Underwater Bubble Blowin' Users Group

[Mike the beginner]

Mark so far as we know red are ofering different mounts as an option other than their standard PL mount that comes attached to the camera.

We dont know yet until we see the camera at NAB what the changing of the mounts will entail. There has been talk that it will be a flange with so many screws that you remove the original pl mount and replace with the optional one. Truth is it could be different, someone suggested that the original mount might stay on and the optional mount gets fitted on to the existing mount (unlikely but who knows) so that is the position with the mounts.

Others have talked about the need to prevent misalignment issues when changing a mount (Stephen Williams) suggesting that this should really be done with great care and preferably not in an unsuitable environment. That sounds sensible to me. From what we know so far i think it might come doing to how sensible and careful you are to change the mounts in a relatively dust free area that allows you to take your time and have a suitable working area to do the chnge over. As i see it, from what i have read only) changing the mounts is not similar to changing a lens. A change of lens is a straightforward job. In an ideal world having your lenses all made say PL mount would avoid any possible perceived problems that "might" occur when changing mounts.

The birger solution if it works as suggested, might involve the same task as changing the existing PL mount to say a red nikon or canon mount but the only difference is that the birger mount is made by birger. We dont know if Birger mount involves placing the mount on the existing PL mount either, o we have to wait and see whether the PL mount gets removed forst or not in either sitiuation. The b4 mount is far more complex as it involves the use of a lens as well as a mount. Will have to wait and see for that as well.

As i see it the birger offers the greater flexibility to change between lenses as some makes of lenses are made in either say canon mount or say nikon mount. You get to choose. This would mean that your tamron and i think sigma as well have choices of fittings, can be used on the birger mount without the need to change the birger mount. The only time you would need to change the birger mount back to PL mount is if you decided to use a cine lens with PL mount fittings. In my case i could use the birger solution for all my underwater work and my telephoto nature and wildlife footage without ever changing the mounts. That is safe and convienient and a hell of a lot cheaper as well. I have ordered the red zoom and i see situations when i would want to use that zoom. I would have to change the mounts for that. I am kinda hoping i can work something out that avoids me having to change the mounts out on the field. Thats my viewpoint from a beginner....someone else can possibly point out any errors.:innocent:

Mike the beginner

 

[Mark Thorpe]

Hey Mike thanks,
My panic attack is over and thanks for the explanations. I do have a pretty good fix on the whole mount thing, I think, but with the lack of info out there, concrete info that is, I guess NAB will set everything straight.

Looking forwards to getting out of this thicket in a few months.

How's bonny Scotland this time of year? My last time there was about 20 years ago walking over the mountains north of Otterburn.

Cheers,
Mark.

 

[Michael Hastings]

Re: Birger

Re: Birger

I think all of the mounts, i.e. Birger and the RED Canon and RED Nikon, replace the PL mount.

Standard for AL is black or goldish hardcoat anodize. You could paint or vinyl coat it from there.

My personal housing will be PVC, I'm quite comfortable with it for anything up to 250 ft. or more and I don't think I will be diving that deep (Yeah I'm a wuss). It gives me a little more size as the special oversize I have is about 3/8 bigger inside, but mainly PVC is just easier to work with and maintain.

Do you know if Birger is utilizing PL or Canon mount on the back end of their RED lens mount solution or does it matter? Assuming a Canon 10-22 and Tamron 90 lens combination with interchangeable front ports from dome to flat port with extension tube if necessary.

I am thinking white powder coating on the aluminum housing for obvious reasons although I'd prefer RED.

Is your personal housing going to be PVC or Aluminum?

$81 price increase except for those of us that offered a deposit 6 weeks ago, right?

No, it's only for guys with engine problems that leave me stranded in LAS. I'm just afraid you'll spend all your money on an airplane engine and won't have any left for RED or a housing.

 

[Mike the beginner]

I would be interested in the pvc housing you make AquaVideo. Once you get the final price nailed down please let me know. I can evaluate and compare.

Mark Scotland is looking good just now! A wee jaunt up Ben Lomond at this time of year can provide great views, though last year it was thick with snow, exciting camping out in a snow storm though!

Yep NAB will have us all running around like headless chickens:waaa:

Mike the beginner

 

[Ken Corben]

housing design getting slicker..

housing design getting slicker..

Seems we're all guessing along the same lines and the solutions look promising.

1) Birger Canon control mount installed on RED body (alignment test especially if shooting 4K, i.e., using all of the CMOS imaging area.)

2) Canon 10-22mm with Dome Port. Lens control from Birger with Aquavideo housing interface to Birger control for aperture control and stick with manual rings for F stop and zoom if possible (less electronics to go wrong?)

3) Tamron 90mm (canon mount) with flat port extender for front of housing.

4) Standard tripod screw mount on bottom of housing (aluminum housings only?)

5) Light meter attachment on right handle.

Oh man, I smell another price increase anouncement from Aquavideo:clown2:

No, it's only for guys with engine problems that leave me stranded in LAS. I'm just afraid you'll spend all your money on an airplane engine and won't have any left for RED or a housing.

I like your wicked sense of humor. Better to be stranded than to crash and burn I always say... and ya, a rebuilt engine starts at $35K for my plane - but hey it's all relative. The fuel bill for the Oakley corporate jet to NZ and back was more than that.

 

[Mark Thorpe]

sharkguy - 4) Standard tripod screw mount on bottom of housing (aluminum housings only?)

In this realm I would prefer something out of the ordinary. I have a tripod mount system for the Gates housing I currently use. What I would like personally to replace this in the future is a simple ball joint on each lower corner of the housing. I would then place an articulated, a la strobe support arm, adjustable 'foot' on each corner allowing adaptation to the most severe of terrain. Also for the added stability needed for larger housings. I find with mine that due to one smallish anchor point for the tripod in relation to the size of the housing I still get quite a bit of movement due to water acting on the larger surfaces of the unit.

My 2c

Mark.

From last night......this in 4k will be astonishing.

 

[Ken Corben]

Mark,

The ball joint solution sounds brilliant! Will you keep us posted on the implimentation? How you secure it with weights or ?

Here's my "holy grail" for RED 3-D underwater rig...

 

[Michael Hastings]

Comments on housing

Comments on housing

A couple of comments:

On the lens controls, once we go electronic for the iris (which we have to) we might as well for the focus (and zoom if available) since it isn't really any more electronics, it is just another couple of switches and/or pots. If the little circuit board fails your kind of screwed anyway whether it is just iris or both iris and focus. In practical terms remember that I'm a video guy so never had to deal much with gears, we've almost always had other ways to get it done so while we can do gears if we have to it isn't the normal day to day thing.

Not sure why we would go with the Tamron rather than a Canon medium tele to keep it a little more standardized. Remember the Planet Earth guys used it because there was an inexpensive PL mount. (the PL converter guy probably chose it for two reasons 1) Like Sigma and others it is designed with a removable mount so it can be used with canon or nikon, so easier to dismantle and do a PL mount and 2) it is really easy to become a direct Tamron dealer to buy lenses wholesale - not so easy to become a Canon dealer.)

The standard tripod mount screw is easy for either PVC or aluminum, but I like the ball arm style idea too if you are going to get serious about macro - it is almost impossible to keep it really steady from a single mount point. That isn't too hard to do with our standard configuration - you can mount the balls at the front and back of the wings, or make a large bottom plate, and it wouldn't be hard to weld small round threaded posts to the PVC housing to screw the ball into (they make balls with a threaded stud on them) or the ball itself to the aluminum housing. On the PVC housing it would only be about a half hour to an hour project but it makes it hard to get the pretty yellow coating on neatly, so it might be a little ugly around the posts.

Do we need a light meter? Don't we get histograms or something on the rear camera screen, plus visual on the LCD? Anyway meter attachment is easy. (but for Ken it is $81 - and yes I agree it is better to be stranded, than lose the engine at 10000 feet.)

Seems we're all guessing along the same lines and the solutions look promising.

1) Birger Canon control mount installed on RED body (alignment test especially if shooting 4K, i.e., using all of the CMOS imaging area.)

2) Canon 10-22mm with Dome Port. Lens control from Birger with Aquavideo housing interface to Birger control for aperture control and stick with manual rings for F stop and zoom if possible (less electronics to go wrong?)

3) Tamron 90mm (canon mount) with flat port extender for front of housing.

4) Standard tripod screw mount on bottom of housing (aluminum housings only?)

5) Light meter attachment on right handle.

Oh man, I smell another price increase anouncement from Aquavideo:clown2:

In this realm I would prefer something out of the ordinary. I have a tripod mount system for the Gates housing I currently use. What I would like personally to replace this in the future is a simple ball joint on each lower corner of the housing. I would then place an articulated, a la strobe support arm, adjustable 'foot' on each corner allowing adaptation to the most severe of terrain. Also for the added stability needed for larger housings. I find with mine that due to one smallish anchor point for the tripod in relation to the size of the housing I still get quite a bit of movement due to water acting on the larger surfaces of the unit.

My 2c

Mark.

 

[Ken Corben]

Tamron VS Canon for macro...

Tamron VS Canon for macro...

Not sure why we would go with the Tamron rather than a Canon medium tele to keep it a little more standardized. Remember the Planet Earth guys used it because there was an inexpensive PL mount. (the PL converter guy probably chose it for two reasons 1) Like Sigma and others it is designed with a removable mount so it can be used with canon or nikon, so easier to dismantle and do a PL mount and 2) it is really easy to become a direct Tamron dealer to buy lenses wholesale - not so easy to become a Canon dealer.)

Here's an excerpt on why the Tamron lens is better for Macro work:

Interestingly, although the Canon lens appears to be very slightly sharper wide-open, once the lenses are stopped down a little the Tamron seems to have far better contrast, colour and detail. Contrast from the Canon lens doesn't really catch up until F8, which seems to be the sweet spot for that lens, while the Tamron actually seems best at F5.6. At F16 both lenses lose some sharpness due to diffraction although the Tamron still appears slightly sharper.

While these results can't be held as being conclusive, it does appear as if the Tamron is the better lens for macro work. One caveat being of course that lens sharpness is one of many variables for this type of work, and indeed typical macro apertures will be around F16 where both lenses have lost some resolution. At this level most shooters will have enough problems with depth of field and focusing to lose too much sleep over minor differences in lens sharpness.


The complete analysis with sample pictures link:
http://photo.net/equipment/canon/can-tam-macro/

Do we need a light meter? Don't we get histograms or something on the rear camera screen, plus visual on the LCD? Anyway meter attachment is easy. (but for Ken it is $81 - and yes I agree it is better to be stranded, than lose the engine at 10000 feet.)

True, one may not "need" a light meter for underwater work with a RED system. Given the as yet unknown and untested camera exposure options and lattitude of camera and redcine etc. However, if you know the rating is 320 and the FPS is X frames then the sekonic meter will speak the truth, i.e., the selected f stop will land the images in or near the center of the sensor's exposure index.

Example - A gray whale suddenly glides 10 meters underneath you as you notice it is in the process of giving birth. You can:

A) Hit record - read the sekonic and set the lens (3-5 seconds) and focus on getting the shot.

B) Hit record - look thru rear of housing at histograms on camera while interpolating data to select f stop and at some point focus on framing the shot?

C) Hit record - look at external LCD for exposure index while fiddling with f stop to get the correct exposure and at some point focus on framing the shot?

D) Not get the shot but rather simply oberve the moment passing you by as you're interpolating histograms while narced out of your mind cuz you've descended past 140' on air while fiddling with the exposure analysis data?

BTW - Trick question, there is no correct answer like most government tests there is only the best answer.

Mike ICMA: I surrender - I am simply going to print a series of $81 checks payable to Aquavideo and mail them weekly cuz I see where this is going:help:

 

[Steve Gibby]

One other factor though, if you're shooting RAW, rather than RGB, is that if you're in the ballpark for exposure at acquisition, you have the ability to adust the gain up or down with REDCINE, along with the white balance, color, saturation, contrast, and curves. It's a very different ball game than when shooting RGB or film, where the exposure is burned in at acquisition. In my thinking, if you're shooting RAW, and you're irised within a relatively close exposure range of what's framed and shot, you should be just fine shooting without a meter, using the exposure tools that are integrated into RED One (histogram, etc.).

Either way will work. I guess it comes down to what you're comfortable with - and whether you're shooting RAW or RGB with RED One. Depending on how quick and accurate the exposure tools on RED One are, shooting RGB without a meter, may also be quite easy. We should know in 8 days at NAB...

 

[Mark Thorpe]

Not sure why we would go with the Tamron rather than a Canon medium tele to keep it a little more standardized. Remember the Planet Earth guys used it because there was an inexpensive PL mount. (the PL converter guy probably chose it for two reasons .....

You don't need to opt for this lens Mike, I am. If that means extra work to make it work then such is life. I'm a simple animal. If the guys at the Beeb swear by it then that's good enough for me. It doesn't matter to me to have an array of lenses all from the same manufacturer. I just want to have what could be deemed as the best tool for the job. By what I've read and heard about the Tamron I will be going with that.

On the PVC housing it would only be about a half hour to an hour project but it makes it hard to get the pretty yellow coating ......

IF I were to buy your product I would definitely request that the housing not be finished in Yum Yum Yellow. For the ball joint idea why not have two ball joints machined into each end of a horizontally traversing 'foot' or rest on the front and rear underbelly edges of your housing? The bar would serve to act as a protective ledge and firm foot when putting the housing down and as the anchor point for the adjustable arms.

Sharkguy - Beautiful image. Was that a photo you took or a screen grab? Nice ambience there.

 

[Michael Hastings]

Just to clarify a few points.

Just to clarify a few points.

Here's an excerpt on why the Tamron lens is better for Macro work...

Regarding lens for Macro, the housing flat port will be pretty much customized for whatever you want - we can use interchangeable ports on the same frontplate as the dome or make a separate front plate for the macro port and it won't make a lot of difference as far as cost. My point was that the BBC's choice was probably as much about availability in PL mount as anything. I'm certainly not hung up on Canon - my main interest is due to the availability of the Birger mount. (In fact I'm already a Tokina and Sigma dealer and pretty sure I can buy Tamron as a dealer also.) I think there will be a number of actual on the RED lens tests done by some of our earlier reservists before most of us get our cameras, and we'll benefit from that feedback.

If you go with the Canon mount, you will have a large choice of primes and zooms from at least 3 or 4 manufacturers that could provide excellent results and it will be fairly easy to accommodate any of them.

The actual mount position of the camera in the housing is determined by the wide lens because of extreme wide view, the use of the dome, and because it is usually the shortest physically. The longer focal lengths use the flat port which is easier to make and is much less critical for positioning and most of the longer focal lengths can be accommodated quite easily.

I am simply going to print a series of $81 checks payable to Aquavideo and mail them weekly cuz I see where this is going:

I'm sure you know I'm just razzin' you, and if you get us hooked up with Gibby's #8 everything will be jake.

IF I were to buy your product I would definitely request that the housing not be finished in Yum Yum Yellow.

So what do you have against AquaVideo yellow? - which is also Dacor Yellow, Cousteau yellow, Sea and Sea (although theirs is a little more lemony - ours a deep yellow), etc. It has a long tradition in the dive industry and it is a bit like Ferrari red - it's our trademark color which we generally use except for special situations.

 

[Mark Thorpe]

AquaVideoRed206 - So what do you have against AquaVideo yellow? - which is also Dacor Yellow, Cousteau yellow, Sea and Sea (although theirs is a little more lemony - ours a deep yellow), etc. It has a long tradition in the dive industry and it is a bit like Ferrari red - it's our trademark color which we generally use except for special situations.

Mike, I've got absolutely nothing against AquaVideo Yellow. Just a personal thing. I like to be as inconspicuous as possible (albeit on open circuit) with my dive gear and camera gear. I don't go for the multi colored suits or accessories. People I dive with say I look more like a Ninja than a diver. Some, not all, of the logos on my suits due to size and contrast have been blacked out, ripped off or made to blend. If you want to make your housing yellow then thats your choice. Just mentioning that IF I decide to go with it I will tell you now, not to expect it to look like your shiny yellow product for long.

Cheers,
Mark.

 

[Mike the beginner]

There are a lot of new still lenses coming out by various companies. The info i read on wide angle lenses indicates that whatever lens is chosen it has to have been tested by others perhaps above and below water to see how they perform.

I think Mark is just playing safe with the tamron which is understandible. I get the impression most pro users at the top of the tree tend to ignore some of the lesser brands and stick to the acknowledged top makes of lenses though.

It could be that some of the less respected brands such as Tokina and Tamron are starting to catch up on the "best brands" as the technology and methods used to make the lenses becomes quite similar.

Might be wise to keep an open mind and wait to see what ideas spring from NAB THEN see what the options are for selecting the various lenses etc.

Hmmm......yellow me thinks i would paint mine black!


Mike the beginner

 

[Michael Hastings]

Colors

Colors

Mike, I've got absolutely nothing against AquaVideo Yellow. Just a personal thing. Mark.

I hear you.

Just mentioning that IF I decide to go with it I will tell you now, not to expect it to look like your shiny yellow product for long.

Cheers,
Mark.

BTW the Aluminum housings are normally black hardcoat. For PVC I try to hold the line on the yellow since it is a trademark, and if I didn't I would get requests for 20 different colors. But maybe with the RED it would be OK to differentiate it a bit. If I were to offer another color what would people like for their RED UW system? Pro Black? Deep blue - probably the least conspicuous and what we used for the Seaworld housing that filmed the killer whale birth? Red for RED? There are hundreds of colors of the vinyl but the particular type I use is a special very thick material that is tougher and also easier to cut around the wings and such, and is only available in about a dozen colors. It is fairly expensive (actually costs more than the tube) so it would be nice to get a little consensus. Mike the beginner has already voted for black, and that is probably the direction I would lean as well.

Too bad we won't see you at NAB - should be exciting and it'd be nice to get the bubble blowers together for lunch one day.

 

[Ken Corben]

Deep Blue on the PVC sounds very slick. I am still leaning towards white powder coat on my aluminum housing.

 

[Mike the beginner]

Deep Blue on the PVC sounds very slick. I am still leaning towards white powder coat on my aluminum housing.

My underwater stuff will be with salmon and sea trout with seals a likely possibility as well. The fish are very easiliy spooked so any housing that does not jump out at you in brightness or prone to flashy reflections would be fine with me.

Mike the beginner

 

[Ken Corben]

The next non-fiction Oscar goes to...

The next non-fiction Oscar goes to...

So Jacques Perrin (Oscar winning Director of Winged Migration) has a $40 million dollar budget for his new epic feature OCEANS. Shot mostly with "highly modified cinealtas" and slated for a Fall '08 release. This will be an amazing film based on his previous accomplishments.

Here's a link to an interview about the project:

http://www.sustainable-development.veolia.com/en/more/news/9FC8fXs7I2xP7iFn1Bsi.aspx?offset=16

I want to take my feature film Changing Tides (ehem, digital cinema release per Gibby nomenclature) to the next level in image capture and storytelling. Can you say RED 3-D underwater?

 

[Mike the beginner]

So Jacques Perrin (Oscar winning Director of Winged Migration) has a $40 million dollar budget for his new epic feature OCEANS. Shot mostly with "highly modified cinealtas" and slated for a Fall '08 release. This will be an amazing film based on his previous accomplishments.

Here's a link to an interview about the project:

http://www.sustainable-development.veolia.com/en/more/news/9FC8fXs7I2xP7iFn1Bsi.aspx?offset=16

I want to take my feature film Changing Tides (ehem, digital cinema release per Gibby nomenclature) to the next level in image capture and storytelling. Can you say RED 3-D underwater?

One to watch out for great stuff. Hey it mentioned here if i quote:

The film is scheduled for release in 2007 and we hope to finish it in late 2006. May the gods be with us...

So is it late 08 or the above?

I love people like that, they help this twisted world at times to wake up to what is hapening in our world. Would be nice if those in power were held to account for destroying the worlds natural resources.

Mike the beginner

 

[Mark Thorpe]

AquaVideoRed206 - If I were to offer another color what would people like for their RED UW system? Pro Black? Deep blue - probably the least conspicuous and what we used for the Seaworld housing that filmed the killer whale birth? Red for RED?

If I had a choice / say in the matter I would opt for black. To choose one of the other options mentioned here I would say Red due to its color performance at depth. My choice doesn't necessarily reflect that of others.

sharkguy......"has a $40 million dollar budget for his new epic feature OCEANS. Shot mostly with "highly modified cinealtas" and slated for a Fall '08 release. This will be an amazing film based on his previous accomplishments".

Wahhhhh, if only. This should be a very nice piece but shooting over not even an entire season eliminates the potential for full seasonal variation in species behavior methinks?

Hey sharkguy, if you want to hear of a good project with a solid idea platform, an easy deliverable concept and the potential to attract big budgets drop me a PM. I have a treatment idea I have been working on for a while.

Cheers,
Mark.