Nikon SB400 vs SB600 on a D90

<p>I'm a beginner photographer and just recently bought my first DSLR, the D90. A lot of times, I am shooting indoors or somewhere where there is poor lighting and I am looking for a flash that could <em>at least</em> bounce off the ceiling so I could still get great photos without the "washed-out" look.</p>

<p>I've read through a lot of posts, articles about these two flashes but still I am still torn between them because of the following reasons:</p>

<p>

<ul>

<li>The SB400 seems to be all that I need right now for what I currently shoot (family & school events) however...</li>

<li>I am afraid that someday I would want/need the versatility and power that SB600 offers. I always want to further my creativity and with the SB600, I know I can do that.</li>

<li>For family and casual events, I'm kinda hesitant to pull out a big, bulky flash lest people might think I am showing off or expect "pro" quality photos from me (which I cannot guarantee). The low key size of the SB400 is perfect for me, especially when I also don't have a big camera bag where I can put it in.</li>

<li>I don't know, but I might come across a situation wherein I'll have to bounce the flash to the sides or to the back. I still don't know yet but I just might. Are these situations common?</li>

<li>If I need to bounce off the ceiling in portrait mode, I guess I can just shoot in landscape and crop it (for the SB400). :)</li>

<li>BUT... the off camera capabilities of the SB600 is what I'm really gonna miss if I get the SB400. Though, as I've mentioned, as a beginner, I still don't know YET in what cases I'm gonna be needing this feature. But I <em>really</em> do want to learn.</li>

<li>Money is kind of a factor right now. There are some events coming up soon in which I'll be needing a good flash. The SB400, I can buy immediately for that. But it might take me another month or so to save up for the SB600 which means I'll have no decent light for those events.</li>

</ul>

</p>

<p>Okay, my question is, which one should I go for?<br>

Won't the SB600 make me look like a wannabe pro photographer at this stage?<br>

I don't understand the GN associated with these things so is there really a <em>major</em> difference in terms of power? Can the SB400 bounce off medium-high ceilings? (showing photos where SB400 was used would be very much appreciated)<br>

Why can't these camera manufacturers make a DSLR with a built-in flash that can be tilted? :)</p>

<p>Thank you for taking time to read my VERY long post! Looking forward to your help.</p>

<p>I too debated between the SB400 and SB600. Ultimately I went with a SB600 (thanks Adorama used department!) and it's worked well so far. It gives me enough power fill the room with light when bounced up off the ceiling, netting me some great shots in low light without the burnt out direct flash look. I think the SB400 is a very capable flash, and if you're only planning on using it for the occasional family event, it will work well. If you're looking to get more into photography, especially with creative lighting, it will be worth it to spend the extra money to get the SB600. That will give you space to learn new techniques (like bouncing off walls, behind you, or shooting off the camera).</p>

<p>As for your concern about being regarded as a pro photographer if you use a large flash, if that's what people think, let them. Don't let people's perceptions control your decisions about gear. Always buy what's best for you, and suits your needs. We all start somewhere.</p>

<p>I would spend the extra for the SB600. I had it and it is a very good flash. The off camera abilities can help to make some creative portraits.</p>

<p>SB600- Off camera will become important to you, and it's capable of swiveling for portrait orientation bounce, which I don't believe the SB400 can do. BTW, who cares if people get "big flash envy?" Also, the SB600 does have more flash power, or greater range than the SB400.</p>

<p>I started with the SB-400 and found it too restricting but it is small and convenient and works well to bounce in a room with a 8' or so ceiling but the power is an issue at times unless you have a fast lens (I have a 50mm f/1.8).</p>

<p>I finally got around to getting an SB-600 - way more power, definitely worth the extra money but it is quite a bit larger. Using it off camera is easy and worth the extra money. I plan on picking up an umbrella to bounce it off of next. </p>

<p>I've also got a lightly used SB-800 coming my way soon but that was a 'right place at the right time' deal that I couldn't pass up from a friend.</p>

<p>If you can swing it, definitely go for the SB-600. Think of it as SAVING money since you won't have to spend the $150 or so for the SB-400 and then the money for the SB-600 later like I did.</p>

<p>P.S. - once I got the SB-600 and played with it for a day, I gave my friend the SB-400 to play with until he decides on what flash he is going to buy - that was about 3 months ago and I still don't miss it.</p>

<p>The number of times you'll need to "bounce the flash to the sides or to the back" will be miniscule compared to the number of times you'll want to turn the camera for portrait orientation (rotated 90 degrees) for a taller than wider image. A hotshoe mounted flash will rotate with the camera. Please consider that in your solution.<br /> <br /> DanBeauvais.com</p>

<p>No question you go with the 600. In my mind the 400 is only a small upgrade to the onboard flash of the D90.</p>

<p>The 600 gives you so much more headroom, in practically every way. From bouncing to flash range, to remote flash capabilities, its really not comparable. You can also add flash modifiers like a basic diffuser or a strap-on Lumiquest bounce, which is rather conspicuous, but gives you a much larger and softer apparent light source. Really, the universe of possibilities expands dramatically.</p>

<p>Definitely get the 600. If you're set on the SB400 because of its size, save your money and use the flash that's already on the D90. In one way, it's far more capable than the SB400 -- it can work in commander mode to control other flashes.</p>

<p>The D600's capabilities -- greater power, bouncing regardless of camera orientation, ability to slave to the pop-up flash (as well as several other Nikon units) make it a far more useful light source. If you're worried that people will expect too much quality from your photos because of your using it, assure them that it is perfectly possible to make a mess of lighting even with multiple flashes, light stands, umbrellas, etc.</p>

<p>SB600 and a Gary Fong 'Lightsphere 2 Clear'.</p>

<p>The SB400 is a great flash for people who don't want to learn photography but would like improved flash. It's also great for more advanced shooters as a <em>second</em> choice for lightweight or low-key situations. But if you want to learn you need a versatile tool like the SB600. And I just plain like the Fong.</p>

<p>I have both the SB600 and the SB400. There is nothing at all wrong with the SB400. It is cheap, easy to use, and will allow you to bounce your flash off the ceiling.</p>

<p>The bang for the buck on both flashes it pretty incredible. I bought an SB400, used it for a year, and then sold it to get an SB600 (and then another sb600, because once you see what modifying light does to photos....). The off-camera stuff is stellar, and the 600 is definitely worth the extra money. However, I do wish I'd kept the sb400, because there are times when I miss having that tiny, unobtrusive flash. You're absolutely right about changing expectations/reactions, and changing whether you have it with you all the time. But if I had to choose one to start with, I'd get the SB600 in a heartbeat.</p>

<p>i have both. i'd get the 600, no question. the 600 wont make you look like a 'wannabe' though its more 'professional' than the 400.if you show up at an event with a 400, you will certainly look like a wanna-be, though, if there are pro shooters there. ultimately, it's not about appearance but results.</p>

<p>there is a major difference not only in terms of power, but features. it's pretty easy with the 600 to dial down the flash for more natural look. with a 400 you have to do this from the in-camera menus, so you could miss shots fiddling with settings. the 400 is more of a travel/casual flash; the 600 is more of an advanced amateur/semi-pro flash which complements your d90's feature set. the price difference is only $100 or so, which isnt that much when you consider the benefits.</p>

<p>Eric,<br /> The D90 generally allows the user to dial down flash power by pressing the flash button on the camera body and turning the front dial, so it's a pretty convenient adjustment. I believe that this can be done even on the 400, although I don't have one to try. Of course, as I said earlier, I am also convinced that Benson would be better off with the 600.<br /> Benson,<br /> One detail. When I need a flash, one of my favorite ways is to set the on-camera flash to commander mode, set the flash unit to wireless remote, and shoot while holding the camera in one hand and the flash in the other. Even while bouncing most of the light, it gives me a better look than with the flash on the camera. You can't do that with the 400, at least not wirelessly, which is the easiest way.</p>

<p>If you are going to take pictures indoors, go with the one with higher power, SB600, which I have. Sometimes I wish I had the SB800 when I am shooting in a room with high celing, for example, that needs a lot more flash power to bounce efficiently in order to get an image with low noise. Clearly SB800 is more expensive and heavier so I think SB600 is a good compromise. The SB400 may be nice for traveling when you need to carry a lighter load.</p>

<p><em>"Money is kind of a factor right now. There are some events coming up soon in which I'll be needing a good flash." </em> This makes the decision kid of obvious, doesn't it</p>

<p>The best 'feature' of the SB-400 is its simplicity. It has one control/setting - on or off. It produces exceptional results, especially on the D90. It is small, lightweight and has ample power. </p>

<p>FWIW: I have a friend who has both flashes and a D90 and rarely uses the SB-600. In fact, the SB-400 is so light in weight that he rarely removes it from his camera. I guess it really all depends on what you are shooting, your shooting style and your preferences. And only you can answer that.</p>

<p><em>Keep in mind that if you buy the SB-400 now (at a really good price) and use it for a while and keep it in excellent condition, you will be able to sell it for just a little less than what you paid for it should you decide to upgrade in the future.</em></p>

<p> </p>

<p>It's been mentioned above, but it bears repeating (loudly!). If you rotate the camera into a vertical position (essentialy for shooting in many social settings), the SB-400 will no longer be able to bounce from the ceiling. You'll only be able to get sideways light, and the sideways shadows that go with them.<br /><br />And of course, the remote capability of the better strobe is the sort of thing that makes a huge difference once you invest 30 minutes in learning how to use it.</p>

<p>Matt, this is a very good point but the OP and others should keep in mind that the D90 has sufficient resolution to crop the image horizontally and maintain sufficient resolution for larger prints.</p>

<p>Spend extra for SB600 i once bought SB400 and after a while I regretted the decision and later purchased SB600. it is more flexible than 400.</p>

 

<p>Get the 600. The chances you will get the 600 and regret not getting the 400 is much, much smaller than vice versa. </p>

<p>Okay, I'm starting to lean towards the SB600 now since about 95% of you root for it and I agree about the features it can offer me in the future.</p>

<p>Still I like the unobtrusive size of the SB400 which I can easily bring to any occassion. But I guess I can use the SB600 off camera sometimes in an event so that it won't be bulging out of the top of my camera all the time.</p>

<p>Does the 600 come with its own bag? Is it a lot heavier than the 400?</p>

<p>I just bought my third SB600, using them with two D70s cameras. The wireless capability is great. I have three stands and umbrellas and last week shot a banquet hall set for 300 people using only two flash units on stands with umbrellas, worked great.</p>

<p>Yes, they have a nice pouch and a flat stand.</p><div></div>

<p>Everyone has already said it but go the 600. You will regret it otherwise.</p>

<p>I am a VERY occasional flash user, preferring natural light. I have a 400 (its what I bought when I didn't know better) and then invested in a flash cord so I could get it off camera and be more flexible including using bounce in portrait orientation.</p>

<p>Its an ok compromise solution because of how rarely I use flash, but I still wish to god I'd just gone the 600 in the first place - in fact the price difference between a 400+cord and a 600 is stupidly small and if I'd just started with the 600 I'd have a better flash unit and less stuffing around.</p>

<p>Wow, that is really great lighting Michael. Now I'm having ideas on how to use the SB600 without attaching it to my camera.</p>

<p>Though the 400+cord mentioned by Bernard could be another consideration. But then again, I don't want to be cheap and compromise the possibilities I can do with the 600. Okay, I'm 98% convinced that I'm buying the SB600. Time to save up.</p>

<p>Between the two? SB600. Been using mine for nearly half a year now, it's been great. That said, I shoot mainly outdoor for "wildlife", and I wish that I'd saved more and bought a SB800. Even with a flash extender and -2.7EV on my flash, I do occasionally get underexposure - would kick myself and wish I'd got the more powerful flash.<br>

Alvin</p>

<p>Benson - let me be clear that cord was a "cheap-arsed" work around to not having a 600. It is not at all a solution I'd recommend.</p>