- Messages
- 10,072
- Name
- Phil
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Not my store, they'll be imports (note to self - may get stung for the tax... )
HK BNS
and for £10 more...
Digital Rev
HK BNS
and for £10 more...
Digital Rev
Pocketwizards flimsy?
- Thread starter dod
- Start date
- Messages
- 10,072
- Name
- Phil
- Edit My Images
- Yes
How'd you do that?
- Messages
- 27,793
- Edit My Images
- Yes
with a headphone splitter, I think it was £1.65 from Maplins
- Messages
- 10,072
- Name
- Phil
- Edit My Images
- Yes
That simple? I thought I'd read somewhere that trying to fire two units didn't work due to voltages or something... (yes, I didn't read it all that well
) and never bothered to research more into it! I think I'll pop in tomorrow! 
Cheers!
- Messages
- 10,072
- Name
- Phil
- Edit My Images
- Yes
One cable between say a fill light and a hair light at the rear, positioned where no one will be walking, and in positions where the lights do not need to be moved seems like a fair enough proposition to me! That still leaves the photographer the flexibility to move around as they wish.
Depends on your usage though I guess.
- Messages
- 27,793
- Edit My Images
- Yes
That simple? I thought I'd read somewhere that trying to fire two units didn't work due to voltages or something... (yes, I didn't read it all that well
Yeah, I read that too, but then if you were selling something at £200, would you tell your customers about that?
Hardly "a ton of cabling", unless you're using really heavy duty pc cords.
Anyway, correct me if I'm wrong, but afaik Cybersyncs aren't CE rated, therefore are technically illegal to use in this country.....
- Messages
- 1,449
- Edit My Images
- Yes
@purpleclouds - Yeah I spose, I don't use them for that though...it would be a complete pain to have them both connected to the same reciever.
They are CE rated, they have a CE mark on them.
They are CE rated, they have a CE mark on them.
- Messages
- 27,793
- Edit My Images
- Yes
- Messages
- 11,512
- Name
- Jim
- Edit My Images
- Yes
So where do you mount the transmitter or do you need a N3 cable for the transmitter as well as the receiver?
- Messages
- 23,200
- Name
- Richard
- Edit My Images
- No
Not sure exactly what Dod was trying to do here in post #34, but to trigger two cameras remotely (or any number) first you need a transmitter and some method of triggering that - either manually with the test button, or by some electronic switch connected to the hot-shoe foot of the transmitter. Then a receiver on the first remote camera connected to the remote release socket.
Another transmitter on the first camera's hot-shoe (set to a different channel) will then trigger a second receiver unit connected to the second camera's remote release socket.
You could trigger any number of cameras in this way, either in daisy-chain sequence as described by using different channels, or simultaneously if set to the same channel. With simultaneous firing you would only need one transmitter on the first camera.
In daisy-chain sequence, the delay between each firing would be the time it takes for the mirror to rise, the shutter to open and for it to hit the x-sync trip - getting on for 100ms with most cameras.
Each camera could also fire a flash in sync off the spare connection - probably the co-ax socket but with the right lead that could be swapped for the hot-shoe.
Sounds complicated
but it's not
- Messages
- 11,512
- Name
- Jim
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Just like he says, when he presses the shutter release on camera one he wants to activate the shutter release on camera two at the same time wirelessly. So presumably the transmitter will be connected to camera one and the receiver to camera two with a cable from the receiver to the N3 (Canon) remote socket.
The question would be, if the transmitter is placed on the hot shoe of camera one would this trigger the receiver to fire the shutter on camera two?
OP
dod
TPer Emeritus
- Messages
- 16,678
- Name
- Ebenezer McScrooge III
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Admirable's explained exactly what I'm wanting to do and the Pocketwizards work flawlessly.
The only issue I've found at the moment is that I'm triggering a MkII with a MkIII. Because the MkIII has more FPS it doesn't/can't always synch the MkII. Such is life
The only issue I've found at the moment is that I'm triggering a MkII with a MkIII. Because the MkIII has more FPS it doesn't/can't always synch the MkII. Such is life
OP
dod
TPer Emeritus
- Messages
- 16,678
- Name
- Ebenezer McScrooge III
- Edit My Images
- Yes
- Messages
- 23,200
- Name
- Richard
- Edit My Images
- No
Yes. But there would be a delay between the two firings - the fraction of a second it takes for the mirror/shutter to activate on camera #1 and trigger camera #2.
For zero delay, use the RF-602 transmitter to trigger both cameras simultaneously (no N3 required) with a receiver unit on each one, set to the same channel. You can fire as many cameras (or flashes) as you like in this way. The receiver units come with a camera cord to do this.
Edit: If you hold the button down on the transmitter, the cameras will keep firing. No need for them to be in firing sync, they will just do their own thing independently.
- Messages
- 11,512
- Name
- Jim
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I think what Dod is trying to achive is two shots of the same subject at the same time but from different angles. One shot from a fixed camera on a tripod and the other hand held with the hand held camera triggering the fixed one.
If the delay is miniscule then I doubt it will matter.
If the delay is miniscule then I doubt it will matter.
OP
dod
TPer Emeritus
- Messages
- 16,678
- Name
- Ebenezer McScrooge III
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Yep, could be bikes, horses, or like this weekend, dogs. I'll be shooting with one camera hand held as normal but want that one to trigger the remote camera at the same time.
The reason why I can't trigger them both remotely is that the movement of the subjects is too unpredictable. I accept I'll miss some shots with the remote camera but can't afford to have them both set up on a fixed point and hope that the subject's going to be there.
- Messages
- 23,200
- Name
- Richard
- Edit My Images
- No
RF-602 will do that. Transmitter on one camera and receiver on the other, using the camera cord supplied. There will be a fractional delay before the seond camera fires, as described.
But holding the shutter button down in this set up will not keep the second camera firing - it will only respond to individual trigger pulses from the transmitter every time the first camera fires. However, if you shoot with the slower camera hand-held, the faster second camera will be up and ready every time and so will fire in sync.
I've tried it and this works fine with my 350D hand-held as (slower) camera #1 and 40D as (faster) remote camera #2 but I can't try it the other way round as the 350D needs a different connector. I strongly suspect that the two would immediately get out of sync and that firing of the second camera would be intermittent at best.
OP
dod
TPer Emeritus
- Messages
- 16,678
- Name
- Ebenezer McScrooge III
- Edit My Images
- Yes
If I'd known that it might have saved a bit of cash. I'd have just had to decide if the individual shots were too much of a limitation.
That's exactly what's happening with the MkIII and MkII combo. I might just turn down the mkIII like Admirable says or I might just swop round the cameras
- Messages
- 23,200
- Name
- Richard
- Edit My Images
- No
One workaround with the RF-602 is to physically press the transmitter's test firing button at the same time as the shutter release (easy if you're an octopus, or you can hold it in your teeth maybe
). The remote camera will then fire independently of the main camera for as long as the button is held down.It might be possible to fool the transmitter into doing this while in the hot-shoe, by taping the triggering pins so that it fires on the shutter release instead of the flash trigger signal. I don't know if that's even possible though.