Inon Z740 - Are negative buoyancy issues that bad?

Hello all,

I am in the process of selecting a housing and dual strobes for my Nikon D200, aiming in the direction of a Sea & Sea DX200 with perhaps the Sea & Sea YS-90 Auto strobes and iTTL Converter. I may not shoot iTTL but like knowing that I can employ it if desired. I'd really like to get the YS-110 strobes but am uncertain of when they will become available.

As an alternative, I am also considering the Inon Z240. The price alone dissuades me but, ignoring that, I have also seen numerous comments regarding the negative buoyancy and inherent handling issues if the Z240s are mounted on arms to the housing handles. I have ULCS standard arms that I anticipated keeping from a Nikonos V rig that I may sell (with orginal Nikonos flash bracket instead), and have seen a post stating that even the ULCS buoyancy arms are of little help in offsetting the Z240's weight. So, where I thought I might swap to the buoyancy arms, perhaps there's not enough benefit to offset the expense of that approach.

So what this really all boils down to for me is a question of, for the number of folks here using the Z240, do all of you find the negative buoyancy to truly be that big of a problem? Obviously a dual-strobe rig would even more greatly affect handling than a single. Personally, I'm trying to keep clutter to a minimum and would rather avoid jerry-rigged solutions to add buoyancy to the strobes or strobe arms. The Sea & Sea strobes have a positive buoyancy which does seem potentially more appealing in concert with the lower price. I'll be shooting with the 10.5mm and 12-24mm Nikkor lenses and suspect that dual strobes should pretty well provide the lighting balance and control I'd be hoping for, but until now, I've never shot with such a small primary strobe (I used an SB-102 primary and YS-30 fill with the Nikonos 15mm).

Thanks in advance for all feedback!

Daryl

Hi Daryl,

I own two Inon Z-240 and i ceratinly like them, but i noticed that they're signicantly heavier then my old D180 strobes, but i don't have any other reference so maybe they're not that heavy. I have them on the same flexible Locline arms as i had my D180s on. The locline's are now getting old (2-3 years) and may be worn out a little bit which isn't really improving their stability.

You also should forget that there is extra weight on the strobes with the sync cables. So i'm looking for methods to get my whole setup more buoyant. This weekend i attached a dry key holder to one of my strobes, which worked except that they're very annoying when walking on land and also when repositioning the strobes.... I'm still working on it, maybe i should start with investing another 100 euros to have my strobe arms renewed.

I think with ULCS arms you won't have the problem that i have since these arms are much stronger then mine. You also can buy Inon strobe arms (which are very expensive IMHO) and then attach an Inon float to it.

cheers, Udo

Greetings Udo,

Thank you for your comments. Indeed, there are many things to add to the buoyancy (negative and positive) of a u/w camera rig, such as the sync cables, battery types, the current camera lens/port configuration, etc. It has been 3 years since I last went diving with my Nikonos V setup with a large SB-102 and smal YS-30 stgrobe, and I don't recall if the SB-102 strobe is positive or negatively buyoant. But I do know everything was quite a handful. Personally, I can't imagine two smaller small strobes posing much of an issue to me, but the comments I've seen about the "heavy" Z240s still has caught my attention as something to consider.

Thanks again,

Daryl

"Personally, I can't imagine two smaller small strobes posing much of an issue to me"

 

Z-240s travel at about 1.65 pounds with batteries and dive at about 2.5 ounces negative with batteries, or less than 1/3 pound for dual strobe setup. Both of these weights are perfectly acceptable to me.

 

My photo rig changes in weight pretty significantly depending on what port, lens, viewfinder and arms I have attached on any given dive. And because of that I find the weight of these strobes practically irrelevant. I consider the whole packaging to be small and light.

Hi Silvio,

Thanks for the numbers....indeed, that sounds rather acceptable to me, and it also prompted a quick test, since I've not been in the water for a while. My SB-102 weighs in at 4 lbs. with batteries, the YS-30 at 1 lb. Filling a bucket with water, the YS-30 seems very near neutral in buoyance, with only about 1/4 inch of it rising above the surface. The SB-102 is harder to judge but is still buoyant. In saltwater that would only increase. Perhaps there was enough buoyancy there to offset the rest of my rig, but I'm not beginning to remember how if I didn't pivot the camera and instead turned the rig for a portrait orientation, I think I was actually fighting the SB-102 buoyancy some. Overall though, it was never a big problem and no doubt the strong ULCS arms factored in. So, perhaps even if more negative, I'd find no issues with the Z740s. Overall, I think I might even prefer a slightly negative system to positive, when considering my overall buoyancy control would be easier to manage if all I had to do was add a puff or two of air to compensate.

Thanks!

Daryl

The problem I had with the Z240s wasn't so much the weight of the strobe by itself but the weight of the strobe and ULCS arm combination. With 2 strobes, 4 8" arms and 6 clamps the total weight was getting out of control. The math says 26.2 oz for arms, clamps and strobes and my Subal housing is a bit negative too, even with a dome port. I've switched to YS350s which are 10.5 oz buoyant and thus counteract the weight of the arms and clamps. I find this setup to be dramatically more comfortable than the Z240s.

Also keep in mind that the position of the extra weight matters too. In addition to making my right arm sore a negative camera held up in front of my face it put the weight at one extreme of my body position and pushed my head down. 2-3 lbs held out in front of you is much harder to deal with than an extra 2-3lbs on your belt.

Also a neutral rig is easier to pass off to a buddy if you need your hands for something else.

Anyway I found that it mattered but as always YMMV.

Clinton

"Overall, I think I might even prefer a slightly negative system to positive"

 

My preference is for my housing to be negative and my criteria is that it is heavy enough to set down in sand or rocks underwater, but light enough to single hand hold. I have almost given up on caring what the travel weight of any of this stuff is, though these Inons are half or less than half the weight of some other strobes.

 

I have been happily surprised with how effective the physical size of the Inons has been when shooting in tight quarters or amongst plants and reef.

 

I have other bigger more powerful strobes for situations where the Inons are marginal, so the Z-240s fit into my photo arsenal quite nicely. But for people who want to buy or travel with only two strobes the Inons may not be the strobe to get.

 

I use them for most situations and am pleased with their performance/cost ratio, but they are not really at their best when using a single strobe or in situations where extra reach is a necessity.

If I keep these posts going, maybe I'll soon quit feeling crabby! (Hermit Crab) ha!

Thanks for your feedback guys...it even helps me start recalling more about my Nikonos V rig and how it handled. While not exactly easy, it was possible nonetheless to hold it with a single hand if I had to, the bulk of the weight being on the left side with the SB-102 and an 8/5 ULCS arm combo. I think the buoyancy of that side was just enough to offset the rest of the rig, with the small YS-30 on a single 12" ULCS arm on the right. As I moved things around, the handling improved, but I think it was overall negative just enough to do exactly what Silvio said...rest lightly on the sand if needed, but still be maneuverable in the water. I think I may weigh the entire setup to see how much weight I've been working with vs. what I might expect of a rigged out D200.

I've been overlooking the size advantage a smaller strobe offers when in tight places where my SB-102 was definitely anything but friendly to use. Fortunately I could usually pull it back some and allow the slaved YS-30 throw in some fill light, moving it a bit closer. As this is simply an expensive hobby for me, I can't really afford to pursue anything more than a single pair of strobes, and I do want to keep the size down to something that travels more easily. Feedback such as this, not to mention all the other information I've gathered in the forum, is certainly very helpful in planning my purchase.

Thanks,

Daryl