Full Frame Cameras with 4k60 10 bit 422 vs GH5M2

I think nobody maybe except Nauticam tried the 12-35 mm on a WACP.
Too expensive for a test 

18 hours ago, Interceptor121 said:

For reference my canon 8-15mm and dome is way sharper than 14-42mm and WWL-1


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Can you please post some examples to see the difference?

On 11/12/2022 at 1:06 PM, Davide DB said:

My buddy has a GH5S and we film together every week. At low ISO (up to 1250) there's a small difference. Higher than that, GH5S is better but I would miss IBIS. I'm able to film nearly steady shots at 42mm (84mm). On a GH5S it's nearly impossible except you are half diver and half gimbal (like my buddy).

Have you thought of some kind of tripod solution?

It also depends on what you are usually shooting but you usually film deep so that is why I think gh5s is a much better option for you.

On 11/11/2022 at 6:50 PM, thetrickster said:

Its really interesting looking at what to buy today - I feel we have hit a bit of a lull since the original GH5 and the cameras that followed it. All very incremental - yes better in all aspects, but nothing that wants me to drop 10k on a system and anything that does look nice, is so so expensive for that 'little' extra.

If you have nothing at the moment - wow the total cost is eye watering with the USD vs EUR/GBP for housings and the bits.

I think you're right, there is zero point going APS-C vs m43 if you already have m43 - the C70 would be a nice choice if you had nothing thou. The GH6 didn't win me over as an upgrade.

The A1 looks like the current contender if you can't live with the Z9 grip - but I think I would spend my money on the Z9 for the internal RAW 8K files. I'm done with anything external.

The WACP-C looks like a no brainer purchase going forwards for 35mm - but for a hobby this its not cheap!

As to m43 - got to be honest I feel its reached its end of life, what we have is great - love my GH5, and BMPCC4K (now we have gyro stab) but won't be buying m43 anymore. For me, for topside I'm waiting for the A7C Mkii 

Look forward to your A1 thoughts, I wish we could rent stuff here - when I looked it was 1/4 the cost of the camera for a week!

For video, the A1 is not really the camera to use underwater. The A7s3 is much better. The difference is not only in noise performance but in color "science" and wb as well. 

For video, the A1 is not really the camera to use underwater. The A7s3 is much better. The difference is not only in noise performance but in color "science" and wb as well. 

Based on whose experience?

The A1 uses a very similar sensor to the A7S3 and on 4k has 2x2 pixel binning resulting in superior performance to the A7S3

In addition the noise reduction is not baked in as result looking at CineD tests the A1 trashes every full frame camera on the market

In terms of white balance looking at not very strict tests of backscatter the white balance of the A1 A7S3 and new A7RV is the same

Nobody uses the A1 for video as it is way expensive but I have not seen a single real example underwater that says it won’t work in fact the opposite

Then sony users are not the best example of competence in video either

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I encountered this situation earlier this year. My GH5 was getting long in the tooth, and the GH6 was announced. That would have required a new housing. Instead I bought a GH5II. Exactly the same form factor, fits in GH5 housing. Improved autofocus, log included, improved stabilization, 10 bit 4k at 60fps. What's not to like? 

Why don't I move on from 4/3? For myself, I don't see the need. Most of my video work ends up online. I've had excellent results when projected on 30x30 foot screens. I rarely shoot iso higher than 3200. On a trip to the Philippines in September I shot all my underwater footage with the Lumix 14-42mm lens and the WWL 1 wet lens. 

The added cost and weight and bulk of moving to full frame is a non starter in my situation. 

Your experience may differ.

I encountered this situation earlier this year. My GH5 was getting long in the tooth, and the GH6 was announced. That would have required a new housing. Instead I bought a GH5II. Exactly the same form factor, fits in GH5 housing. Improved autofocus, log included, improved stabilization, 10 bit 4k at 60fps. What's not to like? 
Why don't I move on from 4/3? For myself, I don't see the need. Most of my video work ends up online. I've had excellent results when projected on 30x30 foot screens. I rarely shoot iso higher than 3200. On a trip to the Philippines in September I shot all my underwater footage with the Lumix 14-42mm lens and the WWL 1 wet lens. 
The added cost and weight and bulk of moving to full frame is a non starter in my situation. 
Your experience may differ.
 

I have and shoot the a1 and a7s3, they both fit in the Nauticam housing for the a7s3. My last trip (November) I used the both bodies typically at a depth of 25 to 60 ft. I would like to stick with a 35mm prime lens but using a 24-70mm G Master with glass dome provided better neutral buoyancy and adaptability to shooting situations. In the past I WB about every 10 feet (Keldan grey card) or when the light changes. This time I decided to go AWB in both bodies and was surprised with the accuracy in both bodies. I suppose the key difference for me is that with the a1 really has a large range of clean ISO’s and with the a7s3 just 640 and 12800 that are clean from most noise. The a7s3 is a stop or 2 more light sensitive which is a real benefit in twilight environments. I still draw on a pair of Keldan 4x lights but try to use as little as possible since I am after fish behavior these days.

I did shoot a bunch of 8k 30fps, s-log3 gamma 3, 422 10bit footage on the a1 and it’s worth mentioning that for a long clip say 5 to 10 mins runtime the camera will overheat in the housing. But shutting it down for a couple of minutes it will work just fine. I usually only shoot 30 sec clips so that does not involve any overheating. I love both, love the Sony eco system of lenses. If I had to choose I’d pick the a1, but if shooting natural light the a7s3 in twilight situations is what I would prefer.

6 hours ago, Whipauee said:

I have and shoot the a1 and a7s3, they both fit in the Nauticam housing for the a7s3. My last trip (November) I used the both bodies typically at a depth of 25 to 60 ft. I would like to stick with a 35mm prime lens but using a 24-70mm G Master with glass dome provided better neutral buoyancy and adaptability to shooting situations. In the past I WB about every 10 feet (Keldan grey card) or when the light changes. This time I decided to go AWB in both bodies and was surprised with the accuracy in both bodies. I suppose the key difference for me is that with the a1 really has a large range of clean ISO’s and with the a7s3 just 640 and 12800 that are clean from most noise. The a7s3 is a stop or 2 more light sensitive which is a real benefit in twilight environments. I still draw on a pair of Keldan 4x lights but try to use as little as possible since I am after fish behavior these days.

I did shoot a bunch of 8k 30fps, s-log3 gamma 3, 422 10bit footage on the a1 and it’s worth mentioning that for a long clip say 5 to 10 mins runtime the camera will overheat in the housing. But shutting it down for a couple of minutes it will work just fine. I usually only shoot 30 sec clips so that does not involve any overheating. I love both, love the Sony eco system of lenses. If I had to choose I’d pick the a1, but if shooting natural light the a7s3 in twilight situations is what I would prefer.

I just bought the A1. I believe the dual ISO implementation is more suitable for underwater use 

The A1 ISO 12800 is useable actually

If you have a water contact optic shooting at f/5.6 and shoot single frame rate 30fps with the A1 in UHD full frame the performance is excellent

The A7S3 with the level at 12800 for me is not as useful I am not running a detective business and the A1 beats it up to 10000

Take into account the A1 has aliasing in UHD full frame if that matters to you more than the A7S3

The a1 and a7s3 are fine UW cameras. IMHO the variances are nuanced and condition dependent. The 12800 ISO in both cameras are fine. the bigger micron sensor of the a7s3 is just a touch more light sensitive. Thats all.

The a1 and a7s3 are fine UW cameras. IMHO the variances are nuanced and condition dependent. The 12800 ISO in both cameras are fine. the bigger micron sensor of the a7s3 is just a touch more light sensitive. Thats all.

On 11/13/2022 at 4:46 AM, Lionfi2s said:

For video, the A1 is not really the camera to use underwater. The A7s3 is much better. The difference is not only in noise performance but in color "science" and wb as well. 

I have both. I prefer the A7SIII for video, mostly because the A1 overheats much faster.

I have both. I prefer the A7SIII for video, mostly because the A1 overheats much faster.

On 12/9/2022 at 12:19 PM, Interceptor121 said:

When you shoot it in 4k binned mode it heats up exactly the same
8k generates heat and to an extent APSC modes the A7S3 doesn’t have


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I love the A1, but the overheating is a problem. I was using it on a film and music recording project in Cuba recently, and it would overheat in under 10 min. Here in the Pacific Northwest, it's not really a problem, but in high ambient heat, it's debilitating. The A7SIII and FX3 cameras we used had no trouble with the heat at all.

9 hours ago, jplaurel said:

I love the A1, but the overheating is a problem. I was using it on a film and music recording project in Cuba recently, and it would overheat in under 10 min. Here in the Pacific Northwest, it's not really a problem, but in high ambient heat, it's debilitating. The A7SIII and FX3 cameras we used had no trouble with the heat at all.

What codec were you using? And how have you set the heat management in the settings?