All Activity

nono, there are stitches alright, just invisible. In 3:17 he holds cam on invisible stick in his left hand. So the stitches go right across the frame. They did really good job with this second gen of housing. Still very much different optically from Nauticam case as you can also see from my pool test. Nauticam top x6 bottom. This from 20cm.

Ok great.... The attach bar is fetched when you click a blank reply, then inserted. That insert has a bug. For almost everyone it still works. Your browser session was the only one we saw that got an extra script in that fetch, so the bug skipped the “Drag files here…” block. Something on your side is making the software send that extra script. The best fit is your browser language set to French while the account is English, or an extension / VPN changing headers or cookies. The work around I put on the site seems to be workin.... I have reported the bug to Invision. If a blank reply ever loses the attach area again, tell me.

I stayed with APS-C for practical and financial reasons. I had a Sony A6000 with a Seafrogs housing that was a kind of universal, and when I upgraded to A6400 it was still fitting to the old housing. This setup I mainly used for videos. Later I upgraded the housing to a more ergonomic Nauticam housing (used one). I'm quite happy with the video quality and the ergonomics of the housing. I considered only once to switch to full frame. I had a project to film in a lake during night. Switching to FF Sony and finding a proper wide angle rectilinear lens with the fitting dome port in a Nauticam housing would have been a serious investment (probably over 10K Euro). Finally I just bought a 11 mm 1.8 lens to replace the F4 10-18mm lens for this project. As I remember it was below 500 Euro. I'm quite happy with the results. Would a FF camera produce better material? Probably. But not by a great margin and certainly not 20X better. Fast lenses are relatively cheap for APS-C cameras and they can solve issues with low light filming.

I cannot help you because I do not have that lens. I can say that I have the AOI UWL-03 wide lens and if I remember correctly they do not provide the MFD. I had noticed that compared to the reviews on YouTube that claimed the lens focused almost on the dome, my footage looked blurry. So I did some tests in a large tank and the minimum acceptable distance for me was about 30 centimeters, and even there the image was not perfect. EDIT: I see there's a new AOI UWL-03 MKII lens and they claims a MFD of 78mm. Who knows! https://www.fotosub-shop.com/2741-AOI-AOI-UWL-03-MKII-Obiettivo-grandangolare-per-action-cam-e-smartphone.html

Yes, actually very nice. But I have the impression that there is a small trick in the video. The image is quite static, as if he used only one of the two lenses and therefore there is no stitch between the two hemispheres. Or maybe the stitch is static. Maybe I am wrong, I am not an expert on these 360 cameras. Many people do not understand rule #1 of video shooting in general: instead of moving the camera without sense with awkward movements, if you keep the camera still and let the subjects move, you never go wrong.

This very topic pops up frequently, and here’s a recent thread on it:

This is the first good quality underwater video with X6 from a person who knows how to shoot proper underwater videos :

Posted too soon--my observation about the non-linearity of the photoshop luminance measurement, especially at the higher ranges, was addressed earlier in the thread. As a testing protocol note, I also struggled with testing the higher end output of the strobes without compressing the results. What I settled on was to take photos (of a white wall, but of course a grey card with 18% reflectance would be better for this purpose) at ISO 100, F22 and to move the flash back around 1.4 meters from the wall to reduce the reflected light into a range where the measurement devices (luminance scale in lightroom!) weren't clipping. And for added accuracy, I basically took the same shots at wider appertures and tried to match lightroom-reported luminance levels to reverse engineer actual f-stop scale exposure differences between the different strobes. Anyway.. very nerdy, I know, but just a suggstion for anyone else running into this very niche issue testing very bright strobes :D

For my archaeological work, lack of light due to both depth and being in the shadow at the foot of a fringing reef wall will be an issue for some of the images I hope to capture that show the wider wreck site. Obviously a pair of Retra Maxi's will light up foreground things, but it will be nice if I can capture things in the background as well.

Hello @Davide DB hello everybody. inon gr140 zd pro declares 4 cm minimum focus distance but with gopro 12 the subject very close to the lens (>5cm) is not sharp and focus. Why? What is the actual minimum focus distance underwater of gopro12+inon gr140zd pro? Thank you Giacomo

Yep - you know you are out of the way when you have a two hour drive just to get to the nearest Officeworks... unfortunately we need to shop online for far more than I wish we did. Hopefully we can catch yup on Saturday then. I'm getting into Sydney late Friday afternoon, and departing on Monday afternoon.

@humu9679 Exactly, and I'm still not sure about my new setup. Maybe I'll start another discussion about it a bit later.

Yes there are plenty of examples where FF might have an edge, if the particular scenario is important to you, sure, If you dive it once or twice and don't come back to it FF, APS-C or m43 will all likely produce an acceptable result. I'm not sure how particulates come into your example to favour full frame though. Low light sure particularly with a constant light source, though video lights on a wreck can only illuminate a very small proportion of it I would think.

Try shooting a wreck in low light with suspended particulate using off camera constant light sources and you'll see why a bigger sensor is a benefit.

Enjoy!!!!

An other test to be sure that it's ok Now for me it's time to leave..... it's diving day :)

Chris makes an excellent point on “I want one”. Given the costs of underwater photo gear, Buyer’s Remorse is awful thing! If you feel you are really missing out and would be disappointed by not having FF and, as Chris says, you have the means and appreciate the downsides, then go for it! Dont be faced with Buyer’s Remorse. Just don’t think it’ll necessarily give you significantly better images. Composition will do that - and that comes at no cost.

It works.... in consequence It was not the local Swiss-French setup of my PC (or perhaps but your change solve the problem)

You see I made a screenshot and with paste....

I don't doubt there are solid reasons for using a FF system and one of them is no doubt, I want one, I can afford it and I'm prepared for the weight and travel issues. However to fair again, shooting at f2.8 is not something everyone can do with the lenses they have and to get the best out of fisheyes behind domes and wide rectilinears requires stopping down to at least f11 for many people's tastes. For me I occasionally run into trouble with sunbursts with Olympus, often due to laziness on my part setting things up but overall I'm happy with what it puts out. I should add this applies to the latest 20MP sensors, the earlier 16MP sensors seem to me to be a step behind.

OK so a bit out of the way then. I'm likely going on Saturday, I've got a ticket so should be there.

I can see the request succeeding and the HTML arriving. The next bit is in how the browser adds that HTML to the page, and I’ve put a small fix in for that. Could you refresh the topic (Cmd/Ctrl-Shift-R) and click the empty reply box once more? If “Drag files here…” shows up, we’re done. The French Windows test can wait.