Dave_Hicks

Backscatter has said they plan to release an HF-1 snoot. I will probably stick with the MF-2 for snooting for now.

The MF-2 is so compact that it's not much of a burden to pack. And now that I have the HF-1 strobes, I can ditch 16 AA batteries and 2 chargers. The MF-2 can share batteries and charger with the HF-1s. Plus, it has the added benefit of giving you redundancy if another strobe should fail. I've seen so many strobes fail on trips it's really a life saver to have a spare. And remember, spares are not just for you but also for your dive buddies. I know my save-a-dive-kit and spares get used a lot more to help other divers!

It's a lot nicer to have your carry lanyard at the top of your first pair of Arms. You can carry the rig without it being unbalanced, and it's much easier to hand up to a boat from in the water.

The problem with that is that I would have to print vertically, and I found out experimentally that it does not work well. You end with concentric rings on the long access with no cross-hatching from layer to layer. That model ended up imploding with a crack across layer lines and the (vertical) gyroid infill collapsing. My Fusion CAD model actually has a cylinder and rounded-rect option in it. The rounded rectangle design can be printed on its side and the long top/bottom surfaces print with lines at 90degs between layers which results in a stronger print. I also changed to grid infill vs gyroid (8%) that supports those long surfaces. Lots of opinions say that gyroid is better, but not under 4atm of pressure apparently. I further added two internal ribs 5mm wide @ 30% on the thicker half of the float. The other half ends up better supported due to the inset grove for the ULCS arm. I considered adding groves or loops on the side for zip ties but decided against it. I plan to add a carbon fiber wrap and groves would not work with that option. Electrical tape holds them together just fine and will last for years of diving.

There will be a very limited range with a narrow plane of focus.

My current project has been making a set of Buoyancy floats for an Underwater Camera rig. The camera rig is about 25lbs out of water and as much as 5lbs negative in the water. Typically, buoyancy floats made of non-compressible foam are used to get the camera to around 1 pound negative or a bit less. I reconfigured my camera recently with the new HF-1 strobes and it got somewhat heavier and more negative, so I needed to rebalance it with new floats. I figured why buy something when I can make my own? The requirements are: * Minimize dry weight / maximize buoyancy * Watertight and pressure resistant to at a least 100 feet deep * Be competitive with the fairly lightweight foam blocks I ended up with a two-part float sandwiched together around a 12" ULCS arm with dimensions of 225mm, 65mm, 65mm. Weight was 200g vs about 120g for the Foam blocks. Buoyancy is higher than what the foam blocks provided by about 20% as I increased the volume a bit more than the foam. I was getting about 325g from 4 standard Stix floats. Jumbo floats would be about 725g. These printed floats are about 800g of buoyancy per arm. I tried a number of solutions, but the one that has worked so far is printing the floats with ABS, 1.6mm walls, top, bottom, 8% grid infill with a couple of internal 5mm wide "ribs" at 30%, and Acetone Painting of the entire print surface. The acetone painting melts the outer surface slightly and seems to be doing the trick of sealing the parts effectively at about 4 atmospheres of pressure. During test dives this week I took the floats down to about 95 feet max and spent more than an hour at over 80 feet of depth. I will need to test them to 130 feet before calling it done. A previous attempt printed with ABS, 5% Gyroid infill, and painted with epoxy ended up imploding at 75 feet. The print failed along layer lines with the infill collapsing. I changed the orientation of the print (horizonal rather than vertical), used Grid infill along the axis of maximum surface area, and add the internal 30% infill ribs. Successful PLA versions with epoxy were much heavier than the ABS solution. Now that I have tested these to work, I will probably add a layer of carbon fiber/epoxy to the outside of the floats. This will add durability and some improved aesthetic to the final product.

It's even easier than that. Just use a loop of paracord and slip a length of 1/2 inch clear plastic water line tubing over it for pennies.

I just watched it. I got a call out in the screen shots at the beginning of the video! TLDR; He likes it a lot, massive power, good light with the 4500k flat filter, killer battery life, good value, and excellent for tropical waters. Cons are that the two knobs (flat for mode, round for power level) should be reversed for better ergonomics. I had the same feedback when I got the HF-1. Weight makes them less suitable for cold water where you don't need that much power. I'm not sure I agree with the point about cold water. It's true you don't need high power levels in cold water, but I do find the battery life and fast recycle times to be very valuable regardless of location. My #1 reason for buying the HF-1 was for rapid recycle in cold water. I've felt limited by this with my Inon 330's for some time.

I will try to find a better example to post. The corner coverage of green water is not going to be useful. And I basically never point my strobe forward from each side like a test shot at a wall. The left strobe was high on a triple arm pointing down and inward, the right strobe was out at 90deg and point toward the diver with edge lighting. IMHO, coverage shots in the real world are only possible if you compose and light for benchmarks rather than artistic effect.

Here is a photo taken with my pair of HF-1 stobes today. Flagpole in the Hood Canal of Washington State. Cloud Sponges at 75 feet: Nikon Z8, WWL-C, 24mm, 1/30s, F10, iso500, Pair of HF-1s using the 4500k flat diffusers.

Thanks for confirming that. Can you share a link to the battery you found to work? ps: Accus is french for battery. Had to look it up.

Call or email Backscatter. If you are not using the specified Nitecore battery, which has a specific 20amp draw specification, then get the correct battery. I ordered a couple of pair with my HF-1s.

I think there is plenty of runway left for creating art with photography. I see a lot of really crappy photos made with top of the line gear after all. It's not the gear, it's the artist that makes images pop. And you are definitely being nostalgic about the Vinyl but you are right about the speakers. Vinyl was never great quality, not a match for a high-quality digital recording like a 40 year old CD. FYI Vinyl records have been recorded from Digital Masters for at least 40-50 years now, so it just gets crappier as it's pressed onto the record. Let's not talk about low bit-rate MP3s of the early 2000s and bluetooth ear buds...

I am occasionally useful. 😉

You are beating a dead horse and repeating yourself. This is not a big deal. I don't care what "topside strobe" makers do. In the photography market there are upsells and revenue generating proprietary battery packs that they can sell for 10 times markup or more. So of course they sell them that way. It is refreshing to see a manufacturer skip out on this fantastic opportunity to squeeze their customers. Back when I used Ikelite strobes their NiMH battery packs would fade and die after some years of use. Rather than buy a new one for $250 I would just buy $15 of Sub-C batteries at BatteryJunction and rebuild the pack myself. I even had some rebuilt at a Batteries+Bulbs retail store for a mere $25 in labor. And yes, the MF-1 was problematic, but it was a wildly innovative and very well received product. The MF-2 fixed all the reliability issues and made the initial implementation and features even better. I hope I can say the same of the HF-1 strobes after some more time in market and personal experience.

I don't see the logic of this. My reading indicates that a matched pair of cells is a good fit. At worst, combining mismatched and protected cells may reduce charge cycle lifespan. I'm no expert on the topic, so fill in the details if I am wrong. I'm willing to be educated!

TLDR; I think you are making too much of this Single Cell vs Battery Pack issue. Okay, I read this and a bunch of other articles and papers on this topic. This ScienceDirect article is about battery lifespan vs matching of internal resistance. I am not overly concerned about potentially maybe reducing the lifespan of a $25 battery from 500 cycles to 300 cycles. (40% reduction in lifespan per the article) It would take several years for even the most active shooter to run though 300 recharge cycles. Secondly, the specified battery (and most similar batteries) includes protection circuits, pressure release, and other safety features that mitigate much of the potential for things to go sideways. Reading up a little bit on the properties of battery packs and cell matching, the best practice is that individual cells of the same age and model number may be combined under a single protection circuit. In other words, pack builders are reliant of the quality control of the batch vs individual cell characteristics.

Interesting observation and the controlled discharge rates. Where can I learn more about this issue? Regardless, it seems it could be easily resolved by pairing the two cells used in the strobe with a bit of colored tape so you don't mismatch them. Thoughts? As for contract manufacturing, this is the way much of the world works. It is not inherently bad if the company involved has done a good job in specification and testing of their design. The Backscatter example with MF-1 is a good one actually. I bought an MF-1 in 2020 and used the hell out of it. I had it fail at least three or four times, an BS always took care of it. I have had the MF-2 for over a year now and it has been flawless. They iterate the design and made significant improvements in function and reliability. This is what gives me hope for the HF-2 and the confidence to buy a pair.

How about an extra $400-500 per strobe on a $1600 USD Retra Pro Max? That's ridiculous for something that should be included in the base price. And that Retra Li-Ion pack is a monster. It's looks ridiculous and cumbersome as hell. Even an Ikelite looks sleek in comparison. Compare to the Backscatter HF-1 which I recently bought and am currently evaluating. It's $900 or $950 if you include a pair of the recommend 21700 Li-Ion batteries. That's better than half the price for a strobe that is more functional and in the same product segment of powerful WA capable units.

I fail to see a tangible difference. How is one cell safe and two a hazard? Have you looked at the new Backscatter HF-1, which uses TWO 21700 cells?

I believe that is a very narrow point of view that puts a lot of limits on innovations available in the battery cell market. There are high quality Li-Ion cells available and there is some real crap. Just like nearly every product sold in every category. Backscatter has been selling Li-Ion powered strobes for at least 5-6 years now and I have not heard any horror stories come out as a result. They are VERY specific in the documentation about what cells they recommend and emphasize using safe and reliable batteries. Monolithic proprietary battery packs are NOT the cure all either. There are stories in the news every day about E-Bikes or Powertool batteries catching fire. I diver friend had a Powertool battery pack used in a DPV/Scotter catch fire and burn her car up. It's up to the equipment makers to spec and recommend reliable batteries, the user to use and charge them safely, and dive operators maintain an environment with safe zones for charging and adequate safeguards to deal with accidents. It's really no different than any of the other Scuba tech we use like regulators, high pressure cylinders, and compressors.

I was just in Palau a few weeks ago, and at the start of the trip another photographer shooting a D850 in a Nauticam housing + trigger could not get his strobes to fire. We went over it together and quickly found out that the flash trigger was at fault. (mine worked with his rig) Fortunately we had access to a multimeter and soldering iron and started looking for broken connections. There was a disconnect on the center pin of the hotshoe. There are just 5 pins on Nikon hotshoes, this would be a nightmare on that sony connector. We looked at the cable to circuit board first and resoldered those wires. But it still didn't work! The Hotshoe connector is a little plastic box with a metal plate and pins. It has 4 tiny screws which we removed. Opening it up looked like a mess! Frayed copper wire strands all over and one of the solder joints had failed and we had a loose wire. We cleaned it up, cut off the frayed wire, spliced the broken wire to make it longer, and soldered it back to the hotshoe pin. Problem fixed, and the diver only missed a couple of dives without his camera. My lesson from this is to always bring a soldering iron and small multimeter or continuity checker. Here is a really nice and small USB powered iron I've have for a little while that seems to work well. There are a number of similar usb or rechargeable soldering irons available that work well. Edit/PS: We had to scrounge an AC powered soldering iron, but it was 110 volts. The Boat ran on 220V!!! Fortunately, there was an expresso machine in the galley that needed a 110volt inverter, so we were able to run the soldering iron off of that. It would have been much better if I had brought my USB powered iron with me instead. null

Let's see a picture of the sync cord/strobe connection. It should be completely blacked out by the little cup over the sensor, which should eliminate any external signal from getting past. If you look at your housing LED/Flash trigger, does it blink randomly?

Two expensive add on options to compensate for an inadequate default design/specs out of the box. Not impressed.

That is outrageously expensive for what are already very high-priced strobes. I guess that know their market.