All Activity

Well, I picked up a pair of Maxis that I had ordered way back in December 2024. I did a short use test against the HF-1 and decided the Maxis would be a better choice, plus I got the original launch price (pre-tarrifs too). I've been doing some TTL tests using a GH6 and the TRT O Smart 3 trigger and I'm pretty happy with the results. One thing that I like on the Retras over the HF-1 is that the retras let you adjust the strobe power up and down in TTL (which is nice for some creative shots). My old Inons could do this too. Another thing that is nice is multiple levels of video lights compared to the HF-1 and finally the extra buoyancy from the Retras. To be honest, I didn't get a chance to do detailed tests of the RC mode ("wireless) using the TRT and the HF-1. Conceptually I understand what it is doing differently than the mimic TTL I'm just not quite sure how that works in practice. I'll be diving with these in April so I'll have some more details.

In principle the way to do this is fairly easy, you just need to work out the right extension. I see the Seacam port chart mentions that is using a converted lens with Metabones to use to the PVL25 extension and that the zoom ring is a special. To that you would need to add extension equivalent to the thickness of the converter in question. Presumably you use the recommended Canon extension with the PVL 25, but you would need to confirm that with Seacam and also ask them if they can help you with a zoom ring, otherwise you would need to have one printed. I would also add that the compact dome or one of the fisheye ports would be more flexible for this setup if you want to do CFWA as you can get quite a bit closer.

Yes CFExpress 1GB but I use allways the same 512 GB SDcard... (have some backup just in case with me. I'm not making backup from the pictures every days on the SSD.. "only" after 3 or 4 days diving and then with the Lightroom xmp. I used when I'm back at home the SSD to transfer the data to my RAID over my home PC. Before I bought the new Surface pro I had some free space problems... (only 512 GB in the old Surface) not because the picture, but the vdeo my wife took. With one TB SSD in the new Surface... and for a small trip it will be enough... but for a trip of 3 weeks... I'll prabably run out of disk space.

I load my camera with a 512gb CFExpress card and a 128gd SDcard. I have 10 of the SDcards (numbered) and rotate in a new one everyday as I import to the PC. Its an easy backup with close to zero effort. So all photos are on 2 memory cards and the PC during a trip. I usually have a backup drive as well if i chose to use it.

I m also travelling with 2 Samsumg T7 from 1 TB to backup (2 times) the pictures transfered. That my R5 have 2 card I only empty one the other hold all the pictures (1 TB) Backup baclup backup..... it's important.

same remark as @Dave_Hicks a Surface Pro with Intel CPU not ARM.

Be sure to buy the Intel CPU version. ARM is great for everything but Adobe apps.

I bought the inon ucl g55 ZD. Next week I'll test such lens, enjoy Giacomo

Thanks very much.

I am using a somewhat dated (very dated?) Sony A7R III / Seacam rig and after seeing the success some members are having with the Canon 8-15 I'm considering giving it a try. I was particularly intrigued by this thread where @jjmochi described using the 8-15 with a 2X TC to have a zoomable +/- 15-30mm. I'm wondering if anyone is using the 8-15mm with the 2X TC in a Seacam housing with a Seacam SD dome port. I use the Sony 28mm / Fisheye Converter in my current rig and it's a fine setup, but I'm looking for the versatility of a zoom if possible.

Welcome!

Thanks!

Aloha and welcome @CRobinson !

Thanks very much.

Thank you all for the answers, you've been really helpfully. I think I'm going to bay a Surface Pro. I'm ashamed but I didn't know that those kind of pc existed. The size is not that big comparing with a tablet and I don't need to learn Lightroom mobile. I am currently paying The LR photographic plan, which includes 20 GB cloud. I think is not enough for everything I have to do if I work with a tablet. Anyway my plan was to buy a keyboard and a pencil for the tablet, so the size is going to be pretty much the same.

Hey @Mark Chivers Do you still have the strobes ? I'll send you a DM.

Hi CRobinson! A warm welcome to Waterpixels! Great to have you with us. we hope you really enjoy the forum. Best wishes Tim

Hi all. I'm a PADI instructor (now in non-teaching status) and photographer formerly from SoCal and now residing in the wilds of the mid-Atlantic region. I'm happy to have found this community and I hope to be able to contribute to and learn from everyone here.

Hi @atus great question! I travel frequently and basically do not carry a laptop any longer. Lightroom mobile is incredibly powerful! There is a tiny learning curve as the interface is a bit different than the classic version, but basically all you typlically will need is included. Equipment: iPad Pro - 11” 2022 w M1. (Currently M4 at the same price i paid) Enough memory cards to not require reuse during the trip (fairly cheap now) An SSD (I use a 1TB Samsung T7 or T9) USB-C dongle w/ card slot, plug for SSD cable, and power connection plug Strategy: Each night upload all photos/videos to SSD using dongle w card inserted Do not format card (super important for redundancy) Upload some of my favorite images to Lightroom mobile Edit as desired Repeat daily For return trip, pack memory cards and SSD in different bags to preserve full redundancy (I.e. cards in my backpack and SSD with in my dive bag or other carry on) Once home, import remaining images from SSD Rename all to desired trip name w date, sequence numbers, etc. Duplicates of previously uploaded images will not upload again All edits made during the trip will sync so long as you have the feature enabled Any edits that require additional plugins can then be made on the home computer. Once redundant images are no longer needed, format the memory cards and reuse. Do the same with SSD as desired and/or fits in your normal workflow I am a Mac person which is why I use an iPad. If you use Windows, the Surface would also be a perfect choice. Either way, a laptop is no longer required to have a successful, connected trip. Traveling light is incredibly lberating! Enjoy! Chip

Lens holder on cross bar

Thanks Dreifish, the above is something I did notice on the HF-1 but not on the Apollo III 2.0 that I happen to own. This is why I recommended to get your strobe checked. I am aware that the 2.0 in official documents just refers to the wireless protocol but from what you describe, I would not rule out that there is also other improvements in the product or the chance that you received a „Monday model“ series, as we say in Germany. The findings in Kiliis and Henley Spiers reviews that included Apollo also point into that direction, that it‘s not flawed. Have a look at the Henley wall projection MTL 12 (full power in fast mode, that is): source: DivePhotoGuide.com The variations or blackouts I get on my two HF-1 strobes (and the HF-1 of my friend) are extreme compared to the Apollo III 2.0 - pretty much like the the Retra and OneUW blackouts and light variations in the DPG reviews. I used the fully charged recommended batteries that are in the Backscatter manual for the fast shooting high fps test. Another potential conflict I would like to put the spotlight on is the fps you can set in the cameras vs what the strobe manufacturers guarantee you. I think MARELUX will grant you 10 fps solid according to their manual in full MTL power. But like your camera I just have the option available to to do 7 fps or 12 fps on my R6 Mark II. That said, the Apollo‘s kept up with Zero blackout frames @ 12 fps. I explored that mystical feature further by digging into the real net frame rate that our Canon cameras will offer. Canon says the fine wording „up to“ depending on settings and batteries used etc. When shooting a stop watch on my iPhone at the high fps setting I found that the camera actually varies in speed between 10.5 to 12 fps in series burst shooting with strobes. This explains to me why the Marelux Apollo III strobes on my desk seem to be able to easily keep up with this pace. It looked like camera and strobes could do this endlessly forever so I stopped the test after a few hundred RAW .CR3 frames and seconds. Coming back to the HF-1 and blackout frame behavior there is also a 2nd source online confirming my experience with the other pretty fast strobe in the leading gang,… Nicolas Remy digged into the high fps possibilities of the HF-1 and also confirmed blackout frames and light Variations, which I do not experience with Apollo III 2.0 in MTL. Have a look: Full HF-1 review on: theunderwaterphotographyclub Hybrid Flash HF-1 Table 2: Hybrid Flash recycle times and number of flashes at the three most powerful settings (source: Backscatter) Power Setting Burst Speed Light Decrease Between Shots Number of Flashes Before a Black Frame Frequency of Black Frames After First One Total Number of Shots Taken Comment 1/4 10fps Smooth 9 Every 2–3 shots 49 1/4–0.5 f-stops 10fps Smooth 14 Every 2–3 shots 42 1/8 10fps Very smooth 43 None 43 1/4 8fps Smooth 16 Every 4 shots 37 1/4 6fps Very smooth 24 None 37 Decrease during first 24 shots, then stable 1/2 5fps Smooth 5 Every 1–2 shots 26 1/2 4fps Very smooth 7 Every 3 shots 25 1/2 3fps Very smooth 13 None 25 Decrease during first 13 shots, then stable F 3fps Noticeable 2 Every second shot 15

Thanks for this, though possibly better 18650 batteries may now be available? I suspect you method has some validity, if the strobe has more power in your test it probably is also brighter in comparison for a quick burst, but I guess it depends on how the strobe is programmed to deal with continuous shots. In addition using 3 18650 (assuming) in series, the voltage is higher so less demanding on amp draw.

This is exactly what I did back in 2024 when I was testing the strobes. I chose continuous shooting rates my Canon could support (3fps, 6fps and 12fps) and then for each strobe dialed down the power until it could keep up with that frame rate without any black frames for at least 20 frames in a row. Once I established what the setting/power level on the strobe was, I measured the GN of the strobe firing at that setting. What I observed is that while it's indeed true that some strobes prioritize firing on each shot even at lower power (HF-1) while others (Apollo III in MTL) prioritize trying to keep all exposures evenly lit by not firing at all on some exposures to fully recharge their capacitor before firing, the end result once you dial down the power sufficiently is the same and indistinguishable -- a series of shots that are all lit with minimal exposure variance. The other thing I noticed is that pretty much every strobe starts out brighter for the first 2-3 shots in the series and gradually dims until shot 10 or so in the series after which it basically settles into a steady-state brightness for the following 20 shots. I measured the brightness based on those latter 20 shots where the shot-to-shot variance was low. I'll be the first to concede that this is more of a technical capability test than a real life test, in that probably if you're really shooting high frame rates to capture behavior, what you care about is the first 10 shots, not the tail end when the strobe settles into steady-state. And there may be real difference in how each strobe handles those first 5-10 shots. I wasn't testing for that per se. Finally.. yes, I had one of the earliest production batches of the Apollo III strobe, before they came up with a 2.0 version. But as far as I know, the 2.0 version is physically identical, the only changes are to the wireless control protocols. Light output and recycling time should be the same between the two models. (Gemini claims: The main difference between the Marelux Apollo III and the Marelux Apollo III 2.0 is the updated wireless communication system and internal software that improves stability for various flash modes. The 2.0 version was primarily introduced to allow better integration with the Lumilink 2.0 wireless transmitter.) My theory is that the HF-1 is able to put out more power in high frame rate mode because of better batteries -- I was using the HF-1 with the nitecore 6000mah 21700 batteries, while the Apollo III had 3 generic 18650 batteries that it came with. Believe the 21700 batteries are just newer/better technology.

edge at the moment, it's a work machine, usually use firefox on home machine, won't be home for a few days yet. I can post some examples. Edge claims to be fully colour managed. checking on this page confirms fully colour managed: Is your system ICC Version 4 ready?

I haven't controlled the images on my Macbook Pro/Safari (gonna do it tomorrow), but on my Win11/Eizo machine I can see significant differences in all images. Which browser are you using?