New Backscatter Miniflash does optical remote

Backscatter just came out with a new version of the miniflash, and a muck stick mounting accessory as well.   They've come up with what appears a clever little attachment to pick up another strobe (on your camera) as a trigger.  The triggering strobe can also be covered with an infrared filter to avoid contributing to the exposure.  The new miniflash2 is then mounted on the accessory stick as a remote tripod - will make snoot shooting far simpler, as long as there is convenient sand.

I like the miniflash1, and I've ordered the miniflash2 and muck stick.  (Both on backorder at the moment.)

Be sure to let us know how you like the MF2.  I would be interested in the MF2 for 2 key factors: (1) same battery as the MW4300, (2) Backscatter doesn't appear to sell the remote trigger separately, just yet.

3 hours ago, Dann-Oh said:

Be sure to let us know how you like the MF2.  I would be interested in the MF2 for 2 key factors: (1) same battery as the MW4300, (2) Backscatter doesn't appear to sell the remote trigger separately, just yet.

If all it really takes to remote a strobe is a bit of plastic stuck into the fiber port, you'll be seeing more on the market soon.

Is the upgrade from MF1 to MF2 worthwhile?  The remote trigger capability is intriguing but what else is gained with buying the new strobe vs the MF1?  Would have to buy new batteries too.

11 hours ago, eyeguy said:

Is the upgrade from MF1 to MF2 worthwhile?  The remote trigger capability is intriguing but what else is gained with buying the new strobe vs the MF1?  

Here is the link to the review article so you can find out if the new features are worth it for YOU to upgrade.

https://www.backscatter.com/reviews/post/Best-Underwater-Macro-Strobe-Backscatter-Mini-Flash-MF-2

11 hours ago, eyeguy said:

Would have to buy new batteries too.

The MF1 takes 18650 batteries and the MF2 takes 21700.  It just so happens that the 21700 battery is the same battery that is in the backscatter MW4300 video light. That makes it nicer for people using the MW4300.  I personally have grabbed the wrong battery 1x or 2x times as I use both the MF1 and MW4300.

According to backscatter, the optical sensor is a lot more sensitive on the MF2 which enables the slave mode and overcomes the issue of cheaper cables failing to fire the MF1. 
I think the main other benefit over the MF1 is HSS support but for me there’s not enough reason to upgrade my MF1s. 
 

I know these are macro strobes, but compared to something like the YS-01 how much worse are they for wide angle?

I have now purchased and received the MF2.   The muck stick is backordered.   I have been using a pair of YS-D1's since 2015, and in June 2022 I first tried the MF1 with (and without) snoot.   

I dove with one YS-D1 and one MF on 20-30 dives, giving me the option off having at least one big strobe for whatever might come up.   I was shooting with 105mm macro lenses though, and I don't think I ever used the YS-D1 in conjunction with the MF.  I used it a few times when I wanted a bit more oomph.

The miniflash isn't suited to wide angle work.   It's just too small.   Not sure the beam spread, because I used the YS-D1's any time I needed wide angle.   With the 16-35 or 14-30, I simply didn't bring the MF but instead used both YS-D1's.

SO - the MF is really suited to macro work, and for that the small size is an advantage.   Limited power might also be useful in that you are much less likely to blow out the exposure with the MF than the YS-D1.

On the MF2, one major new feature being advertised is a stronger focus beam for lining up the snoot.   That should be quite useful as it can be hard to see the aiming light when the sun is out at shallow depth.

About the MF2 - it did not come with a battery.   Keep that in mind when you order.  It also did not come with the filters (IR or gels) or filter holder, so you have to order some accessories to use one MF to trigger the other with an IR signal.

4 hours ago, phxazcraig said:

The muck stick is backordered. 

Craig!

Cancel it and get your buoyancy sorted so you don't need one. They're cop-out for poor buoyancy skills! 

10 minutes ago, TimG said:

Craig!

Cancel it and get your buoyancy sorted so you don't need one. They're cop-out for poor buoyancy skills! 

I think this particular one with the ball mount could be useful for off-camera lighting, and easier to carry around than some sort of tripod.  

6 hours ago, TimG said:

Craig!

Cancel it and get your buoyancy sorted so you don't need one. They're cop-out for poor buoyancy skills! 

What? Hmm... even with a slight surge or current a muck stick is helpful for steadying oneself when trying to achieve critical focus (for example: shooting super macro). Doesn't matter how brilliant your buoyancy skills are, if you're moving, and your subject is not, you are making it harder on yourself.

In addition, using the muckstick with a ball mount allows you place the strobe off camera and trigger remotely... that has nothing to do with buoyancy control.

9 hours ago, TimG said:

Craig!

Cancel it and get your buoyancy sorted so you don't need one. They're cop-out for poor buoyancy skills! 

My buoyancy skills are pretty good.   The stick holds a remote flash.

1 hour ago, phxazcraig said:

My buoyancy skills are pretty good.   The stick holds a remote flash.

 Phew!

Intriguing idea. Are they stable enough?

5 hours ago, TimG said:

 Phew!

Intriguing idea. Are they stable enough?

 

That's what I was wondering.  And a bit limited since they only work in sand.  But an interesting idea.

Yeah, I agree: interesting.

A couple of years ago I thought a tripod would be the answer to off -housing snooting. But of course it wasn't. Trying to find a tripod-friendly base underwater is difficult and rarely successful.

I have to wonder about a muck stick too. A strobe/snoot combination is pretty  weighty even underwater and not terribly well-balanced. Really look forward to hearing how you get on with that, Craig. Please do let us know.

I would assume that weighty is actually good. Still I agree that needing sand likely reduces the usefulness, although if you're just in the muck there usually is enough sand around.

3 hours ago, hyp said:

I would assume that weighty is actually good. Still I agree that needing sand likely reduces the usefulness, although if you're just in the muck there usually is enough sand around.

I expect availability of sand would be inversely proportional to how useful it is to you to get the shot.

The muck stick arrived today.   I haven't opened the box yet.

I do realize that being limited to sticking it in the sand is limiting, but where that is possible it could be really useful.   I think this is just the easiest product to get something like this started.   If you add a clamp to one end, you could use it in a lot more places, but that risks damaging coral.

The miniflash itself is small-ish, though not with a snoot.  I do wonder how stable the muck stick will be if there is some current.

It’d be interesting to see a pic, Craig, with a clamp on it. I’ve never seen a muck stick that wasn’t just a rod of steel with a wrist strap on it. 

Backscatter has a video on their YouTube channel.