All Activity

Simon, Just to confirm, you are saying your test rig is: No vignetting with Nauticam 140 dome plus shade, and 35.5mm N100-N120 adapter, no extension ring? Thanks for your excellent summary.

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.

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.

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.

It may work with the Megadap 21 on Nikon full frame as a fixed 14mm FE and/or zoom on Nikon DX. Not sure it would be preferable over the Nikon 8-15 with FTZ, though. In any case, nice to see additional lenses of potential underwater interest.

No. They are phisically not compatible. I collected another BS. I was too excited about all these fisheye lenses suddenly on the market. I better stay in the video forum 😇

Would it actually fit on M43?

Oops! Sorry for the BS then!

Du bist aus Österreich!? Da könnten wir ja auf deutsch weitermachen. Entschuldigung für verspätete Antwort, ich war beruflich unterwegs. Ich wäre am fokusring interessiert, wie können wir ins Geschäft kommen (sofern du den einzeln verkauftst) Thomas

I fear there is nor Kenko TC for Sony FE...

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

Aloha and welcome @Simon Pierce

Hi Simon, thank you very much for sharing this preview right here with us and thank you also for the raw files. I read that it does not work with the Sony TC. Is there a chance that it could work with Kenko ones or is there a physical reason with the rear lens element? Thank you in advance

So if I understand correctly, this lens will be huge for users of cropped systems, who will be able to take advantage of the zoom without using a teleconverter. Great news for Sony APS-C users and for M43 users 🏆

Many thanks Simon! Looks like a big gap in the Sony lens lineup has now been filled! Are you coming to the Sony Scene event in Melbourne next month?

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?

Simon, Thank you very much for sharing your thoughts on, and experience with, this new lens. Lovely pictures too. I've enjoyed swimming with Kaikoura's speedy duskies as well. Brandon

So as expected no TC compatibility with this lens. So for full frame pictures we have to zoom in to 14mm. Is this really something to worry about and keep the Canon 8-15mm? Maybe just use the Tamron 17-28mm as alternative to the Canon 8-15mm with 1.4tc?

These are the specs for the new Sony FE 8-14mm F/3.5 fisheye. Retail in the US $1599.00. It has an AF lock and a zoom lock for locking the lens at 10mm for full frame on APS-C. Size & WeightWeight 314 g (11.1 oz.) Dimensions (D x L) 63.1-82.8 mm (2-1/2 x 3-3/8 in.) Lens SpecificationsAngle of View (APS-C) 180°-116° Format 35mm full frame Lens Groups / Elements 13-16 Maximum Magnification ratio (x) 0.22 Maximum aperture (F) 3.5 Minimum Aperture (F) 22 Mount Sony E-mount Aperture Blades 7 Circular Aperture Yes Filter Diameter (mm) - Image stabilization (SteadyShot) - (body-integrated) Minimum Focus Distance 0.15 m (0.5 ft) Zoom system Manual Teleconverter compatibility (x1.4) Incompatible Teleconverter compatibility (x2.0) Incompatible Hood Type Petal shape, bayonet type Angle of view (35mm) 180°-180° 35mm equivalent focal-length (APS-C) 12-21 Focal-Length (mm) 8-14

I'm a Sony Digital Imaging Advocate, working with Sony New Zealand. I've been lucky enough to have access to a pre-release FE 8-14 mm F3.5 Fisheye G, so I hope it'll be helpful to share some initial information on the lens here. A fisheye is my favourite lens underwater. For me, that's meant shooting with the Canon 8-15mm fisheye on a Metabones V since 2018. I've been using that with Nauticam's recommended port configuration: the 35.5 mm N100-N120 adapter, 30 mm extension ring, and the 140 dome port (18810/18811) with removable shade. New Sony 8-14 mm (left) in comparison to the Canon 8-15 mm (right). Top: Sony vs Canon + Metabones V. Middle: Sony vs Canon lenses. Bottom: Sony vs Canon + Metabones, with lens hoods attached. I was asked to try to get some underwater photos with this new lens. It's still wintry here in the South Island of New Zealand – 10ºC in the water – and the weather has been generally rubbish, so (a) the dive shop is closed, and (b) no sane tourists want to snorkel. That's limited my opportunity to actually use the lens to two – one, fortunately, rather good – snorkelling sessions with dusky dolphins. These dolphins are (extremely friendly) speedsters, and I'm not fully dialled in on settings / AF struggles with them, so hopefully the shots look nice – but don't read much into them in terms of actual lens capability. All dolphin shots are at f/10 and 1/500 or 1/640 sec (auto ISO) Anyway, some relevant information and stats on the new lens: Price in Australian dollars: AU$2,099 (I wasn't provided with other prices, but they should be out now or available shortly). Autofocus: capable of 120 fps tracking. Two linear focus motors. Min. focusing distance is 15 cm, for a 0.22x magnification ratio. Aperture is f/3.5 – f/22. Relies on in-camera stabilisation. Lightweight (314 g). It has a manual zoom ring. Zoom is internal. There's a 3-position zoom lock on the lens for full-frame circular fisheye (8 mm), full-frame diagonal fisheye (14 mm), and an intermediate lock position for APS-C diagonal fisheye. It has a rear filter holder (same size as the 12-24 mm GM and 14 mm GM lenses). It has an excellent new lens hood design that minimises the in-bag diameter of the lens, which I'm a big fan of. Sony teleconverters don't work with this lens. The Sony 8-14 mm is 82.8 mm long, compared to the Canon 8-15 mm (without Metabones V) at 83 mm. My understanding is that the Metabones V adds about 26 mm to the Canon's length. To use the Sony underwater, I simply removed the 30 mm extension ring and... thought positive thoughts. Hopefully some of you can do proper pool test shots soon, and I'm confident (= extremely hopeful) that Nauticam will produce a proper N100-optimised dome port for this lens. In the interim, I can at least say that the N100-N120 adapter -> 140 mm does work for large animals in the blue (i.e. not thinking about corner sharpness, which I haven't looked at). The Sony's diameter is 63.1 mm, compared to the Canon's 78.5 mm. I don't know enough about optics to surmise how that affects things. I took a fascinating comparison shot of the side of our garage with the Canon 8-15 mm (at 15 mm) and the Sony (at 14 mm) to show the field of view for each. Above: Canon 8-15 mm at 15 mm Below: Sony 8-14 mm at 14 mm I then took a few photos with the Sony at different apertures in case anyone wants to take a look. The raw test files are on Dropbox here: https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fo/n3h4zkyvnq0ngs2tjsw4l/AI88gajXJDUTGs0uuk7IwPw?rlkey=pf2farxnrnxgkvnqthktfffa0&dl=0. I have no doubt this will be a popular lens with underwater photographers, and a really important addition to the Sony lineup for many of us here. I am very happy that my pleas have been answered :) Simon.

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!

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

For my last diving trip, I used an Insta360 X5 to capture some behind-the-scenes footage while I was shooting underwater. I had the X5 mounted on a selfie stick, which was attached directly to my Nauticam housing. For protection, I used the Insta360 Dive Case Pro. I have to say, though: the Dive Case Pro is a seriously bulky piece of equipment. 😄 When you are already diving with a Canon R5 in a Nauticam housing, strobes, arms and all the other accessories, every additional piece of gear makes a noticeable difference. So I was wondering if anyone here has had the chance to directly compare the Dive Case Pro with the regular Insta360 X5 Dive Case. How noticeable is the difference in actual image quality between the two, especially underwater? I understand that the Dive Case Pro is designed to provide better stitching and overall image quality, but I am mainly using the X5 for casual behind-the-scenes clips, short reels and Instagram content rather than professional underwater 360° productions. For that kind of use, is the improvement from the Dive Case Pro really significant enough to justify carrying such a substantially larger housing? Or would you say that the regular Dive Case delivers more than sufficient quality for social media and occasional BTS footage? I’d especially appreciate feedback from people who have actually used both housings under similar diving conditions. If the difference is only noticeable when closely inspecting the footage, I might prefer the much more compact setup. My R5 in the Nauticam housing already keeps me busy enough underwater. 😄

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.