What makes Nikon's Flash so good?

[drjedsmith]

Let me give you some background to my question...<BR>

I have always been a Minolta user, and was very happy with the flash on my

Maxxum 7 & 9 film SLRs. It always seemed that Minolta had a pretty accurate

and advanced flash system for their film bodies.<BR>

Then along came the 7D. My wife bought one, and we had the top end flash -

Minolta 5600HS(D). I was not impressed, and neither were most other long time

Minolta users. Sold the 7D. Went back to slides, and wife bought a medium

format camera. Now looking to get another DSLR, as she will be shooting some

weddings again, and not just portraits (which she does with medium

format).<BR><BR>

Narrowed it down to Nikon (probably D80 or D40X - looking for a compact system

to compliment her Mamiya RZ67!) or Sony Alpha; just don't like Canon's layout.

Went down to the camera shop today. Was amazed at how well even the built in

flash on a lowly Nikon D40 looked! Incredible exposure control. It seemed to

me that the flash can throttle down a lot more than the Sony / Minolta. The

Sony Alpha seemed better than I remember the 7D being, but not as good as

Nikon's flash.<BR><BR>

What is the secret? Is it just a better metering system in the Nikon body, or

does the flash have a lot more "steps" in its control? I'm curious. I'd

really like to go Sony and use Minolta glass again, but the flash is making us

think twice about Nikon.<BR>

Any tips, help, info, etc. would be helpful.<BR>

Jed

[corey]

I,m not sure if you are talking about the nikon built in flash or the sb-400/600/800 but in my opinion light is light regardless of the name on the flash. What you pay for is recycle time, power, cammander mode, bounce-swivel and so on. The SB600 and SB800 have the cammander mode option witch will alow you to remove the flash and place it on a stand or behind or above the bride and fire it with out cords. The sb800 can fire up to 4 other SB600 (I think its 4 I could be wrong on the number) at one time so you could use them as a complete studio lighting. The another advantage to the nikon flashes is that the recycle time is amazing. You can fire mulitple shots before the flash needs to refill the inner power source. which is nice if you plan on shooting 3 frames a sec at your wedding. other after market flashes can take 10 to 15 sec to recycle after a full burst.

Now if you are talking about the built in flash then I believe that nikon has one of the more powerful flashes over most other slr pop ups but It will still only get you about 15 or 20 feet if your lucky.

If I were you I would without question by the nikon slr over the sony. I realize there may be extra money involved with lenses but if you are going to use it for weddings then I think the nikon will give you better quality photos. I have done some studies between the iso setting between the sony and nikon slrs and though nikon is not the best in this field it was still better then sony's alpha.

 

One last thing. I am not sure if the d40 has them option for cammandor mode like the d80/d200.

 

Hope this helps.

Corey

[sam_thompson2]

"What is the secret? Is it just a better metering system in the Nikon body, or does the flash have a lot more "steps" in its control?"

 

Digital cameras do not do TTL metering like film cameras. This is because there is no film to read a meter off of. So when the new digital cameras came around each camera manufacturer created a new form of TTL.

 

The exception is Canon which kept it's E-TTL from it's film days.

 

Nikon created D-TTL, it wasn't a success. Nikon went back to the drawing board and created i-TTL. Therefore where Canon is basically using the same technology from 1995, Nikon has gone through 2 generations of flash technology within the past few years. This is probably the reason why Nikon flashes seem more advanced than other brands.

 

This page explains it a little better.

 

http://www.planetneil.com/nikon/flash.html

 

In terms of flash exposure.

 

The D40 has an advantage by having a 1/500 flash sync speed.

D40x and D80 has the advantage of ISO 100.

D80 has the advantage of a built in support for the multiple speedlight CLS system.

[frank_skomial]

"What makes Nikon's Flash so good?" - simple answer: The new revolutionary iTTL/CLS technology from Nikon.

 

Behind that are: flash metering system that also utilizes D-lens information if you have a D lens, processing algorithms, excellent cooperation between the flash and compatible camera, and years of Nikon experience built into the camera and the flash.

[stwrtertbsratbs5]

Nikon uses distance information (if you have "D" lenses) and a pre-flash sequence to check exposure. They really have nailed digital flash. And their camera body control layout is excellent, too.

[larrybc]

Jedidiah Smith wrpte"

<br>

<br>> I have always been a Minolta user, and was very happy with

<br>> the flash on my Maxxum 7 & 9 film SLRs. It always seemed

<br>> that Minolta had a pretty accurate and advanced flash system

<br>> for their film bodies.

<br>

<br>I felt the same way. Always got great flash exposures with my 7xi and 7 cameras.

<br>

<br>> Then along came the 7D. My wife bought one, and we had the

<br>> top end flash - Minolta 5600HS(D). I was not impressed, and neither

<br>> were most other long time Minolta users.

<br>

<br>I never bought into their DSLR system. The 7D was too expensive when I was ready to buy my first DSLR. I did buy an A1 (great camera, btw...I still think it's ergonomics and feature set are superior to pretty much any prosumer on the market, although its image quality is now a bit behind the times). Flash exposure accuracy with my A1 and the 3600HS D flash wasn't very consistent, unfortunately.

<br>

<br>> Narrowed it down to Nikon (probably D80 or D40X - looking

<br>> for a compact system to compliment her Mamiya RZ67!) or Sony

<br>> Alpha; just don't like Canon's layout. Went down to the

<br>> camera shop today. Was amazed at how well even the built in

<br>> flash on a lowly Nikon D40 looked! Incredible exposure

<br>> control. It seemed to me that the flash can throttle down a

<br>> lot more than the Sony / Minolta. The Sony Alpha seemed

<br>> better than I remember the 7D being, but not as good as

<br>> Nikon's flash.

<br>

<br>I'm not sure what makes the Nikon system so good, or the KM/Sony system so bad. KM was saying that the flash units needed to be re-calibrated, but then you had to wonder what would happen if you used the flash unit with a film body after that. Would it still work for the film body?

<br>

<br>> I'm curious. I'd really like to go Sony and use Minolta glass again,

<br>> but the flash is making us think twice about Nikon.

<br>

<br>I'd definitely say that the Nikon flash system is at least as good as the Minolta film cameras' flash system, and definitely better than the KM/Sony digital flash system. In particular, the wireless flash capabilities are very nice.

<br>

<br>Until Sony brings down the price of their high end glass and produce a decent high end and advanced amateur body, I don't see any compelling reason to buy into their system.

<br>

<br>

<br>Corey Abrams wrote:

<br>[snip]

<br>> swivel and so on. The SB600 and SB800 have the cammander

<br>> mode option witch will alow you to remove the flash and

<br>> place it on a stand or behind or above the bride and fire it

<br>> with out cords. The sb800 can fire up to 4 other SB600 (I

<br>> think its 4 I could be wrong on the number) at one time so

<br>> you could use them as a complete studio lighting.

<br>

<br>The Minolta flash system for film cameras allowed the same thing, and worked very well. Unfortunately, their digital implementation of the same system fell flat.

<br>

<br>> The another advantage to the nikon flashes is that the

<br>> recycle time is amazing. You can fire mulitple shots before

<br>> the flash needs to refill the inner power source. which is

<br>> nice if you plan on shooting 3 frames a sec at your wedding.

<br>

<br>I've used my SB800 with the fifth battery and don't ever recall seeing it keep up with a 3fps rate.

<br>

<br>> other after market flashes can take 10 to 15 sec to recycle

<br>> after a full burst.

<br>

<br>Even my 1980's Vivitar 283 can recycle faster than that after a full power burst. Likewise with all the Minolta flash units I've owned.

<br>

<br>> One last thing. I am not sure if the d40 has them option for cammandor

<br>> mode like the d80/d200.

<br>

<br>It doesn't. You'd need an SU800 or SB800.

<br>

<br>Frank Skomial wrote:

<br>[snip]

<br>> Behind that are: flash metering system that also utilizes D-lens

<br>> information if you have a D lens, processing algorithms, excellent

<br>> cooperation between the flash and compatible camera, and years of Nikon

<br>> experience built into the camera and the flash.

<br>

<br>FWIW, Minolta has been using "D" lenses for quite a long time now, too. My last film Minolta supported that feature. And yes, they used that distance info as an additional parameter when calculating flash exposures.

<br>

<br>I'm not trying to defend Minolta's flash system. Their film flash system was great but their digital flash system was, inconsistent at best. But the Nikon features some of you mentioned were already done by Minolta many years ago. Somewhere along the way, they simply dropped the ball on quality control. I'm sure lack of R&D funding had something to do with it, too. Too bad, really.

<br>

<br>larsbc

[drjedsmith]

Thanks for the replies, this seems interesting to me. I stayed up late reading about different flash systems on the 'net here. From what I can see, both Nikon and Sony use "D" lenses with distance information, and pre-flash sequences of a known intensity prior to the shutter opening to determine the correct exposure. So both should be able to give superb results, as long as the processing algorithms are correct in the camera's metering system.<BR><BR>

After shooting both in the shop, it just seemed to me that the Nikon flash was more subtle in its appearance - as if Nikon had figured out a way to throttle the flash back and give you more ambient expsure with the flash exposure. I know you could achieve the same effect with the Minolta/Sony by using flash exposure compensation, but the Nikon did it in A mode, without changing anything.<BR>

I get the feeling that Sony could improve their flash with a little finesse in the processing part of the equation - hopefully on future DSLR models, since they are starting with the same premise as the Nikon.<BR>

We still might go with the Alpha because of the Minolta lenses that I have, but I appreciate the info on the Nikons - they are quality cameras, and felt good in the hand. I liked the build quality of the D200, but my wife wants a smaller camera.<BR>

Thanks,<BR>

Jed

[leicaglow]

One other thing I found when I bought my first Nikon flash (an SB-11), and is still true with my newest (an SB-800): the color properties of the light is outstanding. It doesn't produce the harsh cold-blue light that independent makers often use. One exception I've found is Metz flashes.

[photo5]

I remember when I first used my new SB-600 with my D70s last summer. I was shooting outside, at a high shutter speed, with fill flash. I remember looking at the small LCD screen, not really seeing the image with a "flash" look to it. This is how smart the Nikon flash system is. It will fill the image to look natural, the flash light is more or less invisible. Which is amazing.

 

That being said, I did have good luck when I had a Canon G5 and Pro1, used with the 420EX flash. Interior photos were always perfectly exposed. Dad has the G5 now, and the Pro1 has been sold on eBay. D80 all the way for me now.

 

Dave

[walterh]

I think the D information is probably not so important for most situations. It seems more of a ad-advantage that a real improvement. Everything else about the new flash units, especially the SB800 I agree with. The SB800 is one little flash that gives just excellent results on new bodies like D70 and D200 (the ones I used it with).

 

The commander mode has one disadvantage: most people blink when the on-camera flash triggers the remote SB800 and there is a noticeable delay that can be annoying. Both effects can be eliminated by using the SU800 commander unit. It cost some money but I just ordered it because I got so much flash use now with the SB800 I get a second flash and will control the 2 units from the commander.

You will have a hard time finding someone who is not enthusiastic about the SB800 and SU800 after some use.

[drjedsmith]

Yes, that was the difference - the Nikon flash shot had a warmer look, and didn't look like flash was used at all, really - except for the catch lights in the eyes, and perfect exposure. The Sony Alpha shot I took wasn't bad, but it had a little more of that blue-flash lighting look to it. Now, this was with the on-camera flashes at the shop, so might be different once you add the external flash into the equation.<BR><BR>

We had a lot of problems with the Minolta 7D and "eyes closed" flash shots as well - does this plague the Nikon lineup also?<BR><BR>

Between the D200 and D80, is there much of a difference with flash, or should they be the same?<BR>

Thanks,<BR>

Jed

[bill_keane2]

Hey Jed, I totally concur with your impressions of the Nikon flash approach. It's just right, where it doesn't appear as though flash has been used at all. Perfect. This is via a D80 (for me) and either the on-camera unit or the SB-600, or SBR-200.

 

I came from an Olympus OM-4T OTF flash renowned for its accuracy, and, in my view, the Nikon is a quantum leap forward.

[larrybc]

Another thing: I read that the SB800 will report the flash colour to the camera. I guess it somehow measures it temperature or something.

 

As for pre-flash, I've also read of the 7D having a fairly long lag btwn pre-flash and exposure flash. The Nikons might be faster. When I have subjects who blink at the pre-flash, I use the FV-lock feature that lets me manually fire the pre-flash and then lock the flash meter reading into the camera, so it uses that reading for all subsequent shots. This eliminates the need for pre-flash.

 

If that suits your shooting environment, it's a great way to deal with the blinkers.

 

larsbc

[tonybeach]

Jedidiah wrote:

 

"We had a lot of problems with the Minolta 7D and 'eyes closed' flash shots as well - does this plague the Nikon lineup also?

 

Between the D200 and D80, is there much of a difference with flash, or should they be the same?"

 

My reply:

 

I don't know what the shutter lag is on the Minolta, but it is in the time after the mirror has gone up and before the shutter releases that the pre-flash goes off and the camera measures that to determine the amount of flash. I used to get a lot of quick blinker eyes shut shots with my D70, but they are non-existent with my D200. Here's a list of Nikon camera shutter lag speeds:

 

D100 = .150 of a second

 

D70 = .124 of a second

 

D70s = .106 of a second

 

D80 = .080 of a second

 

D200 = .050 of a second

 

D2x = .037 of a second

 

D2hs = .037 of a second

[frank_skomial]

D200 has faster processor and shorter determination time between pre-flashes and the exposure flash, and that also helps reduce % of blinkers. Eliminate more or all blinkers by use of SU-800.

[ptkeam]

Huzzah for Nikon flash. I just bought an SB400 (the little bitty one) for my D70. FANTASTIC. I'm blown away by the results. I often used it with a lumiquest mini-softbox. I've used Metz, Sunpak, Vivitar -- but you can't beat Nikon flash

[drjedsmith]

Anthony - I think you hit the nail on the head. If the D70 shutter lag = .124 of a second and you got "blinkers", then that is very similar to the Minolta 7D shutter lag of .117, which caused blinkers for us. The D200 shutter lag of .050 of a second sounds a lot closer to the high end film bodies - which could be why Minolta's flash worked so well on the film - ie. very few blinkers. Unfortunately, I just looked at a review on the Sony Alpha, and the shutter lag is .116, virtually unchanged from the 7D spec!

 

Also, Frank - that would help as wel, if the calculation can be performed faster (ie. more powerful computer) with the D200, then the main flash will fire much quicker after the pre-flash.<BR><BR>

Now if Sony could just get their shutter lag down, in the ball park of the D200, then I would be all in for their camera. At the moment, seems like the D200 is the only body that has this kind of performance for under $2600.<BR>

Jed