AB Cybersync - Replacing pocketwizard as the new standard for pro photographers?

[SteveNC]

Will the new Alien Bee Cybersyncs, at less than half the cost of Pocketwizard Plus II's with a much smaller form factor and similar functionality, replace the PW as a new professional standard for wireless transmitters?

What's your opinion?

My opinion: Not for now. However, Paul Bluff will come out with a new version that I'm sure is already in the works with an ETA of a 1-2 years. This new version will address the drawbacks of the current version including that the unit does not attach securely to the camera's hot-shoe mount (fixed with a latch mechanism) and that the build quality is slightly less than desirable (fixed with heavier duty plastic and a couple more screws).

Once these issues addressed, I think he'll win over a much greater market share in the professional photographer's market. For now I think the units will hold significant share in today's amateur to prosumer market. Of course, by that time I'm sure PW will have updated their product line (with possibly an amateur to prosumer entry-level unit) and there will be new options to consider to keep the debate going.

[turbodude]

nope, because large stadiums and arenas will still have pocket wizards hooked up to their lights,

[bobbyz]

If I am making money through photography then couple of sets of PWs are penuts compared to cost of say nice lens like 300mm f2.8 IS. So I would still use them.

But since I make no money and can do what I want with CymberSyncs I sold my PW and got AB ones. You see lot of for sale PW on B&S forums lately.

Competition is good.

[DSMITH131]

You forgotten about one thing, Profoto, Photogenic, Dyna-Lite, and others that incorporate Pocket Wizard in their lighting. I dont think they will go to AB system

[AlanU]

I can see a switch to Cybersync's for amateur/pro's that shoot social gatherings/weddings.

"IF" the CS units hold up like skyports and PW's its a great bonus since you can have a pocket full of alkelines (for receivers) and coin CR2432 as a piece of mind. You can almost buy 2 CS receivers for the price of 1 skyport universal receiver.

For a non paid hobbyist the main concern is no misfires for a great price. The money saved can go towards more glass.

[Titus213]

I am switching from AB RFT1s to the new Cybersync units. My RFT1 units worked flawlessly and the only issue I had was the AC powered receiver. I am expecting (they haven't arrived yet) that the build and function will be at least a match to the original RFT1 units.

I never could justify the PWs price tag but I understand their function and abilities. I just haven't seen the need for that in my paid shooting. For a lot of pros they are a given and that will not change.

[SteveNC]

You forgotten about one thing, Profoto, Photogenic, Dyna-Lite, and others that incorporate Pocket Wizard in their lighting. I dont think they will go to AB system

Good call, I hadn't thought of that and agree definitely.

I guess the real question is for the semi-professional photog who has another day job, that market could go either way.

[RichNY]

Does anyone want to admit to being the one who answered Yes on this poll?

[Mark1]

Its too soon to really tell. Give them 6 months and you will be able to predict a bit better. Simply because they are cheeper the non pros will use them a bit more. But what they really have to over come is the PW reputation.

[MattMoore]

Although I have the cybersyncs and I love them so far, I doub they will ever replace the PWs for higherend professionals.

In fact, if I had the disposable income, I would have bought the PWs (just wish they were a bit smaller).

But for now, the CSs work great (no more Cactus triggers for me!!!!!!:p).

[Hermes]

Outdoors and in sports arenas, PWs are the gold standard because of their distance rating and ability to trigger cameras.

In studio, Skyports already have a small form factor, look more professional than the cybersyncs, can be charged/AC powered and have been around much longer.

The PWs and Skyports also have worldwide distribution and servicing in place. I can't think of many reasons for a professional to buy the cybersyncs.

[claybuster]

I think I'll stick with my PW's because I have a Sekonic L-358 light meter with the wireless module. I really like being able to fire my strobes with the meter.
Mike

[SteveNC]

Outdoors and in sports arenas, PWs are the gold standard because of their distance rating and ability to trigger cameras.

In studio, Skyports already have a small form factor, look more professional than the cybersyncs, can be charged/AC powered and have been around much longer.

The PWs and Skyports also have worldwide distribution and servicing in place. I can't think of many reasons for a professional to buy the cybersyncs.

Agree with the above, didn't even think about the global marketplace.

I wonder why PW is allowing ebay, elinchrom, and Paul Buff to occupy the amateur/prosumer market. There's certainly a market there that they haven't even tried to fill.

[MattMoore]

...look more professional than the cybersyncs...

Completely subjective, I think the Cybersyncs resemble the PWs more than the Skyports do...and aren't the PWs the most "professional" triggers you can get?

Plus, in studio, unless your taking pictures of photographers, I doubt they care what you use to trigger (or what it looks like); as long as it works. :p

But all systems have their pros/cons; the Cybersyncs are by no means perfect (my only complaint with them so far is the range.....what if I need 1600'?!?!?! (w/o using the repeater mode of the Cybers)).

[Hermes]

Completely subjective, I think the Cybersyncs resemble the PWs more than the Skyports do...and aren't the PWs the most "professional" triggers you can get?

Plus, in studio, unless your taking pictures of photographers, I doubt they care what you use to trigger (or what it looks like); as long as it works. :p

But all systems have their pros/cons; the Cybersyncs are by no means perfect (my only complaint with them so far is the range.....what if I need 1600'?!?!?! (w/o using the repeater mode of the Cybers)).

I agree it's subjective, but to me the cybersyncs look quite cheap and other photographers I've talked to have made the same comment. I was using 'professional' in the universal sense (i.e. design, construction, materials e.t.c.).

From my experience, you've got the second paragraph the wrong way round. Photographers won't care what equipment looks like as long as it gets the job done - clients, stylists, art-directors e.t.c. who are paying for your time/studio or have been hired to work with you tend to stick their noses into everything and make snap judgements based on pretty superficial assessments of your presentation and your gear. It's not fair but it happens and if you like getting paid then you're always well-advised to play along.

[lowcrust]

Paul Bluff! :D Good one!

[FlashZebra]

I love these discussions where everything hinges on the use of the very rubbery yardstick definition afforded the word "professional".

Anyone that uses that word and has a concept that it has even some vaguely consist definition from human to human is very delusional.

The word is laden with such individualized, zealous, and entrenched definitions, and has become so imprecise, I have tried to banish it from my own personal use.

You might give my by personal boycott a whirl.

Enjoy! Lon

[Titus213]

I love these discussions where everything hinges on the use of the very rubbery yardstick definition afforded the word "professional".

Anyone that uses that word and has a concept that it has even some vaguely consist definition from human to human is very delusional.

The word is laden with such individualized, zealous, and entrenched definitions, and has become so imprecise, I have tried to banish it from my own personal use.

You might give my by boycott a whirl.

Enjoy! Lon

Well Lon, that's not very professional of you....:lol:

[Hermes]

I love these discussions where everything hinges on the use of the very rubbery yardstick definition afforded the word "professional".

Anyone that uses that word and has a concept that it has even some vaguely consist definition from human to human is very delusional.

The word is laden with such individualized, zealous, and entrenched definitions, and has become so imprecise, I have tried to banish it from my own personal use.

You might give my by boycott a whirl.

Enjoy! Lon

I only used the word 'professional' to differentiate as I'm far too considerate and diplomatic to say that the cybersyncs look like the sort of novelty souvenir you might see when wandering around disneyland, whereas the skyports don't. All better now:)

[SteveNC]

I only used the word 'professional' to differentiate as I'm far too considerate and diplomatic to say that the cybersyncs look like the sort of novelty souvenir you might see when wandering around disneyland, whereas the skyports don't. All better now:)

By professional, I'm talking about people whose primary profession is photography. In other words, people whose livelihood depends on photography. People who truly depend on their equipment.

[MattMoore]

By professional, I'm talking about people whose primary profession is photography. In other words, people whose livelihood depends on photography. People who truly depend on their equipment.

In those cases, get the PWs, get the look & function of a professional caliber trigger.

I saw my brother's PW Plus II right next to my Cybersyncs yesterday (he wanted to check'em out). Not a huge difference in feel (plastic feels like plastic, both are not tanks), both fire fine in the ranges he tested (of course I'd expect his to have a much longer range).

[lowcrust]

Actually there's a ton of difference between different plastics. Just like metal, wood or any other material. In my own very unprofessional opinion the PWs feel (and somewhat look) very cheap for their cost. They feel more like a hundred bucks than two hundred, so to say.

Whatever, people like em so kudos to whoever designed them. Obviously they have proved their right to existence (and so has the eBay triggers of course).

[tim]

Absolutely not, that's ridiculous.

[ben_r_]

I believe not.

[SteveNC]

I believe not.

But really, why?

As pointed out earlier, clearly Paul Buff does not have the same infrastructure that Elinchrom (with their skyport system) or Pocket Wizard currently enjoys. It therefore does not seem likely that PB will be expanding the Alien Bee brand to overseas markets in the very near (1-5 year) future. But putting aside the scale of the international market economy and purely for argument's sake, assume Paul Buff upgrades the materials used to manufacture Cybersync units to match the "quality" look and feel of the PW with upgraded plastic, more screws, better buttons. Let's also say that the next generation of Cybersync is able to match the PW's "1600 ft" spec. Assume the price of the cybersync remains approximately equal to what it is now. We don't have to assume upgraded reliability because it seems that has essentially been established (thus far).

Then the question remains: Why would the "professional" industry choose a Pocket Wizard Plus II versus an (upgraded) Paul Buff Cybersync?
[given the relatively realistic assumptions of (1) upgraded material (2) equal spec (3) price schedule remains about what it is now, and (4) reliability holds in the long-term]

The only thing I can think of is a perceived value (ie. placebo) effect of owning a name branded "Pocket Wizard." But, given the above assumptions, I do not think that this placebo effect would outweigh the price differential of $356 vs. $130 in a competitive market economy that realizes (correct me if I'm wrong) there is little value-added to a PW system versus an upgraded Paul Buff Cybersync. If a managing editor cares about efficiency (ie. spending his or her budget effectively), it does not make sense IMHO to go with PW with this more efficient alternative available. I'm talking about the domestic company that doesn't necessarily factor in international compatibility. Yes there are companies who already are invested in the PW system, but that doesn't necessarily mean that PW is going to hold a monopoly in that market indefinitely.

Opinions please.

[Mark1]

As I stated before, What they really have to overcome is the PW reputation. Paul could come out with a better product than the PW tomorrow, but it will not be a overnight winner. PW is to ingrained in the photo society as the one to beat. So the fact they have a better product is really irrelevant. ( Example -- Beta vs VHS) They still have to beat the reputation.

Once the Cybers get a reputation it will be easier to tell where they will fit in.

[Titus213]

What are the licensing issues in Europe and countries other than the US with the 2.4 Ghz RF systems? And what is the exact benefit of PWs with their RF licensing requirements?

[Hermes]

What are the licensing issues in Europe and countries other than the US with the 2.4 Ghz RF systems? And what is the exact benefit of PWs with their RF licensing requirements?

2.4 Ghz is an unlicensed band in the EU and many other countries which means that most common wireless devices operate on it to save money. Having said that, most decent triggers use encryption to avoid interference issues.

[Haru]

Reputation is very much key in this. PW's have proven themselves. Not to mention that many people already own them. Even if Cybersyncs are of equal quality at a cheaper price, why would I want to buy them if I already have a set of PW's. And even if one of my lets say set of four PW's dies, it still makes more sense for me to buy another PW instead of a whole new set of cybersyncs. Given time, anything can overtake an established standard. Digital overtook film, but it took time. Digital offers advantages that film could never overcome, but when we talk about two items that do exactly the same thing, nothing really sets them apart except quality and reputation. If the cybersyncs start threatening PW territory, it's a given that PW will step up and try to defend themselves.

[c71clark]

Don't forget that Radio Poppers are out there too. Slightly different market, but still a competitor. I won't be buying PW any time soon, if ever. I was very unimpressed with the build quality. They feel cheap, and too light for the huge enclosure they occupy. If they were at least half as small as they are, I might be more tempted, but seriously.... $300 for a damn little radio trigger? Thats why I am happy that Skyport and Radio Popper are out here.
IMHO, PW get the sales they do because a large number of pro's bought in very early, and so they got to set the "standard" for others. And they don't want to change. THey don't need to either, of course. PW obviously work well. But they ar eno longer the only ones that do.

[Rudi]

I agree with Lon - "Pro" is a very loose definition!

Pros will use whatever does the job! It's silly to expect Cybersyncs to overtake PW, especially since we don't even yet have a clue how good or reliable they are. Just because they're made by Paul Buff doesn't mean a thing - I don't see Alien Bees being the predominant force in "Pro" studio lighting around the world, either. :)

That said, I'm a "Pro" and I chose the Elinchrom Skyports for my needs. Why? I don't need the long range of the PW, and I already use Elinchrom strobes in my studio, so it made sense to get the cheaper system that works with my strobes out of the box (without having to buy other cables, etc.). They're more than enough for my needs. But... should I need the long range of the PW, or if the Cybersyncs prove to have something that I will need down the road, I will buy whatever I need to get the job done. And that's the point - "Pros" will buy whatever they need to get the job done! They will make a decision based on performance and cost and benefit to them and their work (and business). They won't fret about the fact that Paul Buff just happened to bring out a radio trigger system. They will only pay attention when their gear falls short of what they need, and at that time start looking for something that does fulfill their needs. Simple as that! :)

[ungraphic]

I got my second Cybersync CSRB receiver today in the mail, I cant wait to start shooting off camera flash with two lights. I've used pocketwizards once before, and for the price they sell for, I think its a joke. They are massive and look ridiculous on camera, they do feel very cheap mainly because theyre so hollow, and I don't think the whole 'transceiver' thing is a major selling point, one will always be mounted on camera, so might as well get a transmitter only anyway.

The Cybersyncs are way smaller, and feel much more rugged. I've taken hundreds of shots during each session, and i've had plenty. I've never had a misfire.

Oh, and the price is 1/3 of Pocketwizards. I paid $98 US with next day arrival in Canada.

[Damian75]

The other thing to remember is that allot of top pros who shoot on location rent the gear they need to do the shoot, and most of the time that rental gear is profoto,and profoto supports PW and there newer 8a and 8b gear has PW built in. This is becoming more and more the case that new gear that comes out has built in radio receivers ie Elinchrom BXri or Quadra's and the aforementioned Profoto packs. At this point I think your best bet is to go with the trigger that is supported by your strobe manufacturer or shooting environment ie sports arena using PW.

[c2thew]

there should have been an "other" option. triggers are still in their infancies IMO. until a trigger comes out that is adaptable to all lights and can remotely control the lights without having to walk back and forth, and be syncable to 1/8000 of a second, than we will be in business.

pocketwizard is getting close, but can't adjust the light output for strobes (it can work canon brand flashes)
radiopoppers px are the only ones capable with adjusting light with alienbees (if my readings are correct)
elinchrom can control their lights, but can't achieve high speed sync.

[runninmann]

Well, it's been a year and a half since the poll was put up and PW still seems to be going strong, as are CyberSyncs.

[kickmaster]

I own both, PW's and the New CyberSyncs. 95% of the time, I use the Cybersyncs!

[leofoto]

if i get cybersyncs (like CST and CSRB+) from alienbees.. or any other radio triggers like pocket wizardsII to use with lumapro 160 flashes ..will they allow me to remotely control the power of these flashes like adjusting from 1/4 to 1/8 power in Manual mode.
thanks in advance,
Leo

[tim]

No.

[leofoto]

oh really.. so the only thing they do is really just trigger the flash.
if you think their flash is too bright etc. you have to walk back to the flash and adjust its power everytime. ?
that's not convenient at all ? is that how the pocket wizards work as well ?

so this feature is only available in nikon CLS system (or equivalent canon flash system) when working with Nikon/Canon master and slaves ?

thanks.

[tim]

Yep.

Canon/Nikon systems do this, as do RadioPoppers and the new Pocket Wizards - but the new PWs seem to be less reliable.

The advantage of manual flash is consistency. With TTL flash you have to edit each shot individually, with manual flash you edit them all at once in a batch with your RAW processor. Just set up your flash(s), if there's too much light use a smaller aperture, not enough use a wider aperture or higher ISO. I do it all the time, and I much prefer manual flash.

[MT Stringer]

oh really.. so the only thing they do is really just trigger the flash.

Yep, if you don't like the output, adjust your camera settings - open or close the aperture. That's what I do with Alien Bees when they are mounted 100 feet away up on light stands. Most of the time, I have them set at full power. Sometimes in well lit gyms, I set them between half and 3/4 power. Then tweak the aperture or ISO settings until I get it right. The cybersyncs work great for this purpose.

[BrassPremier]

i love my cybersyncs. I use them in my garage studio all the time with no problems. battery life is great. new cyber commander works great. even dropping them multiple times, they go on and on. and you cant beat the price for the quality.

but its pretty tough to become the new standard when pocket wizards have been around forever. cybersyncs will keep pocket wizards on their toes though, as each group tries to out do the other. I only see myself switching to pocketwizards the day i start making good money with my photos and upgrade past my alienbees.

[lowcrust]

My opinion: Not for now. However, Paul Bluff will come out with a new version that I'm sure is already in the works with an ETA of a 1-2 years.
//
Once these issues addressed, I think he'll win over a much greater market share in the professional photographer's market.


In hindsight, what's your take on this now that those 1 and 2 years have passed? See a lot of pros* out there with Cybersyncs?

*)
By professional, I'm talking about people whose primary profession is photography. In other words, people whose livelihood depends on photography. People who truly depend on their equipment.