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]

Originally Posted by 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

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!!!!!!).

[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]

Originally Posted by 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.

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]

Originally Posted by Hermes

...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.

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]

Originally Posted by nw85887

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.

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.