It all depends on if you want or need HS built in. If not the Elinchrom Quadra RX would the best alternative for more power, portability, and light weight. Even with the standard Ranger Quadra RX you can use Pocketwizard for Hypersync and some of the best light modifiers on the market. Or get the the Quadra EB as they will be introducing their HSS version soon and I'm sure it will be a firmware update for existing models. I love my Quadra.
Nope, no TTL on the Quadra's. But then, Why would one want TTL in the first place. TTL is inconsistent and you loose a lot of power when shooting at fast shutter speeds. I'd rather use Hypersync.
With the Quadra's you have 2 options for the flash head. You have the S-Head (nowadays called the Pro head) and the A-Head. (Action head) The difference is the flash duration. The Action heads have a lot shorter flash duration which is nice in the studio for freezing motion. But... for Hyper cyncing the flash duration of the A-Heads is too short. So, if you want to use Hypersync you have to make sure to get the slower S-Heads/ Pro Heads instead.
Btw... if you don't need the "latest and the greatest" this is a steal imho: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1149091-REG/elinchrom_el10430_1_quadra_living_light_kit.html. Buy two of them for $2000,- and you will have twice the flash power (and even more since the B2 is only 250Ws). For the price difference with the B2 set you could almost buy 2x Pocketwizard FlexTT5 and a Pocketwizard MiniTT1 for Hyper syncing purposes. And if you don't need HSS, you could spend that price difference on some very nice light modifiers since these Elinchrom sets come with a Skyport transmitter anyway
I own 2 Elinchrom Quadra's, one RX and one RX Hybrid. The difference between these two are neglectable, accept for the battery. The Hybrid has Li -Ion but these are backwards compatible so you could always invest in some of those later. The difference with the latest Quadra pack, the ELB are a bit bigger. But if you are on a budget, the older Quadra's are great!
TTL works great on my Quantums - and I use it. Just like I use it with Speedlights and just like ProFoto are adding it to their range of lighting.
Get a 200Ws Quantum Qpaq with X5d-R head then upgrade that to 400Ws if you want. With a variety of controllers and receivers to trigger other Monolights and Pack systems, you can't go wrong.
PS: Quantum have been doing TTL for over 15 years.
Mark_EL wrote:
Nope, no TTL on the Quadra's. But then, Why would one want TTL in the first place. TTL is inconsistent and you loose a lot of power when shooting at fast shutter speeds. I'd rather use Hypersync.
....
I think you might have that backwards. There should be no loss in power when using the TTL capability of the B2 (or any other TTL system), but you do lose flash power with hypersync as you increase flash shutter speed.
TTL is actually pretty consistent the few times I've used it with the B2, but I'm more apt to simply meter and shoot manually, though you can get the initial shot with TTL and be able to make quicker adjustments from there by shifting the B2 (or B1) out of TTL into manual mode.
Big difference is the weight----The Profoto B2 is amazingly small and lightweight. Only about 3 pounds! I thought it would be severely under powered, but it works well with leaf shutter lenses (no hypersync, no loss of power) and makes a great on location combination with the B1.
Well sure, TTL itself doesn't give a loss of power. But the High Speed Sync (HSS Mode) does!
This is what the "The Profoto Off-Camera Flash System FAQ" says about this:
Know that one f-stop of flash light is lost for every doubling of the shutter speed. In other words, when shooting with the extremely short shutter speeds that Profoto HSS offers, the B1 and B2 will in most cases be used at its max or near max power.
If I am correct the HSS Mode works the same way as with Speedlites. It will basically fire a very fast series of flash pulses, instead of one normal high power flash. These series of flash pulses are a lot weaker then one full blast and therefore you will lose flash power.
With Hyper Sync there will also be a loss of power but it's my understanding that this power loss is a lot less then with High Speed Sync.
I know but thats why I said: you loose a lot of power when shooting at fast shutter speeds But fair enough, maby I should have been more clear in what I meant.
And yes, it it not the same when working with leaf shutters, because you don't need HSS or Hyper Sync at all. But then, if the TS is on a budget I doubt he will be working with one of those
In my experience TTL is oke when working very fast is required, mostly for fill flash during some parts of wedding days etc. But in those cases I tend to have On Camera Flash. With Off Camera Flash I rather use the consistency of full manual
OT, but people keep saying HyperSync causes a loss of power...this is not the case. High Speed Sync does. Getting mighty sick of people confusing these terms and the pros and cons of each.
HyperSync is a PocketWizard related technology where they time the triggering of the flash/strobe (and allow you to fine tune the timings of the flash triggering), and utilise long flash duration to coincide with your shutter being open. The key here is long / slow flash durations on your strobe. It also happens to coincide on most strobes with using high power settings as the flash duration lengthens as power output increases. (This is also why action heads and freeze settings work against this technology, by shortening the flash duration and making sync at higher shutter speeds more difficult). I do not believe that HyperSync decreases the output of the flash in any way. In reality, if the flash duration is significantly longer than the shutter opening, then not all of the flash output will be captured by the sensor though. So I guess in some cases this could be perceived as reducing the output of the flash.
HSS (or Auto-FP? in Nikon) is not vendor specific, although only some vendors offer technology that does it. It is dependent on the output capabilities of the flash/strobe as it is not just delivering a single punch of light. HSS relies on the flash being able to fire a strobe-like burst of light. It is this pulse-like action that is terribly inefficient compared to a single dump of flash. As shutter speeds shorten, the pulse needs to push harder to expose all parts of the sensor. There is a direct correlation between shortened shutter speeds and decreased effective power of the flash. In real-world situations, if you're shooting at shutter speeds well above your sync speed (think 1/1000th or faster), your flash, be it a Speedlight or something like a B1 / B2 etc, will end up in the upper end of it's power settings. Obviously we know that in the case of Profoto gear it actually won't shoot HSS below power 7.0 (or 8.0 for Nikon). HSS is a very inefficient technology at delivering flash power to the sensor, at this point in time. Hopefully this will continue to improve as time goes by, because it's much more convenient to use than ND filters or HyperSync (which requires PWs for a start, and then often relies on very specific configurations and settings to time perfectly).
In terms of power output efficiency for "overpowering the sun" type situations, my take is as follows, in order of efficiency:
(0.5). Leaf Shutter camera systems with x-sync way higher than 1/200th
1. Shooting at x-sync with small aperture (with ND filter if you want shallow DOF), using a strobe with enough power to keep up with your aperture settings
2. HyperSync, relies on PW triggers, timings tuning, strobes with slow flash durations
3. HSS, relies on HSS capable strobes/flashes and trigger system
In terms of convenience I find HSS the easiest approach for my shooting style and needs, but I can only use it in specific situations as I'm only using Canon speedlights and they simply don't have the power to push that pulse through a large modifier over any distance more than arms-length. If I need to go beyond that then I guess a B1/B2 or the aforementioned Godox AD360 is probably my next step. I find ND filters impractical to work with in most situations personally. And while I'm techy and love to fiddle with things, (and own PW triggers) the HyperSync stuff is too frustrating with regard to timings and tuning and getting the setting right etc that I gave up on that a long time ago. It works...but is best for very specific circumstances that are too limiting for my needs.
Sorry for the OT rant...but please, learn the difference between HSS and HyperSync before you comment and potentially perpetuate misinformation and confusion for others.
Inga wrote:
In terms of power output efficiency for "overpowering the sun" type situations, my take is as follows, in order of efficiency:
(0.5). Leaf Shutter camera systems with x-sync way higher than 1/200th
Only With (i) A high output flash, with (ii) A faster flash duration than the shutter speed, and (iii) A VERY fast radio trigger (if one is being used).
ukphotographer wrote:
Only With (i) A high output flash, with (ii) A faster flash duration than the shutter speed, and (iii) A VERY fast radio trigger (if one is being used).
Good to know. I have no hands on experience with such a setup.
More off-topic info but it is also possible to hypersync with cheap Yongnuo YN 622C triggers. I've experimented with these combined with my Elinchrom D-Lites which are pretty slow. Well, it works. Only thing is, you need a Yongnuo YN 622C TX if you want to be able to adjust timing. (I don't own one of those yet). Yongnuo calls this "Supersync"
Anyway, I think it is nice to know that if you're on a budget, you don't necessarily need expensive Pocket Wizards to do Hypersync.
I cannot review any of these products since I don't own them but since you're looking for an alternative monolight system with TTL there is also the Phottix Indra system that works in concert with the Odin trigger system. It is currently Bowens mount but there will soon be an Elinchrom mount. You can get a setup with 2 500ws heads and a battery for $1900 or 2 360ws heads and 2 batteries for $1800.
But fair enough, maby I should have been more clear in what I meant. 