You're wasting your money on lights.....

[dumpsterDiver]

This is the hero 1 without any lights (or filters) at 185...Of course my buddy had a very powerful light on his camera.



[video=youtube;uZJ0byuTVqU]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uZJ0byuTVqU&feature=share&list=UU1utDku8vJ RJYgBZImLyLJQ[/video]

 

[Interceptor121]

I don't think the issue is if lights are useful or not of course they are but you can spend the same amount two sola 1200 would cost you to get a panasonic tz30 in an ikelite housing with dome and one single light and with that you have more shooting options than with a gopro and two lights as the camera white balances and also does macro and has image stabilisation
I don't think any retailers selling lights is adverse at selling them is just that throwing that amount of money to equip a gopro with two lights is not maybe the best way to spend it

 

[tflaris]

So, I was all set on buying a set of sola 500 lights for my new go pro setup. I have a new go pro 2 with the LCD back, dive housing, magic filter, tray with arms ready for lights. Anyways, I make a phone call to a large online retailer asking about my choice of lights. The sales rep asked where I dive and I said mostly tropical locations i.e. Cozumel, Turks and Caicos, Florida etc.. and he said I would more than likely be wasting my money unless I wanted to get 2 sola 1200's and then it would still be a reach and only useful for underneath ledges or in deep water past 50 or 60 feet on very close filming. I would have to spend around $1,500 and it likely wouldn't make a huge difference then I was for sure out on that.

He said that lights are really good for dark water, green water, night diving etc.. His analogy was to think of shining a flashlight on a bright sunny day.. it's not very effective, but it is very noticeable at night. He said that the clear and bright tropical water is hard to punch through with lights and even powerful lights are only good for a few feet. I was a little surprised at his candid response, especially since it meant he wouldn't be making a sale. His advice was to use the filter from about 15 feet to around 60 feet and it should be more than enough for good memories. He also mentioned I should find some good editing software and I would be happy with the results. I was just surprised at his response and wondered how many other guys on here just skipped lights all together or regretted spending money on lights that aren't that effective. I'm really new to this so forgive me if I am missing something.... it wouldn't be the first time.

I have 2 Ikelite's 151 Strobes I use for UW Photo and they are good for no more than 6' underwater. What the rep said is true. I guess it depends on how well lit you want you videos to be. Its very hard to get realistic lighting in the wide angle shots unless using natural lights ot filters. Opinions vary and this is my 2 cents. Good Luck.

 

[yarik83]

Lights are really good if you need to film something within 10 feet of you. After that your lights become very quickly ineffective. Having said that if all you do is macro shoot then by all means go out and buy lights. I do not have lights... all I have is a red lens filter and dive 8am-1pm. By time boat leaves, gets to dive spot, you jump, get situated, come back up, do your surface interval etc etc etc... You get both of your dives from 9-10 and 11-12. Needless to say if you dive at night you will need lights. My bigblue cf250 x 2 work within 10 feet on night dives, after that while I can see the light camera says.... pfft what's that and you get nothing but a mostly black diluted image.

A dive light let's say 1500 lumens will work like a charm, better yet 2 will work even better but again you have to realize what it is that you will be filming.

Perfect example... out of all the times I dove in Cozumel... I never had to use lights and I dove 45-90ft. Granted I was not able to film the swim through but 3 seconds of swimming is honestly not worth 3000 dollars worth of lights and more importantly if you (like me) never have the need for lights then it would be really really silly to buy them and use them once in a blue moon.

My camera is bonica hddv. My recent additions to dive setup are 2 gopro hero 3 black. I used to have my flashlights mounted to the tray and I just took them down to replace them with gopro setup.

I do, however have 2 err. what are they called... tactical glove thingies which let me attach flashlights and I will continue diving in that formation like so:


But even then I am doing so only because I always dive with flashlights regardless.

It is not easy filming something dark and that is why dive lights are recommended but sometimes you need to be able to justify that purchase. After filming since 2008 I think there was only one time where I really wish I had dive lights and that is only because we did a night shore dive in Cozumel and I did not take my camera with me but had my big blue flashlights shining the way... that is until a diver with a budget 20 times the size of mine pulled out his fancy canister light system which made my led lights feel like a candle.

Check out my signature and visit my youtube channel. I do not post many videos online but those you see on channel were filmed in green water, blue water, 45-90ft deep, cloudy days, bad vis days, filming walls, filming crevises etc etc... pretty much all the things O.P. has concerns about. for a sub $500 camera with no lights... not too shabby.

 

[uncfnp]

I do not do much video so may not be comparable and I dive 100 or less but I sold my strobe, very insistent results (probably mostly operator error) and just shoot RAW then correct white balance in photo editing.

 

[Bopper]

I purchased 1400 lumens of light to use w. my GoPro and it made almost no difference at all. This was typically between 40 to 80 ft diving in So Cal. The only time I'd see an improvement was 1 to 2 ft away from the subject. Even then the improvement wasn't very impressive. I think the guy at the store knew exactly what he was talking about. I'm at a point now where I'm looking to move away from GoPro as I don't think they do well enough in low light situations.

 

[Interceptor121]

I purchased 1400 lumens of light to use w. my GoPro and it made almost no difference at all. This was typically between 40 to 80 ft diving in So Cal. The only time I'd see an improvement was 1 to 2 ft away from the subject. Even then the improvement wasn't very impressive. I think the guy at the store knew exactly what he was talking about. I'm at a point now where I'm looking to move away from GoPro as I don't think they do well enough in low light situations.

That is an example of reaching the limits of a set up that does not do custom white balance and small sensor

A camera with a 1/1.7 sensor with custom WB does ok until 80 feet without a filter because it does not need one, the good news is you can reuse the lights

 

[toozler]

.... I'm at a point now where I'm looking to move away from GoPro as I don't think they do well enough in low light situations.

Is the main issue for you the lack of color or the noise/graininess at depth?

This is a screen capture without filters or any post editing, at about 55 ft deep, using a 60 degree beam, 180 lumen only light, about 3-4 feet from the subject. It does bring color back and it's bright - disregard the narrow beam and the sharp edges. I can't see how a 1400 could make no difference. Do not expect it to light many feet from you, but if properly diffused and with a wide enough beam, it surely can make a noticeable difference on short range shots.



For diving shallow (60ft and up), a filter would do the job.

 

[Interceptor121]

I think this video explains the issues

[youtubehq]os4l_h-Es4Y[/youtubehq]

There are two reasons why the LX7 picture is better than the gopro
1. Lens quality the LX7 has a fast f/1.4 aperture lens the Gopro has an f/2.8 lens like the majority of low end compact cameras. This makes the picture brighter
2. The LX7 has a 1/1.7" sensor 1.5x bigger than the gopro that has a 1/2.5" sensor again like the majority of low end cameras. This makes the LX7 image less noisy

Now if you put the two cameras in water and shoot with ambient light the gopro needs filter as there is no custom WB while the LX7 and any other normal compact camera does not this means the Gopro looses another 1 1/3 fstop of exposure

So between the gopro and a high end compact like the LX7 there are 3 and 1/3 stops of difference whilst compared to a low end camera the difference is only the filter with a payload of 1+1/3 fstop

What does it mean?
It means that the Gopro needs to amplify the signal to be on par so compared to a compact camera shooting at ISO400 the gopro will need to shoot at ISO1000 because of the light absorbed by the filter
Compared to the LX7 at ISO400 the gopro will shoot at ISO4000 which is 3 and 1/3 fstop difference, not only that but because of the smaller sensor this will be actually worse than the LX7 working at ISO4000

As high ISO means noise it follows that because of the lack of custom white balance the gopro produces footage more noisy than any compact camera with custom WB and significantly worse than a high end compact

Considering that red is absorbed at a rate of 1 fstop every 2.5 meters this explains why an advanced camera like the LX7 can go 7-8 meters deeper than a gopro and still produce acceptable results. So if you can push an advanced fast lens camera down to 24-25 meters and this is really already very hard, a normal compact with custom WB can get to maximum 20 and a gopro stops producing decent results around 18

This is the explanation behind the gopro needing lights sooner than other cameras and producing grainy pictures at depth

Of course you can increase bitrate as much as you like but if the initial image is not good it does not get better

In conclusion although there are many examples of gopro footage at 30 meters and attempts of resolving this in post processing the limitation of the gopro in terms of optics and sensor size mean that good results can be produced only down to 18 meters or 60 feet on average

This is still great for a set up that costs under $650 with a tray and filter and there is plenty of fish life and wrecks that are found at depths even shallower

If you want more from your compact underwater video rig you need faster lenses and larger sensor

 

[robbcayman]

Wow, a lot of good information on here. I see both sides.. I really do. My primary reason for going with a gopro was I didn't want to sink $2k + into a rig to take videos to show people back home. I'm not trying out for nat geo and when the guy said I would have to drop another $1,500 on lights on a system that has probably $500 or so in it didn't make a lot of sense.

Maybe I should just throw a couple of intova lights on for $120 and see if that doesn't help in a little deeper water. Maybe something like this?
Amazon.com: Tovatec Mini Torch Flashlight: Sports & Outdoors