What a difference! - SB-700 vs. SB-600

<p>I have always thought that Nikon's biggest problem was it's poorly laid out and counter-intuitive menus. Having said that, the worst of the worst for Nikon was it's speedlight menus. I had a couple of SB-600 and would always have trouble hitting all the combo buttons to get to remote, manual exposure, etc. settings. So I did some research and then bought an SB-700 (which I presume is) the upgrade to the SB-600.</p>

<p>Oh, what a difference a few buttons makes! It's night vs. day! FINALLY! Someone at Nikon had to have fired the lousy software interface manager and brought in someone new! The difference is astonishing!</p>

<p>THANK YOU NIKON!</p>

<p>Agreed. Same improvement from the SB800 to SB900. </p>

<p>I like the SB-700 very much myself. Very clean user interface and in many ways better implementation than previous flashes. The flash does have one flaw though, you cannot use it with CLS in such a way that it is master in TTL, and the remotes are in Manual. Having all the flashes go on TTL can lead to an out of control situation. All on manual by contrast works, but if the master is on the camera then having it as a bounced TTL measured flash for fill is very practical. To do that with current flashes you need to put the SB-910 on the camera to do the TTL fill and master function and the remotes can be any TTL units. This kind of omission was not present in the SB-800 or SB-900/910. However as a result I guess the SB-700's control layout is very clean. PC sync terminal is missing as well.</p>

<p>The SB-700 has one function that is new: the ratio of remote output can be controlled between two groups while they're both in TTL mode. This could be a useful feature but I haven't yet tried it out yet. I guess it is a way to have TTL mode in remotes but keep the floating parameters to a minimum.</p>

<p>The SB-700 is my favorite flash to use on camera as it is lightweight and offers greater freedom of pointing the flash head for bouncing than 600/800 units did. The SB-900/910 flash heads are quite large and it's not as enjoyable to handle the camera with that big thing on the hot shoe. But sometimes the extra flash energy over the 700 is needed, and also the option to have remotes manual while master is TTL is useful to me. </p>

I have several Nikon flashes, I actually like the SB600, both my sons use 700s and like them a lot. I like the Metz 52-af 1

too. I've used it on a few professional assignments now and it works well, especially on the D7100.

<p>Have an 600, 800, and 900. The 600 is kind of lonely these days! But I do keep it emergency backup position along with an older body in a separate bag. Just in case. It still works, no matter how annoying it is! Note that another big improvement in the newer units is the better articulation in the head. The 600 is pretty hobbled, that way.</p>

One thing I definitely like about the 600 is how easy it is to use TTL with like a Gary Fong hood. Just set the

compensation and adjust the position you want to use. No muss, no fuss...

<p>I agree. Much simpler interface with the D700, and this makes switching modes/levels quicker. It's a nice flash.</p>

<blockquote>The SB-700 has one function that is new: the ratio of remote output can be controlled between two groups while they're both in TTL mode.</blockquote>

 

<p>Huh? I don't do much flash shooting (I don't do much <i>portrait</i> shooting), but you can balance groups already. See p.303 of the D800 manual, for example. The SB-600 can't do this itself, since it's not a TTL trigger at all, but I use the D800's on-camera flash to run two groups. (I also use the PC-sync for hairlights or background lighting, since this doesn't get triggered during the metering flash and won't mess up the exposure calculations.)<br />

<br />

I agree that the SB-600 set-up is a little cryptic, but my philosophy was that, since I needed to be able to use the <i>one</i> that I'd got, it wouldn't hurt me to get another two while they were cheap. Besides, I tend to leave them permanently in slave mode and drive them from the camera, so I don't usually see the interface. And I'm reassured that the SB-600 will work with my F5 should I ever feel inclined to try that combination, not that I ever have. :-)<br />

<br />

But I have tried a borrowed SB-700, and it's certainly easier to work out without Ring TFM...</p>

<p>Same here. I could get along with the SB600 OK... with the SB700, I think I actually may have some idea what I am doing. Much better UI.</p>

<p>Agreed that the SB700 is more idiot-proof, Wouter. If I were buying one, the SB-700 is definitely nicer. After getting a single SB-600 before the SB-700 was launched, and with an eye on my F5, my choice was to pick up several, cheap. Having some of my lighting set-up be SB-700s doesn't help me if I have to remember how to use the remaining SB-600s; it's easier to make sure I remember how to use one flash system, no matter how much worse that interface may be than the newer model - I don't know how McNally manages to mix them all. And I didn't want to spend the money on three SB-700s. Besides, as I said, I've set them how I need them and do my remaining control from the camera. If I need to adjust the relative intensities of them <i>within</i> the group, I'll have to fiddle for a bit (or possible just press + or -; I don't remember), but it's not <i>that</i> horrible, because it's not that complicated a flash gun. I suspect the SB-800 is worse just because there's more to it (not that I'll turn down donations). Of course, if one of them somehow gets set differently, it may take me a while to notice.<br />

<br />

Not that I claim infinite understanding of Nikon's complex flash system. The logic of the interaction with auto-ISO is a mystery to me.</p>

<p>Andrew, certainly mixing in the F5 tips the balance for the SB600 anyway. And my "upgrade" to the SB700 was forced - my SB600 stopped working properly. After I bought the SB700 a tip here on these forums helped my get the SB600 back alive, but it still works very intermittent (seems like a capacitor going bad, basically). Otherwise, I would still be using the SB600 - it is not *that* bad. And for my uses, the <a href="/photo/13794854">very few macro experiments</a> I do at home every blue moon does see the SB700 and SB600 play together just nicely.<br>

But on a whole, my knowledge on using flash properly and consistently effective is quite lacking; so my remarks are very much "simple, non-expert and near-automatic use"-based. </p>

<p>Very arty, Wouter. :-) I keep meaning to do more macro (I've been thinking about HeliconFocus), but I don't do that much. And what I do, I tend to light with cheap LEDs. On the other hand, an SB-600 did wonders when I was shooting pubs at night (for pub crawl planning), even if it did get me approached by a young lady of the night who was worried that her image was going to appear in a newspaper.<br />

<br />

Maybe I'd experiment more and be a bit more creative with an easier to use flash gun, admittedly. (With photography, not with the young lady of the night.) Even if I sometimes play with 3-4 flash guns at once, I'm still definitely amateur too. Some day I'll play properly with strobist stuff, but for now, McNally is a long way away from me.</p>