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?


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 + 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" 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 and RadioPopper JrX 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):









Another TTL-capable alternative are the RadioPopper PX 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 theCybersyncsandRadioPopper JrXunits.

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, 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.