420 or 430 - is it worth the extra money?

[davemmm]

Hi everyone<br>

Recently I did a very stupid thing with my EOS30E [Elan7e], involving

balancing it on a bench, from which it subsequently fell. The body,

grip and EF50 1.8 attached at the time are fine, but the Sigma EF-

430ST flash also attached was ripped off, and is now junk, as it

can't be fitted to the hotshoe.<p>

I had been considering an upgrade to the 420EX when funds allowed, as

the Sigma unit doesn't support E-TTL, and was often not recognised by

the camera. However, the announcement of the 430EX has muddied the

waters slightly.<p>

As I see it, these are my options:<br>

1. I could buy a secondhand 420EX now, and get back shooting with

flash ASAP. At the moment, there aren't many round secondhand -

Jessops, the UK's big photo retailer only has one 420 on its used

equipment database.<br>

2. I could wait for a flood of 420EX's onto the secondhand market

after the 430EX is released and well-heeled users and digital users

upgrade, thus bringing the price down (do people think this will

happen?)<br>

3. I could save the pennies for quite a while longer, and get a shiny

new 430EX and then get all the shiny new features.<p>

As I understand it, the 430 offers a slightly higher power [very

slight], E-TTL II [not supported by the EOS 30], colour balance info

[irrelevant on film], and better handling/controls [LCD screen, looks

much nicer than the 420's controls].<p>

Which gun do people think would be the best buy? The 430 looks very

nice, but also very pricey. Would the 420 be adequate? 550's & 580's

are out of the question, by the way.

[bill_goldman]

You missed some very significant features included on the 430EX, which for one is it's inclusion of a manual mode. Another is its drop-dpwn diffusor which provides coverage for super wide angle lenses. Also is its focus assist light covers up to 9 focus point systems. Its features which affect digital bodies are only signifcant if you plan to go that way in the future.

 

As far as E-TTL II goes, both it and the original E-TTL are camera functions, depending on the particular body, of course, but all EX Speedlites support both.

 

The, 430EX, as well as the 420EX can operate as a slave for wireless operation. Should you eventually go that way and add a 580EX, which can function as a master, you will appreciate the similar operating interface on the two newest Speedlites.

 

If none of the above is important or necessary to you, then look for a used 420EX, but if you prefer a new unit, I would encourage you to consider the 430Ex.

[jon_austin]

ETTL-II is a function of the camera body, not the flash. Every Canon EX series flash works with ETTL-II-equipped bodies.

 

Your question poses a very personal cost/benefit situation. Only you can determine if the incremental features are worth the incremental cost.

 

I wouldn't forecast a flood, but the number of used 420EXs in the market will likely increase once the 430EX becomes available. (My only flash is a 420, and I'm considering the upgrade, myself.)

 

If you decide the 430 is worth the extra cost but will have to save for it, it'll probably come down in price in a year or so after it's released. That's a long time to wait though, so if money's tight , I'd recommend a used 420 to get you by until you can afford the (hopefully reduced) 430. If you take care of the used 420 you buy, it probably won't lose too much resale value during the year you wait for the price of new 430s to come down.

 

Then again, after a year or so, you may be able to buy a good used 430 from someone who's upgrading to a new 580!

[jcolwell]

I have 420EX and 580EX Speedlites. The 420EX is a fine flash and you should be able to buy one used in Excellent or better condition for $110 to $150 (US), which is half or less of the price of a new 430EX. I'm not convinced that a lot of people will upgrade from 420EX to 430EX, so don't count on a flood of 420EX's, but they're not all that scarce anyway - most people who upgrade to 550EX and 580EX will likely keep their 420EX as backup and wireless remote. The 430EX does offer useful improvements, but you have to ask yourself if and how often you will actually use them. Both the 420EX and 430EX have the important features (E-TTL, wireless slave mode, high speed FP synch, and I'm pretty sure 2nd curtain synch on bodies that can set it).

[taner]

The ultra-wide angle panel, the catch-light panel, manual mode and controls, and x1.6 crop factor correction were more than enough for me to choose the 430EX over the 420EX, and last week I ordered mine. All these improvements over the 420EX are important if you ask me:

 

-Are you an ultra-wide lover? Do you shoot any thing other than landscapes with them - indoors maybe? With a lens like the 17-40/4L on a full-frame body, the wide-angle panel would be convenient.

 

-Without the catch-light panel, bounce flash will sometimes (or most of the time) give you 'dead' looking eyes. Since I use bounce flash a lot, even this feature was enough for me to make up my mind. With color film, color casts are problematic, and bounce flash might be a bit more difficult, and you can always put together a make-shift catch-light panel yourself.

 

-With cheap, wireless multiple-slave-flash set ups, or with rented high-end studio monolights, the manual mode and controls come in really handy. The 420EX might be used in amnual mode, but with not in the most convenient way:

 

http://www.eosdoc.com/manuals/?q=EX-M-TTL

 

-The x1.6 crop factor correction on the flash head zoom may come handy if you go digital in the near future with a cheaper, x1.6 crop sensor DSLR.

 

Good luck.

[shaun westlake]

This may help

 

http://www.bobatkins.com/photography/eosfaq/ex_speedlites.html

 

I Have a 420ex and a 7e and can recommend the combination highly. Personally I don't see too many people dumping there 420ex to get a 430ex. If I where to upgrade I would get a 580 and keep my 420 as a slave.

[yakim_peled1]

>> Would the 420 be adequate?

 

 

IMHO, absolutely.

 

Happy shooting,

Yakim.

[davemmm]

Hmm, some interesting points about the wide angle diffuser & catchlights.<p>

The 430-ST had a 'wide panel' which clipped over the head and increased coverage to 18mm - is there no wide option on the 420? I am rather fond of my Sigma 17-35... I used a Sto-fen omni-bounce on the 430-ST 95% of the time, and would plan to get one for its successor - would this get me the wide coverage and catchlights too?<p>

Someone quoted a price of $110 to $150 USD for a good used 420. In the UK, an excellent-quality 420 is 120GBP, so about $215USD. Ouch.<p>

I don't think waiting for the price of a new 430 to come down in a yera or so is realistic - no flash pictures for a year? I don't think so.<p>

I won't go to a digital body for quite a while yet, I probably won't be in a position to afford the switch until the 5D's successor is announced :D<p>

So in short, the 420 won't disappoint?

[bennyboy]

I have a 420EX and am not planning on ditching it for the 430, if anything I'll be buying a 580 and use the 420 as a slave... I suspect most people will go down this route - but of course I may be wrong :D

 

If you're not moving to difital any time soon then surely the 420 would be your best choice, you can always get a newer flash if/when you go dogital and that way you'll have a slave too.

[jim_larson1]

I don't think of the 430EX as an improved 420EX. I think of the 430EX as a slightly stripped 550EX. Features AND PRICE are closer to the 550EX.

 

Ignore the "digital" and "ETTL-II" specific features. They are basically smoke and mirrors. Debatable if they even work. (the zoom feature has a well known "feature" that defeats proper flash zoom operation below 24mm)

 

The new catch panel is nice. A stophen omni bounce ($20) is better.

 

The main things that make the 430ex better than the 420ex is the manual controls and manual FEC. . . but if you don't need manual controls then the 420EX is just as good.

 

The 420EX does not need a LCD panel. It has a power on/off button and a high speed sync on/off button, plus a zoom button. All it needs if you don't do dual flash work. The 430EX needs the LCD because it has additional functionality.

[steve_dunn2]

<p>A., do you have your 430EX yet? If so, does the crop-factor adjustment feature actually work properly, or does it have the same flaw that it has on the 580EX as Jim pointed out?</p>

 

<p>David, my $0.02: I have a 420EX, which I used to use on my Elan 7E and now use on my 20D. I'm not upgrading. Here's how the various new features would affect me.</p>

 

<ul>

<li>More power: Big yawn. The guide number jumped by approximately 2%, which is so close to nothing as to be meaningless. The 420EX (and the 380EX before it) is almost always powerful enough for me, and the times it isn't, I'm not talking about falling 2% short; I'm talking about needing a 550 or 580.

<li>Zoom compensation: Nice, if it works properly, but the real benefit of it is to give you use of more of the flash unit's power. I don't need it (see above) but I can see how it would be useful for some people.

<li>Colour balance: I've been hanging out at photo.net, and using the Usenet newsgroups, for years, and I can't think of a single time I've seen someone post "Gee, the colour balance on my flash is really screwy, and it would be so nice if the flash told the camera what its actual colour temperature was." Nor, since this feature was introduced on the 580EX, have I seen a single post saying "I used to get strange colour balance with flash on my old flash unit, but ever since I bought the 580EX, it's perfect." This is a solution in search of a problem, and does not appear to be of any practical use in the real world.

<li>Manual controls: Nice to have, and essential for some people. I haven't needed them yet.

<li>Wide panel: This would be nice if I had a lens with a field of view wider than an effective 24mm, but I don't. My 17-40 gives me a 27mm-equivalent field of view on my 20D, and the 24mm position covers that nicely. But for those who go into ultrawide territory, this would be a very good reason to consider a 430EX.

<li>9-point AF assist: Would be nice to have. The 7-point AF assist pattern covers all 9 points pretty well if I let the camera select a focus point automatically; if I pick them manually, it leaves some (IIRC, the four which are diagonally positioned) out. The AF assist beam was the main reason I upgraded from the 380EX (which, stupidly, only had 1-point AF assist despite being designed to match the 3-point system of the Elan II) to the 420EX when I got my Elan 7E.

<li>Cosmetic improvements: it's a flash, not a fashion accessory.

<li>Faster cycle times: nice to have, and again, essential for some users but not a big deal for me. I'm generally happy with the cycle times I get from NiMH batteries in my 420EX, and again, when the cycle times are too slow, an incremental improvement wouldn't fix the problem.

</ul>

 

<p>Hopefully something in there helps you make your decision.</p>

[jim_larson1]

Steve is spot on. I forgot about the AF point coverage.

 

One more thing about colour temperature: There was a discussion on the Rob Galibraith forum a while back regarding the "adjustment". The general consensus was that if you used AWB *at best* this feature did nothing. At worst. . .it would skew the AWB function. If you selected the *flash* wb. . . .one could potentially see the benefit. But if you actually needed the benefit. . .then you probably needed a better flash than the 580EX to start with.

[taner]

Hey Steve

 

Downtown Camera expects to get the 430EX later this month or during the first week of October, and Canon (at Mississauga) confirmed that. So, no, I have not been able to test the zooming on this flash head for myself yet.

[steve_dunn2]

<p>OK ... when you get your 430EX, it will be interesting to find out if its zoom position works properly. My guess is that it probably will; surely by now Canon has heard of the problem with the 580EX, and it ought not to be very complicated for them to fix this when writing new firmware for the 430EX (and to make sure they test it properly before it leaves the lab).</p>