• Descent 298 publication date

    Our June/July issue will be published on Saturday 8 June

    Now with four extra pages as standard. If you want to receive it as part of your subscription, make sure you sign up or renew by Monday 27 May.

    Click here for more

New Sony Actioncam Announced

jarvist

New member
This new product just announced by Sony looks really potentially quite useful for caving / diving:
http://www.engadget.com/2012/08/29/sony-action-cam-hands-on/

Unlike the GoPro it seems to have a much larger aperture lens (thus more light gathering ability), and a large high-sensitivity sensor. What I can't figure out from the video is whether the 60m rated housing will be 'short sighted' underwater as a result of the non-flat front. The shape also seems a lot more amenable for strapping to the side of a helmet.
 

jarvist

New member
There's a free diver in California (youtube user: sumogurinet) who has put together a very nice set of side-by-side comparisons of the Sony Actioncam and latest GoPro. It does indeed appear to have superior low-light performance, and the mounting looks a lot more sensible. However, the dive case has a bulbous front (why oh why?!) so the focus is not correct underwater (though he improvises with the ?30 Contour Roam waterproof case, which also looks to be another option of cheaply waterproofing '808' and similar cameras).
'Overall video quality at 720P 60FPS 170FOV from Sony Action Cam is fantastic.'

Lots of different comparison video can be found here, and he seems to be adding new ones almost every day:
Sony Action Cam vs GoPro Hero2 under Extreme Low Light Test
 

Local Bloke

New member
A flat port on the underwater housing would distort the underwater picture a dome is required to maintain the correct focus across the frame .  SO I would disagree about the focus thing it should actually be better.
 

jarvist

New member
Local Bloke said:
A flat port on the underwater housing would distort the underwater picture a dome is required to maintain the correct focus across the frame .  SO I would disagree about the focus thing it should actually be better.

The housings have domes so that the wide-angle (almost fish-eye) lens can see to the edge of the frame without vignetting. In air (refractive index ~1.0) this is designed so that it doesn't change the focus at all, both inner and outer surfaces are equally curved. However, as soon as you put the dome into water (refractive index 1.33) it acts as a concave lens with the result that the camera becomes short-sighted.

Flat port housings are standard for diving enclosures (and similarly - diving masks / swimming goggles!) for this reason.
 

Local Bloke

New member
I would beg to differ a dome port is the more common approach to a pro underwater system.

From tinternet not my words

One of the most important and often misunderstood features of an underwater camera housing is the lens port. Flat ports were all that were available for underwater photography from its beginning in 1893 until 1931, when hemispherical dome ports were first used to correct for the refractive properties of water. Flat and dome ports both have their place in underwater photography and it is important to know the theory and practice of each. For underwater photography with wide lenses, the dome port is the best choice, but if the shot starts or ends above water, or if you need to shoot a close-up with a long lens, the flat port should be used.

Flat Port - The flat port is unable to correct for the distortion produced by the differences between the indexes of light refraction in air and water. Using a flat port introduces a number of aberrations when used underwater. They are:
Refraction - This is the bending of light waves as they pass through different mediums of optical density (the air inside the camera housing and the water outside the lens port). Light is refracted 25 percent, causing the lens to undergo the same magnification you would see through a facemask. The focal length of your lens also increases by approximately 25 percent.

Radial Distortion - Because flat ports do not distort light rays equally, they have a progressive radial distortion that becomes more obvious as wider lenses are used. The effect is a progressive blur, that increases with large apertures on wide lenses. Light rays passing through the center of the port are not affected because their direction of travel is at right angles to the water-air interface of the port.

Chromatic Aberration - White light, when refracted, is separated into the color spectrum. The component colors of white light do not travel at the same speed, and light rays passing from water to glass to air will be unequally bent. When light separates into its component colors, the different colors slightly overlap, causing a loss of sharpness and color saturation, which is more noticeable with wider lenses.

Dome Port - The dome port is a concentric lens that acts as an additional optical element to the camera lens. The dome port significantly reduces the problems of refraction, radial distortion and axial and chromatic aberrations when the curvature of the dome?s inside radius center is placed as close as possible to the nodal point of the lens. When a dome port is used, all the rays of light pass through unrefracted, which allows the ?in-air? lens to retain its angle of view. Optically a ?virtual image? is created inches in front of the lens. To photograph a subject underwater with a dome port you must focus the lens on the virtual image?, not the subject itself. The dome port makes the footage marks on the lens totally inaccurate for underwater focus. Therefore lenses should be calibrated underwater. The dome port offers no special optics above water and functions as a clear window.
 

jarvist

New member
Local Bloke said:
I would beg to differ a dome port is the more common approach to a pro underwater system.
For sure, on a dedicated underwater housing where this is engineered into the setup. However, with a above-and-below water housing you've got to optimise for one refractive index or the other, like the GoPro this one is optimised for sharp above-water footage.

In the original press release from Sony, who make the camera:
In the coming months following the camera?s launch, its portfolio of compatible accessories will expand to include:
...
A Replacement Door Pack that offers two different housing door options to deliver improved picture or sound quality for suitable environments: HD Dive Housing - door with flat lens for diving/underwater focus and HD Skeleton Housing - door with opening over the microphone for improved audio

Ref: https://news.sel.sony.com/en/press_room/consumer/digital_imaging/camcorders/release/63617.html
 

jarvist

New member
Local Bloke said:
And now the Hero 3 is out
With, ahem, a flat port enclosure as standard.
But yes - will be very interesting to compare and contrast once the reviews start coming in  :kiss2:
 

grahams

Well-known member
These action cameras are great in good light but pretty hopeless in poor light due to their minute sensors. I doubt that the Hero 3 will be any better, although I haven't seen any low light results.
You can get much better results by using a camera such as the Samsung NX100 which is currently available at knock-down prices i.e. much less than the GoPro. The NX100 has a dx sized sensor - huge in comparison to the action cameras and is excellent for video and stills. The video is only 720p but really comes into its own in low light. It can be protected by a Bingo Bag in a semi-hard case (cheap on ebay), although that protection is not as effective as the GoPro case.
You'll also need good lighting. I use MagicShine CREE LEDs rather than the usual glow-worms that cavers seem to favour. These are intensely bright (up to 1600 lumens) and relatively cheap although the battery packs, which are cylindrical, are not the best design for caving.
 
Top