DSLRUsers.com

Hey all,

I know that a lot of you guys dont rate this flash very highly, but I do own one and am currently looking at different avenues of getting it to work off camera (despite its design claiming that it wont) and from my research I have found two options that may work.

It appears that the SC-28 will work with the SB-400, I think a friend has one that I should be able to borrow, but does anyone have either a SC-28, SC-29 or a SC-17 (also may work apparently) that I can borrow?

Although from my reading the SB-400 does not seem to work with cheap optical slaves, but i am interested to see if it will work with the SU-4 controller unit (no one seems to be able to confirm this). Long shot here, but does anyone have one that they are willing to lend me so I can experiment before going out to buy one?

What I would really like to do with my SB-400 off camera is:
-help light up my light tent
-extra light for macro work

Thanks Everyone
Cameron

I can lend an SC-29 for a couple of weeks, but you would have to pay postage to and from postcode 2550. Weighs approx 250 g. Send PM if interested.

Hi Cameron,
I have an SC29 you can borrow if you like. I also have an ancient optical trigger you can also try.

Reading between the lines, it seems to be simply a direct replacement for the Popup. I wonder if it will work as a commander for the CLS system on those cameras where the Popup will do so? BTW I love this from the manual

Nikon wrote:* When using the SB-400 with these cameras, the SB-400 must be turned on

Does that mean that it will work even when switched off on the other cameras?

aim54x wrote:It appears that the SC-28 will work with the SB-400, I think a friend has one that I should be able to borrow, but does anyone have either a SC-28, SC-29 or a SC-17 (also may work apparently) that I can borrow?

Borrow for a long time or just see if it works? If the latter, I can bring my SC-17 to Minimurra Rainforest next Saturday for you to try out.

aim54x wrote:Although from my reading the SB-400 does not seem to work with cheap optical slaves,...

That does not make any sense at all. I see no technical reason for it not working - at least in manual mode. An optical slave (cheap or other) merely closes the contacts on the flash.

will be interesting to see what your results are. i have no desire to use the sb400 off cam, i would have loved it if it could trigger my other flashes. now THAT would be extremely helpful.

nevertheless, i love the 400. love it to bits.

ATJ wrote:That does not make any sense at all. I see no technical reason for it not working - at least in manual mode. An optical slave (cheap or other) merely closes the contacts on the flash.

These gadgets are powered by the trigger voltage available at the flash contacts - if it is very low, they don't work reliably and/or at all.

Cheers

digitor wrote:These gadgets are powered by the trigger voltage available at the flash contacts - if it is very low, they don't work reliably and/or at all.

Not all of them. I made one that worked off a solar cell.

ATJ wrote:

digitor wrote:These gadgets are powered by the trigger voltage available at the flash contacts - if it is very low, they don't work reliably and/or at all.

Not all of them. I made one that worked off a solar cell.

Yes, I have one that works off a solar cell as well.

Nevertheless, this is the reason why the cheap slaves don't always work with modern flashguns.

Cheers

Anyway, Cameron, I can bring my "cheap slave trigger" next Saturday for you to try with your SB-400. It works fine with my SB-800 and SB-24.

I will await your findings with interest! My "cheap" optical slave (sold as "Seagull" brand on Ebay) works fine with my SB800, and the trigger voltage on this flash measures a mere 3.68V, which seems pretty low to me. The SB400 allegedly has a voltage of 3.3V, although I've not been able to check this.

The Wein slaves (hardly cheap!) are specified to need 5V to work, and are not guaranteed to work with low voltage speedlights.

Take a meter with you as well, and check the voltage on the SB400, it'd be nice to find out what it is.

Cheers

ATJ wrote:I can bring my SC-17 to Minimurra Rainforest next Saturday for you to try out.

Now why didn't I think of that.
I won't be at the meet, but if I can get my SC29 & slave to either Colin or Andrew, they can go for me.

Colin are you still going???

Thanks guys, with a little luck I should have that SC-28 off my mate today (and the SB-400 returned from extended loan - I'll have to chase that up if I dont) so if ATJ you could be so kind to bring your cheap optical slave and your SC-17, and Mr Darcy if you could be so kind as to get your SC-29 to Colion or Andrew that will be great, i'll have everything but the SU-4 tested at once.

Thanks Guys!!!! BTW how similar do you think the Phottix for SC-28 will be? I'll end up buying genuine though.

I have tested the SB400 with SC28 and SC29, both worked as it supposed to be. With the SC-17, as it is a little old, it might have trouble with the TTL system.

The SC29's built in focus lights will not work as there is no power source coming from the flash. It will just work as the SC28.
I don't have the SC17, but if it has the same amount of pins of a modern flash, I have no doubt that it will work just fine.

With other slave methods, I have tried too, will not give any result as you have no manual control over the flash.

Thanks Yip!!! I guess the main component to test on Saturday is Andrew's SC-17 and that optical trigger and a SU-4 if I can get my hands on one.

I figure that if an optical trigger would work then I can still use it as a kicker light with my light tent (75cm) as teh SB-400 is not that powerful and I am really struggling with lights using my normal SB-800/SB-600 set up (via CLS). BTW does anyone know of a nikon sync cord that lets you stack hotshoes hence enabling you to daisy chain mulitple flashes?

My SC-17 works fine with my SB-800 and D300. I get full iTTL. The cord has all the same pins.

aim54x wrote:BTW does anyone know of a nikon sync cord that lets you stack hotshoes hence enabling you to daisy chain mulitple flashes?

I believe there's a few ways to achieve what you want. You don't actually stack them, but you get a cord like the SC-18 or SC_19 and then plug it into the AS-10. The AS-10 is equivalent to the end of the SC-17, etc. without the cord. The ends of the SC-18/19 fit into the connector on the side of the flash, the AS-10 and the SC-17, etc.

I will be going and would be happy to escort the said equipment.

aim54x wrote:Thanks Yip!!! I guess the main component to test on Saturday is Andrew's SC-17 and that optical trigger and a SU-4 if I can get my hands on one.

I figure that if an optical trigger would work then I can still use it as a kicker light with my light tent (75cm) as teh SB-400 is not that powerful and I am really struggling with lights using my normal SB-800/SB-600 set up (via CLS).

I can't see why you would use the SB400 with a optical slave. The flash has no manual output option, hence even if it works, it will be firing at somewhere between lowest and highest power. Which is, very random.

With the same price of the SB400 brand new, I would buy an older SB flash. I bought 2x SB28 for price of $190 before. Maybe higher these days, but the SB28 would outpower the SB400 in any way if you do not plan to use iTTL.

 BTW does anyone know of a nikon sync cord that lets you stack hotshoes hence enabling you to daisy chain mulitple flashes?

What Andrew said. But again, why would you do that? There is CLS or wireless TTL flash... Why the cable hazards? That is why Nikon sells so many SB800/900 units.

I already have a SB-400 so I am interested in seeing if I can get it to work to help add extra light to my light tent (I plan to use it to provide light from behind so i am not too fussed about power output yet) so an optical trigger is the only way I can think of doing so without messing up the rest of my CLS setup (pop up commander, SB-600/800 in butterfly configuration). It is a long shot, but I dont think I can afford even a second hand SB-26/28 at the moment.

The randomness of output is a good point, I would have thought it would have dumped a set amount of power everytime (I read that the SB-400 could be controlled manually via the camera menu on the D40 but I have only just gotten mine back from extended loan so i will have a look to see what they meant using my D300 - I cannot be more handicapped with the D300 right?). But a random output would really kill this idea quickly.

I would really love to add a few more SB-800/900s to my kit but my photography budget is very overstretched at the moment, hence I am looking for a cheap in between.

The stacking cables is another thing that me and a friend were discussing. We just thought that if you could stack your sync cords you could move your commander unit further away from the camera hence extending CLS over a longer distance. Just a thought, but we were not sure if such a cable is available.

aim54x wrote:The randomness of output is a good point, I would have thought it would have dumped a set amount of power everytime (I read that the SB-400 could be controlled manually via the camera menu on the D40 but I have only just gotten mine back from extended loan so i will have a look to see what they meant using my D300 - I cannot be more handicapped with the D300 right?). But a random output would really kill this idea quickly.

I know Yi-P suggested it, but I doubt it would be random. If you were using an optical slave, it would only use 2 contacts, ground and trigger. The quench contact would be left open. This means it would not receive the quench signal from the camera and so would dump the whole flash. i.e. you should get "full power". It should be no different from hitting the fire button on the flash.

ATJ wrote:

aim54x wrote:The randomness of output is a good point, I would have thought it would have dumped a set amount of power everytime (I read that the SB-400 could be controlled manually via the camera menu on the D40 but I have only just gotten mine back from extended loan so i will have a look to see what they meant using my D300 - I cannot be more handicapped with the D300 right?). But a random output would really kill this idea quickly.

I know Yi-P suggested it, but I doubt it would be random. If you were using an optical slave, it would only use 2 contacts, ground and trigger. The quench contact would be left open. This means it would not receive the quench signal from the camera and so would dump the whole flash. i.e. you should get "full power". It should be no different from hitting the fire button on the flash.

That also sounds logical and was my original thought, the best way to find out is to test it. BTW there is no test fire button on the SB-400....I still have to get around to playing with it on my D300...tonight when I get home.

aim54x wrote:That also sounds logical and was my original thought, the best way to find out is to test it. BTW there is no test fire button on the SB-400....I still have to get around to playing with it on my D300...tonight when I get home.

Trigger contact is the centre pin. Ground is available on the contacts on either side of the foot (and on my SB-800, it is the whole foot). A piece of wire across those contacts will manually fire the flash. I used a twist-tie with the ends stripped to bare the wire.

ATJ wrote:Trigger contact is the centre pin. Ground is available on the contacts on either side of the foot (and on my SB-800, it is the whole foot). A piece of wire across those contacts will manually fire the flash. I used a twist-tie with the ends stripped to bare the wire.

So the whole metal foot will act as my ground pin?

aim54x wrote:

ATJ wrote:Trigger contact is the centre pin. Ground is available on the contacts on either side of the foot (and on my SB-800, it is the whole foot). A piece of wire across those contacts will manually fire the flash. I used a twist-tie with the ends stripped to bare the wire.

So the whole metal foot will act as my ground pin?

If it is anything like my SB-800, yes.

ATJ wrote:If it is anything like my SB-800, yes.

I guess we'll find out soon.
http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/sb400.htm there is a picture of the foot 3/4 of the way down.

ATJ wrote:

aim54x wrote:The randomness of output is a good point, I would have thought it would have dumped a set amount of power everytime (I read that the SB-400 could be controlled manually via the camera menu on the D40 but I have only just gotten mine back from extended loan so i will have a look to see what they meant using my D300 - I cannot be more handicapped with the D300 right?). But a random output would really kill this idea quickly.

I know Yi-P suggested it, but I doubt it would be random. If you were using an optical slave, it would only use 2 contacts, ground and trigger. The quench contact would be left open. This means it would not receive the quench signal from the camera and so would dump the whole flash. i.e. you should get "full power". It should be no different from hitting the fire button on the flash.

The flash will manage to dump whatever charge is on its capacitors (or slightly less) when the contact with the firing mechanism is made. So it is not a guaranteed "full power" dump. The safest way to do so is wait until the ready light is on and steady then firing again to prevent very different unexpected results.

I tried triggering with the SB-400 by placing a wire between the centre contact and the metal foot with no luck, it does not have the extra outer contacts (the recessed ones) that the SB-800 does.

I can see where your coming from Yip, but I have noticed that the recycle is very quick (fresh set of Sony Cycle Energy Blue LSD 2000Mah). And when attached to the D300 you can have full manual control via the menu, as well as TTL, no commander mode extension though.

Yi-P wrote:The flash will manage to dump whatever charge is on its capacitors (or slightly less) when the contact with the firing mechanism is made. So it is not a guaranteed "full power" dump. The safest way to do so is wait until the ready light is on and steady then firing again to prevent very different unexpected results.

Well, a) that is not random, but based on the recycle time, and b) will still be equivalent of a "full power" dump as with any flash "full power" is dumping whatever charge is in the capacitor. i.e. you would see the same thing with a SB-800 (albeit different "power") set to manual 1/1.

aim54x wrote:I tried triggering with the SB-400 by placing a wire between the centre contact and the metal foot with no luck, it does not have the extra outer contacts (the recessed ones) that the SB-800 does.

That is very odd. It should trigger like that. Do you have an SB-800 you could try the same thing with? I tried it with mine and it fired fine.

ATJ wrote:

aim54x wrote:I tried triggering with the SB-400 by placing a wire between the centre contact and the metal foot with no luck, it does not have the extra outer contacts (the recessed ones) that the SB-800 does.

That is very odd. It should trigger like that. Do you have an SB-800 you could try the same thing with? I tried it with mine and it fired fine.

This doesn't surprise me.
The manual claims it only works with cameras compatible with CLS. This indicates to me that the firing mechanism is somewhat more complicated than simply shorting the main contacts. Otherwise, it would work with old cameras. It also means that it probably WON'T work with optical triggers. My suspicion is that the flash relies on the camera for most of its smarts & that Nikon neglected (accidentally or otherwise ) to put in a fallback dumb mode.

I wouldn't trust the twistie method of shorting though. Twisties are more than slightly dodgy electrically. Try a metal(!) paperclip instead.

Mr Darcy wrote:I wouldn't trust the twistie method of shorting though. Twisties are more than slightly dodgy electrically. Try a metal(!) paperclip instead.

Which was sort of why I was suggesting trying an SB-800. Proves the twist tie as well as the method. The only reason I didn't go with a paper clip is they aren't insulated. That shouldn't be a problem with a modern flash, but you can give yourself a nasty jolt with older ones (I speak from experience).

ATJ wrote:

Mr Darcy wrote:I wouldn't trust the twistie method of shorting though. Twisties are more than slightly dodgy electrically. Try a metal(!) paperclip instead.

Which was sort of why I was suggesting trying an SB-800. Proves the twist tie as well as the method. The only reason I didn't go with a paper clip is they aren't insulated. That shouldn't be a problem with a modern flash, but you can give yourself a nasty jolt with older ones (I speak from experience).

I used a twistie and was thinking, hmmmm not sure how well insulated this is, triggered my SB-800 in the same manner with the same twistie but no luck with the SB-400. Refer to my earlier post with the ken rockwell link as it has a picture of the foot itself showing that it only has the 4 pins and the metal foot, no extra contacts.

You can see the labels for the hot shoe contacts here. I don't see how the camera could make the SB-400 fire, other than with trigger and ground.

I just tried again with a paper clip, still no luck. No electric shock either!

Do you have a multimeter? Can you check the voltage between the centre contact and the foot? Check both AC and DC.

ATJ wrote:Do you have a multimeter? Can you check the voltage between the centre contact and the foot? Check both AC and DC.

I shall check when I get home. I think my sister has one dating back from her days studying Computer Engineering.

SO how did you go with your experiments on the weekend?

Sorry for not updating this post earlier.

SC-17 N/A - Not sure if Andrew brought his with him, but we didnt test it.
SC-28 ALL GOOD
SC-29 ALL GOOD - no AF-illuminator (as Yip suggested it probably cant power it) Thanks Greg and Colin!
Hama Optical Slave - FAIL thanks Andrew!
Other Optical Slave - FAIL thanks Greg and Colin!

aim54x wrote:Sorry for not updating this post earlier.

Hama Optical Slave - FAIL thanks Andrew!
Other Optical Slave - FAIL thanks Greg and Colin!

I suspect due to insufficient voltage on the SB400 - did anybody measure it?

Cheers

digitor wrote:

aim54x wrote:Sorry for not updating this post earlier.

Hama Optical Slave - FAIL thanks Andrew!
Other Optical Slave - FAIL thanks Greg and Colin!

I suspect due to insufficient voltage on the SB400 - did anybody measure it?

I don't. Cameron couldn't even fire it with a paper clip. I suspect the problem is that Nikon have made a flash that is completely non-standard.

digitor wrote:

aim54x wrote:Sorry for not updating this post earlier.

Hama Optical Slave - FAIL thanks Andrew!
Other Optical Slave - FAIL thanks Greg and Colin!

I suspect due to insufficient voltage on the SB400 - did anybody measure it?

Cheers

I'll try to get my hands on a multimeter, I should have done so earlier but i forgot.

I am an idiot, whilst looking at the SB-400 manual (which I should have done a long time ago) in search of the triggering voltage I discovered the manual clearly states that it is compatible with the SC-17 and SC-28 TTL cables.

No luck with a triggering voltage though. For those interested.
http://www.nikonusa.com/pdf/manuals/Speedlights/SB-400.pdf

ATJ wrote:I don't. Cameron couldn't even fire it with a paper clip. I suspect the problem is that Nikon have made a flash that is completely non-standard.

I agree. And not for the first time. The F3 used a completely non standard mounting system. That one was non standard mechanically. This one uses a standard looking foot, but the electronics are crazy. My thinking is that the flash needs to be set up with CLS type commands to tell it how to fire, & only then will the flash respond to the centre pin short.

FYI SB12 foot designed to mate with the F3 camera:


That system got scrapped pretty quick smart when it failed in the market place. Sometimes, I think the marketing people are REALLY slow learners.

EDIT: On second thoughts I think it was probably the engineers who had never had to buy or use a camera in the field.
I suspect the flash was moved off the top of the prism as that was removable so you could change the matte screen easily. The redesign was so it could be fitted to the film rewind area. but it was VERY badly done. Surely they could have used a socket for the wiring to the flash, or use a conventional style hotshoe mount on the side

That makes sense - if, as it seems, that the SB400 is an iTTL-only flash, what would be the point of triggering it with a slave if the output can't be controlled otherwise?

Cheers

What's the point of Nikon going out of their way (and at extra cost) to stop the flash from being triggered even if it isn't going to be iTTL controlled? That does not make sense at all.

ATJ wrote:What's the point of Nikon going out of their way (and at extra cost) to stop the flash from being triggered even if it isn't going to be iTTL controlled? That does not make sense at all.

It's probably microprocessor controlled. So the cost is in the software (alright firmware!) development
The cost to write the S/W of "ignore if main contact shorted, but no iTTL command recieved" was probably less than
"if main contact shorted, but no iTTL command received, then assume flash is being used in dumb mode, so fire flash at full manual (or last setting or whatever)" Besides those cheapskates still using old cameras really ought to spend more money on a whole new Nikon system.

ATJ wrote:What's the point of Nikon going out of their way (and at extra cost) to stop the flash from being triggered even if it isn't going to be iTTL controlled? That does not make sense at all.

I guess it made sense to the person who made the decision, otherwise they would have decided otherwise. Possible reasons could be:

1: Cost
2: To avoid disappointing results (from not being able to set the output power)

Cheers