 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeArticlesDiving DestinationsLearning Scuba DivingMarine LifeMiscellaneousDiscussion GroupsGeneralScuba EquipmentScuba LocationsAustralian ScubaUK ScubaDirectoryScuba Clubs |
Scuba Forum / General / April 2005underwater strobes
OK - I've just moved from film to digital for U/W phots. I have an Olympus C770 and its matching housing. Now I'm looking at a strobe. There is an Olympus flash-gun with its own dedicated housing but I'm also looking at a Sea-Life SL 960 or a (rather more expensive) Epoque ES 150. If anybody has knowledge or experience of any of these I'd be interested to hear your views. Thanks Ron S. > OK - I've just moved from film to digital for U/W phots. I have an > Olympus C770 and its matching housing. [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > Ron S. Before you make a purchase decision, take a close look at the Inon D-2000. >> OK - I've just moved from film to digital for U/W phots. I have an >> Olympus C770 and its matching housing. [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > Before you make a purchase decision, take a close look at the Inon D-2000. Any comments on the Sea and Sea YS-15? I'm looking into that one. > Any comments on the Sea and Sea YS-15? I'm looking into that one. Low output, so only use at close distances. >>Any comments on the Sea and Sea YS-15? I'm looking into that one. > > Low output, so only use at close distances. It apparently wants you to shoot only at f/2.8 and nothing else, so the power is probably more than adequate (especially since you should be shooting at close distances), and it covers a 35mm lens. That could mean that it doesn't suck as long as you're happy always shooting at f/2.8 and don't have a lens that's wider than 35mm equivalent. By the time you buy an arm and the fiber optic cable the cost is pretty close to DS-50 territory.  SignatureSteve The above can be construed as personal opinion in the absence of a reasonable belief that it was intended as a statement of fact. If you want a reply to reach me, remove the SPAMTRAP from the address. > > Any comments on the Sea and Sea YS-15? I'm looking into that one. > Low output, so only use at close distances. Hi guys, I'm grateful for your suggestions and advice. Here are some (UK) practicalities. Sea Life SL 960 - £140 inc strobe, arm, mount and fibre-optic cable Epoque ES 150 - £250 - ditto Inon D180s - £325 - strobe only (can't find a UK price for the 200) Sea and Sea YS15 - £192 - strobe and fibre optic cable only Sea Life is obviously the most budget friendly but has anybody seen/used one? Ron S. >> Any comments on the Sea and Sea YS-15? I'm looking into that one. > Low output, so only use at close distances. With a guide number of 12, it has plenty of power underwater for *digital* (not enough reach for film though). I am not real familiar with your camera but I think it is basically point and shoot, with zoom, so it is likely that the widest it shoots is 35 - 40 degrees. If that is the case, the Sea & Sea will be fine. You won't have to shoot short and you will have enough strobe coverage to equal the lens at it's widest angle of acceptance. I don't shoot Sea and Sea's but I do think they make some fine underwater strobes. This one does seem to fit your needs for the camera you have chosen. > >> Any comments on the Sea and Sea YS-15? I'm looking into that one. > > > Low output, so only use at close distances. > > With a guide number of 12, it has plenty of power underwater for *digital* > (not enough reach for film though). With such a low UWGN, it unfortunately forces you to shoot at higher effective ISO's to compensate, as well as to get the f/stop up (for point-n-shoot, and/or to have a decent depth-of-field), which will increase the noise level, especially within sub-APS sized digital sensors found on non-dSLR's (aka point-n-shoots). > I don't shoot Sea and Sea's but I do think they make some fine underwater > strobes. IMO, Sea&Sea makes a couple of good aftermarket lenses for the Nikonos. The rest of the stuff, no thanks. -hh > With such a low UWGN, it unfortunately forces you to shoot at higher > effective ISO's to compensate, as well as to get the f/stop up (for [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > IMO, Sea&Sea makes a couple of good aftermarket lenses for the Nikonos. > The rest of the stuff, no thanks. While I do not argue with the accuracy of your comments (in terms of generalization). I disagree with most of what you said, in the context of this conversation, for this reason: we are talking point and shoot here. Was the photographer in question using more camera/sensor/software and better glass your comments would be germane, but considering the quality of light accepted by the sensor via the lens in most point and shoots, working a bit under, if it is even necessary, which it isn't, is more than effective in creating great files for post production. Noise levels hardly enter the equation when talking about cameras of this level. There are much greater barriers to fine photography beyond the effect noise levels imply. The YS-15 is a very good match for the C770, and in fact is probably good of a strobe for the camera in question. >> OK - I've just moved from film to digital for U/W phots. I have an >> Olympus C770 and its matching housing. [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > Before you make a purchase decision, take a close look at the Inon D-2000. As much as I like Inon innovations, this model, while having a color temp of 5500K, often renders harsh and displeasing images. Shouldn't at that temp, but does. Which is one reason Inon sells filters to cool the temp. They claim their reflectors "soften", which isn't the same as cools, the light. So I suspect something in the reflectors is causing the harsh edge the strobes deliver. Strange, in my view,...5500K is a nice temp for a small strobe and should result in better light on the image. >>> OK - I've just moved from film to digital for U/W phots. I have an >>> Olympus C770 and its matching housing. [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > Strange, in my view,...5500K is a nice temp for a small strobe and should > result in better light on the image. I am using a diffuser which has a bit of a blue tint, it softens the light and widens the pattern a bit as well. I get about 110 degrees. My WAL is about 105 degrees. Without the diffuser, it does seem a bit harsh, which is why I bought it. The diffuser also comes with a couple of coloured lens to cover the modelling light, you choice of red or blue. The little tabs that lock it in place are poorly designed, you quickly end up gluing it in permanently. Linking is optical. Cocoview in less than 2 weeks. > Without the diffuser, it does seem a bit harsh, which is why I bought it. You've made me curious Rudy. Why did you want light that rendered harsh contrast in the image? >> Without the diffuser, it does seem a bit harsh, which is why I bought it. > > You've made me curious Rudy. Why did you want light that rendered harsh > contrast in the image? Read it again. Then think before twisting my words. >>> Without the diffuser, it does seem a bit harsh, which is why I bought >>> it. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Read it again. Then think before twisting my words. Nah, it was a honest question. If you choose not to answer....no problem. >>>> Without the diffuser, it does seem a bit harsh, which is why I bought >>>> it. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > Nah, it was a honest question. If you choose not to answer....no problem. Ok, I bought the diffuser to soften the light and to widen the field a bit. The Canon seems to be a bit too warm, the slight blue tint of the diffuser helps correct that. You loose half an F stop. Is that better? > Ok, I bought the diffuser to soften the light and to widen the field a > bit. The Canon seems to be a bit too warm, the slight blue tint of the > diffuser helps correct that. You loose half an F stop. > > Is that better? The question was about why you bought a strobe that projects both harsh and off-temp light........not why you bought a diffuser. But thanks for your replies anyway. >> Without the diffuser, it does seem a bit harsh, which is why I bought it. > > You've made me curious Rudy. Why did you want light that rendered harsh > contrast in the image? Daniel, did they not teach you elementary comprehension at school?. Rudy's sentence clearly states that he brought a diffuser as the light was harsh, you on the other hand wanted to know why he purchased a light. Daniel, are you of such limited mental capacity that you cannot understand a fairly simple sentence?. But then I assume you are a troll who deliberatly twisted Rudy's words as your a dumb f.ck. FOAD <chop> Oh, good. Another anonymous cheesedick slinging the sophomoric insults. <ka-plonk> > >> Without the diffuser, it does seem a bit harsh, which is why I bought it. > > [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > But then I assume you are a troll who deliberatly twisted Rudy's words as > your a dumb f.ck. either that or you miss the concept. > FOAD >>> Without the diffuser, it does seem a bit harsh, which is why I bought >>> it. [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > > FOAD What's FOAD mean :^) >>>> Without the diffuser, it does seem a bit harsh, which is why I bought >>>> it. [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > > What's FOAD mean :^) f.ck off and die. > >>> Without the diffuser, it does seem a bit harsh, which is why I bought > >>> it. [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > > What's FOAD mean :^) Friend of a Debate? ;-) > ? What's FOAD mean :^) > ? > > Friend of a Debate? Somehow, i doubt it. Take out the "goes diving" bit.... Trip photos on line at www.morg.co.uk > clearly states that he brought a diffuser Where did he "Bring" it from ?????? Take out the "goes diving" bit.... Trip photos on line at www.morg.co.uk > >> Without the diffuser, it does seem a bit harsh, which is why I bought it. > > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > sentence clearly states that he brought a diffuser as the light was harsh, > you on the other hand wanted to know why he purchased a light. Soooo....in other words, Rudy bought the strobe not knowing that its light was going to be "harsh", and he 'fixed' the problem with the diffuser....? No, that doesn't make sense, since he said: "Without the diffuser, it does seem a bit harsh, which is why I bought it." But it does seem kind of seems odd that one would actually recommend a strobe for a characteristic that then is (partially?) neutralized by an additional purchase, doesn't it? YMMV, but I'd personally like a bit more clarification from Rudy too. My impression is that he was going for color temperature (and perhaps coverage width?), but I'd like to be sure. -hh >> >> Without the diffuser, it does seem a bit harsh, which is why I bought >> >> it. [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] > > -hh Yes, that is correct. > > My impression is that he was going for color temperature (and perhaps > > coverage width?), but I'd like to be sure. > > Yes, that is correct. Thanks for the clarifiation, Rudy. -hh >> " H. Huntzinger" <{NOSPAM-rm_to_reply}rec-scuba2005@huntzinger.com> >> wrote: [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > -hh http://www.digitaldiver.net/strobes.php Since this was my first strobe, I had to do some research, then experimentation. The diffuser was added to the system, as well as a WAL. First, I had to find strobes that worked with pre-flash. That narrowed down the field a bit. Then I was looking at the manner of linking, optical seemed the best choice. Guide number factored largely. Number of battery cells. Would it work with my UW housing. Adding a second strobe. Future upgrade to a better camera/housing. The Inon system worked nicely with my Canon system. Optical linking works very well. They use a piece of film that is opaque to visible light that is taped over the strobe on the camera, the fibre optic pickup see the infrared spectrum. The Inon mimics the camera's strobe, you get accurate metering. Totally easy. > YMMV, but I'd personally like a bit more clarification from Rudy too. > My impression is that he was going for color temperature (and perhaps > coverage width?), but I'd like to be sure. That's what I took from his comments as well and which was the cause of my curiosity. Why buy a strobe which is admittedly harsh, and shoots a bit warm for your tastes, just to correct harshness and cool the color with a diffuser, creating a lost stop in macro and maybe fish portraits? I wasn't attacking him, I was just curious as to what controls, capabilities, reliability issues caused him to make such a decision. >> YMMV, but I'd personally like a bit more clarification from Rudy too. >> My impression is that he was going for color temperature (and perhaps [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > attacking him, I was just curious as to what controls, capabilities, > reliability issues caused him to make such a decision. Daniel, I owe you an apology, I got somewhat perturbed with your statement to Rudy and it was none of my business. My juvenile spewing hence force had more to do with a bad day at work and was misdirected. Your questioning of Rudy's purchase was valid and was clearly not a slight on him. Me bad and I am sorry. 300PSI > Daniel, > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > 300PSI Thanks, and no problem. I didn't take offense, I learned what FOAD means and Rudy, bless his heart, got to tell me to "f.ck off and die". It ended up being a winner all the way around :^) |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.