New Flash System in the Works [CR1]

[JonAustin]

It may come as a surprise, but the 600 ex-rt's will still work perfectly...just like the 580EX's I retired a few months ago. But yeah...I know the feeling.

-pw

Yep, the 580EX II's I owned worked great, but the radio transmission and improved menu system on the 600's is a dream. I never have to refer to the manual anymore. I even stopped carrying one with me to remote shoots.

 

[deleteme]

What is wrong with E-TTL II? from my expirience I have been getting consitent results with Canon ttl in varying lighting situations without any glitches. Compared to that Nikon Matrix metering shows a lot of variable results even within the same lighting scenario.

I get just as many exposure errors as my Nikon friends ( we all shoot professionally). Both systems do OK in unchallenging environments of medium contrast but fail in high contrast situations. We generally use manual in most indoor events as that gives us a much higher keeper rate.

 

[deleteme]

As Lee Jay rightly said: The metering system is not in the flash, it's in the camera.

So, to make an ETTL-III work, new cameras alongside new flashes would be needed.

Remember the transition from ETTL-I to ETTL-II: The old EZ-flashes used light reflected off the film, and the ETTL-II uses pre-flashes. Incompatible, because ETTL-I flashes just can't produce a pre-flash. While ETTL-II flashes can fall back to ETTL-I and so be used on the old cameras, the new cameras couldn't use the old flashes.

The same will be likely in a II ==> III transition: New bodies will almost certainly be necessary to use ETTL-II and will potentially not work with ETTL-II flashes.

I agree that the cameras are the key to the new ETTL implementation. However I remember when Olympus introduced the concept of TTL flash back on the OM-2. Everyone was excited at the prospect of spot on exposure once and for all.
Actually never happened. Cameras still make dumb decisions whether reading off film, a bounced pre-flash exposure or through the photocell on an old auto-flash.
I am very skeptical that we will see any significant improvement in flash exposure in the near future.
I have just seen too many "improvements" to believe in any of them.

 

[Hillsilly]

Sorry for the possibly dumb question, but I'm curious....

In what ways are Canon lagging behind Nikon with flash systems?

I thought the recent radio triggering, 600EX RT etc put them ahead (if not equal)?

 

[stefang]

Remember the transition from ETTL-I to ETTL-II: The old EZ-flashes used light reflected off the film, and the ETTL-II uses pre-flashes. Incompatible, because ETTL-I flashes just can't produce a pre-flash. While ETTL-II flashes can fall back to ETTL-I and so be used on the old cameras, the new cameras couldn't use the old flashes.

I think you got that mixed up. Old EZ flashes never supported E-TTL of any flavor, and every incarnation of E-TTL uses a preflash. New digital cameras can't use EZ flashes, at least not in automatic flash metering mode, but even the oldest 420EX will work on any Canon dSLR sold today. It remains to be seen whether E-TTL III requires new cameras, new flashes, or both.

And that's yet another mixup
My old 540EZ used A-TTL. Not literally E-TTL, but it did use a preflash too.
If you want to know the details: the definitive resource on the Canon flahs system is available at http://photonotes.org/articles/eos-flash/
A must-read for anyone wanting to know the details about the EOS flash system...

 

[RGF]

I believe Nikon has used distance information for years.

The disadvantage of E-TTL is that a reflective object in front of the main subject (at the focal distance) can kick back lots of light and cause the flash/camera to underexpose the scene.

 

[LDS]

Yeh, it's a pretty weak excuse. After all, if they can admit visible wavelength electromagnetic radiation through a whopping great hole in the front of the body then they can sort out an antenna for radiofrequency...

Good idea... put an antenna in every lens, thereby you would need new body + new flashes + new lenses...

 

[AcutancePhotography]

Ah, encryption in the Camera <==> Flash communication. Entirely possible technically. And licences to encryption keys would be expensive... I don't know if this would get anti-trust approval, but technically entirely possible.

And while encryption is used, why not also encrypt Camera <==> Lens communication? A brilliant move against Sigma, Tamron and the like...

Oh no, what a horrible idea!

Cripes! Don't give them ideas!

I am not sure there would be any anti-trust issues.

But then the competitors would work hard to find a workaround. They always do..... which is good for the customer.

 

[AJB]

Ups, sorry. Yes indeed you're right of course, the EZ flashes used TTL, the EX used E-TTL of any flavour (I or II).
So there's a chance ETTL-III could be compatible with existing cameras.

As I understand it, the ONLY difference between E-TTL and E-TTL II was the software in the body. An old flash made before E-TTL II had been invented would behave as E-TTL II when used on a new body with the II flash metering software.

So, if E-TTL III was a similar upgrade, then all current flashes would use the new E-TTL III when used with a new body. Similarly future flashes not yet released would use E-TTL II metering when on a current body, or E-TTL metering when used on a really old body.

The EZ flashes' A-TTL system used light reflected off the film, which digital bodies can't really do and don't have a sensor for. I think I'm right in saying that when E-TTL first came out, though, the new E-TTL film bodies supported both; E-TTL on new EX flashes and A-TTL with EZ flashes. And I think that even the newest flashes still support A-TTL if used on an old film body.

So I'd expect that whatever Canon do next would be pretty compatible with old bodies and old flashes.

 

[InterMurph]

Ah, encryption in the Camera <==> Flash communication. Entirely possible technically. And licences to encryption keys would be expensive...

Encryption software is free: http://www.openssl.org/.

Encryption software is difficult to use, and very difficult to use properly. That's why most products just don't use encryption, and that's likely why Yongnuo was able to produce compatible products.

 

[iowapipe]

I don't mind current metering, what I miss (I own st-e3, 4x600ex-rt):

- simple RT-slave for firing studio flashes (sync cable).
- RT master built into camera body (or GPS receiver in every camera)
- smaller RT master/slave flashes (size of 270EX and 430EX)
- remember master/slave state after battery change
- more masters (when I use more camera bodies, I have to swap ST-E3 when I grab another camera body)

I could be hallucinating, but I just recently (last month) used a four-flash setup (one on body, three on stands, all 600-EX RT's) over the course of three days, recharging the batteries each evening, and it seems to me that the flashes remembered which master / slave state they were in prior to the battery change. (This stuck with me, because I purposefully moved them around (reassigned their groups), to even out their use (master being pre-flash only, B & C groups 1-2 stops below group A).)

I would like to see Canon build RT transmitters into future bodies, as well as produce a successor to the ST-E3-RT that includes an AF-assist light.

This announcement may slam the brakes on 600 EX-RT sales. Anyway the update will be entirely welcome.
-pw

It may, indeed. That might, in turn, drop their prices enough for me to purchase a 5th (and possibly 6th) unit.

Since 'many' who are posting here seem to be more likely to have the added battery-grip, why couldn't Canon integrate an antenna into that part? Sure seems like the material is some sort of plastic/poly/etc. material that wouldn't be as likely to block the signal.

 

[Marsu42]

Encryption software is difficult to use, and very difficult to use properly. That's why most products just don't use encryption, and that's likely why Yongnuo was able to produce compatible products.

Canon might not be interested in strong encryption making 3rd party products impossible, but be happy to delay them and generate lotsa r&d costs for the competition. After all, where would Canon be w/o 3rd party lenses and flashes with these prices for original parts? Anyone wanting to buy a €500 flash for a €500 Rebel camera?

I know for a fact that Canon doesn't want to encrypt their camera firmware, it's still a weak xor with the same key that enables Magic Lantern to make Canon cameras boot 3rd party fw at all. If they wanted it, there would be no problem makeing at least very, very hard to break a real fw update protection.

 

[Ozarker]

Encryption software is difficult to use, and very difficult to use properly. That's why most products just don't use encryption, and that's likely why Yongnuo was able to produce compatible products.

After all, where would Canon be w/o 3rd party lenses and flashes with these prices for original parts? Anyone wanting to buy a €500 flash for a €500 Rebel camera?

I actually had 3 Canon 600EX-RT flashes and an ST-E3-RT when I was shooting with a Rebel T5i. I'm up to seven 600EX-RT flashes now and shoot with a 70D. So yes, I think there are people who have Canon flashes for their Rebels. I don't think I'm all alone either. From what I've seen personally, the magic is in the lenses, flashes, and flash modifiers (And how they are used creatively along side the camera). I am far from being a pro. I've never made a dime from my gear. I've never had a paid shoot. I'm just a hack enthusiast. A real HACK.

I think the 600EX-RT is a great product. Not perfect, but great. Should the prices fall when something new is introduced... I'll work towards 15 flashes as quickly as I can. I just enjoy the creative outlet that photography is for me. The 600 EX-RT will keep me happy for a long time. I'll skip the next upgrade. I need a full frame camera and more L glass first.

 

[PerfectSavage]

Mark me down as annoyed because I have my preferred number of 600ex rt, 3, and now I may finding my self upgrading one at a time... I know I don't have to.... But I'm anal like that.

You are a marketing department's dream. ;D

It may come as a surprise, but the 600 ex-rt's will still work perfectly...just like the 580EX's I retired a few months ago. But yeah...I know the feeling.

-pw

Exactly. I'm still using 580EXs and a couple 550EXs with zero issues...and the little 270EXII for family stuff. Do I misfire? Of course, but always my error. Would I like to lose the RTs with the 5s for the built-ins on the 600? Of course, but it just isn't a real issue for me. Improved metering would be interesting to see how overall IQ improves but if you're having consistent issues with flash/metering, I'd suggest it's probably user error, not your equipment. I also can't see them coming out with new flashes and metering that would only work with post-5DS bodies either...like the 5D4 and 1DX2....but they might. You can make the argument people certainly aren't looking to shoot with shoe flashes on the 5DS/SR so it could be a 5D4/1DX2 compatible thing. That would certainly be a major reason to upgrade for all the 5D3/1DX users on the fence, right?...especially the 5D3 wedding/event shooters.