Underwater Monitor for Panasonic GH5

Curious why u would flip it upside down..

For macro, flipping the monitor down towards you leaves your sightline to the lens open which helps in finding smaller subjects.

It also helps the balance of the rig as I found when pulling light arms far forward with stix floatation added it unbalances the tripod somewhat.

For certain wide-angle shots it is nice to look down on the monitor. For example if you want to shoot up at the surface you don't have to get under your camera to frame the shot.

Same with swimming through / above a reef. You can hold camera below you to get a better angle, without worrying about disturbing the bottom or sensitive life.

Regards,

Adam

Sent from my SM-G903W using Tapatalk

Oh that I understand. I genuinely thought ud switch the position of the ball mount and literally turn the monitor upside down haha

Skickat från min VTR-L29 via Tapatalk

Oh that I understand. I genuinely thought ud switch the position of the ball mount and literally turn the monitor upside down haha

 

Skickat från min VTR-L29 via Tapatalk

One thing I discovered and am very happy about is the monitor senses when it is inverted and flips both the image AND the button functions. Sometimes you need to jiggle or move it so it is right side up, but the button function change is great as you don't have to remember which button to press when zooming or changing settings.

Overall I am very happy with the new set up

Regards,

Adam

Sent from my SM-G903W using Tapatalk

With the Atomos housing, is there any way to position the monitor so it's above the camera housing at a 45 degree angle (e.g. standard position for monitoring from above) instead of tucked in behind the housing and pointing backwards like the built in camera screen? Or how about just having the monitor pointing straight upwards so you can look down at it if shooting macro straight on the sea bed?

With the Atomos housing, is there any way to position the monitor so it's above the camera housing at a 45 degree angle (e.g. standard position for monitoring from above) instead of tucked in behind the housing and pointing backwards like the built in camera screen? Or how about just having the monitor pointing straight upwards so you can look down at it if shooting macro straight on the sea bed?

Like this: ?

Using the NA-GH5, and the straight shogun bracket from the NA-GH4 (not the angled one from the NA-A7) I’ve put it on the wrong way around so the attachment point for the Atomos is further forward, it’s then angled due to the newer style Nauticam handles being angled forward. This allows the Atomos housing to have a more natural viewing angle.

Only issue I have is with reflections on the screen (not the internal Atomos one). Currently seeing where to get 7” matte anti-reflective screen stickers from that are waterproof

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yeah, like that. Looks like a pretty good angle ergonomically, though it is a bulky piece of kit indeed.

Do you mean the reflections off the window of the nauticam Shogun housing? That's what's causing problems?

So at the end of the day, have you done any sort of testing comparing the highest quality recording you can get from the Shogun (is that 4k60p in Prores 422 HQ?) vs the 400mbs internal 10bit4:2:2 recording? Any noticable differences in terms of macroblocking, etc?

Seem like the setup runs just under $5k with the housing and the monitor, vs $2500 for the DiveandSea 5A monitor or about $3000 for the SmallHD 502 bright + nauticam housing (Is this even possible with the original nauticam SmallHD 502 housing? Backscatter seems to be listing a seperate Nauticam housing from the SmallHD 502 bright, but not available yet). Trying to justify the extra price. I mean, the Shogun is definitely the brightest and largest of the bunch, so as a monitor, I'm sure it's awesome. But it's also the bulkiest..

Is it negatively bouyant in the housing?

Yeah, like that. Looks like a pretty good angle ergonomically, though it is a bulky piece of kit indeed.

 

Do you mean the reflections off the window of the nauticam Shogun housing? That's what's causing problems?

 

So at the end of the day, have you done any sort of testing comparing the highest quality recording you can get from the Shogun (is that 4k60p in Prores 422 HQ?) vs the 400mbs internal 10bit4:2:2 recording? Any noticable differences in terms of macroblocking, etc?

 

Seem like the setup runs just under $5k with the housing and the monitor, vs $2500 for the DiveandSea 5A monitor or about $3000 for the SmallHD 502 bright + nauticam housing (Is this even possible with the original nauticam SmallHD 502 housing? Backscatter seems to be listing a seperate Nauticam housing from the SmallHD 502 bright, but not available yet). Trying to justify the extra price. I mean, the Shogun is definitely the brightest and largest of the bunch, so as a monitor, I'm sure it's awesome. But it's also the bulkiest..

 

Is it negatively bouyant in the housing?

Sent from my SM-G955W using Tapatalk

Yeah, like that. Looks like a pretty good angle ergonomically, though it is a bulky piece of kit indeed.

 

Do you mean the reflections off the window of the nauticam Shogun housing? That's what's causing problems?

 

Yeah the window. The angle of the screen seems to give me really strong reflections of myself. Im sure some matte protector will fix it

So at the end of the day, have you done any sort of testing comparing the highest quality recording you can get from the Shogun (is that 4k60p in Prores 422 HQ?) vs the 400mbs internal 10bit4:2:2 recording? Any noticable differences in terms of macroblocking, etc?

 

No. I havent. As I havent purchased any V60 or V90 SD cards that work at 400Mbps. Dont see the point as I do it straight to the SSD.

But the Inferno at 4K@60p is 1660Mbps vs the 400Mbps internally and 10Bit too. Which I do find a big difference (you would get that benefit with the internal 10Bit vs 8bit also)

Trying to justify the extra price. I mean, the Shogun is definitely the brightest and largest of the bunch, so as a monitor, I'm sure it's awesome. But it's also the bulkiest..

 

If I didnt have it from my GH4 setup, I personally think recording internally to a V90 card and running a cheaper / smaller monitor would be easier. But I got it so Ill use it and I dont regret, as it is a joy to use underwater :-)

Is it negatively bouyant in the housing?

I dont know the weight of the shogun part. But for reference:

1x NA-GH5

1x NA-Flame

1x Macro35 Port

1x WWL-1 (including its buoyancy collar)

Requires 2x 70x220mm Float arms and that isnt even enough to make it neutral.

Yeah. Its not small (due to float arms) and finding a bag that it fits on the boat hasnt been successful..

 

 

Yeah the window. The angle of the screen seems to give me really strong reflections of myself. Im sure some matte protector will fix it

 

 

No. I havent. As I havent purchased any V60 or V90 SD cards that work at 400Mbps. Dont see the point as I do it straight to the SSD.

 

But the Inferno at 4K@60p is 1660Mbps vs the 400Mbps internally and 10Bit too. Which I do find a big difference (you would get that benefit with the internal 10Bit vs 8bit also)

 

 

If I didnt have it from my GH4 setup, I personally think recording internally to a V90 card and running a cheaper / smaller monitor would be easier. But I got it so Ill use it and I dont regret, as it is a joy to use underwater :-)

 

 

I dont know the weight of the shogun part. But for reference:

 

1x NA-GH5

1x NA-Flame

1x Macro35 Port

1x WWL-1 (including its buoyancy collar)

 

Requires 2x 70x220mm Float arms and that isnt even enough to make it neutral.

You should be able to film 10 seconds or so at 400mb/s on fast UHS-1 like the Extreme Pro cards if you have one of those. Give it a try -- should be enough for comparison purposes

The size of the files is indeed a big difference, though in all fairness the internal codec maxes out at 400mb/s at 30fps -- which should be 880mb/s in Prores HQ, so only about 2.2x the size. The prores will definitely be easier to edit -- I usually end up having to transcode the 400mb/s all-i from the GH5 to edit smoothly in FCPX. But if there's no real quality gain, then I'd much rather stick to the smaller internal files and use proxies for editing where necessary.

Boyancy wise, I have a similar setup -

1x NA-GH5

1x NA-Flame

1x Macro 29 Port

1x WWL-1 (including its buoyancy collar)

1x 70x220mm float arm

This is slightly negative still, though probably only a few hundred grams. Sounds like the Atomos housing, if negative, isn't massively so.

What kind of battery life are you getting out of the Atomos?

But the Inferno at 4K@60p is 1660Mbps vs the 400Mbps internally and 10Bit too. Which I do find a big difference (you would get that benefit with the internal 10Bit vs 8bit also)

Is there a solution that support 4K60 10-bit?

Nauticam housing (SKU # 17909) for my Atomos Ninja Inferno DOES NOT support 4K60 10-bit, 4K60 8-bit and 4K30-10bit ONLY!!!

Not 4K-60-10bit.

I did ask Nauticam management before I was planning to buy and they confirm that.

It is because of HDMI cable, their version supports HDMI 1.4, but for 4K-60-10bit it requires 2.0 at least

So, looking forward and still trying to find a solution.

yep, its a known issue. Unfortunatly Nauticams existing Bulkhead setup for HDMI is pretty much flawed imho, using a flimsy Micro HDMI connection.

Sounds from their message that they will have to think about a totally new solution. I multipin connector like Diveandsea is using may be more useful.

Its due to using Micro HDMI. No solution for existing GH5 housing.

They have now moved to a larger M24 port on their new housings (see the NA-XT3) so can support a straight through full size HDMI cable (so 4K60p@10bit) and they have updated the NA-FLAME to take this new cable too.

Its annoying for sure - I found out (the hard way) too!

The issue with HDMI V2.0 is that the cable must not break i.e. it must be a continuous cable from camera's output all the way through to the recorder.

This means that it must pass through both the camera's and (in this case) Ninja Inferno's housings. The size of plugs on the HDMI cable means that the standard M16 ports are too small.

At the BOOT show (http://www.wetpixel.com/articles/show-report-boot-2019), I was told that Nauticam has now invested in the machinery and testing gear to produce HDMI cables in house. Some new housings will have an M24 port, which will allow the HDMI cable to route without breaks and offer 4K/60 10 Bit and ProRes RAW from the Nikon Z series cameras with the Atomos Ninja V.

Adam

Its due to using Micro HDMI. No solution for existing GH5 housing.

 

They have now moved to a larger M24 port on their new housings (see the NA-XT3) so can support a straight through full size HDMI cable (so 4K60p@10bit) and they have updated the NA-FLAME to take this new cable too.

 

Its annoying for sure - I found out (the hard way) too!

I also thought the issue is the micro HDMI however I have not found any documentation to say that micro HDMI is limited to 1.4 in fact there are 2.0 cables

One of the things to be considered is the number of interfaces and the reliability the current set up has 2 cables and 3 interfaces:

1. Cable in the monitor (likely full size)

2. Cable in the housing (micro to full)

3. Connection to the monitor, bulkhead to monitor cable, bulkhead to camera

Even if you overcome the limit of the connector the interfaces remain I am unsure if this will be able to reliably transmit the data rate required

Yes, sorry I wasnt being clear enough.

There is indeed micro hdmi cables that support HDMI2.0 - its the combination of micro hdmi and the number of breaks in the cable that appear to be the issue. Breaks in full size cables (well at least 90 adapters) dont seem to stop 4k@60 signals, but just one adaptor with micro hdmi seems to stop It.

Its annoying for sure - I found out (the hard way) too!

Did You just spend the money before had got to know it? Sad.