Choosing a Speedlite for Elan/100 -- planning for the future

greenspun.com : LUSENET : Canon EOS FAQ forum : One Thread

I've finally regained interest and scraped together the cash to outfit my old EOS Elan (that's original Elan - i.e. EOS 100) with a few accessories.

This camera has served me well since 1993 and I don't feel like getting a newer body right now. Actually I was excited about the D30, but then decided that I think I'll wait until SLR digital resolution is closer to film (and more affordable for a hobbyist like me).

So my first purchase will be an external flash. I'm looking at the 420EX Speedlite since it's inexpensive and would position me for E-TTL in the future.

Can someone poke a hole in my resoning: my Elan does not support E-TTL, only A-TTL. The 540EZ flash would give me A-TTL, matching my Elan; but from what I can read, people seem to think A-TTL is not all that great. And actually since the Elan has just one focusing point, it really doesn't buy me anything over TTL, is that correct?

I like the idea of getting a newer flash even though I can't use the E-TTL right now, so when/if I get a newer Canon body I'll have a good flash to match. Also the wireless function would be a treat in the future. I like the abilities of the 550EX but 420EX would still be a good slave flash to have available, right? And cheaper, for now, giving me some extra $$$ for a super-wide-zoom lens. :-)

If anyone can give me advice on this, I'd appreciate it--the local salesman just seems to tell me what I want to hear. *sigh*

Thanks, Christian

-- Christian Erickson (christian@tenbyten.com), November 05, 2001

Answers

Your reasoning sounds right on to me. The 420EX will be just fine for your needs right now (you'll still have TTL metering) and will definitely be the way to go with a future body. Jim

-- Jim Simon (jsimon724@aol.com), November 05, 2001.

If you plan on buying a new camera in the not too distant future this is a good way to go. But there is no guarantee that Canon won't change flash metering systems in the future. In fact, they probably will if you wait long enough. So, buying for the future is a good idea as long as the whole system doesn't change before you decide to buy the new camera body.

The problem with a 420EX on an Elan, is that you have no way to adjust flash exposure Compensation. The flash doesn't have the controls for it and the Elan's FEC only controls the built in unit. The Elan II or Elan 7 both have FEC for the external unit as well as the built in one. To get FEC, you'd need to get the 550EX.

The other option is to get the Sigma EF500 Super. It has ALL the features of the 550EX (and more), almost as much power, recycles considerably faster than the 550EX and cost's less than the 420EX. It's problems are a user control interface that is not as well laid out, it doesn't work well with all Canon digital point & shoots and not built quite as well. But for half the price of the 550EX...

-- Jim Strutz (j.strutz@gci.net), November 05, 2001.


"I like the abilities of the 550EX but 420EX would still be a good slave flash to have available, right?"

Since you are thinking of the future, consider that although the 420EX will act as a slave, you'll still need a master (550EX or ST- E2). I reasoned (for myself) that I didn't want to buy the ST-E2 and not get a flash for my money, so I use one of two 550EXs as master when I need one. I also have a 420EX that I sometimes use as a slave. All I'm saying is that if you are thinking of the 420EX as a slave already, you may end up with the 550EX anyway - why not get the better gear first?

-- Derrick Morin (dmorin@oasisol.com), November 05, 2001.


Follow-up question:

Thanks a lot for the advice you've given; this forum has been a great help to me.

The Sigma flash...hm...I had assumed I'd buy Canon equipment, but I have heard a lot about Sigma lenses, and now the flash. Is this a really good company? How long have they been around? Are their optics as good as Canon optics in the $400 price range? I'm comparing Canon USM 20-35 f/3.5-4.5 and Sigma HSM 17-35 f/2.8-4?

-- Christian Erickson (christian@tenbyten.com), November 06, 2001.


"Is this a really good company? How long have they been around?"

They are an okay company and have been around for quite a while. You can even find some old screw mount Sigma lenses. They produce some really cheap lenses, some decent lenses, and some very good lenses. So does Canon. In my experience, in each catagory, Canon usually outperforms the Sigmas in build quality if not optical quality too. But the Canon lense are most often priced higher as well, so it's not always a fair comparison.

The other problem with Sigma lenses, as they apply to Canon cameras, is they often may be compatible with today's cameras, but not with tomorrow's. There is usually a list of Sigma lenses that needs to be re-chipped every time Canon introduces a new body. This happens mostly with Sigma's low-end lenses. Sigma has been very good about doing this free for any lens in current production, but it's still a pain & what about 10 years from now?.

I have to admit that I'm wondering about the EF500 Super's future compatibility as well. It doesn't work well with the Canon G1 right now! But then, nothing else seems to work well with the G1 either.

"Are their optics as good as Canon optics in the $400 price range? I'm comparing Canon USM 20-35 f/3.5-4.5 and Sigma HSM 17-35 f/2.8-4?"

I don't know about all there lenses, but the 28-70 f/2.8 is very good for the price. It's image quality and price are in the same league with Canon's 28-105 USM. There are trade offs either way comparing these two lenses. It's not the match of Canon's 28-70 f/2.8, but what is? It's also 1/3 the price.

The Canon 20-35 USM f/3.5-4.5 is a very good lens. It's hard to compete with for the price, but the Sigma 17-35 HSM f/2.8-4 does in most catagories. They are about equal in sharpness and straightness. But the Canon has FTM to go with it's USM and the Sigma uses a micro motor HSM so you don't get FTM with it. The other side is that the Sigma zooms out to 17mm & the Canon doesn't. Some wouldn't care since 20mm is wide enough for them, but for me ending at 20mm is not even an option. I bought the Sigma.

-- Jim Strutz (j.strutz@gci.net), November 06, 2001.



As flashes go, the 420EX is a good standby, I use it all the time on my RT with no problems. I prefer my 430EZ for the RT and the 420 with an optical slave, but E-TTL support will be a plus if you're looking to get a new body in the near future.

"Are their optics as good as Canon optics in the $400 price range? I'm comparing Canon USM 20-35 f/3.5-4.5 and Sigma HSM 17-35 f/2.8-4?"

I've used both, and the optics are great for both. The Canon claims to have no distortion throughout the range, and from my experience they've lived up to it. The Sigma shows some distortion, but it does go much wider. And the speed is hard to beat in this price range. With moderate (8x10) enlargements both lenses are tack sharp. Benchmark tests have reported the Canon being sharper and truer to colour, but I can't see the difference. Focus with the Sigma is definately not as fast or as quiet as the Canon's USM. Guess it depends on what you're looking for. I prefer the Sigma (and dream about the Canon 17-35 f/2.8... sigh)

-- Kelvin Yu (ky145@yahoo.com), November 10, 2001.


Moderation questions? read the FAQ