PocketWizard for Nikon being tested, no release date yet

Pocketwizard posted an update on their Nikon version of FlexTT5. The good news is that prototypes are already being tested. The release date is still unknown:

"So the big question is when?  It all depends.  There will be surprises along the way. As we learned with the Canon system, it is IMPOSSIBLE to peg a date.  If things go well, it will be sooner.  If there are major surprises, it will be later."

Via Photographybay

This entry was posted in Other Nikon stuff. Bookmark the permalink. Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.
  • Matt


    • metavanguard

      “He’s either dead or he’s alive. The cops either got him or they don’t” – Mr. Blonde

      At least pocket wizard isn’t wasting any money in their PR department. They just hire marketing wizards to say a whole lot of nothing in 500 words or less.

  • Second

    Does anyone know the advantages to this one, than the pervious modals

    • dave

      They do TTL… in Nikon’s case, iTTL. The Canon eTTL version was released last year (or was it longer) and they had all sorts of problems with them. So they are kind of gunshy about saying anything definite. The Nikon version was supposed to be out only a couple month after the Canon version, but the engineers have spent their time puttin gout fires.

      Meanwhile, RadioPopper is raking in the $$$. The only thing bad anyone says about RadioPopper is that they have a hard time hitting their release dates. But now that their products are in the market, they are spot on.

      • GlobalGuy

        Does RadioPopper do iTTL? How is the compatibility with other third-party equipment?

        Anyone know how NIKON is helping (or not helping) PocketWizard in this effort? I really wonder what the hold up is. I also wonder why lighting systems are still controlled by flash brackets and infrared almost exclusively, its really ridiculous in many ways.

        • n

          radio popper does do TTL as wel but their option is not particularly elegant.

          they have the radiopopper px system which basically is a little adapter you stick on the side of your flash. it has to be placed directly over your infared signal window so thatit can shoot the signal into it. it works, but it can be a kinda unweildly because of its size and the awkward position of the receiver.

          The radio poppers are more elegant. they attach via hotshoe or pc link and just work. no need to carefully align the receiver to your infared window. They look and act like traditional triggers, but work with ttl beautifully. You’ll be able to remotely control power levels no problem too.

          Also, because of their design, it is also speculated that youll be able to push your flash sysnc speed a full stop higher. Thats full flash power at a faster shutter speed, not just fp sync. so thats just an added benefit

          • dave

            “The radio poppers are more elegant. they attach via hotshoe or pc link and just work.”

            Are you talking about the RP JrX or the Pocket Wizards? If it’s the JrXs, they don’t do full TTL but they do allow you to control output of ANY TTL capable flash from the transmitter (with the RPCube or equivalent”

            If you are talking about PocketWizards… the “just work” part is highly debatable. The reason the PW engineers haven’t gotten around to the Nikon version for a year is because the Canon version had all sorts of problems. Apparently the Canon flash system was not designed to PocketWizard’s specifications.

            Yeah, I guess the other complaint about the RadioPoppers is that you mount them directly on the flash, but the Px series is smaller than the P1 and they have special removable holders so you don’t have to put velcro or sticky tape on your flashes. Other than that, the RadioPoppers DO “just work”… for both Canon AND Nikon.

          • n

            My entire comment was referring to the Radiopopper PX system.

            Also, What you’ve said is not true. The Radiopopper JRX system allows you to remotely control power levels of MOST ttl flashes. It doesn’t, for example, work with the SB-900 – which in my opinion makes it an instant nogo.

            google it if you don’t believe me.

          • n

            oh and, my bad, there was a typo: i meant to say that the pocket wizards are more elegant than the radiopopper PX system.

            The JRX system is not in the same category so I wasn’t bringing them up as a comparison.

          • NoNoNo

            The JRx system doesn’t work on the SB-900 (and SB-400) because it ISN’T a TTL flash. It is an i-TTL only flash.
            The JRx system uses the original TTL (film TTL) quench pin to control power.

  • ZinhaEq

    “no release date yet” Well, I can say for sure that it will be much earlier than D700’s successor.

  • JMD

    Hmm, maybe they will be available by the time the economy recovers! That said, I intend to trade in my transmitter only model for two of the newer models. I’m going to keep my current “Transceivers” and possibly pick up two more “Transceivers as others move to the newer model. The current models work extremely well for what they are designed to do,…I just want a lower profile on-camera.


    • Ryouichi Yasahiro

      The SB-800 was the SB-900’s predecessor.

      • Anonymous

        I think he was joking.

  • steve

    It sure seems like PW are investing a lot of resources in this. I just wonder how many photogs are going to use the TTL mode. Don’t get me wrong, it would be a nice feature, but how many people are NOT going to shoot on manual mode.

    That being said I know there are a lot of other nice features of these PWs.

    • Anonymous

      The Mini and Flex are not just for those who on i-TTL. The ability to shoot on manual at high-speed synch on FP (e.g., 1/8000) using RF without worrying about the remote flash’s IR line of sight can be helpful.

      Having said this, the Nikon CLS and AWL still rocks!

    • Anonymous

      The Mini and Flex are not just for those who shoot on i-TTL. The ability to shoot on manual at high-speed synch on FP (e.g., 1/8000) using RF without worrying about the remote flash’s IR line of sight can be helpful.

      Having said this, the Nikon CLS and AWL still rocks!

    • Lawliet

      Everybody shoots manual because there is no other way to do it reliably.
      With the new PWs you could either use iTTL for some situations or work manually with the added benefit of being able to adjust the flash output from the camera.

      • Gustav

        Uhm… that’s the point of this product – so you CAN use iTTL reliability.

        • dave

          It’s funny… All the Canon shooters I know say TTL isn’t reliable. All th e Nikon shooters I know say it is. Maybe its just Canon’s TTL that isn’t reliable.

    • For me, it’s NOT about being able to shoot TTL. It’s about being able to control multiple groups of remotes without ever leaving my camera position. That is why I LOVE Nikon’s CLS. Even with the pop-up flash as a commander, I just go on the camera LCD and dial in the remotes on the fly. I shoot in manual 90% of the time, so wireless TTL is not that important to me, but having to walk around to each flash and adjust the power (like you had to do with old Pocket Wizards) is just not an option for me. I’ve gotten way too spoiled by CLS.


      • Hmm

        Which makes the RadioPopper JRx system (three groups) right up your alley.

  • Buck

    I can think of a few other things you are besides “third”.

  • SavageGuy

    I shoot mostly in summer. If they can get these out in next 40 days I’m buying a bunch. If not, I have to invest in something else (???).

    • dave

      RadioPopper has been doing iTTL and CLS for almost two years now. The Px has been out over a year.

  • Remington

    I have a couple of PWs, too, and they are great. Good to see that your can use the PW in full iTTL mode. I guess the market is for those who need some distance coverage with their wireless. However, You can achieve the same capability with the SU800 commander or another SB900/800 as a master. Even pop-up can trigger my SB900 with full control from my D300.

  • SavageGuy

    Just went to their site. I’ll have to start checking for something else. They are going to test, test, test (Canon problems have them scared). They admit it will be moths before public units are available. Dang.

  • kevin

    Honestly don’t waste your money on the Flex or Mini. Some people have had horrible issues with the build quality on the canon models. The issue being they break relatively easily. The hotshoe on them is prone to breaking out of it spot or at least it was when I was using them. If it wasn’t for that one issue they were spot on.

    I personally use radio poppers now as I love the design a lot more not. I just wish they’d change the flex design since I loved that mini unit to death.

    • LGO

      One other problem is the shorter working range of the FCC version of the Mini and Flex. This is not a problem for CE versions. PW remedied this problem using socks!

      I am an avid practitioner of Nikon’s CLS/AWL where I typically use an SB-900 as the master flash unit and a mix of SB-900s and SB-800s as remote units.

      Even if PW releases a Nikon model, I expect that there will be few takers. The Nikon CLS and AWL provides wireless control of multiple flash units usable even in bright sunlit conditions (just came from a noon time photo-shoot from the beach … so yes, you read that right … Nikon’s AWL work well even in bright sunlit conditions!).

      At no extra cost, no extra weight and no extra batteries to bring and charge, the Nikon CLS/AWL is an exceptional feature that Nikon owners should learn and take advantage of.

      • Eric Duminil

        It’s true that the ability to control power ratio remotely is a great advantage of CLS & AWL.

        But they do come at an extra-cost, namely, the difference between the price of an old SB-28 and the brand new SB-900!

        • I picked up two of my sb-600’s used for $130.

          Like five years ago. How can you beat that?

          My sb800 was the most painful part at $270. All around not bad at all in my opinion. I bet it’s even easier to find used sb600’s today.

        • LGO

          For fixed and semi-static situations, I have 10 of the non-CLS compatible Nikon flash units on programmable optical triggers. These are inexpensive and works well in these conditions.

          Yet the SB-28 is no longer as inexpensive as they were a year ago. Why buy the Nikon SB-28 when there are so many other flash-units out there that cost less? Could it be that the SB-28 has features that are worth paying the extra money for?

          Its the same with the SB-900 vs the SB-28. The SB-900 is more expensive but it has features that I will willingly pay extra for. These features are indispensable when working in a fluid and fast-changing condition.

  • CannonBall

    If you have an investment in PW then this is good news. If you don’t you should really check out Radio Popper PX – they just work and have worked for a long time. Oh, and the Radio Popper JrX dumb triggers have amazing range and reliability for way less than a PW… I love mine.

    • Yeah, once I found out about the DIY RPcubes, I decided to go the Radio Popper route myself. I’ll probably be picking up a couple of AB800s in the next few weeks, so I’ll be able to mix them with the SB600s (for hair and background).

  • LGO

    NR Admin … any word on the Nikon SB-700?

    • What will the sb700 do that a sb600 can’t do today?

      I can think of lots of stuff the sb700 can’t do. Like be purchased and used today.

      Seriously though, what’s all this crap about an sb700? What are people looking for?

      • LGO

        Your choice of words are quite revealing of what you know. 🙂

        Take a look and study the differences between the SB-900 and the SB-800. Then you will perhaps get some idea as the differences there will be between the SB-700 and the SB-600.

        • Gustav

          “Your choice of words are quite revealing of what you know”

          Come on now! You can make your point without relying on childish insults. It makes one almost want to skip reading your reply altogether. Let’s look at the sb800->900 improvements and see if they apply to the sb600->mythical sb700

          Zoom range – the 900 increased the zoom range – well it is Nikon’s top of the line speedlight – it doesn’t necessarily mean they want to increase their mid-range speedlight.
          FX/DX detection – auto adjustment of zoom based on equivalent focal length of a DX camera – I agree, this should be in the SB600.
          UI improvement – the SB600 doesn’t have as many functions as the SB800, so a UI improvement, while may be nice, not necessary.
          Recyling time improvement – well, we all want that, but again, this is the mid-range speedlight, not the high end.
          Thermal protection and indicator – nice – should be in all flashes.
          360 degree rotation – high end feature, no guarantee Nikon wants to put this in the mid range product.
          Price increase – I don’t want the SB600 to go away for a more expensive SB700. The SB600 is at a great price now.

          So other than DX detection and thermal protection, I can’t really see why we *need* an SB700. If you want all those features, the SB900 is for you.

          • Metavanguard

            Don’t you just *love* it when the Nikon Robots tell us what we *need*?!

            We don’t *need* anything more flash. We don’t *need* more than 12mp.
            We don’t *need* more ISO.
            We don’t *need* f/1.2.

            Maybe what we don’t *need* is another post about what we *need*?

          • Gustav

            Actually, Metavanguard, we do need posts like mine too many people here don’t understand product positioning, R&D expense, and market realities. It costs a tremendous amount of money to make a new product, and if you make your midrange too good, then you cannabalize sales of your high end. Not smart.

            I’m glad the posters here don’t run Nikon. They’d have the best gear at the best prices, but only for a short while, as they’d run the company into the ground.

          • LGo

            As to whether my statement was an insult, my statement was nothing more than a Rorschach test to the original poster. What would be said of it would reveal what would be read into it. So your comment revealed more what you think of it rather than what I said of it.

            You need to check out the start of this particular thread where I simply asked the NR Admin whether he has heard anything about the SB-700 for which I got a reply that included the word “crap”. And yet it was me that you say was insulting? You need to do a system check on your sense of what is fair here.

            The primary differentiating factor between the SB-900 and the SB-700 is that the SB-700 will not be able to function as a Master Unit. There is no issue on this and this alone will ensure that those who need an SB-900 will buy an SB-900, not an SB-700.

            Other than this, there are several features of the SB-900 that should be incorporated into the SB-700. You mentioned a few and conceded to these. I agree. I would add a few more but I will dwell particularly on the superior user interface of the SB-900, primarily in the switch, wheel and the function buttons.

            If the SB-700 were used primarily and only as a remote flash, I would probably agree with you that the superior user-interface of the SB-900 is unnecessary. A power-on button is really all that is necessary once you have set the channel and the group settings.

            Yet most people will buy the SB-700 more as a primary on-shoe flash rather than merely as a dedicated flash unit. In this situation, the ease with which one can set the mode as well as any adjustments to this (plus or minus f-stops) will significantly improve the owner’s experience in using the flash. So is the convenience in the ability to one-button switch from an on-camera flash to an off-camera remote flash triggered using the camera’s built-in flash. These are significant differentiators because this ergonomics and ease of use are the hallmark of Nikon’s design and is what differentiates it from the others .. and personally, is what makes me chose Nikon.

            You made mention of the high cost of developing a new product. Fair enough. Yet you will readily see that Nikon’s high cost of developing a full-frame in the D3 was brought down by spreading this cost in the D700.

            So it will be with the SB-900 and the SB-700. A significant portion of the development cost have already been incurred in developing the SB-900. By applying what has been learned there in the SB-700 which will sell considerably more units than the SB-900, the per-unit cost of the SB-900 and the SB-700 will be brought down as well.

            Re what you think of the people here at Nikonrumors and whether they should be running Nikon, why the put down? I’d say that the passion and dedication of many of those who visit here are resources that Nikon would do well to take advantage of if it is to remain a strong and viable company.

          • Metavanguard

            Re: Gustav – “I’m glad the posters here don’t run Nikon. They’d have the best gear at the best prices, but only for a short while, as they’d run the company into the ground.”

            Gustav quotes himself: – “Come on now! You can make your point without relying on childish insults. It makes one almost want to skip reading your reply altogether.”

            I second that!

          • Gustav

            Metavanguard, you are correct and I apologize for my wording. Let me rephrase: “I don’t believe the posters here understand that to maintain a healthy business, you can’t add every feature you can think of to every product you make. While you may make your low and mid end customers very happy, concessions must be made to ensure you have a healthy customer base on your low, mid, and high end range of products.”

            In other words, just because Nikon could do something (like add high end features to an SB700), doesn’t mean they should if they want to maintain a healthy business.

          • @LG0

            “The primary differentiating factor between the SB-900 and the SB-700 is that the SB-700 will not be able to function as a Master Unit.”
            Using the 800:600 analogy we also get
            *The 700 won’t have an optical slave
            *The 700 won’t have an external battery hookup.
            *The 700 will have 2/3rds to 1 stop less power.

            Face it, most of the upgrades from 800->900 are unlikely to trickle down to the 600->700 update.

            The frickin 900 won’t even work on any Nikon film camera except the F6!

            Last thing we need is a _crippled_ replacement for the 600.

          • @LG0

            Oh – and the 700 will likely not have a PC jack.

  • when the Canon models first came out, I was excited about getting these, but since then I’ve purchased some PW plus ii’s, and have learned a lot about manual flash control and techniques, and really don’t think I’ll have any use for them. So in a way, I’m GLAD they’re taking so long to release a Nikon version, it’s saved me money.

  • Anonymous

    No release dates, no description of features, actually no extra information at all. Not much of an update, really!

  • Monday August 30 2010.
    Nikon D950 3 sensors 14.3MP :o(
    ISO 1600 with NO noise. No video.
    Price……..I’ll have an other beer 😮

  • Shahar

    There’s still a big question – I couldn’t find a straight answer for.

    When I work with TTL (using SU800 or SB800/900 as a master) I have control over the flashes modes (Manual, TTL, AA, Off, etc…) – how will I do it with the FlexTT5/MiniTT5?

    Will I still need my SU800 on-top of the MiniTT5? so I can transmit my commands to the flashes? Meaning – I need to put my remote flashes in Normal mode (not remote) – so they won’t be activated by the SU800 CLS intra-red flashes?

    Too many questions…
    Regarding working with manual mode – unless you work with distances of like 20m-30m and more – I don’t think there’s a reason to pay more than $26 & free shipping for a kit of 1 Tx and 2 RX units PT-04 (the low ceiling ones) …

    Just my $0.02 🙂

    • Yep, you’ve just brought up the main issue with Pocket Wizard TTL versus Radio Poppers.

      With Radio Poppers, the ENTIRE thing is piggybacked. The commander is piggybacked, the remote is piggybacked, so you’re still using CLS 100%. The only downside is that the bracketry is a bit unwieldy, however I’ve used them and they’re really just fine.

      Oppositely, the “advantage” of the Pocket Wizard system, being able to attach directly to the hotshoe, may be the source of some serious dis-advantages too- For one, people have mentioned just how easy it is for those things to break. They’re not metal-to-metal, so especially when you put a big fat SB900 on your camera with a PW unit in between, that’s a recipe for the whole thing falling apart. And secondly, as you have just pointed out, it’s not a true piggyback on the CLS system. So, unless they’ve got some SERIOUS tricks up their sleeves, it will be some weird kind of hybrid system that tries to take the IR transmission and convert it into something the hotshoe can understand. My guess is that you will NOT be able to continue using your beloved CLS interface.

      And that, unless I’m part of the PW testing team and am convinced otherwise by first-hand experience that blows me away, is why I’ll be buying Radio Poppers when the time comes…


  • HomeRentalPro

    I use Paul Buff “Cybersync” remotes (CST & CSRB+) to fire my SB-800 off camera and not have to use the onboard D300 flash to trigger. This way I can hide the flash out of view to light the room to achieve fill & bounce without it being directly on the camera.
    Great little sets, bullet proof and work with Alien Bees, White Lightings and all other studio flashes as well.
    Smaller in scale and half the price of the current P/W. The new versions demo’d are $60-$70 more than the current P/W for the Canon models.
    You can get both the trigger (CST) and the remote (CRSB+) for less than what one current P/W works.

  • John Dosy-Doe

    The thing that upsets me is that I don’t really care that much about TTL but I do want low profile PW’s….why can’t they come up with that!????

  • Jesus_sti

    How can you shot TTL when the flash are not on the camera. (how it know are far are the subject ?)

    • There are several of what’s called “monitor pre-flashes” that meter the scene. What happens is the flash pops at a very low level and meters the scene before the mirror goes up. The preflashes also trigger the remote flashes to pop a tiny bit, so their brightness in the scene is also metered and factored in the overall exposure. Then the mirror goes up and the scene is exposed with the metered flash settings.

      Nikon started this before digital because it’s a little more consistent in terms of exposure. The old way had been metering sensors for flash exposure pointed back at the film, so that when the film was exposed flash exposure was actually read off the surface of the film. Different films reflect light differently, so a more objective view through the lens directly, instead of off the film, gave more accurate results (and annoying pre-flashes that can make your subject blink). Nikon also did this with the F5 and it’s RGB meter, since the pre-flash method also allows you to use color information in the exposure calculation, which you can’t do with TTL off the film.

      Turns out digital sensors aren’t as reflective as film, so reflected TTL off the sensor is damn near impossible. So Nikon’s pre-flash system (and wireless!) were easy to translate into a system that plays nice with digital sensors. Hence, Nikon’s system is fairly mature and works well (not without flaws, but hey).

    • Oh, so with the PW and other radio system, I’m guessing the monitor pre-flashes still happen, but not the ones that communicate with the other flashes, since they’re unnecessary.

  • Dr SCSI

    I have been waiting several months for the PW FLEXTT5 iTTL capable units for Nikon. As an owner of the SU-800, the SB-800 and several smaller SB-R200 units, I can say I have a love/hate relationship with Nikon CLS/AWS and iTTL. The love is being able to control 3 flash groups and setting the ratios from the SU-800, while letting iTTL figure out the power levels each flash needs to output. No need to run around with my flash meter and take readings. The hate part of our relationship is caused by infrared, line of site, and restricted distances. I originally thought I could easily use the SB-R200 units (qty 4) for extra light at the same distances I use my SB-800, but it seems the SB-R200’s aren’t as sensative to the IR pulse and don’t always fire as expected. Maybe the IR eye is too small or limited in viewing angle. They work great when used for close in macro photography work, but forget trying to use them at distances over 10 feet. It looks like I will need another couple of SB-800s or SB-900s or whatever the new go between is that Nikon brings out next, since the SB-R200s won’t cut the mustard. Unfortunately the Nikon SB-900 is WAY overpriced and the SB-800 is no longer made. With the new PW FlexTT5, I will finally be able to use flashes at a distance of more than 30 feet, out of sight, out of line, and in direct sunlight. Now if Nikon would just build in radio based wireless to their flashes, the $465 price they charge for the SB-900 might be justified. (I am certain both Nikon and Canon did the IR thing, since they can just build one flash unit for world wide distribution, no CE, FCC, to deal with and its cheaper.) As it is, I am also looking at pro-studio gear which can be battery driven; especially when I start to add up the cost of all the SB-900s, the SU-800, and PocketWizard gear to drive it all, the Profoto stuff doesn’t look so expensive anymore. As for all of you asking about the magic behind the FlexTT5, the PW engineers had to reverse engineer the Nikon flash and camera communications so that their transciever looks like those respective devices to their counterpart (i.e. when mounted on camera, the TT5 looks like a flash, and when a flash is mounted on the TT5, it thinks it is on a camera. The difficulty PW has, is trying to figure out the myriad of communication protocols Nikon uses for the various settings. I am sure Nikon does not assist one bit in PW endeavors, and my hat goes off to the PW team. Now hurry up and put me on the Beta testers list so I can start using the damned things! 🙂

    • Gustav

      I thought the R200’s were only for close-up macro work, so it’s not surprising they don’t work at large distances. Since you have an SU-800, and were complaining about the price of the SB-900, why not get a couple of SB-600s? They’re less than half the price of the SB-900.

      • Dr SCSI

        Yep, the R200’s were designed for macro, but I thought and hoped they could do dual duty; which they can and did, but at limited distances between them and the commander, because of IR issues. Flash to subject distances isn’t the problem, plenty of power with four units. I too thought about getting multiple SB-600s, but then I started hearing rumors about an SB-700. 🙂 I hate buying gear one month, just to see the newer, better, feature rich stuff released a month later. Fortunately, I don’t have a pressing need for the flashes now, I can get by with my macro flashes for the time being. I just like what PW did for the Canon shooters, and I look forward to the Nikon equivalent. In the meantime, I am going to follow Matt’s advice and go take a look at the RadioPoppers. Fortunately , time is on my side, so I get to really look at all options at my disposal, while getting feedback from others in this forum.

    • Honestly, you should give the RadioPopper system a try. Especially now with their JRX system and the forthcoming RP Cube, you can effortlessly integrate wireless and TTL with both hotshoe flashes AND studio packs. All while controlling the remotes from your camera position, which is in my opinion the REAL reason a professional should consider this. Wireless TTL doesn’t excite me as much as NOT having to walking over to the remote to change it’s setting each time.

      Just snatch up a bunch of used SB800’s for $299, and a RadioPopper PX system for full CSL compatibility OR if you don’t like the RadioPopper attachment method (electrical tape and brackets) …then just get the JrX transmitter and receivers, which attach directly to the camera hotshoe.

      Just my opinionated opinion!

      • LGo

        @ Matt

        Thank you for taking time to explain the differences between the PocketWizard and RadioPopper. In your short but very concise explanation, I have been able to figure out why I should indeed look at RadioPopper if I want to go on an RF implementation of the Nikon CLS/AWL.

        I will add that RadioPopper needs to do a better job in its website to better explain its products. PocketWizard has a larger portion of the market mindshare not because RadioPopper lacks a good products but that PocketWizard does a better job in explaining its products.

        Thanks again.

        • And

          PocketWizard also has a long-standing history of excellent cross-line compatibility and second-to-none quality and reliability.
          RadioPopper has been forced to be the innovative one in an attempt to capture mind (and market) share, but their quality is definitely second, while still not duplicating all of PW’s featureset. (No repeater mode for extended range, for example).

          • 1. Radio Popper’s range far exceeds that of the PW Flex system. 2. Radio Popper gives you 100% of the CLS system features. 3. The PW Flex system has a history of range problems (this should shoot down the quality issue). The issue that I have with the Radio Popper units that support Full CLS is the cost. Read my lips “FULL CLS COMPATIBILITY”

      • Dr SCSI

        I just went over to the RadioPopper website, and it looks like they have put together a pretty good and affordable system for relaying the IR signals that Nikon (iTTL) and Canon (ETTL) use. For Nikon shooters with Nikon flashes using iTTL, the PX Transmitter to PX Receiver is the prefered way to go. However, Nikon shooters planning to mix studio lights like Alien Bees with their Nikon Flashes, are going to be disappointed, as for the PX Transmitter to the JrX Reciever, it looks like Canon ETTL is the only game in town. Also another disapointment….A direct quote from the RadioPoppers site, “It is important to note that certain newer flashes, such as the SB900, that are manufactured with iTTL compatibility only, will not be compatible with the RPcube.” The SB900 isn’t the only Nikon flash using iTTL; the SB800, and SB600, and SB400 all use iTTL. I guess your vision of using the JrX, RP cube, Nikon flashes and Studio lighting is now dissapearing like a mirage, unless you own the older TTL flashes (i.e. SB28); at least you didn’t buy that system yet. 🙁 Also, when using the JrX system with either Canon ETTL or Nikon iTTL, there are serious limitations on the the flash sync speeds, “1/160 second for
        Canon gear” and “For Nikon gear, the max sync speed in this mode is
        1/200 second.” No High-Speed Sync at all with JrX and the RP cube. Although the PWs are more expensive, I wouldn’t quite write them off just yet. They will eventually provide the ability to mix and match the studio lights with Nikon flashes using iTTL, but I don’t think they will be as funtional as the RP for remotely controlling the power levels of Alien Bees and the like; you will still need to run around the studio adjusting your studio strobes. The one drawback to the RadioPopper solution for PX Transmitter to PX Reciever communication is the requirment of an on camera iTTL/ETTL flash. The PW TTL5 for Nikon and Canon eliminates the on camera flash requirment, thereby allowing you to use that $200-$500 flash someplace else more appropriate. In addition, that now “off-camera” remote flash can still be used to command IR based flashes at a distance using iTTL/ETTL and CLS. Plus, PW figured out how to get even faster FP sync speeds, up to 1/500 for the Canon gear; I am sure they will do the same for Nikon. I applaud, RadioPoppers for an inovative product which was quickly brought to market. And for most users, the RadioPopper PX Transmitter / PX Receivers are probably the cheapest and easiest way to implement iTTL/ETTL with full FP Sync speeds and Full 1/8000 High Speed Sync (Available NOW); albeit at the cost of an on camera flash or SU-800 controller (yes, the in camera iTTL Flash, think Nikon D300, D300S, D90, D700, can act as the commander with the RP PX system, but it is a challenge to line up IR with the PX Transmitter, RP is looking at a possible future product to address this) . I am just curious how the RadioPopper PX Receivers connect to the flash units; the manual states velcro is used to affix both the Transmitter and the Receiver. I guess since this is basically an IR relay system, you might not even need to connect the PX receiver directly to the flash, but just have its IR output window in line of sight with the Flash IR window. Maybe you could use one PX receiver to control multiple remote flashes? The manual did say “a PX Receiver to each slave flash”, but the Nikon IR communications for iTTL and CLS, when directed at the multiple slave flahes wouldn’t care about the source of the IR, just set your channel and group on your flashes, the IR transmitted includes that data and it would trigger the flashes accordingly. Maybe the PX Receiver has a low IR output, so you are forced to buy multiple units for the number of remote flahes you want to trigger. (Conspiracy Theory 🙂 ) Anyway, whatever anybody decides, it needs to be the right choice for their needs, but they also need to make sure they read all of the vendor documentation before making a purchase. For me, the RadioPopper PX solution definitely looks viable for my needs, as I already have an SU-800. Unfortunately I own two Sekonic light meters with the Pocket Wizard transmitters built in them, and I would love to keep that functionality down the road with my future Profoto studio lights I plan to purchase. Which now reminds me, Profoto dropped Pocket Wizard support in their future lighting systems, in favor of their wireless triggering system known as Profoto Air. Hmmmm, decisions…decisions….

  • roko

    yada, yada,yada, just give us nikon ILC (interchangeable lens compact)

    • (free shipping)

      • LGo

        Nikon, 50mm lens f/1.8D

        “Free Shipping does not include Alaska, Hawaii, Puerto Rico, the U.S. Virgin Islands, and APO/FPO. ”

        What …. even at US $7,256.55? 🙁

        LOL! 🙂

  • Zwede

    I’m still holding my breath on the PW’s. I don’t like the cludgy way RP implemented their solution – having to tape the remotes to the flash – not impressed.
    As far as the socks and the range shown by the Canon version, my understanding is that this is due to extremely poor shielding of the Canon flashes – especially the 580’s – which interferes with the radio, dramatically reducing the range. Again, based on what I have read, the SB-800 & 900 do not suffer from this problem.
    I will definitely have a close look at the PWs (and my budget) when they come out.

    • Been preaching this to others here already- (sorry if it gets repetitive)

      If you don’t like the attachment methods of the RadioPopper PX system, try the JrX system. It allows you to effortlessly integrate BOTH studio strobes and hotshoe flashes, controlled FROM your camera position without going over to the remote, AND these things connect to your hotshoe and don’t need to be taped up all ghetto.

      It’s essentially the same as what the PW system will do, but with more versatility and probably for less money. All we’re waiting on is the RP Cube device, and if that thing ships before PW ships their Nikon TTL system, in my opinionated opinion there’s very little reason to buy the PW TTL system period.

      The best way to understand it is to read the blurb they’ve got describing their JrX system:



      • Zwede

        Following your link it seems there are a bunch of ifs and buts there too:

        1. It requires the RP Cube which is not available – kind of similar to the PW
        2. It requires that you have non-iTTL flashes, which unfortunately is all I have (4 SB-900s): ” It is important to note that certain newer flashes, such as the SB900, that are manufactured with iTTL compatibility only, will not be compatible with the RPcube”

    • Kevin

      Even though they are poorly manufactured and prone to breaking easily? The pocket wizards dont use tape the last i saw. Mine have brackets that hold everything in place. The pocket wizard design is extremely weak around the hotshoe.

      • Zwede

        This thread is the first where I have seen that comment. On the contrary I have seen many comments remarking at how solid the mount is, probably since it would be the first thing to catch someones attention.

        Have you seen these failures in person, or do you have a link to where they are discussed?

        • Zwede

          I just did some research on this myself, and I think what is happening here is a mixup – the hotshoe on the older PWs are prone to breaking, however the hotshoes on the MiniTT1 and FlexTT5 have received special comments on how robust the are, and those are the ones we are talking about here.

  • Martin

    Well, more and more offers around:
    If those will be as reliable as RF-602 and priced 100-150USD for RX/TX pair…
    On the other hand, none of chinese rf units supports full i-ttl communication ( it requires rx-to-IR bridge )

  • Prosumer

    What a crap 🙂

  • Back to top