Pocket wizard vs. Radio popper

[irvin]

Which one and why? All opinions welcome! (working with a d300 and nikon speedlights). Thanks!

 

[Port Royal Dad]

I’m a speedlight junky.

Being that I love my 580EX speedlights, particularly their portability, I have not felt the compelling need to buy other lights, so I wasn’t too concerned with controlling other lights outside of speedlights.

The bottom line for me is this…for the most part I know how to use my speedlight’s in terms of lighting and their various operations functions, and their limitations. With the speedlight on my camera, and so at the camera’s position, I can control practically all aspects of my lights: Ratio, output, manual vs Ettl, etc.

With the Radio Popper PX system, I do not have to learn any other operating system. For the most part, they are plug-n-play. The Radio Popper PX allows me to continue shooting with my current work flow.

I’m sure that the Pocket Wizards share this same functionality too, but the Radio Popper seems a lot more simple. Also, there is a, much debated, interoperability issue between the new Pocket Wizards Mini/Flex and the Canon 580EX speedlights; and all I have are 580EX’s. And I wasn’t about to sell my speedlights.

So I bought into the Radio Popper PX.

Regards, Mike

--
B.R.A.S.S. (Breathe, Relax, Aim, Sight, Squeeze)



A Link To - WilbaW's Unofficial Rebel Forum FAQ- http://snipurl.com/RebelFAQ

 

[irvin]

Thanks, mike, for the reply.

Something i don't see mentioned in any of the reviews: once you get the pocket wizards, younneed one for each speedlight. With radio Poppers, you can mix the radio signal with the original signal. Is that correct? If so, that's a lot of money saved.

 

[Port Royal Dad]

The Radio Popper PX system operates in a very unique way. But it still isn’t cheap/inexpensive. Especially if you want to maintain ETTL/Ittl and High Speed Sync capabilities. This is the strength of the PX system too.

You need a transmitter on top of a commander/master flash, and then a receiver for each slave flash. The nice thing is that the transmitter and receiver can be set for either a Nikon flash or a Canon flash.

It essential takes flash data that’s transmitted via the IR line-of-sight and then puts the very same data onto a Radio Signal.

The transmitter sits on top of a commander or a master flash which picks up the flash signals via magnetic pulses from the flash head, and then transmits the information via radio signal to the receiver. At the receiver, the radio signals are then converted back to IR for the slave flash.

Here's a link to the RP website. Take a look at the two videos: The PX System and Details and Setup . http://radiopopper.com/px-system

Again, I choose Radio Popper over Pocket Wizard because of the issues between the Canon 580EX flash and the Mini/Flex. But I haven't seen any complaints from the Nikon folks and their flashes.

Regards, Mike

Thanks, mike, for the reply.

Something i don't see mentioned in any of the reviews: once you get the pocket wizards, younneed one for each speedlight. With radio Poppers, you can mix the radio signal with the original signal. Is that correct? If so, that's a lot of money saved.

--
B.R.A.S.S. (Breathe, Relax, Aim, Sight, Squeeze)



A Link To - WilbaW's Unofficial Rebel Forum FAQ- http://snipurl.com/RebelFAQ

 

[irvin]

Sorry i didn't explain myself, mike. This is what i meant:

Let's say you have 5 flashes to be used off-camera. With pocket wizards you need one transmitter and 5 receivers. With the radio poppers you could get by with one transmitter and 2 receivers IF 3 of your flash units are within range of the camera's own signal. That is a very important difference, because, most of the time, at least a couple of speedlights are near the subject. This is the main reason i'm leaning toward the radio poppers; if cost were the same i'd go with pocket wizards, thogh.

 

[JAE1]

Pocket Wizards. Everyone else uses them. If I go to a studio, need to rent/borrow something, etc. chances are I have to be using Pocket Wizards.

Plus the Pocket Wizard module for my light meter is awesome. (not sure if RP has anything similar)

 

[Port Royal Dad]

That's right. With the on-camera commander/master flash, you can still trigger any slave flash that do not have a RP receiver. As long of course that the slave can see the signals from the master.

I agree too...that aspect is nice.

Regards, Mike

Sorry i didn't explain myself, mike. This is what i meant:

Let's say you have 5 flashes to be used off-camera. With pocket wizards you need one transmitter and 5 receivers. With the radio poppers you could get by with one transmitter and 2 receivers IF 3 of your flash units are within range of the camera's own signal. That is a very important difference, because, most of the time, at least a couple of speedlights are near the subject. This is the main reason i'm leaning toward the radio poppers; if cost were the same i'd go with pocket wizards, thogh.

--
B.R.A.S.S. (Breathe, Relax, Aim, Sight, Squeeze)



A Link To - WilbaW's Unofficial Rebel Forum FAQ- http://snipurl.com/RebelFAQ

 

[tundracamper]

One other thing I considered was long term compatability. If Nikon or Canon changes the signalling for some new feature in their flashes, so long as it still uses IR, the RadioPopper will work. My understanding of the PW system is that the remote flashes are setup in regular TTL, not remote mode. So, new features require a firmware upgrade, after the designers figure out the language. With the RP, you are good to go. I don't buy the argument to buy something just because that's "what everyone else has."

 

[irvin]

I'm leaning toward the Pocket Wizards because, having a much wider user base, odd are the company will be around for a while. The Radio Popper guys should have priced their units much cheaper - as it is, they run the risk of not surviving, in spite of having a good product. Another factor is that the Pocket Wizards don't require to set the flashes to 'remote' and their output can be changed with KNOBS (with the optional zone controller).

I still have some homework to do, though. It is a serious (at least to me) financial commitment, specially given that this is just a hobby.

 

[UKphotographers]

I use Quantum radio equipment. I too don't subscribe to the 'everybody else uses it' mentality and like to control my equipment remotely - which is what the Quantum equipment does for me, has been doing, and continues to do.

I've been watching the development of the PW's for a couple of years and tried the early Nikon versions, but they were unreliable so they were ditched. As time goes on, the glitches will be ironed out and they will become more useful.

If you just require remote TTL or remote Manual control, both the RP's and PW's will serve your needs, but if you're looking for more bang for your buck, only the PW's will provide higher Hypersynch speeds which can translate to a greater flash/ambient ratio (give your flash more power compared to what it will normally have). A useable level for this, (making a compromise on even coverage) I established was up to +1.6 stops.. thats like adding another 2 flash units to your existing 1... This is a unique feature and could be very useful, especially if further improvements are made. When I tried this initially, the only way that this advantage could be obtained was by using a speedlight remotely, now it seems this same advantage is available using a speedlight fitted on the camera fitted transmitter (TT1/TT5).

Your reasoning to stick with the RP's for the IR conversion to radio is sensible, but you still lose the Hypersynch capability, but with Canon versions of the PW's allowing IR control of remote group A, it's not entirely beyond reason to expect that this might translate through to Nikon at some point.

I enjoy the benefit of the Quantum system which also controls my speedlights, but if I was to be solely reliant on only speedlights, being able to increase flash output when it's really needed in bright conditions would seem like a really attractive proposition.

--
Ian.

http://www.commercialphotographer.co.uk

Theres only one sun. Why do I need more than one light to get a natural result?

 

[irvin]

Thank you for your help, Tundracamper & Ian.

I work with Nikon speedlights exclusively, so I'm leaning toward the Pocket Wizards. I think both systems are very similar in features/cost, when everything is said and done. Whenever that's the case, I feel more comfortable going with the industry 'standard' (in this case the PW). The Radio Poppers should offer potential customers some real incentive to take a chance on them.

BTW, I have been investigating other systems, but it seems the all have severe limitations (the most common one being the lack of sync beyond 1/250). In the end, I prefer to pay more for a headache-free solution.

 

[tundracamper]

only the PW's will provide higher Hypersynch speeds

NOT TRUE! RP simply extends the Nikon AutoFP via radio. It's my understanding that the PW uses some non-standard protocol to enable HSS. I was using my flashes just the other day at 1/2000 with the RP, and it worked great.

Your reasoning to stick with the RP's for the IR conversion to radio is sensible, but you still lose the Hypersynch capability,

Again, check your source. The RP simply extends EVERY Nikon feature via radio. It's PW that decided to interrupt the Nikon language to enable certain "features."

If you want to learn what the RP's can do, instead of spreading misinformation, check out Dave Black's video's where he shoots hockey, surfers, and motorcyclers, all using high speed sync with two RP receivers and 8 Nikon SB-900's in remote mode. Those videos are what convinced me that RP was the best route for me. If I can find a link, I'll come back and post it.

 

[tundracamper]

That didn't take long! Scroll down to the bottom of the page. All the videos are good, but the motocross and surfer ones are pretty concise on what he does. Really neat!!

http://www.daveblackphotography.com/workshop/11-2010.htm

 

[tundracamper]

BTW, I have been investigating other systems, but it seems the all have severe limitations (the most common one being the lack of sync beyond 1/250). In the end, I prefer to pay more for a headache-free solution.

Yes, if you are going to spend that kind of money, you want HSS. To my knowledge, the RP, PW, and Quantum remote systems are the only ones that provide this feature. Make sure YOU understand all the features that each system provides before purchasing. Don't rely on what other's tell you. Like I said above, the Dave Black videos really helped me since I like to shoot sports.

 

[Port Royal Dad]

I like his setup. And his photography is awesome.

Thanks for the link.

Regards, Mike

That didn't take long! Scroll down to the bottom of the page. All the videos are good, but the motocross and surfer ones are pretty concise on what he does. Really neat!!

http://www.daveblackphotography.com/workshop/11-2010.htm

--
B.R.A.S.S. (Breathe, Relax, Aim, Sight, Squeeze)



A Link To - WilbaW's Unofficial Rebel Forum FAQ- http://snipurl.com/RebelFAQ

 

[irvin]

Thank you for the advice (and the link). You're absolutely right: spending this much money requires thorough investigation of all possibilities. So far, it seems to me the choice is between the pw and rp.

I have been watching all their videos and the two syatems seem very capable to me. Hard decision

BTW, I have been investigating other systems, but it seems the all have severe limitations (the most common one being the lack of sync beyond 1/250). In the end, I prefer to pay more for a headache-free solution.

Yes, if you are going to spend that kind of money, you want HSS. To my knowledge, the RP, PW, and Quantum remote systems are the only ones that provide this feature. Make sure YOU understand all the features that each system provides before purchasing. Don't rely on what other's tell you. Like I said above, the Dave Black videos really helped me since I like to shoot sports.

 

[tundracamper]

I have been watching all their videos and the two syatems seem very capable to me. Hard decision

You are correct. Here is something else to consider....

When I first setup my RP system, I was having problems getting the system to operate at 100% reliability with the transmitter on an SB-900 master. This was particularly true after I put on a telephoto lens. I was getting very frustrated.

So, I put the system in diagnostic mode. In that mode, the transmitter and receivers tell you the number of flashes that they are sending/receiving. Turns out, the system was always sending pulses and they were always being received. Well, when the SB-900 was zoomed to 200 mm (for that telephoto!), the PX transmitter was not picking up all the pulses. The number dropped from like 17 to 12. So, it was transmitting and the receivers were receiving, but the remote flashes weren't firing. I went back and looked at the manual to determine that I had the transmitter mounted too far forward. Once I moved it back, all started working perfectly. The diagnostic mode on the RP helped me figure out the problem VERY quickly. I was seeing that all the receivers were in fact correctly interpreting what was being sent - but some dummy had put the transmitter in the wrong place.

On top of that, the RP is a dual hardware system, working with Canon and Nikon. Plus, with fiber optics, you can run multiple flashes off a single receiver. That cuts down the cost difference significantly.

You can tell I'm biased toward the RP, but have been very happy with their features and performance so far.

 

[UKphotographers]

only the PW's will provide higher Hypersynch speeds

NOT TRUE! RP simply extends the Nikon AutoFP via radio. It's my understanding that the PW uses some non-standard protocol to enable HSS. I was using my flashes just the other day at 1/2000 with the RP, and it worked great.

Your reasoning to stick with the RP's for the IR conversion to radio is sensible, but you still lose the Hypersynch capability,

Again, check your source. The RP simply extends EVERY Nikon feature via radio. It's PW that decided to interrupt the Nikon language to enable certain "features."

If you want to learn what the RP's can do, instead of spreading misinformation, check out Dave Black's video's where he shoots hockey, surfers, and motorcyclers, all using high speed sync with two RP receivers and 8 Nikon SB-900's in remote mode. Those videos are what convinced me that RP was the best route for me. If I can find a link, I'll come back and post it.

Well... this is going to be very embarrassing for you. I'm correct on both counts.

HSS isn't Hypersync. RadioPoppers can't do Hypersync. Hypersync enables you to retain full power output whilst exceeding your maximum x-sync. HSS doesn't. Where a PW can power an SB900 at full output to 1/800s with no loss, the standard Nikon HSS and RP's both lose 2.6 stops PLUS the 1.6 stops increase between 1/250s and 1/800s that PW provide - a total loss on behalf of RadioPoppers of 4.2 stops. 4.2 stops !!

HSS forces your flash to pulse to emulate a continual ambient type illumination and reduces output by 2.6 stops. Hypersync doesn't.

Your indoctrination by Dave Black's video towards the Radiopoppers is nothing new. Before you start slinging allegations, I suggest you reread my post and then go and check your own facts.

The use of 8 speedlights used in David Blacks video in HSS, I can match using only 1 (one) Quantum.

The PW system is capable of providing +1.6 stops more output from an SB900 than it is normally capapable of by enabling the same level of output to be used at 1/800s rather than 1/250s. At this shutterspeed, if you want to match one SB900 At 1/800s with a PW TT1 and TT5 you would need 28 SB900's if used with RadioPoppers .

They don't tell you that in the video do they ?!! LOL!

8 speedlights used with RadioPoppers in HSS barely cancel out the HSS loss / penalty.

You can read here if you want to understand this more fully:
http://www.commercialphotographer.co.uk/blog/?p=274

--
Ian.

http://www.commercialphotographer.co.uk

Theres only one sun. Why do I need more than one light to get a natural result?

 

[irvin]

Thanks, Ian

That's some very interesting data there!

One question: in essence, with PW you get full power up to 1/800 only, as opposed to 1/8000?

Hey, even if full power is available up to 1/800 only, I think that feature alone tips the balance in favor of PW.

HSS isn't Hypersync. RadioPoppers can't do Hypersync. Hypersync enables you to retain full power output whilst exceeding your maximum x-sync. HSS doesn't. Where a PW can power an SB900 at full output to 1/800s with no loss, the standard Nikon HSS and RP's both lose 2.6 stops PLUS the 1.6 stops increase between 1/250s and 1/800s that PW provide - a total loss on behalf of RadioPoppers of 4.2 stops. 4.2 stops !!

HSS forces your flash to pulse to emulate a continual ambient type illumination and reduces output by 2.6 stops. Hypersync doesn't.

Your indoctrination by Dave Black's video towards the Radiopoppers is nothing new. Before you start slinging allegations, I suggest you reread my post and then go and check your own facts.

The use of 8 speedlights used in David Blacks video in HSS, I can match using only 1 (one) Quantum.

The PW system is capable of providing +1.6 stops more output from an SB900 than it is normally capapable of by enabling the same level of output to be used at 1/800s rather than 1/250s. At this shutterspeed, if you want to match one SB900 At 1/800s with a PW TT1 and TT5 you would need 28 SB900's if used with RadioPoppers .

They don't tell you that in the video do they ?!! LOL!

8 speedlights used with RadioPoppers in HSS barely cancel out the HSS loss / penalty.

You can read here if you want to understand this more fully:
http://www.commercialphotographer.co.uk/blog/?p=274

--
Ian.

 

[tundracamper]

You are correct that I was comparing apples to oranges. HSS is not AutoFP. I have heard of putting a flash on the hotshoe in AutoFP and then using the Sync Port to hack another flash into providing full output during the AutoFP flash. Is that was you are referring to? The article seems to indicate this. That gain of 1.6 appears somewhat deceiving as the ISO is being increased. Also, according to what I see, the SB-800 does not have the same output over the entire flash duration.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/zelig2/3363442862/

So, this approach does not come without some disadvantages. To imply that this is a solve-all approach seems deceiving. If you have one SB-900 at full power versus 4 at a lower output, the 4 will cycle much faster, allowing one to capture images more frequently. So, HSS comes at a cost. Clearly, each approach has it's compromises.