Yongnuo vs. Pixel?

[Arthur_Nunes]

would pixel using incompatibility between pixel magos and 622C to discourage people on buying 622C and sticking with pixel kings or...

yongnuo would be using this incompatibility to discourage people on buying pixel magos and pick their 568EXII or 500EX???


for those who aren't aware, Pixel released recently a hard to believe flash unit with GN 65, HSS capable and 4w LED modeling lamp for no more than 90 dollars on ebay. I'm intended to pay to see this in action but I've been reading about incompatibility between them and 622C, what makes the set up useless for many low bugget strobists.

yongnuo already released a firmware update wich fixed some issues but ignored the Magos incompatibility.

I hope that its not a marketing war or something, even though everything says both wont give in

any one who has any news about this, comment please

 

[privatebydesign]

I'd say it really depends on what you want from your flashes.

If you want cheap fully functional Speedlites then get a 550EX for around $100, they will work on every EOS ever, they are the cheapest way to get complete Canon functionality and reliability and if you then move to third party radio triggers they will work on them all.

If you don't want, and will never want ETTL etc then any manual third party flash that is readily available and cheap enough to throw away if it ever gets an issue. But as the YN-622C is an ETTL capable trigger and costs much more than basic dumb triggers I can't see any sensible reason for going with issue riddled on compatible flashes.

I kept going with my many 550EX's and third party triggers without issue for years in a pro environment until I moved to the 600-EX-RT and the RT system.

 

[Arthur_Nunes]

I want to give a little kick in the overrall power of my set. I'm close to balance the sunset sky with my current lightning and I think Magos are worth the risk. I know 90 dollars seems frighteningly low and it could probably explode at any time, but I always bought cheap stuff and never got disapointed. I don't worry if magos become my first disappointment because its not that much money.

by the way, I'll using 622C for almost 2 years and they never let me down. By the time it was released, if you tell some pocket wizard user that some chinese brand were proposing to do the the samething PW does, they would probably say that it woul be a shit.

 

[privatebydesign]

http://flashhavoc.com/pixel-x-650-ettl-flash-now-available/

I also have used some YN products without issue for years, but others are not so good.

Also, the GN of 60 or 65 is a misnomer, they produce no more actual light output than a 550EX, 580EX or any multitude of 5-- series flashes that everybody makes that doesn't zoom to 200mm.

 

[Arthur_Nunes]

received a Classy NO from Yongnuo today.

"Hi dear user,

Thanks for contacting us!
At present, all the YONGNUO products are mainly designed and developed for Canon and Nikon. For we don't have a Pixel Mago flash to be tested with our products, we are not sure if it's compatible with our products. If possible, we kindly suggest you to take your device to a physical store to test with our products to avoid purchasing a wrong device.

Thank you very much for your attention to YONGNUO products! If you have any other questions, please feel free to contact us again.

Best regards,

YONGNUO"


as yongnuo is already well established on third part flash market, they won't give in as expected.




the answer from pixel looks like a kung fu deflection:

"Yes, we did found this issue. But our Mago can work with original flash. If not, we will develop new firmware to correct it.

Since there are so many flashes on the market, so cannot make sure every flash can work with the Mago.


Anyway, thanks for your support.

Good day!"

no comments about this last one. I'm hoping magic lantern or something crack this then

 

[Skirball]

received a Classy NO from Yongnuo today.

"Hi dear user,

Thanks for contacting us!
At present, all the YONGNUO products are mainly designed and developed for Canon and Nikon. For we don't have a Pixel Mago flash to be tested with our products, we are not sure if it's compatible with our products. If possible, we kindly suggest you to take your device to a physical store to test with our products to avoid purchasing a wrong device.

Thank you very much for your attention to YONGNUO products! If you have any other questions, please feel free to contact us again.

Best regards,

YONGNUO"


as yongnuo is already well established on third part flash market, they won't give in as expected.




the answer from pixel looks like a kung fu deflection:

"Yes, we did found this issue. But our Mago can work with original flash. If not, we will develop new firmware to correct it.

Since there are so many flashes on the market, so cannot make sure every flash can work with the Mago.


Anyway, thanks for your support.

Good day!"

no comments about this last one. I'm hoping magic lantern or something crack this then

I'm actually surprised that the Yongnuo response was so well written, especially considering what their website and instructions look like. Obviously the response from Pixel is the results of your original email being filtered through an online translator, and then their response back through the other way.

To their point, you can't expect third party developers to consider products from every other third party vender. It goes against the basic concept of cheap third party alternatives. And you're right, they don't want you buying other third party gear, they're there to persuade you to buy theirs instead of the name brand stuff.

 

[Arthur_Nunes]

as Pixel's answer were too deflecting, I summarized my message in only one phrase: "but will be any firmware to make mago compatible with 622?"

Pixel's turn:

"Dear Arthur,

Thanks for your mail.

If possible, we definitely would like to do that.

But actually only Yongnuo could develop a new firmware to solve this issue.

We hope that you could understand that.

Good day!"

now I accepted the facts... :-\
I just wanted to make sure about this (wich I already suspected), and inform because I know there are people willing to use both units together yet

 

[Gary W.]

Hey all,

For what it's worth, I purchased the Pixel Magos flash(es) for @ $89 each and love them so much that I will keep them even though, at the moment, they do not play together with my PW Flex/Mini setup! The LED light being used as a modeling light is SWEET, the menu is straight forward, and, best of all, a GREAT deal!! I will just wait for full compatibility and use the sync cables that I ordered. I do plan on getting a charging pack of some sort in the near future, though!

Gary W.

 

[Arthur_Nunes]

I think I'll buy it anyway then...

I can still use the 622 on mix mode so flash adjustments take priority over transmiter/camera unit.

since I'll use the flash on 1/1 or 1/2 I don't need remote adjustments that much.

 

[Besisika]

I think I'll buy it anyway then...

I can still use the 622 on mix mode so flash adjustments take priority over transmiter/camera unit.

since I'll use the flash on 1/1 or 1/2 I don't need remote adjustments that much.

I have been using the 622C for a couple of years now and quite satisfied with it. I tried the pixel before it and dissapointed. It is nice to see that they are trying something new.
Please update this thread with your findings. It would be great, if it works well like the 622C, to have it as a back up.

 

[Zen Graphic Photography]

Hi all,

I'm the one who buy Margo for 89$ for using with YN622 and find the problem like this.
Before I use 430exii and just want to have some more powerful of 3rd party flash.

For now I'm very happy with the flash. Think about to buy Pixel's transmitter but not sure what model I use to.

Can someone advise me for this please? Can I have just one transmitter w/o receiver ? Cause the Pixel Margo has inner receiver...if i don't misunderstand.

Thx for every comments.

 

[Arthur_Nunes]

Can someone advise me for this please? Can I have just one transmitter w/o receiver ? Cause the Pixel Margo has inner receiver...if i don't misunderstand.

Thx for every comments.

Zen, Pixel Mago has no built in wifi capabilities. Since its Pixel's first speedlight, built in wifi probably is coming in future models.

Apparently you'll need Pixel Kings to trigger and control Magos appropriately. Unfortunately Kings have no timing adjustment but versions X and Pro may have if in the future via firmware upgrade.

the only problem with Pixel Kings: Price.

about double the price for both X and Pro units (X may be used as receiver since it has no LCD screen like Pro has)

 

[Zen Graphic Photography]

Zen, Pixel Mago has no built in wifi capabilities. Since its Pixel's first speedlight, built in wifi probably is coming in future models.


the only problem with Pixel Kings: Price.

about double the price for both X and Pro units (X may be used as receiver since it has no LCD screen like Pro has)

I'm looking to King Pro/X for this solution. Anyway the 2nd Margo is also interesting for Master and Slave
Too many thanks for wifi information.