HSS Shooting Strategy

[RustBeltRaw]

When I upgraded from the 580EX IIs I sold-off the TT5s. They worked OK, but the built-in RT is considerably better. I'd really encourage you to get the St-E3-RT...

All true, but the ST-E3-RT cannot do wireless second-curtain sync, and the range is relatively limited. It covers a studio - even a large one - quite well, but when your camera's six inches from the ground and the radio signal has to get through a crowd to a light stand 40ft (12m) away, the extra power from the Pocket Wizards becomes handy. And the ControlTL system enables wireless second-curtain sync, which is important for concert and fire performance photography. The shot below would look rather different with first-curtain sync.



All that said, if Canon would plug the holes in the ST-E3-RT's sync options, I'd be happy to stop carrying all the transceivers. But I'd still keep them, because I intend to muck about with Einsteins and other photon bazookas at some point.

For portraits you could use one light for key, one for fill, and one for hair; a hair light is one of the key areas that lifts a portrait from amateur into professional quality.

Agreed. Since I'm in the "a portrait is about the face" camp, I generally, I prefer a very, very subtle hair light, or none at all. My (largely non-paying) clientele seems to prefer colored rim or edge light, but your point stands. Honestly, I like the wireless manual control better than the wireless TTL.

[Colin Southern]

Personally I haven't had any issues with lack of range with the ST-E3-RT - if anything it's been better than the TT1 / TT5; only the traditional Plus IIs were legendary in that regard.

I agree about the 2nd curtain sync though - that one I don't understand the reason for.

[RustBeltRaw]

Personally I haven't had any issues with lack of range with the ST-E3-RT - if anything it's been better than the TT1 / TT5; only the traditional Plus IIs were legendary in that regard.

I'll certainly try it eventually. At which point you are welcome to say "I told you so!"

I agree about the 2nd curtain sync though - that one I don't understand the reason for.

Nor do I. Heck, you can make a very compelling case for always using 2CS instead of 1CS. Since the ControlTL system can do it, the shutter speed data is clearly available in the serial stream from the hot shoe contacts. And Canon, obviously, programmed it into that stream. So if they were intelligent enough to include the necessary data, why the deuce aren't they using it?!

[JR1]

I am hoping to shoot slow moving wild life (not BIF) with a 5D2 (BIGMA) and a 600EX-RT with a Better Beamer (Fill Flash). I am getting totally lost with regard the strategy of using HSS. Depending on which web site I visit, I see “don't use HSS, just shoot at standard sync speed” or “use, HSS at higher speeds but it comes at a cost of performance” but nobody seems to quantify the expected loss in performance. Since distance, camera to subject, is important for my shooting scenarios I am trying to understand what HSS loss in performance actually means, e.g., what happens to the GN, as a function of shutter speed, when using HSS while trying to use higher ISO values to increase "reach".

1. I have a BB for my Metz 45 cl4-digitals but rarely use it.

What exactly do you want from your flash

This



Or this (taken with a 60D and siggy 120-400)



Or this



All are using HSS, if you can tell me exactly what you want to shoot and achieve I will be more than happy to pm you or post what you need to do.

When I HSS I use 60D or D7000s at 1/4000th of a second with flash set to HSS and a flash duration of about 1/20,000th of a second.

[Colin Southern]

I'll certainly try it eventually. At which point you are welcome to say "I told you so!"

I'd normally suggest a chocolate fish, but I'm on a diet ... too many chocolate fish

Nor do I. Heck, you can make a very compelling case for always using 2CS instead of 1CS. Since the ControlTL system can do it, the shutter speed data is clearly available in the serial stream from the hot shoe contacts. And Canon, obviously, programmed it into that stream. So if they were intelligent enough to include the necessary data, why the deuce aren't they using it?!

All I can think of is that since the controller has to communicate with up to 15 slaves individually, it's some kind of timing issue.

[RustBeltRaw]

All I can think of is that since the controller has to communicate with up to 15 slaves individually, it's some kind of timing issue.

Certainly possible. I wonder if they could do it, but not without ruining compatibility with older flashes. Regardless, there's a definite egg-on-face aspect to a third-party product offering control solutions for your products that you don't. The 600EX-RT was an excellent chance for a clean slate on flash communications. As the only radio flash in Canon's line, it's not like it needs to be tied to the same disadvantages as older infrared flashes. Even if the controls were inconsistent, I wish they'd been a little more progressive with the 600EX-RT's software.

[Colin Southern]

Certainly possible. I wonder if they could do it, but not without ruining compatibility with older flashes. Regardless, there's a definite egg-on-face aspect to a third-party product offering control solutions for your products that you don't. The 600EX-RT was an excellent chance for a clean slate on flash communications. As the only radio flash in Canon's line, it's not like it needs to be tied to the same disadvantages as older infrared flashes. Even if the controls were inconsistent, I wish they'd been a little more progressive with the 600EX-RT's software.

I don't disagree with any of that - so I can only assume that they would have if they could have; I'm betting that they'd have known about the backlash they'd get over it in advance.

Yep - 3rd party products do do it, but those products don't do all that the RT system does - so I'm picking it was a design compromise they had to make (bit like my superman pills -- they work great, but they give me an itchy nose every 3rd Friday).

[RustBeltRaw]

When I HSS I use 60D or D7000s at 1/4000th of a second with flash set to HSS and a flash duration of about 1/20,000th of a second.

Bluntly, this is impossible. Flash duration (t.1 time) in high-speed sync is effectively equal to the camera's sync speed. It's possible to reach 1/250th (60D and D7000 sync speed) with a bunch of 1/20,000-duration pulses, but the t.1 time will still be about 1/250th, not 1/20,000th.

I'm betting that they'd have known about the backlash they'd get over it in advance.

Agreed. We certainly aren't the only ones squawking.

[inkista]

Yep - 3rd party products do do it, but those products don't do all that the RT system does ...

*koff*

YN-E3-RT. [POTN thread on same which includes a few posts by a YN engineer]

Fully compatible with 600EX-RT. Groups mode. ID codes. Groups D&E, etc. etc.

AF assist light.
2nd curtain sync.
Manual power control of remote flashes when used on a non-Canon iso-compliant hotshoe.
Groups mode on pre-2012 Canon bodies.

Oh. And it's about US$150.

The upcoming YN-600EX-RT is an unknown at this point, and obviously Yongnuo-cheap-for-a-reason but.... just saying. Canon may need to step up their game, here, even if Nikon never joins the built-in-radio-trigger party.

[Colin Southern]

*koff*

YN-E3-RT. [POTN thread on same which includes a few posts by a YN engineer]

Fully compatible with 600EX-RT. Groups mode. ID codes. Groups D&E, etc. etc.

AF assist light.
2nd curtain sync.
Manual power control of remote flashes when used on a non-Canon iso-compliant hotshoe.
Groups mode on pre-2012 Canon bodies.

Oh. And it's about US$150.

The upcoming YN-600EX-RT is an unknown at this point, and obviously Yongnuo-cheap-for-a-reason but.... just saying. Canon may need to step up their game, here, even if Nikon never joins the built-in-radio-trigger party.

Looks good. If they stuck a Canon badge on it they might have a winner

Or perhaps they could sell it to Nikon!

[RustBeltRaw]

The upcoming YN-600EX-RT is an unknown at this point, and obviously Yongnuo-cheap-for-a-reason but.... just saying. Canon may need to step up their game, here, even if Nikon never joins the built-in-radio-trigger party.

Proof that bothCanon and Nikon need to step up their games. Each has their advantages. Add 2CS to the 600EX-RT in both TTL and manual, use a Nikon CLS-style control system, keep the OEM reliability, and boom. Personally, I'll pay the extra $130, because I have a bad habit of staying outside when it starts to rain.

[Colin Southern]

Proof that bothCanon and Nikon need to step up their games. Each has their advantages. Add 2CS to the 600EX-RT in both TTL and manual, use a Nikon CLS-style control system, keep the OEM reliability, and boom. Personally, I'll pay the extra $130, because I have a bad habit of staying outside when it starts to rain.

We'll probably never know why Canon didn't include 2nd curtain sync, but I can understand why they would only offer limited compatibility with pre-2012 Canon equipment: they're a business that want's to sell post-2012 equipment (which I don't have a problem with).

Companies like YongNuo irritate the heck out of me though; if they've got the skill to produce something that works where Canon's doesn't (like 2nd curtain sync) then why the heck couldn't they have come up with their own "RT" system instead of riding Canon's coat tails? Instead, they wait for folks like Canon to invest millions in developing, marketing, and establishing something like this, and then produce a rip-off product at a fraction of the cost.

Want to know why Canon products cost a lot more? One of the reasons is that R&D is proportionally greater due to the fewer units they sell due to people buying knock-off products like this.

Personally, I hope Canon can go after them for a few patent infringements. I won't be touching one with a barge poll; it's unethical in my opinion.

/end_rant.

[RustBeltRaw]

We'll probably never know why Canon didn't include 2nd curtain sync, but I can understand why they would only offer limited compatibility with pre-2012 Canon equipment: they're a business that want's to sell post-2012 equipment (which I don't have a problem with).

I think maintaining compatibility with pre-2012 equipment is important for the 600EX-RT and ST-E3-RT's infrared system. With the radio system, I think they missed a chance for a clean-sheet makeover on the control software and communications standard. There are no legacy radio products to create compatibility concerns, so why carry IR system weaknesses (2CS is also unavailable on IR) into the radio product line?

Companies like YongNuo irritate the heck out of me though; if they've got the skill to produce something that works where Canon's doesn't (like 2nd curtain sync) then why the heck couldn't they have come up with their own "RT" system instead of riding Canon's coat tails? Instead, they wait for folks like Canon to invest millions in developing, marketing, and establishing something like this, and then produce a rip-off product at a fraction of the cost.

In general, I agree. The YN-E3-RT copies everything from the Canon nomenclature to the case appearance, and the internal circuitry is probably largely or entirely copied from the original. As an engineer, I have a problem with the laws that allow that and the attitude that makes it tempting.

All that said, where do you stand on a product like the PocketWizard Flex radios? Even though their product is a ground-up design, it still uses Canon and Nikon TTL protocols.

[Colin Southern]

I think maintaining compatibility with pre-2012 equipment is important for the 600EX-RT and ST-E3-RT's infrared system. With the radio system, I think they missed a chance for a clean-sheet makeover on the control software and communications standard. There are no legacy radio products to create compatibility concerns, so why carry IR system weaknesses (2CS is also unavailable on IR) into the radio product line?

You've confused me with that lot; the St-E2 uses near IR (generated in the visible spectrum with a white light from a flash tube, passed through a red filter), but it's not something the ST-E3-RT has (it's radio signal only) (so no compatibility there) (however the 600EX and 600EX-RT maintain that compatibility using the flash bulb -- the same as other master controllers such as the 550EX, 580EX and 580EX II). I'm not sure that they did carry any weaknesses through to the new radio system; the lack of 2nd curtain sync is the only irritation that comes to mind.

In general, I agree. The YN-E3-RT copies everything from the Canon nomenclature to the case appearance, and the internal circuitry is probably largely or entirely copied from the original. As an engineer, I have a problem with the laws that allow that and the attitude that makes it tempting.

All that said, where do you stand on a product like the PocketWizard Flex radios? Even though their product is a ground-up design, it still uses Canon and Nikon TTL protocols.

I don't have the same issue with PocketWizard because at the time Canon & Nikon didn't offer the same functionality, and their protocols were the only ones their cameras spoke -- so PW would have had to develop their own cameras to do it any different -- quite a different situation to the likes of YN.

[inkista]

So... I guess I shouldn't mention that the YN engineer on POTN stated they're going to be releasing an RT-compatible receiver for studio strobes?

Is it still R&D theft if you're offering an RT product Canon doesn't make? I can see the case for yes. But I can also see the case for no. If Canon hadn't created the RT system, Yongnuo couldn't coast by on it. But if Yongnuo makes this unit, it could also open up a lot of Canon shooters who weren't contemplating the RT system because there was no way to integrate manual lights into it to the possibility of moving to the RT system. And it may not be financially viable for Canon to develop a similar unit, because people would expect a relatively low (say, <=$100; e.g., PW PlusX) pricepoint for a manual-only trigger.

[Colin Southern]

So... I guess I shouldn't mention that the YN engineer on POTN stated they're going to be releasing an RT-compatible receiver for studio strobes?

Good luck to them on that; with studio strobes the most important thing is the triggering (I use plus IIs and plus IIIs for that); the power adjustment is too slow for ETTL to work -- manual power adjustment can be useful though (although I do it from my iPad with the Elinchrom SkyPort gear)

Is it still R&D theft if you're offering an RT product Canon doesn't make? I can see the case for yes. But I can also see the case for no. If Canon hadn't created the RT system, Yongnuo couldn't coast by on it. But if Yongnuo makes this unit, it could also open up a lot of Canon shooters who weren't contemplating the RT system because there was no way to integrate manual lights into it to the possibility of moving to the RT system. And it may not be financially viable for Canon to develop a similar unit, because people would expect a relatively low (say, <=$100; e.g., PW PlusX) pricepoint for a manual-only trigger.

Who knows - and it's moot anyway because they're not going to change based on what we think Going by their ST-E3-RT with the YN-E3-RT name tag, I don't think they're going to lose any sleep over it either way!

[RustBeltRaw]

You've confused me with that lot...

Because I assumed the ST-E3-RT included an IR transmitter. My mistake.

On the basis that essentially all innovation draws, in some respects, from previous innovation, I too, am okay with PocketWizard. They at least started with a clean sheet of paper.

[Colin Southern]

Because I assumed the ST-E3-RT included an IR transmitter. My mistake.

To be honest, the ST-E2 was a bit of a dog in my opinion.

Useable inside, but outside was pretty hopeless - especially if the lights were behind and using a brolly (I had mine facing backward on a "flagpole" attached to the camera bracket)