Is the HF-DC1 flash light a good choice for my Canon EOS 400D?

Question

I want to buy an external flash light for my Canon EOS 400D. Is HF-DC1 good enough or is it designed for more compact cameras?

Any suggestion on alternatives?

Asked by Don

Answer

Canon HF-DC1 is designed for Canon PowerShot product line only and incompatible with DSLRs. You can get Canon 270EX which is about the same price range. Other relatively expensive options will be Canon 430EX II and Canon 580EX II.

Also there are 3rd party (non Canon branded) flashes, which are cheap. But most of them do not have automatic (TTL) mode and all settings have to be done manually.

Answered by ShutterBug

Check more discussion of this question.

HF-DC1 flash light for Canon EOS 400D

Question

I want to buy an external flash light for my Canon EOS 400D. Is HF-DC1 good enough or is it designed for more compact cameras?

Any suggestion on alternatives?

Asked by Don

Answer

Canon HF-DC1 is designed for Canon PowerShot product line only and incompatible with DSLRs. You can get Canon 270EX which is about the same price range. Other relatively expensive options will be Canon 430EX II and Canon 580EX II.

Also there are 3rd party (non Canon branded) flashes, which are cheap. But most of them do not have automatic (TTL) mode and all settings have to be done manually.

Answered by ShutterBug

Check more discussion of this question.

How can I optimise the lifetime of a Nikon speedlight?

Question

I have an SB-800. It's the newest Nikon strobe that will work with my F5. My F5 will probably outlast me (it probably has another 100,000 shutter actuations in it and I use less than 10 rolls a year, but I likely won't live another 278 years...).

What is my optimal strategy for making sure the SB-800 lives as long as possible?

Certainly storage advice suggests that if you don't use your speedlight much, you should take it out of storage every month or three, put batteries in and fire it a couple of times. But, my interpretation of this advice is that not to use the flash at all will shorten its life. I understand that. But what if I can choose to use the flash regularly, or not? Let's say I have two SB-800 stobes, A and B, and I store A in this way, taking it out and firing it monthly. Strobe B, on the other hand, I use every day or two (and carry with me).

Barring accidental damage, which strobe is likely to last longest, A or B? Why?

My question is essentially motivated by the fact that I could keep using my SB-800, or buy an SB-910 and mostly use that (effectively reserving the SB-800 for use with the F5).

Asked by James Youngman

Answer

Depends if you need CLS or not. (Don't even know if the F5 has CLS).

I'd keep the SB-800, and use it until it dies. The Strobist folks snap up all the good used Nikon strobes, but they are still tons cheaper than the SB-910 (and the Canon equivalent).

I consider strobes to be like tires on my car. Good to have good ones, but they are normal wear items, don't expect it to last decades.

That said, I have a 1970s vintage Vivitar 285 that still works, and it works fine on my Nikon F. But its voltage is too high for modern digital cameras.

Answered by Pat Farrell

Check more discussion of this question.

How to verify that Nikon SB-28DX AF-assist is working?

Question

I have a Nikon SB-28DX which I am using with an F5. I understand from the instructions how to turn the AF-assist illuminator off. But, how do I verify that it's working? Does it still work with the flash in standby? If no, how do I ensure that the unit will perform AF-assist only, and not fill flash?

In case it makes a difference, I'm activating AF using the AF-on button (that is, custom function 4 is set to 1).

Asked by James Youngman

Answer

Try it in a very dark room. If you can focus, and there's no flash, it's working.

I haven't used an F5 (only much more primitive SLRs), but I assume it will let you shoot with no film loaded so you're not wasting anything.

You've edited the question to emphasize the part about ensuring the unit will perform AF-assist only, which is pretty different from the question of verifying if it is working. From the manual (note the DX and non-DX are identical for film cameras), this flash does not appear to have a mode that does what you want — activate the AF assist light but not actually flash. Some flash makers call this "Spot Beam mode"; Nikon, for flash units that have it, calls it "AF-Assist Illuminator only" (AF-ILL ONLY) or, somewhat confusingly, "Firing canceled". I don't have an SB-28DX, but since the manual doesn't mention this as an option, it's probably not. You can still verify this with the test mentioned above.

Answered by mattdm

Check more discussion of this question.

Can using an old flash damage a new DSLR?

Question

I have been using my dad's old Metz mecablitz 18 B1 flash for a while with my Canon 7D and had no trouble with it, but just received some advice from a friend that using old flashes can fry the camera. Is this true? And if so, is there a safe way to use it (I'm trying to avoid having to buy a new flash – but also would like not to destroy my camera). The flash takes 3 x AA batteries and has a single hotshoe connection.

Answer

Yes the trigger voltage on some old flashes is too high for modern electronic cameras.

There is a page on botzilla Photo Strobe Trigger Voltages which lists many old flash units. I don't see your dad's flash model there, but the 20 B3 model had a trigger voltage of 168 volts.

According to this thread on photo.net, the 7D can handle up to 250V, so that flash may be safe with your camera, even if it does have a high voltage like the B3 model

There is further information on dpanswers on safe voltages for Canon and Nikon, and also how to measure the trigger voltage of a flash.

Check more discussion of this question.

How do I compare the output of an LED panel with that of a flash?

Question

How do I compare the output of an LED panel with that of a conventional hotshoe flash?

I haven't been paying attention to the LED panels, but they've been on the market long enough so that I'm assuming they're stable and understood.

From what I've read, most of the smaller ones are really only effective from a few feet away. The larger ones are probably more money than I'd care to spend. I'm happy with my current flash setup (Canon; two 580ex and one 430ex), and I'm trying to figure out what I'd have to get to duplicate this setup using LED continuous lighting in terms of output.

Answer

It's very difficult to compare directly to flash of any sort, since flash (speedlight or studio flash) takes the shutter speed component of the exposure out of consideration. A more useful comparison is to traditional tungsten studio lighting -- quartz/tungsten/iodide lighting rather than photofloods, since that was more-or-less the industry standard before cool lighting alternatives (HMI, fluorescent, LED) came along.

A typical studio set-up for hot light portraiture would have consisted of a 650-1000W key light (the Ianiro Red Head and Lowel DP Light are good representatives of the type), with secondary lights of various wattages for background (usually a wide-throw light, such as the Lowel Tota), hairlights, kickers and accents. That is, as you might have guessed, a hell of a lot of light, but it was what was required to get a sufficiently high shutter speed to mostly eliminate subject motion -- with a posed subject -- at an ASA of 100 or so. I'm taking about 1/30 to 1/125 with typical portraiture apertures of f/5.6-11, depending on how far the light was from the subject and the kind of modifier you may have been using.

Now, in this day and age, we don't have to worry quite so much about sticking to low ISO settings, since there are few small-format cameras (APS-C or 35mm-format) that can't turn in a respectable performance at ISO 800, and many are excellent a couple of stops faster than that. That's both at least three stops of light you don't have to pay for and three stops of light your subjects don't have to endure (and if you've ever been shot on film under hot lights, you'd really appreciate that). So something that gives a 250-watt tungsten equivalent would be adequate for use in a small studio. You won't be able to turn night into day the way you can with 20KW HMI spots, but it's certainly good enough for posed portraits and large product shots, if you're willing to forget about very fast shutter speeds. When you can move the lighting in tighter, you can go faster. But if you're working hand-held or the subject is moving, you still need a metric crapload of light to make it work since you become dependent on the shutter speed.

That said, continuous lighting and flash are very different, and only overlap in use occasionally. Continuous lighting can be a lot easier to work with for still life, product and (fully-styled) food shots, where you can afford to take forever going over all of the placement details, reflectors, gobos and flags to achieve perfection and aren't too very worried about the shutter speed. With people, it pretty much means posing. LED lighting will probably get more powerful in the next little while, but there is also a limit to what people are going to put up with in terms of brightness. You can buy an Arri HMI spot right now that will work on household power and get you a fast shutter speed, but it's like staring at the sun. If people is your game, then studio flashes would be a better step up from speedlights than continuous lighting. The modeling lights will let you see shadows and highlights well enough to direct your subject, and it's a lot more comfortable for them to sit under while you're working.

Check more discussion of this question.

How does the power of a flash relate to the duration of the flash pulse?

Question

Specifically for my Nikon SB-700, but also for flashes in general - how does the power setting relate to the duration of the pulse? Basically, is the power normally controlled by cutting down on the duration of the flash, or by more/less intense pulses?

I've not been able to find the duration of the flash pulse at each power setting anywhere. Also, I realize that the pulse isn't a perfect square, so is "duration" normally measured as the time from the beginning of any output to the end of any output, or say the shortest time window that contains 90% of the output?

Answer

This is one of the key differences between "speed light" hotshoe flashes and traditional studio lighting. With studio lighting, flash power is determined by the amount of capacitor charge, the duration increases (slightly) for lower-powered flashes. For hotshoe flashes, the capacitor is charged to full but the burst of light stopped when the proper amount is delivered (traditionally, by an electronic component called a thyristor).

One thing that makes the Nikon flash system awesome is that Nikon makes by far the best manuals for their flashes. Only Metz comes close. You can find a chart of duration at each power setting on page H17 of the SB-700 manual:

Flash duration (approx.)   1/1042 sec. at M1/1 (full) output
   1/1136 sec. at M1/2 output
   1/2857 sec. at M1/4 output
   1/5714 sec. at M1/8 output
  1/10000 sec. at M1/16 output
  1/18182 sec. at M1/32 output
  1/25000 sec. at M1/64 output
  1/40000 sec. at M1/128 output

As you note, this a curve, and you're exactly right that the normal means of specifying the duration do not measure the entire "long tail" of the curve. There's two values usually used: T.5 and T.1. The first, T.5, is the time that the flash pulse brightness is above 50% of the peak, and T.1 is the time that the pulse is above 10%. That's a little different from saying 90% of the output — which would maybe be more meaningful for photographers, but would be more calculation to determine. With these numbers, you just look at the peak and then figure out where the cut-off is on either side of the curve, and measure between those two points.

Generally, flash makers give T.5 rather than T.1, since that's a) slightly easier to measure and b) gives results which sound more impressive. For studio lights, the T.1 value is more useful and better reflects the real effect on exposure, but for speed lights, the abrupt cut-off means that at anything but full power, T.1 and T.5 are roughly the same.

Because these numbers are so low even at full power, I suspect that they are T.5 values (I don't see Nikon saying either way, which is generally means T.5), but since Nikon flashes are so nice, it's possible that they are T.1.

Check more discussion of this question.

Does a flash work well with regular alkaline batteries?

Question

In doing research prior to purchasing my first flash for my DSLR system I have come across a wealth of information, including this post that outlined many great points in selecting the best rechargeable batteries for use with the flash unit.

Since I will use the flash unit in far between outings I was planing to use regular batteries at first. I am still trying to decide if rechargeable batteries are justified for my limited use situation.

Since I have loads of batteries laying around to run my 2 year old's toys, I always have them on hand. I know they are not cheap and to make a sound decision, I need to know how fast or how many flash cycles I can expect to get on a set of batteries.

To add some context, on a single night I can take anywhere from 500 to 1,000 photos. If half were to use flash would i last the night on a single set?

The flash I will probably purchase is either the Nikon speed light 600 or the new 700.

Answer

Nikon produces excellent manuals for their flashes, with a lot of great technical information (rivaled in this area only by Metz). The following is from the SB-600 User Manual, page 19:

Alkaline-manganese | 3.5 sec. | 200  / 6-30 sec.
Lithium            | 4.0 sec. | 400  / 7.5-30 sec.
Nickel             | 2.5 sec. | 180  / 6-30 sec.
NiCd (1000 mAh)    | 2.9 sec. |  90  / 4-30 sec.
Ni-MH (2000 mA)    | 2.5 sec. | 220  / 4-30 sec.

The first column is the type, followed by approximate time between full-power flashes (best case), followed by the number of flashes you can expect to get, followed by the typical recharge time.

Additionally, on a further chart, Nikon recommends recharging your NiCds or NiMHs when the recycling time drops to 10 seconds, whereas it's suggested to keep your alkalines until they're taking a full half a minute between flashes. (It's worth noting that they give the 10-seconds-then-trash recommendation for Lithium primary cells too.)

So, you can see that while Lithiums last longer, it's not so much more than NiMH that it's really going to be worth it except in extraordinary circumstances (like, no access to power for weeks).

The most important differentiator here, though, is the recycle time. It takes 50% more time to be ready to go again when using alkaline batteries. That alone is a reason to go with NiMH.

Also, if you're not going through batteries constantly, I highly recommend low-self-discharge NiMH batteries like Sanyo's Eneloops — normally, NiMH batteries drain significantly just sitting overnight, and these don't, so you can charge them up and have them ready to go.

Check more discussion of this question.