Canon MR-14EX II Macro Ring Lite Flash

[Patriot]

Looks nice, just received this update from Adorama
http://www.adorama.com/CAMR14EX2.html
The all-new Canon Macro Ring Lite MR-14EX II is ideal for EOS quality close-up photography when used in conjunction with one of Canon's EF Macro lenses. Redesigned as a perfect complement to contemporary digital SLR setups, it is the most advanced macro flash Canon has ever produced. It has a maximum Guide No. of 34.4 ft./10.5m at ISO 100 and a twin-tube design where both flash tubes can be directed to fire independently or together. Sophisticated white LED focusing lamps and two forms of modeling lights make for easy and accurate previewing of lighting effects. Infinitely adjustable in any lighting condition with its illuminated dot-matrix LCD, the Macro Ring Lite MR-14EX II has 12 custom functions and supports E-TTL wireless autoflash when linked with one or more Speedlite 600EX-RT flashes. All this in a refined, compact design with shorter recycling times than its predecessor makes the Macro Ring Lite MR-14EX II a reliable, customizable choice.

 

[Sabaki]

This is probably the most interesting new product for me.

Two things I'd want from this product:

1. Better diffusion when photographing subjects with reflective type elements, such as the body of a ladybird.

2. This is a lesser want but I find the mark 1 very difficult to store in my camera bag. It's shape is ungainly and awkward.

Can't wait to hear some first impressions!

 

[neuroanatomist]

Note that this new flash is weaker - I guess they called it "MR14" because it looks the same and "MR10.5-EX" would have sounded lame. The GN of the new flash is 10.5m/34 ft, vs the GN of the original that is 14m/46 ft.

Other than the LED modeling lights, a revised LCD display, and a shorter recycle time I really don't see any benefit of this flash over the original. The shorter recycle time may simply be due to the fact that it's less powerful...

There's also confusion over whether this is RT or not. The DPR blurb states, "Canon also announced the MR-14EX II Macro Ring Light, which can be controlled wirelessly using the radio-based 'RT' system." Controlled wirelessly isn't the same as controlling wirelessly, and an RT slave-only capability for a flash that only mounts to the end of the lens seems really stupid. No real information one way or the other, because the 'wireless' in the vendor product pages could refer to optical control. Having the new MR14 be a master for the -RT system would be quite useful, but it's not clear if this is the case (I'm guessing no, simply because I'd assume if it was, Canon would have called it the MR14-EX-RT).

 

[Drizzt321]

Note that this new flash is weaker - I guess they called it "MR14" because it looks the same and "MR10.5-EX" would have sounded lame. The GN of the new flash is 10.5m/34 ft, vs the GN of the original that is 14m/46 ft.

Other than the LED modeling lights, a revised LCD display, and a shorter recycle time I really don't see any benefit of this flash over the original. The shorter recycle time may simply be due to the fact that it's less powerful...

There's also confusion over whether this is RT or not. The DPR blurb states, "Canon also announced the MR-14EX II Macro Ring Light, which can be controlled wirelessly using the radio-based 'RT' system." Controlled wirelessly isn't the same as controlling wirelessly, and an RT slave-only capability for a flash that only mounts to the end of the lens seems really stupid. No real information one way or the other, because the 'wireless' in the vendor product pages could refer to optical control. Having the new MR14 be a master for the -RT system would be quite useful, but it's not clear if this is the case (I'm guessing no, simply because I'd assume if it was, Canon would have called it the MR14-EX-RT).

Good notes. And here I was just thinking how having a ring-light that's a wireless RT master. If it's not...WTF is Canon thinking?!

 

[kirispupis]

This is probably the most interesting new product for me.

Two things I'd want from this product:

1. Better diffusion when photographing subjects with reflective type elements, such as the body of a ladybird.

2. This is a lesser want but I find the mark 1 very difficult to store in my camera bag. It's shape is ungainly and awkward.

Can't wait to hear some first impressions!

If you want better diffusion then just pick up the MT-24EX and add diffusers to the heads. In terms of difficulty to store, I do not see any improvement here.

Initially I was excited because I thought this product was using wireless between the flash controller and the head, instead of the ungainly cord. I figured if they added this to the MR-14EX it must be coming soon to my beloved MT-24EX. Sadly this is not the case. I honestly cannot see any improvement in this product over the previous one in terms of my needs.

 

[mackguyver]

I had pre-ordered one from Adorama just after it was announced, but now the CPN and other sites have details on the flash, I wrote Adorama to cancel the order. I'm guessing the LEDs will help lock focus faster, but most of my subjects are pretty slow.

I think I'm going to give this $50 cheapie a try:
http://www.aputure.com/blog/2013/12/02/cri95-amaran-halo-led-ring-flash/

 

[neuroanatomist]

... but now the CPN and other sites have details on the flash...

Thanks for that!

So, for clarity - the GN 10.5 spec on B&H and Adorama refers to one tube firing only. With both tubes firing, it's GN 14, same power as the original.

Also…

I honestly cannot see any improvement in this product over the previous one in terms of my needs.

It's new, Canon can charge a little more for it, so it improves their profits. But as for us consumers, it adds nothing meaningful as far as I'm concerned.

 

[danielm]

Would consider if it used the radio triggering. Without it, "meh".

 

[wtlloyd]

LED based, should have a notably longer battery life, no?

 

[mackguyver]

LED based, should have a notably longer battery life, no?

It looks like the LEDs are only used for focus assistance.

 

[scottburgess]

This is probably the most interesting new product for me.

Two things I'd want from this product:

1. Better diffusion when photographing subjects with reflective type elements, such as the body of a ladybird.

2. This is a lesser want but I find the mark 1 very difficult to store in my camera bag. It's shape is ungainly and awkward.

My guess is that you'll have to keep wishin'! The only clear advantage I see here is that the new model costs 10% more--great for those moments when you brag about how expensive your gear was. Oh, well, I guess there are those extra custom functions... :

Just as a side note: my Mark I model has some serious battery suck--can't let batteries sit idly in the unit without them being quickly drained. So one might hope that the new version lacks this "feature."

 

[neuroanatomist]

Just as a side note: my Mark I model has some serious battery suck--can't let batteries sit idly in the unit without them being quickly drained. So one might hope that the new version lacks this "feature."

Interesting. My MT-24EX doesn't do that...maybe it's because I leave eneloops in there.

 

[scottburgess]

Interesting. My MT-24EX doesn't do that...maybe it's because I leave eneloops in there.

Okay, I'm not clear: why would a rechargeable make a difference vis-à-vis an alkaline? If the unit is still drawing power when shut off, wouldn't it drain these as well?

I do have eneloops too, but I never tested keeping them in the flash overnight.

 

[mrzero]

I'm hoping this at least drives down the resale prices for the Mark I by flooding ebay once the ads for the Mark II hit the pages of DentaLife and Dentaltown Magazine. I'd pick one up for $250 just for S&Gs.

 

[neuroanatomist]

Interesting. My MT-24EX doesn't do that...maybe it's because I leave eneloops in there.

Okay, I'm not clear: why would a rechargeable make a difference vis-à-vis an alkaline? If the unit is still drawing power when shut off, wouldn't it drain these as well?

I do have eneloops too, but I never tested keeping them in the flash overnight.

They drain overnight with the flash powered off? That sounds like an electrical malfunction. I can leave eneloops in there for weeks/months and they have plenty of power left, same with my three 600EX-RTs.

 

[Ruined]

Any indication if this will fit on the 100L without an addt'l adapter?

 

[neuroanatomist]

Any indication if this will fit on the 100L without an addt'l adapter?

It has the same attachment design as the original, so for the 100L you will need the Macrolite 67C adapter.

 

[David Hull]

Note that this new flash is weaker - I guess they called it "MR14" because it looks the same and "MR10.5-EX" would have sounded lame. The GN of the new flash is 10.5m/34 ft, vs the GN of the original that is 14m/46 ft.

Other than the LED modeling lights, a revised LCD display, and a shorter recycle time I really don't see any benefit of this flash over the original. The shorter recycle time may simply be due to the fact that it's less powerful...

There's also confusion over whether this is RT or not. The DPR blurb states, "Canon also announced the MR-14EX II Macro Ring Light, which can be controlled wirelessly using the radio-based 'RT' system." Controlled wirelessly isn't the same as controlling wirelessly, and an RT slave-only capability for a flash that only mounts to the end of the lens seems really stupid. No real information one way or the other, because the 'wireless' in the vendor product pages could refer to optical control. Having the new MR14 be a master for the -RT system would be quite useful, but it's not clear if this is the case (I'm guessing no, simply because I'd assume if it was, Canon would have called it the MR14-EX-RT).

I was thinking exactly the same thing -- my guess is it is Optical or IR or whatever they have always been.

 

[wayno]

Whilst RT master capability for this should be built in, in reality I'm not sure whether it offers a huge advantage over optical master in the case of macro work. I would have thought...?

 

[Logan]

can the original be used as an optical trigger?