SB400 & no control except in AUTO

[jonathan_mcgraw]

HI ALL

I have a D7000. Beside having a SB800 & an SB900, I have a SB400.

I'm well aware of it's limitations , but I find it”s size so handy for everyday carry. However I have poured over & poured over it's & various other instructions, & I can not figure out how to get the flash to expose automatically except in “Auto” mode. I would love to figure how to get it to expose at ~ a stop + a half under ambient for a subtle fill. But, Hell, I can't even get it (the camera to expose the flash) @ ambient. It fires away @ full power. I can only set the f-stop per the distance like the good 'ol days w/ flash bulbs & old strobes. I've tried to set the FV w/ the FN button but that doesn't seem to work either.

Is it impossible? Is that why they no longer make it?

I can make the SB800 or 900 do just about anything I need

Any help greatly appreciated, JDMc.

[peterbcarter]

It sounds like the SB400 only understands the old iTTL, changed sometime after the D200 was introduced. I have an Sb-25 that I used to use on my D200, but going forward after that I had to replace it for my digitals.

[rodeo_joe1]

From Nikon's SB-400 manual:

"A note on microcomputer-controlled Speedlights The Speedlight incorporates a microcomputer to control flash operations. In rare cases, the Speedlight may not work properly even after a fresh battery is properly installed. If this happens, replace the battery while the Speedlight’s power is turned on."

 

However, it looks like the SB-400 doesn't support B i-TTL, needed for fill flash where ambient is the main source of light.

 

FWIW, I still use SB-25s with my DSLRs. It has the very useful Auto-Aperture mode that gives extremely reliable and well-exposed results. For fill, you simply set the AA aperture on the flash to about two stops wider than the lens aperture.

Edited May 9, 2017 by rodeo_joe|1

[rodeo_joe1]

PS. Doesn't the D7000 have a popup flash? Surely that's adequate for fill in most cases? It's not very much less powerful than the SB-400.

[paul_k1664875007]

Just checked to be sure what my SB400 does with my D7100 and DF (have used it in the past on my D3 and D800, without any issues as well)

 

On both camera's, with the SB400, and the bodies in A(perture) and Program mode, exposure tends to lean toward 'over exposed', with close to burned out highlights

Which is probably due to the camera already, based on the selected A and P settings, getting the 'correct' exposure, on top of which then the flash is rolled out, resulting in the over exposure, much like what happens when shooting iin Auto Iso mode in combination with non TTL e.g. studio strobes in a too high power setting

This could very well be due to the fact that I have my flash synch on my rear shutter curtain, possibly if on the first curtain this might not happen (but I'm too lazy to check this last moment idea)

 

Note that the SB400, unlike the SB800 and 900 (I have the SB800 and 910 myself) does not offer the options of Manual (as in: the speedlight delivers a flash at full power, and based on GN, ISO and distance you calculate the aperture number to get a 'correct' exposure) nor a Automatic mode (in which a built in sensor in the flash independent of the camera's TTL electronics determines the 'correct' exposure based on the selected ISO and the reflected flash light) as it lacks the option to dial in a Manual mode on the flash, nor has a built in metering sensor needed for Automatic mode

It only can be steered using the camera's electronics, hence the only available M (to be selected in the camera's Flash menu) and (also in camera) iTTl modes

 

As I always use my camera's in Manual mode when using flash, I never ran into the above mentioned P and A mode issues during my shooting situations anyway

When using the SB400 in this way, I can easily 'manipulate' the exposure with the Flash Exposure button on the top left side of the lens mount, or the 'exporsure +/- selection button in combination with dial' on the camera

 

On a side note, despite the official description that the SB400 can't be used as part of Nikon's CLS system, it can if used with (in my case) Pocket Wizard TT5's, both in (reduced power settings) TTL and even Manual (yes, the 'dumb' way) mode allowing to use it eg as a very low output fill in flash.

Probably other similar type remote radio triggers (Odin?) allow thsi as well, worth looking into if you happen to have those

 

HTH

Edited May 9, 2017 by paul_k

[alan_olander1664878205]

The SB-400 operates in BL-TTL all the time unless you set the camera to spot metering then it will operate in regular TTL. Manual flash control is set in the camera's menu where you can select full power, 1/2 power, 1/4 power, etc.

 

See link below:

 

Nikon TTL BL flash - D-lens distance data accuracy

[rodeo_joe1]

That Scantips article just confirmed what I already knew - that i-TTL (BL) is basically crap!

 

That's why I hang onto my SB-25s. Their AA mode almost never lets me down. Even when bouncing flash or using modifiers. As long as the flash sensor can "see" the subject it just works.

 

AA mode's not quite as accurate as manual mode and a flashmeter, but for quick 'n' dirty it's very reliable, with a much better hit rate than when I've tried to use i-TTL.

 

I suppose Nikon would have us believe the "i" in i-TTL stands for intelligent. "Iffy" would be a better interpretation.

 

The SB-400 was contemporary with the D70 as far as I can make out. Hmmmm, was i-TTL BL even a thing back then?

[ilkka_nissila]

i-TTL came with the D2H in 2003 if I recall correctly. The SB-400 came a few years later. As far as I know, i-TTL has always been well regarded but the remote flash triggering using that system has its limitations. I don't have any problems with using i-TTL flash on the hot shoe; works great, with occasional +/- 1/3 stop compensation depending on circumstances. For remote triggering, radio is usually more reliable though there can be issues with concrete with some radio triggering systems for flash.

[paul_k1664875007]

I'm not very good, and actually not very interested, in what the 'correct' description of the SB400 flash technology is or is called, be it TTL of iTTL, and prefer to base my comments on actual (personal) use of the flash itself (on DSLR's ranging from a D1H, D70S, D2X, and as mentioned D3, D7100, D800 to a DF) rather then quoting some googled up article

 

The Scantips article BTW is quite incomplete in its critiscism of the TTL-BL flash mode

The TTL-BL mode, even if called 'intelligent' TTL mode', in practical working conditions means the flashlight is balanced/mixed with the existing light to get a 'correcty' exposed image, and in such a way that it doesn't, as would be the case in 'normal' TTL mode, become the (overpowering) main (flash) light

It's is my long time preferred working life flash option with any Nikon speedlight I use.(as it is of many long time 'older' TTL Nikon speedlight users - amateur and professional - I know, and might very well be the reason why Nikon dropped the standard 'just TTL' option in eg the SB910), it simply gives a far more pleasing 'balanced' look, rather then an otherwise overpowering, burned out 'look I'm using a flash' look

 

The experience of the writer seems to be limited to the SB910 (which I have myself, so am well aware of how it operates as a working tool) which only was announced end 2011 (against the eg the SB800 in 2003)

If he had handled the SB600 and SB800 (which he seems to have not) he would have known that on those units the speedlight offers the (with the click of a button) selectable option to chose between TTL and TTL BL mode (which produce completely different results)

Instead he delves in an extensive (relevant?) essay on the D-lens data technology and how that supposedly doesn't interacts with the TTL-BL

 

For all practical purposes, but if I take a shot and see on my LCD it's not 100% correct/somewhat under exposed, I don't spend a lot of time and energy on the theory why such might not be the case (guess that if you have a site and need content to lure clicks you do)

Maybe I'm dumb, but I don't panick since I know I, if desired, can immediately correct that in the next shot with the FEC button, or the Exposure compensation buttton on the camera, and also have the reassuring knowledge I afterwards still can do a lot of shadow detail recovery on my RAW file in post processing (yet another advantage of shooting Nikon)

Which IMO are far more realistic options to consider as possible solutions while busy actually taking pictures (rather then spend a lot of time theorizing and making endless series of test shots)

It's not like having an under exposed shot on negative film, which, as experienced film shooters know, is far harder, and most likely only at the loss of IQ, to 'correct' in print (one of the reasons I prefer shooting digital, despite my experience extending 40+ years shooting, developing and printing film)

 

I agree with Ilkka's obbservations: yes, the SB400 works well when used from the hotshoe using the camera steered flash exposure modes (within the limitations as posted above). Don't know whether that's TTL or iTTL, nor care

All I want is to, if needed, just pop it on a camera, and (continue) to shoot away without having to worry whether the exposure will be OK (it in my long time experience will be, even if there might be small variations in the exposure; but demanding constant identically 'perfect' exposed images is IMO a bit onrealistic)

I don't constanty vary my settings between Manual, A(perture priority), S(hutter speed priority) or Program, or Matrix, Spot or Center metering mode, when using flash I always have my camera in Manual(ly selected shutter speed and aperture) mode and Matrix Metering. and if necessary make corrections while shooting as described (also) above

Could be the camera's I use do switch between iTTl and TTL mode, but as said, all I care about is to get a, within a certain range which I can if necessary slightly tweak in post processing, 'correctly' exposed picture

 

And the SB 400 does that, on the venerable D1H - even if not in iTTL mode, not possible on that body - and D70S (which does handle iTTL just like its predecessor the D70), as well on the more recent D800 and DF ( I have no immediate need to upgrade to a more modern D750, D810 or D500, the oldies still deliver the IQ I want; the money thus saved I can spend on lenses, or other non photography related things - which, believe it or not, do exist :) )

 

It however (officially) does not work as part of Nikon's CLS system ( it lacks the photocell to communicate with a Master flash/camera)

This is clearly stated in the SB400 tech info on the Nikon product site, and yes, also in the manual (which probably few who posted seem to have ever seen or handled in the hard copy form) As I posted earlier, it, as I found out, does though in combinations with in any case PW TT5's, and perhaps also other radio triggers

 

Nikon's remote CLS system in itself works well, even within some limitations.

In its original form, introduced with the SB800 in 2003, it's infra red triggered, making the system next to useless used outside under bright sunlight (using a SC29 cord gives some relieve, but only up to a point, and really not that much). It works well inside though, but even then keeping the remote flash with the 'line of view' of the trigger is a deciding factor for succesfull use.

 

If you only have limited experience working with the CLS system, and in particular only in its original infra red form, and since then not have kept up with, and worked/experimented with advancing technical options such as radio triggers, the observation that it 'sucks' is outdated to say the least, and you have been withholding yourself some very usefull real life working solutions

If used in combination with (more modern) radio triggers like the PW TT5 or Phottix Odin, in which case the whole infra red thing becomes redundant, the CLS system works (in my experience, have started using it this way shortly after the PW TT's were introduced)) next to flawless, esspecially when using a Nikon SU800 or PW AC3 as steering unit and much better and reliable then the SB25's AA (?, perhaps Auto Flash mode, = non TTL light metered via a sensor in front) mode (when that speedlight was introduced, back in the film shooting F4/F801 days, friviolities like the CLS system didn't even exist)

 

So sorry, can't/won't quote some article of an 'expert' or manual I googled, can only fall back on actual. long time working experience with the SB400 and the CLS system

Edited May 9, 2017 by paul_k

[rodeo_joe1]

Does any of that actually help the OP with his problem Paul?

 

That 3rd party hardware needs to be used to make Nikon's AWL system work reliably says quite a lot, don't you think? It seems like it took Canon's introduction of built-in radio flash slaving to finally trigger (pun intended) Nikon to follow suit.

[ilkka_nissila]

Jonathan, what happens if you adjust the flash exposure compensation on your camera body (it should be accessible through a button on the left side of the pop-up flash). If you set it to 0, -1, -2, -3, does the flash exposure change? Keep the ambient exposure on manual for this test and set the exposure so that the scene is slightly underexposed without flash. Set the flash to TTL rather than manual in the camera menu. This "always full output" behaviour could be because the camera is set to control the flash in manual mode instead of TTL. According to the SB-400 manual, this is a custom setting on the camera.

 

All my SB's have performed in a logical way but I don't have that particular unit.

[paul_k1664875007]

Does any of that actually help the OP with his problem Paul?

 

Yes, much more then refering to some vague article of an 'expert' who has no experience with the flash at hand, at best just with one model Nikon speedlight, and at best shallow experience with the Nikon flash system and how it prgressed from the next to fail proof TTL on film bodies like F4, F801, F90X and F100 (with the SB25) via the specially adapted for use on DSLR's SB80DX and later despite new 'king of the mountian SB910 still highly regarded SB800

Or partisan remarks based on experiences from way back when, apparently not updated by following/applying newer technological developments

 

My remarks are based on actual working with the SB400, in the set up (flash in hotshoe) and with virtually the same camera (D7000 vs D7100) as the OP, so I can make/hand down real world, own experience based, remarks and tips

 

That 3rd party hardware needs to be used to make Nikon's AWL system work reliably says quite a lot, don't you think? It seems like it took Canon's introduction of built-in radio flash slaving to finally trigger (pun intended) Nikon to follow suit.

 

I must say I always love those kind of observations and reactions on something which clearly was a casual observation (see my first post 'On a side note ...)

 

While Nikon in 2003 got their act together with regards to the flash system on DSLR's (to the high standard Nikon users based on their experiences with the TTL on film slr's were used to) Canon was still struggling with their speedlight (and which for many professional users was a major reason, next to the 2008 introduced D3, to joyfully return to Nikon)

 

When Pocket Wizard introduced the TT5's in 2010 ( a development you seem to have missed nor have any experience with), they without any problems could be used in combination with Nikon speedlights like SB600 and SB800 (didn't read that, but worked with them that way)

Canon was a different story however, the then current speedlights needed special socks to work with the TT5's, and even then in a much less functional way then the Nikon ones, making functional remote radio triggering with eg the EX580 problematic to say the least, or maybe better a far away illusion realistically speaking

 

The 2012 released Canon 600EX RT currently costs in the Netherlands Euro 639 , and obviously can't be used as a (i)TTL speedlight on a Nikon DSLR

If however I still happen to have a SB400, SB00 or SB800 (which due to their age will cost much less) I can just pop them on a PW TT5 (new Eur 200, and for less available 2nd hand) or e.g. an even less expensive Phottix Odin, and use those 'oldies' with any Nikon DSLR

Maybe not iTTL with a D1H, but without any problems with anything ranging from a D70 to D800 (limiting myself to the camera's I use/have used, even though I read enough positive reviews about use with 'newer' models)

No need to (costly) switching systems, which obviously would be becessary if I would want to take 'advantage' of (dare I say expensive, considering Eur 639 for a EX600 RT?) Canon built in radio technology (OK I would lose bragging rights for having the lastest, most costly gimmicks; but then again, I take pictures instead)

 

Perhaps Nikon does not have built in radio triggering model wise up the the same level/specs as Canon with the (less expensive) SB5000

But then again, I have been using Nikon speedlights (released to as far back as 2003) without any problems remotely radio triggered since 2010

While Canon finally had its act together at a much later date, and, very high cost if I would switch camera brand, as I then had to sell my Nikon gear and buy similar Canon equipment just for getting a 'better' speedlight

 

So yes, Canon's more modern 2012 remote radio trigger technology 'may' be more advanced then Nikon's SB5000 (no personal experience with either, so can say anything/make any comparison - apart from the price, and perceived costs of having to switch system - based on that)

 

But considering the question was for tips on how to get his SB400 better working on a D7000, does that actually help the OP with his problem?

[rodeo_joe1]

Paul, the going rate for a used SB-400 seems to be around $150 US. Add to that a PW TT5 and receiver, or the Phottix Odin kit, and you're looking at an expenditure of well over $350 US. Not to mention the extra size and weight added to the kit to be carried. It kind of defeats the object of having a tiny (and relatively cheap) speedlight.

 

It sounds like the OP is an amateur, so do you really think that's an economical or practical suggestion?

 

If you read back to the initial responses to Jonathan's post. Some suggestions were made as to why the flash wasn't working as expected. The sidetrack to i-TTL BL was simply to try and determine if the SB-400 actually supported that function. Not to suggest throwing twice what the flash was worth at making it work!

[ilkka_nissila]

The OP isn't talking about remote flash triggering, as far as I can tell his problem is related to controlling flash exposure when the flash is used on the hot shoe.

 

To Paul's point about Canon remote flash triggering vs. SB-5000; I have not used the Canon system but the SB-5000 is excellent and the radio triggering is very reliable and what's nice is that the radio trigger doesn't require its own battery (the transmitter uses the camera battery and the receiver is built into the flash and uses the flash batteries) so there is less battery maintenance than with other brands' radio triggers. The radio AWL system works even together with optical triggering based older CLS flashes so you can mix old and new technologies if you want to. I use an older flash in the hot shoe (bounced TTL flash) and the SB-5000 as a remote and everything works fine, together or separately. Furthermore the WR-R10/A10 that is used to trigger the remote flash using radio can be used for synchronized triggering of cameras and for remote triggering from a small handset, so there are multiple uses for it. I don't know what you might be referring to when you suggest that the Canon system may be more advanced, could you elaborate? I get it that Nikon only have three cameras that are compatible with the radio AWL system so far; that is a limitation for now. The Canon transmitter ST-E3-RT has its own display; with the Nikon WR-R10 it is much smaller and there is no display; the flash control panel is in the camera's menu system. The menu might be a little slower to access but on the other hand the WR-R10 is much smaller and you still have the flash shoe free for use of a flash or another accessory. One could argue advantages either way.

Edited May 11, 2017 by ilkka_nissila