PocketWizard Flex TT5 Mini TT1 vs Radio Popper PX

[chad_hoelzel1]

<p>This is not so much a question but a resource thread for those trying to figure out what to get. If you have the time watch all 8 videos... I found the actual field testing very informative<br>

1 of 8<br>

 

2 of 8<br>

 

3 of 8<br>

 

4 of 8<br>

 

5 of 8<br>

 

6 of 8<br>

 

7 of 8<br>

 

8 of 8<br>

 

[phil_bradon]

<p>Hi Chad. Certainly interesting piece of history. RF noise was a pretty big problem early on. PocketWizard found a pretty interesting thing to contain it. They now go the distance. And now offer some pretty amazing improvements in the Canon Flash system.<br>

Check this out.<br>

 <br>

</p>

<p ><a href="

<p > </p>

<p ><a href="

<p > </p>

<p >

<p > </p>

<p >Might check out the recently finished Mark Wallace US MeetUP tour. 2-1/2 months, 8 cities. Lots of happy PocketWizard MiniTT1 and FlexTT5 owners.</p>

<p > </p>

<p >Phil Bradon</p>

<p > <br>

 </p>

[chad_hoelzel1]

<p><strong>I own neither system</strong> but am saving up for a wireless system. No offense to pocket wizard owners but I think the fix SUCKS. A person spends all that money on a system and then they have to put a sock over their flashes....what's up with that...RECALL and fix. Why would I want the rear display of my flash covered up so I can't see what's happening or change settings easily. It's using a band aid to fix a system that should have been properly designed from the beginning. All this add on stuff to make it work would probably interfere with various diffusers a person might want to put on a flash. <br>

For those wanting to blame Canon for the problem don't. Paul Buff's CyberSync system and Pocket Popper's system all use a higher frequency which doesn't have problems getting close to the distances claimed by the respective manufactures. On a side note I'm also not sure I would want to have to plug my wireless system into a computer every time I want to change setting or check battery level (Like the Mini TT1).</p>

[sknowles]

<p>Like PW's or not, they're widely used in sports photography (remotely controlling cameras and some camera/flashes). The problem is due to the frequency, which is only in the US, other countries use different ones, and it's less a problem from interference used by RP's from the other uses of the frequency, such as short range phones, mikes, wireless equipment, etc. And the PW fix is due to Canon's lack of shielding and only necessary in some circumstances. I haven't noticed PW users racing to replace their units with RP's.</p>

[felix_mizioznikov]

<p>+1 for paul buff stuff. high speed is over rated.<br>

using iso50 1/200 at f14 would really darken daylight, and a alienbee mono would really brighten your subject.</p>