Pinging Leo R. - Nikon 8800 and SB-800 flash comments

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.zlr (More info?)

"All Things Mopar" <usenetMAPS123@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:Xns95FC9B71CE52AReplyToken@216.196.97.131...
> Hi, Leo.
>
> Just wanted to pass on to you (and any othes lurking on
> this) that I confimed the specs and prices for the Nikon
> SB-600 and SB-800 Speedlights.
>
> The 600 retails for $250 with no rebate, has a GN of 98,
> and weighs 10 oz. with less features than the 800, as you
> noted in a reply to me yesterday.
>
> The 800 retails for $380 with a $25 rebate, making the net
> price 355. It has a GN of 125 and includes a 5th AA
> battery pack for faster recycle times. It weighs just 12
> oz.
>
> Both are quite a bit lighter than my Sunpak 433D, which is
> 16 or 17 oz. (all specs without batteries, of course).
>
> Interestingly, neither the 600 or 800 is listed as
> supported by TTL or i-TTl for the Coolpix 8800. Actually,
> the only cameras listed on the 600/800 spec sheets are
> Nikon DSLRs, and then only a few of what Nikon actually
> sells.
>
> Hmmm. Besides your personal experience, both local camera
> stores I've talked to say that the SB-600 and SB-800 are
> i-TTL compatible with the 8800.
>
> Given the 98 and 125 GNs for the 600 and 800 respectively,
> that would give me theoretical maximum range at f/3.5 of
> 28' and 35'.
>
> So, I've got a hard decision to make. And, I don't wanna
> blow it again buying a potentially less-capable flash to
> save just $105.
>
> Besides your personal experience and dpreview.com, can you
> point me to any sources to learn more about these 2
> flashes, as well as the 8800?
>
> Thanks in advance, Leo.
>
> --
> ATM, aka Jerry

Hi again Jerry,
Yes, I feel sure the SB-800 would give you better results BUT I believe the
reason the Nikon DSLRs are listed as being combatible but not the CP8800, is
that the former are fully compatible and utilise all the SB-800 features,
whereas the CP8800 has the limitations as set out in the manual which I
listed for you.
Any other info? Don't know. Perhaps if you went to the dpreview forums and
did a few searches of Nikon Talk you may find something. Or better still,
take the CP8800 out for your ten day "test drive" and see if you can include
an SB-800 as well.
Sorry I can't be more helpful Jerry but good luck.
Leo

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.zlr (More info?)

Leo R. commented courteously ...

> Yes, I feel sure the SB-800 would give you better
> results BUT I believe the reason the Nikon DSLRs are
> listed as being combatible but not the CP8800, is
> that the former are fully compatible and utilise all
> the SB-800 features, whereas the CP8800 has the
> limitations as set out in the manual which I listed
>for you.

Hi, Leo.

I've been reading/posting/reading in real-time today which
is probably discourteous. I should know enough to complete
my research before jumping the gun and asking you to do my
research for me. Call me impetuous <sp?> when I get
excited! <grin>

Once I printed the complete specs for the 8800, it indeed
talks about it being an i-TTL camera which takes nearly
full advantage of the SB-600/800.

[snip]
I read the full dpreview report on the 3800 as well as the
Fuji S20, which a camera store recommended over the 8800.
It is clear to me that the Nikon will be better choice.

Meanwhile, I'm knee deep Googling for "nikon 8800 review",
and finding some fascinating stuff.

So far, the main negative I've personally found for the
8800 is that Nikon reduced the max ISO on the 8700 from
800 to 400. I also learned that the 8800 is, I believe, at
the current end of the evolutionary chain from 5700 to
8400 to 8700 to 8800, so while there're clearly
differences in appearance and more MP, the underlying
architecture is the same.

Being an engineer, my strong supposition is that Nikon
finally got it thru their head that this architecture
can't support ISO 800 without images that look like beach
sand. I'm gratified to see that the 8800 goes down to ISO
50, which will help me minimize noise from the higher MP,
and still be able to shoot up to maybe 18' with the SB-
600, which will almost always suffice.

Again, thanks muchly for your continued help.

--
ATM, aka Jerry

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.zlr (More info?)

All Things Mopar commented courteously ...

> I read the full dpreview report on the 3800

Of course, I meant "8800"...

--
ATM, aka Jerry