Nikon SB-700... less power?

photogreen

Nikon has released SB-700 a few days ago. Why are they giving it less power? Power is something that is never enough

Nikon SB-700 release

Matthew Saville

The question is, why would they give it MORE power? (than the SB900?) That just doesn't make sense. That's like making the D3 5 FPS and the D300 8 FPS. Bottom line- it's a mid-level flash; they're going to give it mid-level power.

I do believe that, to Nikon's credit, the SB700 DOES have more power than the SB800, which I don't know whether or not I'm surprised to hear.

Of course it's very difficult to calculate, because they use extremely arbitrary guide number measurements that depend on ISO and flash zoom angle. Practically EVERY manufacturer tries to list their flashes at a different setting, so it is more difficult to compare REAL world guide numbers. Really lame, but a fact of marketing. :-(

angevin1

photogreen wrote: »

Nikon has released SB-700 a few days ago. Why are they giving it less power? Power is something that is never enough

Nikon SB-700 release

I take it you're referring to the power being down a few (very Few) feet in guide number from the SB600 it succeeds?

If I put my consumer hat on for just a second, I think they have potential to have hit a home run without having their pants down.

The Spec's over at Nikon and in your ref. appear to make this out as a great flash for a middle of the road consumer to buy and use, along with a few aspiring CLS folks to boot.

I say without their pants down because until this thing came along, the SB600/SB400, etc just didn't offer the average consumer with money to burn anything useful, nor did it provide salesmen anything to sell. The SB700 does I think offer them both something. it offer's them a smart acting/interface with a Nikon camera that hopefully will help them produce a much better/creatively exposed-photo.

I think they actually thought through this and time will tell, but I think it's approaching the fence~ Caveat; if it'd been priced about $40 cheaper, it'd be well over the fence!

Zerodog

It will be interesting to see what the size is in relation to the SB600. I love the size of the 600. I put it in my pocket. And it has a really fast refresh rate. But the 900 rules for power and zoom flexibility. It will be interesting to see what people say about this new 700.

photogreen

I did refer to SB-600. I'm not saying that SB-700 has nothing to offer. It has a lot. The commander function might already be worth the upgrade. Typically though, users expect more of everything from a new model . In this case, the power is less. So, I was wondering whether it's a marketing move or technical difficulty?

SoCalAl

I'm totally with Tom on this one! It is a great technology upgrade that was needed to interface with the latest camera technology.

gowiththeflow

Matthew Saville wrote: »

I do believe that, to Nikon's credit, the SB700 DOES have more power than the SB800, which I don't know whether or not I'm surprised to hear.

The SB-700 looks to have a GN of 92' to the SB-800's 125' and the SB-900's 131'. It's only 6' off the SB-600's power.

SoCalAl wrote: »

I'm totally with Tom on this one! It is a great technology upgrade that was needed to interface with the latest camera technology.

Have to agree- it fills the giant void that Nikon left when they turned the SB-800 into a collector's item. It's only going to be a replacement for the SB-600 in as much as it will replace it in my camera bag, and relegate the 600 to remote duty.

I don't know about you, but I wasn't going to spend almost $500 to get a flash that's much heavier and bulkier than the SB-600, just to get the Commander mode and more power, and I never could find the right deal on an SB-800 at the right time.

While the lack of power compared to all the others is a bummer, I don't think it'll be a deal breaker.

Matthew Saville

gowiththeflow wrote: »

The SB-700 looks to have a GN of 92' to the SB-800's 125' and the SB-900's 131'. It's only 6' off the SB-600's power.

Are the comparisons at the same zoom head setting? I can't find an across-the-bar equivalent to compare them all. Some are at 105mm flash zoom, some are at 35mm, some are at ISO 200, some are at ISO 100.

gowiththeflow

Matthew Saville wrote: »

Are the comparisons at the same zoom head setting? I can't find an across-the-bar equivalent to compare them all. Some are at 105mm flash zoom, some are at 35mm, some are at ISO 200, some are at ISO 100.

nikonusa.com gives them all @ ISO100/35mm, including the SB-800 if you search for it.

I don't know where I originally found the SB-800's spec, but on that site it lists it as 38m compared to the SB-900's 34m? Perhaps I found one that used a different zoom/ISO combo?

The reported lack of support for older TTL modes (besides i-TTL) might be a deal breaker for me though, if I can't use it properly on the F100. :cry Maybe my search for an SB-800 isn't over after all.

Matthew Saville

gowiththeflow wrote: »

nikonusa.com gives them all @ ISO100/35mm, including the SB-800 if you search for it.

I don't know where I originally found the SB-800's spec, but on that site it lists it as 38m compared to the SB-900's 34m? Perhaps I found one that used a different zoom/ISO combo?

The reported lack of support for older TTL modes (besides i-TTL) might be a deal breaker for me though, if I can't use it properly on the F100. :cry Maybe my search for an SB-800 isn't over after all.

Yes, I'm almost positive that only the SB700 and SB900 are listed at 35mm flash head zoom, the others are at 105mm or something else. But I might be wrong. And of course there's always the fact that each individual flash is NOT perfectly equal to it's claimed GN, it can be off by quite a bit sometimes...

Either way, I think we can agree- a used SB800 is the way to go for many advanced shooters who're on a budget but need lots of function. I'd rather have a bag of 3-4 SB800's than any fewer SB700's and 900's... :-)

=Matt=

shawngs

I just wish it had a 1/8 adapter for a wireless adapter (pocket wizards, alien bees, etc). Unfortunately the range limits of CLS can be restricting at times...