ChrisH

Yes, the effect of warm strobes will be not as pronounced when shooting from a greater distance. But for underwater you will usually want to avoid shooting from a greater distance and instead try to get as close as possible. I have a 16-35mm lens, but I used it only a couple of times and with not much success. So I don't really get it, why I should not use a Fisheye, unless I need a lens without the fisheye distortion. If you need more flexibility, a fisheye zoom used with a TC will get you there. Also, Retra makes a diffusor that they call "Shark diffusor", so it is for pelagics. On their website it says: "The Shark diffuser shifts the color temperature by -1000K and reduces the overall light output by -0.8 F-stop. The Shark diffuser is designed to prevent overexposing shark bellies and to give an especially warm light output for a more vivid blue background. The Shark diffuser is suitable also to other large animals and schools of fish." So Retra also thinks it is a good idea to use warm color light, even if you can't get as close as with reef scenes. I have attached some pictures, that show how warm color temperature strobes render colors with sharks and that it is absolutely possible to get close enough for fisheye shots. As I wanted to show the "out of cam" colors, I have attached pictures that I didn't process because they are nothing special. Only some adjustments to highlights, shadows and some clarity were made now. Colors are as you get them with auto white balance, warm strobes, fisheye. Nothing fancy, simple as that. Note the colors on the 3rd picture, shot with the same equipment on the same dive, nothing done to colors, not even saturation added. Just as it is. So that brings me back to the question: why would I not want warm color strobes? Maybe for shooting in greenish water, yes. But in warm ocean water? Why use cold light temperature? For video I get it. But for pictures? Why not go for the strobe with warm color temperature?

I have never used Canon, but with my Nikons I can change Picture Control settings (Standard, Landscape, Portrait etc) and the color profile (RGB, sRGB). Both settings will only affect the jpg files, but not the RAW files. I leave my Picture Control to "Standard". In Lightroom you can choose a camera profile (also Landscape, Portrait etc) which I also leave to "Standard". For export jpgs for web browsers, I export in sRGB, which will affect the colors and can alter the "blue". That's why I stated that in RGB and viewed on a good monitor (wide color space) the blues look usually better in my pictures than in sRGB.

Ah, now I got it! my bad! I thought you meant the profile in the camera (used for the jpgs), because you refered to Canon and Landscape. In Adobe Lightroom I use the standard "Adobe Color" profile for my RAW editing. The Landscape Profile has a little too much saturation in it for my taste. But you are right, it can change the look of the RAW file a lot. It really comes down to personal preference and the camera, because the colors are interpreted very differently!

Yes indeed, when I used Olympus back then I was never satisfied with my blues. Even in post processing I was not getting the color/rendering I wanted. After I switched to Nikon, the blues were much "better" or should I say more to my taste. The difference was very notable. And switching to warmer color temperature strobes did get me a little more to my desired rendering of blue. But the difference between the Olympus and the Nikon was much more noticeable than switching to warmer strobes. Also, what I forgot: Nikon has different AWB settings! And after switching from my D810 to my Z8 I had to experiment with the different AWB settings to get the results I wanted, as the newer sensor and processor rendered the colors (very) different! I now use the A1 setting, which is a little warmer than the standard setting, but not as warm as the A2 setting. I don't know how that translates to Canon/Sony or other manufactures. So there are a lot of variables in those comparisons. Maybe I should try to just manual WB to the color of my strobes. I just didn't feel a need for it, as I am getting my "blues" the way I like them with my settings/equipment. But It would be a nice experiment. Also: the desired "blue" is a personal preference and everybody has a different taste of what the "blue" should look like. I only shoot RAW, so I don't have any jpg. My picture setting is "Standard" in the D810 and Z8 but that will only affect the rendered jpg file as far as I understand. So I don't know what translates to the Canon "Landscape" format? Or does it affect color rendering within the RAW file? At least for Nikon, I don't think so?

If you want to get a litte more flexibility out of the 8-15mm Fisheye, consider using a 1.4 TC from Kenko (be careful, not all variants of them do work with the Z8!). If you can get a zoom gear for that combination (I use that from Seacam) you are getting basically a zoom-lens, having the same field of view as with the 8-15mm Fisheye at 15mm, but from there you can zoom in. If you are not using the 8mm setting, it gives you more flexibility. It will have a slight impact on image quality, but I found it ok when I need the flexibility (some additional "reach"). But I won't use it for sunburst shots, that is a weak point of the combination.

I have attached three images that where shot with warm color temperature strobes: Retra Pro with filter and Seacam (4400 Kelvin without filter). White Balance was on auto. No (!) adjustments to color were done in post processing. The colors are out of cam. I converted it to sRGB for web display, but in RGB and with a good monitor the blues are much better. The two shots with diver in it were shot at 25-30m depth, so the blues are a litte dark but you can bring that up easy in post. With my older strobes (cooler color temperature), I am pretty sure I would have to make some adjustments to get the colors as they are now out of cam.

First, the effect of warm strobes is not a night and day difference, but there is a difference and if you have seen it, you can't unsee it 😉 Second, the effect cannot fully be done in post processing... at least I can't do it. Maybe others can, but I would argue it is a lot more effort than just getting it right in camera. The effect shows mostly in warm water and if the main subject is close (a lot of strobe light reaching it). It mostly can be seen in reef scenes shot very close (fisheye lenses). I am not sure about the technical details of it, but as I understand hitting the subject with warm light will bring the white balance and color rendering of the camera "cooler", giving more pleasant, rich blues while retaining a pleasant foreground color (hit with warm light). So it cannot be replicated with global white balance, because it is the different light temperature between foreground and background. The closest I can get to it with post processing is to play with the color sliders for blue and aqua in Lightroom, adjusting hue, luminance and saturation.

I always buy my one-year-license from Amazon. They sell it at least 2 or 3 times a year for around 80-90 Euro, which used to be the best deal I know. Not sure how much they will go up in the future with Adobe increasing the price though...

Thank you! Yes, the lens is manual focus only. A hell to use with DSLRs, but with focus peaking on the Z8 it is much easier to use. Having a external viewfinder is also very helpful! But everything must be set before the dive: you dial in the aperture and focus distance and then you search for subjects that fit the settings. Yes, the lens did fit the port (plus extension) I already had. The lens needs an adapter, as it has a M42 mount.

@CaolIla Thank you!😊

A few pictures from my trip to Anilao (Philippines) in September 2024. Unfortunately the weather was very bad and we had high water temperatures, too. So there were not that many critters around as I was used to. Also Blackwater diving was not possible because of the weather. Equipment used: Nikon Z8, Nikon Z 105mm Macro, Nikon 8-15mm Fisheye with 1.4TC (first picture); Trioplan Copy (last picture) Seacam Housing, Seacam D150 Strobes, Retra Snoot

Somehow the pictures don‘t load/show? Next try…

I have found my perfect solution for me in two ThinkTank items: a Airport Advantage XT roller and a Retrospective bag. I use them as Carry on Luggage and my personal item. For my trip to Anilao (macro) I have the following items: in the roller bag fits my Nikon Z8, Seacam Housing, Seacam Fisheye Macro port, two Seacam 150d strobes, my Nikon 8-18 Fisheye with FTZ Adapter and Zoom Gear, the 105mm Z Macro lens, the 60mm Macro lens, the 1.4 Teleconverter, Weefine +13 diopter, Seacam 45 viewfinder, 4x power pack for the strobes, some batteries, cables, adapters and my Laptop. the Retrospective holds the Seacam Macro Port, my Trioplan copy, Tablet, headphones, 2xdive computers, and some personal stuff but has plenty of space left. The rest of the equipment is in the check-in luggage (strobe arms, extension rings). But even if my check-in luggage would not arrive, I could start shooting with the gear that is in my carry-on. Now lets hope they will not check the weight 😬 (16-17 kg) at check in. But usually if they do, I just show them whats inside and how fragile and expensive it is and had never had a problem.

The amount of TC1.4 sold for use underwater is probably very low compared to the TCs sold to use on tele lenses above water. So none of the TCs was designed for Fisheye-Zoom lenses but the Kenko was the only one I know (until the Sony now) that worked with this Fisheye Zoom lenses at all. Actually, I would love to have a housing manufacturer design such a TC for underwater use, optically designed for those Fisheye-Zoom lenses, instead of the long tele lenses. But I might be dreaming here 😉

Thank you! Happy you like it! 😊👍