Sea&Sea YS 250s vs Inon Z240s

I have a pair of Inon Z240s that I use with my Aquatica housing.

While they work quite well, I think I would like a little more power. Typically, I end up shooting with the Z240s at close to full power at ISO 100, and it works ok so far. However, I think I would like a little more power "headroom", just in case.

Looking at Backscatter and the published specs, it appears as though the YS 250 is substantially more powerful than the Z240 (GN 32 vs 24 officially, 22 vs 14 as per Backscatter; also slightly greater coverage. But I read some reports on DD that claim only half a stop of difference in power output.

Now that the strobe has been out a little longer, does anyone have more skinny on the power issue? Or has anyone compared the two strobes and if so, what was the result?

Thanks,

Vandit

I don't have any experience with the Inon's to allow a direct comparison, but I used a pair of YS 250's for about 10 dives in Indonesia last year, and was very happy with them. I would typically start @ about f5.6 and 1/4 power on each strobe. At full power, they "feel" like they fall somewhere between Ike's DS125 and DS200's

The YS 250's are a little heavy underwater, and quite a bit larger than the Inon's others on the same trip were using. It's amazing how fast 160 gm (2 x ~ 80 gm in water weight) starts to get tiring

I'll probably buy a pair of YS250's to replace my Ike strobes this year.

As an example, the image below was shot at f6.3, ISO 100, lit by two YS250 Pro's at half power each. The lit area is probably about 8' x 6'

Hi Craig -

Thanks for that info. Yes, it does give me a feel for the power of this light. But it is hard for me to conceptualize the difference in power without comparing the two.

I am not too fussed about physical size, as 90% of my shooting is done off my own boat, leaving from my own beach I agree with you re. the weight thing - but now I have the Stix buoyancy arms, which work quite well in making the setup neutral.

Perhaps I will order 1, and test it out.

Vandit

Vandit...

I did actually do some dives using an Inon D2000W optically slaved to an Ike DS51 on the same trip (thanks again Drew ), and I can say that the YS250 Pros were MUCH more powerful than that combination, had a better battery life and generally behaved better. The spotting lights on the YS250's are as bright as the light in my SS200.

Here's an example of a shot, also at f6.3, 100 ISO, lit with a DS51 and a slaved Inon D2000W, at half power.

Note that the lit area is much smaller. It was a darker, greener day as well.

Cool - that makes it easier to compare.

The D2000S is GN 20, the Z240 is GN 24 and the YS250s are 32 (all air), so if there is a huge difference between the D2000S and the S&S, then there should be a noticeable difference between the Z240 and the S&S as well.

Thanks for the help, Craig (and the photos, which speak a thousand words apiece).

Vandit

Hi Vandit,

The guide numbers that you mention are the various companies advertised specs. If you have a look at the study/test conducted by BACKSCATTER on their web-site, you will see that the actual results are vastly different from those as advertised! The YS250 still wins out, but only just. A very welcome test and the results speak for themselves. Thank-you BACKSCATTER.

Bruce

Hi Bruce -

I did read that article but for some reason, I was under the impression that the difference was more than it was. After your post, I went and re-read it and you're right - the difference isnt that much.

I typically shoot with the subject no further than 1m in front of me, so according to the Backscatter numbers, this is less than 1 stop of additional power at that distance (f/22 vs f/18).

Not really worth springing $1500. In the immortal words of Beavis: "Funk that."

It would be nice to get something that gave me a "real" GN of 28 or so. That would be 2 stops more than the Z240s at 1m, and would do me jes' fine. Correction - it would be nice to get a relatively *affordable* light for that price. The price tag of Subtronics and such just cause me needless pain.

Vandit

I think Craig's photos pretty much tells the story. I don't think I've gotten close to lighting up that much coral with my twin z-240's and camera at similiar settings.

True. But if the Backscatter figures are to be believed, then the increase in power is not so much.

The YS250s have a wider angle of coverage, which does help with the overall "lighting ability." However, my problem is not so much ability to light a wide area, but ability to stop down.

As far as lighting subjects go, the Z240s do quite well:

I typically shoot macro at f16 and WA at f8, and in both cases, I have to set the camera to 400ISO in order to have some headroom in power. There, a larger GN would be more helpful than a wider angle of coverage, methinks.

Vandit

True. But if the Backscatter figures are to be believed, then the increase in power is not so much.

The YS250s have a wider angle of coverage, which does help with the overall "lighting ability." However, my problem is not so much ability to light a wide area, but ability to stop down.

As far as lighting subjects go, the Z240s do quite well:

I typically shoot macro at f16 and WA at f8, and in both cases, I have to set the camera to 400ISO in order to have some headroom in power. There, a larger GN would be more helpful than a wider angle of coverage, methinks.

Vandit