|
| Author | Thread |
|
|
01/03/2008 08:52:00 PM · #1 |
Question 1:
I've heard many times, Nikon have a far superior flash system. But I've never heard any details. Why is Nikon flash so much better than Canon? What does it do that Canon doesn't? Is it differences in functionality, or reliability, or exposure accuracy? Is it better for multi-flash systems?
The only functional difference I know of is that the D80 has built in wireless TTL flash control via visible flash pulses, but put a 580/ST-E2 on the camera, and Canon's have that capability too.
So, what's the big Nikon advantage?
Question 2:
A friend of mine has a D80, and his TTL preflash was very noticeably firing before the main flash. Probably enough time to consciously blink after the preflash. On my 400D the preflash is almost invisible, but the D80 was a very distinct double flash. I don't think it was red-eye preflash, because it was too quick for that, maybe .1 to .2 seconds. Any thoughts on this?
|
|
|
|
01/03/2008 09:34:54 PM · #2 |
I haven't used Nikon's system, but have used the canon system (and sigma and metz's implementations of it too).
Canon doesn't publish how it's system works. THere is some curve calculation in fill flash mode and that makes the flash, well, unpredictable.
You also have mutliple metering modes and they will affect how the flash does it's thing. There was a lengthy discussion about this on another forum and no concensus on whether averaging or evaluative was better, and when each was better. Some claimed one was better indoors, or when there was a near background, or if there was a reflective hotspot in the frame (glass, mirror, white clothing). Others thought the other mode was better, and that each acted differently based on camera mode (Av, Tv or M) or even ISO...
What I have observed firsthand is it tends to be inconsistent and if it errs, it's on the side of underexposure. The Metz 54 tended to overexpose when in doubt as to what was 'correct'. The sigma seems the most consistent, but is also the weakest in build, power and recycle time of the three (580EX2 is the canon flash I've used).
eTTL2 is supposed to be better, at least with certain lenses (they feed the focal distance back to the camera's computer) but I've not seen any improvement on this - perhaps it's only good for direct flash which I never use.
|
|
|
|
01/03/2008 09:49:02 PM · #3 |
Yes, I'm finding the same thing. I did lots of tests on another thread about 6 months ago, and even very small changes in the scene will cause upredictable underexposure, with results of 1 stop or more of underexposure. I have been wondering if this is a problem of my individual camera, but I've heard of others too.
It's totally unpredictable, so it often means taking 2 or 3 shots while adjusting the flash EV. I'm constantly saying "No wait, stand still, I have to take another one!". And these days, I start with the EV on +1, and work from there. I have a 550EX which I often use bounced, with a white card or 80/20 on the flash. It's very frustrating not getting a useable automatic exposure, and if Nikon can get this sort of stuff right, I'm considering jumping ship (for other reasons too).
Message edited by author 2008-01-03 21:49:34. |
|
|
|
01/03/2008 10:02:41 PM · #4 |
I think the main thing is communication between master and slave units. The Canon IR system has limitations (sensors have to see each other well, short distance limits), while I've heard that the Nikon system is supposedly a bit better. Related to this, only the newest Canon 580EX II flash has PC jacks built in to it, while all the Nikon strobes do, making it MUCH easier to mate Nikon Speedlights to eBay triggers/Pocket Wizards/other slaves.
The second reason alone is why two of my strobes are Nikon, and only one a Canon, for those times when it just has to be mounted in the hotshoe. If I had the money to go out and expand on my flash system/build a new first-class one, I'd go Nikon.
|
|
|
|
01/03/2008 10:39:29 PM · #5 |
| I'm using hot-shoe mount for the ebay trigger at the moment, and yes, it's a bit of a flimsy setup. But, for about $10 you can buy a PC to hot-shoe adaptor, so you can easily have a PC port on a Canon flash. The adaptors are very small, and have a cold-shoe on the bottom, so would make a good solid cold-shoe mounting point. |
|
|
|
01/04/2008 01:50:25 AM · #6 |
| I'll let you know about the 580ex II in a day or two as I just picked one up an hour ago... been playing around Triggering 420ex which seems to work quite nicely... looks like I got a bit of reading to do though. |
|
|
|
01/04/2008 02:23:41 AM · #7 |
Two thing usually come up with the NIkon system. The off based flash (creative lighting) on Nikon generally calculated better distance information than Canon's system. However, with the arrival of the 580EX II this has been equalized for the most part.
2nd thing, is I can use the D200/D80/D70 as the triggering device and have my flash somewhere else in the room. If I were to do this with Canon, I would have to buy two flashes, one for the camera to trigger the other flash I put elsewhere in the room. With Nikon I save $$$ not needing a separate triggering flash on my camera. Though the D3/D2 bodies do require a separate flash unit since they do not have popup flashes to send the info to the remote units.
One thing I will say though, is once you start getting into 3 or 4 flashes, people usually move on to strobes where the hole triggering system and distance stuff really doesn't matter as much. |
|
|
|
Current Server Time: 12/29/2025 10:11:57 AM  |
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 12/29/2025 10:11:57 AM EST.
|
