30fps vs 60fps

[krame]

Hey all,

I'm not planning on buying a system until after Christmas, so I have way to much time to pixel peep and pour over stat sheets instead of actually getting in the water with something. There is a method to my madness, but instead of boring you that story, I'll bore you with another.

When shooting underwater video, just how important is 60fps?

 

[EL Pistoffo]

The 2 main advantages are smoother looking video that results from higher frame-rates as well as a smoother end results when slowing down 60 fps video in post editing or otherwise. Note that aside from PC's not too many devices are very adept at playing back 60fps at this point in time.

 

[Scubanoobi]

I don't think it's that important underwater, unless you're slowing down the motion it's just a waste of disk space - some people will disagree.

 

[kelemvor]

I don't use the high frame-rate option unless it's a situation that will likely need slow motion. 60fps is a pain to edit, and a pain to play back unless you edit the video down to 30fps. Also you need more light, which is a problem when diving.

At 60fps, that's a maximum exposure time of 1/60th of a second. The camera only has a f/2.8 lens. The camera will have to bump the ISO up to compensate in low light (diving) so you'll get grainy video. If it isn't allowed to adjust the ISO, then your video might appear darker than you'd expect. Neither are ideal. Both can be mitigated with a good video light setup.

 

[krame]

Thank you all for the quick reply.

A little more on the why. The Sony RX100ii appears to be the runaway hit for compact video, but for an equivocal price, one can step into the mirrorless category but at the cost of 1080p 60fps. How would you guys compare mirrorless video capabilities to that of the RX100ii?

 

[ronscuba]

Don't forget the extra lens and port costs for mirrorless cameras, plus size and weight.

 

[EL Pistoffo]

Don't forget the extra lens and port costs for mirrorless cameras, plus size and weight.

Yep those extra costs are what's holding me back.

 

[krame]

Don't forget the extra lens and port costs for mirrorless cameras, plus size and weight.

Yep those extra costs are what's holding me back.

+2

The next question revolves around whether there is one good general purpose lens (i.e. 18-55 kit lens as with nikon) and what kind of detriment having a 3.5-5.6 lens would be underwater.

 

[ronscuba]

With new cameras coming out every 6 months, it's difficult to keep up with. I think there is some pretty good UW video footage from one of the Panasonic mirrorless cameras out there. Not sure what lens though.

 

[matdiver]

I mainly shoot 720/50p at the moment (Belgium=PAL), precisely because I really like to be able to do a bit of smooth slo-mo when I'm editing. You can have a look at the GH2 videos in my signature to see what I mean. I find the 50p image better, especially as a lot of the stuff down there is fast-moving. I have a Panasonic GH2, which can't film 1080/50p (I don't think it's part of the Blu-Ray disc spec either). No problems editing on i7 quad core 2-year old Vaio.
Lenses - I can't see that I'd ever want to change the power zoom 14-42 lens I have. It's very small and light, fits behind a flat port with only a centimetre or so to the glass and.... you can zoom smoothly!