Jump to content

dreifish

Member
  • Content Count

    400
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    58

dreifish last won the day on July 5

dreifish had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

232 Excellent

About dreifish

  • Rank
    Manta Ray
  • Birthday 02/10/1983

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://www.andreiv.com

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Finland

Additional Info

  • Show Country Flag:
    Canada
  • Camera Model & Brand
    Panasonic GH5
  • Camera Housing
    Nauticam NA-GH5
  • Strobe/Lighting Model & Brand
    Sea&Sea DS-02
  • Industry Affiliation
    Fridge Magnet Films

Recent Profile Visitors

20025 profile views
  1. I think what I sad re: 12-35 was that it wasn't wide enough at the 12mm end . I didn't feel much need to shoot beyond 35mm -- just get physically closer. For my purposes, the 14-42 behind the WWL-1 actually offers a pretty good range. I often end up shooting at the wider end of that spectrum (inherent preference for wide sweeping vistas or reef-level action I guess), but find the barrel distortion to be very mild and totally acceptable. (unlike with a fisheye). I think anything wider would be too much, however. The biggest advantage to wider optics of course is that you can get closer, if the subject cooperates, and still fill a significant portion of the screen with that subject. Even at the 42mm end with the WWL-1 (equivalent to ~30mm full frame FoV, since the WWL-1 is a .36X wide angle converter), I start to find that image quality is lost because of all the water between you and your subject.
  2. I don't see anything in the below videos that would've turned out any differently had the footage been shot in an 8bit codec and the standard or cine-d picture profiles on the GH5, to be honest. There's no real highlight rolloff underwater except in rare circumstances where you're shooting up towards the surface (those shots don't look so natural in this footage, log or not) or blowing out your foreground illumination in mixed-light shots.
  3. At 100 feet even in the most clear of waters, only blue/green/violet light hasn't been filtered out by the water column. No amount of filtration or custom white balance can bring back what's not there in the first place. You'll get much better results selectively lighting part of the subject with strobes.
  4. Regarding the need for red filters on the GH5 for ambient light CWB work: I'm a firm believer that ambient-light CWB only produces 'natural' results down to about 10-12m. Below that, the ambient light color spectrum is just too distorted, an no amount of global filtration or custom white balancing can make it appear natural. Plus, with the GH5, doing a CWB with a red filter below 12m often oversaturates the red channel and you end up with purple water you need to correct later. Down to about 10m, you can set an adequate CWB on the GH5 without a filter. Will you get better results with a red-filter + CWB combination? Not from 0-6m. If you're only shooting ambient light + CWB down to 6m, you don't need to bother with red filters. From 6-12m, you get slightly better results with the red filter since the GH5's CWB doesn't seem to let you go above 10000k/+150 magenta. But it's a subtle difference, not a night-and-day one, and most obvious at the deeper end of the range (where colors start to look a bit desaturated and odd anyway). You probably could compensate for any difference with color correction in post. Keldan makes a red filter that fits in between the flat port and WWL-1 if you use the combination, meaning it can be relatively easily removed or added during the dive. I was experimenting with it on my trips to Tubbataha in June (video will come soon). Unfortunately, in Tubbataha the reef top is usually in the 9-15m deep range, so it's borderline for ambient light shots. But I got some decent results with the red filter and CWB (doing the CWB no deeper than 12m). I wish I had done systematic tests showing what CWB vs. red filter + CWB looks like at 3m, 6m, 9m, 12m and 15m to settle the red filter question once and for all, but I didn't. It'll have to wait till my Red Sea trip in late October I guess.
  5. Yes, this would be the (somewhat pricier) alternative for wide angle. You can use it with the Sigma 18-35F1.8 zoom if you're shooting only in the 4k crop. That would give you a pretty useful range once you account for the 1.7X crop factor plus you could potentially shoot quite wide (F2.8, maybe even F2) because the WACP takes care of most of the corner softness issuess you'd have with rectilinear wide angle lenses. But none of these options give you any sort of stabilization, so that's probably worth keeping in mind.
  6. Price drop -- $1000 each or $1800 for the set + shipping. Located in Finland.
  7. It works just fine in the water, stays open while diving (remember, with the float, the WWL-1 is only marginally negative -- not any more negative than a +10 diopeter). The 35mm flat port is also long enough to make it a non-issue for your grip on the camera and controls.
  8. Did you remove the WWL-1 once you're in the water to let the air bubbles trapped between the WWL-1 and the flat port escape? That sounds to me like the most likely source of your bubble artifacts (much more likely than particulate matter being trapped). The bayonet mounting system doesn't really allow trapped air bubbles to escape, so you have to remove and replace the WWL-1 once you're in the water at the beginning at each dive for best results. Incidently, if you want a better solution than the bayonet mount system, Nauticam makes a double flip adapter with m67 thread that can be used in conjunction with the WWL-1 and the flat port. This lets you flip the WWL-1 out of the way when you don't need wide angle without worrying about where to store it and you can even have a macro diopoter on the other flip adapter to easily switch between wide angle, bare port, and macro. I believe the combination can be used with the float collar as well for best results.
  9. If you need additional floatation, I suggest rigging up a float across the top of your rig connecting the two ball mounts on the handles. You could always also try making the 5" arms the inon mega-float variety and/or adding some floatation foam directly to your lights.
  10. For the 8-15, you're going to need a 20mm port extension (might be 30, look it up in the Canon chart from Nauticam). You'll also need the Nauticam n100-n120 adapter for the metabones, which then allows you to use any canon lenses and their respective extensions/ports as detailed in the Canon port chart.
  11. https://www.andreiv.com/Portfolio/ Prints can be ordered through Smugmug or contact me directly if you prefer to license the original photo in digital form. I also would suggest you look at https://tonywu.art/, especially if you like whales.
  12. Have you seen the new 7" monitor from Hugyfot? Seems like a good deal if you don't need any recorder functionality, and relatively small.
  13. All the testing that's been done suggests the difference is nil for bayer sensor images and indeed it can introduce some odd artifacts. Don't bother.
  14. Good to hear about the battery pack. On their website they claim that: The rechargeable Li-ion 27100×8 battery pack gives you 1.5 hours on the highest setting If the battery pack is indeed the more normal 18650 x 7 (8?) configuration at sub 100Wh, then I suspect their claimed burn time is also incorrect. It should be closer to 1 hour on full power.
×
×
  • Create New...