DSLRUsers.com

... Obsolete ...

VK4CP wrote:I am keen to see if the larger head actually translates into a softer light that would be more suitable for interior photography.

I'll be really surprised if it is: it's only a small change in head area.

We currently have a couple of 300s and a 700 (of the D variety) and an 800 and a 900 (of the SB variety) in house. We're expecting, within the next few days, to get a 900 (of the Alpha variety) and to ten start to do some serious playing with all of them side by side. That will take a few days to get happening .... but I might grab the strobes and take them to the Botany View tomorrow night and see what differences they present there.

Looking forward to hearing what you have to say about the 300's, 700's and the 800 vs 900 (D and SB type respectively). I wouldn't mind getting some info on the alpha-type 900 as well.

Cheers
Cameron

... Obsolete ...

as i said in the other thread where i gave my thoughts on this, there is no difference in the application you have given. (a picture of a room). i even use the sb400 indoors frequently with 3.1m ceilings and have no problems at all so long as you are familiar with getting the best out of flash photography.

the softness of the light in particular is more about your strobe positioning and settings in relation to your subject as opposed to just the strobe itself. not trying to be a smart ass here but hotspots will be more about inappropriate use of strobe rather than the strobe head itself, particually when you are comparing the 800/900 which are very similar. it certianly wont be a difference evident in such a test. the sb800 is a great little flash and performs just fine.

Rooz wrote:the sb800 is a great little flash and performs just fine.

"little" I think it of being my big flash, my SB-400 is my little flash. ROFL

the baby SB-400 does a sterling job indoors if used properly (not pushed beyond its limitations)

... Obsolete ...

going out on a limb, my guess is the color and power of the light is the same, and think a comparison is frivolous

Oz_Beachside wrote:going out on a limb, my guess is the color and power of the light is the same, and think a comparison is frivolous

I totally agree - there are so many varying parameters that you would need lab conditions to tell any difference. All I know is that the SB900 is 100% easier to navigate than the SB800 and to me thats worth it

... Obsolete ...

A personal opinion is exactly that, personal. One can either accept it or reject. My reference to lab conditions is assuming, no read that as, no one would have the faintest idea as to actual location conditions without being present. I have seen time and time again pics posted on this forum where the people offering critique say that it has too much saturation or not enough, or the colour balance or WB is wrong only to have the poster say that his/her pic looks as it did when it was taken.

My advice would be to toddle off to the local Nikon dealer with SB800 attached and ask if you can test the SB900 in situ. In this way you would have a real life experience and be able to judge for yourself and not rely on personal opinions.

adam, i get what your saying and normally i agree with you but i think what we're trying to say here is that there is no discernable difference between them in most applications. this is mainly due to the fact that TTL is so good and there is such minute differences in the light emitted that if you are purely looking at buying the 900 over the 800 due to a perceived advantage on strobe capacity to light a room evenly then you wont find the extra dollars in the result.

this is an application where the 900 excels. zoomed to 200mm it could give me a very direct light source to illuminate the subject that was quite some distance from the lens.



otherwise...the "softness" and even-ness of a light, any light, be it strobe or stand, is much more dependant on the positioning and exposure settings than it would be simply the flash head design itself. especially when we are talking about a flash as good as the sb800 which is truly excellent. i dont have any hard evidence but to me the 900 seems to give me more reliable results in the real world that i have not been able to justify or replicate in a switcheroo test. sorry mate.

VK4CP wrote:You "guess"?

That means all the commentary is based on assumption and guess work.
I must be more technically inclined, as I value comparison images found on other forums and sites.
It counts for more than what personal opinions are worth, IMO!

If lab conditions is changing one variable (the speedlight itself, with everything else remaining the same), then I must be asking too much.

well, its an educated guess...

I dont think the SB800 will be inferior to an SB900, and that if you already have SB800s, then only get an SB900 if your SB800s stopped working.

lots of togs (particularly in web forums) over analyse the electronics and lab stuff, in a world where variables way beyond our control and comprehension are all around us.

back to your softness question, the size will only matter relative to your subject. if the actual size difference is significant compared to your subject, then yes it will be softer (such as close up macro), but if you are shooting people or real estate, it will be two-tenths of a poofteenth...

Both SB800 and SB900 have their pros and cons.
1) weight
2) size
3) toggling from master to remote
4) existing accesorries, including the camera bag
5) more intelligent in terms of sensing the gel filters
6) ability to zoom in to 200mm vs 105mm
7) beam types (of sb900)

Anyway, I think there should not be much of a diff at the hands of those experience (plenty here). Perhaps they will have a better views for you.