Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

Underwater Bubble Blowin' Users Group

CamDiver said:
Yep, agreed. As wide as possible without breaking the bank, is that possible ? Is there any given formula for working out the angle of view in degrees in relation to the focal length of any given lens? ie what should we expect as a field of view in degrees from say a 10mm as opposed to a 14mm? I have gotten so used to shooting the Z1 with the Fathoms 120 degree external WA adapter lens. What focal distance lens would be required on RED to replicate the 117 degree FOV of the Fathom SWP44?

Cheers,
Mark.
Click to expand...

Mark: This is my point - virtually all of us have been using substantially wider lenses than a 14 on RED. I don't know if the Fathom is 117 horizontal or diagonal but the Canon chart shows 10mm is 107 diagonal on APS-C (virtually identical to RED) so even less horizontal. The Arri chart shows the 10mm Ultraprime is 100 degrees horizontal and even the 8R is only 110 degrees horizontal.

This is why I suggest the 10-22 Canon or maybe better the 11-16 tokina as the sort of "standard" underwater lens with RED with the possibility of the 14mm for the "ultrasharp" work in very clear water.

What we all kind of wish for (still photographers too) is an EF-S prime lens version of the 14mm which would be about a 9mm, but nobody knows if or when that might happen.
 
Fathoms SWP44 is diagonal FOV.

I suppose this is more as a desire to have the widest possible image for filming the big stuff. I am sure 100 degrees is also fine having also shot extensively with Amphibico's offerings a few years back. There was only one lens that beat them back then and that was the Thelacetor at 112 degrees. Nice but real expensive.

Its all well and good looking at Canon's etc but we are still missing that elusive Birger smart mount. I've been told, next week!!

A prime EF-S 8mm !! Now wouldn't that be a thing of beauty? One can dream I guess.

Stay well mate.
Mark
 
Mark,
why not go big and get the zeiss 8mm ultraprime? I see someone offering one for sale on the forum. He might take your house in trade---worth asking anyway. Probably won't take mine though.

I do love that 8mm ultraprime though. It was a crisp lens and after using it and then going back to the 18-50 red it was like going back to an old sony TR101. HUGE difference.
 
BajaProductions said:
Mark,
why not go big and get the zeiss 8mm ultraprime? I see someone offering one for sale on the forum. He might take your house in trade---worth asking anyway. Probably won't take mine though.

I do love that 8mm ultraprime though. It was a crisp lens and after using it and then going back to the 18-50 red it was like going back to an old sony TR101. HUGE difference.
Click to expand...
Dude, I've only got one money tree fer chrissakes!!! :waaa: hehehe
 
Zeiss T2.1 12mm and 14mm PL mount lenses.

Zeiss T2.1 12mm and 14mm PL mount lenses.

I have access to some good zeiss T2.1 PL mount lenses in very good condition.
2-14mm and 2-12mm- presumably mid to late 90s vintage. I will see them Monday or Tuesday so don't have pricing yet but I am told will be very good pricing from reputable people.

Trying to gauge interest among the bubble blowers. Also Roughly what should these go for? - remembering that PL lenses are going up every day as more and more REDs come on line (and if the dollar keeps falling making anything new or used from Europe even more expensive).

PM me if you are interested as these are very hard to find (I have had my eye out for the last six months - as has Ken Corben and Johnny Friday) One of the 12mm's for sale is the one I have had for several months as I already committed to buying the 10mm from the group for my own use. The 10 is really big , so requires a special port and only focuses to 14" so big dome as well - the 12 and 14's fit in the standard port size and close focus enough for even 6" ports no problem.

I have not mentioned these on other threads as I want to give the bubble blower's first shot as wide angles are really necessary for us.

I believe these are the specs:
10MM Arri/Zeiss PL Distagon T* 2,0/ 10mm T2.1 - front diameter 156mm close focus 14"
12mm Arri/Zeiss PL Distagon T* 2,0/ 12mm T2.1 - front diameter 135mm close focus 10"
14mm Arri/Zeiss PL Distagon T* 2,0/ 14mm T2.1 - front diameter 114mm close focus 9"

Photos are NOT the actual lenses.
 
CamDiver said:
OK so now that we are all sitting down. What's the price on these puppies, respectively??

I'll say it first.........eek!

Cheers,
Mark.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure - pl have gone nuts in the last six months but I think we are in the $5-7K range for the 14mm and 6-7K for the 12s.
 
CamDiver said:
......and the 10mm ??
Click to expand...

about $10K. AFAIK there's not a lot of difference between the older 10mm and the Ultraprime 10 (same T-stop diameter, etc.) which is about $23K new.

EdIT: Found some ballpark prices for New Arri Zeiss Ultraprimes

8mm Ultra Prime Distagon T2.8...... € 21,147.00... $30,451.68
10mm Ultra Prime Distagon T2.1..... € 15,921.20... $22,926.53
12mm Ultra Prime Distagon T1.9..... € 15,274.60... $21,995.42
14mm Ultra Prime Distagon T1.9..... € 11,893.20... $17,126.21
 
ginclearfilm said:
I reckon you guys have probably already seen this but here is an update regarding the GATES housing for RED

http://www.marinevisions.com/Deep-Red-Underwater-Video-Housing-Update-nid-3.html
Click to expand...

Thanks for posting this ginclear.

Although the photo appears to be a press type/public domain one I thought it would be a little rude for a competitor to post it so use ginclear's link to take a look or maybe one of you can post it.

I had seen an earlier email describing this but not an actual picture, so I had made some speculative comments privately to my customers but now I can share my thoughts publicly.

First, I thought Gates might do it this way as it fits there "boxish" style housing. That style had a real advantage for cameras like the Sony HVR-Z1, EX1 and Canon XH-A1 - where you had a handle, microphone and other things sticking up and out that meant you could make a substantially smaller housing with a rectangular shape than the smallest circle that would fit all of those things in - which was a very bulky 10.75 inch diameter with lots of wasted space. This is not true of the REDONE because it is almost perfectly shaped to fit a cylinder. The top is round, and the sides protrude out so the sides (and the connectors) fit into the curve. Consequently we can fit the REDONE into a 9" diameter cylinder. 1.75" different diameter doesn't sound like much but you have to remember that the volume increases exponentially as the cross section increases (the side length squared for a box or radius squared for a circle). You can add quite a few inches to the length before you reach how much you increase it by adding just an inch or two to the cross section.

I doubt if you can get much smaller than what we have achieved with our cylinder (and we have reduced weight and volume further by machining the flats on the outside). Without dimensions of the Gates housing I cant calculate the volume exactly but I'm pretty confident it won't be smaller, and it may actually be larger.

The other big problem with that approach is that you greatly increase the frontal area so a lot more drag pushing it through the water. (BTW these same volume/drag issues apply to the element technica housing which uses the topmount and rods to hold the battery and drive behind the camera, that was posted a little while ago on another thread - it appears to be a significantly larger tube, quite possibly the 10.75 inch diameter since that is the standard 10" pipe size - our 9" is a special size tube.)

The only real advantage of placing the drive and battery on top is this:

Quote from Gates: "It also allows access to the rear control panel. Our design team has worked out details to access all salient rear buttons and joystick –the latter being a clever and challenging one indeed."

We can hit the buttons pretty easily (several of which you can have programmed with your preset functions anyway), but the rotary knob is certainly tricky and tougher for us because it would require a long shaft actuator from the back, or gears and multiple controls from the top to be able to turn and push.

But first, consider that the need to use these functions is fairly limited. Remember that most of the things we did with video cameras - white balance, iso, gain, color shift, gamma, knee, black stretch, etc. DO NOTHING TO THE RECORDING ON THE REDONE because we record the RAW sensor data. All of that stuff only affects what it looks like on the live LCD. And then that stuff gets set in post in REDCINE and again does not affect the recorded data - only the exported data - be it quicktime, PRORES, DPX or whatever. So setting or changing underwater does nothing. But if you want to, you can do many of them underwater with the direct switches or the presets.

Second, most of the things you need the knob for like shutter angle, varispeed ramp, time code or naming adjustments, etc. would be pretty rare to need to be set underwater. We decided not to even attempt to incorporate the rotary knob control (if you have used rotary controls on other video housings you may have found them to be a bit fussy/unreliable anyway) because we have good alternatives:

One: we have always anticipated that RED would make a handheld remote/ccu like the ones that have been available on virtually every broadcast camera. (As a bit of history here's a partial list of broadcast cameras we have housed: Sony BVP-3, BVP-30, DCX-M3, DXC-3000, BVW300, BVW400, BVW600, DVW700, F900. Panasonic RECAM, AJD310 D3, DVCPRO AJD200 and 700 AWE600, AWE800, Varicam. Ikegami DNW7, DNS-201, Hitachi HV-C10 HV-C20, etc.) ALL of these have small handheld remotes that handle all of these functions and are much easier to integrate into the housing - either internally or in a small external box. Presumably RED will make one of these or at least provide remote access through the RS232 or USB as it should have better/easier access than the other cameras.

Two: even without a CCU, and if you need more functions than available via presets, there is another method that provides the same capability as the rotary knob on the camera and is much easier to implement and use. Although it requires some additional expenditure, it is a fraction of the difference between the price of our housing and the announced price of the Gates housing. It provides substantial additional capability to the setup besides just the rotary functions control, and it does not require any addition to the housing size so can be retrofitted to our existing housings. Since Gates may not have figured this one out yet, I will leave it for a later post/announcement but it will be available with new orders or to our existing customers in a month or so.

For those that may not be aware, our aluminum housing pictured below (there is a less expensive PVC version) is $8699.00 with acrylic dome (with interchangeable 8" domes, Macro ports, extension rings, etc. available) and our 8" AR coated glass dome option is available now ($2399 - requires its own dedicated frontplate, $1899 at time of housing order but you would need the standard frontplate to allow use of the other interchangeable ports.) I don't know what the official announcement was, but I had heard that the price was to be $18K or more, and there current announcement says they are now looking at a glass dome but I don't know if that would be standard or an option.

As far as lenses the Gates announcement says this "At this juncture the RED 18-50 and Birger/Canon/Nikon are the only ones for sure."

AquaVideo has already have shipped more than a dozen housings setup for Birger Mount Canon lenses, Arri 8R, RED 18-50, Arri 10mm Ultraprime, Arri 12mm t2.1, Nikon manual still lenses, Contax/Zeiss manual still lenses, etc. (We even set two of them up for remote control of iris, and focus with a 150' cable to the surface.) All except the 10 fit fine with the large diameter of the standard frontplate that uses the large standard Aquatica thread mount (the 10 is just too big and requires the glass dome plate) and you can use long macro and other lenses with the macro port and/or extensions which screw into the standard frontplate.

The mountplate shown is an older one, there is more space between the battery and the camera rear now but gives the basic idea.
 
AquaVideoRed206 said:
...The other big problem with that approach is that you greatly increase the frontal area so a lot more drag pushing it through the water. (BTW these same volume/drag issues apply to the element technica housing which uses the topmount and rods to hold the battery and drive behind the camera, that was posted a little while ago on another thread - it appears to be a significantly larger tube, quite possibly the 10.75 inch diameter since that is the standard 10" pipe size - our 9" is a special size tube.)
Click to expand...

Yes and no.

The difference between 10" and 9" on a 55cm long tuble is 2kg. I use 10" and therefore can accomodate F900 and most other cameras, maybe except F23, but who cares, LOL.

I can also maintain centered position of the lens with Red One and other cameras which, with 9" tube, you can't (it has to be offset and changes from camera to camera). You need different front plates, which is OK, but with 10" tube you don't. I shed more than 2kg by using titanium instead of plastic, but agree, even 2kg is a lot when it all adds up. Also, I think my housing at 55cm (tube only) is slightly shorter, so the saving by using 9" tube may not be that significant.

One advantage of Aquavideo and my housings over Gates/HH design is their vertical stability in water due to longer design. I find short housings "wobbly". So, I agree with the shape considerations.

I also agree about the access to all controlls, you don't need them underwater. If you happen to afford 1% of your remaining attention to something other than focusing, framing, neutral buoyancy, camera movement, steadiness, etc...it would be your diving equipment and attention to stay alive - it helps more than being able to adjust white balance on the monitor.

Also, I presume, the housing will be disposable for EPIC or any other mechanical change, including different lens options. No 100% trade-in for Epic swap offer, I guess.

Gates still haven't revealed how they intend to solve critical focusing of various lenses through the dome. That one will be most interesting to see, for me anyway.

Any ND filer stages?

It just shows designing a housing for a cinema camera is far from simple and often requires many compromises. R&D is enormous if you want to perfect it.

I look forward to seeing DEEP RED housing in its final shape, it certainly sounds interesting.
 
Pawel Achtel said:
Yes and no.

The difference between 10" and 9" on a 55cm long tuble is 2kg. I use 10" and therefore can accomodate F900 and most other cameras, maybe except F23, but who cares, LOL.
Click to expand...

Alright, check those meds Pawel!:biggrin:

Picking nits here:

First I was comparing to 10.75" Diameter which is the OD for 10" standard pipe size

.927 lbs. per cm for 9" 51.02 lbs. 1.32 lbs. per cm for 10.75" 72.79 lbs

which gives a whopping 20.7 pound increase - close to 10 KG.

But even if you are using a true 10" OD
.927 lbs. per cm for 9" 51.02 lbs. 1.15 lbs. per cm for 10.75" 63 lbs

it is still 12 pounds more which is 5.5 Kg.

.........


I hear you on the ability to use multiple cameras - I have a 10.75 inch housing that I have used for BVW300A, DVW700 HD and for a Varicam basically with different mountplates and frontplates. Of course this was made much simpler because the iris, focus, zoom, and tape start/stop was all through the lens and we could use the handheld ccu to control all the camera functions.

Most importantly though - the biggest thing I like about the REDONE is that it does fit in a package that is about 30 per cent smaller than any of the broadcast video or 35mm film systems and gives us equivalent or better quality.

When I started with a BVW30 in the 80s we had 120 pound setups that were difficult even for two people to get in and out of the water and almost impossible for one person. Then with the BVW300 size we dropped to 75 or 80 lbs. - fairly easy for two and possible for one. Now at just over 50 lbs it is really easy for two and not hard for one person to get it in and out.

The 9" size is perfect - we can use virtually any lens - I can even just barely fit my Arri 10mm ultraprime which is huge.

Pawel Achtel said:
Also, I presume, the housing will be disposable for EPIC or any other mechanical change, including different lens options. No 100% trade-in for Epic swap offer, I guess.
Click to expand...

We can accommodate various lenses with extension rings for the dome, or macro ports which are interchangeable on the standard frontplate.

The EPIC shapes that have been shown are so dramatically different retrofit wouldn't make much sense. As far as tradein - I am happy to double the price to $18K and offer full tradein, but I am guessing that most people would rather just pay the regular $8599 without the trade-in option.:biggrin: I will offer some level of tradein, though.
 
AquaVideoRed206 said:
Alright, check those meds Pawel!:biggrin:
Click to expand...

You're right, 5kg :clown2: I should have read the label, it clearly says: "Don't post in Underwater Bubble Blowing Users Group within 24 hours after taking the medication". LOL

One thing, though, my 10" ID machined (!) tube is only 3mm thick, or thin, so the OD is just 10.2", not 10.75". So, the difference in OD between mine and yours, shouldn't be 1", probably just 1/2" or so. Then, my end result may look good again despite those nasty side effects of my meds :biggrin:

What is the length of the tube in your housing, looks much more than 55cm?

Either way, the external form factor looks very similar to my housing. I like how it balances underwater.

AquaVideoRed206 said:
are so dramatically different retrofit wouldn't make much sense. As far as tradein - I am happy to double the price to $18K and offer full tradein, but I am guessing that most people would rather just pay the regular $8599 without the trade-in option.:biggrin: I will offer some level of tradein, though.
Click to expand...

True, I was referring to the Gates housing. Yours should adapt more or less, no?
 
Finally back in the mix. Just spent a week on a Sea Lion colony surrounded by water, white sharks and wafts of, well you don't wanna go there......

Mike, got your offer on PM. Watch this space for news coming soon.

Johnny, any more of that and you will go blind........!! :)

ScubaMagazine.net, or we're just people who realize you get what you pay for. Image quality in the end is what we are about.......

Cheers all,
Mark.
 
CamDiver said:
Mike, got your offer on PM. Watch this space for news coming soon.

Cheers all,
Mark.
Click to expand...

You big tease!:biggrin:


Glass domes and frontplates are finished and ready to ship. sharkguy, Johnny, amund, and bert are first on the list. Will post pictures tomorrow. Been too busy shipping to get the pictures done. Mexico RED housing yesterday, HVX200 rental housing today, and Russian RED tomorrow, Bert's Thursday or Friday. Meltdown Saturday.:biggrin:
 
AquaVideoRed206 said:
You big tease!:biggrin:


Glass domes and frontplates are finished and ready to ship. sharkguy, Johnny, amund, and bert are first on the list. Will post pictures tomorrow. Been too busy shipping to get the pictures done. Mexico RED housing yesterday, HVX200 rental housing today, and Russian RED tomorrow, Bert's Thursday or Friday. Meltdown Saturday.:biggrin:
Click to expand...
hahaha, sounds better than 2000 incontinent sea lions IMHO......:red_bandana: "Har, where's me Buccaneers"? "Under ya Buckin' Hat"!
 
Gates Deep Red

Gates Deep Red

Here's the latest on the Gates housing for the Red One.

http://www.gateshousings.com/PR.html

I'd love to know how much that baby is going to cost...
Actually, maybe I don't want to know after all. :sad:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top