Finally @mirrorless family - Z5 Flash recco

[Hemant Deshmukh]

Hi All,

With heavy heart traded my beloved D750 with 24-70 VR 2.8E, 70-200 2.8 FL and 200-500.  My 2/3 investment drained for Z5 and 24-120 F4 S 🙃. Kind of Happy and  Sad. Anyway, wanted try mirrorless with basic investment. Happy with Z5 and 24-120. Just few days observation.

Can someone recommend flash for Z5. SB700 seems be right option. SB500 is not in compatible list. SB5000 is a over kill.

I shoot Landscape/ Portraits / indoor events. Nothing for money. Just as a hobby.

Appreciate your insights

Thank you

HD

 

[Niels - NHSN]

Check this out: https://www.zsystemuser.com/accessories/z-accessories/nikon-flash-for-z-cameras.html

 

[rodeo_joe1]

You can never have a flash that's too powerful, and the SB700 is a bit puny in light output. 1 stop less than a top-tier speedlight to be precise, and that 1 stop can make a big difference if trying to bounce or otherwise diffuse the light. 

I would recommend getting a used SB-800, or SB-900 or 910. Their price has fallen quite a bit recently I see - that's if you're comfortable buying 'pre-loved' gear.

Currently I see SB-800s offered for about £90 and SB-900s for under £150 UK, from a reputable dealer. 

Otherwise there are new i-TTL compatible speedlights from YongNuo, Godox and Newer that all offer more light-output for a lot less money than a weedy SB-700. (But don't even consider Meike flashes!) 

The build-quality of Nikon's speedlights is first-class, but they definitely don't offer good value for money unless you buy them used.

Edit: From that Z-flash compatibility link above-

"To perform optical wireless on a Zfc, Z30, Z50, Z5, Z6, Z6 II, Z7, or Z7 II, you need a flash in the hot shoe that can serve as Commander."

Time to look into 3rd party radio triggers then, methinks. Or just forget about flakey i-TTL and go with AA flash or fully manual control. 

Edited December 20, 2022 by rodeo_joe1

[Niels - NHSN]

I own the SB700 which I use on my Z6ii and I am happy with it, fairly compact and plenty powerfull for me. It doesn't allow usage of the in-camera flash menu, but I am fine with just using the rear display of the flash unit.

As far as I understand no current Nikon flash has support light for AF. They are all designed for DSLRs and can only emit red light - whereas the Z series cannot focus on the red light pattern.

I also use the SB400, which is very basic. Out of production but easy to find. Just put it on the camera and shoot. No controls other than the camera's -/+ compensation, but if that's all you need, it is a great tiny portable unit.
Mine broke the lock pin mechanism and left the pin in "out" position, so if I put it on the camera, it will not come off.
Instead I use it with a SC-17 TTL sync cable (which doesn't have the locking hole) in my film scan setup.

Edited December 20, 2022 by NHSN

[Niels - NHSN]

Nikon is long overdue in updating their flash lineup to fully accommodate the Z series.

I am puzzled that they haven't done that with the advent of the Z9, but I suspect there are also factors outside Nikon's control that has an influence on that. This past summer, Nikon had to temporarily suspend taking orders of the SB-5000, presumably due to the global parts shortage. 

[mike_halliwell]

31 minutes ago, rodeo_joe1 said:

1 stop less than a top-tier speedlight to be precise, and that 1 stop can make a big difference if trying to bounce or otherwise diffuse the light. 

Definitely! 

I often bounce a pair or triple of YN560iiis to increase ambient light in a big room/church.

[rodeo_joe1]

52 minutes ago, NHSN said:

They are all designed for DSLRs and can only emit red light - whereas the Z series cannot focus on the red light pattern.

How do the Z series manage to focus on a red subject then? (No chance of trapping Santa Claus on camera with a Nikon Z in that case!) 

TBH, I gave up on unreliable i-TTL years ago. If I need flash automation I fall back on my old favourite SB-25s that have AA mode. The exposure accuracy is just as good as i-TTL. 

Otherwise, in off-camera multi-flash setups, radio triggers and manual control are the order of the day. Because you pretty much know where the subject is going to be and the effect you're after. What could optical triggering and i-TTL offer? Even Joe McNally has been known to abandon CLS and resort to other measures in the post-script to some of his videos! 

Edited December 20, 2022 by rodeo_joe1

[ilkka_nissila]

28 minutes ago, rodeo_joe1 said:

How do the Z series manage to focus on a red subject then? (No chance of trapping Santa Claus on camera with a Nikon Z in that case!) 

TBH, I gave up on unreliable i-TTL years ago. If I need flash automation I fall back on my old favourite SB-25s that have AA mode. The exposure accuracy is just as good as i-TTL. 

Otherwise, in off-camera multi-flash setups, radio triggers and manual control are the order of the day. Because you pretty much know where the subject is going to be and the effect you're after. What could optical triggering and i-TTL offer? Even Joe McNally has been known to abandon CLS and resort to other measures in the post-script to some of his videos! 

Most of the flash focus assist light on Nikon speedlights is in the infrared and only a small amount of visible red light is emitted. A Z camera sensor is designed to block most of the infrared light so as to not distort the colours of the scene compared to human vision. So that's why it doesn't work well with the assist light.

 

Typically the solution to the problem would be to emit white light as a focus-assist light but that's much more distracting to the subject side than the current slightly red mostly infrared light used in Nikon speedlights. I think they haven't done this change to visible because it's really, really distracting and noticeable, a bit like working with continuous lights. I remember using a Fuji X100S a church concert when they had a candlelit choir precession in the center corridor of the church and when I used my camera just about everone turned towards me to see what was that bright light the camera was emitting to be able to focus. IMO there is no acceptable solution to the problem and we just have to focus on the ambient light that the subject reflects.

Edited December 20, 2022 by ilkka_nissila

[rodeo_joe1]

20 minutes ago, ilkka_nissila said:

Most of the flash focus assist light on Nikon speedlights is in the infrared and only a small amount of visible red light is emitted.

 

Typically the solution to the problem would be to emit white light as a focus-assist light but that's much more distracting to the subject side than the current slightly red mostly infrared light used in Nikon speedlights. I think they haven't done this change to visible because it's really, really distracting and noticeable, a bit like working with continuous lights. I remember using a Fuji X100S a church concert when they had a candlelit choir precession in the center corridor of the church and when I used my camera just about everone turned towards me to see what was that bright light the camera was emitting to be able to focus. IMO there is no acceptable solution to the problem and we just have to focus on the ambient light that the subject reflects.

Well, that raises two points.

1. Many of Nikon's DSLRs have an incandescent bulb (nearly white) AF assist light built into the camera. *

2. What light source emits in the visible red and IR parts of the spectrum simultaneously? There's no commercial LED that does that, and Laser light is by nature monochromatic. Also, wouldn't using IR cause a lens-dependent focussing error? 

Sounds like a bunch of lame excuses for simply not activating the flash AF assist to me. 

* The fact that a large diameter lens or lens hood blocks the AF assist lamp is beside the point! 😉

Edited December 20, 2022 by rodeo_joe1

[ilkka_nissila]

The on-camera focus assist light present in some Nikon DSLRs is indeed visible light but the assist light on the accessory speedlights is mostly IR and that's why it's effective while being barely noticeable to the subject rather than overwhelmingly bright like the assist light on the Fuji mirrorless (the DSLR in-camera assist light is a bit less annoying than the one on the Fuji but I always turn it off to avoid spooking my subjects). IR assist provided by the Speedlight works on DSLRs because the autofocus sensor doesn't need to produce a natural colour rendition to please the human eye so it can let in some IR light and focus using that.

[dennisbrown]

I have the SB-900, SB-910, and SB-5000 and all function perfectly with my Z5 and Z7 cameras.  There were some issues with the SB-900 overheating when using for long bursts, but the SB-910 addressed that issue.  As an aside, I never had problems with my SB-900, although I've never used it in rapid flash mode.

One of my local dealers has an SB-910 on his eBay site for @@150.

[mike_halliwell]

1 hour ago, dennisbrown said:

@@

Isn't that some sort of armoured troop transporter in Star Wars?

[joseph_smith3]

The Nikon SB500 is compatible with the Z5. See page 640 of the Nikon Z5 reference manual for a list of compatible flashes with a table of supported features. I use the Nikon SB5000 on my Z9 an sometimes the SB 800. The table does show that the SB 500 is limited in features compared to other flashes listed like the SB5000. 

[dennisbrown]

20 hours ago, mike_halliwell said:

Isn't that some sort of armoured troop transporter in Star Wars?

Yes!

However, my interpretation is due, in its entirety, to keyboard fumble-itis before finishing my morning joe.

[rodeo_joe1]

On 12/20/2022 at 11:51 AM, ilkka_nissila said:

IR assist provided by the Speedlight works on DSLRs because the autofocus sensor doesn't need to produce a natural colour rendition to please the human eye so it can let in some IR light and focus using that.

The issue about using IR to focus with has nothing to do with colour rendition. Different lenses (even so-called Apo lenses) focus differently with infrared than with visible light. That's why some old lenses had a separate IR fiducial on the focussing scale. Sometimes at a fair distance from the normal focus fiducial. 

Focussing using IR will cause a focussing error in the visible spectrum. Therefore (apart from there being no visible red+IR emitting LED easily obtainable) I question the source of your information about IR forming the main source of focus-assist lighting. That would just be inviting focus errors. 

In fact, relying on visible deep-red light for AF is pushing things. Especially given Nikon's propensity to build noticeable LoCa into their lenses! 😲

Edited December 27, 2022 by rodeo_joe1

[ilkka_nissila]

1 hour ago, rodeo_joe1 said:

The issue about using IR to focus with has nothing to do with colour rendition. Different lenses (even so-called Apo lenses) focus differently with infrared than with visible light. That's why some old lenses had a separate IR fiducial on the focussing scale. Sometimes at a fair distance from the normal focus fiducial. 

Focussing using IR will cause a focussing error in the visible spectrum. Therefore (apart from there being no visible red+IR emitting LED easily obtainable) I question the source of your information about IR forming the main source of focus-assist lighting. That would just be inviting focus errors. 

In fact, relying on visible deep-red light for AF is pushing things. Especially given Nikon's propensity to build noticeable LoCa into their lenses! 😲

The red/IR assist beam on speedlights is so dim to the human eye that it's difficult to see how it could be useful for helping the camera focus if the camera sees the light the same way as humans do. The on-camera assist light in many cameras is visible light and very distractingly bright. Why would camera manufacturers put an inferior assist light in their flashes? The answer is that it is dim to the human eye but not dim to the camera's autofocus sensor. This way they were able to create a system which genuinely helps in low-light autofocus buy is not distracting to the human eye.

 

Canon's accessory flash assist light was measured by Bob Atkins:

http://www.bobatkins.com/photography/technical/focus_vs_light_source.html

 

The accessory flash light's AF assist spectrum peaks at 700 nm and ranges from 660 to 730 nm. The human eye has three spectrally different cone "sensors". The red cone spectral sensitivity peaks at 565 nm and reaches 10% around 670nm. Thus the 660-730 nm assist light is visible to the human eye but just barely, with very low sensitivity. It is however, what Canon chose to use for the accessory flash assist light.

 

Now, whether having a near-infrared light source causes a big enough focus shift that it is a concern in a situation where you have to choose whether to get any shots at all, is debatable. The manufacturer could make a correction for this in camera.

 

Edited December 27, 2022 by ilkka_nissila

[mike_halliwell]

The mirrorless Z5 is totally blind beyond ~680nm and/as it's got a vey good IR blocker...so a far-red/IR AF assist is going to be useless.

 

[rodeo_joe1]

From Bob Atkins' article - 

"There's far too little visible light for focusing by visible light but AF is fine, indicating it must be focusing using IR. Almost every lens will have a different focus setting for IR light than for visible light. In fact many lenses have (or had in the past) a separate red mark on the distance scale showing the position for IR focus, usually displaced toward the infinity end of the scale."

Isn't that almost exactly what I said? 

Then basically, Bob Atkins and I agree that using an IR AF assist light is a fundamentally bad idea. 

So why did Nikon and Canon follow such a stupid path? 

My cynical side says they simply cheaped out on the AF sensor and couldn't be arsed to fit an IR blocking filter, which could also explain why AF fine-tune is so flakey. And now the direct imaging-sensor AF of a MILC has turned around and bitten their lazy, penny-pinching backsides. Meaning they now have to spend on re-designing their flashes for the mirrorless age... a spend that will doubtless be passed onto the customer. 

Not only that, but the AF assist light in Z series flashes (should they ever appear) can no longer be barely visible. 

Edited December 28, 2022 by rodeo_joe1

[rodeo_joe1]

22 hours ago, ilkka_nissila said:

The manufacturer could make a correction for this in camera.

 

But obviously didn't, according to Bob Atkins' investigations. 

It may be possible now, by having a massive LUT covering every lens, but it wasn't possible when the AF SLR and DSLR first came out, with limited memory and CPU power. A scenario that makes the choice of an Infrared AF assist light even more bizarre. 

[mike_halliwell]

With the crazy high ISOs now available, wouldn't a very low power white-light pre-flash be suitable... to such an extent to be barely visible?

It would be able to 'set' ISO 128K 'flash' and calculate down to chosen exposure ISO.

[ilkka_nissila]

1 hour ago, mike_halliwell said:

With the crazy high ISOs now available, wouldn't a very low power white-light pre-flash be suitable... to such an extent to be barely visible?

It would be able to 'set' ISO 128K 'flash' and calculate down to chosen exposure ISO.

Focusing in low light takes 100's of ms, a preflash would be < 1 ms, so that wouldn't work. The AF assist light needs to be continuous lighting significantly brighter than the existing light in the scene (otherwise the camera would focus using the ambient light) and this is why implementing it with such wavelenghts of light to which human eye has good sensitivity to is extremely distracting. Use of a NIR light is a compromise for sure but it is not distracting and results are better than having no focusing at all. 

Edited December 28, 2022 by ilkka_nissila

[mike_halliwell]

Just to check, with Nikon Zs, what is the lens's aperture doing during focusing?

Wide open, @ taking aperture or whatever it likes for it's own reasons?

[ilkka_nissila]

1 hour ago, mike_halliwell said:

Just to check, with Nikon Zs, what is the lens's aperture doing during focusing?

Wide open, @ taking aperture or whatever it likes for it's own reasons?

If the selected aperture is f/5.6 or wider, the camera focuses using the same aperture as will be used for the actual exposure. If the aperture selected for the exposure is smaller than f/5.6 then the camera will open the lens up to f/5.6 for focusing (or wide open if f/5.6 is not available) and stops it down for the taking of the picture.

This is a compromise which reduces the impact of aperture-dependent focus shift and gives adequate light for focusing. It also helps to maintain a stable viewfinder image (at f/5.6 or wider) as the aperture is not changed for focusing (unless a really small aperture is chosen for the picture).

Edited December 28, 2022 by ilkka_nissila

[mike_halliwell]

So, atleast 3 stops less light, than DSLRs, reaches an AF sensor?

[ilkka_nissila]

2 minutes ago, mike_halliwell said:

So, atleast 3 stops less light, than DSLRs, reaches an AF sensor?

How do you come such a conclusion? Apertures are used also in DSLR AF sensors and the AF sensor does not see all of the light that contributes to the image. The mirror and submirror system do not transmit all of the light to the AF sensor since some of the light is needed for the viewfinder image. Additionally, the AF sensor module contains masks. 

What is critical for the functioning of autofocus in low light is the contrast-to-noise ratio. It would be difficult to properly analyze the two systems without detailed information about the components. It seems too complicated to do for the purposes of personal curiosity for me at least! 

I guess it would be useful if we could report the conditions in which AF has failed to work in a practical shooting scenario, what was the subject, exposure and lighting like. The we can discuss possible solutions.