A7III is here !!!

Gh5s no IBIS... but A7SIII is coming.

Gh5s no IBIS... but A7SIII is coming.

Yeah, stupid Panasonic, that was one stupid design constraint. If it had IBIS, it would be #1 seller on BHPhoto - which is what the A7iii currently is and still only on preorder.

Like I said, the A7Siii is going to be a stunning camera... got to be.

Well Im not sure if they will have enough A7III to sell and this will delay A7SIII launch... but Im not in rush, my A7RII is doing well...

Nothing I've seen suggests that the A7III/A7RIII/A9 have fixed Sony's inability to set a custom white balance properly underwater (with or without a filter).

If you think Sony's ambient white balance underwater is just fine, I suggest you try comparing it with Canon or newer Panasonic camera -- it's quite a difference.

If you know to handle Sony cameras you wont have any problem. CMWB is usefull untill 15m... after that you will kill the blues. And I do not have any problem w WB at 15m I can not fix at post...

Samples at 10/15m, CMWB TaxDiver?

From the GH5, 10m, MWB, no filters, ambient light only. (before/after correction):

I agree that below 15m you need torches though. No amount of white balancing ambient light is going to help you.

From A7RII. Beteewn 15-20m. EYE-WB, no filters, no lights, last one color graded.

Sony A7RII at 12-15m. EYE-WB, no filters, no lights, 8bits 4:2:0...

Light color graded...

Seacam housing in two month... [emoji4]

Seacam housing in two month... [emoji4]

I presume that means a housing for the A7Riii and A9 will then too!

Lots of FF choices soon then!

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I presume that means a housing for the A7Riii and A9 will then too!

 

Lots of FF choices soon then!

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I presume that means a housing for the A7Riii and A9 will then too!

 

Lots of FF choices soon then!

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

To be honest, I don't see anything in the Sony A7 line that would recommend it for underwater video over a GH5, and the A7III doesn't change that. Great land camera, and I may end up picking one up for that reason, but underwater? Why?

Full frame is actually a liability underwater as far as I'm concerned -- it means having to shoot at higher apertures to get reasonably sharp corners, which negates any low light advantage full frame might have. Just take a look at the samples I and TaxiDiver posted above -- even at web resolutions, the corners of his shots are visibly soft, whereas I was shooting at F4 and getting perfectly sharp corners. (I've used the WWL-1 + Panasonic 15mmF1.7 lens combination as wide as F2 with good corner resolution).

You also cannot set an accurate white balance without filters. Even with filters, the results will need tweaking in post to look good, and even then you can only take it so far. I suppose color is a matter of taste, but I wouldn't call TaxiDiver's samples particularly pleasing.

I've used an A7RII underwater for two years. Can you get good results with it? Yes, especially with lights. Would I go back after switching to the GH5? No way. There's not a single thing I miss about it as far as underwater video is concerned. It's definitely a better stills camera than the GH5 with the right lenses, and the shallow depth of field is nice when filming 'cinematic' people shots on land. But if your main focus is video, at this price point, I think the GH5/GH5s is a much more capable camera. I'd only trade it for a Canon 1DXII (maybe -- the video files are very large because of the inefficient codec), Canon C200, or a RED.

So undersell your A7RII as you didnt know how to use it. Now you get GH5 and see you cant get anything better with 10 bits than 8bits. So at last a camera 3 years newer is not so better than an old A7RII... but yes, now you can CMWB. Lets see what we can do with an A7III or an A7SIII....

To be honest, I don't see anything in the Sony A7 line that would recommend it for underwater video over a GH5, and the A7III doesn't change that. Great land camera, and I may end up picking one up for that reason, but underwater? Why?

 

Full frame is actually a liability underwater as far as I'm concerned -- it means having to shoot at higher apertures to get reasonably sharp corners, which negates any low light advantage full frame might have. Just take a look at the samples I and TaxiDiver posted above -- even at web resolutions, the corners of his shots are visibly soft, whereas I was shooting at F4 and getting perfectly sharp corners. (I've used the WWL-1 + Panasonic 15mmF1.7 lens combination as wide as F2 with good corner resolution).

 

You also cannot set an accurate white balance without filters. Even with filters, the results will need tweaking in post to look good, and even then you can only take it so far. I suppose color is a matter of taste, but I wouldn't call TaxiDiver's samples particularly pleasing.

 

I've used an A7RII underwater for two years. Can you get good results with it? Yes, especially with lights. Would I go back after switching to the GH5? No way. There's not a single thing I miss about it as far as underwater video is concerned. It's definitely a better stills camera than the GH5 with the right lenses, and the shallow depth of field is nice when filming 'cinematic' people shots on land. But if your main focus is video, at this price point, I think the GH5/GH5s is a much more capable camera. I'd only trade it for a Canon 1DXII (maybe -- the video files are very large because of the inefficient codec), Canon C200, or a RED.

Possibly the AF performance of the A7III/A7RIII might be a compelling reason for some over the GH5’s weaker AF.

When you used the 15mm on the GH5 with the WWL-1, what port did you use?

The one thing that kills the A7III for me is the 1.2x crop in 4K 30p. On that alone, I’d spring for the A7Riii or wait to see what the A7Siii brings.

We are ALL waiting for A7SIII. Actually Im waiting for Seacam housing...

Seacam A7III is in the oven YESSSS.

Possibly the AF performance of the A7III/A7RIII might be a compelling reason for some over the GH5’s weaker AF.

 

When you used the 15mm on the GH5 with the WWL-1, what port did you use?

AF perhaps -- I'd be curious to hear if anyone is using AF underwater with Canon's DPAF system. For wide angle, you don't really need autofocus, you typically have quite a wide depth of field to play with. For macro perhaps it would be advantageous, if there was an easy way to select the subject you want it to focus on/track, and it was reliable enough to track it..

I used the 15mm inside the 29mm port, same as what I use for the Olympus 14-42pz.