sb900 flash ??

[jerry_milroy]

<p>I have a D300 and 70 -200 2.8 sigma lens, I mainly shoot my kids sports indoor volleyball, basketball (school I can use a flash) club no flash allowed, and outdoor soccer some night games and vacation stuff. I like the idea of having being able to function the cameras flash and a remote flash at the same time (that being the best possible coverage for the buck). Is the sb900 what i need or is there other options?</p>

[John Crowe]

<p>Seriously consider a used SB800. More power for much fewer dollars with similar characteristics.</p>

[Matt Laur]

<p>He's unlikely to be able to <em>find</em> an SB-800 (which is discontinued) unless it's used. And that makes it an unknown quantity, in terms of the health of the unit's capacitors and flash tube. A new-looking unit could still easily have been cooked by someone who didn't even know they were damaging it.<br /><br />Regardless, the SB-900 may have less actual power (barely), but its pattern can be more efficient. It's larger, for sure, but no awkwardly so on a D300 with a 70-200/2.8 (which is already a sizeable payload).</p>

[jerry_milroy]

<p>Can the sb900 be fired off the camera as a slave.</p>

[ArthurRichardson]

 

<blockquote>

<p>Can the sb900 be fired off the camera as a slave.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Yes</p>

 

[Hector Javkin]

<p>So can the more economical, less bulky, and less powerful SB700, according to the <a href="http://www.dpreview.com/news/1009/10091509sb700.asp#press"><strong>announcement, as reported here</strong></a>.</p>

[leighb]

<blockquote>

 

<p>Can the sb900 be fired off the camera as a slave?</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>If it wants to cooperate.</p>

<p>I purchased a pair of SB-900s a couple of months ago with the intent of using one on-camera and one off. The off-camera unit would fire about half the time. And yes, everything was set up and properly aligned.</p>

<p>I returned them and got my (substantial) money back. Ridiculously high price. It's a flash, not a camera.</p>

<p>Subsequently bought a used SB-800 that works great. Went back to using Elinchrom monolights for fill.</p>

<p>- Leigh</p>

 

[John Crowe]

<p>Don't be overly concerned with buying a used flash. Mine is almost 25 years old and it works as well as the day I bought it. It has TTL capabilities and full LCD display/control. </p>

<p>I second the comment concerning the SB-900, "ridiculously high price."</p>

[howard_owen]

<p>Find an older Nikon flash, use it in manual mode with a wireless trigger (Yongnuo RF-602, Phottix Strato) and save yourself some serious cash. For what Nikon and Canon want for their top tier speedlights you can buy a mono light and have 5 stops more power.</p>

[ShunCheung]

<p>Flash is one items I wouldn't buy used. There is essentially no way to tell whether it has been well used and/or abused by the previous owner(s), e.g. has suffered from repeat over-heating. A flash can look brand new when the tube is about to die with an expensive repair. An abused camera body or lens typically has wear and tear on the body or glass and the mount, now there is also the shutter actuation count to check.</p>

<p>The SB-900 is well made and easy to use, but unfortunately it is indeed expensive and also large. The new SB-700 should be coming onto the market around this time. It is essentially a mini SB-900 but it has even less power. There is also the older SB-600 but its menu system is horrible.</p>

[bgelfand]

 

<blockquote>

<p>Don't be overly concerned with buying a used flash. Mine is almost 25 years old and it works as well as the day I bought it. It has TTL capabilities and full LCD display/control.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>If you bought your flash 25 years ago, it was designed for film cameras. Film photographers shot fewer frames than many of todays digital shooters. I read the forums and see people "bragging" about shooting 3,000+ shots in a day. For film that would be about 90 to 100 rolls of film in day, not a likely occurance for film due to the expense of film and processing, not to mention processing time. With digital has the probability of stressing, even ruining, a flash in short order increases dramatically over film.</p>

<p>I would have fewer qualms about buying a used SB-28 (a film camera flash) than I would a used SB-800. The SB-28 probably had considerably less use than the SB-800.</p>

<p>I, too, am concerned about the "ridiculously high price", not only of the flash, but camera equipment in general - just look at the price of good lenses and even camera bodies. Much of the price increases are due to the low value of the dollar compared to other currencies; prices will not come down until the dollar appreciates, and may not even then if demand holds.</p>

 

[bgelfand]

<blockquote>

<p> [Duplicate message deleted]</p>

</blockquote>

[mark liddell]

Go for a used SB800, it's smaller, cheaper with the same power. There is a reason they have become so sought after on the used market.

[twmeyer]

<p>No one here seems to appreciate the substantial advantages of the user interface on the SB900 as compared to the SB800. If you plan to use the flash in manual, or in any way other than just setting it to think for you, then the SB900 has a huge advantage in flexibility and speed. If you're exclusively a TTL user, then go for the SB800 (if you can get a used one with a warranty for at least the first month... {try KEH}).</p>

<p>The user interface and beam concentration capabilities have me using the SB900 WAY more than the SB800... t</p>

[jerry_milroy]

<p>All the vball I choice the settings (Iso,apt, speed), soccer I choice the apt only usually. I have not shot with a flash before, so at first it will probably be the flash doingthe work. I see a big learnig curve ahead. I really want to be good at the sport stuff. Were can I find info about flash shooting directed at sports? You folks always have great insight in to topices. Thank You</p>