Wireless E-TTL from Canon vs. Sigma flashes

boulderNardo

Looking to finally get some E-TTL based flashes.
Been reading too much Joe McNally
Using Vivitar 285s up until now, would like some E-TTL functionality without the $400 price tag of the 580EXII.

Looking at used Canon 550EXs and the Sigma EF-530 DG Super.
Both have "Wireless E-TTL" ... Can I assume that wireless E-TTL is cross-compatible? i.e. I can get a 550EX and a Sigma now and they'd fire each other, and could add a 580EXII to the set later on and all three would work together?

Also, just to make sure ... "Wireless E-TTL" actually implies RADIO signals, correct? Not the old-school Infra Red flash triggering right?

And while we're at it - any recommendations against/for the Sigma flash? Price seems unbeatable...

Thanks!
_Bernardo

divamum

The canon flashes/system is infrared, so I assume that Sigma-compatible ones would be too....

ziggy53

Canon and Sigma flashes are "highly" compatible but not perfectly compatible in a feature-for-feature sense. If you are only looking at the wireless E-TTL then I think you would be pleased in that, while the nomenclature is somewhat different regarding channels, the actual signals exchanged between master and slaves are highly compatible.

I use 2 of the Sigma EF 500 DG Super model flashes and I am very pleased with the performance of the flashes in general, and with the image results in particular.

Divamum is correct, the communication is in infrared between master and slave.

If you want radio frequency along with E-TTL then you would have to "also" purchase into the new PocketWizard Flex/Mini system.

boulderNardo

ziggy53 wrote:

Canon and Sigma flashes are "highly" compatible but not perfectly compatible in a feature-for-feature sense. If you are only looking at the wireless E-TTL then I think you would be pleased in that, while the nomenclature is somewhat different regarding channels, the actual signals exchanged between master and slaves are highly compatible.

I use 2 of the Sigma EF 500 DG Super model flashes and I am very pleased with the performance of the flashes in general, and with the image results in particular.

Divamum is correct, the communication is in infrared between master and slave.

If you want radio frequency along with E-TTL then you would have to "also" purchase into the new PocketWizard Flex/Mini system.

Thanks for the info Ziggy (and others!).
I ended up going with two Canon 550EXs.
*JUST* got them so haven't had time to play with them, but still wondering:

a) If, like divamum says, they "talk" infrared, do they still pass E-TTL information to each other just like McNally describes the SB-800/900s do for Nikon?

b) Again, if they use infrared, to the bases with the IR receiver/transmitter need to be pointed at each other to work?

c) If they do pass TTL information over IR, why would anybody need *radio* triggers with TTL information (like the PW Flex/Mini which cost an arm and three legs).

Thanks!
_B

chrisdg

boulderNardo wrote:

Thanks for the info Ziggy (and others!).
I ended up going with two Canon 550EXs.
*JUST* got them so haven't had time to play with them, but still wondering:

a) If, like divamum says, they "talk" infrared, do they still pass E-TTL information to each other just like McNally describes the SB-800/900s do for Nikon?

b) Again, if they use infrared, to the bases with the IR receiver/transmitter need to be pointed at each other to work?

c) If they do pass TTL information over IR, why would anybody need *radio* triggers with TTL information (like the PW Flex/Mini which cost an arm and three legs).

Thanks!
_B

(A) Yes.

(B) Not usually. Indoors and confined outdoor spaces, the transmitter easily bounces off walls and such to relay the signal - albeit in relatively close quarters like homes and smaller buildings. I rarely have a misfire indoors. I understand that if you were in a large open building (church or something) you would likely need to keep a relative line of sight between transmitter and receiver. In other words, they don't need to be pointing directly at each other. The slave receiver just needs to be in the relative path of transmission, somewhere just out in front of the master. It works surprisingly well.

Outdoors, as long as you keep the two relatively close (i've casually tested as far away as about 30 feet, but nothing scientific) and the receiver somewhere out in front of the transmitter, you should be good. Apparently bright sunlight can interfere. In McNally's work, you'll often see him having to move the master commander somewhere behind him via a flash cord, because his camera is closer to the subject than his flash.

(C) the PWs will successfully transmit and receive almost under any conditions and have no line of sight constraints. Among several other benefits, they have tremendous range and predictability.

I suggest that you put the canon wireless through it's paces over time, and if you have too many misfires (a subjective decision) then fork over for some PWs.