Does the power difference between the Inon S-2000 and the S&S YS-01 make a difference?

I ask because the most recent Backscatter testing shows the YS-01 being notably more powerful than the S-2000, and they don’t even show the S-2000  on the "with diffusers" graph. 

I’m a novice at UW photography, so is this power difference significant enough to warrant going with the YS-01? 

I currently use a lumix LX10 and a single S-2000.  I really like the S-2000’s small size – I want to keep my whole rig quite compact and know neither are powerful enough for wide angle photography - and I am looking to get another strobe.  If changing to two YS-01 is worthwhile (max flash power, quicker recycle times, etc.) even though they’re significantly bigger, I’m willing to get two and sell my S-2000.  I’m looking for any help and opinions.  Thanks.   

The difference while it looks like a lot is less than a stop (a stop is 1.4, square root of 2) relative difference the YS01 is 1.16 GN brighter. nothing to worry about especially for macro. When I shoot mine in macro I am mostly using them at like 1/2 power

Bill

Interestingly both S&S and Inon both claim their strobes to have GN of 20, the backscatter results show a smaller number. The Inon has GN 17 with the diffuser, the S&S with diffuser is about the same. 

Bill

I have had two YS-01 I damaged one and sea and sea wanted to charge me a very high amount to I got rid of them and switched to Inon
Having had the Z240 and the YS-01 I can tell you that if you don't damage the YS-01 are almost as good for wide angle than the z240
The TTL didn't work but you should not use it.
Right now if you can't afford a Z330 or equivalent power I would go with the YS01/02 for a compact camera to do some decent wide angle
The s2000 are great for macro and cfwa but totally useless for bigger scenes

Sent from my SM-A505FN using Tapatalk

This is my experience as well. I own two Ys-02 (same as Ys-01 without ttl) and my mother owned two S2000. When we were shooting side by side, the difference in power certainly felt significant for wideangle. While the YS-01 is barely adequate, the S2000 is just not powerful enough. My mother recently upgraded to YS-D2Js. I am planning to stick to my YS-02s. 

Thanks everyone.  This information definitely makes me think about getting the YS-01, especially since it has some wide angle capacity and I'd like to have that option in the future.   

the required power for wide angle work is not absolute, flash exposure scales with aperture and on an LX-10 with a 2.7x crop factor f5.6 should provide adequate depth of field (equivalent to f16 on full frame) and I expect the S-2000 will provide adequate light if you use appropriate apertures.  The difference in output between the various UW  flashes available is not that big for example between a 17 guide number and a 20 guide number you have 0.46 stops.  If a Z-240 is indeed GN=24 and Backscatter calculated correctly a GN of 17 for an S-2000 that is 1 stop in round numbers.  I use Z-240s at f8/ISO200-250 all the time so an S-2000 should work at f5.6/ISO200-250 assuming similar coverage and edge illumination. 

You can check this out for yourself just take some test shots at f5.6 with you current S-2000 positioned as you would if you have two of them.   It'll illuminate one half of the frame only but allow you to prove whether or not two will provide enough power to cover all your frame. 

in terms of power and coverage the YS-01 and the Z240 are almost equivalent with diffusers. The inon diffuser is stronger than the sea and sea one on the YS-01

Although the theory of one stop less is through in practical terms you are not in a dark room so that 2/3 of a stop will make quite a bit of difference to your shots especially at the centre of the frame for wide angle that is not that close, for close shots you won't see much

As you have a single strobe now why not just buy a second identical one? You will have double the power and the S2000 keep well their value on the market some people keep them for macro because of their size and the light quality is very good

Turns out I'm probably not going to worry about wide angle anyway.  I started researching compatible wide-angle lenses for the LX10 because I love the perspective they provide.  However, almost all have significant vignetting because of the native 24mm lens.  I read that to remove the vignetting, the camera has to zoom to 35mm for all the lenses, which unfortunately removes a significant portion of the FOV and still has some distortion there too.  The only wide angle lens that didn't have negative review with the LX10 is the WWL-1, but I don't want a huge, heavy, $1300 lens.  Lower size, weight, maneuverability, and cost win out here for me.

It's looking now like I'm just going to buy a Nauticam Wet-Mate Dome Port to give me a little bit of a wider view and forgo a proper wide-angle wet lens.  I'll be missing out on some nice shots, but that's the compromise I'm willing to have.  

I'm assuming that two S-2000s will be more than adequate for the ~74 degree horizontal FOV that I'll get with the wet-mate?  If so, I'll very likely be getting another one then.

The Weefine WFL-01 is also designed for 24mm lenses. However, there are few reports of ones actually in use. Maybe you could order one and test it in the bathtub? If you stick to the Wetmate I think you will be fine with the S2000.

16 minutes ago, hyp said:

The Weefine WFL-01 is also designed for 24mm lenses. However, there are few reports of ones actually in use. Maybe you could order one and test it in the bathtub? If you stick to the Wetmate I think you will be fine with the S2000.

Krakel KRL-01 (rebranded Weefine WFL-01) was tested with an LX10 here; the results are discouraging.

Some of the older cheaper wet wide lenses need 35mm, a lot need to be at 28mm but at that size give about a 100deg field of view.  For example the INON UWL H-100  gives 100deg at 28mm and the optional dome unit increases that to 145 deg:   http://www.inon.jp/products/lens/uwlh10028m67/top.html

again the s-2000 should be fine with that, shooting at f5.6 will have adequate depth of field.