waso

It's ritten in the article and your have to scroll down more than half the page. Tonight I can make a screenshot.

If you follow my link above, you'll find the sentence: 'This lens is not compatible with Canon extenders.'

I better ask Pavel - maybe there was some progress in the meantime. But I would prefer a housing-inside-system anyway.

Yes, the Nikon flash protocol seems to be much easier for reverse engineering compared to Canon. As a Canon user that was quite confusing to me. Yes, that was the latest info I received from him as well. Version 3 is now being sold: Trt-Electronicse-TURTLE 3 SMART TTL trigger for Canon MILC systems.e-TURTLE 3 SMART TTL trigger for Canon MILC systems.

But it doesn't seem to be compatible with Backscatter. And there's only the Retra Pro MAX /II listet.

I've been reading a lot lately, and it's becoming clear that I'll most likely go with the Backscatter HF-1 (as Architeuthis already mentioned) – or perhaps the Retra Maxi. However, I much prefer the overall package of the HF-1 (with the variable snoot and filters). One important issue is TTL, and I'd like to know if there are any other options besides the E-TURTLE 3 SMART TTL TRIGGER for the Canon R5/HF-1 combination. If I'm not mistaken, Underwater Technics also offers a version for Canon, but I don't find an external model very practical. Does anyone have experience with how well TTL works with these converters and Canon mirrorless cameras with HF-1? Is there perhaps a third solution? Does anyone have practical experience with Canon mirrorless and Retra regarding TTL reliability?

The 7-14 Fisheye is unfortunately NOT compatible with RF Extenders: https://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-RF-7-14mm-F2-8-3-5-L-Fisheye-STM-Lens.aspx

Ohh, interesting...

Which dome port did you use for this comparison?

Hi Wolfgang, unfortunately I can only compare it underwater and above water, but there it's clear. I've never used a macro lens behind a dome port – even though its use seems plausible in many cases. But since I lose the option of using close-up lenses, I would only do it in special situations – and whether the investment would be worthwhile is another question.

With a 100mm lens (Canon) I can see a significant decrease in image quality due to CA and some softness in the corners.

I don't know him, but he definitely has a Dutch accent.

A future RF fisheye lens will certainly not be compatible with Canon RF converters. The rubber lip takes up far too much space, and RF is generally more compact than EF. It would still be interesting...

Thank you for the test update, @Dave_Hicks! Since the high brightness apparently led to non-linear saturation effects, and since in reality (in warmer water) a warming diffuser is used in more than 90% of cases anyway, I would be very interested in a test at 4500K (as I mentioned earlier), as this would be much more practical (at least for me). The difference between max and boost would probably then be more clearly visible.