Alex_Mustard

Retra sent me an email with the specs last week and I was reading it to a couple of the guys on my Red Sea workshop, who commented it seemed engineered to beat the HF-1 in each department. One of them then quipped that Retra should have called it the Backscatter Xterminator! The guide number scale makes the difference seem much larger than it is. I've tested (only on land) it against the HF-1 and it is marginally brighter centre frame. But you have to look to see it. And that is with both without diffusers, which is not how you are going to normally use them. But I also understand why Retra have made this - because quite simply some of their customers or potential customers have said that this is what they want. While others, like me, prefer the philosophy of the Pro Max for my photos. And I think it is great news that there is now a wide variety of quality products out there offering people the chance to choose what they think is right for them.

This was very sad and, as always, scary news. I have never been on the boat, but always thought they were very nice people. It must have been terrifying for all on board, especially in such a remote location. We were moored next to MV Nouran at Deadalus on the day of their fire. We left at sunset, and the fire was later that night. We spent much of the day diving beneath their boat with the oceanic whitetip sharks. Waiting Not waiting! This is probably the last photo taken of MV Nouran (far right), as we left that evening:

I'd just say it does the same job as the SMC-1 (but is also optimised to work with the Sony 90mm as well as the 100/105mm lenses) and incorporates what Nauticam have learned about optics in the 10 years since the SMC-1 was introduced. If you have an SMC-1 and are happy there is no need to upgrade. If your SMC-1 is getting a bit tatty then this is a good reason to replace it. If you shoot Sony and regularly see the cut off with the SMC-1, then this gets rid of it. Alex

Good news for second hand values, though. Hype it up a bit and cash in!

I've been shooting it since May. Haven't used my SMC-1 since, although the performance is very, very similar. I like it very much, although the other products are more interesting to me.

Just a hat with "Don't forget your lens, Dummy!" written on it! Alex

There is a downside to Isaac's conversion (get well soon, Isaac). By dividing the lens into two parts (port and lens) it opens up the opportunity for dumb photographers to leave one part at home. In my case I am on a Komodo to Alor trip with the port, but the lens is in England. In my defence we're in the middle of moving house and everything is in boxes, which made packing much trickier than usual. Fortunately for us dummies, Sony cameras are so popular amongst UW folks that there are plenty of fisheyes on board to borrow!

Looks like it has flooded (they normally have air inside - who wants to try and compose a photo through oil!). I would not dive it like that. If you have the standard viewfinder or a friend has a spare viewfinder then use that.

The quick answers are: 1) No. I used the same camera WB for both. But I didn't do detailed testing - I just went out and shot. 2) No. But on the reef, reviewing between shots, I wasn't really shooting fast, I was getting compositions right, reviewing my shot, adjusting when needed. https://www.instagram.com/p/C5rH6q9Nqqv/ Longer answers for others, like OP, interested in these things. I wasn't doing an official review, but was testing for my own interest - so I didn't take notes or do specific comparison shots. That said I am very familiar with what exposure my normal settings and flash powers give, so I immediate notice the differences of different gear. I am lucky that I have access to all the good gear and I would always swap to better gear when it comes to market - so I always try and try good products. Anyway, I last used the Seacams back to back with the Retras when I was in Misool in March. Although that is not that long ago, I've done over 100 dives this then (with others strobes), so I don't remember all the details. But I clearly remember shooting the same settings with each (both power and exposure settings and using the same white balance I normally use - being a Sony user I shoot K WB mostly). The difference between them in light was very small - and both are very much to my taste. In back to back testing you might see a difference, but shooting real world subjects they give very similar light at the same power settings. Both recycle fine. But neither is as instant as the lithium powered strobes are at the highest powers. I don't remember ever waiting on either strobe (although I was shooting at a normal pace, composing carefully, reviewing etc - see video link above). As a general comment (for the benefit of others following), while recycling time is an easy stat to measure, I don't believe it is important for almost all UW photography. We usually review between shooting, it is not as if we have a (different) perfect photo opportunity several times each second. And I think taking a moment to carefully compose etc, is more valuable than spraying off extra frames. Most things in the ocean do not move super fast. There are not normally fast moving elements likes a bird's wings or eye-lids blinks which make or break a composition a nature composition on land. When I first got my Nikon D4 (in 2013, I think) I remember shooting mandarinffish in Lembeh one evening. I set the camera to higher ISO and shot 10 frames per second with my Inon Z240 strobes on a lower power. On that dive I had several hundred shots of mandarinffish pairs, I think over 90 in focus where their eggs were visible too - but despite all these good shots, I got nothing any better than if I had just taken one shot of each rise. It made me realise that much of the time the viscosity of water slows down behaviours underwater and shooting multiple frames often just means multiple similars, rather capturing than some lucky/magic moment. Alex

Biased to my own photography taste

I have done multiple wide angle dives in the last few months with the Retra Pro Max, Seacam 160, Backscatter HF-1, Kraken KS160 (and Scubalamp SUPE D-Pro in December). They are all very good strobes. My preference is the Retra, but if I was forced to use one of the others I'd get by fine. I am always interested in testing gear that might expand by capabilities - but I won't test gear that I feel will restrict my photography in any way. I am not interested in wasting my dive time using lesser strobes - but the fact that I have done multiple dives with all of these - is a vote of confidence in them all. The Retra is my favourite because it has the nicest quality of light, lots of power and is two strobes in one (in Lembeh (May) I shot it small with 4 batteries, while in Raja Ampat (March) and Red Sea (June) I shot it with 8. None of the other strobes here are ideal for macro - so you probably need to budget for a second set of something else if you do dedicated macro trips. People make a lot of fuss about 8 AAs, but if you get good, fast chargers - they are super easy to live with and in real world UW photography you are never waiting for them to recycle. The battery life is a big step on from previous Retras. The controls are simple and excellent. Like the Bluetooth updates and I like how you can fix and change aspects of them by connecting to phone. Wished they made a non-TTL model. I own Retra Pro Max, totally reliable. I've not tried their sticky out Lithium battery yet, but I am not planning to get them (but will try some when I have a chance). The first Seacam 160s I tried (borrowed from he who shall not be named of Wetpixel) when they first came out were unreliable - and I didn't like them as a result. But I borrowed Erin's in March and had a very good experience with them. I find the light very, very similar to the Retras, just with slightly more throw and slightly less softness. The light output level is near as damn it the same as the Retras with real subjects. The batteries are nice, but that is a lot of money to pay and you need your own spares if nobody else is shooting these strobes. This is what is best about AAs - you can borrow them from everyone if you have a charging issue/flood etc. The power control was a bit annoying, without a deadstop - so you have to look at the screen all the time to know where they are set, and even worse the smaller increments are indicated by small dots on the screen which are hard to see without looking (closely). Erin's were set to 1/3 stop increments which was also annoying - but I presume this is an option. Anyway, very good strobes, but I wouldn't have them over the Retra even at the same price. Erin's were totally reliable. The Kraken KS-160 has a nice quality of light. But it does not have as much light output as the Retra and and Seacam. I know it has more stated WS-1 than the Retra - but this does not translate to light output. But they are still powerful strobes and capable of rapid firing with the Lithium batteries (although after you've shown off to your buddies - this really has limited uses in normal underwater photography, other than making everyone think you have no sensitivity towards the wellbeing of your subjects). The lithium battery packs are very nice to live with and charge straight from USB-C which is nice. I used them a few months apart, but I felt that the light and power from the "similar" SUPE D-Pro was identical. The SUPE I tried was not reliable and several of the power settings did not work. The Krakens were totally reliable. I think that they are correctly priced versus the Retras - cheaper - but a level below. I like that they are simple with no TTL. The Krakens weak point is ergonomics. The main power knob is in whole stop settings and then your have a turny dial to adjust within stops - I could say more, but this is not nice to use. They are heavy in the water, but have good buoyancy collars. The Backscatter HF-1 does not have the natural quality of light of the strobes above. But boy, does it have a lot of power. And it also has a well judged diffuser (the flat warmest one) that gives it a very decent quality of light, when attached. While still giving out more power than those above. It has excellent battery performance, which means you can shoot all day (not a big deal), but more importantly encourages you to use more of the power, more of the time. If you regularly shoot big animals/pelagics in bright conditions this would be my choice. If you shoot more close focus wide angle then you might favour one of those above with a more pleasing quality of light. The ergonomics are better than the Kraken and Seacam. They are a bit heavy in the water. They were totally reliable on my trip. They also have a video light. They are very attractively priced at present. They are my second favourite here. Alex

Here are some reasons: https://wetpixel.com/forums/index.php?/topic/14391-subtronic-nightmare-continues/ https://wetpixel.com/forums/index.php?/topic/55535-subtronic-support-did-it-again-be-aware/ https://wetpixel.com/forums/index.php?/topic/63755-troubles-with-subtronic-underwater-flashes/ https://wetpixel.com/forums/index.php?/topic/50432-subtronic-issues/ https://wetpixel.com/forums/index.php?/topic/44156-subtronic-customer-service/ https://wetpixel.com/forums/index.php?/topic/23076-subtronic/ You need to be a member of the other place to read.

Matt and I recorded an episode of The Underwater Photography Show on the HF-1 earlier in the week. We put the Brian Skerry episode out first. But I’ve scheduled the HF-1 episode for today (Dave gets a mention)!

Although I am massively behind on my image processing - there are 70+ FCP shots on my website now. They are not test shots, but hopefully they show the variety of images the FCP can produce: https://www.amustard.com/library/page/search/FCP/1/ Alex

I am ordering some Universal cables. Fortunately our local dealer is on my workshops - so he can bring them to Egypt (excellent customer service)!

What flash synch cords do these take? Trying to find some that fit. Alex

This is the first of two parts of an old interview I did with Martin - the interview was for a written article, and the recording was just for my memory. So the sound quality is not the best. The files said it was 2006, but listening to it, I actually think it was summer 2009.

I wrote this tribute to my good mate 😭 https://www.scubadivermag.com/underwater-photography-world-mourns-renowned-uwp-guru-martin-edge/

I am well versed in the various conversions, having shot Seacam Converted for Nikon 13mm, Belic Converted for Nikon 13mm and Isaac Converted for Sony. As Tom says, both the Seacam and Belic conversions do not report aperture correctly. At open apertures the difference is small, but gets more pronounced as you shut the aperture. Borut Furlan published a helpful look up table for converting the indicated aperture to the true aperture (very nice): This relationship is the same on the Saecam and Belic converted lenses - but the Belic converted lenses only stop down to an indicated f/22 (a true f/14). The other factor is that the Monster adapter is poor. I've only tested the LA-FE2 converter (the one that works with older AF-D lenses like the RS-13) briefly, but found it unreliable on the one test I made. And definitely not something I would want to use on important dives. I do use the Monster LA-FE1 (which only works on newer Nikon F lenses with AF motors inside them). This is still not wonderful, but does work with AF-C and AF-S modes. I find this adapter is OK to use, although I wouldn't bet my life on it! One issue worth mentioning I have had is when using it in cold water (Silfra). Here I had communications issues and it would not report aperture correctly. Often shooting with a different aperture than I set! I have never had that problem in warm water - and felt it was caused by a power drop caused by the cold. Isaac's conversion turns the RS-13mm into a Sony lens - with all the advantages that brings. Which have been extolled before in this thread and is definitely the way to go if you want to use this lens on Mirrorless (either Sony or Nikon Z). Alex

Thank you. Looking forward to shooting something different.

I've downloaded, but not installing it as I've going to Lembeh tomorrow and definitely don't want to loose all my custom settings. I plan to update post trip - but have the update downloaded in case I feel like updating in the field.

The correct advice for the workshop too!

I had Subal housings for all my Nikon cameras - so I didn't have any Nauticam N120 ports to carry over to the N100 system, I am afraid. With the Nikon 8-15mm lens, I use a 30mm EXT ring with the 35.5mm adapter and dome. I have used the 60mm with the standard 90mm (although it is slightly long). But also with the N100 4" port and N100 20mm extension (which I don't think is on sale - although I have 2 of them). Sorry that is not much help. I am sure others have used them with the N120 ports. Alex

For me, none of the other RS lenses are very interesting. I have the 20-35mm, 28mm and 50mm still, but have never been seriously tempted to convert any of them. The 50mm is just a standard macro lens. The 28mm and 20-35mm are both UW corrected - but neither is as wide as they seem. Just as the Nikonos V 15mm is actually the equivalent of a 20mm lens, so the 20-35mm is something like a 24-42mm (I don't know the exact conversion), which limits its usefulness underwater. Rene Aumann made an 18mm for the RS, but this was simply a land lens and dome combo - programmed and waterproofed (very expertly) to work with the RS camera. But not UW corrected.

For me f/13 is an ideal aperture for most wide angle on full frame. Because in standard shooting it is hyperfocal meaning that both your foreground and background details are both fully in focus. It also tends to give excellent corner sharpness. It makes for more engaging compositions of scenes - because all elements can full engage the viewer and makes the composition more engaging. It is easier to shoot more open - you won’t need such powerful strobes for a start, but then the different elements (foreground/background) of the images won’t all be contributing as strongly to the composition and the final image will be less impressive to the viewer. Theoretically there is a very tiny loss of sharpness due to diffraction between f/8 and f/13, but this is a completely minor issue compared to the image quality losses from dome ports and particularly shooting through water as we do underwater.