Reading mode: Light Dark

Canon Flashguns vs Nikon Flashguns

Go to last post
A

anthony rayner

Well-known member
Messages
175
Reaction score
0
Location
Brisbane, AU
Hi,

I was playing with a Nikon flash (SB800 running on 5 NiMH batteries) the other day...once charged it could easily fire off about 10-11 full strength flashes in a row faster than the camera (D70) could write the file to the CF card. If you just pull the flash off and repeatadely press the test button you can fire 10-11 flashes in about 3 seconds. Basically if you were taking photos (at night) of a bride throwing the bouquet you would easily be able to take 4-10 flash shots of the action within that 3 seconds of opportunity, depending if the camera can keep up. (The Nikon D70 couldn't keep up btw). The official recycle time you will see listed for the Nikon flash is 2.9 sec, but they must have multiple capacitors inside that charge up and then store the voltage for multiple flash cycling...does anyone know if this is what they do, or how they do this? I mean you can even set the frequency (eg 15 Hertz) for the flash to go off so you can capture things like a bouncing ball multiple times through the the bouncing.

I have a so-so Sigma EF500 DG ST flash on my canon but there is no way it could do this sort of thing? One shot, maybe two within that 2-3 second window of opportunity (ie much slower than the camera).

Question: Can any of the Canon flashes recycle as fast as the Nikon? I've searched here and on the Canon website but all seem to suggest that while the recycle will be faster than my Sigma they can't do 10 (or even 4?) continuous flashes spaced apart by something like 0.1 of a second?? What is the best official "pulse" time for the high end Canon flashes? I can't find anything listed.

Regards,
Tony

ps. My skin burst into flames when I touched the Nikon...sort of like when a vampire goes out into daylight! I'll never do it again, I promise :)
 
It total depends on the power of the burst. Set at full power, there is no way the a 580ex could do 10-11 flashes in three seconds.

The 580ex (and its forerunner, the 500ex) can do stroboscopic flashes, from 1Hz upwards to 199 Hz. It will only do this at 1/4 power or less. For example, it can do 12-14 flashes per second for 5 seconds at 1/128 power, which is 60 flashes in 5 seconds.

I doubt that multiple capacitors are used. The output of the flash is very dependent on the size (capacity) of the capacitor – several smaller capacitors wouldn't have the power of one larger one.

You can download the Canon 580ex manual from the Canon website, if you are interested. Page 25 has a tables comparing flash frequency at various outputs.

Brian A.
 
Hugowolf said:
several smaller capacitors wouldn't have the power of one larger one.
Click to expand...
Why's that then? If the capacitors can handle the same voltage as the larger one then why wouldn't 2 half size capacitors in parallel be as good as one larger one?
 
if the flash was actually outputting a full pop you wouldnt get that kind of performance but rather the documented 2.6 seconds. The flash was set to output lower bursts thats it. Same goes for any flash

if you use a canon flash you can yuse the CP-E3 with the high voiltage port. This will lower the charging time for the flash to just under a second. This will allow you to shoot bursts

Watch out for the flash though. Too many bursts can burn out the flash

--
Michael Salzlechner
http://www.PalmsWestPhoto.com
 
Paul-UK said:
Paul-UK said:
several smaller capacitors wouldn't have the power of one larger one.
Click to expand...
Why's that then? If the capacitors can handle the same voltage as
the larger one then why wouldn't 2 half size capacitors in
parallel be as good as one larger one?
Click to expand...
Yep, but I think the OP ment that only one of them would be used at a time for full flash. So if the Nikon could do 10 full flashes in a row, it could have several capacitors which are used separately so that while one is used for the flash the others are being loaded.

To implement that, inside a (Nikon) flash should be 2-3 full size capacitors, thus 2-3 times the size of a capacitor that is needed for a full flash. But in such an implementation I can't see any benefit over one large capacitor. Of course, the shape of the space taken by several capacitors is easier modifiable.

Vesa
 
anthony rayner said:
Hi,
I was playing with a Nikon flash (SB800 running on 5 NiMH
batteries) the other day...once charged it could easily fire off
about 10-11 full strength flashes in a row faster than the camera
(D70) could write the file to the CF card. If you just pull the
flash off and repeatadely press the test button you can fire 10-11
flashes in about 3 seconds. Basically if you were taking photos
(at night) of a bride throwing the bouquet you would easily be able
to take 4-10 flash shots of the action within that 3 seconds of
opportunity, depending if the camera can keep up. (The Nikon D70
couldn't keep up btw). The official recycle time you will see
listed for the Nikon flash is 2.9 sec, but they must have multiple
capacitors inside that charge up and then store the voltage for
multiple flash cycling...does anyone know if this is what they do,
or how they do this? I mean you can even set the frequency (eg 15
Hertz) for the flash to go off so you can capture things like a
bouncing ball multiple times through the the bouncing.
I have a so-so Sigma EF500 DG ST flash on my canon but there is no
way it could do this sort of thing? One shot, maybe two within that
2-3 second window of opportunity (ie much slower than the camera).

Question: Can any of the Canon flashes recycle as fast as the
Nikon? I've searched here and on the Canon website but all seem to
suggest that while the recycle will be faster than my Sigma they
can't do 10 (or even 4?) continuous flashes spaced apart by
something like 0.1 of a second?? What is the best official "pulse"
time for the high end Canon flashes? I can't find anything listed.

Regards,
Tony
ps. My skin burst into flames when I touched the Nikon...sort of
like when a vampire goes out into daylight! I'll never do it again,
I promise :)
Click to expand...
Tony,

I have 4 SB800's and 3 580EX's so feel that I'm qualified to give you a fair answer.

Flash recovery time will depend on how you use the flash. If it's direct flash (flash on-camera aimed directly at the subject - but nobody in their right mind would use a flash like that!) an SB800 can get a small burst off, say 3-5 frames before you see power loss (underexposure) with the 5-battery setup. Keep in mind this is not happeining at full power, the flash is using TTL metering to determine output, so your individual bursts may not be a consistant power. A full power 1/1 pop takes about 3 seconds to recover from with fresh (5) batteries.

Now as soon as you start bouncing the flash, your recycle time drops down considerably, but it's still pretty good for a 2-3 image burst, again that depends on your subject, how the bounce is done, and what your camera's ISO and exposure are set to.

When I came to Canon, one of the things I missed using the 580EX's was the 5th battery. The recycle time of a 580EX is deffinitely slower in just about every situation. It's not a huge difference, but noticible it was. The 580EX has about 1 stop more light coming from a much larger head when shot 1/1, so a full power shootout will go the way of the SB800 because it's 1/1 is less and has more batteries from which to draw power from. I use Canon's compact battery pack to add another 8 cells to the battery and is more than suits my needs and obviously outperforms the 5-battery SB800. With the Nikon battery pack added to the SB800, it's about as even as it gets.

--
Regards,
Joe H.

---------------------------------------
http://www.BBSphotography.com

I don't suffer from insanity... I enjoy every minute of it.
Sarcasm included... some assembly required.
 
vpera said:
vpera said:
vpera said:
several smaller capacitors wouldn't have the power of one larger one.
Click to expand...
Why's that then? If the capacitors can handle the same voltage as
the larger one then why wouldn't 2 half size capacitors in
parallel be as good as one larger one?
Click to expand...
Yep, but I think the OP ment that only one of them would be used at
a time for full flash. So if the Nikon could do 10 full flashes in
a row, it could have several capacitors which are used separately
so that while one is used for the flash the others are being loaded.

To implement that, inside a (Nikon) flash should be 2-3 full size
capacitors, thus 2-3 times the size of a capacitor that is needed
for a full flash. But in such an implementation I can't see any
benefit over one large capacitor. Of course, the shape of the space
taken by several capacitors is easier modifiable.
Click to expand...
Yes, sorry. I didn't mean to imply that there wasn't more than one capacitor, but that weren't ten or more.

Brian A.
 
Thanks to everyone for your replys. I will have to play with that Nikon flash a bit more to compare it against my current Sigma flash.

Joe I think your reply gives me a good comparison between the nikon and canon flashes. From what I can tell the Nikon and Canon operate in a similar fashion for the sitution I decribed....ie. if the bride throws the bouquet and you want to get 3-4 flash shots in rapid succession (probably within 2 secs, but probably not full flash...TTL) then both will keep up in a similar fashion. (Correct me if I am wrong Joe).

I really do not think my Sigma EF500DGST can do this..but it is hard to know because the instructions that came with it are very bad, and definitely not comprehensive. These are the hazards of buying non-genuine gear I suppose, but I will look into it more. The purpose of my initial thread was to ensure that WHEN I buy a canon flash that I get one that can do the rapid fire flash that I describe.
Thanks again everyone.
Tony

ps Joe, I really liked your website. There are a number of absolute pearls in there.
 
I used Nikons for a while and was really impressed with the SB-800 recycle time and output power. The 5th battery sure makes a difference but its not the only explanation. Its a very fine, optimized flash.

I'm now using a 550EX and its not only slower but it also seems to drain the batteries faster than the SB-800.

--
-------David-------
http://flickr.com/photos/childish/
 
Octane,

Sounds like that extra battery gives the Nikon flash an edge (unless using supplementary battery packs etc).
I am going to hijack my own thread here....

I looked at your (octane) Flickr website and really liked it. The black and white photos are truely beautiful...a couple of questions for you:

1) When do think you will have your B&W actions available?
2) How much do you think you will charge for them? Ballpark figure.

3) With the slideshow that comes up...is that a feature of the Flickr site, or do you use another program and then put it in? (What program?)

4) If that slideshow is part of the Flickr website what level of membership did you need to get access to it?

Somewhat back on topic...what sort of flash gear did you use to get some of these "specifically" lit B&W's:

http://flickr.com/photos/childish/359227399/in/set-72057594137075635/ and photo names: "In the sun" on black, "Wide", "Aaron face in the dark".

Many Thanks.
Tony
 
so get a CP-E3 , clip it to your belt its not big and it will make your flash recycle full power in under 3 seconds, anything less is almost instant
Octane said:
I used Nikons for a while and was really impressed with the SB-800
recycle time and output power. The 5th battery sure makes a
difference but its not the only explanation. Its a very fine,
optimized flash.

I'm now using a 550EX and its not only slower but it also seems to
drain the batteries faster than the SB-800.

--
-------David-------
http://flickr.com/photos/childish/
Click to expand...
 
I had a number of SB800's for my D2X cams and really disliked the 5th battery. Firstly because it was plain awkward and secondly because you can't charge a set of 5 batteries together. All batteries come in sets of 4 and are charged in sets of 4, well most chargers anyway.

I always felt it to be a rather silly solution and therefore rejected it soon after getting the SB800's.

For better recycle times, simple use a bigger battery, like the Turbo 2+2 from Quantum I had back then. That way the flash can fire full blast and still recycle within a second or so. I never measured it but it was very fast.

There is a catch however: you'll be able to blow up your flash with ease when using powerful batteries like that. NO flash unit from Nikon or Canon can handle that many full blast flashes in such a short time as this battery can provide. So they are prone to overheating and dying because of it. So be careful what you wish for. I don't want your next message to read: "I think I just killed my flash".
anthony rayner said:
Hi,
I was playing with a Nikon flash (SB800 running on 5 NiMH
batteries) the other day...once charged it could easily fire off
about 10-11 full strength flashes in a row faster than the camera
(D70) could write the file to the CF card. If you just pull the
flash off and repeatadely press the test button you can fire 10-11
flashes in about 3 seconds. Basically if you were taking photos
(at night) of a bride throwing the bouquet you would easily be able
to take 4-10 flash shots of the action within that 3 seconds of
opportunity, depending if the camera can keep up. (The Nikon D70
couldn't keep up btw). The official recycle time you will see
listed for the Nikon flash is 2.9 sec, but they must have multiple
capacitors inside that charge up and then store the voltage for
multiple flash cycling...does anyone know if this is what they do,
or how they do this? I mean you can even set the frequency (eg 15
Hertz) for the flash to go off so you can capture things like a
bouncing ball multiple times through the the bouncing.
I have a so-so Sigma EF500 DG ST flash on my canon but there is no
way it could do this sort of thing? One shot, maybe two within that
2-3 second window of opportunity (ie much slower than the camera).

Question: Can any of the Canon flashes recycle as fast as the
Nikon? I've searched here and on the Canon website but all seem to
suggest that while the recycle will be faster than my Sigma they
can't do 10 (or even 4?) continuous flashes spaced apart by
something like 0.1 of a second?? What is the best official "pulse"
time for the high end Canon flashes? I can't find anything listed.

Regards,
Tony
ps. My skin burst into flames when I touched the Nikon...sort of
like when a vampire goes out into daylight! I'll never do it again,
I promise :)
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top