L&M Bluefin HC1 Housing

decoweenie

Many thanks, I will have a read...

__________________
"...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

AndyP

Got to say the FX1 whilst a cracking camera, is not exactly travel friendly with a UW housing.

Andrew

bubblefree

To answer your questions as to whether the quality you are getting on an HC-40 (which I am not familiar with but assume it is a one chip DV camera) would be improved the answer is yes on both counts but the results may not be that noticeable with 3 chip DV. Moving from one chip DV cameras to 3 chip DV cameras does not increase the resolution that the camcorder captures, this is governed by the DV tape and is the same regardless. However a 3 chip camcorder does capture light better than a one chip and is therefore more sensitive. This is where the better color reproduction and low light issues are improved.

Going from HC-40 to HDV there will be a very noticeable increase in quality. However HD come in many different flavors. (If you already know this stuff please ignore the explanations) Sony's version of the HDV format uses 1080i which means that it captures 1080 pixels vertically and the image is interlaced. There is not enough room here to go into interlaced vs progressive in detail but progressive gives you a much better quality with a doubling of the information that has to be processed. Two of the top HD formats are 1080i and 720p (yes you guessed it 720 lines of vertical resolution and progressive scan). The main advantage of the progressive picture is that it is supposed to be able to cature much higher speed shots (e.g. sports) than interlaced, however as with everything else which is in the HD world this is hotly debated. I haven't yet used an HD camera so I can't give you much personal feedback. I have seen output from the FX-1 which was Sony's marketing rather than real world footage. The quality was unbelievably stunning. Excellent details and fantastic color repoduction. However it was very interesting that in their marketing footage Sony used very slow pans and subjects which moved slowly. I haven't yet seen any comments from people about how these cameras perform underwater.

My only concern with the HC1 would be how well it performs in lower light conditions and whether this is good enough to get good quality at depth.

Andy, I agree that the FX-1 is big, haven't seen the size of any of the housing yet.....

decoweenie

Again, thanks a lot for the detail explanation.

I have done a little bit of research since...

One other factor that was brought up by someone else on TDS forum is the actual editing of the HD footage. It is supposedly massive and will require los of computing power, plus additional hardware (read: more $$$)

Lastly, the HD hardware is probably still in its infancy for the "prosumer" product line so there will probably a lot of changes/improvements in the next 2-3 years (like everything new).

Since I do video in dark environment (i.e. deep wrecks, etc), I might still go with the LMI Bluefin housing and Sony PC1000 if:

• able to sell of my relatively brand-new Amphibico EVO and HC40 package.
• able to determine if the Bluefin package is smaller than the EVO package (travel)

__________________
"...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

caveseeker7

The picture below gives you an idea. That's Amphibico's housing, the picture is from Amphibico Phenom & FX1 review by Paul Wags .
There are more for better size comparison, as well as a cool one of the housing at zero gravity.

Wetpixel has a lineup of FX1 housings on their website.

Attached Images

Amphibico.jpg (55.8 KB, 73 views)

__________________
Cheers
Stefan



"Political Correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional, illogical minority,
and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media,
which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end.!"

decoweenie

That's definitely TOO BIG for:

• mount on scooter
• dive in current
• travel

which are what I would like to use the camera for.

__________________
"...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

caveseeker7

You should have gotten a Fatman while Cis-Lunar built them.
If it can push the Wallmapper, it can push the HD cam.

__________________
Cheers
Stefan



"Political Correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional, illogical minority,
and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media,
which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end.!"

lof

I have just ordered the L&M Bluefin housing. They guarantee that there is no vignetting. I'll let you know when it arrives. There is quite selection of lenses and accessoires to go with it.
I have a L&M still camera housing and I am quite happy with it. Nice, compact, well designed, easy to handle, wet W/A and Macro lenses, very versatile system.

__________________
Jakub
Golem Gear ShopKeeper
www.golemgear.com

AndyP

Good heavens, I thought we had seen the last of interlaced video. To be honest TV is not my field, though CCD's are. Should have checked really. My main concern with the HC1 is the use of CMOS, but this also applies to the PC1000. Given the choice I would go for the Panasonic 3CCD miniDV but there is no UW housing worth having for it.

The 3CCD cameras do offer better resolution but this is in the inter-colour resolution, most single CCD's use a 2G R B mask, though sony use a G, GB, R, B mask, this means you have to strip the resolution interpolate the colour and reapply the resolution. Though the pixel to pixel resolution remains the colour resoution is much reduced. This is obviously not the case with the 3CCD systems. I personally think the biggest advantage for 3CCD systems for UW work is the much better control over colour balance, particually in the UK where we have very "green" water and it is very hard to find the best correction filter to use for long shots.

Andrew

wrecked

The FX-1 is definatley a monster to carry around and using it in that massive housing underwater would be quite a task especially at depth and in some current.

I did manage to use both the FX-1 & HC1 on land and the quality of both cameras in good light conditions is almost the same, very difficult to depict between the two. In low light the HC1 performed well however this was just in a lowlit room. I found that distant objects with HC1 tended to remain a little fuzzy.

The FX-1 however different story with its great manual features I became a top rate camera person almost immediatley. The camera adapts to lowlight and focuses well on objects at a distance. I would like to see a actual side by side demo of each camera underwater and at depth.

You gotta say with current technology in camcorders the HC1 for the money is awsome value. I think you just need to be a little closer to your subject and carry some xtra light with you.

I will definatly be considering the HC1 as my next purchase. I just need a housing that can handle down to 60mtrs.