The more I use Nikon's CLS, the more I like it!

<p>No question, today, just a comment about CLS - the Nikon Creative Lighting System (speed lights like the SB-910 and SB-800 triggered via a master controller in Commander Mode).</p>

<p>I have been dabbling with CLS for years, but I put more emphasis on using it in the past year or so. I purchased the SU-800 earlier this year after being disappointed with the reliability of flash heads in Commander Mode. I'm very impressed with the performance of the SU-800 and the reliability of its communication with the flash units. The more I use the CLS system, the more I like it. Lots of possibilities and lots of fun! Keep up the good work, Nikon!</p>

<p>I tried it and ditched it as it is to unreliable outdoors in daylight. Have now switched to the Phottix Odin flash trigger and receivers. These are 100% reliable up to 100 mtrs and can trigger the flash units around corners. Allow TTL and high speed sync with three groups and all can be adjusted from the camera unit including flash zoom on each group.</p><div></div>

<p>Sorry uploaded a picture of the Canon one's but they also make them for Nikon that I use with my D600.</p>

 

The first time i used cls was the last time i used it and bought radio triggers. Its good for close proximity and indoors only

for reliability. Other than that its mot worth much glad u like it though.

<p>Another disappointed user of CLS here too. It failed on me big time when I tried a simple setup of on-camera flash for fill and off-camera key lighting. The Key light was set just behind the camera and no more than a few feet away. CLS failed to trigger the key about 50% of the time. Back to completely reliable dumb radio triggers for me, since I also find that fiddling about in a camera menu to set flash levels takes more time than simply walking over to the flash and pressing a button or two on it.</p>

<p>Edit: Incidentally, does anyone use TTL automation for multiple off-camera flash setups? Since the camera can't work out which flash is supplying light to where in the subject; how the heck does it know what power to apply to which flash? Seems like the lighting ratios would be a complete crap shoot to me.</p>

<p>I agree with the OP that the SU-800 works well in many (indoor) situations; the pop-up never gave me but grief when I tried to use it as a commander. I got foreground spill light, long recycle/waiting times, frequently closed or half-closed eyes, and uncertain triggering of the remote(s). The SU-800 avoids the first three problems and in small to mid size white or light coloured rooms, the triggering has been reliable for me. It also has a convenient control panel that I find easier to use than going into the camera's menu system to adjust settings for each flash group.</p>

<p>Outdoors, or in large/dark indoor spaces, if I need a remote flash, I prefer to use larger flashes with their own proprietary radio triggers (where the receiver is built into the flash and allows flash energy to be adjusted from the transmitter on the camera). The flash energy range of my Elinchroms is better suited to solve larger scale lighting problems and balancing with bright daylight.</p>

<p>I would like to see Nikon integrate radio receivers into their flashes so that there is no need for extraneous units that need to be plugged in and extra batteries need to be maintained. A built in receiver would get its power from the batteries inside the flash. Perhaps in camera bodies such as the D750, which include built in wifi, also a radio trigger with full CLS-style controls could be integrated into the camera body. I guess the main issue in integrating it into those camera bodies with full metal chassis is that the transmission and reception would be poor. Accessory radio triggers with a control panel similar to the SU-800 could then be used for cameras that cannot accommodate a built in radio trigger due to their construction.</p>

<p>For some reason Nikon hasn't gotten into radio triggering of flashes yet. Perhaps they will do that in the next generation.</p>

Rodeo. I have 6 622n slaves I use in weddings. Ive tried ttl in one wedding and it just stinks. Its inconsitent and not

accurate at all. Since then off camera flash are strictly in manual power. I use 3. Usually at 1/32 power. In addition to the

on camera flash which runs in ttl. I do have to adjust that for certain pictures. The dj lights on the dance floor drives the

metering crazy. I can shoot 5 shots in a tow with people standing atatic for a picture and get 5 different exposures

altogether.

<p>If you have multiple groups of flashes in TTL mode, the CLS system issues a set of preflashes from each group in turn, and using the matrix meter it can see which part of the image area is lit by which groups and how much energy to output from each flash group to achieve a balanced exposure. This works sometimes and other times does not; using multiple TTL groups successfully takes some practice to learn what works and what should be avoided. If you want a high degree of consistency from shot to shot, manual flash should be used.</p>

<p>There is also a lighting ratio mode which you can take advantage of if you use the SB-700 as commander. From what I understand of how it works, you specify the lighting ratio for two remote groups and TTL takes care of determining the overall flash exposure. I haven't used this yet but theoretically at least it seems like a good idea to prevent the character of the shot from differing too much from shot to shot and yet allowing some degree of movement of the subject relative to the flash positions.</p>

 

<p>For most of my flash shots I'm using big monolights anyway, but when I need something quick and accurate at close range such as portraits of small childrena and families on the fly, I've come to really like the simplicity of CLS.</p>

<p>Kent in SD</p>

<p>It did not work for me. I set up in a long front room where I wanted to take photos of a friends golden wedding. Although the flashes seemed to fire the results were so dark and gloomy that I gave up and just put them on manual mode. Amazingly (or perhaps predictably) the few film photos I took using a main bulb gun firing PF1b's and a bounce slave firing PF5b's came out so much better...</p>

<p>Often one needs to adjust the TTL flash compensation similarly to using exposure compensation in ambient automatic exposure modes. E.g. if the walls are white maybe +1/3 or +2/3 stop compensation is in order as a starting point. It is always a good idea to make test shots before relying on some configuration and make adjustments (+-EV as well as positioning of the lights) if the results are not initially satisfactory. Also remember that in a dimly lit interior the image on the LCD looks brighter than it would in bright ambient light, so it's best to look at the histogram and blinking highlights. I sometimes forget that the LCD image seems brighter in the dark, and end up having to adjust the images more in post-processing than I would have liked. But it's an operator error quite obviously. A screen which adjusts itself with ambient light would be great. </p>

 

<p>My experiences have been hit and miss with CLS. I have used it successfully inside and out with the onboard flash triggering two SB800 units. The biggest problem I have encountered is 'closed eyes' in an indoor family portrait situation where I had the remotes firing into umbrellas on either side but the onboard flash invariably caused someone to blink 8 or 9 times out of 10. I'm glad I took enough shots to salvage the shoot.<br>

Most recently while shooting an 18 member family group, also indoors, my test shots were all satisfactory. I put one flash on a mantle and one on the other side of the room on a bookshelf, both aimed upwards. My tripod was positioned in a French door opening to an adjoining room. The camera was on a 10 second timer to allow me to get in the picture, too. When viewing the shots later here at home I realized that one of the flashes hadn't fired consistently resulting in vicious shadows that took me hours to remove. After careful consideration, I remember pulling the tripod just a few inches farther into the adjoining room to allow for a bit more of a comfort zone for post processing and I guess it was just enough to lose contact with the sensor on one of the SB800s. Of course, this is all 'driver error' and fixed with experience. However, I never have any problems working the same way with my two Metz mz70-5 units. They are similarly controlled but don't ever surprise me. They also have large proprietary batteries that are much better suited to the task than 4 or 5 AA cells for every SB800 employed, but then they don't have little stands or fold up neatly into my camera bag for portability. </p>

 

<p>Wow rough crowd! I can't say I have used CLS extensively, but it has always worked fine for me. I agree - never liked using the built-in-flash as commander. </p>

<p>I've had good experiences with my MU-800 and three SB-600 flashes for small venue concerts, outdoor portraits, and even an empty banquet hall set up for 200.</p>

<p>I had reliability problems using the built-in flash as a commander. It worked sometimes, but if the lights weren't in front of the camera, the didn't fire a lot of the time. The SU-800, by comparison, is amazing. Indoors, outdoors, flashes behind umbrellas and soft boxes, the little round sensor on the flash pointed in the wrong direction - no problem! Consistent flash every time.</p>

<p>I use my CLS system in manual mode most of the time. I trust TTL metering even less than I trust auto-exposure modes. I used the system frequently, and I can dial in what I want quickly in manual mode - I rarely need more than two test shots to fine tune everything.</p>

<p>CLS features that I like - <br>

- Portability<br>

- Reliability (with the SU-800)<br>

- Power controlled from the camera position<br>

- No cords, EVER!<br>

- Radio triggers requre extra hardware and batteries<br>

- No radio interference hassles<br>

- No international communications restrictions<br>

- Native high-speed sync<br>

- Each SB-910 comes with a full CTO gel (plus the green one that I don't use), a diffusion dome, and a handy tabletop stand<br>

- SB-910s never shut down into a power saving state when they are in Remote mode. They are always on and ready.<br>

- The manual zoom feature is like having a built-in grid<br>

- Easy to mount one or multiple flashes on a light stand (or even a tripod)<br>

- Easy to use with modifiers (umbrellas, smalls to moderate-sized soft boxes) using inexpensive adapters<br>

- SB-910s use inexpensive rechargeable AA batteries</p>

<p>One comment I noticed: Some people tried CLS once or for a short while and then gave up on it. That's like trying a camera once and giving up on photography if the pictures didn't turn out well. I made a point to drag the system out and use it as often as I could, even it it was only the SU-800 with a single handheld SB-910. Over time, I gained familiarity with the system. I can set up a complex four-light system anywhere in about ten minutes and tear it down just as quickly. Everything works, and except for stands and modifiers, it all fits in my camera bag.</p>

<p>Of course, I enjoy using mono-lights when possible. I appreciate their superior power. But four mono-lights are not nearly as portable as four SB-910s, they don't support native high-speed sync (High FP in Nikon terms), they require wires or radio triggers, most of them don't support TTL metering, and if you need to change the output power of a light, you'll need to walk over to it and change it physically.</p>

 

<p>I gave CLS a try for off camera flash and really wanted to like it but could never make it to work reliably for me either. Like others have said, the pop-up flash in commander mode gave dismal reliability in outdoor sunlight. Trying to align the sensors to "see" the pop-up flash after every lighting change took a lot of time and caused much frustration which kind of defeated the convenience TTL and CLS is supposed to provide. I'm sure using a dedicated flash on-camera aimed at one of the off-camera flashes (or the SU-800) would give more reliable results, but that would require a substantial investment in Nikon lighting equipment to do something that manual flashes and dumb triggers were accomplishing just fine. I ended up getting some cheap Yongnuo 560III flashes with built-in radio receivers and their 560TX remote transmitter which allows for remote power control in different groups. Initially I had some problems with the brand, but after sorting it out they have worked well and have taken quite a beating but held up. The range and reliability is much better than CLS and allows me greater finesse when making adjustments. Will they still be working in 10 years? Who knows, but I doubt Nikon's current TTL will be compatible with their equipment in 10 years either which would require more money spent to keep the system current. I still prefer using Nikon TTL for on camera flash however.</p>

<p>FWIW, Canon have already moved to radio triggering and control for their top-of-the-range speedlite - at a very top-of-the-range price of course. It's like they suddenly realised that radio telephony is a much better communication system than sending morse code by flashlight!</p>

<p>Most of the accounts that I'm reading here illustrate the ineptitude of the built-in flash as a CLS commander.</p>

<p>I recall seeing discussions about the built-in flash. Some people wonder why Nikon includes them on cameras of the D700/D800 caliber. Supporters always mantion that it can be used as a CLS commander. And yet, in this discussion, the consensus is that the built-in flash doesn't work very well. (I agree)</p>

<p>I'm wondering whether Nikon has done themselves a disservice by including the pop up flash on serious cameras. The pop up seems to have convinced a lot of users that the CLS system is unreliable. It may not be suitable for every case - large distances, flash heads around corners - but the SU-800 works a heck of a lot better than the pop up flash does. I would have given up, too, if I had to use the pop up.</p>

<p>Dan, I agree with you and think that the pop up flash has given CLS an undeservedly bad reputation. I would prefer the camera not to have the built in flash; instead, better viewfinder optics could take advantage of the space freed by it (as in the Df and the D4s). Unfortunately, a lot of people seem to buy cameras based on specifications rather than actual quality of implementation or ergonomics (it's as if they don't really believe that features or differences that are not listed in the specifications actually exist and could be of significance). The SU-800 has worked well for me within the domain of small flash photography and outside of this domain, I use larger flashes (two 400Ws Elinchrom Quadras) which come with their own triggering system; the in-between zone of using small flash in outdoor daylight that some people are doing can be covered by third party add on radio triggers but in most cases I feel that it is like retrofitting a motor and side car into a bicycle when in fact the right tool for the job may be a van or a truck. The modifications may work but they require bits and pieces with their own batteries to manage, yet do not make the flash energy range of speedlights any bigger to make it more suitable for balancing with bright daylight with proper modifiers.</p>

<p>That said I am all in favour of Nikon incorporating radio into their transmitters and flashes - it won't make a big difference to me but it would allow those users who prefer working over long distances, over obstacles, or in bright daylight with small flash to save money currently spent on third party triggers. What I would really like to see is a coordinated effort by flash manufacturers to make a system of advanced triggering that could be used across brands; currently there are so many incompatible systems that make it unnecessarily complicated to use multiple brands of flashes together. If and when Nikon introduce a radio based system it may ruffle some feathers with those who elected to invest in third party triggers but if a standardized effort is made then the different tools could be used together. I have a remote control for audiovisual equipment that can be programmed to issue commands that mimic proprietary remote controls; this could be very nice to have for flash triggering. Currently to my knowledge, mirrorless camera systems are not supported by the major makers of advanced TTL radio triggers; by having a standardized framework new types of cameras could enjoy benefits of these systems without the trigger manufacturers having to reverse engineer their TTL flash protocols, something that has taken years to make the Nikon and Canon versions (with somewhat less than perfect record of reliability).</p>

<p>Still, I can use the two brands of flashes that I currently have together in the studio by placing the secondary units in SU-4 / plain optical triggering mode or by a Skyport universal receiver but these do not provide remote flash output control for the secondary units. Elinchrom has seen the benefits of supporting the users of other studio flashes by a set of adapter rings allowing the use of Elinchrom modifiers on most major brands of studio flash, so at least some manufacturers understand the benefits of flexibility to mix and match units and are realistic.</p>

<p>If Nikon comes out with built-in radio triggers, I'll upgrade my SU-800 and SB-910s. Optically triggered CLS (with the SU-800) works well for my needs today, but I would love to have the radio option if it ever becomes available.</p>

<p>I don't want to deal with third-party hardware and extra batteries unless I absolutely need those things. But if Nikon comes up with something like Canon's 600EX-RT flash units, I would be intrigued. In the meantime, CLS provides extensive creative possibilities in a portable package.</p>