# General > Member's Lounge > Photography >  Nikon Close-up Speedlight Remote Kit R1 & Macro lenses

## wasabi8888

Hi all

Anyone knows about the above? I have the SB800. Can it be used with the above? There is also the R1C1 which includes the SU800. What is the difference between the 2?

----------


## Goondoo

> Hi all
> 
> Anyone knows about the above? I have the SB800. Can it be used with the above? There is also the R1C1 which includes the SU800. What is the difference between the 2?


You can refer to here for info.

R1

R1C1

Ken Rockwell

----------


## benny

R1C1 kit is for cameras without the 'commander' mode. Hence you need the SU-800 to trigger the flash wireless whilst retaining the iTTL function.

Cheers,

----------


## Simon

I have seen it in action, comparing to the canon counterpart, the wireless/cordless version is so much easier to use in the field. However, I personally feel that such dedicated flash system is good for closeup, not every macro subject. That is one of the reason why I only saw it once in action by my fellow butterfly guru and never came out of the dry cabinet since then  :Smile: . 

The R1 can be used with 4 flash units, ideally 3 units on the subject and 1 at the background to give amble lighting to produce a nice background.

just my take. Such system is not everyone's cup of tea

----------


## wasabi8888

So for my camera body (D80), I just need the R1 right? I will need the built in flash to serve as the commander? My only concern is that the built-in flash may be powerful enough versus SB800 with the R1 kit. Can the SB800 be used with the R1?

----------


## wasabi8888

Simon, noted.

What do you think of the AF Micro 200mm f/4D IF-ED?

----------


## benny

Jeff,

Go for the R1C1. Because when you get your D3, you will realise that you still need the SU-800. Also, I know the commander mode can be programmed not to fire whilst it trigger the wireless flash, but I heard it's a bit complicated to set. I may be wrong.

And get the AF Micro 200 mm f/4D IF-ED. This week if possible. Then you can use it on Sunday.

Cheers,

----------


## wasabi8888

> Jeff,
> 
> Go for the R1C1. Because when you get your D3, you will realise that you still need the SU-800. Also, I know the commander mode can be programmed not to fire whilst it trigger the wireless flash, but I heard it's a bit complicated to set. I may be wrong.
> 
> And get the AF Micro 200 mm f/4D IF-ED. This week if possible. Then you can use it on Sunday.
> 
> Cheers,


Friend, you think I print money... I am unemployed leh.....

Can I buy the R1 and then add the SU800 later? Can SB800 be used in place?

----------


## Simon

you probably wouldn't believe this, but 100&#37; of my fellow butterfly friends (about 8 to 9 of them) using a 180mm macro lens either nikon or canon prefer the Tamron 180mm, for its optical quality and price. Apart from not having a real time manual focus, I think it is a great lens. 

I do not owe a nikon system so I can't comment much on the 200mm.

At 200mm, in my field experience, your technical basic has to be good (without the use of a tripod of course)  :Smile: 

my dream setup

photo from really right stuff

----------


## wasabi8888

Simon

That's a very very interesting comment. You are looking from quality versus price perspective right? But just from quality angle, is there a huge difference between the 2?

Do you know how much the Tamron 180 cost?

----------


## Goondoo

> Simon
> 
> That's a very very interesting comment. You are looking from quality versus price perspective right? But just from quality angle, is there a huge difference between the 2?
> 
> Do you know how much the Tamron 180 cost?


It should be about $1.2k for a nikon mount.
I had opt for a Sigma 150mm f2.8 mainly for the weight and aperture though.

----------


## Simon

well, I know a few of them switched from whatever brand (canon, nikon, sigma) to the tamron 180. Hugh difference? nah, most lenses are almost similar, except for maybe a slight difference in optical quality. There was an article once on comparison between the canon, sigma and tamron. Both the canon and tamron 50 & 90mm came up tops with the sigma 50mm winning over the canon and both the canon and tamron is at par at the 90/100mm length. I wouldn't suggest you go with hearsay, it is better for yourself to have a look at the lenses, because some hobbyist will prefer build quality over other factors. I can vouch on the optical quality of the tamron 180. I never like the sigma, although externally, it looks so much better than the tamron, but a few of my friends had problems with the peeling of the EX coating haha.

When I got mine 3-4yrs ago, it was about 1.1k, should be slightly cheaper now. You already have the 105mm, I suggest you make full use of that lens before upgrading. 180mm gives me a usable distance between me and the subject, especially with butterflies, can't say it is the same for other macro subjects but as long as you dealing with sensitive bugs like the butterfly, a short macro lens should do relatively fine. 

a longer macro lens does sometimes have problems of their own, especially at tight places where the minimum focusing distance is impossible and sometime you wish you had a shorter lens with you  :Grin:  :Laughing: 

keep your money in your wallet and play with your 105mm

----------


## Goondoo

> well, I know a few of them switched from whatever brand (canon, nikon, sigma) to the tamron 180. Hugh difference? nah, most lenses are almost similar, except for maybe a slight difference in optical quality. There was an article once on comparison between the canon, sigma and tamron. Both the canon and tamron 50 & 90mm came up tops with the sigma 50mm winning over the canon and both the canon and tamron is at par at the 90/100mm length. I wouldn't suggest you go with hearsay, it is better for yourself to have a look at the lenses, because some hobbyist will prefer build quality over other factors. I can vouch on the optical quality of the tamron 180. I never like the sigma, although externally, it looks so much better than the tamron, but a few of my friends had problems with the peeling of the EX coating haha.


I have to agree with that. There is a saying that if these companies can't manage to even produce a decent prime lense, they shouldn't be in the market at all.

----------


## wasabi8888

> 180mm gives me a usable distance between me and the subject, especially with butterflies, can't say it is the same for other macro subjects but as long as you dealing with sensitive bugs like the butterfly, a short macro lens should do relatively fine.


Simon

Did I get you wrong and did you mistype? For sensitive insects like butterflies, a long macro lens should be better rite?

Anyways, I feel that the 105mm is too short for butterflies, dragon flies etc... unless i damn lucky or damn fit to chase them around like Robert....

I do worry that if I upgrade to D3, both the 105 and 180 will be damn short...

----------


## benny

> I do worry that if I upgrade to D3, both the 105 and 180 will be damn short...


Add a tele converter. That's what I was using on Sunday on the 180 mm.  :Wink: 

Cheers,

----------


## Simon

oops.. my bad, bad typo  :Smile: 

lets say, wait till you get a hang of things first, get your basic brush up before all the upgrading thoughts comes jumping out of you  :Smile: 

sometimes, it is not how fit you are, but your understanding of the subject. Take for an example dragonflies, generally, most dragons will fly back to the same spot when you approach them ( not spook them off  :Smile: )

If you are interested, you can always tag along on my butterfly outings to find out how simple butterflies can be, okie maybe not everyone of them

----------


## wasabi8888

> oops.. my bad, bad typo 
> 
> lets say, wait till you get a hang of things first, get your basic brush up before all the upgrading thoughts comes jumping out of you 
> 
> sometimes, it is not how fit you are, but your understanding of the subject. Take for an example dragonflies, generally, most dragons will fly back to the same spot when you approach them ( not spook them off )
> 
> If you are interested, you can always tag along on my butterfly outings to find out how simple butterflies can be, okie maybe not everyone of them


hmmm.. agree with you.. maybe I should shoot more. Having said that, i cant go this Sunday... I will go on Friday morning to shoot....And I think, for my shots which you saw, the tripod serves me better than the monopod...alot sharper.....my hands not steady enough for the monopod

----------


## Simon

Obviously if everything stay still, a tripod will be the top choice. But a macro lens is still managable in my opinon, we usually take a few shots handheld before moving closer or setup a tripod for the subject. It is rather tiring if the subjects kept moving away each time you have your tripod open  :Smile:

----------


## benny

> hmmm.. agree with you.. maybe I should shoot more. Having said that, i cant go this Sunday... I will go on Friday morning to shoot....And I think, for my shots which you saw, the tripod serves me better than the monopod...alot sharper.....my hands not steady enough for the monopod


I see you are having second thoughts about the monopod now....  :Grin: 

Cheers,

----------


## wasabi8888

> I see you are having second thoughts about the monopod now.... 
> 
> Cheers,


I think my hands alone not steady enough... so monopod and tripod really serves different purposes. I am trying to see whether my tripod can be a monopod by extending only one leg. If the subject stays still, i can then extend the other 2 legs...Wonder whether people do that... or maybe I am weird

----------


## wasabi8888

Someone suggested the Wimberly F2 Macro brackets... Any comments?

Also, the remote cords SC 28/29. What is the difference between this cord and the SC 15?

----------


## benny

> Someone suggested the Wimberly F2 Macro brackets... Any comments?


Not too bad. Usually used in pairs for better effect. Best used with wireless trigger though. I might still have one lying around if you want to play with it.

Cheers,

----------


## wasabi8888

> Not too bad. Usually used in pairs for better effect. Best used with wireless trigger though. I might still have one lying around if you want to play with it.
> 
> Cheers,


the SC 15 or SC 28/29? Wonder whether there is anything you do not haVE

----------


## Goondoo

> I think my hands alone not steady enough... so monopod and tripod really serves different purposes. I am trying to see whether my tripod can be a monopod by extending only one leg. If the subject stays still, i can then extend the other 2 legs...Wonder whether people do that... or maybe I am weird


If you don't mind me asking, what mode do you usually use when shooting? What are the shuttle speeds and apertures generally used (you are using a 105mm now right?)

Edit: I just seen the EXIF of your previous trip.
Generally, to minimize hand shake, try to use this formula for shuttle speed when shooting.
1/(focal length x crop factor) or at the very least 1/focal length.
If you find the background too dark, up your ISO. This formula will help your stableness by a huge mile even when hand held. The other concern should be getting the insects in focus as the wind blows.... something that even using a tripod can' help.
For aperture size, most macro photographers recommend f8-f11 as it is generally the sharpest.
Try it, you will be amaze of the result yourself.

----------


## Goondoo

> If you don't mind me asking, what mode do you usually use when shooting? What are the shuttle speeds and apertures generally used (you are using a 105mm now right?)
> 
> Edit: I just seen the EXIF of your previous trip.
> Generally, to minimize hand shake, try to use this formula for shuttle speed when shooting.
> 1/(focal length x crop factor) or at the very least 1/focal length.
> If you find the background too dark, up your ISO. This formula will help your stableness by a huge mile even when hand held. The other concern should be getting the insects in focus as the wind blows.... something that even using a tripod can' help.
> For aperture size, most macro photographers recommend f8-f11 as it is generally the sharpest.
> Try it, you will be amaze of the result yourself.



Or you can try this....

----------


## hwchoy

> I do worry that if I upgrade to D3, both the 105 and 180 will be damn short...



I assume you mean that you are worrying that the working distance from you to the subject will be reduced when you go FX/full frame?

note that minimum focusing distance, working distance, magnification, etc are all optical property of the lens itself, regardless of the body you are using. 

eg the canon 100mm has a 30cm minimum focus distance, at which point it gives a 1:1 magnification (i.e. a 1cm object will be projected onto the sensor/film plane at 1cm actual image size). whether you use it on a 1.6x of full frame body, it will still give a minimum focus distance of 30cm, at a 1:1 magnification.

now the only difference here is that the subject image (eg 1cm) will appear smaller *in relation to the sensor frame* on a full frame body.

simple conclusion: crop factor and sensor size does not affect any of the optical property derived from the lens design itself.

----------


## wasabi8888

Billy

That's an interesting video.....

I shoot at f11 for macro although there have been times that I forgot. I shoot mostly aperture priority. Will take note of the focal length and shuttle speed...What you advised is really the fundamentals of photogrpahy and it's quite embarassing that sometimes I can forget it....

----------


## Goondoo

> Billy
> 
> That's an interesting video.....
> 
> I shoot at f11 for macro although there have been times that I forgot. I shoot mostly aperture priority. Will take note of the focal length and shuttle speed...What you advised is really the fundamentals of photogrpahy and it's quite embarassing that sometimes I can forget it....


Don't worry, it happens to me too.  :Grin:

----------


## luenny

Jeffrey,
I think if you're really into macro, you should get the closeup speedlight system - R1 or R1C1 if you plan to upgrade to D3 later. Also remember to get the 200mm Macro Nikkor lens and make sure you bring it out on our next trip so that I can borrow.  :Grin: 

But seriously, I am also looking at the R1 speedlight system. I think it may be a good tool but for $700+++ I am still seriously considering if I really need it or not. As for getting close to subjects, I find dragonfly not a problem. Butterflies, I don't know. I usually can get pretty close to dragonfly, sometimes even touch it. And if all else fails, I use a 2x extender for the 105mm and that's usually enough.

----------


## Goondoo

> Jeffrey,
> Butterflies, I don't know. I usually can get pretty close to dragonfly, sometimes even touch it. And if all else fails, I use a 2x extender for the 105mm and that's usually enough.


You really should have joined us last Sunday and witness Benny chatting away with a butt(erfly), for 20 mins or so, positioning and repositioning his flash all over it... mounting and remounting his tripod again and again.... and he is like inches away from it...  :Opps:

----------


## luenny

Yeah, so there you go Jeff. You don't need the 200mm macro, just pass it to me and I'll help you use it.  :Grin:

----------


## wasabi8888

Luenny

I am still considering the RC1. As for the 200mm, I heard rumours that a new one is going to be launched at the PMA.. Well, i may just line that up in one of the must haves for 2008

----------


## ccs

Sb800 can be set as master or slave. If set as master it can trigger flash off wirelessly.

----------


## Goondoo

> I had opt for a Sigma 150mm f2.8 mainly for the weight and aperture though.


Yea! My boss just called and told me he had help me purchase this lense for less than $800 from Hong Kong!  :Laughing:  :Laughing: This Sunday trip can confirm liao!  :Grin:  :Grin:

----------


## StanChung

I want to see pictures... :Grin:

----------


## trident

Billy,
wah your boss so good one arh?
great,will see this sunday how the lens perform.  :Smile:

----------


## Goondoo

> Billy,
> wah your boss so good one arh?
> great,will see this sunday how the lens perform.


His hobby also photography mah!
He's a Canongrapher  :Angel: 
Another Director is Nikonian, the 60mm and 18-200mm I was using was borrowed from him.  :Embarassed:

----------


## trident

Canongrapher as oppose to a nikongrapher?  :Laughing:

----------


## hwchoy

canongrapher as in canongraphers.org?

----------


## Goondoo

> canongrapher as in canongraphers.org?


Canongraphers.org is another group led by USM from Clubsnap I think, but I mean he left due to some internal politics. 
I mean he die hard canon fan la.

----------


## hwchoy

no, canongraphers.org is owned by the famous (or infamous) Deadpoet. Benny is there too. Canon users should pop over, but non canon users can join too, just that most of the chat revolves around canon gear, but also quite a bit on general photography.

USM was holding onto canongraphers.com but seems he gave it up already.

----------


## benetay

USM is quite a nice person, met up with him and a few fellow canongraphers + nikonians to shoot at Siem Reap. 

When will Canon have a 100mm macro with IS?

----------


## Goondoo

> USM is quite a nice person, met up with him and a few fellow canongraphers + nikonians to shoot at Siem Reap. 
> 
> When will Canon have a 100mm macro with IS?


So I assume you met with with Old Man Cecil too?

----------


## hwchoy

since I do all my macro with flash, I don't need IS.

----------


## benetay

> So I assume you met with with Old Man Cecil too?


Yes i've met Cecil very fun person to be with. Remember one night part of the group went for a KTV session. He got great voice!


I guess with IS it's just a good to have. I wonder how many people will switch over to a 100mm macro IS if it's out in the market.

----------


## hwchoy

in fact nikon stated that in the 105 macro VR, the VR is not really meant for macro mode.

----------


## Goondoo

> Yes i've met Cecil very fun person to be with. Remember one night part of the group went for a KTV session. He got great voice!
> 
> 
> I guess with IS it's just a good to have. I wonder how many people will switch over to a 100mm macro IS if it's out in the market.


He is now heading the photography club in my CC.... hehe...  :Opps: 
Anyway, lets not OT further.  :Embarassed:

----------


## Goondoo

> in fact nikon stated that in the 105 macro VR, the VR is not really meant for macro mode.


Yea, its meant for portraits shots actually. None of the VR worked on macro I think, even the 18-200mm VRII doesn't.

----------


## hwchoy

I wonder how is the bokeh on the Micro Nikkor 105/2.8 VR. If the VR is meant for portrait, then it has got to have good bokeh.

----------


## benetay

> in fact nikon stated that in the 105 macro VR, the VR is not really meant for macro mode.


Just a question, have you tried using the 100mm as a portrait lens? Does it work well or is it better to have lens like the 85 L or 135L? I'm actually quite impress with the bokeh of the 100mm macro on portrait. 

Okay so i guess there is no need for 100mm IS , thanks!

----------


## Goondoo

> Just a question, have you tried using the 100mm as a portrait lens? Does it work well or is it better to have lens like the 85 L or 135L? I'm actually quite impress with the bokeh of the 100mm macro on portrait. 
> 
> Okay so i guess there is no need for 100mm IS , thanks!


If remember correctly Wynx and BCLee were using tamron 90mm for portraits.

----------


## hwchoy

> Just a question, have you tried using the 100mm as a portrait lens? Does it work well or is it better to have lens like the 85 L or 135L? I'm actually quite impress with the bokeh of the 100mm macro on portrait.


please there is not even close comparison. to be fair the 100 macro was never meant to be a portrait lens, _senso stricto_. the canon ultra-huge-aperture lenses (50/1.2L, 85/1.2L and 135/2L) have amazing bokeh and colour rendition, right behind the classic CZ. the 100 macro was designed for neutrality so colours are accurate but not ooomphy, and bokeh is also pretty neutral.

I would not use the 100 macro for portraits. I doubt the Tamron 90 will fare much better.

----------


## benetay

Well i guess considering the price of those portrait L's it better be good. I might consider getting the 50 f/1.4 . Okay that will be in another thread when i'm feeling a little rich.

Cheers!!

----------


## Goondoo

> no, canongraphers.org is owned by the famous (or infamous) Deadpoet. Benny is there too. Canon users should pop over, but non canon users can join too, just that most of the chat revolves around canon gear, but also quite a bit on general photography.
> 
> USM was holding onto canongraphers.com but seems he gave it up already.


Ohhh, DP, the man that helped me convert my first D70 into IR capable.

----------


## hwchoy

here's what is considered good bokeh http://www.aquaticquotient.com/forum...ad.php?t=36201

bene, I love my 50/1.4 except that it flares badly in harsh light at wide open.

----------


## benetay

Thats solid bokeh! It's the famous f/1.2 L. 

Choy so you suggest i should get the 50 f/1.4? I think i don't mind having something light. I'm too weak to carry too many lens for a long period of time.

----------


## hwchoy

nah, take your pick!

----------


## benetay

I still choose the middle one. It's more economical friendly. The right one is for Benny.

----------


## luenny

> in fact nikon stated that in the 105 macro VR, the VR is not really meant for macro mode.


I think Nikon state that the VR is not really meant for macro because it cannot cope so well with macro. But for me I feel that it does help a little.

Anyway, so who's getting the Nikon close-up speedlight remote kit R1 and the 200mm macro lens?? I really want to see those in action.

----------


## wasabi8888

Not yet lah... like simon said... simple pic also cannot take.. should not upgrade so fast.

erh.... actually simon did not say... but i think so as well

----------


## hwchoy

> Thats solid bokeh! It's the famous f/1.2 L. 
> 
> Choy so you suggest i should get the 50 f/1.4? I think i don't mind having something light. I'm too weak to carry too many lens for a long period of time.


check out these bokeh!!! pardon the slight handshake, shot in the very dim bar at wide open. don't believe the EXIF, it is faked.

----------


## benetay

Okay thanks , will get the 50 when i need it. Nowadays hardly shoot anything.

----------


## hwchoy

oh but the beers weren't shot with the canon lenses  :Smile:

----------


## benny

> Go for the R1C1. Because when you get your D3, you will realise that you still need the SU-800.





> Friend, you think I print money... I am unemployed leh.....


I know someone purchased D3 with 24-70 f/2.8 just because it felt 'shiok'. Upgrader from D80. That's why I recommend the R1C1. It's inevitable and you know it. It's your destiny.  :Grin: 

Unemployed by choice. It only means you don't even need to print money.  :Shocked: 

Cheers,

----------


## wasabi8888

> I know someone purchased D3 with 24-70 f/2.8 just because it felt 'shiok'. Upgrader from D80. That's why I recommend the R1C1. It's inevitable and you know it. It's your destiny. 
> 
> Unemployed by choice. It only means you don't even need to print money. 
> 
> Cheers,


OOOOOOOOOOOOIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Don't have to tell the whole world hoh....

----------


## Goondoo

> OOOOOOOOOOOOIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
> 
> 
> Don't have to tell the whole world hoh....


Congrats on your new toy, can always pass me you old toy if you no longer need it....  :Opps:

----------


## StanChung

What was the topic already?  :Grin: 

I think the R1-C1 is very interesting. Could be very useful to take large tank shots. I bought the SU800 separately, looking back, I should have just gotten the R1-C1.

I find the bokeh for the 105VR a teeny bit too sharp edged- this is nitpicking of course. 

Once upon a time I shot quite a bit of portraits for an amateur. Hopefully I will remember how to again.  :Grin:  Going to do the family photos.  :Knockout:  Will try the 80-200 and also the tammy 90 to see the difference.

----------


## StanChung

> check out these bokeh!!! pardon the slight handshake, shot in the very dim bar at wide open. don't believe the EXIF, it is faked.


Handshake enhances bokeh one la!  :Grin:  Softer and nicer. But I like the subject matter.  :Razz:

----------


## wasabi8888

> Congrats on your new toy, can always pass me you old toy if you no longer need it....


Old toy is my secondary/backup unit....

need to try out my new lens though.. 24-70.... i think I ot already

----------


## hwchoy

> Handshake enhances bokeh one la!  Softer and nicer. But I like the subject matter.


still you have to admit the colour is nice and rich, not much adjustment was done. they were shot with Carl Zeiss Planar after all  :Kiss:

----------


## benny

> OOOOOOOOOOOOIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
> 
> 
> Don't have to tell the whole world hoh....


You were the one who said you decided to take a break for a while. Not me.  :Grin: 

Cheers,

----------

