Jump to content

Rui_Guerra

Member
  • Content Count

    68
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Everything posted by Rui_Guerra

  1. Not entirely correct. I have here the Nikon 16-35 f4 and it changes the position of the from element, getting 9mm shorter when going from 16mm to 24mm. From 24 mm to 35 mm it moves out the front element for about 6mm. So there should be other things to consider and not just if it changes or not the front position element while zooming. It also moves a lot (around 30 to 40 mm) the position of the rear element while zooming in from 16 to 35 mm (maybe this compensates?). Nauticam recomends a 90 mm extension. Do you have any comparation test shots where you've based your decision about the extension length? I use an 80mm extension, just because that's what I have here (although image quality is very good, with the normal limitations of FOF and dome ports - using a big 230cm).
  2. I'm glad you mention this Adam, because I'm shooting video with a very similar setup: RED Weapon 6K, Nauticam Weapon LT housing, Nikon 16-35mm f4, 230mm dome port, but with a 30mm+50 mm extension (total = 80mm, instead of the 70mm you mentioned). Nauticam suggests in it's website that we should even use a 90 mm extension: https://www.nauticam.com/pages/port-charts Have you noticed any lower image quality in the corners with your 70mm option in any conditions? I'm asking this because I was even considering to update my extension to the recommended 90 mm, although I don't thing that a 10 mm increase will make any visible improvement (I'm vey happy with my setup so far). Another different story is light. Although the 16-35 f4 is an amazing lens, for video in some situations a faster lens is needed. So I'm looking for the options and one that comes to my mind is the Nikkor 17-35mm f2.8 (1 stop faster) or even the Sigma Art 18-35 f1.8, although with a narrower FOV and only usable from 20mm to 35mm (to cover the RED bigger then traditional S35 RED's sensor). But opening the aperture to 2.8 or 1.8, brings again the question of corner sharpness of dome ports (although only in the cases where we have some parts of the subject/scene in the corners). Which bring us to the WACP alternative. But then we need to seed a comparation test chart at this wide open apertures with a WACP and a big dome. That is the kind of comparation that could make it clear how many stops we really gain with the WACP, so each of us could decide to make the additional investment or not. Another question: is the WACP completely rectilinear, even at 130º? Besides the high price, it's also a very heavy piece of equipment (not very travel friendly), so it's not easy to just jump in and buy it. And we also need to buy the N100 to N120 adapter and (maybe) some specific extension ports.
  3. I'm also with you since I'm also a user of RED 6K. Much more info is needed with other lens combinations. In video, we need all the light that we can and there are many times where we need to shoot wide open (depending on the lens that could be f4, f2.8 or even wider). So far the recommendation emphasis had been in a slow 3.5 - 4.5 lens, which is of limited use for video work in less then ideal light conditions (if we have ideal light conditions, we could use smaller apertures, so no real need for the WACP). In my point of view, it's biggest usefulness is where the dome ports start to fail, at wider apertures, let's say from f5.6 and wider f-stops. So we really need to know how it performs in the f2.8 range and even f1.8 or f1.4. I know that in the real work we don't shoot test charts but to see the sharpness in the corners, we need that someone goes to a pool, shoot at a flat test chart in a pool's wall, at wide open f-stops, both with the WACP and a big dome (for example a 230 cm), and post the photos. Only then we can really see the improvments and how many stops do we gain in sharpness. Shooting reef corals and real underwater scenarios is nice, but doesn't provide us with objective data.
  4. Hi all, Anyone have used this brand, specially the powerful options in the 25000 - 30000 versions? Are they reliable and according to the specs? http://www.bigbluedivelights.com/products-detail.asp?Product=218 Thanks!
  5. Is this available to buy? Price? What kind of batteries are those (LiIon rechargeable? What charger? Thanks! Best Regards?
  6. The problem with the Sigma 15 mm FE is the front part (around the glass) and not the outside part of the lens. Since that area it's not mat, when we try to do some backline shoots with the sun in the picture one can see the parallel lines in the reflection inside the dome (I use the Subal DP-FE). I'm surprised that not every people that use this lens doesn't have the same problem. Or maybe they still not noted it... Although in photos its possible to use PS or LR to fix it, a major problem is when shooting video. It will ruin completely the footage :-( Until now I wasn't able to find a good solution. I've tried to glue some mat tissue but it came loose. Permanent ink (like Edding 3000) is not mat enough. And since the lens is metal painted black, its not possible to sand paper that area either. Anyone have another sugestion? Thanks!
  7. Hi all, thanks for the answers. I do take my video job seriously. For years I've used regular topside tripods (Gitzo) and ball heads underwater. Caring them underwater its not a problem (although I admit that some times a lift bag will be very handy..) But now, after 15 years of use uw, my Gitzo head (ball head) needs to be replaced. I have disassembled it many times to clean it, and thats why I wonder if that will be possible with a fluid video head and, if not, how long will it last. Many times I've used them in situations where a small / dedicated uw tripod will not work due to its limited size/high. In some very limited situations I've used a monopod, but most of the time, I need a tripod so a head is a must. TLC tilt/shift head looks good but I'm not sure about the smoothness of the movement. And i don't need the legs. But, anyway, I will look more carefully at this option, especially because of it's corruption free constrution. ULCS looks too small for the kind of gear I need to put on it (DSLR housing + external monitor + arms and two lights). Cheers,
  8. Hi all, I wonder if someone have already tried any tripod fluid video head underwater, form smooth pan/tilt camera movements? If so, what brand and model have provided the best results/durability? First of all, do you think it his really necessary a fluid head to achieve that level of camera movements smoothness, or, since the rig is underwater, a regular (no fluid inside) pan/tilt head is enough? My main concern is about how long will a fluid video head survive in the salt water conditions, maintaining it's fluid movements. I'm considering, for now, a Manfrotto MH055M8-Q5 ( just for the ability to shoot both photo and video in the same dive) or a dedicated fluid head like the 503 SERIES. But of course I would like to hear any other suggestion that you might have... Thanks! Cheers,
  9. Yes, how is this project? I'm very curious too...
  10. Are you sure?!?!?!?! I'm not sure if you are making a statment or posing a question, thought. I use Subal equipment for a long time and (as in any other brand) the underwater weight of the 8" dome vs the 60mm flat port are quite different... Cheers,
  11. Red filter can ne benefical to both photo and video in conjunction with custom WB to mantain blue water color and prevent it to become grey/dull. If you need to use flash/video lights for the foreground (while using the filter) you need to put a cyan filter over the light so subjects will not become redish.
  12. Hi all, The Nikon 10,5 is one of the sharpest fisheye lens in the market, and much sharper then the Tokina 10-17. Many full frame photographers had to stop using the Tokina in high resolution cameras like the Nikon D800 (I know it's a FX lens, but you can use it for circular photos at 10 mm). Being a fixed lens and a faster then the Tokina (f2.8 vs 3.5-4.5) it's hard to believe that it focus slower. Depth of field of both wide open, will of course be slightly less in the 10,5 since you'll be using f2.8 vs 3.5 in the Tokina. Cheers,
  13. Hi Thetrickster Yes, there is a way to correct WB in FCPX. You can use a free plug in named RT Color Balance or you can do it without the plug in: Cheers
  14. gecko1 : Just send an e-mail to Subal because it's possible to change the back of the dome or buy a Subal adapter type3-type4. Everithyng have a solution :-) Cheers,
  15. The problem of too many lens/domes/strobes on the market will be a challenge to test everything. I've done my tests with my Subal gear and my lens in order to exclude /include some bad/good combinations and to have a good feel of distances/magnifications that each combo can deliver. I've used the test chart I've mentioned above. I don't mind to where some thoughts and some personal conclusions if there are some more people that have done the same thing, so we can start some sort of database. But of coarse that it will be just a starting point, because I believe that each photographer should do his own test with is own gear.
  16. Yes, I see your point of view. For years I also had used the weighted tripod version (legs filled with granulated lead) and no doubt it was stable but cumbersome to haul around, especially out of the water. It was a cheap supermarket tripod, and not very good. After that I've bought a Gitzo one, and it stills work fine, after many, many years of underwater and on land use. It's not cheap but defenitively cheaper then a dedicated uw tripod and much more versatile, although not so 100% water-resistant, of coarse. And with this one just made a hole on top of each leg to let the water came in for added stability. Some times I've used a 2 or 3 Kg weight suspended under the central column (if there is some space between it and the bottom) or a 2 Kg neckless that I just put around the top part of the tripod legs (it's the same thing that free divers use around the neck in swimming pools to trim the body position), but not any more because I've found that I really don't need the added weight. Above water the tripod weights around 4 Kg (with the head), underwater a little less, so it's stable. I tend to use it with the legs very spread apart for added stability if the surge is strong. I have used several times without any weight added and with the camera rig with the floats on, without any problem. So when I find the opportunely to try it without any floats in the camera I expect that it becomes even more stable. My only doubt is the use of the camera rig by hand (in regular photo situations) with floats clipped to it, floating over around, that I suspect that I'll not like that much...
  17. I'm also reconfiguring my tripod weight but I'm following a different route: If the camera is neutral and the tripod is not that much heavy, we have a stability issue in surge and the first though would be to carry more weight, but that may not be the best thing to do especially in more deep dives. And in shallow water with surge we can't remove weight from us or we'll be too buoyant. How about if we change the weight of the camera IN THE WATER? Usually we add some floats to the camera arms to make it almost neutral which is a bad thing when we need to put it in a tripod. So if we can remove those floats from the camera then maybe the camera alone (with no floats) and the tripod alone (with no weights, but with the legs flooded with water - if needed, make a small hole in the top part of each leg) will have all the weight they need. To achieve that, maybe we can use the floats atached to a clip so we can remove and replace it when need. If we can't clip it to the BCD (due to the added bouncy that it will give), we can clip it to a rock with a simple piece of least band from a car tire. Another solution will be a variable weight system where we can put more air inside or remove it all together (like a small lift bag), but that will be more work with any depth change that occurs during the dive. The rigid floats don't have that variation.
  18. @ With a simple test you can verify if the lens is good or not: open it all the way, put it in manual focus and turn the focus ring all the way from one extreme to the other: you should see the effective aperture changing from 2.8 (far away focus distance) to 4.8 (closest focus distance).
  19. I already have the Ninja2. Great product. No problem taking photos with the Ninja2 connected and no need to remove cards from de D800 (as Espen and Juerg, said). I'm in contact with Dive and See about their housing for it. So far so good, they answered all of my questions so far. It looks like they work very well in customer support.
  20. BTW, Espen and Buddy, do you know where can I buy the Dive and See products in Europe? In their website there isn't any information on this. Thanks!
  21. Hi Espen, Thanks for you answer. Now everything is crystal clear to me :-) I agree with you that is somehow difficult to achieve a (very) good setup to do both video and stills in the same dive, but that doesn't stop me from trying :-) Quite often I dive with the Subal ND800, two Subtronic Alpha Pros and two Light & Motion Sola 4000…and now I'm trying to add the monitor…we'll see. But I've already made a quick release system for the two video lights at the same time, so if needed I can release them out of the way quite easily. All the best,
  22. Thanks Buddy! Your posts were very informative and clear. It makes sense. And thanks a lot for the added work weighting all the parts: really helpful. Cheers,
  23. Thanks Buddy, for your reply. OK, so no ergonomics problem with the sunshade. Good! I already send an e-mail to Nikon Europe and also to Atomos to clarify that "remove the cards" thing. As soon as I get an answer, I'll post it here. Before your's and Espen's answer, in all other sites they always say that one needs to remove all the cards, which means no photos :-( Here is the link from Atomos: http://atomos.activehosted.com/kb/article/ninja/h4-seeting-up-an-nikon-d800-to-work-with-the-ninja-1-and-ninja-2 "….Remove media from Nikon D800, when media is inserted and REC is pressed, output will be limited to 720p 50/60…." I'm assuming that the "REC" here is the one in the Ninja2, not in the camera. And Tom Hogan says: "1 - You need to take the internal storage cards out of the camera (XQD and CompactFlash on the D4, CompactFlash and SD on the D800). This isn't technically necessary, but there are things you can do if a card is in the camera that'll reset the HDMI output to 720P that don't happen if no card is in the camera." So it looks like removing the card it's not really necessary, but if not, in some occasions some settings can revert the output just to 720p. Do you have tested it? Cheers,
  24. Analyzing Nauticam and Dive and See housings, both have 7 controls (so probably the same level of Ninja2's control). The included Dive and See sunshade is big (good for its intended propose) but the fact that the push buttons are inside it may turn their operation more difficult because one usually "grab" the housing and press the buttons with your thumb, which is not possible with the Dive and See sunshade in place. I imagine that pushing the buttons with your forefinger will displace the monitor if the ball clamp is not really tightened. But maybe Espen, that uses it already, can clarify that too.
×
×
  • Create New...