Getting good DSLR video when shooting wide angle

Please register or login

Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.

Benefits of registering include

  • Ability to post and comment on topics and discussions.
  • A Free photo gallery to share your dive photos with the world.
  • You can make this box go away

Joining is quick and easy. Log in or Register now!

NJScubaDoc

Contributor
Messages
181
Reaction score
19
Location
Deerfield Beach, FL
# of dives
200 - 499
I'm making the transition from shooting still into video. I've decided to take advantage of some of the holiday sales and pickup a set of Kraken 3500s to add to my Nikon D7000. I'm fairly well versed in the principles of still shooting and based on what I've read so far, many of those techniques and considerations will transfer to shooting video as well.

One area that I'm having a hard time finding conclusive information on is how to reconcile shooting decent wide angle footage. With shooting macro it seems pretty straightforward that like still, the video lights are going to replace long wavelength lost light at depth. As such, filters and white balance aren't necessary. What then, is the solution for shooting wide angle where the output of the video lights isn't enough to compensate? Is it attention to white balance, achieving compensation that way? Is it an in-lens (is there one large enough to fit over 6" dome ports?) red filter in combination with setting white balance? Is it shooting as shallow as possible to take advantage of ambient light? A combination of all those things? I'm interested in any best practices more seasoned videographers have found to get everything from stunning reefscapes to wide angle wreck shots. Thanks!
 
What lens do you plan on shooting your wide angle with? One option would be to get a red filter for your lens and to put it on before you put the camera in the housing. Be aware though that this is a pretty good solution but not a perfect one. It will give you more natural colours, but it does it by reducing everything except red so the net effect is that you will lose a stop or two of light. This can be mitigated by using a faster f-stop, or a higher ISO, but it is a compromise.
 
What lens do you plan on shooting your wide angle with? One option would be to get a red filter for your lens and to put it on before you put the camera in the housing. Be aware though that this is a pretty good solution but not a perfect one. It will give you more natural colours, but it does it by reducing everything except red so the net effect is that you will lose a stop or two of light. This can be mitigated by using a faster f-stop, or a higher ISO, but it is a compromise.

Usually when shooting wide angle I use a Tokina 10-17 fisheye. I've seen various articles/guides/tutorials etc that have advocated "just fixing it in post" but in my experience with stills, it's better to implement an in-the-field solution to get the best results before trying to manipulate later with software. So that could be a good solution. How would using a red filter on the lens impact the video lights? Say when doing a close focus wideangle reef shot where the lights illuminate the subject in the foreground? I suspect you'd have to just be keen to set white balance to compensate for the extra red? Thanks for the reply!
 
Last edited:
Usually when shooting wide angle I use a Tokina 10-17 fisheye. I've seen various articles/guides/tutorials etc that have advocated "just fixing it in post" but in my experience with stills, it's better to implement an in-the-field solution to get the best results before trying to manipulate later with software. So that could be a good solution. How would using a red filter on the lens impact the video lights? Say when doing a close focus wideangle reef shot where the lights illuminate the subject in the foreground? I suspect you'd have to just be keen to set white balance to compensate for the extra red? Thanks for the reply!
The Tokina 10-17mm fisheye is a superb lens underwater, but IIRC it does not have threads to attach a filter, so the advice of adding a filter may not be a viable solution for you. It certainly would not work on a lens that does not have threads.

To address your other question, the only time that I have shot video underwater, I simply used a GoPro so I was able to put on or remove my red filter as required. If you have one mounted on the lens behind the dome port, then that would mean that lights would not be ideal. Anytime that you are close enough for the video lights to be effective (typically within about 3-4 feet of your subject), the red filter will give everything a red colour shift. Everything is a compromise. The trick is to find the compromise that works best for your particular problem without raising a set of new problems.

It would appear that the most effective compromise might be to modify the White Balance in the camera.

If you are using the Tokina 10-17mm lens, a screw on filter is not an option so lets look for other possible solutions. I have never shot a Nikon D7000. Does it have the capability to do "custom white balance" on the fly? (Pointing it at something that is a neutral grey and taking a white balance reading off of that and setting the white balance accordingly?) If so, that could be a possible solution. Adjust you white balance prior to key shots based on depth and light conditions. This should, in theory, yield very good results but would be relatively labour intensive. A variation on this would be to set your white balance to "Cloudy" or "Shade" and accept that it will not be perfect but it will be better than doing nothing. This would be less work, but might not give as good results. A middle ground option would be to make a cheat sheet so to speak of rough guidelines. At this depth for wide angle, set the White Balance to _________. At this depth for macro set the white balance to ______. In shallow water against a sandy bottom, set the White Balance to _________. If you go with the third option, you can get a rough ideal of what you need for white balance from stills shot in various conditions and then use those values in your camera's White Balance Presets.

I hope this helped, and did not simply muddy the waters more.
 
I'm making the transition from shooting still into video. I've decided to take advantage of some of the holiday sales and pickup a set of Kraken 3500s to add to my Nikon D7000. I'm fairly well versed in the principles of still shooting and based on what I've read so far, many of those techniques and considerations will transfer to shooting video as well.

One area that I'm having a hard time finding conclusive information on is how to reconcile shooting decent wide angle footage. With shooting macro it seems pretty straightforward that like still, the video lights are going to replace long wavelength lost light at depth. As such, filters and white balance aren't necessary. What then, is the solution for shooting wide angle where the output of the video lights isn't enough to compensate? Is it attention to white balance, achieving compensation that way? Is it an in-lens (is there one large enough to fit over 6" dome ports?) red filter in combination with setting white balance? Is it shooting as shallow as possible to take advantage of ambient light? A combination of all those things? I'm interested in any best practices more seasoned videographers have found to get everything from stunning reefscapes to wide angle wreck shots. Thanks!
This question is how you start to convince yourself you need a full frame Nikon and a faster lens :). In a few years you'll be mortgaging your house for a red epic with a gates housing and 400 lbs of lighting.

If you ever make it down to the Florida Keys there are plenty of dives with interesting stuff to shoot in very shallow water, which will make it a lot easier. Maybe invest in some very fast prime lenses? You sacrifice the zoom feature but capture a lot more light. I've got a 35mm f/1.8 nikkor prime lens that was under $100. I think I've seen f/1.2's for a bit more money.
 
Don't! I've been lusting after and half serious about a Red Weapon 8K and Nautilus housing. With a couple of lenses and the different ports I got an all in price of $120K (without lights). If my wife wouldn't' kill me I would simple because all the settings are just metadata and can be fully adjusted in post.

Oh and it's shiney...:wink:
 
The Tokina 10-17mm fisheye is a superb lens underwater, but IIRC it does not have threads to attach a filter, so the advice of adding a filter may not be a viable solution for you. It certainly would not work on a lens that does not have threads.

To address your other question, the only time that I have shot video underwater, I simply used a GoPro so I was able to put on or remove my red filter as required. If you have one mounted on the lens behind the dome port, then that would mean that lights would not be ideal. Anytime that you are close enough for the video lights to be effective (typically within about 3-4 feet of your subject), the red filter will give everything a red colour shift. Everything is a compromise. The trick is to find the compromise that works best for your particular problem without raising a set of new problems.

It would appear that the most effective compromise might be to modify the White Balance in the camera.

If you are using the Tokina 10-17mm lens, a screw on filter is not an option so lets look for other possible solutions. I have never shot a Nikon D7000. Does it have the capability to do "custom white balance" on the fly? (Pointing it at something that is a neutral grey and taking a white balance reading off of that and setting the white balance accordingly?) If so, that could be a possible solution. Adjust you white balance prior to key shots based on depth and light conditions. This should, in theory, yield very good results but would be relatively labour intensive. A variation on this would be to set your white balance to "Cloudy" or "Shade" and accept that it will not be perfect but it will be better than doing nothing. This would be less work, but might not give as good results. A middle ground option would be to make a cheat sheet so to speak of rough guidelines. At this depth for wide angle, set the White Balance to _________. At this depth for macro set the white balance to ______. In shallow water against a sandy bottom, set the White Balance to _________. If you go with the third option, you can get a rough ideal of what you need for white balance from stills shot in various conditions and then use those values in your camera's White Balance Presets.

I hope this helped, and did not simply muddy the waters more.

Thanks, this was really helpful! The Tokina doesn't have a filter thread, but it seems you can tape a Magic Filter to the back of the lens and it just so happens I'll be down the street from one of their US dealers on my next trip so I'll give it a shot. The D7000 has custom white balance, and up to 9 presets, so I was thinking about doing exactly what you suggested.
 
This question is how you start to convince yourself you need a full frame Nikon and a faster lens :). In a few years you'll be mortgaging your house for a red epic with a gates housing and 400 lbs of lighting.

If you ever make it down to the Florida Keys there are plenty of dives with interesting stuff to shoot in very shallow water, which will make it a lot easier. Maybe invest in some very fast prime lenses? You sacrifice the zoom feature but capture a lot more light. I've got a 35mm f/1.8 nikkor prime lens that was under $100. I think I've seen f/1.2's for a bit more money.

It's already started, haha! I'm trying to work with what I have and make it a gradual progression. Heck, I may hate video all together and go back to shooting stills. I have the 35mm 1.8 that is my goto lens for just about everything, so I may look at getting an appropriate port for that and giving it a whirl depending on how things go with the Tokina/Nikkor Macros I usually shoot with.

Edit to add: Looks like the 35mm takes the same dome port I have, so I'll have to try it!
 
Last edited:
It's already started, haha! I'm trying to work with what I have and make it a gradual progression. Heck, I may hate video all together and go back to shooting stills. I have the 35mm 1.8 that is my goto lens for just about everything, so I may look at getting an appropriate port for that and giving it a whirl depending on how things go with the Tokina/Nikkor Macros I usually shoot with.

Edit to add: Looks like the 35mm takes the same dome port I have, so I'll have to try it!

Video and photo are very different with "subject movement" being the biggest difference. Video is easier and better for capturing subjects that move. On the flipside, subjects that remain relatively still are better for photo.

You mentioned reefscapes and wrecks. To me, these are photo subjects, not video. No law against shooting video of them, but colors will never look as good as photo and without movement, video might be boring to watch. You can record as you swim to create movement. I frequently use footage like this in between shots of moving animal life when editing a finished video.

Keeping this in mind might change which lens you want to start with and how you approach shooting underwater video.
 

Back
Top Bottom