Canon 90EX as master for macro work?

I am using a 6D/100 2.8/2 270EX II, and a home-made bracket for macro work. I currently use a 622-TX to fire the 270s. I was wondering about using a 90EX as master to control the 270s. That would make my rig a bit lighter. The only big drawback I see is the 270 is always group A unless fired by a 622c. Any thoughts?

Are you currently using ratio control? Just trying to understand why having both 270s in group A would be a problem.

Yes/no/maybe. I am just getting started with this type of stuff. At least ratios is an option with the 622 setup. If I fire the 270s with a 90EX, ratios is not an option. I did find another thread (2013?) where someone fired OC 580EX II with a 90EX. I tried firing the 270s with a 580EX II. While it is reliable indoors, I got lots of mis-fires outside in daylight. Primarily because I can't face the 270s toward the 580 while they are lighting subject matter. I think the 622 system is more reliable. Still working on all of this.

Irritates me that Canon flash units are not radio controlled.

The new ones are. 600RT and 430 RT. I got 4 622c and a 622tx for $100. I already had the flash units.

GeoKras1989 wrote in post #17669635
I am using a 6D/100 2.8/2 270EX II, and a home-made bracket for macro work. I currently use a 622-TX to fire the 270s. I was wondering about using a 90EX as master to control the 270s. That would make my rig a bit lighter. The only big drawback I see is the 270 is always group A unless fired by a 622c. Any thoughts?

Hrm,

Your rig in general would be lighter with just using the two 270II's that you have, or reducing down to a single 270II. You can get a ton of light from them. I wouldn't try to use a 3 light setup handheld anyways. Even twin lights gets heavy quick. I would just look at ways to spread the light you have out, via diffusion.

I'm a little confused by your need to use groups and stuff here too. Maybe I just don't know all the benefits of setting groups and stuff for this purpose.

I would just set your camera & flashes to sync with 2nd curtain, and reduce to 2 lights maximum, 1 light for even less weight, and focus on spreading out the light instead of adding more lights.

Very best,

MalVeauX wrote in post #17674719
Hrm,

Your rig in general would be lighter with just using the two 270II's that you have, or reducing down to a single 270II. You can get a ton of light from them. I wouldn't try to use a 3 light setup handheld anyways. Even twin lights gets heavy quick. I would just look at ways to spread the light you have out, via diffusion.

I'm a little confused by your need to use groups and stuff here too. Maybe I just don't know all the benefits of setting groups and stuff for this purpose.

I would just set your camera & flashes to sync with 2nd curtain, and reduce to 2 lights maximum, 1 light for even less weight, and focus on spreading out the light instead of adding more lights.

Very best,

As you are aware, I really don't know what I am doing. I just wanted to preserve the possibility of ratios. The YN stuff does that. The 270s are not natively capable of anything but group A. Perhaps I don't need ratios.

I am still in need of diffusers. I looked at Stofen, and Lumiquest mini-boxes. I think I can make something comparable out of margarine tubs.

I didn't plan on using the 90EX to contribute, just to fire the 270s. To date, I have experimented with two setups:

1.) 2 270s mounted on YN-622c, fired by 622Tx.
2.) 2 270s mounted to bracket, fired by 580EX II.

#2 is better balanced, since all the weight is in my hands, not hanging off the bracket. A 90EX master would save the weight of the 580. However, I find the 580 system less reliable than the YN. I don't think I've had a mis-fire with the YNs. It is a regular occurrence with the 580 as master. Perhaps a small reflector on each 270 to catch the pre-flash? But then I would worry about light being reflected onto the front element. But then again, the 580 is not contributing to the exposure, so maybe that is not an issue.

Can you explain the 2nd curtain suggestion? I know what it is, I just don't get why you are suggesting it.

Thanks for the tips, keep 'em coming. I am still experimenting. Starting next Monday I'll have considerably less time for this stuff. Retirement is boring me to death. Back to school on 8/24!

Heya,

I would pull the flashes back away from the front of the lens element, so that the weight is back on the camera, and not at the end of the lens basically, this also gives you room to setup a diffuser that sits on the lens (or lens hood!). You can use anything really as a diffuser. I would get some styrofoam plates or foam sheets and work with that and some tape at first to get something that you like the feel and look of. A wide one with two small lights will look very nice and have a lot of wrap around. Overall it will reduce weight by bringing the weight to the center (near your hands), and give you room for better light spreading which will give you a lot nicer overall light.

You don't need ratios, groups, etc. All you need is the lights to fire when you go to do an exposure. There's nothing really to it.

The sync to 2nd curtain is a suggestion another macro-photog specialist put me on and I've stuck to it because you can totally see the difference when shooting with flash as fill with ambient light retained in the image (not full flash macro). I started shooting at lower shutter speeds and using flash duration to freeze the image. That works fine in low light. But when blending ambient with flash, low shutter can result in ghosting (which is very easy to move and shake with a heavy setup, especially a front heavy setup). By syncing to the 2nd curtain, you get less ghosting as the flash is the last thing that last curtain takes in. I instantly noticed ghosting gone, and had sharp images even at low shutters with shaking going on, regardless of image stabilization.

I shoot a lot in day time and night time, at night, it's not a big deal. During the day, if I want to blend ambient light with flash as fill, it is a big deal and made a big difference.

I suggest it because it will let you open up your shutter speed (before you were pushing you shutter very fast, requiring more light and more flash power to compensate, using HSS). By opening that shutter you get more ambient light to mix with, so your flashes are fill, and you can get it to be softer and more natural looking that way. It also helps as you stop down aperture to F11 or F16. It reduces the need for higher ISO too (not that it's a big deal, with a 6D). But in general it really gives you more flexibility with that shutter speed while keeping sharp non-ghosting images, with a non-stabilized lens.

So far, this is my lightest setup for my macro work to date. Short lens (90mm) with image stabilization. One flash, in the hot shoe which has really cut down on weight as it's centered since I used to have it hanging off a magic arm way out near the lens. And my diffuser is now the lighest thing, just foam. I use cardboard & tinfoil to bounce the flash spill into the diffuser. The diffuser is just cut and taped to the lens hood. It's very light weight. Yet still pumps out very soft, good, wrap around light:

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/xgoZ​8S

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/wzsS​Uj

MalVeauX wrote in post #17674772
Heya,

I would pull the flashes back away from the front of the lens element, so that the weight is back on the camera...

A 270EX II isn't that heavy, and the advantage to getting it out toward the end of the lens is that by getting it close to the subject you can get better diffusion, and shorter flash durations (easier to freeze motion and get sharper images).