Review - Canon Speedlite 600EX-RT

[Canon Rumors]

Discuss our review of the Canon Speedlite 600EX-RT here.

[FunPhotons]

Whoops, common mistake at the top of the article.

Canon light triggering is NOT an infrared system.

It uses visible light pretriggering.

The red panel on your flash is for auto-focus assist.

[infared]

GREAT review, Justin...and excellent sample shots to illustrate your points in the article. You are quite the capable new asset here at Canon Rumors! Thanks for an incredibly well-rounded review of a complex subject.

[msatter]

Never had any problem with PocketWizards and Canon flashes but then I don't life in an FCC area. I life in an EC area were different frequencies are used to communicate with the PocketWizards.

In short it was an problem caused by Canon who produced interference in a bandwidth that used for communications. 

Read more on FCC on: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Communications_Commission
Read more on EC on: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CE_marking

From PocketWizard self: http://www.pocketwizard.com/inspirations/technology/range/

[TWI by Dustin Abbott]

Good review, Justin.  In a studio setting I found the 60D/7D optical triggers worked fine, but yes, they were nightmares outside.  When I went to full frame I purchased the Yongnuo 622s and they have worked well for me.  Glad that Canon is stepping up the technology, though.

I wonder if they (through firmware) will allow for flash control with the 600EX-RT using the 6D's wireless system.  I would hope that, at minumum, future bodies would have that master control built in.  It's not just the expense of additional components; it is the awkwardness of adding more components to the camera body when often what you need is to just shoot (without more and more weight!)

[JVLphoto]

Never had any problem with PocketWizards and Canon flashes but then I don't life in an FCC area. I life in an EC area were different frequencies are used to communicate with the PocketWizards.

In short it was an problem caused by Canon who produced interference in a bandwidth that used for communications. 

Read more on FCC on: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Communications_Commission
Read more on EC on: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CE_marking

From PocketWizard self: http://www.pocketwizard.com/inspirations/technology/range/

All I'm saying is that if Pocket Wizard produced a product for a pre-existing Canon product, then it should have been thoroughly tested in all the markets.  Did Canon make a flash with too much RF interference? Maybe. Did Pocketwizard do their due diligence to make sure this wouldn't affect their customers? nope.

[JVLphoto]

Good review, Justin.  In a studio setting I found the 60D/7D optical triggers worked fine, but yes, they were nightmares outside.  When I went to full frame I purchased the Yongnuo 622s and they have worked well for me.  Glad that Canon is stepping up the technology, though.

I wonder if they (through firmware) will allow for flash control with the 600EX-RT using the 6D's wireless system.  I would hope that, at minumum, future bodies would have that master control built in.  It's not just the expense of additional components; it is the awkwardness of adding more components to the camera body when often what you need is to just shoot (without more and more weight!)

I wish, but I'm sure we both know the answer to that. It's the same questions as why I can't add any arbitrary number of timed shutter releases to do in-camera time-lapse? Dongles and accessories are a great market for the manufacturer.

I would like to see added levels of control, though, while you can go from High-speedy sync and back again through wireless, you can't change the zoom (a minor complaint, since 99% of the time I'm shooting inside a light mod).

[neuroanatomist]

I wonder if they (through firmware) will allow for flash control with the 600EX-RT using the 6D's wireless system.  I would hope that, at minumum, future bodies would have that master control built in.  It's not just the expense of additional components; it is the awkwardness of adding more components to the camera body when often what you need is to just shoot (without more and more weight!)

Makes sense, but...

It's not just the expense of writing the firmware code to support Wi-Fi flash triggering, it's all that lost revenue from the 600EX-RT and ST-E3-RT units we won't sell if we include the feature.  Sure, we did it with the popup flashes on the low end models, but that was old optical triggering tech, not our brand new RF tech.

 

[dragosdor]

Hi there, I am new to this forum actually registered just to inquire about this 600 rt review. I am a seasoned photographer using a 5d3 and 4 flashes 600rt and I have been looking for a cheaper backup body alternative. The reviewer mentions that you have to own a 2012 camera for the RT system to be compatible, but then he puts 7d on that list, among 5d3, 6d and 1dx. So since when is 7d a 2012 camera? Or, did it gain compatibility through the 2.0 firmware? I am very interested since I will want to buy a 7d if it turns out is fully compatible. Forgot to mention I am only looking for the radio triggering and groups and high speed sync. Not the optical trigger which I even forgot the 600rt can do.

[neuroanatomist]

So since when is 7d a 2012 camera? Or, did it gain compatibility through the 2.0 firmware? I am very interested since I will want to buy a 7d if it turns out is fully compatible.

Welcome!

The review is incorrect.  The 7D has the same limitations as any other pre-2012 camera for RF triggering, even with the v2 firmware - one stop lower X-sync, no group flash, and no HSS.  However, the 650D/T4i is a 2012 camera (and should have been on Justin's list in place of the 7D), and is 'fully compatible' with the 600EX-RT without those limitations.

[JVLphoto]

So since when is 7d a 2012 camera? Or, did it gain compatibility through the 2.0 firmware? I am very interested since I will want to buy a 7d if it turns out is fully compatible.

Welcome!

The review is incorrect.  The 7D has the same limitations as any other pre-2012 camera for RF triggering, even with the v2 firmware - one stop lower X-sync, no group flash, and no HSS.  However, the 650D/T4i is a 2012 camera (and should have been on Justin's list in place of the 7D), and is 'fully compatible' with the 600EX-RT without those limitations.

Thanks guys, sorry about that error, you're right, the 7D is pre-2012 and not compatible with the full feature group mode. We'll get that fixed up in the review ASAP. So what does that make compatible? 5D3, 1DX, 6D right?

[JVLphoto]

Hi there, I am new to this forum actually registered just to inquire about this 600 rt review. I am a seasoned photographer using a 5d3 and 4 flashes 600rt and I have been looking for a cheaper backup body alternative. The reviewer mentions that you have to own a 2012 camera for the RT system to be compatible, but then he puts 7d on that list, among 5d3, 6d and 1dx. So since when is 7d a 2012 camera? Or, did it gain compatibility through the 2.0 firmware? I am very interested since I will want to buy a 7d if it turns out is fully compatible. Forgot to mention I am only looking for the radio triggering and groups and high speed sync. Not the optical trigger which I even forgot the 600rt can do.

Yeah, don't do it - that's my mistake - we'll fix it up in the review. Backup options are the 6D for now and *maybe* they'll release a 7DMKII this year...

[infared]

"I wonder if they (through firmware) will allow for flash control with the 600EX-RT using the 6D's wireless system.  I would hope that, at minumum, future bodies would have that master control built in.  It's not just the expense of additional components; it is the awkwardness of adding more components to the camera body when often what you need is to just shoot (without more and more weight!)"

...but then Canon would miss out on selling a $300+ accessory?   

[JVLphoto]

"I wonder if they (through firmware) will allow for flash control with the 600EX-RT using the 6D's wireless system.  I would hope that, at minumum, future bodies would have that master control built in.  It's not just the expense of additional components; it is the awkwardness of adding more components to the camera body when often what you need is to just shoot (without more and more weight!)"

...but the Canon would miss out on selling a $300+ accessory?   

Exactly. At least this is a $300 accessory that actually does something practical - for a change.

[David Hull]

Never had any problem with PocketWizards and Canon flashes but then I don't life in an FCC area. I life in an EC area were different frequencies are used to communicate with the PocketWizards.

In short it was an problem caused by Canon who produced interference in a bandwidth that used for communications. 

Read more on FCC on: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Communications_Commission
Read more on EC on: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CE_marking

From PocketWizard self: http://www.pocketwizard.com/inspirations/technology/range/

This is Pocket Wizard's fault for not testing the product properly.  The Canon flash is fully compliant with all of the international regulations that were in force at the time of its design and manufacturer.  That is what all of those little logos that are plastered on them mean.  Radio Popper, other PW's etc. work fine it was LPA Design's responsibility to make their product work with Canon, not the other way around.  The simple fact is that LPA did a poor engineering job and did not test their product properly.