Photo Forum / Digital Photography / DSLR Cameras / April 2006
Substitute for Speedlite flashes? (First post!)
|
|
Thread rating:  |
Gus - 19 Apr 2006 20:54 GMT Hi - I've been lurking since buying my first slr (a Canon 350D) a couple weeks ago. I've got some questions I'm hoping I can get help with.
I'm interested in picking up a good flash, but find the Speedlite 430EX which works with my camera is probably... 1) overspec'd for what I intend to do (e.g. don't think I'll need slave/master capability anytime soon) and 2) expensive. On the other hand, the built-in flash clearly has a number of limitations so I was wondering what are good substitutes for the speedlites. Any suggestions, gratefully received.
Gus
All Things Mopar - 19 Apr 2006 21:28 GMT Today Gus commented courteously on the subject at hand
> Hi - I've been lurking since buying my first slr (a Canon > 350D) a couple weeks ago. I've got some questions I'm [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > are good substitutes for the speedlites. Any suggestions, > gratefully received. I have a 430EX for my Rebel XT and simply love it. It is, to me, an excellent compromise of price, performance, compact size, and moderate weight, all of which I why didn't buy it's bigger brother Canon 580EX.
I don't now need a slave, although I could certainly use one someday when I might get more serious about doing a better job of shooting my primary subject - cars in dark museums, but it's 25-30' range is adequate for my current needs, it's eTTL is excellent (once I figured out I needed to use the FEL button on the back of the camera), and to put it simply, it delivers the good for me.
Expensive is a relative term, I think. I spent $2,150 on just two Canon L-glass zooms and $400 on a Sigma which I view as money well-spent as I can probably use them when I upgrade to a better Canon DSLR next time.
Can you give us some insights as to the subject(s) you intend to use, distances involved, expectations, lens(es), etc.?
The built-in flash is useless beyond about 10 feet at ISO 100, but I do use it for snapshots because I don't need to lug the 430EX around. For casual shooting, I might also use my Sigma zoom, but usually use the Rebel's XT, again for minimum size, weight, and obtrusiveness in social surroundings.
But, if you need or think you want power, then don't quibble about price. Or, buy an lower priced brand. In any event, whatever you buy, I strongly recommend you get it from a store that will give you a 10-day you-questions-asked money back guarantee because no amount of research and asking opinions really gets it. You simply must take it on some typical shoots, learn quickly how to use it, and evaluate the results at home to see if it's fitness of purpose suits your pistol or not.
 Signature ATM, aka Jerry
"Whether You Think You CAN Or CAN'T, You're Right." – Henry Ford
Fred Anonymous - 19 Apr 2006 22:11 GMT > Hi - I've been lurking since buying my first slr (a Canon 350D) a couple > weeks ago. I've got some questions I'm hoping I can get help with. [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > Gus Hi Gus. I felt the same way about the 300TL gun which was made to go with the CanonT90 back in the 1980s. I eventually paid the big bucks to get the 300TL and quickly found it was money very well worth spending.
When I recently bought an EOS350d I didn't wait long before getting a 430EX. This was partly because the 350d is not backwards compatible with earlier Canon guns (despite what is written in the handbook for the 350d) and partly because of my earlier findings with the 300TL.
I don't expect to need slave/master (although I do have two Minolta slave/master guns for use with a Minolta SLR) but I do find the 430EX works well with the 350d. I am finding that I experiment more with flash, developing new techniques, using the 430EX.
Regards, Ian
Gisle Hannemyr - 20 Apr 2006 06:39 GMT > I'm interested in picking up a good flash, but find the Speedlite > 430EX which works with my camera is probably... [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > number of limitations so I was wondering what are good substitutes > for the speedlites. Any suggestions, gratefully received. I'll suggest a good generic "auto" flash such as the Sunpak 383 Super. It'll cost you between $70-90 brand new (compared to the $280 or so for a Speedlite 430EX). For most purposes, "auto" mode provides more reliable control over exposure than E-TTL II.
For much more detail, and some background on buying flash for Canon DSLRs, please visit: http://hannemyr.com/photo/flash.html .
 Signature - gisle hannemyr [ gisle{at}hannemyr.no - http://hannemyr.com/photo/ ] ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Sigma SD10, Kodak DCS460, Canon Powershot G5, Olympus 2020Z ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gus - 20 Apr 2006 06:57 GMT > I'll suggest a good generic "auto" flash such as the Sunpak 383 Super. <snip>
> For much more detail, and some background on buying flash for > Canon DSLRs, please visit: http://hannemyr.com/photo/flash.html . Gisle,
Thanks for this. Very useful and will read throught the link you sent.
Gus
Jan Böhme - 20 Apr 2006 07:39 GMT Gisle Hannemyr skrev:
> I'll suggest a good generic "auto" flash such as the Sunpak 383 Super. > It'll cost you between $70-90 brand new (compared to the $280 or so > for a Speedlite 430EX). It might be difficult to get one these days. I tried to get one for my Panasonic FZ20 last month, and ha no success at all with Swedish dealers, nor with British ones. The Swedish dealers simply didn't list it, wheras it was listed as out of stock with the British web dealers shipping to Sweden. And when I checked on Sunpak's website, it doesn't seem to be included on their list of current flashes anymore.
Pity if they have discontinued it, because it was the only generic flash with both horizontal an vertical tilt and full non-TTL auto capacity that I knew of on the market for new things. I ended up buying a used Nikon SB-24 for the same amount of money instead.
Jan Böhme
Gisle Hannemyr - 20 Apr 2006 08:30 GMT > Gisle Hannemyr skrev:
>> I'll suggest a good generic "auto" flash such as the Sunpak 383 >> Super. It'll cost you between $70-90 brand new (compared to the >> $280 or so for a Speedlite 430EX).
> It might be difficult to get one these days. I tried to get one for > my Panasonic FZ20 last month, and ha no success at all with Swedish [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > it doesn't seem to be included on their list of current flashes > anymore. B&H in New York lists it as "in stock" ($80).
As for Sunpak - if you go into their "Easy choice of right flash"-feature on their website, and do not select a specific camera brand, you end up at a page that recommend that you get the 383 Super.
I hope it is not dicontinued. That it is not featured under "Products" on Sunpak's site is strange. But it looks as if even Sunpak now moves in the direction of flashes "dedicated" to a spesific camera system.
I'm truly puzzled by why people pay premium amounts for "dedicated" flashes than can't be used across camera systems when "generic" ones work just as well and only costs a fraction of the price.
> Pity if they have discontinued it, because it was the only generic > flash with both horizontal an vertical tilt and full non-TTL auto > capacity that I knew of on the market for new things. I ended up > buying a used Nikon SB-24 for the same amount of money instead. Yeah, the older (for film) Nikon Speedlights such as the SB-24, SB-28 and SB-26 has a very good auto mode. Because their TTL-mode is useless with a modern digicam, some Nikon owners are replacing them with DX versions and are selling them off cheaply. These are generally very well built flashes and a second hand version in mint condition can be a good alternative if a new Sunpak 383 is unavailable.
 Signature - gisle hannemyr [ gisle{at}hannemyr.no - http://hannemyr.com/photo/ ] ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Sigma SD10, Kodak DCS460, Canon Powershot G5, Olympus 2020Z ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jan Böhme - 21 Apr 2006 12:56 GMT > > The Swedish dealers simply didn't list [the Sunkap 383 Super], > > wheras it was listed as out of stock with the British web > > dealers shipping to Sweden. And when I checked on Sunpak's website, > > it doesn't seem to be included on their list of current flashes > > anymore.
> I hope it is not dicontinued. That it is not featured under > "Products" on Sunpak's site is strange. But it looks as if > even Sunpak now moves in the direction of flashes "dedicated" > to a spesific camera system. There was a Brit reporting today in dpreview's Panasonicc forum that he finally had obtained his 383 - three months after ordering it.
Goes to show that a) there at least still are some flashes left, also on this side of the pond, but also that b) something rather bizarre is going in nevertheless.
Jan Böhme
David Dyer-Bennet - 20 Apr 2006 15:51 GMT > > I'm interested in picking up a good flash, but find the Speedlite > > 430EX which works with my camera is probably... [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > for a Speedlite 430EX). For most purposes, "auto" mode provides more > reliable control over exposure than E-TTL II. Wow, is it as bad as that? OTF flash metering was a really *big* advance against the previous automation based on sensors in the flash units. Canon hasn't recovered that in their digitals yet? Ouch.
 Signature David Dyer-Bennet, <mailto:dd-b@dd-b.net>, <http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/> RKBA: <http://www.dd-b.net/carry/> Pics: <http://dd-b.lighthunters.net/> <http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/> Dragaera/Steven Brust: <http://dragaera.info/>
Tony Polson - 20 Apr 2006 20:56 GMT >Wow, is it as bad as that? OTF flash metering was a really *big* >advance against the previous automation based on sensors in the flash >units. Canon hasn't recovered that in their digitals yet? Ouch. I'm not sure that *any* manufacturer has achieved the accuracy and reliability of off-the-film flash control in a DSLR. Any criticism of Canon therefore applies equally to the others.
Personally, I have gone back to non-TTL auto flash control with my Metz flashes on the Canon D5 and Pentax *ist D. It isn't as good as off-the-film TTL flash control, but it is far more predictable than either the Canon or Pentax DSLR TTL systems.
Gisle Hannemyr - 21 Apr 2006 01:26 GMT >>> I'm interested in picking up a good flash, but find the Speedlite >>> 430EX which works with my camera is probably... [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >>> number of limitations so I was wondering what are good substitutes >>> for the speedlites. Any suggestions, gratefully received.
>> I'll suggest a good generic "auto" flash such as the Sunpak 383 >> Super. It'll cost you between $70-90 brand new (compared to the >> $280 or so for a Speedlite 430EX). For most purposes, "auto" mode >> provides more reliable control over exposure than E-TTL II.
> Wow, is it as bad as that? OTF flash metering was a really *big* > advance against the previous automation based on sensors in the > flash units. True.
> Canon hasn't recovered that in their digitals yet? Ouch. YMMV, but I have both a set of Canon 550EX Speedlites (which I use with the ST-E2), and a set of auto flashes (mix of several brands, which I trigger with radio controlled slaves) - and I find that the auto-based setup in many cases more convenient to use.
The ST-E2 and 550EX are great in a controlled setting if you have the time to work out the lighting in detail a need to be able to use power ratios, etc. However, for a quick and dirty setup where you just want correct exposure and softened shadows, auto flashes really shine.
OTF was great, and IMHO Canon's present E-TTL II offerings is nowhere near what TTL read of the film was able to deliver.
It is not necessarely a digital vs. film issue, howver. Nikon's i-TTL system (which relies on pre-flash just like Canon's) performs much better than Canon's E-TTL II, so it is /possible/ to have some sort of well behaved TTL with digital - Canon just haven't been able to deliver yet.
Nikon also let you choose between i-TTL and auto in their units. Canon has no auto mode, which I find strange as long as there is so many situations where E-TTL II does not work well. (Flash is one reason to go for Nikon instead of Canon.)
As for aftermarket products, I believe Metz will sell you a flash (54 MZ SCA-2102) that let you choose between auto and E-TTL - but no wireless operation. Sigma will sell you a flash (500 DG Super) that supports Canon's wireless protocol - but no auto. What is missing for the Canon system is a flash that supports Canon's wireless protocol, and also let you choose between auto and E-TTL II.
 Signature - gisle hannemyr [ gisle{at}hannemyr.no - http://hannemyr.com/photo/ ] ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Sigma SD10, Kodak DCS460, Canon Powershot G5, Olympus 2020Z ------------------------------------------------------------------------
David Dyer-Bennet - 21 Apr 2006 03:47 GMT > >>> I'm interested in picking up a good flash, but find the Speedlite > >>> 430EX which works with my camera is probably... [quoted text clipped - 36 lines] > well behaved TTL with digital - Canon just haven't been able to > deliver yet. iTTL was one of the primary reasons I upgraded from a Fuji S2 to a Nikon D200. In studio situations I'm happy to set up lights manually, but for other things I really like on-camera bounce with a fill card, and auto-exposure is a win for that if the automation is any good.
The pre-flash is slow and annoying, but since both Nikon and Canon have decided it's the necessary approach to digital TTL flash control, they're probably right, at least until somebody brilliant does something brilliant.
> Nikon also let you choose between i-TTL and auto in their units. > Canon has no auto mode, which I find strange as long as there is > so many situations where E-TTL II does not work well. (Flash is > one reason to go for Nikon instead of Canon.) Ouch, no auto choice? That *is* annoying. Not only might I want it on a modern camera, but I also use it when I use the flash on an older body that doesn't do TTL anyway.
> As for aftermarket products, I believe Metz will sell you a flash > (54 MZ SCA-2102) that let you choose between auto and E-TTL - but no > wireless operation. Sigma will sell you a flash (500 DG Super) that > supports Canon's wireless protocol - but no auto. What is missing for > the Canon system is a flash that supports Canon's wireless protocol, > and also let you choose between auto and E-TTL II. Sorry to hear it, I have friends who use Canon. And am generally in favor of more good products.
 Signature David Dyer-Bennet, <mailto:dd-b@dd-b.net>, <http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/> RKBA: <http://www.dd-b.net/carry/> Pics: <http://dd-b.lighthunters.net/> <http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/> Dragaera/Steven Brust: <http://dragaera.info/>
AaronW - 21 Apr 2006 06:05 GMT > > >> I'll suggest a good generic "auto" flash such as the Sunpak 383 > > >> Super. It'll cost you between $70-90 brand new (compared to the [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > > flash units. > > > Canon hasn't recovered that in their digitals yet? Ouch. Canon over engineered it. Exposure metering is linked to the AF point. So if the user AF and then recompose, the AF point will be off the point of interest. So the metering will be wrong.
If AE is locked with AF, then the point of interest is correct. But the overall composition is wrong. So the average part of the weighted average metering will be wrong.
> The pre-flash is slow and annoying, but since both Nikon and Canon > have decided it's the necessary approach to digital TTL flash control, > they're probably right, at least until somebody brilliant does > something brilliant. Some Pentax DSLR can do TTL without preflash.
http://digitcamera.tripod.com/#slr
Tony Polson - 21 Apr 2006 09:35 GMT >Some Pentax DSLR can do TTL without preflash. But the results are unpredictable. :-(
David Dyer-Bennet - 21 Apr 2006 17:53 GMT > >Some Pentax DSLR can do TTL without preflash. > > But the results are unpredictable. :-( Ah. So they match the performance of the Nikon D100 and the Fuji S2 then.
 Signature David Dyer-Bennet, <mailto:dd-b@dd-b.net>, <http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/> RKBA: <http://www.dd-b.net/carry/> Pics: <http://dd-b.lighthunters.net/> <http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/> Dragaera/Steven Brust: <http://dragaera.info/>
Tony Polson - 21 Apr 2006 19:19 GMT >> >Some Pentax DSLR can do TTL without preflash. >> >> But the results are unpredictable. :-( > >Ah. So they match the performance of the Nikon D100 and the Fuji S2 >then. I'm not sure that any DSLR brand currently offers auto flash performance that approaches, let alone matches, that of the best 35mm OTF TTL auto flash systems such as those of the Nikon F5 and F100.
Gus - 20 Apr 2006 06:53 GMT Thanks Ian and ATM for the comments and observations, which are helpful.
Will have a look at the 430EX again, although with all the aftermarket equipment around for Canon, I'm surprised there's nothing out there that's seen as a cheaper run-for-the-money to the Speedlites.
Gus
Slack - 20 Apr 2006 07:12 GMT > Thanks Ian and ATM for the comments and observations, which are helpful. > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Gus www.sigma4less.com
AaronW - 21 Apr 2006 04:34 GMT > Hi - I've been lurking since buying my first slr (a Canon 350D) a couple > weeks ago. I've got some questions I'm hoping I can get help with. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > 2) expensive. On the other hand, the built-in flash clearly has a number of > limitations so I was wondering what are good substitutes for the speedlites. If you want bright flash, non-TTL auto flash is OK. Sunpak 383.
If you want fill flash, E-TTL is better. Sigma EF 500 DG.
http://digitcamera.tripod.com/#flash
ink - 21 Apr 2006 08:28 GMT "AaronW" wrote...
> If you want bright flash, non-TTL auto flash is OK. Sunpak 383. > > If you want fill flash, E-TTL is better. Sigma EF 500 DG. > > http://digitcamera.tripod.com/#flash Hm... is anyone using the Nikon version of the Sigma EF 500 speedlight on a D70 or D200? What about "older" film SLRs? Would such a speedlight be usable on an F100, for example?
Cheers, ink
|
|
|