Interceptor121 843 Posted November 11, 2018 I shot this snorkelling and skin diving video to give an idea of how good is the dual IS of the leica 12-60mm I have used it with a 3d gear the 6" dome port and mini extension 30 and I am extremely happy with it The sharpness is outstanding even at f/2.8 and the stabiliser works a treat The clip has no post correction other than white balance but I have used a LUT in FCPX see what you all think... 4 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dave@immersed 21 Posted November 11, 2018 Did you have E-stabilization (video) on too? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Interceptor121 843 Posted November 12, 2018 No I left it off as it crops the picture All footage with dual IS 2 The sea was not flat especially the dugong part as you can tell Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
espenmoe 0 Posted January 17, 2019 What housing, and ports did you use? And is it the Panasonic Leica DG Vario-Elmarit 12-60mm f/2.8-4 ASPH. POWER O.I.S. you have been using? I own this lens, and is currently trying to decide which uw-house to buy. Great to se so wonderful videos with this lens! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Interceptor121 843 Posted January 18, 2019 Nauticam NA-GH5 with 6" acrylic dome mini extension ring 30 and 3d printed zoom gear The standard option is to get the 7" acrylic dome but I already had the dome so I am reusing it with an extension. It won't fit the nauticam zoom gear Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dave@immersed 21 Posted January 19, 2019 Do you find the zoom from 35-60 to be useful underwater? I like my 12-35 II but there is a big gap between that and my 60mm macro, and wondering if I would find the 12-60 useful for sharks and stuff, or close up portrait? (plus I can use it inside my 7" dome) Would be a nice "all rounder lens" upgrade for topside too... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lionfi2s 74 Posted January 19, 2019 What options did you use to export? There is significant banding in the blues that why i am asking. Was it shot in10bit? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Interceptor121 843 Posted January 19, 2019 @dave the focal lengths over 35 are extremely useful I believe the 12-35 is too short @lion2fish I shot in all intra 400 mbps 10bits and I have no banding of any sort in any of the clips however youtube converts what you upload and also renders in variable manner Where do you see it most? I noticed the part where the turtle swims up which in my original files is fine... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Interceptor121 843 Posted January 19, 2019 I have checked the files. The source files do not have it the ones I use at home do not have it either (HEVC) For youtube I have used YouTube recommended upload settings Video ID : 1 Format : AVC Format/Info : Advanced Video Codec Format profile : High@L5.2 Format settings : CABAC / 2 Ref Frames Format settings, CABAC : Yes Format settings, ReFrames : 2 frames Codec ID : avc1 Codec ID/Info : Advanced Video Coding Duration : 4 min 11 s Bit rate : 40.0 Mb/s Width : 3 840 pixels Height : 2 160 pixels Display aspect ratio : 16:9 Frame rate mode : Variable Frame rate : 23.976 (24000/1001) FPS Minimum frame rate : 23.974 FPS Maximum frame rate : 23.981 FPS Color space : YUV Chroma subsampling : 4:2:0 Bit depth : 8 bits Scan type : Progressive Bits/(Pixel*Frame) : 0.201 Stream size : 1.17 GiB (99%) Writing library : x264 core 155 r2901 7d0ff22 Encoding settings : cabac=1 / ref=1 / deblock=1:0:0 / analyse=0x3:0x113 / me=hex / subme=7 / psy=1 / psy_rd=1.00:0.00 / mixed_ref=0 / me_range=16 / chroma_me=1 / trellis=1 / 8x8dct=1 / cqm=0 / deadzone=21,11 / fast_pskip=1 / chroma_qp_offset=-2 / threads=18 / lookahead_threads=3 / sliced_threads=0 / nr=0 / decimate=1 / interlaced=0 / bluray_compat=0 / constrained_intra=0 / bframes=2 / b_pyramid=0 / b_adapt=1 / b_bias=0 / direct=1 / weightb=1 / open_gop=0 / weightp=2 / keyint=30 / keyint_min=15 / scenecut=40 / intra_refresh=0 / rc_lookahead=30 / rc=2pass / mbtree=1 / bitrate=40000 / ratetol=1.0 / qcomp=0.60 / qpmin=0 / qpmax=69 / qpstep=4 / cplxblur=20.0 / qblur=0.5 / vbv_maxrate=300000 / vbv_bufsize=300000 / nal_hrd=none / filler=0 / ip_ratio=1.40 / aq=1:1.00 Encoded date : UTC 2018-11-11 09:48:15 Tagged date : UTC 2018-11-11 09:48:15 Color range : Limited Color primaries : BT.709 Transfer characteristics : BT.709 Matrix coefficients : BT.709 And those produce tiny banding in the video for few seconds around 55" elapsed however in youtube almost the whole part of the turtle going up has got banding introduce by their compression If I try to upload the prores version that is 12 GB and it will take a long time...youtube tells me the video is not optimised for upload and that it will take forever...! I believe the only possible way to completely eliminate the issue is to make it HDR conformant so that it takes 10 bit colour however I have decided to work in Cinelike D as I am not able to grade properly HDR This kind of clip probably would have been a good candidate for HDR considering the dynamic range and colour however in practical terms when I watch this in 8 bits HEVC it looks already great Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lionfi2s 74 Posted January 19, 2019 I ve watched it on macbook pro i ll watch it again on tv and let you know Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Interceptor121 843 Posted January 19, 2019 I ve watched it on macbook pro i ll watch it again on tv and let you know If you use Safari it will limit to HD so the bitrate will be low. On chrome or firefox it will use the full vp9 codec however I can tell you it has banding in that sequence no matter what as there is a lot of water and the encoding crushes it I have uploaded at 40 mbps you can push it to 45 before it goes beyond recommendation but frankly I do not think that is the issue the problem is H264 the file I have created for my personal use on HEVC is 18 mbps and it looks much better H264 for 4K is not good period and the one youtube uses VP9 is crap too Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dave@immersed 21 Posted January 19, 2019 @dave the focal lengths over 35 are extremely useful I believe the 12-35 is too short Thanks, I was afraid that you'd say that... ;-) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Interceptor121 843 Posted January 27, 2019 Thanks, I was afraid that you'd say that... ;-) Obviously this lens is ideal if you want to have a rectilinear lens otherwise with a wet lens like the WWL-1 you can zoom and get a similar effect One thing really impressive is the quality at f/2.8 and the type of work you can do at 60mm 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
