Architeuthis

Here one can inspect photos of testcharts taken with the new 100mm macro, also with 1.4x and 2x TCs and compare to other macro lenses (e.g. Sony 90mm): https://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=1019&Camera=1175&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=2&LensComp=1757&CameraComp=1538&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=2 The test pattern in the extreme periphery with 2x TC attached is even better compared to the blank 90mm lens. It is difficult to judge the sharpness in the center. I guess it is reduced with TCs attached (I could not find yet accurate measurements of resolution in numbers), but it still looks very good...

Thank you Sevag, I will contact you directly as soon as I am back at home. Also the second HF-1 died finally after few dives. Currently I have a single MF-2 strobe with snoot and can make macro (still 2 diving days left and on Sunday, November 30th I will fly back home) ...

Just an update on my personal experience with the MF-2s: I am now using one MF-2 with the snoot together with one MF-1 and this works fine. Even without HF-1 there is plenty of light for small subjects (e.g. nudies). I am still not convinced that two MF-2s (without snoot) are plenty of light for how I shoot macro and prefer the HF-1s (altough they are big). For snooting, however, I find the MF-2 very usable.. I am certainly interested in the new HF-1 snoot, but have now mixed feelings about the HF-1s (that performed until now): one broke during the holidays in Tansania (Mafia Island) where I am still for another week. The ON/OFF switch first made droubles, sometimes it worked, sometimes not and after few days of diving it broke completely (no more possible to switch the flash ON despite of full, fresh, batteries). The other HF-1 still works, but the ON/OFF switch also does not work reliably (I almost lost one dive because I could not switch the HF-1 ON UW (I only had the MF-2 with (and without) snoot for making photos during this dive)). => I will send both HF-1s in after I am back and will then decide whether to stay with HF-1s or switch to another big flash, unreliability is really a contraindication and at the moment I am really pissed off at the moment (I also have still my Z330s at home))...☹️

I am at present at Mafia Island/Tansania and did not have Internet acess for many days (but for the moment it works). Just before leaving, I got more feedback from Nauticam regarding ports/extensions for the Sony 100mm lens. I post it here, maybe it is of interest for some (but maybe it is outdated i the meantime) "Hi, Thank you for reaching out. #1: The 1st generation extension ring is interchangable with the mark II version, So yes, you can use the old N100 ER30 with macro port 125, on the condition that focus gear is not installed. So you soly rely on the lens auto-focus. #2: When using with 1.4X TC, N100 30 + Port 125 left 14mm space betwen the lens front to port glass. The magnification from our test is 1.8X, whereas the distance with 2XTC is 4mm (with ER30), max magnification is 2.7x. When using with SMC2, the max mag. is 2.4X, and 3,2X with SMC-2. It is recommended to use our SMCs. #3. The combo of N100 ER30 + N100 Port 105 is also compatible with Sony 100mm (with no focus gear), the distance from the lens to port window is 13mm. It can work with our macro lenses. However it won't be compatible with our EMWLs. Sorry that we don't have plan for ER20 at this moment. #4. The lens diameter is fairly large, to ensure the compatibility, the best option is still the dedicated port 125. Dr. Alex M will soon do a review of this lens with The Underwater Photgraphy Show on youtube, he may offer further insights of his experience using this lens and port. I've also copied our representative in the Netherlands here, they have a the biggest uw camera shop in Europe and most importantly, most of our popular items in stock. Their service is also impeccable. Let us know if you have any further questions please."

I asked at Nauticam USA whether the "old" N100 30mm extension, supplied e.g. along with the WACP-C (#37401), would also work together with the N100 macroport 125 to house the Sony 100mm macro & TCs (as stated above, the portchard mentions only the type II extension (#37430))... The answer was positive: "Thank you for reaching out. And you are right, the first generation N100 ER 30 works for the same purpose."

I guess you have already tried to use a red focus light, but your fish do not like it? Many creatures do not recognize red and are not scared away while AF works to some extend...

The current portchard does not give MFD of the bare lens (1.4x), but shows other MFD values: 100mm&SMC-3: 2.4x/34mm 100mm&SMC-2: 3.2x/17mm 100mm&1.4xTC: 1.8x/105mm 100mm&2xTC: 2.7x/115mm

Thank you for this valuable info (better nor keep the old 105 macroport)...👍 Did you test already the 1.4x TC? (The current portchard says that the 125 macroport needs an additional N100 30II extension to accommodate lens&TC. It is not stated that the old N100 30mm extension, that is delivered along with WACP-C and many have already, will work also (some incompatibility?))

I have always some programs running in the background (Mail, Reminders, Firefox, Loupedeck, etc...) When I open LRc and PS, I have already 20.45 GB RAM occupied (Macbook M1Pro (32GB). Smaller RAM works, but much slower since data are swapped between SSD and RAM then...

See e.g. Phil's discussion of Nauticams recommendation to use the 30mm extension (N100) for both the 1.4x and the 2x TCs (additional 17.1mm vs 27.4mm, respectively - the difference in end of lens to frontglass must be 10.3mm between the different configurations) According to the specs, the 100mm macro is 17.4mm longer than the Sony 90mm macro. Adding this additional length would give a 122.4mm macro port as ideal length (in case the 105mm port is ideal for the 90mm lens). Instead it is 125mm (probably the next doable length in 5mm increments) It is well possible that the difference between Nauticam and Marelux is not entirely due to the different position of camera in housing. It seems that the manufacturers do not care too much about some mm's more or (sometimes) even less. Probably a single mm is not very relevant in practice (unless it is the mm that makes the port too short, or the vignetting without (or with diopter))... => Better we test out what works best with Nauticam (as Phil does for Marelux; or buy the new ports/extensions that seem to have pretty high tolerances, similar to "self-made" solutions)

Thank you for this valuable info... 👍 Do you know whether the space between Sony 90mm and frontglass is comparable between Marelux macroport 97 and Nauticam macroport 105? I am asking as Nauticam user: 20mm extension to the existing 105 macroport will perfectly give the 125mm of the new, dedicated, port for the Sony 100mm lens, what is recommended by Nauticam. As you write, Marelux recommends 15mm extension in addition to their macroport... => in case a 15mm extension, coustom made by Saga, works also with the Nauticam 105 macroport, the same 15mm extension combined with the 30mm N100 extension is perfect for the 2x TC as well (44,7mm more is required in theory). (if nobody can test, maybe I will order first a 15mm extension, that I can use anyhow together with the 30mm for the 2x TC. In case it is too short for the pure lens, I have to order another 20mm extension for it)

Dimensions of HF-1 according to KI (coud not find specs. on Backscatter page): The Backscatter HF-1 strobe has a size of approximately 6.34 x 3.70 x 6.38 inches (161 x 94 x 162 mm) with its ball mount. Its weight is 2.5 lbs (1.14 kg) in air and 4 oz (250 g) in water, including the battery and ball mount Dimensions of Retra Pro Max II according to Retra: Weight (2) 888g / 1.005g // 1,96 lbs / 2,21 lbs Dimensions (mm) / (height w/ Booster) Ø 102,5 mm x 148 / 173 mm / Ø 4.0 inch x 5.8 / 6.8 inch Buoyancy w/ Booster -160 g Buoyancy wo/ Booster -70 g => pretty similar, I believe the Retra is not really better for macro regarding weight and size... As already said, HF-1 works very well for also macro, but a smaller flash (that is then suboptimal for WA) may be preferable for macro...

When comparing the working distances between Sony 90mm and 100mm macro lenses it is required to compare working distances at comparable magnifications (e.g. 1:1) in order to compare the effect of close focussing on focal length. As you write, the working distance of the 100mm lens is shorter compared to the 90mm lens, but this is at magnification 1.4:1 instead of 1:1. Only when the working distance of the 100mm lens at 1:1 is shorter compared to the 90mm lens, focal length of the 100mm lens is in fact smaller at 1:1 magnification... It seems that in practice the way to increase magnification beyond 1.4x with the new macro lens is to use the TCs rather than diopters (Moreover, the working distances at high magnifications become sweet as sugar with TCs 😋)...

I am another fully satisfied HF-1 owner, but I cannot compare to the other strobes you mention (Retra, Subtronic). When I cokpare to the strobes I was using previously (Z330, YS-D2), the HF-1s are a big upgrade (power and also the 4500K diffusers).. HF-1 works very well also for macro (a special optical snoot is under development as Backscatter confirmed recently). It is, however, big and one may wish to have smaller strobes for macro... On my last trip in September, where it was possible to transport all gear by car, I had two MF-1 plus two MF-2 (one with snoot) with me. The MF-2s for macro. After few dives I switched to MF-1s, even for macro, as the MF-2s were too weak for my tase... On my next trip that starts November 12nd and is "lugagge-sensitive", I will take with me two HF-1 plus one MF-2 with snoot (probably the last trip with MF-2; when the HF-1 snoot will come out, I probably will also use HF-1 for snooting; another option is purchasing a Retra LSD for one of our five Z330s and then take the Z330 as a spare and for macro)... Wolfgang P.S.: I am using A7R5 in Nauticam housing, 90mm macro lens +/- SMC1, Canon8-15mm fisheye +/- 2x TC, WACP-C with 28-60mm and Sony 20-70mm behind Zen DP170.

I jumped to Apple (14", M1Pro, 32 GB RAM, 2 TB SSD) when I retired almost 3 years ago and these M processors became available (In my profession I needed some programs that exclusively ran with Windows PC, no chance for Apple). It was a leap forward when working with LR and PS, I never looked back (although the reliability/stability of MacOS in general, reminds me at the earlier stages of windows 🫤)... I am using this laptop during travelling and also at home (at home I have a second calibrated monitor for photo processing). The laptop is still perfect for me for travelling - no complaints for standard procedures... At home I frequently use the new AI functions of LR and PS (e.g.: denoise in LR and also the backscatter removal by Erin Quingley in PS). Then the M1 chip comes to its limitations (amost 1' for AI denoising in LR or backscatter removal in PS; 61 Mpixel raw files). I read that the new M5 chip is the first of this series that has special hardware, that accelerates AI functions. I guess the time ripens to upgrade (the bottleneck is AI, all other performance is totally o.k.), but no hurry, I easily can wait for M5Pro or M6Pro... Just for travelling, for me, any Mx laptop would do it (small 14" for better fit into the backback), but I like the "Pro" because it has multiple slots, including a card reader (the "Air" versions are quite spartanic with just a single USB-C slot and I would nee dto carry an adapter with me (also o.k. but better "Pro")). When buying new, however, I would not go for an older model, the newest hardware is the most futureproof and will serve the longest time (buy cheap, buy twice...)... Wolfgang