# D60 off camera wireless flash



## benlonghair (Aug 19, 2009)

I'm looking at an SB-600 to go with my D60. As I understand it, the SB-600 will work wirelessly with a D90 and up. I have no desire to upgrade my body right now. Well, I have the desire, but not the ability. 

So what I'm wondering is if I'm just not seeing a wireless hot-shoe adaptor for my camera. What I'm planning, once I get the flash is to get one of the Nikon Hot Shoe to PC Sync Terminal Adapter and a cord to go with it to start. Wireless would make my life easier, I'm pretty sure.

Is there any way to do it cheaper than a SU-800?


----------



## JerryPH (Aug 19, 2009)

yes.  www.flashzebra has a hot shoe adapter for under $20... thats what I use for my SB-600 and Pocket Wizard or modded Cactus V2s wireless setups.

Do a search here, you will find at least 3-4 posts repeating this info complete with pics and links.


----------



## PhotoXopher (Aug 19, 2009)

Look into the Cactus V4's and be happy happy.

Basic kit is about $35:
http://www.gadgetinfinity.com/product.php?productid=17204


----------



## benlonghair (Aug 19, 2009)

Thanks guys, that'll give me a good place to start.


----------



## jazzodin (Aug 19, 2009)

Maybe I don't understand your question but you can fire a sb-600 wirelessly with a D60 as far as I know.I can fire a sb-600 wirelessly with a D70s and my D80. You just need to go into your flash settings in the camera and chance your  flash from ttl to comander mode,then set the sb-600 to remote and you can fire it wirelessly.You do need to have your built in flash up for this set-up to work though.


----------



## PhotoXopher (Aug 19, 2009)

D40, D60, D3000 and D5000 do not have the Commander mode in them.


----------



## jazzodin (Aug 19, 2009)

Really ?....bummer.I didn't know that.


----------



## IgsEMT (Aug 20, 2009)

for short distances, like 1-2 feet, even a ttl cord will do. i used to use it with my d50 and sb600.


----------



## KmH (Aug 20, 2009)

eBay radio trigger and 2 receivers. $45 including shipping.

No cords, no line-of-sight.


----------



## JerryPH (Aug 20, 2009)

IgsEMT said:


> for short distances, like 1-2 feet, even a ttl cord will do. i used to use it with my d50 and sb600.



A 4-foot ETTL cord is $25... A wireless trigger/receiver is $35 and is good for 30 feet... which would you prefer?


----------



## IgsEMT (Aug 21, 2009)

> _for short distances, like 1-2 feet, even a ttl cord will do. i used to use it with my d50 and sb600._
> A 4-foot ETTL cord is $25... A wireless trigger/receiver is $35 and is good for 30 feet... which would you prefer?



I never said it was IDEAL  but it did the basic job till $ became available for the upgrade.


----------



## benlonghair (Aug 23, 2009)

JerryPH said:


> IgsEMT said:
> 
> 
> > for short distances, like 1-2 feet, even a ttl cord will do. i used to use it with my d50 and sb600.
> ...



I'm starting to think the cord is the way to go. I shoot very little posed stuff at this point, so having TTL is more important to me than range and positioning. Basically I want my flash off the plane of the lens, which a wire would allow me to do.


----------



## JerryPH (Aug 23, 2009)

benlonghair said:


> I'm starting to think the cord is the way to go. I shoot very little posed stuff at this point, so having TTL is more important to me than range and positioning. Basically I want my flash off the plane of the lens, which a wire would allow me to do.



I do weddings, which are extremely dynamic, in 100% manual mode and 100% no TTL.  TTL is over rated, IMHO and limiting to boot.

TTL has it's place, but once you get over the fear of not using it as a crutch, that is when your photos start looking a LOT better.

You are also limited to the distance of that wire... and if you want proper results, you will need more than 3 feet of distance between the flash and camera.  The first time you pull down your flash/lightstand and have it come crashing to the ground... you will likely reconsider going wireless.

If you *Still* cannot live without TTL, there are solutions from Radio Popper thumbup or the new units from Pocket Wizard thumbdown that are there for you.


----------



## rbraden (Aug 23, 2009)

Two words,

Joe McNally.  Nuff said.


----------



## benlonghair (Aug 23, 2009)

JerryPH said:


> I do weddings, which are extremely dynamic, in 100% manual mode and 100% no TTL.  TTL is over rated, IMHO and limiting to boot.
> 
> TTL has it's place, but once you get over the fear of not using it as a crutch, that is when your photos start looking a LOT better.



Ya, I just have no clue what I'm doing. Never had a flash that was newer than... 1975 maybe.


----------



## Samanax (Aug 23, 2009)

Have you checked out the *Strobist web site* yet? 

For inspiration I check out their *Flickr Group Pool*. 

*Strobist: Lighting 101*

*Strobist: Lighting 102*

*MidWest Photo Exchange: Strobist Inventory*

*FlashZebra*


----------



## JerryPH (Aug 23, 2009)

rbraden said:


> Two words,
> 
> Joe McNally.  Nuff said.



Two more words... very limiting.  TTL is plus or minus 3 stops, it controls a maximum of 3 groups.  It has a limited range of 30 feet, under optimal conditions.

I totally respect Joe McNally... but he has VERY carefully defined his abilities to conform to the ideas of how a shot should be lit according to the rules some CLS engineer in Japan 20 or so years ago said we all should and he is VERY careful to never go outside of those boundaries that CLS is tied to.  He is the ultimate CLS ambassador.  

I love the guy and his work... but I won't be tied down to those limitations nor will I ask someone else to, becuase it is easy to walk around all of them.  All it takes is the desire to walk closer to the edge.

I live for those moments I can do something that CLS could never do even on it's best day... and lately, it is happening at least 1 or more events a week for me (read hundreds of pictures a week or more).

I did a TTD (Trash The Dress) tonight with my mentor that could not be done with CLS even if the angels were singing the moment I hit the shutter ... I will post you an example or two tomorrow and explain why CLS could not cut it under those circumstances.


----------



## andrew99 (Aug 24, 2009)

Joe McNally really knows how to get around limitations of CLS.. He'll put an SU800 commander on a TTL cord attached to the hotshoe to trigger the remote flashes.  After reading some of the stuff he did to get CLS to work, you kind of wonder if it wouldn't be easier with cybersyncs or pocket wizards!  Not to mention, imagine the cost of replacing all those SB800/900's and SU800 when the next generation of Nikon CLS comes out!


----------



## benlonghair (Aug 24, 2009)

My next question is this, if anyone cares to answer. SB-XXX are friggin expensive. Is there a brand that makes a quality unit that is slightly less expensive? (I have a problem paying extra for the NIKON name.)


----------



## JerryPH (Aug 24, 2009)

NONE that will do CLS properly... MANY that do not do CLS, are all manual and are the equal in power output for a lot less.

That is another reason to toss the crutch of CLS into the ditch... lol

The best little workhorse flash that I own that is not CLS compatible is the Vivitar 285HV.  $90 bucks at Adorama or B&H, is the same power as a SB-800.  Where it is less, is the no CLS, as mentioned, and the build quality is not the same level (its not THAT far off)... but then again, that should not come as a surprise when comparing a $90 flash vs a $500 flash.







What I was saying earlier about CLS not being able to do this... a 3 flash setup and the moon effect top left is from a single bare flash 40 feet away (camera left).  The 2nd flash is camera right and about 50=55 feet away in about 4 feet of water, and a Vivitar 285HV shooting through an umbrella camera left close to subject.  CLS would not let me get this shot from a TTD that my mentor and I did last night.


----------



## benlonghair (Aug 24, 2009)

Alright, I can see how TTL can be a crutch. 

The next question is how do you determine necessary output? Is it an educated guess then adjust from there? (ie "I want more light on the right, less on the left, set right to 1/1 and left to 1/4 and try") I would think that's pretty iffy especially working with weddings and such. Your example above, Jerry, I'd think she wouldn't want to sit in the water for fifteen minutes to get the exposure right.

Did I mention that I know nothing about flashes? 

Thank you all for your input so far.


----------



## kundalini (Aug 24, 2009)

JerryPH said:


> *TTL* has it's place, *but once you get over the fear of not using it as a crutch*, that is when your photos start looking a LOT better.


*cough*bull*cough*$hit*cough*

How can you consider such a well thought out concept, highly engineered and extremely intuitive communication of lighting between camera and flash to be a crutch?



JerryPH said:


> That is another reason to toss the crutch of *CLS* into the ditch... lol


*cough*bull*cough*$hit*cough*

TTL & CLS are not the same animal.

Also, since benlonghair can't utilize CLS with the D60, why the hate on it in this thread? You might be the Grand Whazoo of lighting on TPF , but stick with one system at a time, please.


----------



## JerryPH (Aug 24, 2009)

kundalini said:


> TTL & CLS are not the same animal.
> 
> Also, since benlonghair can't utilize CLS with the D60, why the hate on it in this thread? You might be the Grand Whazoo of lighting on TPF , but stick with one system at a time, please.


 
I consider TTL a crutch becuase *it* sets the power for you... you are bound by it's limitations. I consider CLS a crutch because it offers wireless TTL. It also has a very limiting distance issue.

I don't hate CLS (which is Nikon's implementation of off camera wireless TTL or manual control, which I know you know, but I should have better explained), I use it now and then and even mix it with manual wireless situations frequently. 

In my local strobist club, basically, the ones that are wireless and non-CLS users have consistently better pictures than the ones who use CLS (manual or TTL). They are not bound by the limitations of distance nor TTL constraints and it shows. My own personal experience also bears this out. My shots improved noticeably once I realized how much more control and possibilities one has when you go full manual and wireless.



kundalini said:


> You might be the Grand Whazoo of lighting on TPF , but stick with one system at a time, please.


 
I am honored that you feel that way way about me (in a joking kind of manner, I'm sure... and I do NOT see myself as anything more than a guy well versed in off camera lighting  ), but really... if anyone follows a similar path to me, they will see that within 3-4 months of intensive playing with this stuff, that it becomes quite simple. I am at the point where I get to a location, visualize the final results that I want and setup the lights without a 2nd thought. I can now concentrate 100% on my subject, and not on the technical.  I am up to 15-20 lighting variations in my toolkit that I use reguarly and all it is, is practice, practice and a little more practice. 

You, the OP and anyone else who does this enough can match or exceed my knowledge, it is just that now, I can talk about this stuff becuase I do it on a nearly daily basis in an incredible variety of situations the last few months... and I am sharing an opinion (which no one has to agree with, we are all free to do as we wish).

Bottom line, CLS is ok... but if you are interested in really freeing your creative muse with fewer restrictions, you *will* be looking elsewhere other than CLS (with or without TTL). 

If you are starting out, why not get a head start and bypass that step that everyone does sooner or later?


----------



## JerryPH (Aug 24, 2009)

benlonghair said:


> The next question is how do you determine necessary output? Is it an educated guess then adjust from there?


 
Different methods:
1. light meter
2. histogram

I use the light meter in studio and histogram on outside shoots.

How to determine what works and what doesn't?  I read... a lot, I practiced... a lot.  That's about it.


----------



## kundalini (Aug 25, 2009)

Sorry Jerry, I forgot my smilies.    Yes, it was a bit tounge-in-cheek, but I think TTL & CLS are tools that can give great results.  Much akin to using one of the priority shooting modes, let the electronic brains work out some of the issues as they were designed, so I can consentrate my grey matter on what I want to.  

As I haven't any RF triggers yet, I am limited to CLS for triggering off-camera flashes.  However, I too will use flash in manual mode dailing power up/down via the Commander menu.


----------



## JerryPH (Aug 25, 2009)

We're good.  

Another thing to consider is that sometimes if you are close with the camera to your subject, is that even the on camera flash (when used in commander mode and configured with the "--" or "do not contribute to the light" setting), visibly contaminates the scene with it's light spill.  Those that follow the flickr strobist group have read the several threads that clearly proves that this is a concern... albeit an easy one to solve.  A fast and uber easy solution is a small piece of tin foil placed a little in front of the on camera flash, but still leave room enough so that light can bounce off to the sides and communicate with the remote slaves.  A little creative bending of this foil can block 100% of the "contaminating flash's" unwanted light without losing any ability to talk to the slaves.

This becomes slightly more challenging if your on camera flash is a SB-800 or SB-900... a little more tape and foil are then needed to remedy this, but definitely still easily fixable.  Just a little more food for thought if you were getting additional unwanted light and were not sure where it was coming from.


----------



## PhotoXopher (Aug 25, 2009)

I use this unit made by Nikon and it works perfectly:

Nikon SG-31R


----------



## JerryPH (Aug 25, 2009)

N0YZE said:


> I use this unit made by Nikon and it works perfectly:
> 
> Nikon SG-31R



I knew this piece would come up... and there is an issue in the fact that it is hellaciously overpriced for what it does, and it doesn't reflect the light off to the sides as well as that simple piece of tin foil paper.  Try it out... I bet you can near double your camera to remote flash distance with a creatively folded/bent piece of foil over this item.  It does address the unwanted front fill, though.


----------



## PhotoXopher (Aug 25, 2009)

We're talking camera gear, when is hellaciously overpriced not an issue?


----------



## JerryPH (Aug 25, 2009)

N0YZE said:


> We're talking camera gear, when is hellaciously overpriced not an issue?



  You have a point.. but if free is better than $50... thats $50 more in your new lens fund.


----------



## PhotoXopher (Aug 25, 2009)

$50!? Dayum, I _only_ paid like $12 shipped for mine...

Oh well, it works as advertised and have yet to have a failure while using it. Granted it's not needed most of the time. (I felt it most helpful when shooting in front of windows or of people wearing glasses.)


----------

