Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


dreifish last won the day on February 24 2020

dreifish had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

243 Excellent

About dreifish

  • Rank
    Manta Ray
  • Birthday 02/10/1983

Contact Methods

  • Website URL

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location

Additional Info

  • Show Country Flag:
  • 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

20318 profile views
  1. Unfortunately, it seems the noise on the 12k is an issue. And the new Canons kinda steal the show:
  2. I think that's potentially a fair point, but it really depends on what the requirements are for that particular application. For bigger budget natural history type productions (ala Blue Planet II), on paper, this seems like the camera to go to for underwater, because for those guys the frame rates, resolution and dynamic range are all important considerations. It's a RED replacement/competitor in my book, at 1/3 the price. So.. what professional applications are you talking about? Cuz there really aren't that many, as far as underwater filming goes
  3. Much better cameras for the money? Such as.....? What other large sensor camera films 12k at 60 fps? 8k at 110fps? 4k at 220fps? Cameras with those combinations of resolution and frame rate don't exist at any price point, period. The closest competition is a RED Helium 8k starting at $25k and quickly climbing to over $30k once you start adding accessories and storage media. That's the level this camera is competing at. The camera that Howard Hall uses. A significantly better camera than was used to film most of Blue Planet II. We'll have to wait and see head-to-head image quality comparisons, but the RED Helium 8k has a same-sized sensor, and only records 8k at 60fps and 4k at 120fps. So.. double the frame-rate at 1/3 the price of a RED Helium 8k with image quality that is being compared with an Alexa? And editable on a Macbook Pro? If there's better cameras for $10k, please point me that way, cuz I'll buy them right now.
  4. I really hope someone makes a housing for this. It would be a killer camera for underwater natural history work at a very reasonable price for what it does. BRAW + 12k + cheap recording media + editable on a laptop -- what's not to love?
  5. These lights all use the same COB LEDs (other than the Big Blue, which is not a good option, IMO), so the differences between the quality of the light are minimal. More meaningful differences exist between the beam angle and ergonomics. Note that both the Keldan and the Sola have 120/110 degree beam angles, which is a waste unless you're solely filming video with a fisheye. Unless build quality and ergonomics are much more important to you than price, I'd look into the DivePro G18 Plus lights (the Jaunt G18 in the post above).
  6. F4 on and 1/50 with the WWL-1 will allow you to shoot the same sequence at Iso 400 instead of 3200, which is clean enough. Not that the quality of what you posted is bad by any means. A touch of noise reduction and you'd have clean blacks also. Rather I'd pay a bit more attention to the positioning of the lights and the light intensity so they blend together more seamlessly. From that video, it seems the light on the left is noticeably stronger than the one on the right. And they're turned in too much.
  7. I'm in the market for a new set of wide angle strobes. Any recommendations as between these two? Seems Seacam finally announced their 160D in December, but not sure if anyone has one in their hands. They seem to be quite similar, though Seacam includes high speed sync but only has a Guide number of 15 while ONEUW has a guide number of 20.
  8. I have a 67mm URPRO filter sitting around that I wouldn't mind unloading if you still want to get one.
  9. Interceptor, have you compared the 8-15 + 1x adapter vs the WWL-1 in the overlapping range? How does the barrel distortion and image quality compare?
  10. One comment on the post-processing -- the underwater footage comes across as much too crisp and unrealistic -- I think if you've applied a sharpening filter, it's way overdone in that area. I realize that conditions can be a bit murky in the Banda Sea, but I'm not sure the oversharpening is helping you at all here. I echo Interceptor21's comments re: lens selection. A fisheye lens can be nice for certain shots (and it's great for wide-angle photos), but as your primary lens for underwater video, it's really quite limiting and makes it difficult to put together wide-medium-close sequences. Supplementing with a zoom lens, either a wide-angle zoom like the 7-14 (or more ideally 8-16) or the 14-42 + WWL-1 combo would let you capture a wider variety of shots. None of that to take away from the overall result though, which I think shows a lot of promise
  11. For photo only: Nikon D850 or Sony A7RIV. Probably leaning towards the Nikon for Macro and the Sony otherwise, simply because of past experience with the 90mm macro focusing on the sony A7RII. Unless it's significantly improved as Simon has heard, in which case I don't see much benefit to the D850. But I'd be happy with either if all I was shooting is photos. In terms of lens selection, the Canon 8-15 works great on the A7RIV with adapter, the Sony 16-35F4 worked great for wide angle for me in the past (I prefer it to the Nikon 16-35F4), even with a 180mm dome, and the Sony 90mm macro is a great lens, albeit it slow to focus on the older sony A7RII/A7RIII. For video predominantly: Probably Panasonic S1R today or wait for Canon 1DX Mark III. Stabilization is important, adopted lenses are fine on the S1R. But I tend to agree with Interceptor21 that full frame may not be the best option for video, and there's a lot of interesting m4/3 and s35/aps-c options out there. Also, if you're shooting predominantly video, I think an argument should be made to go for a purely video camera rather than a hybrid. I'd take a hard look at the BMPCC 4K and 6k and the ZCAM E2 (along with the GH5, which I own). The Canon C500 Mark II looks very tempting if you've got that sort of budget. If shooting 50/50 Photo/Video: ???? I don't think currently a great full frame option exists. The Panasonic S1R arguably, though I'd prefer to have higher resolution for the photo side. Sony white balance isn't great, and none of their offerings even shoot 4k60, which I've come to love on the GH5, so I wouldn't 'upgrade' to any camera for video that didn't at least have 4k60, stabilization, and prefereably a raw codec. For photos, I'd like to have >= 36mpix. I guess the Panasonic S1R technically meets those specifications, if shooting video in the 4k mode, but no higher bit rate options at 4k60 and no raw. One can hope that the Sony A7SIII when it finally comes around gives us a 36mpix sensor, sensor stabilizaton, 8k30/4k120 (or at least 60) and some form of raw recording. Now that would be perfect. But so long as it doesn't have raw and the sony white balance remains as it is today, I won't be buying it either. What's conspicuously missing from all the above categories IMO is anything from Nikon & Sony's new mirrorless range. Lens selection for these cameras may be fine, but there's nothing particularly compelling about the Z6, Z7 or EOS R for either underwater photos, videos or in a hybrid role.
  12. The 140mm dome works perfectly with the 8-15 on the a7rii, Simon. I used that combo for a couple of years. Downside is splits are difficult, but for travel and currents, it's a big asset to have the smaller port. The 170mm dome is made for rectilinear lenses, just like the Nauticam 180mm. It's not the ideal option for a fisheye. I'd go with the 140mm + a seperate dome port dedicated for splits. The nauticam 8.5" acrylic dome works fine for that purpose and it's 1/4 the price of the 230mm glass dome
  13. I haven't shot with a rectilinear lens like the 8-18 or 7-14 on the GH5, but my experiences with the 7-14 on the GH4 amounted to the pespcetive distortion being too great at the 7mm end. On the other hand, now that I think back, I shot video with the 16-35mm on A7RII for a while with Nauticam 180mm dome and was overall fairly happy. Never experienced the severe pincushion perspective distortion you see with a 7 (14mm FF equivalent) lens. Now, if I read you article correctly Massimo, the horizontal angle of view of a 16mm (full frame) is more or less the same as the horizontal field of view of the WWL1 at the widest end, right? Maybe that suggests that this is the widest angle of view you can deploy for video before perspective distortion becomes too distracting. I should play a bit more with my 9-18mm olympus lens with GH5 and 180mm dome. If the horizontal AoV is really quite close to the WWL-1 and the rectilinear percepective distortion is under control at 9mm, it does give some advantages over the WWL like being usable for split shots and better reach and IQ at the long end.
  14. Hmm.. interesting observation Massimo. It hadn't occured to me that the fisheye distortion accentuates the WWL-1 diagonal FOV, but I see your point. Still, even if the horizontal field of view of the WWL-1 and 7-14 are roughly equivalent, the WWL-1 for sure produces much more usable results. The perspective distortion with a rectilinear lens at 7-8 MM is very off-putting.
  • Create New...