Adventurer

Do frequent and a little longer vacuum tests with that dome on your housing to get peace of mind and to be sure. problem solved

Well 0.4kg underwater weight are a bug not a feature. If you do not like a nose up system during your dive you can fix this affordable with less than $10 of car wheel trim weights. This is more easy and less expensive than having to put money in specialized and bulky float arms or bouyancy collars. I see nose up systems beneficial to your photography and video underwater. Your framing will include the water column and result in more please imagery. Especially with 45 deg Viewfinders this help 😉

130 FOV is not as magic and easy to handle. 10mm FF lenses get you there. If you enjoy the more practical FOV 114-63 existing 14-35mm give you a better real world experience underwater.

Well I might get stoned for this critical comment, but… looking at the (in my opinion) superior results of classic fisheye lenses: Will the FCP be Nauticam’s personal revival of the Nikonos RS disaster? Weight, size, price and dismal performance increase definitely point into that historic direction.

Exactly my impression after 4 weeks in the water with two S220 in Indonesia. I think I previously wrote almost the same as Dhaas somewhere here in the forum a few days/weeks ago. It’s the most underrated, attractively priced and underestimated underwater strobe in 2024 ! Cursed by the look a like S-2000’s legacy because many noobs will mistake the purpose of the previous Modell with the potential of the new S-220. Also the often mentioned wait for a Z330 successor is totally pointless. Just my personal opinion.

Don’t underestimate the DOF issues this optical category produces, once you move the concept to a full frame sensor. If you compare land based 28-60mm DOF to a 10mm lens, the latter will give you 130 FOV and more DOF sharpness. This water contact optic category that throws the image into the distance enjoys an excellent reputation for compact cameras, microfourthirds and previously camcorders, because they crop in on the center part of the optic.

I can get access to a D-Pro and wonder if that one is also in the fast or slow strobe category. I think you can derive some insights from the D-Max, so I am curious about your readings on that one. Also interested in the Kraken KRS160, if anybody has values for that one.

Here is one of your practical applications @Phil Rudin as asked above. Also as previously mentioned faster light gives you crisper (sharper) subjects in photography. I must thank @DreiFish for putting so much work in his answer. He illustrated it very well with his example pictures and I could not have it explained better. Especially point 6. and 5. in his initial answer are very worthwhile reading. I hope 🙏 less people skip over that too fast 😎😉 To me strobe speed ( and I do not mean recycle time with that ) is just as important as strobe power (GN, Ws etc).

Sorry - I must apologize for reading to quick. That part is valid and DreiFish is right. He correctly explains the difference. However the readout speed of your camera sensor must be able to keep up with the strobe, if it’s really fast.

no you cannot. what you described is a test for x-sync speed, not flash duration. you are all mistaking the effect of shutter speed for flash duration. please try to get your head around this another time. I know it’s counter intuitive and may be difficult to sort out. If you have a fast moving subject you can freeze it in your frame with a very fast and strong strobe, even if you expose for 3sec or bulb. There is no need to discuss x-sync speed or new fancy global shutter or HSS for this, it is not the application and irrelevant.

You could have lowered that ISO and would have received nicer blues 😎

I do not agree Wolfgang. Keep in mind the following. When you try to photo water droplets you will find that your shutter must be set to bulb to archive this. The flash will freeze your foreground. The sharpness of your underwater imaging subject is largely also accounted to bringing fast light to the table. You will observe a pleasing “crispness” if successfully mastered with the right gear. More than 10 years ago I had a lot of issues with Subtronic and Ikelite strobes which had round flash tubes. These were very slow as @Chris Ross pointed out correctly. Occasionally this resulted in an unpleasant movement halo in front of fast moving subjects (a lot of pelagic animals and fast movers such as dolphins and sharks). When I switched to system strobes or other uw strobes that used xenon flash modules (in German: Stabblitzröhren) the problems disappeared. Also my macro shots got crisper.

Hello Sergio, as far as I understood you are talking about the ambient light. The part in the picture your strobes cannot reach, correct? It would be good to know, if you also changed settings upon ascent. ISO and/or shutter speed need to be re-evaluated whenever the ambient light changes. Different water depth is such a change. You should be able to archive nice blues at any water depth. The color temp of your strobes and auto-wb has a minor influence, too. But I recommend not to focus on that part too much.

Dear forum members, in another thread here we gently touched the question of having fast light. While everybody is currently still talking about guide numbers and color temp, I would like to raise awareness about flash duration and flash peak values and energy. This is a very old video about a Canon 580 EX II where you see the setup and measurement curves that can be done. As all of you want to know what the most powerful and best underwater strobe in the market is, this is an interesting approach. Years ago I have been involved in such a test. Maybe a member has the equipment to go for such a setup and can publish the results. Here is the video on youtube: How to measure Flash Duration

Today my Marelux 30mm Extension Ring finally arrived, thanks to hydronalin Germany. So I re-did the test and also optimized the chessboard straightness with a leveling tool. To me this F11 picture just looks great and I think that I almost nailed the right position with 30mm extension ring. 35mm was the computed optimum when leaving the BK7 glass out of the equation. That missing computation should allow you to go shorter up to 10-15mm on large domes. So averaging in data collection errors and some other mistakes it’s worthwhile to finalize all with a practical test setup in the garden. As I had slight vignetting with 35mm in the corners (see above) the 5mm less just seem right and I am glad. As we often talk about “curved virtual images” behind domes I thought it’s interesting to observe this practically. I was able to sneak my phone camera perspective in from the top, which shows you very well the curved chessboard on the dome below the waterline. I hope this helps others here to optimize their dome setups and get maximum IQ out of them.