Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)
Sorry I meant the Canon 400EX. Question still, is the Sigman a better
flash?
On Wed, 31 Aug 2005 10:43:17 -0500, Jim Townsend <not@real.address>
wrote:
>Don Smith wrote:
>
>> Specs on Sigma look better. Will 199HZ verson 5 HZ make a big
>> difference?
>
>Easy answer :-)
>
>The 400EZ won't work on your Digital Rebel... You need Canon EX
>flashes... The EZ series won't do E-TTL (which your camera needs).
>
>The Sigma EF-500 does to E-TTL and will work.
>
>
>
Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)
Don Smith wrote:
> Sorry I meant the Canon 400EX. Question still, is the Sigman a better
> flash?
There is no 400EX.. 420EX perhaps ?
I've never used one, but the Sigma is highly rated. It has onboard
flash compensation (which is a plus for Canon 300D users. It's *supposedly*
as good as the Canon 520EX... But again.. I've never tried the Sigma
flash.
Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)
On Wed, 31 Aug 2005 16:11:39 -0400, Don Smith <dhsmith@bellsouth.net>
wrote:
>Sorry I meant the Canon 400EX. Question still, is the Sigman a better
>flash?
I can't say whether it's better than the 400EX, because I don't have
one, but I bought the Sigma EF-500 DG Super for my rebel, and it works
just fine.
>
>On Wed, 31 Aug 2005 10:43:17 -0500, Jim Townsend <not@real.address>
>wrote:
>
>>Don Smith wrote:
>>
>>> Specs on Sigma look better. Will 199HZ verson 5 HZ make a big
>>> difference?
>>
>>Easy answer :-)
>>
>>The 400EZ won't work on your Digital Rebel... You need Canon EX
>>flashes... The EZ series won't do E-TTL (which your camera needs).
>>
>>The Sigma EF-500 does to E-TTL and will work.
>>
>>
>>
--
Bill Funk
Replace "g" with "a"
funktionality.blogspot.com
Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)
"Don Smith" <dhsmith@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:rm3ch11nmh3dgf44tek4uq3h1722kq35md@4ax.com...
> Sorry I meant the Canon 400EX. Question still, is the Sigman a better
> flash?
>
You probably meant 420EX. The Sigma has flash exposure compensation which
is not on the 420EX, you'll find this useful on the Digital Rebel since it's
not available on the body. You can also manually control the output on the
Sigma, something you can't do on the 420EX. The Sigma is slightly higher in
power, and can be used as a master to another E-TTL flash or slave to a
ST-E2 or another E-TTL master mounted on the camera; the 420EX can only act
as a slave.
Basically, the Sigma is a near-clone of the Canon 550EX functionally
speaking. The Sigma isn't built as well, but unless you're a
photojournalist or adventure photographer it's not an issue. Hasn't been
for me.
Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)
Mark B. wrote:
> "Don Smith" <dhsmith@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
> news:rm3ch11nmh3dgf44tek4uq3h1722kq35md@4ax.com...
>
>>Sorry I meant the Canon 400EX. Question still, is the Sigman a better
>>flash?
>>
>
>
> You probably meant 420EX. The Sigma has flash exposure compensation which
> is not on the 420EX, you'll find this useful on the Digital Rebel since it's
> not available on the body. You can also manually control the output on the
> Sigma, something you can't do on the 420EX. The Sigma is slightly higher in
> power, and can be used as a master to another E-TTL flash or slave to a
> ST-E2 or another E-TTL master mounted on the camera; the 420EX can only act
> as a slave.
>
Note that the recently announced, but not yet avaiable, 430EX has flash
exposure compensation and manual control. Don't know if it can master
or not. I didn't close enough.
You are about to answer a thread that has been inactive for more than 6 months. If you still wish to proceed, please ensure that your posting is original and does not duplicate or overlap any prior responses to this thread.