TimG

Hey Friso What a pain. So, if you disconnect the fibre optic cables from the camera and fire the strobes, can you see the trigger LEDs fire? If so, the trigger is ok. If not, there’s a trigger problem. Try new batteries; make sure the hot shoe is attached properly on both the camera and to the UWT board. If the trigger fires and you can see the flash, reattach the fibre optic cables and fire the trigger. Can you see a light at the end of the cables? If so, the cables are ok. If not, there’s a problem with your cables. (Bit unlikely both are faulty but you never know) You say your Retras are ok. Great! The key thing at this stage is does the UWT trigger flash?

Yep, the Nikkor 8-15 works perfectly on a Z mount body via the FTZ. I use the lens a lot weirdly for topside shots.

Dave, why are you so certain AA powered strobes are over? They are such a simple solution. Easy to obtain, inexpensive, unlikely to explode, no issues of moving them by air (or mail!), and as far as I can tell for most uses, deliver sufficient power. Am I missing something? Other than my dive computer and camera battery, I use AAs for everything and standardising makes charging and cable management so much easier.

Yeah, I’m pretty much the same but use just 2x 4 AA chargers. Just did a Red Sea liveaboard, 3 dives a day - no problem. I can’t be taking enough pictures!

Totally agree. I’m delighted with my ProMaxs and the battery life with the booster.

Ajit, much better if you post jpgs……

Brilliant! Well done!

Argh - how annoying is that!

Hey John. Good to have you over here. I’m sure you’ll see lots of familiar names from WP. We hope you enjoy the forum.

Do let us know how you get on, Antoine.

Hey John! Welcome to Waterpixels. Great to have you with us. We hope you enjoy the forum.

Well Sacha has come to the right place then. Our "gift" is helping people spend more money, right?

Hey Sacha I do think having two arms on the strobe is a good idea as it allows for maximum flexibility. That said, yes, you might have problems with the balance of the system if the strobe side is negatively or positively buoyant. But this is something you can play around with and you might well be able to keep your system level. Really system levelling is, in my view, only an issue if it leads to stress or pain in your wrists in achieving a level image. If it does, then you need to tackle it - maybe by adding something to the non-strobe side. But all relatively easy to resolve. On the ball heads, they do tend to be a standard size: 1". If you can get a reasonable solid feel to the system, I would not worry. If they are floppy underwater then, yes, something needs changing. It could be that using a thicker o-ring solves that problem.

Hmmm, yeah, not easy. I do think the guys are right in staying with the same ecosystem - Nikon/Nikkor. The problem is though the same one I would have - moving away from DX into, presumably, FX. No problem, of course, with macro lenses. The 90mm or 105mm Nikons work extremely well with FX or DX. If you go down the Z-mount route, the Nikkor Z 105 looks amazing. WA is another story if you are used to the Tokina 10-17 (as I am having had my Nikon/Subal D500 since 2017 and still loving it). As Wolfgang says, there is no FX equivalent. Even FEs are an issue with Z-mount. In a foolishly idle moment I took a look at the new Nauticam Z6III housing having just upgraded my (topside) Z6 to the Z6III. It was not long before I was mulling over the Nauticam recommendation of the Z6III with the WWL-C and Nikon Z 24-50 which, Nauticam argue (well they would wouldn't they) is a brilliant WA combination. Have to say, it did look good. But then the issue arises of pixel count and DX v FX. I'm not a pixel counter and have never seen the point of having more than 20MB or an FX sensor for most use. However, for the moment Nikon pretty much force us down the FX route. Would you want to go with a 20ishMB Z6III when there are FX cameras (Z8?) around which can create bigger files with more cropping potential? Or even which can switch to DX and still create decent size files? I have not yet sorted these first-world dilemmas out in my mind. No cash has, as yet, been slapped down for the Z6III/Nauticam system - I love my Subal/D500 too much. But, have to say, I really was thinking hard about it..... on paper it looked pretty darned good.

Hey calbeardiver! Great to have you with us. A warm welcome to Waterpixels.

Great to have you with us, Antoine. Welcome aboard!

Hi Wolfgang Yep, I hated the icons on the upgrade to 6.0 and wrote to Loupedeck about it. They explained I could use the icon editor to change them or revert back to v5 of the software. I took one look at the editor….. and reverted back. I’ve not tried 6.0.1 I was so disappointed about the upgrade. I think the Loupedeck CT is brilliant and have been using one for some years and updating the software as new editions appeared. But, for me, 6.0 was really retrograde. Im using a Mac Studio with Sequoia.

Hey Jordi Welcome to Waterpixels. Great to have you with us! We hope you really enjoy the forum. Best wishes

Hi Hernan Greta tio have you with us. Welcome to Waterpixels! We hope you really enjoy the forum.

Good to have you with us, Ajit. A warm welcome to Waterpixels

Could not agree more with this. Heading underwater able to shoot anything sounds good in theory. In practice it usually ends up a mess: too much gear to sort out and juggle. But, even more importantly, I'd suggest, is that the thought process and composition decisions are so different between macro and wide-angle that getting really good images for both on one dive is very difficult. Decide what you'd like to shoot before you head underwater, based on research and what you have heard about the area; then set-up for that. Depending on what happens, you may be able to change gear/lenses etc for a second dive.

Hey Sacha Yes, posts are only editable for a short period. This is quite deliberate.

I’d suggest using ULCS arms with Stix floats. The combination allows flexibility for buoyancy and both are very long-lasting.