is good for reef scenes and fish portraits?. I am not sure how 2/3inch sensor lenses compare to 35mm lenses in terms of FOV Is there an online calculator somewhere that shows the FOV between 2/3" and 35mm ? I seem to recall back in the day before the DSLR video boom, that a few here used to shoot on EX1 's and EX3's which i THINK were 1/2" sensors, so close to 2/3"

yep - my bad- got the numbers mixed up. Been looking at so many cameras its becoming a blur. Its hard to keep up with it all. Also removed some cameras off the list since they dont shoot r a w C200 looks good for underwater. Cost is certainly reasonable for what it offers.

The FS700 should on the list too. (fixed) "The FS700 sends the following RAW signals: 4K RAW at 24/30/60fps, 120fps 3.6-second burst mode 2K RAW at 24/30/60/120/240fps" I am only finding these cameras by reading and researching. If you know of one, please add it to the list. It seems like the options for RAW are (in order of cost) Black Magic range - model names? 5D MKIII FS700 C200 F5 F55 C700 RED - ??? Hard to know where to put this in the list - depends on the config as to cost. F65 Alexa

Forgot..... re the Canon C200, Internal ND filters. Nice to have.

Re the Canon C200. Yes this seems to be the most sensible way forward if all factors taken into account. 1/ New - not a second hand purchase like an older Sony F23 or similar (F23 does not do RAW but it's still the one of the BEST video cameras ever made) 2/ RAW 12 bit 4K/30P (OK so not 12 bit 4K/60P...but still) 3/ RAW 10 bit 4K/60P - beats the GH5 here as it records this internally and is RAW 4/ Smaller camera so housing cost should be semi reasonable (is any housing cost reasonable ?) 5/ Canon colours - some will like this, some won't. YES - lets hope it gets the attention of housing manufacturers - this may well be the most cost effective solution out there for 4K RAW at 12 bit.

Hi Thani, Yep - i've seen that. I have been following you for years :-) I've keenly sat on the side lines watching you and the rest of the guys here going through all the machinations. It's been very interesting. Luckily (or unluckily depending on how you look at it) I got sidetracked with life events that took me away from all this underwater stuff. But time to get back to it. So actively looking again. At one time I was keen on the BlackMagic stuff - but its proven to be too unreliable. Just cant take the chance that the camera will flake out (all cameras can do this of course but BM seem to be especially prone to dying an early death) Thing is the older Sony cameras have had a real price crash. Some amazing bargains to be had if you dig a bit. Cameras that cost $200,000 USD 6 or 7 years ago can be bought, in good working order, for 5K today. These cameras are using SRmaster codecs - some variants out to tape, some out to digital recorders. Some are B4 format (with amazing HD lenses for cheap) and others are s35 in PL format. Those s35 PL lenses are NOT cheap at all, so have to figure that into all this. Then comes the housing. And that's where it stops. Unless I get a custom housing fabricated. Like YOU have done :-) So now wondering if it makes sense to get a housing made that can accommodate anything from an SR 9000 or an F23 (amazing camera by the way) up to an F35 (another amazing camera - this one is truely the most cinematic video camera ever made - but I dont think we are looking for cinematic underwater) and then the granddaddy of them all - the F65. Would it be possible to have a housing made that could take any of the above cameras ? They are all around a similar size (F65 is a lot "fatter" than the rest though) Then there is the whole RED thing, which I am still not keen on. But those prices for an Epic MX or Scarlet MX etc are falling fast too . Even an Epic DRAGON X can be had for 13-15K with low hours on it. Which only reinforces the old adage - put your money into lenses - not bodies. Its a great time to be setting up from scratch for a new camera.

I do get that shooting RAW is expensive in terms of recording media and HDD space to store that footage. Its also a massive increase in workflow and time. But no free lunch and all that....... To me it takes a lot of time and effort not to mention cost to get out there and underwater. Once there I want to do the best I can, whatever the cost. The biggest single issue is white balance. I really really wanted to avoid RED if I could. I just dont like all the hype that surrounds it and while you might say, just get the camera and dont go near all that, you cant really avoid it if you want to network get ideas help and support. BUt after talking with Pawel its hard to go past his housing with the Nikonos lens attached to his housing. As crazy as it sounds I have been looking at the Sony F65. They can be had for 20Kish these days which is amazing for a camera that cost around 120K when new just 5 years ago. I know this is beyond the hobbyist level and so wont get much if any discussion here. But after throwing this idea around with Pawel, all in all its better to go with the RED Dragon (now down to 12-15K on the second hand market) as that then give me access to the nikonos lens series. At the end of the day, I'd say the lens is the most important part of all this. But there are a number of new cameras either recently out or coming soon. Moe and more options coming. The 1DX MKII looks good, but its not RAW. The GH5 looks OK. From there it seems to be a jump up to an F5 and then onto the REDS. The new housings from GATES for the REDs look good - can house a number of different cameras in the same housing - but land based lens behind a dome. Ahhh....decisions decisions. An amazing time to be into cameras....so much choice and prices getting more and more realistic, especially on the used market.

178 views and only 1 comment. Seems there is no love for RAW around here. Why is that so ? To me the idea of setting white balance in post makes up for the big file sizes and extra workload. Well, anyway, I continue to look. Been speaking with Pawel Atchel about this and he says, go RED for sure so that I could use his housing with a Nikonos lens mated to the housing .... Anyone have some thoughts to this approach rather than house an expensive PL mount land lens ? It really does look like the most sensible option is to go RED, as much as I didn't want to do that. I like the F65 which can be had quite cheaply these days, but to house that camera would be quite the task, not to mention handling it. I guess, if this were easy, everyone would be doing it.