600EX-RT: Viability as a remote shutter release?

[privatebydesign]

What difference does AF via a one stage switch or a two stage switch make in a remote setup? The answer is none. The camera will AF before the image is taken using either.

There is a difference. In a one-stage switch, the camera will engage the AF and then immediately shoot. There is no time in between for the vibrations introduced by the AF mechanisms to dissipate before the shot goes off. In a two-stage switch, you half-press the remote to engage the AF, then you have the option of waiting for the vibrations caused by the AF motors to dissipate, and then you fully press the remote to fire the shot.

I'd like to see proof of that, I have never heard of AF causing vibrations, never. The mirror, if you are not using mirror lock up, can cause vibrations at some shutter speeds, but not AF.

But, as Neuro points out, if you are using lights then the shutter speed, and vibrations, become moot as it is the flash duration that becomes your effective exposure time and that is fast enough to overcome any such vibrations.

 

[entlassen]

I'd like to see proof of that, I have never heard of AF causing vibrations, never. The mirror, if you are not using mirror lock up, can cause vibrations at some shutter speeds, but not AF.

If you can't see how the AF module in a camera, which is essentially a motor, causes vibrations, then I don't know what to say. You do hear it whirling away in your own camera, right? It's a moving mechanical part. It spins another mechanical part attached to it (the lens). Sometimes the lens isn't even attached airtight (e.g. 70-200 II's often have a tiny bit of play between the lens and body). There is friction, there is movement, and this movement comes in short bursts, disrupting the inertia of the camera.

Accounting for AF vibrations is standard procedure for people shooting test charts when not in manual mode.
Many of the D800 users I referenced earlier had flawed tests because they didn't account for it and got false positives in their images. One of the reasons those threads were so long and numerous was because a lot of it was figuring out who did their tests correctly and who did not (and there are a lot of factors that can corrupt a sharpness test).

And yes, mirror slap can cause vibrations.

 

[Swphoto]

Oh, does the picture on Amazon look different than the one you have or something?

Edit - The WRT-A's manual says the receiver use CR2 batteries, but I looked at some youtube videos of user reviews and some have receivers that take AAA batteries. I guess there are variations.

This is what my receiver looks like: http://img.gawkerassets.com/img/17pk3hn8p4l3sjpg/ku-xlarge.jpg

 

[entlassen]

Oh, does the picture on Amazon look different than the one you have or something?

Edit - The WRT-A's manual says the receiver use CR2 batteries, but I looked at some youtube videos of user reviews and some have receivers that take AAA batteries. I guess there are variations.

This is what my receiver looks like: http://img.gawkerassets.com/img/17pk3hn8p4l3sjpg/ku-xlarge.jpg

Thanks. Yeah, it looks different than the image being shown on Amazon; the cord plugs into a different location.

 

[WPJ]

Check this out, at least you only need to carry the receiver

Satechi Bluetooth Smart Trigger

Bluetooth smart trigger

 

[Loswr]

One-stage remote with the self timer set?

 

[privatebydesign]

One-stage remote with the self timer set?

Now that is a stroke of genius amongst the irrelevant drivel. I can confirm it works too.

P.S. I still haven't found the D800 focus threads where they specifically point to AF induced vibrations ruining a strobe illuminated test image, but I really don't care either.

 

[entlassen]

One-stage remote with the self timer set?

Now that is a stroke of genius amongst the irrelevant drivel. I can confirm it works too.

P.S. I still haven't found the D800 focus threads where they specifically point to AF induced vibrations ruining a strobe illuminated test image, but I really don't care either.

If you're going to resort to self-timers, then you might as well not even use a remote. Need to get into a group shot? Screw the remote, use the self-timer right?

Irrelevant drivel huh. You mean like that post where somebody demanded proof that a spinning motor causes vibrations?

 

[privatebydesign]

Irrelevant drivel huh. You mean like that post where somebody demanded proof that a spinning motor causes vibrations?

No, I meant the post when a certified engineer asked you where there was proof that an AF motor negatively impacts image quality.

 

[Loswr]

You do hear it whirling away in your own camera, right? It's a moving mechanical part. It spins another mechanical part attached to it (the lens).

And yes, mirror slap can cause vibrations.

I don't hear it whirling away in my camera...but then, I don't use a Nikon dSLR.

Lots of things cause vibrations, including the earth itself. They only matter if the frequency and amplitude are such that IQ is affected. I doubt that's the case for vibrations caused by the AF motor in the lens.

It's well documented that the vibrations from mirror slap only affect IQ at certain shutter speeds. The effective shutter speed for a strobe-lit shot is fast enough that mirror slap has no effect.

One-stage remote with the self timer set?

Now that is a stroke of genius amongst the irrelevant drivel. I can confirm it works too.

Sometimes the simple solution is the best one. Not that I'm opposed to unnecessarily complex and/or expensive solutions...after all, I'm using $80 in RRS accessories (not counting the $250 L-bracket) to do a job that could be accomplished with a few cents worth of Velcro.

 

[entlassen]

Irrelevant drivel huh. You mean like that post where somebody demanded proof that a spinning motor causes vibrations?

No, I meant the post when a certified engineer asked you where there was proof that an AF motor negatively impacts image quality.

I agree. That post sounded pretty irrelevant to me.

 

[entlassen]

Sometimes the simple solution is the best one.

C'mon neuro, you know that any solution where you're paying money to get sub-optimal functionality is not the best one. Almost all dedicated remote shutters have 2-stage triggers and continuous burst capability, like a camera's actual shutter button. The original post in this thread was asking if the 600EX-RT's shutter release button also had this functionality, and the answer was no, and that's fine because that's not the primary purpose of the 600EX-RT. I just wanted to know if its button had that additional functionality as a bonus, so one could skip buying a dedicated remote altogether. Obviously nobody in their right mind would pay $1000 for two speedlights just to have a remote trigger, and then go even further and gimp themselves by setting a self-timer just because the speedlight doesn't have half-press AF engage.

 

[privatebydesign]

You do hear it whirling away in your own camera, right? It's a moving mechanical part. It spins another mechanical part attached to it (the lens).

And yes, mirror slap can cause vibrations.

I don't hear it whirling away in my camera...but then, I don't use a Nikon dSLR.

Lots of things cause vibrations, including the earth itself. They only matter if the frequency and amplitude are such that IQ is affected. I doubt that's the case for vibrations caused by the AF motor in the lens.

It's well documented that the vibrations from mirror slap only affect IQ at certain shutter speeds. The effective shutter speed for a strobe-lit shot is fast enough that mirror slap has no effect.

One-stage remote with the self timer set?

Now that is a stroke of genius amongst the irrelevant drivel. I can confirm it works too.

Sometimes the simple solution is the best one. Not that I'm opposed to unnecessarily complex and/or expensive solutions...after all, I'm using $80 in RRS accessories (not counting the $250 L-bracket) to do a job that could be accomplished with a few cents worth of Velcro.

I can't forget your ST-E3-RT and 600-EX-RT to use as an optical trigger for the Einstein, that took the title of "unnecessarily complex and/or expensive solutions..."

I'd still like to see these D800 threads that definitively illustrate AF induced vibrations causing observable IQ degradation.

 

[entlassen]

I'm scouting around for newer products and might have found a decent compromise:
http://flashhavoc.com/yn-622n-tx-first-image-emerges/

It looks like Yongnuo is going to release a newer version of their old YN-622C sometime later this month or early next year. The unit is called the YN-622C-TX and acts only as a transmitter which interacts with the existing YN-622C transceivers. The link above does show "Remote Shutter Release" as one of its new features, which the old YN-622C doesn't have.

So it seems to me the setup would be:
YN-622C on camera hotshoe
Speedlight on YN-622C
YN-622C-TX acting as the transmitter remote
(Nothing connected to camera's 3-pin)

It seems this would resolve the following:
1) ETTL - Check
2) Camera hotshoe isn't taken up in such a way that you can't mount a flash - Check
3) No extra receiver needed for remote shutter - Check
4) No cord needed to connect receiver to camera pins - Check
5) Remote shutter release functionality - Check

This system still wouldn't leverage the RT radio functionality that's already built into one's 600EX-RT, but it seems like the cleanest one I've seen so far.