Little camera, big strobes?

I previously pursued this query here (I was/am enamored of One 160X strobes for my Olympus kit), and took a mild drubbing for it--but apparently didn't learn from the experience.  I may be in the market for strobes, though, and so am back for more. 

At base, the question seems to me to be a simple one.  Taking weight and size out of the equation, and assuming a full-frame sensor with a 16mm fisheye lens and a M4/3 sensor with an 8mm fisheye lens, does one camera benefit more from more powerful strobes than the other?  I gather the answer is yes, but I just can't wrap my mind around why.  By way of context, we're headed to Jardines de la Reina soon, and wide-angle will be the watchword(s).  School me, please . . .

If you consider a dome port a smaller sensor will have more depth of field at the same f/number.

Imagine full frame at f/16 you are looking at f/8 for MFT

This means your strobes can be two stops less powerful for the part of the image that your strobes will cover

All sounds great however in reality for newer high resolution cameras you don't need to shoot f/16. I have found that in many cases you can get good shots on full frame cameras at f/8 or f/11 so that gap is smaller than the theory

In general terms though larger sensor -> higher f/number -> more powerful strobes required

Yes, the m43 cameras don't need to be stopped down so much so need less strobe power.  How much less depends on your starting point and what you are shooting.  On the example of the fisheye many people shoot them at f11-13 on full frame while on m43 I shoot at f8 mostly, but expect I could use f5.6in a lot of cases. 

The other consideration is the mass of the strobes compared to the housing - many strobes are pretty close to neutral UW but not all and combining a big strobe with a small housing my be a bit unbalanced.  I'm sure the OneUW strobes would be great but I expect the retra strobes would very much give them a run for their money in a more compact package.

Yes, the m43 cameras don't need to be stopped down so much so need less strobe power.  How much less depends on your starting point and what you are shooting.  On the example of the fisheye many people shoot them at f11-13 on full frame while on m43 I shoot at f8 mostly, but expect I could use f5.6in a lot of cases. 
The other consideration is the mass of the strobes compared to the housing - many strobes are pretty close to neutral UW but not all and combining a big strobe with a small housing my be a bit unbalanced.  I'm sure the OneUW strobes would be great but I expect the retra strobes would very much give them a run for their money in a more compact package.

Really helpful.  Thanks much!!  I'm leaning toward Retras, but want to understand a couple of lighting-dynamics issues -- especially with the reach of the beam for wide angle.  I'm certainly cognizant of weight, size, rig balance, $$$ . . . but now that the full-frame housings are coming down in size, I'm interested in the extent to which the reach of the light (both front-to-back and side-to-side) depends on the size of the  sensor.  The weight difference between the OM-1 and Z-6II housings is a tad over half a pound, and the R6II is just a half-pound heavier, and the width differences are minor.    

I'm completely happy with my Olympus/OM gear, especially appreciate the f-stop analysis, and look forward to not buying big strobes.  

Cheers!

--RIck

The reach of light of the strobes does not change it is fixed. However because the sensor size changes the light density increases as the sensor size decreases. Ultimately with equivalence 16/11 or 8/5.6 is the same

What many people do not understand see my post on the field of view vs vignetting is that as the target moves further away from your light source this becomes a point

It does not matter anymore the shape of the tube etc etc because due to inverse square law light falls at the edges anyway

So while at close range you may enjoy a more uniform beam and less hot spots as light travels in water the benefit drops and ultimately sheer power is what matters to illuminate at least some part of the frame

I do also topside photography and in order to increase diffusion and homegeneity of light you bring the source close to the subject this is why when you see studio you have massive soft boxes on top of people, when you put them further away there is very little difference between that and a less sophisticated device like an umbrella

So light homegenity is more important at close range not far away, there is never going to be a case that you will cover the entire frame with light and in addition your mirrorless lens vignettes and has fall off anyway so check carefully what you are looking for

More importantly what strobes have you got now?

Technically the quality of light is impacted by the size of the light source as seen from the subject, so you can make your light source larger as in a soft box, get it closer or a combination of the two.  Of course UW, using a soft box is not practical and you can only get closer with your lights, which you want to do anyway.

Reach is purely down to strobe power, you will get more reach with greater power.  Likewise if you use a lower f stop you extend the range - for example if you were at f16 on full frame and using full power, to get the same DOF you would be at f8 with m43 and setting the flash 2 stops lower in power.  However if you have a more distant subject with m43 and still at f8, you can turn up power by 2 stops to extend range compared to full frame. 

This is ignoring ISO as it impacts strobe and ambient together, you can use more ISO to compensate in full frame and and use shorter exposure, up until you run into the flash sync limit.  HSS sync may help a little to get more range at higher ISO  but it robs the flash of power.

Your other consideration with very wide beams is backscatter and if you are also using them for macro you may want to control beam width and Retra has a good set of accessories to help with this.

Reading some other posts from @rickmorgan] I see he has two inon
Z330
Due to the two light tubes the Inon will show patterns in the output without a diffuser

Once equipped with a diffuser those strobes should still provide adequate output for his OM-1

I will have a look at his galleries to see how they look in practice


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Thanks, Interceptor.  I'd better 'fess up--one of my 330s went for a dive without the battery-housing o-ring in place.  I'm waiting to hear from Backscatter on its status.  If the electronics aren't pristine, I'm in the market.  As to galleries, here are most recent efforts . . . https://rickmorgan.smugmug.com/Papua-New-Guinea-May-23/  https://rickmorgan.smugmug.com/Fiji-November-2022/

1 hour ago, rickmorgan said:

Thanks, Interceptor.  I'd better 'fess up--one of my 330s went for a dive without the battery-housing o-ring in place.  I'm waiting to hear from Backscatter on its status.  If the electronics aren't pristine, I'm in the market.  As to galleries, here are most recent efforts . . . https://rickmorgan.smugmug.com/Papua-New-Guinea-May-23/  https://rickmorgan.smugmug.com/Fiji-November-2022/

In case of premature disapperance of one of your Z330 I would be considering options as you are doing as the strobe is discontinued

Wait to hear from backscatter then make your call