Upcoming Panasonic GH-4K

Am I the only one not seeing Richard photos?

Am I the only one not seeing Richard photos?

All the photos I put up here are done via Tapatalk via the App on my Phone which in turn use imageshack for image hosting

here is the direct URL for the last image http://tapatalk.imageshack.com/v2/15/01/27/42d940d5135df174bd034371dcb01a71.jp <- add a 'g' at the end.

Copy that to your browser - does the photo load?

Very odd!

To be honest, I don't think you're missing much

Ah!

Now with the direct link I understand: my shitty proxy at job is filtering tapatalk addresses

They are afraid of some diving gear porno

After seeing the very impressive housings on this thread I'm a little hesitant to post this, but here goes...4K on a shoestring!

The monitor (1) is a Sony CLM-V55 in a glued acrylic box - a bit of a bodgie job but it works. I use it primarily for composing shots, and it's particularly handy when the subject is on or near the bottom and the monitor can be tilted upwards.

I've fixed a couple of aluminium brackets inside the camera housing (2) to hold a 15cm HDMI adapter lead. The bracket affixed to the internal camera platform (3) has a recess to hold the camera's HDMI cover open, and also stops the male micro plug from twisting about in the camera - micro plugs can be easily damaged.

The port (4) is a 4 inch acrylic dome sourced from a US company. I reduced it to the appropriate diameter by rubbing it on fine abrasive paper placed on a flat surface, and then glued it to the barrel of a cut-down Ikelite port. The shade is made from PVC tube.

A tripod can be easily attached or removed above or below water via quick release clips on opposing sides of the affixed base (5).

Altogether this setup (Ike housing, GH4, 8mm fisheye lens and monitor) came in at around 4500 AUD (about 3600 USD), leaving a bit of change for a 55 inch UHD Sony Bravia TV.

It's not particularly pretty but it works, and the results have so far been pleasing.

Impressive! I wish I was skilled with my hands like that! I would say my setup was 3x the cost. Yet I bet you get the same results! Look forward to seeing your videos.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

After seeing the very impressive housings on this thread I'm a little hesitant to post this, but here goes...4K on a shoestring!

The monitor (1) is a Sony CLM-V55 in a glued acrylic box - a bit of a bodgie job but it works. I use it primarily for composing shots, and it's particularly handy when the subject is on or near the bottom and the monitor can be tilted upwards.

I've fixed a couple of aluminium brackets inside the camera housing (2) to hold a 15cm HDMI adapter lead. The bracket affixed to the internal camera platform (3) has a recess to hold the camera's HDMI cover open, and also stops the male micro plug from twisting about in the camera - micro plugs can be easily damaged.

The port (4) is a 4 inch acrylic dome sourced from a US company. I reduced it to the appropriate diameter by rubbing it on fine abrasive paper placed on a flat surface, and then glued it to the barrel of a cut-down Ikelite port. The shade is made from PVC tube.

A tripod can be easily attached or removed above or below water via quick release clips on opposing sides of the affixed base (5).

Altogether this setup (Ike housing, GH4, 8mm fisheye lens and monitor) came in at around 4500 AUD (about 3600 USD), leaving a bit of change for a 55 inch UHD Sony Bravia TV.

It's not particularly pretty but it works, and the results have so far been pleasing.

Wow, very impressive.

Nice project casbba!

Glad you like it.

I forgot to mention the high tech buoyancy control system for this rig. It's an inverted bucket that keeps the unit level and neutrally buoyant mid-water, or with air removed allows it to sit firmly on the bottom or on a tripod.

Again, it doesn't look pretty but it works beautifully!

Hahah!

Hi,

I'm wondering if I can get some advice regarding the gh4. I have around 150 dives with a sea&sea D300 photo rig, but have just started underwater video with the gh4 ( I've used it topside quite a bit). I have the nauticam gh4 housing, tray and xit tripod, 8mm FE and 4" dome port. I also have Panny 60mm and flat port. I just made my first dives with the FE and have not used the 60 yet ( I see that there is not much video recommendation for it on this thread). I used a red magic filter and MWB with ambient light on the first dives (key largo) and I guess for a first attemp I was satisfied with the results given mediocre ambient lighting conditions. It's going to be a while until my next dives, but I'm willing to put $4K into "improving" this rig. I'm not sure if I should blow it all on lighting, or, some on lighting and some on rectilinear lens (7-14 ?) and port ? If I had to put a number on it, I would say that my interests are 70% WA and 30% macro. I just don't have enough experience with video and video lights at this point , plus I live in Colorado, so I can't do much experimentation.

From this thread it seems the 8mm FE is not too popular, although Backscatter really pushed it and the 60mm to me( my fault, not theirs)

Anyways, any and all recommendations on how to improve the rig will be greatly appreciated. I did miss a couple of opportunities on my dives because the subjects were under an overhangs and badly under illuminated.

Thanks !

Edit: I meant the Oly 60mm macro.

The suggestions from backscatter are the right ones for still images. For video you want a rectilinear wide angle (7-14) and for macro something stabilised like the panasonic 14-42 power zoom with add on diopters

Thanks. I should have done more research so I won't blame Backscatter, however I specifically told them I wanted to do video exclusively. At any rate, I am fairly pleased with my 8mm FE footage for WA and CU/WA for now and am really considering lights.

Which lights would be best for subject illumination of general WA and CU/WA scenes with either a FE or a 7-14 setup , say 20-60ft depths and sunny conditions. I was thinking of a pair of Keldan 8x or 4x. Would the 8x be overkill ? If size was not a consideration, would the 8m be a better choice given the modular capabilities ? I'm an amateur that will maybe make 1 big trip (Indo, Mexico, Caribbean ) and several smaller trips (Keys) per year. I'm expecting my skill to improve and don't want to buy lights twice

Thanks. I should have done more research so I won't blame Backscatter, however I specifically told them I wanted to do video exclusively. At any rate, I am fairly pleased with my 8mm FE footage for WA and CU/WA for now and am really considering lights.

Which lights would be best for subject illumination of general WA and CU/WA scenes with either a FE or a 7-14 setup , say 20-60ft depths and sunny conditions. I was thinking of a pair of Keldan 8x or 4x. Would the 8x be overkill ? If size was not a consideration, would the 8m be a better choice given the modular capabilities ? I'm an amateur that will maybe make 1 big trip (Indo, Mexico, Caribbean ) and several smaller trips (Keys) per year. I'm expecting my skill to improve and don't want to buy lights twice

Too much use of a fisheye lens in video can make your audience dizzy. Minimise the amount of panning and trucking with a fisheye. That 8mm is a good lens but the 7-14mm is better for general purpose WA use.

The Keldan lights are great, except for the weird purple colour. Be careful of purple reflections if using a pair of Keldan lights for macro work.

Last year, I bought a pair of the iTorch Pro 7 lights. 5,000 lumens each. Batteries that can be easilly swapped in a wet environment. Cheaper than the Keldans. Still working fine after about 50 dives.

Regards

Peter

FYI, GH4 4k crop factor is 2.3x (below is screen grab from video file).

https://www.flickr.com/gp/ejbali/n0Z28b

https://www.flickr.com/gp/ejbali/7F89WD

Now if you bring down this underwater FOV will decrease even more.
The barrel distortion of 8mm fisheye with GH4 in 4K is much less then FE lens on the other dslr in 1080p.

I shoot 8mm and 7-14 but I often feel 7mm in 4K mode is too narrow.

FYI, GH4 4k crop factor is 2.3x (below is screen grab from video file).

 

https://www.flickr.com/gp/ejbali/n0Z28b

 

https://www.flickr.com/gp/ejbali/7F89WD

 

Now if you bring down this underwater FOV will decrease even more.

The barrel distortion of 8mm fisheye with GH4 in 4K is much less then FE lens on the other dslr in 1080p.

I shoot 8mm and 7-14 but I often feel 7mm in 4K mode is too narrow.

Micro four third crop factor 2.08x when reported in 3:2 with 1.2x 4K crop 2.5x in 16:9 2.615x

So I'm conventional terms the 7-14 lens becomes a 17.5-35 mm lens in 16:9 18.3-36.6mm which is around 99 degrees diagonal and a bit more than 90 horizontal

Not that wide after all but you can zoom.

8mm fisheye is around 125 degrees fixed and still distorted

Thank you Peter, Escape and Interceptor. I appreciate the advice.

I do see some edge distortion with the 8 mm in the underwater video, but it is less than I was expecting.

I think I am going to add the 7-14 + 6" dome + focus ring and a pair of some kind of lights.

Peter, regarding the keldans, I was trying to figure out the purple comment, I knew they made a cyan module , but purple ? Then I figured out what you meant :-).

Under what conditions would one need a pair of 10,000 lumen lights vs 5,000s ?

Also at 2.6x crop, I can see why the 60mm would be difficult for Macro video. Using my Nikon D300 (1.5x I think), I shot both a 60mm and a 90mm for macro. Although I did get some great shots with the 90, it was frequently tough to focus and frame.

I'm really pleased with my Keldan's (the 8M CRI 5000Lm versions) - for sure more the light the better, but I can confirm that the higher CRI rating, does bring much more colour definition (when I compared them to my old LFM Lights) so I'm glad I've sacrificed power for colour, if that makes sense.

Never had an issue with the color of the lights themselves causing any issues.

These super powerful light (in excess of 8,000) are really only needed for trying to get some colour back when filming where ambient is still present, like trying to get some lighting on a wreck - and then you really do need lots and lots!!. At night I'm finding I have to turn down mine, as they are a little too bright...

I agree on buying the right lights now, rather than going cheap to start with, and the Keldans are great in that in a couple of years, if they LED modules get even more powerful, you can just buy the module and not the whole light again!

Regarding the 7-14mm - this I've found to be perfect even in 4k mode. I have it in the glass Zen 170mm dome. Would like it to have some IS, alas we can't have everything!

I would like perhaps too, to have manual focus, but the focus to infinity (once set to say 3ft way using f5.6 or above) provides super clear/in focus video.

I've got the 8mm lens, but still deciding which dome...

Its all in all a great setup

Hmm.... may be I should put Keldan light as one of my stocking stuffer in the future. The interchangeable module makes it interesting and I came across this about Cyan light technique, you have to turn up the volume real loud since the video narration is barely there:

http://www.nauticamusa.com/cyan

By the way, if you need video equipment purchase consultant, do consider calling Reef Photos, Chris Parson has great knowledge about video and they frequently have video workshop. Cristian Dimitrius works with them from time to time and I took video class from them both. I talked to a friend of the staff there and seems like they're trying to add a "video department" because the demand is growing. So definitely get second option after talking to Backscatter, Bluewater etc. all other places.

Under what conditions would one need a pair of 10,000 lumen lights vs 5,000s ?

 

Seriously though, even 5,000 lumen lights I rarely use on full power. The only time would be when it is bright sunny day and you want to use the video lights for foregound fill so you need the light power to compete with the sun. if you are using a cyan filter to balance the video light colour with the ambient light colour, you need all the light you can get. (http://wetpixel.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=54683) But, even then, too much light can look artificial (compare soap opera lighting Vs movie lighting).

Regards

Peter