Backscatter.com

The Best Underwater Strobes Tested 2026 - Underwater Phot...

It may or may not be a surprise, but there are no industry standards or governing bodies conforming the methods, or the specifications, on how underwater strobes are tested. Most strobe manufacturers

I've just spent some time looking over this in some detail. Lots of high quality data - Zero conclusions. Backscatter is in the business of selling all of these strobes so it is no surprise that they are not making any editorial comments.

I think that their data matched up pretty well with what I generated in my review of the Retra Maxi with comparisons to the Backscatter HF-1.

My take aways from the Backscatter data:

• Look no further than the Retra Maxi and Backscatter HF-1 if you want a wide angle capable strobe

• Beam Pattern, smoothness, and brightness of the Maxi and HF-1 are pretty much neck and neck. All other strobes are dimmer and less wide, sometimes with inconsistent patterns.

• The HF-1 is the champion in fast recycle time with the shortest interval between flashes as any target power level. The HF-1 is about 2-3 times faster at cycling to the next flash at the target GN.

• The Maxi stomps every other strobe in the Buoyancy / Weight ratio making it very easy to handle in the water.

One surprise was that most strobes had a big mismatch between their stated color temperatures and the measured temperature. All of the Backscatter strobes (HF-1, Atom, MF-3) had accurate temperatures along with the Kraken S160 and S&S 250. Every other strobe had significant measured variances, including the Retra Maxi and Max/Max-II models.

My Review:

Inside Scuba

Long Term Review of the Retra Maxi Strobe

Dave Hicks tests the Retra Maxi strobe across 100+ dives in Raja Ampat and the Pacific Northwest, comparing it head-to-head with the Backscatter HF-1.

Edited September 1Sep 1 by Dave_Hicks

This is a really interesting review. I think two things that i really appreciated about it (other than a huge amount of work) is that it:

1) Is the first comparable review of the Sea and Sea YS-D130r

2) It reviews Marelux even though Backscatter does not sell them.

I also really appreciate that they did it with and without diffusers for the beam comparison since so many of us shoot with diffusers all the time, or pretty close to all the time and so comparing one with and one without is helpful.

Finally, I will be adjusting the color temperature I shoot with my strobes underwater based on their findings, so even without being in the market for a new set of strobes, it was a helpful read.

Thanks @Davide DB for sharing! I agree that it matches much of the hard work that @Dave_Hicks assembled and shared.

As a person who prefers seeing over reading specs, I appreciate the stationary examples within a controlled underwater setting. This allows a side by side comparison. With the A-B slider, it literally is a side by side comparison. The fixed target is a good way to compare overall light spread and consistency. I find that the results match my personal experience with the various strobes and diffusers I have used in the wild.

Beyond the power and pattern, durability, dependability, serviceability, buoyancy, and of course price also factor in the buying equation. Color temp consistency is also an interesting consideration. Hopefully this type of comparison can become more of an industry standard, or at least something that is repeated roughly every year as a reference tool.

Edited September 2Sep 2 by ChipBPhoto

5 hours ago, ChipBPhoto said:

Beyond the power and pattern, durability, dependability, serviceability, buoyancy, and of course price also factor in the buying equation. Color temp consistency is also an interesting consideration. Hopefully this type of comparison can become more of an industry standard, or at least something that is repeated roughly every year as a reference tool.

I think this was a massive amount of effort that Backscatter put into this report. It would be amazing if they kept adding new strobes to the matrix and turn this in a standing comparison tool.

As of now they don't compare or contrast features like video lights, battery type, battery life, flood alerts, and price. These would be useful additions to complete the picture.

I would like to see brightness measured as a ratio of center vs some standard degrees from center, like at 90 degrees to axis and 120 degrees to axis.

Edit, I meant 45 and 60 degrees.

Edited September 2Sep 2 by Nemrod

20 hours ago, Nemrod said:

I would like to see brightness measured as a ratio of center vs some standard degrees from center, like at 90 degrees to axis and 120 degrees to axis.

Edit, I meant 45 and 60 degrees.

You can visualise this by downloading the images and measuring brightness in photoshop at the square next to each circle.

BTW Backscatter mention that the rings are at 30/60/90/120° - this must mean the angle is measured from one edge of each circle to the other edge. They are shooting with a WWL which has a 130° diagonal field which is what we see as the approximate diagonal measurement. As an example here is a polt comparing the Seacam 160D with a Retra pro max II without diffusers. The brightnesses are the pixel brightnesses sampled from Photoshop (100- K which is the black level which is what Photoshop reports):

You can see the Retra brightness drops more rapidly than the seacam as you move further off axis.

Our commentary of the test will be published soon, here is a preview: https://www.retra-uwt.com/pages/a-closer-look-at-backscatters-strobe-test-retra-uwt

1 hour ago, Oskar - Retra UWT said:

Our commentary of the test will be published soon, here is a preview: https://www.retra-uwt.com/pages/a-closer-look-at-backscatters-strobe-test-retra-uwt

Very complete analysis and you pointed out many legitimate issues. Some issues with formatting the charts - the legends are not showing which line belongs to which product.

One other thing to highlight that might be worth noting. The numbers for Backscatters strobes all seem to align well with the manufacturer reported specs. GN brightness and Color temperature for example. I suspect this a "methodology bias" where BS is using the same measurement method as their marketing department. The numbers might be valid, but the consistency works in their own favor.

Similarly with Isotta Red64 discrepancies. You can be sure that Backscatter did not allow any such oddities with their own strobes. They should correct the outliers to avoid the perception of bias.

I hope that Backscatter makes some quick revisions to their test report.

Edited September 3Sep 3 by Dave_Hicks

Thank you, Dave. We’ve fixed the legends and improved readability on mobile devices. If anyone else has any suggestions, please let us know. We’re planning to publish the article next week.

https://www.retra-uwt.com/pages/a-closer-look-at-backscatters-strobe-test-retra-uwt

Edited September 4Sep 4 by Oskar - Retra UWT

Thanks Davide DB for this very interesting link.

In my opinion, including price information would be a plus.

I think Back Scatter did make a useful and honest attempt to provide good data. I also agree with Retra that improvements could be made especially in the graphs and some of the measurement methodology. I really enjoy the side by side comparison where I can pick a strobe and add diffusers.

There is no serviceability or reliability chart! Inon and YS for example. Basically throw away strobes. True, I have Inon strobes that are 20 years old and still going and several which developed various problems with switches and disappeared into the nether world when sent off for repair. I will gladly pay more, even a lot more for a strobe that has a strong warranty and can be repaired, serviced and even updated.

This is fun! Nearly the same brightness in the center but clearly one strobe is producing a lot more power. The problem with GNs! And then the Maxi vs HF-1, just what I see there, the Maxi has a fuller, smoother light output and is if we must say it, slightly more powerful regardless of the charts, I am looking at it with my eyeballs!

Edited September 4Sep 4 by Nemrod

Many of the decisions in the review were made for a point, and while we all like to internet judge others - the more we do that the less likely future iterations like this will come out. If this comparison was nothing more than the slider tool, it would remain one of the most helpful comparisons out there. What else do we have? Hard work by Dave and others that are one offs between 2-4 strobes (which are super useful!)? Information from other sites where everything is great - even a gopro that can't focus close enough to be usable underwater being a good choice? Or a lot of people who just bought a strobe and say how great it is.

In the retra response "A retailer testing what it sells" - Is not correct as it also tests strobes it doesn't sell.

Backscatter also does not recommend any strobe, including their own (which is branded - so I think the COI is pretty obvious). So the attempt to be impartial is there. They have also - and specifically - not steered people towards their branded items in their many review videos. If a good option, they have - in the past - recommended one of their own products but also suggested strobes from other brands.

When someone comes out with tests like this, everyone loves to jump on them for not doing it this way or that. Each of the decisions was for a reason. Is it to make their strobe look good? Or was it that they have to choose one way, and any way will be flawed to some degree. Then we can balance that with most people's attention span - there is only so much people will read these days.

Personally, much the like comparison tools that have helped us buy cameras on sites like dpreview, this is at least an attempt to provide one more piece of information that allows people to compliment information gained on sites like waterpixels and various youtube channels.

Thanks, interesting test and interesting discussion in this thread as well.

I would be great to have something like this for the murky world of video lights.
A little bird recently told me CRI measurements are not really representative, since CRI evaluates colour rendering on only 8 pastel and low-saturated colour samples for instance.
And beyond light quality, burn times/battery life, constant output (or not), actual lumen/lux/candela output, edges and beam angle, button ergonomics, weight and buoyancy...

Edited September 7Sep 7 by bghazzal

I want to thank Backscatter Photo for the most informative and fact based comparisons on strobes ever. We can quibble over details that might subtly affect the results here and there and improvements in the graphics but regardless, huge effort, thank you..

Thank you Backscatter for all the work that went into this -- it's really an impressive and useful data set for the community, and responsive to some of our comments going back 2-3 years when Backscatter started doing this testing but published it strobe-by-strobe in a less easily comparable manner.

I see no reason to doubt the impartiality, as the results accord to the testing many on this forum have done, and my own testing of the HF-1, Apollo III, Inon S220, Ikelite DS230 and UW160 from 2024. For what it's worth, I think their methodology is about as impartial as it can get. Inevitably with comparison testing choices must be made about methodology (e.g. how to test recycling times, color temperature, beam spread) and I think they made good and defensible ones that have created the best data set out there on this topic. And importantly, a data set that simply didn't exist before, for which I think much recognition should be granted.

A few observations that jumped out at me as interesting (my own earlier testing pointed in this direction, but it's great to have it confirmed in a quasi-lab enviornment with the right instrumentation!)

• Color temperature is a spectrum, not a point reading. It seems all of the strobes pretty much get cooler at higher power outputs.

• There's nothing magical about the Seacam 160d -- despite it's historical mythical status for light quality :) Color temperature, output, beam pattern -- newer strobes match or exceed all of that, which is great, because it means we can pay significantly less for great performance.

• The Inon S220s are really impressive for their size, weight and boyancy characteristics. It's hard to do better without doubling the travel weight.

I too would like to thank Backscatter for their enormous amount of work putting this together! A ton of useful information there - some new, some confirming what we sort of knew (or suspected).

This chart from the article is interesting showing recycle time compared to guide number - I have selected the fastest recycling strobes. It is possible that there might be some strobes that are even more suited than the Backscatter HF-1 for shooting say 10 frames per second continuously. The HF-1 tops out at around GN10 before the recycle rate suffers, whereas the Supe D-Pro doesn't suffer until at least GN18, and the Sea&Sea YS-D130R is at GN16. It would be interesting to test these three strobes for their ability to maintain a continuous 10 frames per second.

2 hours ago, CCRphoto said:

This chart from the article is interesting showing recycle time compared to guide number - I have selected the fastest recycling strobes. It is possible that there might be some strobes that are even more suited than the Backscatter HF-1 for shooting say 10 frames per second continuously. The HF-1 tops out at around GN10 before the recycle rate suffers, whereas the Supe D-Pro doesn't suffer until at least GN18, and the Sea&Sea YS-D130R is at GN16. It would be interesting to test these three strobes for their ability to maintain a continuous 10 frames per second.

Why 10 fps? Why not 3 or 5 which are more achievable by the most capable strobes?

I want to echo most of the comments here and expressly commend the undoubtedly extensive work that went into this elaborate testing procedure.

Really great, Backscatter!

2 hours ago, Dave_Hicks said:

Why 10 fps? Why not 3 or 5 which are more achievable by the most capable strobes?

Why - big underwater focus stacks - up to 300 images.

Any chance you could replicate those tests you did for me on the Retra Maxis - but using the HF-1 instead - to find out if it can 10 fps at any power settings?

New Sea & Sea D130R looks less bright than I thought it would (light distribution). Inon’s legacy 330 surprisingly strong.

Edited September 8Sep 8 by Christian K

More convinced than ever that everybody needs a pair of the little Inon S220 strobes. Almost as bright as the new D130 in the center and notice the beam is wider in the horizontal axis than the D130. Clearly an elliptical beam, but that is per Inon design.

Edited September 8Sep 8 by Nemrod

3 hours ago, CCRphoto said:

Why - big underwater focus stacks - up to 300 images.

Any chance you could replicate those tests you did for me on the Retra Maxis - but using the HF-1 instead - to find out if it can 10 fps at any power settings?

I will see if i can try that soon. Currently diving at Gods Pocket through Friday. Maybe I can knock it out tonight after diving is done.

I brought both the Maxi's and HF-1 strobes, today i rigged the HF-1s to try out a new float design.

It is a great test to have access to even if not looking for a new strobe, and it looks clear Backscatter see the long term commercial benefit of a good reputation as a retailer offering sound advice, rather than promoting a specific product they have made.

The Z330 ii also comes out well and it is great they tested a discontinued, yet popular strobe. It is useful to see the beam width compared to newer strobes which helps visualise how to position them for different types of shot. When I got the Z330's I found they were a bit more sensitive than I was used to in where they point, potentially brightening zones of wide scenes not completely evenly. I assume this helps reduce backscatter versus very wide beams that maybe are more forgiving in which direction they point. I don't see it as a problem but rather something to take into consideration during use... the same thing applying to the S220. The weight, size and reliability of the Inon's for me have been the deciding factor.

This does raise the point about diversity ... the reason we have plenty of choice is because people have different priorities. So, it is great their test does not to recommend a single product.

I do have a concern though about the new super-bright strobes (and modern very bright snoot lights) and how much that disturbs the wildlife. It seems safest to use as much light as you need, rather than as much light as you can carry.