I am proud owner of two MF-2 plus one snoot and have used them recently on few dives in Croatia with A7R5 and Sony 90mm macro lens - I must say that I was pretty disappointed... ☹️

My experience was that, when I use the MF-2s with the diffusers that produce nice soft light, I can use the camera at base ISO (100) only up to aperture f/11. Without the diffusers I can go up to f/16, but in any case I had to place the flashes as close to the end of the port as possible (no reserves for creative lighting, e.g, placing the strobes aside to create texture).

I did not even dare to dry the snoot, because the flashes were so weak...

Did others experience similar problems with FF macro?

I am just curious how other are satisfied with MF-2 for FF macro.

I know I could increase ISO, but I think this is far from ideal for macro photos, flashpower should not be the rate limiting factor. I have two HF-1s and like them a lot (previously I had Z330). Last two years I used the HF-1s also for macro and, of course, they produce plenty of light for any kind of macro, but HF-1 is big and heavy and the alternative with two MF-2s plus snoot looked very attractive...

Wolfgang

The MF-2 is great for FF Macro. Feel free to bump up your ISO to 160-250, which is what I do. I mostly use it with the snoot and shoot F11-F18 all the time. I pair it with an HF-1 (previously Inon 330) as a secondary fill light, but mostly on low power and with a reduction ring. The MF-2 is the primary light in most of my Macro shots.

(edit) I never use the diffusors and mostly shoot it at the top 2 power levels. (6 & 7}

Here are a couple of shots from a few days ago taken using the MF-2 on FF.

Nikon Z8 w/Nikkor 105mm lens, MFO diopter, f16@1/200s iso200 Backscatter MF-2 strobe & snoot + BS HF-1 strobe

Nikon Z8 w/Nikkor 105mm lens, MFO diopter, f14@1/250s iso160 Backscatter MF-2 strobe & snoot + BS HF-1 strobe

Edited Friday at 04:42 PM2 days by Dave_Hicks

I really struggled with the same setup as @Architeuthis when I was in Dumaguete (even down to taking a snoot and not using it!). I thought the shots were darker than I expected (after copying other people's settings). I use the NL2160HP batteries so should have plenty of power available.

I got a couple of decent shots but I feel like they were more down to luck than judgement or skill!

I just put it down to my lack of knowledge/experience in manual strobe usage, which it probably was mostly, but I'll be following this thread for any tips! Sounds like bumping the ISO up would be a good thing to try next time I actually get in the water!

If your shots are dark using the MF-2 or Snoot, and you have adequate aperture and ISO you probably don't have the lights aimed properly. It can take some practice with the snoot in particular. Even a small aiming error will result in dark shots.

Another consideration is that you use the edges of your beam with diffusers in play but with the snoot you aim the centre of the beam right at the subject and you could get the strobe significantly closer to the subject as well. If you halve the distance you get 4x the light or 2 stops. The diffuser reduces total light output from the strobe but the snoot if it has no optics won't reduce the lumens/m2 too much as it is just selecting the light coming out from the strobe beam and blocking the edges of that beam. If you really didn't actually try the snoot at all, then you quite possibly missed this.

48 minutes ago, Chris Ross said:

Another consideration is that you use the edges of your beam with diffusers in play but with the snoot you aim the centre of the beam right at the subject and you could get the strobe significantly closer to the subject as well. If you halve the distance you get 4x the light or 2 stops. The diffuser reduces total light output from the strobe but the snoot if it has no optics won't reduce the lumens/m2 too much as it is just selecting the light coming out from the strobe beam and blocking the edges of that beam. If you really didn't actually try the snoot at all, then you quite possibly missed this.

The MF-2 snoot does have optics. And don't use the diffuser on this strobe, it does not have power it can afford to lose.

4 hours ago, Dave_Hicks said:

The MF-2 snoot does have optics. And don't use the diffuser on this strobe, it does not have power it can afford to lose.

does it concentrate the light? I'm just thinking lots of other people use them successfully stopped down as you do for macro so judging based on regular strobe positions would be misleading.

4 hours ago, Dave_Hicks said:

The MF-2 snoot does have optics. And don't use the diffuser on this strobe, it does not have power it can afford to lose.

I did have the diffuser on the whole time I think 🤦🏻‍♂️

Hi, all,

I use the MF-2 exclusively for my macro dives with a high-res FF rig. In fact, I normally dive with only one MF-2 with wonderful results. I typically add the OS-1 snoot for 60%+ of my macro images. I find the built in aiming light to be essential! I use the diffuser when not snooting. Bear in mind this is highly dependent on the water clarity and overall brightness of the scene.

Like others have said throughout the following is required:

• Verify the strobe is aimed correctly: The significantly smaller physical size of the strobe lens requires much more accuracy in aiming than a substantially larger sized light.

• Bring the strobe closer to the subject: The goal of macro is to light small subjects within a small area. This often requires the light source to be closer to the subject to ensure it is properly lit to highlight it from the surrounding scene.

• Don't be afraid of higher ISOs: While we have been trained to use the lowest possible ISO, modern digital systems play nicely in higher settings. ISO 200-400, or even higher, is an extremely comfortable range for current systems.

And of course everything I shared above is meant to be changed or 'broken' to fit the particular scene and end artistic goal.

I find the MF-2 to be an exceptionally well made piece of gear and a key tool in my macro kit.

Enjoy!

chip

45 minutes ago, ChipBPhoto said:

Hi, all,

I use the MF-2 exclusively for my macro dives with a high-res FF rig. In fact, I normally dive with only one MF-2 with wonderful results. I typically add the OS-1 snoot for 60%+ of my macro images. I find the built in aiming light to be essential! I use the diffuser when not snooting. Bear in mind this is highly dependent on the water clarity and overall brightness of the scene.

Like others have said throughout the following is required:

• Verify the strobe is aimed correctly: The significantly smaller physical size of the strobe lens requires much more accuracy in aiming than a substantially larger sized light.

• Bring the strobe closer to the subject: The goal of macro is to light small subjects within a small area. This often requires the light source to be closer to the subject to ensure it is properly lit to highlight it from the surrounding scene.

• Don't be afraid of higher ISOs: While we have been trained to use the lowest possible ISO, modern digital systems play nicely in higher settings. ISO 200-400, or even higher, is an extremely comfortable range for current systems.

And of course everything I shared above is meant to be changed or 'broken' to fit the particular scene and end artistic goal.

I find the MF-2 to be an exceptionally well made piece of gear and a key tool in my macro kit.

Enjoy!

chip

I think my diffusers must still be in the box. Does the snoot even fit over the strobe with the diffuser installed? The OS-1 snoot has an internal diffuser and a focal lens inside it. An additional drain on power or the need to remove the add-on diffuser to install the strobe just seem like problems to me.

I thank you all (so far?) for your very interesting contributions...👍

It confirms me that the MF-2s are not really suitable for the way I personally make macro photos: (i) Making the maximum out of the strobe power by placing the strobes to the object as close as possible (and no headroom for other positions), (ii) increasing ISO (means to me I am wasting the IQ of my FF system, just because the strobe is too weak) and (iii) omitting diffusers (and snoot) because they eat up too much light.

I find this pretty suboptimal and will continue to use the (not really handsome) HF-1s for macro...

There was once a snoot announced for HF-1 from Backscatter. Did a high quality snoot appear so far?

Is there a high quality optical soot existing (e.g. Retra) that can be mounted easily to HF-1?

Wolfgang

1 hour ago, Dave_Hicks said:

I think my diffusers must still be in the box. Does the snoot even fit over the strobe with the diffuser installed? The OS-1 snoot has an internal diffuser and a focal lens inside it. An additional drain on power or the need to remove the add-on diffuser to install the strobe just seem like problems to me.

It’s either snoot or diffuser, not both at the same time.

Both are easily removable / changeable during the dive.

I have a clip on my snoot so I can clip it off on my rig when I’m not using it. The diffuser is on a string which allows it to also be connected to my rig when I mount the snoot.

Edited Saturday at 04:11 PM1 day by ChipBPhoto

Piling on to this thread.

Just back from Tulamben and Lembeh. I used almost exclusively MF-2 strobes on the trip. Lots of snooting with the OS-1, Definitely need use the top settings on the strobe. I am pleased with the results.

My rig:

• Nikon Z8

• Nikkor Z 105

• Nikkor F 60

• MFO-1

• SMC-3

• MF-2

• OS-1

Edited 17 hours ago17 hr by pdxDiver

7 hours ago, pdxDiver said:

Piling on to this thread.

Just back from Tulamben and Lembeh. I used almost exclusively MF-2 strobes on the trip. Lots of snooting with the OS-1, Definitely need use the top settings on the strobe. I am pleased with the results.

My rig:

• Nikon Z8

• Nikkor Z 105

• Nikkor F 60

• MFO-1

• SMC-3

• MF-2

• OS-1

What ISO did you typically use on you images?

1 hour ago, Dave_Hicks said:

What ISO did you typically use on you images?

In reviewing back, I commonly use ISO 160-320 with my a1.

MF-2 power is normally on 5-6.

Aiming light varies based on ambient conditions.

I use the Nitecore NL2160HP/6000mAh batteries in it.

This was approved via an email with Backscatter.

*These same batteries work well in the HF-1, but NOT the 4300 video light.

10 minutes ago, ChipBPhoto said:

In reviewing back, I commonly use ISO 160-320 with my a1.

MF-2 power is normally on 5-6.

Aiming light varies based on ambient conditions.

I use the Nitecore NL2160HP/6000mAh batteries in it.

This was approved via an email with Backscatter.

*These same batteries work well in the HF-1, but NOT the 4300 video light.

Did you find that your Image Quality was ruined by using ISO 320?

15 minutes ago, Dave_Hicks said:

Did you find that your Image Quality was ruined by using ISO 320?

Great question - I personally do not.

I appreciate everyone’s standards are different, but even at 100% on a high res screen they look solid to me. I find any minor noise reduction or sharpening, which is all normal, is easily handled in LR or similar.

1 minute ago, ChipBPhoto said:

Great question - I personally do not.

I appreciate everyone’s standards are different, but even at 100% on a high res screen they look solid to me. I find any minor noise reduction or sharpening, which is all normal, is easily handled in LR or similar.

Totally Agree.

I remember shooting ISO 400 on my D70 or D300 years ago, and there was noticeable noise in those shots. Even then the basic noise reduction in LR cleared it up nicely. On any FF camera from the last 10 years (D800+) this is just not an issue. An ISO 1000 shot on my Z8 looks better than ISO 400 did on my D300. And the neural-net based NR features in almost any post processing software is amazingly effective at cleaning up artifacts that you only see in a 200% crop.

I took some ISO 800 shots a few weeks ago in dark, murky, particulate filled waters with 5–10-foot visibility while looking for Sixgill Sharks in Seattle. The Z8 handled them great!

These were all taking with a Z8, 60mm w/KRL-09 wet-wide lens, ISO800, f8. No AI image processing was applied to these pictures. Shot at point-blank range.

Edited 8 hours ago8 hr by Dave_Hicks
typo

5 minutes ago, Dave_Hicks said:

Totally Agree.

I remember shooting ISO 400 on my D70 or D300 years ago, and there was noticeable noise in those shots. Even then the basic noise reduction in LR cleared it up nicely. On any FF camera from the last 10 years (D800+) this is just not an issue. An ISO 1000 shot on my Z8 looks better than ISO 400 did on my D300. And the neural-net based NR features in almost any post processing software is amazingly effective at cleaning up artifacts that you only see in a 200% crop.

I took some ISO 800 shots a few weeks ago in dark, murky, particulate filled waters with 5–10-foot visibility while looking for Sixgill Sharks in Seattle. The Z8 handled them great!

There were all taking with a Z8, 60mm w/KRL-09 wet-wide lens, ISO800, f8. No AI image processing was applied to these pictures. Shot at point-blank range.

Nicely done! I always appreciate the quality of your images.

My Canon 5Dii struggled above 800.

My first uw DSLR was the Canon T2i. Anything above 400 was virtually a crapshoot if it would be usable or not.

FYI - Retra just confirmed in a email exchange that they will not make an LSD adapter for the HF-1. They also understand Backscatter has shelved the idea of a snoot for it as well. The reason given was it “is not suitable for shooting.” Too bad, both the LSD and HF-1 are quality pieces.

17 minutes ago, ChipBPhoto said:

FYI - Retra just confirmed in a email exchange that they will not make an LSD adapter for the HF-1. They also understand Backscatter has shelved the idea of a snoot for it as well. The reason given was it “is not suitable for shooting.” Too bad, both the LSD and HF-1 are quality pieces.

Too bad. Meanwhile...

FYI - I am adapting this for Retra so there is an alternative to paying them $150 per strobe for a few grams of plastic.

Edited 8 hours ago8 hr by Dave_Hicks

51 minutes ago, Dave_Hicks said:

Too bad. Meanwhile...

FYI - I am adapting this for Retra so there is an alternative to paying them $150 per strobe for a few grams of plastic.

Once again Dave Hicks for the 3D win!

Nice results

6 hours ago, Dave_Hicks said:

What ISO did you typically use on you images?

100 -200

4 hours ago, pdxDiver said:

100 -200

@pdxDiver nice frames!