Andrej Oblak

Great, happy for you!

With Inon Z-330 I was often dealing with shadows in the middle of the frame, with strobes positioned in a classic 10-2 position for horizontal shots or 12-6 for vertical shots. Diffusers were on by default. With Retras (no diffusers), which have arguably better and more even spread of light, I never had to deal with this issue. Same strobe positions, as I've used with Inons, usually just work in the first shot, so I can focus more on creative strobe positioning and individual strobe powers, without worrying about technical issues (unwanted shadows). I did, however, still manage to get images without a shadow in the center even with Inons, it just took some more careful repositioning of individual strobes. So in my opinion, it is possible to see this unevenness, but usually when you're still underwater and taking photos. But a bit more difficult in the final image, where the photographer already selects the image with best lighting.

This ☝️ With the one exception - I've moved from Z-330. A lot of comparisons were already written in the topics that makar0n quoted above, so I suggest reading them thoroughly.

The biggest improvement I see is in a much better battery life and easier handling of the booster & 8 batteries. But honestly I can't do a direct comparison with 3rd generation Pro X, as I've only tested the 2nd generation Pro. But I'll assume that battery life is similar on Pro X as it was on Pro (I believe there were minor improvements, but nothing significant. Correct me if I'm wrong.) Pro just annihilated a single pack of batteries. I barely had enough charge for a single dive, and I had to swap them after each dive to avoid running out of power mid second dive. Unfortunately I didn't get a chance to use the booster with it. With Pro Max I can do multiple dives easily with a single battery pack and I'm using booster just to speed up recycle times. Actually with booster I change my batteries only after 2 or 3 days of diving (but honestly I don't do hundreds of photos on a single dive). As for the ease of use - it's all a single compartment, booster is basically just a taller battery cap and it doesn't introduce additional o-rings to the system. So you load all 8 batteries at once and not in a totally different compartment as it was the case with the old booster. Besides that the flash tube is slightly bigger I believe than in old models, there's frosted glass, dials are much more clicky and precise (I didn't like them with the old Pro model - Inon's were better), you can see current power level on the LCD display (I find that useful for cave and night photography, but it's not that critical feature), and more. I'm sure there's some nice promo material which points out all the minor differences 🙂

Yet you still go into great lengths criticizing new Pro Max strobes, while at the same time admitting you haven't even had a chance to test them yet. And don't just extrapolate from your experience with 2 generations older Pros. I've used them both and Pro Max is a very clear step up from the old Pro in many areas. Sorry, but with this information in mind I just see no point in discussing this topic with you anymore.

Wait, did I get it right? This topic is just a rationalization of your recent purchase? 🤔

I think you missed the point of my post completely. I never claimed it's not possible to do such images with other strobes. I can also dump hundreds of nice images that I did with my Z-330s, but again that's not the point. It's the ease of use and the quality of light that sold me. But I can't put these into numbers. I can't prepare an Excel spreadsheet for you and empirically prove why my light is better than yours. There's this thing called subjectivity. I used Inons for over 6 years and I liked them. I got a chance to borrow a pair of Retra Pros to do a comparison and liked the differences that they made enough, that I was prepared to shell out 4k€ for a pair of new ones with boosters. If you see and appreciate the (sometimes very subtle) differences, and you're prepared to pay the premium price, then you'll buy it. But if you don't see it and the quality of light of Inon S-220 is the same to you, then make a rational decision and buy a cheaper flash and spend the rest of the money on something else. For example a scuba diving trip where you'll make awesome images with your brand new flashes. And sorry, I feel dumb having to explain this to you, but if an unit is 5-times more expensive than the other unit, it doesn't mean that it's 5-times better. When you get into the premium segment, differences are sometimes so minor, that you question yourself if they are worth the difference in price. In the end it's you who decides if you're willing to pay for it or no. Can you imagine that there are people who are buying Leica cameras where they could get so much more by buying a cheaper and much more feature rich Nikon, Canon or Sony. Have you ever tried convincing those people that they are wrong? 😅 Maybe some Excel spreadsheets will help them change their minds

I was on a scuba diving trip last 2 weeks in Croatia. I did organize the whole thing, so I tried to take as many photos as all the organizational duties permitted me. On the last day we went on a location, which I scouted with my DPV one week ago, famous for bi-colored (2 colored?) sea fans (gorgonians). But the problem is that they are deep. Very deep. 50 meters and deeper. If diving with air, you have very little bottom time, before decompression starts ramping up quickly and besides that you also need to fight narcotic effects of nitrogen that also show up fast on such depths. When descending I already picked my first scene. A nice and bushy gorgonian. I set my shutter speed and ISO to some approximate values which usually work on such depths. Set the approximate position of flashes and an approximate power, for which I expected they should work. When I reached the subject, I immediately framed it, took the photo and checked the LCD. Lighting was just spot on. Correct balance between both flashes, no hotspots, no shadows in center, nice, warm and pleasing colors of the foreground and nice blue color of water. And virtually no backscatter. You can see the resulting photo attached to this post. Maybe call it luck, maybe I've grown and improved as a photographer, but with my old strobes I _never_ got it right in the first shot. But this happens more and more often with my new Retras - the more that I get to know them. I was using my old strobes for 6 years, so I was also quite familiar with them. When choosing which strobe to buy, more than being fixated on the most powerful beam that I could get, I focused rather on the quality of light and all the modifications of the light that I could do with it. I won't deny - I'd love it if they were a bit more powerful. But just for that peace of mind to know that I could have more power if I wanted it. But in reality I never need it. I mostly shoot wide angle scenes on 12/25/50% max. So I still have some maneuverability if I need it. In my opinion when choosing a flash, one should not be so fixated purely on spec sheets but rather should check photos which were made with that flash. If a lot of (famous) photographers are making beautiful photos with them, then there must be something to it. If there are no nice photos to be found, then I guess this speaks for itself as well.

Anglerfish v3.0 trigger + optical cable works just fine

Same here. I migrated from Inon Z-330, and never regretted it. The more I get to know my new flashes, the more I like them. It's so much easier to get a pleasing and more even light. It's hard for me to explain, I just see the subtle differences in each shot that I make. Power and numbers on paper are not everything.

This is a good point. But I'll take a flash with an even beam just about every time instead of a flash which is prone to hotspots and requires more fiddling to get nice and even lighting. Why? I shoot mostly in the Adriatic sea where the critters are more skittish and don't like you getting too close. I have plenty of photos where in the first shot of the series there was full of fish and by the time I managed to set up my strobes perfectly, most of them were gone by then and all you are left with is an empty scene. But usually my first shot is either under- or overexposed, has hotspots or lots of backscatter because of wrong position & power level. So if a flash is able to give me nice and pleasant lighting without too much fiddling, then there's a much bigger chance that a photo will be a keeper. But this is of course just my experience and I know that it doesn't apply to each and every one 🙂

I'd use it to: Widen the beam Soften the light Reduce hotspots Change color of the light

Thanks guys for all the answers 👍I still use Nikon D500 with Tokina 10-17mm (and occasionally Nikon 10.5mm - especially for cave photography) which gives me enough versatility, even for shooting sharks. I imagine that Kenko TC paired with 8-15mm fisheye gives you this versatility as well, albeit with a bit shorter zoom range. This weekend I used 10-24mm rectilinear after quite a long time (1+ years) and I admit I felt a bit lost at first. I had to forget all the "muscle memory" I gained from shooting with the fisheye - positioning, distance to subject, strobe power etc. That's why it seemed a bit unusual to see that WWL-1 can be used as an alternative to a fisheye 🙂 As @ChipBPhoto said - I see it more as a different tool than as a substitute. I used AOI UWL-09 which was pretty heavy. Dropping it was my biggest fear, closely followed by accidentally cross threading it when reattaching it back to the port. Thankfully neither of these happened, but I must admit that my life is easier now when I don't have to do that anymore 🙂 In my opinion a bayonet mount is a must if you use wet lenses.

A couple of questions I was always curious about (but was too afraid to ask 🙂): How is a WWL-1 an alternative to a fisheye lens? 130° FOV vs 180° is substantially different. Different framing, you need to be further away from the subject, need to drive flashes stronger, different lens distortion, ... I'd understand if WWL-1 would be suggested as an alternative to 16-35 (or 10-24 on APS-C), but usually it's not. And then there's that inconvenience of burping the wet lens. I was always so annoyed when I needed to do that on my previous compact camera system, especially since I didn't have a bayonet mount. Really "fun" to do in a deep water where you can drop it and never find it again. How come only Canon 8-15 is used on modern Sony mirrorless systems, why not Nikon 8-15? How come a Kenko 1.4x teleconverter is used, when both Canon and Nikon offer excellent 1.4x teleconverters? Is Kenko better, cheaper?

Foreground is different color. Left one looks much more yellowish / warmer than the right one. I think the left one should be white balanced to have a more neutral foreground (and maybe the right one too - hard to judge on a phone screen), and then let's see the difference