Why Use Pocketwizards?

[crosbyharbison]

So if I'm controlling 2 canon 580 ex II's why not just use canon's solution the ST-E2 ("http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/164264-REG/Canon_2478A002_ST_E2_Transmitter.html)?


It sounds expensive and bulky to replicate the features already built into the flash units or is there something I'm not getting here.

[George Slusher]

Good question, but there is something you're not getting. Unless you're talking about the new PocketWizard E-TTL system (Mini TT-1 and Flex TT5), it's two quite different systems. The ST-E2 is a "wireless controller" that works with some Canon flashes (and some Sigma flashes, like the 500 DG Super). It acts much like a 580EX attached to your camera. (In fact, you can use a 580EX that way, turning off its own flash.) It exchanges exposure settings with the remote flashes. It can work very well. (Note the conditional phrase.)


But--and this is a big "but"--it has major limitations that can make a wireless set-up difficult or even impossible.


1. The flashes have to "see" the ST-E2 signals. Their sensors have to FACE the ST-E2 for best results. IF you're in a small room, the ST-E2's infrared signal can bounce off walls, but that reduces the range and reliability. Otherwise, you'll have to turn the flash bodies so that they face the ST-E2's location, then turn the heads in the direction you need


2. For the same reason, it's difficult to set up a wireless network with umbrellas, though you can turn the cold shoe on the umbrella bracket around so that the flash sensor faces away from the umbrella. Even then, though, they probably won't directly face the camera. It's even more difficult to do a wireless set-up with softboxes, scrims, and other modifiers that block the flash sensor.


3. A ST-E2 (or 580EX/580EX II) controlled network is even more problematic outdoors. If you're shooting in the daytime, using fill flash, you can probably forget about a wireless network--you'll have the proverbial slim and no chances.


4. Wireless networks are notoriously unreliable--thepercentage of mis-fires can be quite high unless you're in optimal conditions.


5. To make matters worse, the ST-E2 uses an odd battery (2CR5) that can be hard to find and is not cheap. When I got mine, I tried to find a battery locally. One (of three) Radio Shack store had one for something like $20+. Finally, I found one at Best Buy for about $13. (I later ordered two from an eBay seller for $5 each with free shipping. B&H has them for $6 plus shipping.) That's a far cry from AA alkalines that the PocketWizards use.


The PocketWizard (PW) Plus transceivers, on the other hand, are wireless remote triggers. They don't support E-TTL. Their job is to transmit and receive a simple radio signal that tells the remote flash(es) to fire. The lack of TTL is the obvious disadvantage (that also means no high-speed sync) but the advantages are significant:


1. Much longer range--up to 300 ft in the best circumstances, vs maybe 20 ft for the ST-E2. I've gotten at least 180 ft.


2. Line-of-sight is not required. The remote flash can be behind a wall, for example, or behind the camera--almost anywhere. (Some indoor sports photographers put flashes up above the arena/court, firing down, for example.)


3. Works outdoors as well as indoors.


4. Much more reliable--not 100%, but pretty close, depending upon the distance.


5. Works with umbrellas, softboxes, etc. (Some studio lights have a PocketWizard receiver built-in.)


6. The PocketWizards can actuate a camera, as well as the flash(es) for a totally remote setup. (That will require one more PocketWizard unit, of course.) I have 3 PW Plus II transceivers and one transmitter (no longer made--I got all 4 on eBay). I can put a transceiver on the camera hot shoe, set it to channel 1, and connect the "Camera/Flash" jack to the camera's remote trigger connection through a special cable. The PWs for the flash(es) on channel 2. I carry the PW transmitter set to channel 1. When I push the trigger button, the PW transceiver on the camera fires the camera shutter, then, when it gets the signal through the hot shoe, it transmits a "fire" command on the next channel up (2) for the flashes.


7. You don't have to mount the PW on the camera hot shoe. You can connect it (with the right cable) to the camera's PC connector (if it has one). That way, you can also have a flash on the camera (or on a bracket, using the off-camera cord). Later today, I'll try to take a photo of my 30D + Really Right Stuff Wedding Pro Flash bracket ("http://reallyrightstuff.com/flash/04.html) + 580EX + PW transceiver and a set-up without the bracket to show what I mean.


For more on using off-camera flash, go to the "Strobist ("http://www.strobist.blogspot.com/)" site. There are tutorials, articles, and discussions.

[Maleko]

As clearly put by George, the ST-E2 isn't very "reliable". I have used one and sometimes the flash won't go off because as stated, it isn't in direct line with the flash and remote. My mate even went back to the good old Flash Shoe Cord instead of the ST-E2 it was annoying him that much!


I would definately go for an alternative, such as the Pocketwizard.

[Sean Setters]

You don't necessarily have to go with Pocketwizards to get good reliability and range. Two more affordable options include the Cybersyncs ("http://www.alienbees.com/cybersync.html) and RadioPopper JrX ("http://shop.radiopopper.com/) units. They are "dumb" triggers like the original Pocketwizards, but are significantly cheaper. The RadioPopper JrX units were just released a week ago, and the only drawback I've heard so far is the relatively short battery life of the transmitter. I use the Cybersyncs, and they are simply fantastic. Both of these systems provide about 300ft of range, while the original Pocketwizards (non-TTL) have a range of about 1600ft (very few people actually use that kind of range, though). It is possible to use Cybersyncs in relay mode for increased range. Cybersyncs can also be used to trigger the shutter wirelessly if you have a motor (shutter release) cord with a miniphone jack. In fact, I used this feature yesterday while taking this self-portrait (the strobe in the background and the camera are both being triggered by Cybersyncs):



http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2428/3863087943_01d8577dd4.jpg ("http://www.flickr.com/photos/budrowilson/3863087943/)





Another TTL-capable alternative are the RadioPopper PX ("http://www.radiopopper.com/products/) units. They're about as expensive (if not more) than the new TTL-capable Pocketwizard units, but they're generally regarded as a much more reliable product. They developed TTL-to-radio communication; only after their pioneering R&D did Pocketwizard get off their lazy bums to try to develop the same thing. ;-)


If you want to put our toe into the water of radio-based non-TTL flash firing, you might want to investigate the cheapest alternatives--those being ebay triggers. They include Cactus, Yongnuo, etc. The ebay triggers can be extremely unreliable (although it is possible to receive a decent set), but it's a relatively cheap way to find out if you want to spend more money on a higher quality product.

[George Slusher]

Sean:


Thanks for the info. The original RadioPoppers (P1) were a neat idea, but they and the newer PX both work entirely differently than the new PocketWizard TTL devices. The original RadioPoppers picked up electromagnetic pulses when the on-camera flash fired, then transmitted those to the receiver on the remote flash. The receiver then pumped the appropriate optical signal via a fiber optic cable to the sensor on the remote flash. The PX seems to use a better implementation. For example, the receiver now attaches to the front of the slave flash, with an IR emitter smack up against the flash's sensor. That's a better system, to be sure. The original P1s were a mess to install, apparently--you had to get the fiber optic in just the right place. (Peter Gregg devised a clever mounting system for the P1 that used a wide rubber band to hold the fiber optic in place.)


The big advantage to the original RadioPopper P1 (and probably the PX) over the PW devices for Canon users seemed to be better reliable range, primarily due to EMI from a 580-series remote flash affecting the PW Flex TT5 transceiver in receive mode. (It wouldn't affect the Mini TT1 transmitter or a Flex TT5 on the camera.) PW has been working on a shield for the flash. An interim solution is to move the flash away from the transceiver, using an off-camera cord, and/or orient the receiver antenna and the flash in particular ways. An even better solution, I've read, is to use Canon 430EX slaves. They do the same thing as the 580 series (slightly less power and less swivel freedom), but cost a lot less. ($270 vs $420 at B&H)


An even bigger advantage for the RadioPopper is that their devices are compatible with both Canon and Nikon TTL systems as they come. The PW units, OTOH, are uniquely for Canon or Nikon systems. (The Canon system is out; the Nikon system is expected--sometime.)


There are several disadvantages to the RadioPoppers, compared to the new PocketWizards:

You MUST use a flash (or commander like the ST-E2) on the camera. The PocketWizard Mini TT1 can be used without a flash, since it interfaces directly with the CAMERA, not the flash. The PW Mini TT1 and Flex TT5 (the transceiver) both have Canon flash shoes on top. That increases the cost of the system, as, to have two off-camera flashes on their own (no flash from the camera location), you have to use three flashes or two flashes and a commander. The PW units would require just the two remote flashes.

The RadioPopper PX requires that you affix essentially permanent tape and/or velcro to your flash units. Their mounting for the transmitter looks like it might get in the way of using flash modifiers like the Lumiquest devices. They will also reduce the resale value of your flash. (I've watched eBay for over a year. The price of Canon 580EX and EX II flashes with attached velcro is usually less than those without velcro; most have many fewer bids, as well. A lot of people apparently don't want gooey stuff on a $300+ flash.) It's also not clear if the mounting for the receiver will interfere with the normal operation of the sensor when the receiver is removed.

In order to interchange a flash from master to slave, you'd have to put both mounting systems on. The PW devices don't require that, as they have no mounting systems.
The new PocketWizards can also act as a simple non-TTL trigger by themselves (the Flex TT5 has an external sync connector like a Plus II); the RadioPopper PX units cannot, as they don't interface electronically with the flash or camera. IOW, they can't be used with off-camera Vivitar 285HV flashes, a favorite of "strobist" fans. The PX transmitter can trigger the JrX receivers that can interface with studio strobes and non-TTL flashes, like the 285HV. Similarly, the PW Mini TT1 & Flex TT5 can trigger PW Plus & Multimax transceivers & receivers.
The PW Flex TT5 transceiver, like the "simple" PW units, can trigger a camera remotely, then relay the signal to the remote/off-camera flashes when the shutter fires. The Flex TT5 can even trigger a continuous "motor drive" burst by the camera.

The PW units can be upgraded (firmware) and "programmed" via a USB port. I didn't see that capability listed in the RadioPopper manual, but it's probably not necessary, in any case, as the RadioPopper system is much simpler.



The RadioPopper web page says:


"<span class="productText"]
Not only is the RadioPopper PX system the leader in wireless ETTL by
radio, but the newest addition to the line, the JrX, makes RadioPopper
the first solution to be able to mix ETTL compatible flashes, full
power studio strobes and low cost handheld flashes in a single shot."


The PW TTL units have been able to do that since they came out--they can control the PW Plus and Multimax devices. The PW Multimax transceivers can do some other things, from their site.

Selective Quad-Zone Triggering
Time-Lapse Imaging


Multi-Pop Flash


Rear-Curtain Sync
SpeedCycler (sequential triggering of sets of flashes, used in product photography, for example)




I'm not sure just how useful they would be. It's likely that the
RadioPopper PX units can do some unique things, too. Both support
high-speed sync.


In summary, both systems have advantages and disadvantages. Their concepts of operation are different, however, so I wouldn't agree with your last sentence. RadioPopper's R&amp;D would have been pretty much irrelevant to that for the PW. It would actually be simpler, as they wouldn't have to reverse-engineer the Canon or Nikon TTL system.


An interesting note: the RadioPoppers use essentially the same concept (with different implementation--e.g., the pickup on the master flash) as IR "relays" for A/V system remotes. In 1990 or so, I had a wired system, called the "Rabbit," that would pick up the IR output from a remote, send the pulses over a thin wire to a transmitter that would pump out the IR signal. It didn't have to point at the unit (TV, stereo, cable box, VCR, etc), as the signal would bounce around the room. I had the cable box and VCR downstairs and a "remote" TV upstairs. I ran the Rabbit wire and the coax for the RF signal out a window, up the outside wall and in through a window. A few years later came similar devices that use radio linking, like the Radio Poppers.

[Rodger]

Two more affordable options include theCybersyncs ("http://www.alienbees.com/cybersync.html)andRadioPopper JrX ("http://shop.radiopopper.com/)units.


Dangit I always forget that "affordable" in the photography world doesn't equal affordable in the highschool student world haha. Until I find a new job, the Cactus V2s system will have to suffice. ohhh well. At least they get the flash off camera.

[George Slusher]

I almost forgot: if all you want is a simple trigger, without TTL, you don't have to use something as expensive as the PocketWizard or RadioPopper devices. There are Chinese-made RF triggering systems that work well over a limited range. I have a set (well, I actually have two transmitters and three receivers) that I got on eBay from seller "jiakgong," whom I've had very good results with. They are smaller, lighter, and a LOT cheaper than the PW units. Their reliable range is much less than with PW--maybe 30-40 feet, in good conditions, but that can be enough for many uses. The transmitter uses a garage door remote battery, which is not cheap, but not as expensive as the battery for the ST-E2.


You may see/read/hear about the "Cactus" system, one brand from China that is actually sold by at least one retailer in the US, Midwest Photo Exchange ("http://www.mpex.com/browse.cfm/2,185.html), who have a lot of neat gear. The Cactus is a bit more expensive than the units I bought ($30 vs $25), but they should work as well and you don't have to wait for 2 weeks or more to get them from China.

[Sean Setters]

In summary, both systems have advantages and disadvantages. Their concepts of operation are different, however, so I wouldn't agree with your last sentence. RadioPopper's R&amp;D would have been pretty much irrelevant to that for the PW. It would actually be simpler, as they wouldn't have to reverse-engineer the Canon or Nikon TTL system.


What I meant to say was that Pocketwizards had no incentive to develop TTL-capable radio-based flash triggering until Radiopoppers came along.Pocketwizards simplyweren't developing the technology (maybe thinking it was too complicated or not cost-effective). Once theRadioPopper P1 units were announced and then released, the folks at Pocketwizard felt it was in their best interest to develop a similar technology (although implemented differently). The evidence is that they rushed through R&amp;D and releasedthe new units without sufficiently testing them. While there are certain measures that can be taken to minimize the flaws associated with the new units (which involve more cost or inconvenience), Pocketwizards are still playing catch-up (and probably will for some time) to RadioPoppers in that particular market segment. Yes, the Pocketwizards (on paper) are easier to use and provide more features--but in use, they're just not as reliable as the PX system. I'll take reliability and range over a couple of nifty features any day. Think of it this way--the RadioPopper P1s were their first attempt at the technology. The PX system is their second (having addressed the shortcomingsof their first attempt). The Pocketwizards are on their first attempt at this technology. Do you want to beta-test their technology or go for something that's been proven and refined?

[crosbyharbison]

The PocketWizard (PW) Plus transceivers, on the other hand, are wireless remote triggers. They don't support E-TTL. Their job is to transmit and receive a simple radio signal that tells the remote flash(es) to fire. The lack of TTL is the obvious disadvantage (that also means no high-speed sync)
<div style="clear: both;"]</div>





Is there a pocketwizard product that supports E-TTL (i.e. high speed sync)?


Also since I will be using Canon's 580 ex II's I was alarmed when I read this:


While the FlexTT5 works ideally upon many older Canon flashes, the
580EX, 580EX II, and 430EX emit strong RF noise across the
PocketWizard's frequency range, and this significantly reduces
out-of-box range performance of the FlexTT5 Transceiver.In
PocketWizard's research, the interference from the flash varies wildly
from sample to sample; they can only guarantee that the flash will work
to ~30' (~10m) in all conditions, although they do have many suggestions for increasing this considerably.





So what should I buy?

[Sean Setters]

Is there a pocketwizard product that supports E-TTL (i.e. high speed sync)?


Yes, the new Pocketwizard Flex (transceiver) units and Mini (transmitter) units work with E-TTL. Yes, you can do high-speed sync with them. Pocketwizards also developed a technology called Hypersync that allows another stop or so pastthe naturalmax sync speed of your camera using (I believe) any flash. The units are re-programmable using a USBcable and your computer.



While the FlexTT5 works ideally upon many older Canon flashes, the 580EX, 580EX II, and 430EX emit strong RF noise across the PocketWizard's frequency range, and this significantly reduces out-of-box range performance of the FlexTT5 Transceiver.In PocketWizard's research, the interference from the flash varies wildly from sample to sample; they can only guarantee that the flash will work to ~30' (~10m) in all conditions, although they do have many suggestions for increasing this considerably.


This is exactly the shortfall I was talking about because of therushed the R&amp;D and testing before releasing the units. The performance, I've heard, using a 580EX flash is abismal. There are steps you can take to improve the situation, but they are inconvenient and somewhat costly (at least compared to everything working great out of the box). The biggest reason to pay the premium price for Pocketwizards has always been range and reliability. With the new units, the range and reliability of the units have clearly suffered (using the 580EX units, at least) and thus have stained the Pocketwizard's great reputation.


As far as what you should buy--I suggest you do as much reasearch on the new Pocketwizard units as well as the Radiopopper PX units if you absolutely must have E-TTL capable, off-camera, radio-triggeredflashes. Otherwise, if youthink you can live without E-TTL, then read up on Cybersyncs, Radiopopper JrX, and CTR-301p (decent ebay) units. Personally, I use Cybersyncs after having had ebay units for quite some time. I enjoy the reliability and range of the Cybersyncs, and I don't mind adjusting the power of my flashes manually.


For examples of what I've done with Cybersyncs (as well asebay units),surf throughto my flickr photostream ("http://www.flickr.com/photos/budrowilson/).

[George Slusher]

The new PocketWizard products (MiniTT1 and FlexTT5) and the RadioPoppers support E-TTL II. The older PocketWizard Plus II and Multimax and the RadioPopper JrX do not use TTL in any form. They are remote triggers that work with any camera with a hot shoe or PC connector, any flash or strobe (you may need a hot shoe if the flash doesn't have , studio lights, etc. In a simple sense, they are the wireless equivalent of a network of cords connecting the flashes to the camera. (Some pros and some studio lights use "household" connectors and regular household extension cords.) So, the two sorts of products are really quite different.


Which you "should" buy will depend upon your own uses and criteria. If you want long range and reliability and E-TTL compatibility, the RadioPoppers are probably best. You'll also need one more flash or the ST-E2 to act as the source for the RadioPopper transmitter, so the cost will be higher. That extra cost may be partially mitigated by the cost of a shield for the PocketWizard units. If the range you need isn't as long (how many people put the off-camera flash 150 ft from the camera?), the extra capability, flexibility and lower cost of the PW system may be attractive, as long as they work reliably in your situation.


It will also depend upon what sort of set up you will use. It sounds like you are considering two off-camera flashes with no flash on the camera, as you mentioned two 580EX II's and a ST-E2. In the cost estimates below, that's what I've used. However, there are other possible setups, like one on-camera flash and one remote/slave flash. You can use a Canon 430EX II as a slave (not as a master), for $150 less than the 580EX II.


Here are some example costs for using two off-camera flashes, using B&amp;H and RadioPopper prices. I don't include batteries or shipping, as that can vary a lot. You can easily figure other options. I don't include the cost of lightstands, umbrellas, umbrella brackets/swivels, cables, etc., that you will also need, depending upon the situation. (They can really add up--see below.) Be prepared for a major cost shock.


RadioPopper PX system:

2 Canon 580EX II: $420 x 2 = $840

ST-E2: $220

RadioPopper Transmitter: $249 (currently out of stock)

RadioPopper Receivers (2): $249 x 2 = $498
Total: $1807 (a bit outside the budget of a starving student!)
Option A: Could use another 580EX II as the master: total = $2007
Option B: Use 430EX II slaves ($270): total = $1507 with ST-E2, $1707 with 580EX II as master
Option C: Use one 430EX II slave, one 580EX II slave, plus ST-E2: $1657



You can figure other options. You can't use a 430EX II as the master flash--it can be used only as a slave.


PocketWizard E-TTL-compatible:

2 Canon 580EX II: $420 x 2 = $840


ST-E2: Not needed


MiniTT1 Transmitter: $199


FlexTT5 Transceivers (2): $219 x 2 = $438
Total: $1477 (less, but still outside the starving student budget.)
Option B: use 430EX II remote flashes (both): $1177
Option C: use one 580EX II and one 430EX II: $1327



The main difference in price is the need to have a flash or commander on the camera with the RadioPoppers. That adds $220 for the ST-E2 or $420 for a 580EX II. The cost difference would be reduced if you end up having to use a shield with the PocketWizard system.


All those options are quite expensive. They might be worth the cost, though, if you really need the E-TTL capability. The big question, though, is whether you need E-TTL. It's very expensive. Do you want to spend that PLUS the cost of stands, etc.? It could easily add up to over $2000 with the RadioPoppers. I'd think that one would have to be very serious, indeed, about the benefits of E-TTL flash to spend that much.


If you're using a fairly static setup, you can easily use the flashes in manual mode. E-TTL can actually get in the way, especially if you keep the lights fixed but move the camera around. For example, if you move the camera to an angle to show more shadow on the subject, the E-TTL II system will try to lighten the shadow, even if you want the shadow to remain as it was. You can use a simple adjustable flash (non-TTL) as one or both remotes, as well as the more sophisticated Canon flashes. Examples are the Vivitar 285HV ("http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/61441-REG/Vivitar_233965_285HV_Auto_Flash.html) (which I use), $90 at B&amp;H, and the more capable LumpPro LP120 ("http://www.mpex.com/browse.cfm/4,12311.html), $130 at Midwest Photo Exchange. You'd want to have one 580EX II for on-camera (or bracket) E-TTL use. The disadvantage would be that you can't use the 285HV or LP120 in an E-TTL wireless system. If you want to be able to use one flash on the camera as a master and one slave, you could use 2 x 580EX II's or a 580EX II and a 430EX II--or find the older 580EX and 430EX used on eBay.


You could then use either the RadioPopper JrX system or the PocketWizard Plus II transceivers. I haven't seen a comparison of them re: capabilities like range. In other features, they seem pretty much equal for ordinary use, though the PW Plus II transceivers can act as relays, triggering a camera, then sending the flash signal, as I mentioned above. You can trigger a camera with the JrX receiver with the right cable (probably identical to the PW cables), but you'd need an extra receiver. Still, the cost of a JrX transmitter and receiver is $50 less than the cost of one PocketWizard Plus II transceiver!


About cables: the JrX comes with a miniphone-to-sub-miniphone
(2.5mm) cable plus miniphone (3.5mm) and 1/4" plugs. Those will work
well with many studio strobes, but NOT with the 580EX II, which has a
PC connection. You'll need a miniphone-to-PC cable ("http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/131298-REG/PocketWizard_804_301_PC_1_Miniphone_to_PC.html)
($18 @ B&amp;H) for each 580EX II. If you use the 430EX II, 285HV or the older Canon 580EX, you
can use a miniphone-to-hot-shoe cable ("http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/586996-REG/Impact_8091020_1_Mini_Phono_Plug.html) ($30 @ B&amp;H) or buy a cheap hot shoe with a
PC connection and a miniphone-to-PC cable. The LumoPro LP120 has a miniphone connection as well as
PC &amp; hot shoe, so it works with almost anything. You may find cheaper cables from other sources, especially on eBay.


RadioPopper JrX remote triggers:

2 Canon 580EX II: $420 x 2 = $840


Jr X Transmitter + receiver: $119


JrX receiver: $69
Miniphone-to-PC cables: 2 x $18
Total: $1064
Option B: use 430EX II remote flashes (both), with 2 hot shoe cables @ $30: $788
Option C: use one 580EX II and one 430EX II with appropriate cables: $926 (still able to have a 2-flash wireless network)

Option D: use a Vivitar 285HV as one remote (need the 580EX II for general on-camera use): $746

Option E: use a LumoPro LP120 as one remote: $746 (flash is more expensive, but you don't need the extra cable/hot shoe)




PocketWizard remote triggers (using PW Plus II):

2 Canon 580EX II: $420 x 2 = $840


Plus II Transceivers (3): $169 x 3 = $508 (no extra cables needed)

Total: $1348
Option B: use 430EX II remote flashes (both), with 2 hot shoe cables: $1108
Option C: use one 580EX II and one 430EX II, with one hot shoe cable: $1228
Option D: use a Vivitar 285HV as one remote (need the 580EX II for general on-camera use): $1048


Option E: use a LumoPro LP120 as one remote: $1048



If you don't need the range of the PocketWizard Plus II or RadioPopper JrX (whatever that is), you might use the Cactus triggers from Midwest Photo Exchange--$37 for the transmitter &amp; receiver with decent batteries ("http://www.mpex.com/browse.cfm/4,11447.html) and $25 for an extra receiver with good battery ("http://www.mpex.com/browse.cfm/4,11444.html). You don't NEED extra cables with the Cactus V2s receivers, as they have a hot shoe on top, but it's a precarious situation. I'd prefer to use the proper cables (e.g., PC-to-PC or PC-to-hot-shoe), but left them out of the following.


Cactus V2s remote triggers from Midwest Photo Exchange:

2 Canon 580EX II: $420 x 2 = $840


One set of transmitter &amp; receiver: $37

Additional receiver: $25
Total: $902 (no extra cables needed)

Option B: use 430EX II remote flashes (both): $602

Option C: use one 580EX II and one 430EX II: $752
Option D: use a Vivitar 285HV as one remote (need the 580EX II for general on-camera use): $572


Option E: use a LumoPro LP120 as one remote: $602



Again, that does NOT include the other stuff you'll need--lightstands, umbrellas, swivels/brackets, etc. Midwest Photo Exchange has several package deals that variously include lightstands, triggers (PocketWizard or Cactus), umbrellas, swivels, cases, and flashes, plus other useful doodads. Their "Starving Student" package with Cactus triggers and LP120 flashes plus all the other gear is $450 ("http://www.mpex.com/browse.cfm/4,12322.html). For me, that plus a 580EX II (total $870) would be a great way to go, as you'd get all the basic stuff you'd need. Later, you can move up to the JrX or PocketWizard Plus II triggers for the greater range/reliability or even the RadioPopper PX or PocketWizard TTL systems.


I built my own system piece-by-piece, much of it from eBay. Below is what I spent for a minimalist 2-flash system. (The costs include shipping.)

580EX (used): $285
Used 285HV: $71
Chinese triggers (transmitter + receiver set @ $24 + extra receiver @ 17): $41
Hot shoes with cables (PC-to-PC), 2 @ $8.50 = $17
Total to compare to above: $414




Then, add in the other stuff for a "strobist" system of 2 matched off-camera flashes plus the 580EX for on-camera E-TTL:

Additional used 285HV: $64
Lightstands: $58 (included reflector boom &amp; holder plus a case) + $45 (Giottos from B&amp;H) = $103
Umbrellas (2 white satin collapsible @ $21, 2 silver @ $29): $100
Umbrella swivels (2 @ $15 from B&amp;H): $30
Total: $711



I spent more on lightstands because I needed heavy-duty stands, rather than lightweight, compact stands, to use outdoors. The lightweight stands can easily blow over, or, even if you weight them down, be damaged by the wind catching a nearly 3-ft wide umbrella. If they go over, it may be goodbye flash and/or PocketWizard.


Later, I moved to the PocketWizard Plus II system. I got 3 transceivers on eBay for a total of $417.


There are all sorts of gadgets one can add to the basic system--ball bungees, brackets or caddies for attaching the PW triggers to a lightstand, longer cables, various types of cold and hot shoes (one can use a cold shoe--no electrical connection--if the flash has an external connection), "motor drive" cables to connect the PW triggers to the camera's remote trigger connection, plus a bewildering array of flash modifiers--umbrellas, soft boxes, reflectors, gels, etc.


If you get really serious, you can invest a small fortune in external battery packs that will cycle the flash(es) more quickly and allow more shots. (It's easy to overheat the flash if you use full power shots in rapid succession, however.) Quantum Turbo batteries cost $389 ("http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/43375-REG/Quantum_Instruments_QTB_Turbo_Battery_with_115V.ht ml) each at B&amp;H, plus you'll need cables for your particular flashes ($28-54 each, depending upon flash &amp; manufacturer). I got two used Turbo batteries plus cables for the 580EX and both 285HVs for a total of $422 on eBay. A cheaper option with the Canon 580EX II is the Canon CP-E4 battery pack, ("http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/498738-REG/Canon_1947B001_CP_E4_Compact_Battery_Pack.html) $150 at B&amp;H. (You can get cheaper battery packs on eBay, as well.) It doesn't cycle as fast or last as long as the Turbo batteries, but, with rechargeable NiMH AAs, it's a lot cheaper and lighter (1 lb vs 2.5+ lb). The cost and weight can add up, fast.

[crosbyharbison]

Thanks for the awesome post George. I think I should add that, for now at least, I am just shooting in a terribly light gym. I've progressed over one year from not being able to shoot at all in the gym to getting okay shot. This year I'm looking for great shots.





http://img34.imageshack.us/img34/3008/crosbyharbison1.jpg


My first attempts at indoor sports with available light in a different decently light gym with a slow lens (Canon 28-135 3.5-5.6)

http://img196.imageshack.us/img196/7852/crosbyharbison2.jpg


First attempt in the terrible gym but I bought a 430 ex II that I had mounted directly on the camera. Notice the ambient is more than 2 stops below of what I had the flash at. Also note the long shadows on the wall.




http://img34.imageshack.us/img34/4975/crosbyharbison3.jpg


Finally I bought a 580 ex II to mount on camera at a lower power setting to reduce large shadows on the back wall and commanded the 430 ex II of camera left for some rim/separation light. (disregard the poor focus). Again notice how terrible the ambient light is. I have a 40d and I'd really like to not put the iso above 800 as it gets pretty noisy for my taste.





This season I'm hoping to get two flashes off camera for more mobility and add some gels to the flashes for color temperature.


After consideration of the posts here I've decided to just use my 430 and 580 with 3 pocketwizard plus II units and then sell the 430 and replace it with another 580 when I have more money.


So I would be spending $576.80 now and then $200 (net) to replace the 430 later.


Of course for my setup I will need 2 umbrella stand adapters and bogen superclamps as well as some gaffers tape and some ball bungees if I can't clamp onto anything in there.

[George Slusher]

Quite a challenge you've set yourself, Crosby! Shooting indoor sports is a real PITA. I don't go to basketball games, but I do shoot indoor horse shows, which can have even worse lighting, if that's possible. Our 4-H Youth Fair Horse Show is in an arena that has not only dim lighting, but very difficult-to-handle color balance, as the overhead lights seem to vary in color output (possibly based on their age?). I've had to go to f/2.8 zooms (Canon 17-55mm f/2.8 IS &amp; 70-200mm f/2.8L IS) plus a bunch of primes--Canon 35mm f/2, 50mm f/1.4, 85mm f/1.8 (the one I use the most), and 100mm f/2, plus a Sigma 30mm f/1.4 that I got after the last horse show and haven't tried out in that venue. Later, I'll post a shot that demosntrates the difficulty. I end up using ISO 1600 or even 3200 on my 30D much of the time in that arena, with the usual noisy results, but that's better than blurred images due to subject movement.


If I were in your situation, I'd strongly consider putting money into one or more faster (and better quality) lenses, rather than more flash gear. The 17-55mm f/2.8 or 24-70mm f/2.8 might work well. (The EXIF data on your photos show FLs of 28mm and 44mm.) For what you'd spend on E-TTL triggers, especially the RadioPoppers ($750 + another flash or the ST-E2, total of $970-$1170), you could buy either lens used or the 17-55mm new. Which would be better would be up to you. They would both be almost 1 stop faster and have better image quality.


You also might consider a prime lens or two (or three!). Look through your
photos and see what the common focal lengths you use and figure out if
a prime would work. I would guess, if you're close-in, that the Sigma 30mm f/1.4, Canon 28mm f/1.8 or Sigma 28mm f/1.8 would be good. They would all be at least two stops faster than your f/3.5 lens--the f/1.4 lenses are even two stops faster than the f/2.8 zooms. Even the vernerable Canon 35m f/2 might be OK. The shallow depth of field can be useful, too, to put the background out of focus. Other advantages of the primes are that they are smaller, lighter, use smaller (i.e., less expensive) filters, and easier to use. Get a fairly wide prime and crop when you need to.


To put it into perspective, the shutter speed for your ambient light shot was 1/100th at f/3.5. At f/2.8, that would be about 1/150. At f/2, it would be 1/300, at f/1.8 it would be 1/378, at f/1.4, it would be 1/625! Maybe you don't need flash, especially with the difficulty in matching the color of the ambient light.


New prices:


Canon 28mm f/1.8 - $500


Sigma 28mm f/1.8 - $379 - includes hood


Sigma 30mm f/1.4 - $439 (I paid $330 used) - includes hood


Canon 35mm f/2 - $300 (I paid $212 for used with a hood and Hoya SHMC UV filter)


Canon 35mm f/1.4L - $1,299 (Probably not worth it)


Canon 50mm f/1.4 - $399 (I paid $335 used, but it included the hood--$20-27 at B&amp;H, for a total new of $419-426)


(The Canon 50mm f/1.8 at $110 might be usable, but it's not as fast-focusing nor as good as the f/1.4)


Canon 17-55mm f/2.8 IS - $1,030


Canon 24-70 f/2.9L - $1,349


Thus, you could get the 30mm f/1.4 and 50mm f/1.4 for less than the RadioPoppers + ST-E2.

[crosbyharbison]

I forgot to mention that I'm using the 50 mm f/1.4 now and love it and its focal length. I do find that anything shallower than f/2.5 produces undesirable results. The canon 28 sounds like a great lens for some wider shots and I'll look into it.


To get my Canon EX 430 II to work with the Plus II system do I need this ("http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/586996-REG/Impact_8091020_1_Mini_Phono_Plug.html)?


If I want to use a third flash can I get the mini TT1 on my camera and mount a flash on top of it and still operate with my Plus II's?

[peety3]

While the FlexTT5 works ideally upon many older Canon flashes, the 580EX, 580EX II, and 430EX emit strong RF noise across the PocketWizard's frequency range, and this significantly reduces out-of-box range performance of the FlexTT5 Transceiver.In PocketWizard's research, the interference from the flash varies wildly from sample to sample; they can only guarantee that the flash will work to ~30' (~10m) in all conditions, although they do have many suggestions for increasing this considerably.


This is exactly the shortfall I was talking about because of therushed the R&amp;D and testing before releasing the units. The performance, I've heard, using a 580EX flash is abismal. There are steps you can take to improve the situation, but they are inconvenient and somewhat costly (at least compared to everything working great out of the box). The biggest reason to pay the premium price for Pocketwizards has always been range and reliability. With the new units, the range and reliability of the units have clearly suffered (using the 580EX units, at least) and thus have stained the Pocketwizard's great reputation.





The new PW units do have some issues relating to R&amp;D/testing, but the short range is NOT a by-product of a rushed timeline. Pocket Wizard US products have been on a particular frequency for years if not decades. Some of the recent Canon flashes emit significant RF energy on the PW US frequency band, and that's not Pocket Wizard's fault.

[peety3]

Is there a pocketwizard product that supports E-TTL (i.e. high speed sync)?


Yes, the new Pocketwizard Flex (transceiver) units and Mini (transmitter) units work with E-TTL. Yes, you can do high-speed sync with them. Pocketwizards also developed a technology called Hypersync that allows another stop or so pastthe naturalmax sync speed of your camera using (I believe) any flash. The units are re-programmable using a USBcable and your computer.





To elaborate further, the new PW units can do normal/HyperSync/high-speed sync or normal/high-speed sync or normal/HyperSync. For any of the modes that use high-speed sync, they can increase the usable light output of your flash, up to 1.8 stops better (camera-dependent). This is a prime reason why I have three Flex units on order, due to arrive on Monday.


I'll admit that I'm aware of the distance limits with the 580II flashes that I use, so I ordered two SuperClamps (to hold the Flex units on the stand away from the flash) and two OC-E3 cables to interconnect the goods, and picked up some ferrite cores at RadioShack today.

[George Slusher]

[removed]

[crosbyharbison]

Is there a pocketwizard product that supports E-TTL (i.e. high speed sync)?


Yes, the new Pocketwizard Flex (transceiver) units and Mini (transmitter) units work with E-TTL. Yes, you can do high-speed sync with them. Pocketwizards also developed a technology called Hypersync that allows another stop or so pastthe naturalmax sync speed of your camera using (I believe) any flash. The units are re-programmable using a USBcable and your computer.





To elaborate further, the new PW units can do normal/HyperSync/high-speed sync or normal/high-speed sync or normal/HyperSync. For any of the modes that use high-speed sync, they can increase the usable light output of your flash, up to 1.8 stops better (camera-dependent). This is a prime reason why I have three Flex units on order, due to arrive on Monday.


I'll admit that I'm aware of the distance limits with the 580II flashes that I use, so I ordered two SuperClamps (to hold the Flex units on the stand away from the flash) and two OC-E3 cables to interconnect the goods, and picked up some ferrite cores at RadioShack today.
<div style="clear: both;"]</div>





Let me know what kind of range you have after you test; I'm interested.

[George Slusher]

[removed]

[peety3]

I'll admit that I'm aware of the distance limits with the 580II flashes that I use, so I ordered two SuperClamps (to hold the Flex units on the stand away from the flash) and two OC-E3 cables to interconnect the goods, and picked up some ferrite cores at RadioShack today.
<div style="clear: both;"]</div>





Let me know what kind of range you have after you test; I'm interested.
<div style="clear: both;"]</div>





I've experimented in my front yard and on a "gig" with the PW Flex system. In my front yard, I found that I could go perhaps 100-150' with the PW units in "optimum" position (umbrella mount tipped over 90', Flex antenna straight up, flash head as far from Flex as possible, camera-mounted Flex transmitter antenna pointed up) using no other accessories. I found about the same range with the Flex separated from the flash using a ferrite-equipped OC-E3 as well as the Canon CP-E4 external battery pack. I think my mistake was not testing the flashes with the remote-mounted Flex but without the battery pack, as I suspect that might have given me more to work with. Honestly, with two flashes (one gelled red, the other gelled blue) aimed at my large white SUV (Ford Excursion) and a 24-105 mounted to my 1D3 body, the SUV was approaching "speck" smallness in the sample photos (i.e. this wasn't a likely lighting scenario that AA flashes could really handle anyway).


At a gig, I decided to go simple and mount the Flex units in their optimum position and forgo the remote mount and/or battery packs. For an indoor dinner, anything solid in the way could cause problems (but half the time the pillars were messing up my composition anyway). At another indoor dinner, I ended up with the light stands rather far away from the podium, and I made the mistake of trying to snoot the remotes to avoid spill on the projection screen, leaving me with a rather tight window of well-lit area. Reliable triggering for the most part to probably 120', just not used to operating without a local sense of recharge-ready indication (i.e. operator issues).


Outdoor, I struggled a bit because I don't do much flash group portrait work (because I rarely have the power to actually do it, so I shoot natural light) and therefore don't have ambient-flash balancing skills well developed. However, I found myself successful doing a group shot of ~100 people at probably 20' away. For this shot, my stands were up as high as they could go, 580EX II flashes zoomed to 35mm I think, with a gobo on the bottom to minimize near-side white-out. Aperture was f/5.6 for DoF, aperture priority -1EC, and ISO 800 gave me a shutter speed of 1/1000 (which is theoretically the maximum HSS efficiency gain using the Flex units on a 1D Mark III, of about 1.8 stops). Some back-row people are a little dark, but my stands were as high as they'd go, so "oh well". :) This is probably shot with the 17-40L or possibly the 24-105L. Range wasn't the real factor here IMHO, instead it was the HSS power gains and I'm certainly happy with what I got (except for "forgetting" to gel the flashes with 1/4CTO).


http://photos.templin.org/albums/toc09-quick/TOC09_038.sized.jpg