 It appears you have not yet registered with our community. To register for free click here
|
 | |
4th August 2005, 03:36
| #11 (permalink) |
| Crash Test Dummy  Current Rebreather/s: Other CCR Other Rebreather/s: Other CCR Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Cairo
Posts: 5,510
  | Quote: (Originally Posted by Ryan) I think this camera would look awfully nice in the little Bluefin that was used for the TRV-950 & HC1000, w/ manual white balance hacked through lanc... Hopefully Light & Motion will announce something soon No, that's not the answer I was looking for...   Already have 2 housings and don't want to spend more $$$ for one more, I am hoping the Stingray-II will work. Do you know if the HC-1 will work with existing L&M LANC hardware in (for example) my Stingray-II housing ? |
| (Offline) |    |
|
4th August 2005, 11:33
| #12 (permalink) |
| Crash Test Dummy Current Rebreather/s: Other CCR Other Rebreather/s: Other CCR Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Cairo
Posts: 5,510
| Quote: (Originally Posted by Andy M) I could have sworn when I bought my USVH housing it was rated to 120m... 3/8ths thick aluminium walls, 3/8ths thick perspex. No holes, pure electronic, just two main o rings... Andy,Are we talking about the same usvh.com compay ? I have one of their DV-100 housings for a number of years so familiar with their products. AFAIK, they don't have any aluminum housing. And there is still 1 thru-hole to pass the cable to video camera. IIRC, their depth rating is only ~70m from the last time I read their site. |
| (Offline) | |
|
4th August 2005, 13:44
| #13 (permalink) |
| Dude   Current Rebreather/s: Home Build Other Rebreather/s: Sport Kiss Home Build Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Cambridge, UK
Posts: 415
 | Quote: (Originally Posted by decoweenie) Are we talking about the same usvh.com compay ? I have their PC housing it is definately thick cast aluminium. Most substantial housing I have seen, I would be quite happy taking it to 100m. I cant find any DV-100 housing on their site. Maybe you are talking about some of their early housings and they have new products since then? www.usvh.comAndy
__________________ Know your PO2 at all times |
| (Offline) | |
|
4th August 2005, 13:58
| #14 (permalink) |
| Crash Test Dummy Current Rebreather/s: Other CCR Other Rebreather/s: Other CCR Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Cairo
Posts: 5,510
| Andy, I am confused... It is the same company. And this is what I got from their "About" page: The material we use is a very high-quality (and expensive) polyurethane. It's very strong, tough and lightweight. The housing can easily withstand a depth of 250+', but it's still light enough to take with you around the world. and this is the page for the DV-100 housing... http://www.usvh.com/DV100.html I haven't seen any aluminum housing from the website. Could you point to a picture of your AL housing ?
__________________ "...after a while you get bored offering advice to a bull that like to keep butting the fence with its head rather than walking through the open gate..." - Rebreather World PM |
| (Offline) | |
|
4th August 2005, 15:35
| #15 (permalink) |
| Dude Current Rebreather/s: Home Build Other Rebreather/s: Sport Kiss Home Build Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Cambridge, UK
Posts: 415
| Quote: (Originally Posted by decoweenie) Andy, I have the PC housing which is on their main housings page. So it is polyurethane after all!! Wow. You would never have guessed, it sure feels like cast aluminium! It feels cold to the touch and metallic. When you ping it it sounds metallic so I guess I assumed it was aluminium at some point in the distant past. Sorry for the misinformation and subsequent confusion...I am confused... It is the same company. And this is what I got from their "About" page: The material we use is a very high-quality (and expensive) polyurethane. It's very strong, tough and lightweight. The housing can easily withstand a depth of 250+', but it's still light enough to take with you around the world. Now is "withstand a depth of 250+'" good enough for you? Andy
__________________ Know your PO2 at all times |
| (Offline) | |
|
4th August 2005, 15:41
| #16 (permalink) |
| Crash Test Dummy Current Rebreather/s: Other CCR Other Rebreather/s: Other CCR Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Cairo
Posts: 5,510
| Quote: (Originally Posted by Andy M) So it is polyurethane after all! OK, I thought it might be the problem, but rather you figure that one on your own...  Quote: Now is "withstand a depth of 250+'" good enough for you? No, 250ft is only 75m which is about the same as most of the plexiglass housing. I even have a housing claimed 70m working depth that had springs workable to only 60m.I want at least 100m, damn it... 
__________________ "...after a while you get bored offering advice to a bull that like to keep butting the fence with its head rather than walking through the open gate..." - Rebreather World PM |
| (Offline) | |
|
5th August 2005, 00:30
| #17 (permalink) |
| Administrator  Current Rebreather/s: Inspiration Classic Other Rebreather/s: Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: HOUSTON, REPUBLIC OF TEJAS
Posts: 1,120
| Quote: (Originally Posted by decoweenie) I want at least 100m, damn it... And so do I, damn it....! 
__________________ [SIZE=2]"CC Rebreathers will become a viable part of tech diving [U]WHEN PIGS FLY[/U]!!"--GI3[/SIZE] |
| (Offline) | |
|
5th August 2005, 04:26
| #18 (permalink) |
| New Member  Current Rebreather/s: Evolution Other Rebreather/s: Join Date: May 2005 Location: NYC
Posts: 58
| Housings have an incredible lag time from the time cameras ship. I recently put together an HD rig for the Sony Z1U HD camera. We used it to document Pulley Ridge on a research project headed by Sylvia Earle and featured in the upcoming ADM. I went with a Gates housing for the camera for a price/performance/availability issues. We were however using a prototype housing while we waited to receive our production model. Many of the other housings are still vaporware but might ultimately provide a higher level of usability. The nature of the mechanical controls present a certain level of difficulty to use. We had several problems at depth with the ability to power the camera on and accidentally turning it off with the bump of the housing against counter lungs. I think the FX1 camera shipped about a year before the first housing was available and the Z1U was shipping several months prior to the availability of the same housings. Going HD is not a small undertaking because of the size of the housing and costs are reflected just as brutally. The new smaller camera HC1 may well prove to be a much better tool since it is significantly smaller, but I would be concerned that quality may be a problem. The Z1U is pretty good quality wise, but it definately is challenged by movement at close range. Shooting Video transects in the 200'+ range require snails pace to minimize compression and stylistically you'll want to freeze on subjects to allow the resolution to fully render in each key shot. This may be less of a problem shallow with lots of ambient light. The HC1 is not supposed to be as good of quality as the quasi-pro Z1 so folks should test it out before investing. A better choice might be a regular DV cam. When it looks good it looks great but when it is off it is not too useful. Hopefully we'll have some footage to post at some point in the future. I'll try to post both the good, the bad and the ugly. The real camera/housing combo to wait for is the upcoming Panasonic which will shoot real HD onto disk...only the cost of a high end breather...that's before buying the housing! Doug
__________________ www.TheDepthFinder.com |
| (Offline) | |
|
7th August 2005, 07:16
| #19 (permalink) |
| New Member  Current Rebreather/s: Other Rebreather/s: Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 68
| Hi Phi, I have to agree with most that Doug said. HDV is not really true HD. As it uses MPEG-2 at 25Mbps it suffers from massive compression artefacts on busy scenes. Forget shooting schools of fish, for example. The codec gives up the ghost, basically and it looks far worse than garden variety DV. Also, the sensitivity of HDV cameras is very low, and I mean low. At 100m you will need a lot of light (actually more than I need in 2/3" CCD HDCAM) or else the image will be very noisy (shimmer). What will Panasonic offer remains to be seen, but the higher recording rate looks promissing. I expect it will also struggle with sensitivity of 1/3" HD CCD. For shooting with 2/3" HDCAM I use over 30,000 lumens of lights (over 1000W of high intensity lamp) and at times I still wish I had more juice. For a short time I was even considering little Sony HDV as my secondary camera, but my enthusiasm has gone after seeing samples. Regarding housing, I have decided long time ago to build a housing that can take any camera to any diving depth (Bazooka can go down to 500m). It is ridiculous (expensive) to have to buy a new housing each time you want to put a different camera in it. Just my thoughts. Cheers, Pawel |
| (Offline) | |
|
7th August 2005, 08:14
| #20 (permalink) |
| Crash Test Dummy Current Rebreather/s: Other CCR Other Rebreather/s: Other CCR Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Cairo
Posts: 5,510
| Thanks for the info, guys. Looking like I will hold off on buying a HD recorder for a while which is perfectly suitable with my flat pocketbook at the moment anyway.
__________________ "...after a while you get bored offering advice to a bull that like to keep butting the fence with its head rather than walking through the open gate..." - Rebreather World PM |
| (Offline) | |
Linear Mode
RebreatherWorld.Com ©2005 - 2008 Scuba Flair Limited
Rebreather World, Rebreather World and the Rebreather World Logo are TrademarksAll rights reserved, no republishing of content without written permission.
By using this website you have agreed to our Terms & Conditions of Use
Rebreather World, Rebreather World and the Rebreather World Logo are TrademarksAll rights reserved, no republishing of content without written permission.
By using this website you have agreed to our Terms & Conditions of Use
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.1.0