<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!-- generator="bbPress/1.1" -->
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
	<channel>
		<title>Nikon Rumors Forum &#187; Tag: SB 800 - Recent Posts</title>
		<link>http://nikonrumors.com/forum/tags.php?tag=sb-800-801</link>
		<description>where there’s smoke there’s forum fire</description>
		<language>en-US</language>
		<pubDate>Mon, 20 May 2013 15:58:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<generator>http://bbpress.org/?v=1.1</generator>
		<textInput>
			<title><![CDATA[Search]]></title>
			<description><![CDATA[Search all topics from these forums.]]></description>
			<name>q</name>
			<link>http://nikonrumors.com/forum/search.php</link>
		</textInput>
		<atom:link href="http://nikonrumors.com/forum/rss.php?tag=sb-800-801" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />

		<item>
			<title>Willis on "Should Nikon make a SB 800 classic"</title>
			<link>http://nikonrumors.com/forum/topic.php?id=371#post-4825</link>
			<pubDate>Wed, 22 Jul 2009 12:13:15 +0000</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>Willis</dc:creator>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">4825@http://nikonrumors.com/forum/</guid>
			<description><p>They have the same amount of power. The SB 900, as I understand it, can throw the light in a tighter pattern (which is part of the reason for the larger flash head), so at long focal lengths, it can concentrate the light in a smaller spot. Sort of like a lossless snoot.
</p></description>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>NicolBolas on "Should Nikon make a SB 800 classic"</title>
			<link>http://nikonrumors.com/forum/topic.php?id=371#post-4752</link>
			<pubDate>Sun, 19 Jul 2009 16:24:53 +0000</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>NicolBolas</dc:creator>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">4752@http://nikonrumors.com/forum/</guid>
			<description><p>I made some mesurement between the SB-800 and SB-900 and they both have the exact same power. SB900 is far more efficient thanks to it's well designed interface, and by no means should nikon get back to the SB-800 IMHO.
</p></description>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>mb on "Should Nikon make a SB 800 classic"</title>
			<link>http://nikonrumors.com/forum/topic.php?id=371#post-4685</link>
			<pubDate>Thu, 16 Jul 2009 15:20:56 +0000</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>mb</dc:creator>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">4685@http://nikonrumors.com/forum/</guid>
			<description><p>SB600 has zoom feature too and is much smaller, but yes we would all welcome something called SB700 if it is just a bit less power then SB900, a bit smaller zoom and with same interface but for much less money.
</p></description>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>warprints on "Should Nikon make a SB 800 classic"</title>
			<link>http://nikonrumors.com/forum/topic.php?id=371#post-4683</link>
			<pubDate>Thu, 16 Jul 2009 14:53:14 +0000</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>warprints</dc:creator>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">4683@http://nikonrumors.com/forum/</guid>
			<description><p>I'm with you Willis.   Why is Nikon holding out on the SB700?   To force sales of the overpriced and oversized 900?    Yeah, maybe I need one 900, but I don't need several for multi-flash set-ups.
</p></description>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Willis on "Should Nikon make a SB 800 classic"</title>
			<link>http://nikonrumors.com/forum/topic.php?id=371#post-4680</link>
			<pubDate>Thu, 16 Jul 2009 11:28:56 +0000</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>Willis</dc:creator>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">4680@http://nikonrumors.com/forum/</guid>
			<description><p>No need to re-release the SB800. The main complaint I hear about the SB900 (aside from the heat issue which I believe is now resolved) is that its to big. A side by side with the 800 shows that it is clearly larger by a substantial margin (more than the 800 vs. 600). </p>
<p>They need to release a version without the zoom features (which I assume contribute to the size of the flash housing) that still has the vastly better interface. Presumably this will be the SB-700
</p></description>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>warprints on "Should Nikon make a SB 800 classic"</title>
			<link>http://nikonrumors.com/forum/topic.php?id=371#post-4678</link>
			<pubDate>Thu, 16 Jul 2009 09:25:36 +0000</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>warprints</dc:creator>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">4678@http://nikonrumors.com/forum/</guid>
			<description><p>No.  I have an SB800 and much prefer the interface on the SB900.   As I've posted before, I'd really like to see Nikon spend their development money on an SB700 - a slightly beefed up SB600 with the 900 interface.
</p></description>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>bmxdad on "Should Nikon make a SB 800 classic"</title>
			<link>http://nikonrumors.com/forum/topic.php?id=371#post-4677</link>
			<pubDate>Thu, 16 Jul 2009 08:52:01 +0000</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>bmxdad</dc:creator>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">4677@http://nikonrumors.com/forum/</guid>
			<description><p>On other forums there have been lots of complains about the new SB 900, special with problems of overheating and the fact that it has maybe less power than the SB 800.  The cost is also higher.</p>
<p>Anyway I have the SB 900 and have yet to get it to overheat, and you could turn of that feature.  I would also think that if you had a SB 800 and SB 900 shooting side by side they would both get hot at the same rate, but the SB 800 would not warn you of overheating.</p>
<p>That being said should Nikon sell the SB 800 again as maybe the SB 800 classic</p>
<p>Pete
</p></description>
		</item>

	</channel>
</rss>
