AC9 with AB800

I had some time this afternoon so I did a bit of testing.
Setup an AB800 with a Pro Studio Solutions 36" Octabox as light source.
AC9 mounted on FlexTT5 for the light and MiniTT1 with AC3 on the camera.

When the AC9 is plugged into the RJ on the back of the AB800 sets the light three stops below max so 1/8th power. That means there is two stops (limit of AB800's range) down and 3 stops up. The AC3 supports up to 3 stops up or down from middle.

The mid range exposure was F10 at ISO 200 with the front of the Octa 4 feet from the subject and no diffusion in place. I used a 1/200 shutter speed (Max sync on 5D2).

Exposure was right so I used the AC3 power adjustment and the aperture setting to test the up and down power adjustments in M.

The adjustments were reasonably accurate, always within 3% using Lightroom V3 to read the white square on a color checker.

The next test was using the Auto mode to provide Exposure Tracking. This means that once the base exposure is set, changing the ISO, Aperture or Flash Exposure Compensation on the camera with impact the power of the light. Thus, after making the first exposure, if you want to stop down the lens for more DoF, the light will track up in power. Similarly, if you open the Aperture the light will decrease in power. And, if you use the camera FEC to reduce flash relative to base exposure the flash will be decreased.

This also worked well. Its a little tricky to get the base exposure and in order to change the base exposure one has to turn the Mini off and back on. Change the exposure settings and then half press the shutter release to transmit the data from the camera to the Mini and thus the Flex and AC9.

I've never fine tuned my ControlTL stuff for Hyper Sync. It works with the AB800 and AC9 but it is also obvious that its using the tail of the flash. i.e. Not much light and distinct graduated fall of from bottom to top of the frame.

All-in-all works as advertised.

The image below is the baseline image from the test.

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

OK, I am sold on this technology for use with Alien Bees. I like my results so far using the Mini/Flex system with a 580EXII using ETTL. So I posted a previous thread about Ac3 / Ac9 / PW Flex with Alien Bees, and most people have not done enough testing and now this confirms to me that is actually works.

I like the fact that I can use the Mini/Flex system with both flashes and strobes.

Breaking out the credit card now... need two more Flex units.

Kurt,
That's the next thing for me to spend some time testing. 580EXII on Mini with AB800 connected to AC9.
Naturally that means no AC3 on the Mini. Will be interesting to see how that situation works.

The tracking is kind of a constant exposure work around similar to what TTL does with speedlites.

I have a suspicion that the ABs will just be strobes without the AC9 similar to if they were connected directly to a flex via a mini connector. Would be cool if ABs in group C could be controlled with FEC from the back of a 580EXII.

dmward wrote in post #11385180
Kurt,
That's the next thing for me to spend some time testing. 580EXII on Mini with AB800 connected to AC9.
Naturally that means no AC3 on the Mini. Will be interesting to see how that situation works.

The tracking is kind of a constant exposure work around similar to what TTL does with speedlites.

I have a suspicion that the ABs will just be strobes without the AC9 similar to if they were connected directly to a flex via a mini connector. Would be cool if ABs in group C could be controlled with FEC from the back of a 580EXII.

How about if you set the 580EX to master and put the AB strobe in Group B. I'd like to see if setting the ratio on the 580EX will have a corresponding effect on the AB output.

And see if you can test them with the master in E-TTL mode and in Manual mode.

One other thought.
If all one wants to do is control power remotely on the ABs and eventually Einsteins, the Cyber Commander is a better solution than the AC9 with AC3.

This does give a level of control for PW users but not up to the level offered by the Cyber Commander solution with plus triggers for ABs and the modules for Einsteins.

Leo,
Those are the kinds of things I want to try.

That, for me, is the real benefit. Being able to remotely adjust power on the ABs with a speedlite on the Mini and using its group control capabilities.

dmward wrote in post #11385209
One other thought.
If all one wants to do is control power remotely on the ABs and eventually Einsteins, the Cyber Commander is a better solution than the AC9 with AC3.

Yes, but the Cyber Commander ONLY works with ABs... one of the key features of the PW solution is you can use Canon Flashes and/or mix with ABs. Thanks for all these posts.
I hate buying equipment only to find it doesn't work the way you thought it would.

KurtGoss wrote in post #11385270
Yes, but the Cyber Commander ONLY works with ABs... one of the key features of the PW solution is you can use Canon Flashes and/or mix with ABs. Thanks for all these posts.
I hate buying equipment only to find it doesn't work the way you thought it would.

And you'll soon be able to mix Nikon flashes (on top of the Nikon FlexTT5) in there, too,if you happen to have one or more of the Nikon flashes that support iTTL.

Leo,
That't interesting. I wonder how that would work. All the iTTL commands are unique to Nikon while the ETTL commands are unique to Canon.

And then there is the ability to control Elinchrom RX as well. It does make for an interesting world.

Regarding the CC. If all one has are PCB monos its a really nice way to control the lights.

As is always the case, the ControlTL solution, because its "cross platform" is more complicated and less feature rich than any of the proprietary solutions.

Not worse or better, just different.

dmward wrote in post #11386159
Leo,
That't interesting. I wonder how that would work. All the iTTL commands are unique to Nikon while the ETTL commands are unique to Canon.

And then there is the ability to control Elinchrom RX as well. It does make for an interesting world.

Regarding the CC. If all one has are PCB monos its a really nice way to control the lights.

As is always the case, the ControlTL solution, because its "cross platform" is more complicated and less feature rich than any of the proprietary solutions.

Not worse or better, just different.

Although the Nikon and Canon wireless systems have their unique protocols, it would behoove PocketWizard, if they had designed their ControlTL system properly, to employ a brand unspecific protocol to communicate between the "master" MiniTT1 or FlexTT5 and the "slave" FlexTT5 devices. That would allow the Canon MiniTT1/FlexTT5 devices to talk to the Nikon MinTT1/FlexTT5 devices for cross-platform interoperability. And it looks like that is, in fact, the case. Have a look here:

https://photography-on-the.net …p?p=11373334#po​st11373334

Leo,
I spent some time looking through that thread.
The significant portion was the Galbraith (sp?) article.
it said that at present it was manual only below X Sync. Heck, I can do that with RF-602s.
In fact I did some testing using an RF-602 transmitter in the shoe of a flex. It worked like a charm.
All the manual flashes, a Nikon and a couple of YK manual units fired as expected.

dmward wrote in post #11386808
Leo,
I spent some time looking through that thread.
The significant portion was the Galbraith (sp?) article.
it said that at present it was manual only below X Sync. Heck, I can do that with RF-602s.
In fact I did some testing using an RF-602 transmitter in the shoe of a flex. It worked like a charm.
All the manual flashes, a Nikon and a couple of YK manual units fired as expected.

Dave, the article says you will be able to adjust and trigger a Nikon flasf with a Canon system and vice versa. Can your RF-602 do that, too?

Leo,
Missed the adjust statement.
That is useful and unique to the Control system.