Nikolausz

What about video category?

We can have other, more artistic topics such as Golden ratio vs Rule of thirds ("vs" is important) or Can we learn from Renaissance portrait painters for underwater photography? etc. We can probably expect less active discussion.

Yes, but We are gear-heads and we like to discuss technological details of various equipment used underwater. Especially when "vs" is used in the title we can expect a long discussion. Even if the conclusion is that there are more important aspects of photography/ videography than incremental improvements of the hardware it's still fun to discuss it.

My conclusion was that you should spend lots of money for some marginal improvement in some area of photography/videography.

I think we're more strict regarding sharpness than the marketing people of these companies. I use AOI UWL-03 wide lens with GoPro 12 and something like 4-6 cm was advertised as I remember. I haven't done any scientific experiments but my footage with Xmas worm filmed approximately that distance was not sharp.

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.

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

I would also probably use this camera mainly underwater, so I agree, that this extra lens means that underwater use was seriously considered and designed.

So the question has been answered. Now, the youtube is full with X6 promotion reviews but only very few underwater footage so far. The only longer test is by Hugh Hou (only snorkelling) and the information he has shared is a bit troubling. In order to use the dive case, you have to change the lens on the camera. I think it has to do with the 1 inch sensor and the hyperfocal distance set by the above water lens, plus the dome of the dive case. It will be interesting to see some real scuba diving tests.

I think Insta360 considers third-party manufacturers as competitors. I've just found out that Easydive has also aluminium housing to X3 and X4 (but no support for X5) https://www.easydive.it/en/underwater-housing/360-video-camera I still use my X2 and not yet motivated to upgrade yet.

I'm sure they will develop a new dive housing for this camera. It's just a matter of creativity and engineering.

That's catch 22 I will stick to my small sensor GoPro

In my opinion, when the 1 inch sensors were introduced, they should have also implemented an AF system into these small cameras. I wouldn't call them action cameras but small content creator cameras. Most of them are not used for sport anyway.

A critical problem, in my opinion, is the minimal focus distance with Mission 1. It is way longer than in the case of the black series due to the larger sensor. It will be OK for reef scapes but CFWA pictures will be not sharp. As moving as close as possible, especially in case of lower visibility, it is important for underwater videography to use an additional correction lens. I'm not sure if existing lenses (non or AOI) were compatible or not.

I absolutely agree with your analysis and I came to a similar conclusion. Due to the crop factor, we can forget the ILS version for wide angle (but the mission 1 pro will be interesting). I played a bit with the idea of building a compact macro system around the ILS version, but honestly, it makes more sense to spend the same money on an MFT camera with a properly communicating macro lens with AF. Not to mention that according some rumours, the new Sony RX100 camera with 1 inch sensor is around the corner. Probably a safer bet to build an underwater camera system around it.

I'm really sorry. It was a really great source of information. I spent lots of time browsing uwpmag issues. I will miss it

They're actually cheaper than I expected

Maybe there will be electronic contacts on the final model, otherwise it's just a missed opportunity.

Many people pointed out on another forum that there are no electronic contacts to the lens (on the prototype), which means that most of the MFT lenses cannot be used.

I can imagine that it would be possible to build an excellent compact macro system around the mission Pro ILS, but it would probably require an external monitor.

I was toying with the same idea, but overall it's not that cheap. I was actually considering a cheap phone in an even cheaper case with DIY wifi connection (coax cable). However, I use Sony A6400 and the remote app (Imaging Edge) is just PITA to use. It would cause probably so much frustration underwater, that I decided not to try this route. Maybe somebody has a better experience.

I still think it was good to warm up this topic, because we know more about the Nauticam housing and maybe somebody already has some first hand experience.

I mainly focus on underwater videography but sometimes I could use some good quality still images. Couple of months ago I saw a video (see below) about using video files to make high resolution still images. I'm quite convinced:

It would be interesting to see a comparison with the original Invisible Dive Case Pro from Insta360. The price difference is huge (890 vs 140 Euro), so Nauticam case should offer something. It looks more durable and the dome ports are glass, but it also heavier (though more compact). For me a decisive factor would be image quality, especially handling stich lines and inner reflections. I'm not sure, if I would pay the extra cost of the Nauticam aluminium housing.

I've been using an Insta360 X2 camera for a while. During a recent trip I had the same dilemma to either use a GoPro (with AOI) or the 360 degree camera on the top of my mirrorless housing. Comparing the footage from both camera I can conclude that The GoPro has still a way better quality. However, I can still use few seconds of Insta sequences as interesting perspectives, but not too long sequences, because some optical errors (stiching problems) will be obvious. Another good use is to leave the 360 degree camera on a "tripod" in shallow water. For usable footage you need lots of light for the Insta cameras. New models are probably better. I wouldn't use it as a main camera but it can be a very useful tool. I use ot on a ball-head like below to attach to my main camera: Some examples for the videos with Insta360 X2 you can find in my short movie about Bali: 1:44 - 2:10; 2:41