Hi res Still Camera vs Video Camera vs Drones...the drone it is...lol.

All good stuff.

I think for now I am going to see what this year brings.  I have a 18MP DSLR that does shoot in raw format.  I have several gropes for the video aspect.  I really want to capture the moments where my son has a fish.  But even then, I'm not sure a consumer/prosumer level video camera would last at all on the water. 

The solution for this year may just be to stick with what I have and teach my kid how to better shoot the gorpro.  he did a pretty good job this last time out.  I think I am leaning toward the one item that hasn't been discussed much and that's a better optical zoom video camera.  I hate the fact that the go pros, you have to be right next to the action to see any detail.

Hmm...It's frustrating because if it was something I did for a living, I wouldn't hesitate to upgrade.  But like KK was saying, the major reason I am dong this now is to capture the moments out with my son, i.e. the target audience is my family and friends.  I think a decent video camera might be a worthy investment since I would likely use that the most. As far as the DSLR, I will continue to use what I have until I definitively hear from someone that "I would have used that picture, but the quality just isn't high enough."

You can get on the cover of a fishing magazine with a picture taken with a Gopro. You just really have to have some nice fish, good composition, and be crazy enough to catch them in a kayak (which you are). The Olympus TG4 is a great waterproof point and shoot and takes good low light images(for a point and shoot). I loved mine until I broke it. That being said, I take my Nikon DSLRs out on the salt water often. I just don't drop them in the water...yet. It is a little harder to get them out quick.

I have taken fishing action photos with a Nikon COOLPIX AW110 (not as good as the Olympus IMHO) that are going to be used in marketing materials for a lodge (at least that is what I was told). You can put a mediocre camera in the hands of a pro and get great shots. You can put a $2500 camera with a $5000 lens in the hands of someone without a clue about composition and lighting and end up with crap. The key is to learn your equipment really well. Also take several shots of the same thing and pick the best 1 or 2. Publications want the best photo they can get for the situation. If the best perspective comes from a fellow kayaker at the same level and that is the only one they can get, that is what they will take. If the best picture comes from a cell phone camera, and it is all they can get and they really want it, they will pay. Newspapers do it all the time. 

A great book to read for diving in is The Digital Photography Book: Part 1 (2nd Edition)  https://www.amazon.com/Digital-Photography-Book-Part-2nd/dp/0321934946/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1492750781&sr=8-1&keywords=digital+photography+book  It is a very easy read.

I am a Nikon fan. You can pretty much use any lens they have made since the 1950s (I believe) on their cameras. However, the older lenses will obviously not become automatic.    Canon--not so much. I used to use Canons many many years ago back when there was this stuff called film. The lenses became paperweights.

Sadly for professional photographers out there (I am not one other than part of my job sometimes requires me to be a photographer), the advances in digital photography and the fact that many magazines and newspapers will just buy photos of an event from amateurs has left many of them jobless.  I am willing to bet that most pictures published in sporting magazines are not taken by "professional" photographers. At least not the magazines I read.

I think for now I am going to see what this year brings.  I have a 18MP DSLR that does shoot in raw format.  I have several gropes for the video aspect.  I really want to capture the moments where my son has a fish.  But even then, I'm not sure a consumer/prosumer level video camera would last at all on the water. 

As you have seen a million+ times, Gopro quality of footage is used in the filming/broadcast industry as a frequent and acceptable standard. What you need to avoid is FOV settings (Gopros can be set at various FOVs) that have noticeable fish eye distortion. Might work for an exceptional shot for 5 seconds but curved horizons and bent trees and power poles are not compatible with the human brain for long. LOL.  FOV around 90 to 110° will produce good quality footage that is easily incorporated into camcorder quality footage(read DSLR or true camcorder) without large changes in the optical view that shocks the brain during B roll and cutaway scene changes.  The extreme wide angle (the common 170° lens) is almost never "needed" unless you are recording sky diving. 

But there are relatively "inexpensive" plastic waterproof pouches with a glass front "lens" for DSLRs that you can shoot through for under $100 that is affordable compared to $1000-$4000 pro housings. But that type of pro housing will get you top side and shallow UW footage, even deep dive footage, whatever, til your battery dies. But I'd say that is your "next level" of options for the future. The pouches might be worth a look-see. You will feel confident taking the camera on the water. And have the versatility of Raw still frames and HQ camcorder quality video...with zoom.

The solution for this year may just be to stick with what I have and teach my kid how to better shoot the gorpro.  He did a pretty good job this last time out.  I think I am leaning toward the one item that hasn't been discussed much and that's a better optical zoom video camera.  I hate the fact that the Gopros, you have to be right next to the action to see any detail.

A little filming tip for both of you. Remember Stability. Action cams have no real image stabilization and so movement is your worst enemy for quality footage. I suggest use the head mounted Gopros rarely if ever. Its amateur quality footage because, like a chicken, a person engaged in an activity can almost never hold their head still enough for enjoyable footage. An alternative is to try using the chest harness mounts for a Gopro size cam. A bit bulky and awkward with the PFD on so you might consider during filming days to ditch the fancy PFDs loaded with front side pockets like camel humps and use a vest that has a smooth front surface to allow the camera to be mounted compactly against the body and for the most part out of the way of the action. (When you get real serious perhaps even an inflatible PFD provides a flat surface.) Remember that won't be your primary filming platform for scenes but with practice can become essential as you become well versed in positioning your body to the side of your kayak where much of the action will be.  As you will find, its very hard to be shaking the camera much when its attached to your chest...a human tripod of sorts.  Suction cup mounts with a tether can be positioned just about anywhere on a plastic kayak which provides an almost infinite perspective for a different angle of the scene, even underwater view. And easily moved to other parts of the boat quickly, especially working as a team, one can help put a suction mount in more difficult locations on the boat than for a single person.

ZOOM: See above waterproof pouches for your DSLR. Problem solved! For now.

Hmm...It's frustrating because if it was something I did for a living, I wouldn't hesitate to upgrade.  But like KK was saying, the major reason I am dong this now is to capture the moments out with my son, i.e. the target audience is my family and friends.  I think a decent video camera might be a worthy investment since I would likely use that the most. As far as the DSLR, I will continue to use what I have until I definitively hear from someone that "I would have used that picture, but the quality just isn't high enough."

I shoot with a $6000 Sony Z1U with a $500 Canon HV30 as my "back up." Which one is easiest to grab and shoot with? You guessed it. I'll frequently have the HV30 strapped to my hand on the boat all day long while the Z1U sits in the case in the cabin. Although the Sony is a much more capable camcorder, when you compare the footage side by side its difficult to tell the difference unless you are using some of the Sony's programmable features not capable on the Canon. In the long run though, plain straight shooting shots are 90% of all you will need.

Lastly, think about mounting that AMA again on your craft. On a glassy day it would provide you a stable platform to move close to Ryu's action and stand up and get some great camcorder shots (or stills) that no one shoots now unless they are on an out of the scene mothership shadowing the angler.

I would suggest contacting the folks at Fish Alaska mag and introducing yourself. I'll bet they have already heard of you and know all about you. Ask them for their Publisher's Guidelines and Pricing for articles, photos, and other contributions. As Craig alluded to with today's technology, you and the rest of us are competing with the entire world of "photographers" and "videographers."  The only caveat is they can't "get lucky" for good journalism, so if you can write THAT is where the money is. And the supporting photos of yours becomes icing on the cake.

When is your next outing?  Big minus 5 tides next week. Am thinking of butter clam digging on the east side of the Spit and try for a flounder and halibut while there. (Got to save my 5 summer kings for a real fish! Ha)

How much waterproofing do you want?

For the money you might want to consider an underwater housing for a camera you already  own.

Ok..just as an update to this thread, I went and bought a low end drone to see how useful it might be. 

So I went and spent $699 for the DJI Spark Drone Fly more package.  the drone is $499 and the additional 200 bucks got me a remote controller, extra battery, and better charging kit.

So first the bad:
This is the cheapest drone DJI makes.  The most noticeable issue is battery life at 15 minutes.  Still with extra batteries that should be ok.
Not everything works as advertised.  Hoping a firmware update saves some of the issues.

Even though its small, its still a flying blender.  Thats important because I plan to hand launch and retrieve it.

Though the camera is pretty dang good, the wide angle and 1080 P means that I have to be pretty close to the subject to get any decent shots.  Sort of like a gopro.  4K would have been useful as I could of digitally zoomed in a little bit and still preserved something relatively close to HD (1080P) footage.

The big bummer is that don't think I am going to be able to consistently land this on a moving/drifting kayak.  I am also unsure how to practice that even if it could be done.  Need to think about it a bit more.

The final huge bummer is not the drone but the rules governing drones.  Its hard to legally fly this thing anywhere without being within 5 miles of an airport.  Alaska has runways EVERYWHERE!  In most areas driving between Anchorage and keno, it was multiple runways within 5 miles or a wildlife refuge.  In theory you just have to contact all the airports, but as I said, there are dozens of them EVERYWHERE in Alaska.  I think I can circumvent that with a Part 107 Commercial license which I am going to test for tomorrow.  lol.  Minimal Studying so I give it 50/50 I will pass it. 


The good:

This drone gets into the air in 30 seconds, so it is twice as fast as almost another drone out there.
Range is a mile with the remote control.
Can control it with hand gestures (photos only right now), Smartphone, or Remote Control
1080 Camera is pretty good and images pretty stable despite only having a two axis mechanical gimbal.  Stabilization is really good. 
It's fast!  Meaning I can get to my kids kayak in a hurry (30 mph) then slow it down for better pictures.
And its cheap (relative to other drones) so if I am going to lose it to Davey Jone's Locker, I am out only half what I would ay for DJI's next level new drone.

So some video footage.

Indoors hand launching

Spark in sport mode shot with my Samsung S7
 

Footage shot by the spark:


Some more footage.  The drone footage is at the beginning and end.


Picturesshot by the Spark:




   

For what its worth, there's an app from the FAA that helps locate clear airspace, etc.  There's some 3rd party apps that are also useful.

https://www.faa.gov/uas/where_to_fly/b4ufly/

Thanks for the review and video.  I'm researching a drone purchase.  Other than a $200 difference in price why did you go with the spark instead of the mavic pro?  From what I've seen and heard the Mavic is the more robust unit while still having a small form for portability.

Thx yippiekaiyak.  Thats what I used.  Heres a screen shot of maybe 10 miles of low population area outside of soldotna.  I dont want to have to call 12 airports everytime. A 107 certificate eliminates the notification requirement.

Snopro, price was a big factor.  I can replace the spark for 499 vs 999 for the Mavic.  At some point, knowing myself, a drone I own will end up at the bottom of the ocean. 

It really was due to size and the ability to get it into the air quicker.  The Mavic from a spec point of view is superior in every way.   

I thought the hand launch and retrieve was going to work better...not sure know given the movement of the kayak. 

I guess my thought process was that I own a DSLR and a Samsung S7.  90% of the photos I use are off my phone.  For the quality of stuff I produce (low), the best camera is the one I take with me.

But I will say if i really start using a drone AND I can get my daughter interested in piloting it because she is into photography, I see stepping up to a Mavic or Phantom 4 series fairly quickly. 


Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk

That's a lot of airports.   Is the 107 certificate the professional versus the personal use license?  I don't have one yet, just looked into it when my brother got one.

That's a lot of airports.   Is the 107 certificate the professional versus the personal use license?  I don't have one yet, just looked into it when my brother got one.

Basically that's what it is.  $150. multiple choice (3 possible answers) , 60 questions, need 70% to pass in two hours.  renew every 2 years.

Any one with common sense can get 50% correct with zero studying.  The other 50% though is reading sectional charts and weather related questions including reading METAR and TAF weather bulletins plus impact of weather on flying. With a couple of hours worth of studying, I think I have a 75% chance of passing it or better...if all of the online study questions are representative of the actual tests. 

But these high tech flying machines require a specific set of procedures for calibrating all the sensors and gyros on the aircraft. Sensors for level horizon calibration require a dead solid level platform to calibrate on. Even the slightest tilt of the platform will cause the camera gimbals to have tilted horizons which no professional footage would allow.

The next procedure requires calibrating the compass. One initiates the compass calibration by holding the bird at arm's length and rotating your body 360° then turning the drone perpendicular to ground and rotating 360° again for many brands of drones. Envision trying this in a kayak.  On a mothership even wiring and the metal of the boat will affect your compass calibration that can cause erratic flight behavior and even flyaways....gone for good. Many drone makers say remove your wrist watch and empty your pockets of keys and change to prevent compass problems. Probably the most common reason birds crash or are lost.

I'm pretty far from an expert but a teenager with a DJI Phantom 4 was at my house a couple of weekends ago and I can assure you nothing of the sort of all that calibration was needed to shoot amazing video with that unit. He just plopped it on the ground (not perfectly level ground), sync'd the controller to his iPhone and he was flying in about 90 seconds. As for the video quality you can judge yourself on YouTube. The drone would hover absolutely rock solid wherever he wanted it and was relatively idiot proof in the regular mode (there is also a sport mode which allows you to fly faster and bypass some of the obstacle avoidance, etc.). Also he would walk around (like over 100 ft.) while he was flying and the drone still found/followed him to return "home".

I am 100% confident that you could successfully fly a Phantom 4 from a kayak. I'm also 100% confident that it wouldn't be worth the hassle and space required.

I'm also 100% confident that it wouldn't be worth the hassle and space required.

That's sort of how I feel about crab traps.  Drone versus crabs any day in my book.

But crabs taste waaaay better than drones. 

Seriously tho, I don't want to thread-jack too hard, but INSAYN's method of rigging a "crab hawk" with a small float is great if you don't want to deal with full-size traps/rings on the kayak. You can fold up 3 of those really easily and dump them where you're fishing and work them or just let them soak and check them every so often. I've had better results from my regular crab pots, but they do work.

I am 100% confident that you could successfully fly a Phantom 4 from a kayak. I'm also 100% confident that it wouldn't be worth the hassle and space required.

The space issue is a huge reason I went with the much smaller Spark.  But after watching videos and playing around with this mini-drone, if you insist on flying a drone from a kayak, the Phantom 3 and 4 may be the way to go since you can "catch it" out of the air with less likelihood of emulating sticking your hand in a blender due to the configuration of its landing gear.  But yeah, where would you put one in an already crowded kayak?   

As far as whether drones are generally worth it or not off a kayak, I think that depends.  My son and I get some SUPER benefits from being on fishing teams and having sponsors.  I have no problems with going the extra mile to help those who have so generously supported our hobby. 

I also think it has the potential for income at a future point for my son and daughter.  It's probably not going to be "me quitting my job" type of money, but it might be comparable to my kids working at McDonalds for the summer.  I am also hoping the video memories I take are a little more interesting than the 8mm video my dad took when we were kids and have never seen a projector since the initial screening.  Haha.

I am really hoping to get some interesting footage before I either sink, destroy, or decide it really is too much of a hassle.  lol.   

As far as whether drones are generally worth it or not off a kayak, I think that depends.  My son and I get some SUPER benefits from being on fishing teams and having sponsors.  I have no problems with going the extra mile to help those who have so generously supported our hobby. 

I also think it has the potential for income at a future point for my son and daughter.

That's a really good point about sponsors and that kind of thing. Drone footage is immediately compelling.