Wireless Ligthting: Canon E-TTL vs. PocketWizards

03/24/2005 12:30:11 PM · #26

Also, I was thinking that since you don't use your flashes for sports you would not have yet experienced the range difficulties that people are talking about...That's another plus for the pocketwizard system...

Edit: thanks for the links, I'll check them out now...

Message edited by author 2005-03-24 12:30:27.

Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM

03/24/2005 12:42:14 PM · #27

Not sure if anyone is paying any attention to this thread but this Sportsshooter thread seems to give good unofficial reviews to those cheapie radio units...

I think that's the route I'll take...spend $100 on a 4-channel radio kit with a transmitter and 2 receivers and buy a used 550EX and a Vivitar 285HV. The total package will cost less than $450 and if the radio does fail, I'll still have the optical to go on.

dwterry

Canon EOS-1D Mark III

03/24/2005 06:54:08 PM · #28

Originally posted by thatcloudthere:

//www.vivitar.com/Products/Flashes/flash.html

oh...and I meant 283 and 285HV, not 183 and 185HV...oops...

Ah! That explains why I couldn't find any information via google.

Okay, so they are just regular flash units that you want to use PocketWizards to trigger... (I had in my mind that these were strobes or at least large flash units)

I don't think I can answer your question, but I can give you another thing to think about:

If your subject is going to be moving around, then that changes your lighting distance (as you know, the further from the light source, the less light you get). So, if you're in "full manual mode" with your Vivitars and PocketWizards ... how fast do you think you can recalculate the proper exposure?

In this case I'm thinking E-TTL is the way to go. Let the camera figure it out for you...

But! Just to confuse you with my answer. What if you have more lights and thus more coverage? Example:

Back to the subject of basketball games ... did you know that the pros *do* use pocketwizards and the like? They put their flashes up ABOVE the players so that there is no "blinding light" down at the player level. Plus, they have several lights go off at once so that they can get good even lighting.

That's how you can see such perfectly exposed sports photos without the blur of slow shutter speed and without the obvious "cone of light" from an on-board flash. The light is remotely controlled and flashed from above.

Is the decision any easier yet?

03/24/2005 11:58:18 PM · #29

Originally posted by dwterry:

... did you know that the pros *do* use pocketwizards and the like?

Yeah, I know that, which is why I've been told to get the pocketwizards (much more reliable)...Prof_Fate's remarks just confused me.

I think I'll end up with the super cheapo radios linked below, a 550EX, and a Vivitar 285HV...If the cheap radios suck, I'll save up for the pocketwizards.

Prof_Fate

03/25/2005 12:43:51 AM · #30

Originally posted by thatcloudthere:

Originally posted by dwterry:
... did you know that the pros *do* use pocketwizards and the like?

Yeah, I know that, which is why I've been told to get the pocketwizards (much more reliable)...Prof_Fate's remarks just confused me.

I think I'll end up with the super cheapo radios linked below, a 550EX, and a Vivitar 285HV...If the cheap radios suck, I'll save up for the pocketwizards.

i didn't mean to confuse you. I covered college basketball and was not allowed to use flash. Pushing film to ASA800 (ISO these days) worked. SI didn't cover the games, and the local news guys did not use flash, be it in the rafters or elsehere. I did some HS football coverage too - again, no flash. Alansfreed covers the steeler games - i'd bet he doesn't use flash.