# New Flash System in the Works [CR1]



## Canon Rumors Guy (May 4, 2015)

```
We’re told that Canon is working on a new flash system based around a new metering technology, which could possibly be E-TTL III.</p>
<p>The source said Canon is well aware they lag behind Nikon in flash metering technology and are “actively working on improving their own system, rather than making new E-TTL II flashes”.</p>
<p>This new technology could appear in 2016 in a new flagship Speedlite.</p>
<p>More to come…</p>
```


----------



## The Flasher (May 4, 2015)

Canon Rumors said:


> <p>We’re told that Canon is working on a new flash system based around a new metering technology, which could possibly be E-TTL III.</p>
> <p>The source said Canon is well aware they lag behind Nikon in flash metering technology and are “actively working on improving their own system, rather than making new E-TTL II flashes”.</p>
> <p>This new technology could appear in 2016 in a new flagship Speedlite.</p>
> <p>More to come…</p>



News flash: Canon finally saw the light . Hope they include a ready signal and battery level indicator as well.


----------



## sanj (May 4, 2015)

Canon Rumors said:


> We’re told that Canon is working on a new flash system based around a new metering technology, which could possibly be E-TTL III.</p>
> <p>The source said Canon is well aware they lag behind Nikon in flash metering technology and are “actively working on improving their own system, rather than making new E-TTL II flashes”.</p>
> <p>This new technology could appear in 2016 in a new flagship Speedlite.</p>
> <p>More to come…</p>



You don't say....


----------



## Marsu42 (May 4, 2015)

Canon Rumors said:


> We’re told that Canon is working on a new flash system based around a new metering technology, which could possibly be E-TTL III.



I find this plausible, as they skipped the opportunity do add some features when releasing the rt flashes. Next to metering, the obvious cases would be remote 2nd curtain sync and remote zoom.

And it's extra plausible as there is still no 440ex-rt, but Yn and whatnot clones of the 600ex ... so Canon might chose to leap ahead with a completely new flash lineup. And they'll make sure you need a post-2015 camera body for it :->


----------



## grainier (May 4, 2015)

I mostly see a ploy to make Yonhnuo's incompatible.


----------



## AcutancePhotography (May 4, 2015)

grainier said:


> I mostly see a ploy to make Yonhnuo's incompatible.


The cynic in me would agree with you. :-\


----------



## Lee Jay (May 4, 2015)

The flash metering system isn't in the flash, it's in the camera.


----------



## RLPhoto (May 4, 2015)

Marsu42 said:


> Canon Rumors said:
> 
> 
> > We’re told that Canon is working on a new flash system based around a new metering technology, which could possibly be E-TTL III.
> ...


+1 on the 2nd-curtain and Remote Zoom. I haven't had any issues with ETTL metering and it's still better than Nikons flash metering since the 600RT's release with a 5D3.


----------



## eosuser1234 (May 4, 2015)

Please just make a DSLR with 1/500 sync. 
Nikon has done it with D70, Canon should too!
And no crappy HSS b.s. it is junk compared to true syncage. 
With electronic shutters these day, it can be done!


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 4, 2015)

eosuser1234 said:


> Please just make a DSLR with 1/500 sync.
> Nikon has done it with D70, Canon should too!



Canon did, with the 1D.


----------



## m (May 4, 2015)

Another flagship without a fleet.

Without an entry level model, I don't see myself buying into this system.


----------



## Chaitanya (May 4, 2015)

What is wrong with E-TTL II? from my expirience I have been getting consitent results with Canon ttl in varying lighting situations without any glitches. Compared to that Nikon Matrix metering shows a lot of variable results even within the same lighting scenario.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (May 4, 2015)

With sales dropping like a rock, camera makers are tossing everything at the wall to see what sticks.

Not to say that Canon lighting is far behind the times as far as its ability to properly light a wide variety of scenes under diverse circumstances. I really doubt that any improvement will be enough to convince me. Since the cameras themselves do not do a accurate job of exposure in difficult lighting, and since they tell the flash how much light is needed, and when, is their really any hope?


----------



## drjlo (May 4, 2015)

ETTL-II or III, isn't it time Canon put built-in RT triggers into some of their bodies for God's sake? :'(


----------



## jdramirez (May 4, 2015)

Mark me down as annoyed because I have my preferred number of 600ex rd, 3, and now I may finding my self upgrading one at a time... I know I don't have to.... But I'm anal like that.


----------



## Click (May 4, 2015)

drjlo said:


> ETTL-II or III, isn't it time Canon put built-in RT triggers into some of their bodies for God's sake? :'(



+1


----------



## AcutancePhotography (May 4, 2015)

jdramirez said:


> Mark me down as annoyed because I have my preferred number of 600ex rd, 3, and now I may finding my self upgrading one at a time... I know I don't have to.... But I'm anal like that.



You are a marketing department's dream. ;D


----------



## grainier (May 4, 2015)

drjlo said:


> ETTL-II or III, isn't it time Canon put built-in RT triggers into some of their bodies for God's sake? :'(



Don't you know? Canon bodies block radio waves. At least that's their explanation for not putting wi-fi into xD bodies.


----------



## wockawocka (May 4, 2015)

Metering fine for me on ETTLII?


----------



## keithcooper (May 4, 2015)

jdramirez said:


> Mark me down as annoyed because I have my preferred number of 600ex rd, 3, and now I may finding my self upgrading one at a time... I know I don't have to.... But I'm anal like that.


A marketeers dream  ... since they can't stop perfectly good kit from still working when new ones come along


----------



## bear (May 4, 2015)

I don't mind current metering, what I miss (I own st-e3, 4x600ex-rt):

- simple RT-slave for firing studio flashes (sync cable).
- RT master built into camera body (or GPS receiver in every camera)
- smaller RT master/slave flashes (size of 270EX and 430EX)
- remember master/slave state after battery change
- more masters (when I use more camera bodies, I have to swap ST-E3 when I grab another camera body)


----------



## Maximilian (May 4, 2015)

Canon, bring it on. Do what ever you want. 

But don't make it too expensive and give also other flashes rt. Not only to one flagship.

Otherwise you won't see my money for new flashes.


----------



## unfocused (May 4, 2015)

Chaitanya said:


> What is wrong with E-TTL II? from my experience I have been getting consistent results with Canon ttl in varying lighting situations without any glitches...



+1. The only time I've had a problem with the ETTL on the 600RT is when I've made a mistake. (Which does bring up my one complaint – the interface isn't the most intuitive in the world. Helps a great deal if you have a newer camera with on-screen controls, though)


----------



## jdramirez (May 4, 2015)

I rarely buy new, and when I sell my gear it is usually for more than I originally bought it... But I hate depreciation. It kills me that I am losing $1 per day that I own my 5d mkii. 

So with my flashes... I can sell the old ones off for more than I paid.... I'll find a deal on the new one's And bam... I have the latest and greatest for a small upgrade cost... Which will inevitably be recouped when I sell the new ones in favor of the new new ones a few years down the line. 

So I help keep the secondary market values high... So I guess that's a plus.



AcutancePhotography said:


> jdramirez said:
> 
> 
> > Mark me down as annoyed because I have my preferred number of 600ex rd, 3, and now I may finding my self upgrading one at a time... I know I don't have to.... But I'm anal like that.
> ...


----------



## Pixel (May 4, 2015)

I'd love to know how you sell for more than you bought? Are you even USING this equipment?



jdramirez said:


> I rarely buy new, and when I sell my gear it is usually for more than I originally bought it... But I hate depreciation. It kills me that I am losing $1 per day that I own my 5d mkii.
> 
> So with my flashes... I can sell the old ones off for more than I paid.... I'll find a deal on the new one's And bam... I have the latest and greatest for a small upgrade cost... Which will inevitably be recouped when I sell the new ones in favor of the new new ones a few years down the line.
> 
> ...


----------



## WillT (May 4, 2015)

I am really surprised they think they are lagging behind Nikon in this department. Instead of working on ETTL III they should focus on their sensors.


----------



## Machaon (May 4, 2015)

grainier said:


> I mostly see a ploy to make Yonhnuo's incompatible.



Except that would probably also make the existing fleet of Canon flashes incompatible.

Lack of backward compatibility would be a very unattractive feature. So I presume that cameras and new flashes will still be able to play ETTL-II.


----------



## Machaon (May 4, 2015)

grainier said:


> Don't you know? Canon bodies block radio waves. At least that's their explanation for not putting wi-fi into xD bodies.



Yeh, it's a pretty weak excuse. After all, if they can admit visible wavelength electromagnetic radiation through a whopping great hole in the front of the body then they can sort out an antenna for radiofrequency...


----------



## sulla (May 4, 2015)

As Lee Jay rightly said: The metering system is not in the flash, it's in the camera.

So, to make an ETTL-III work, new cameras alongside new flashes would be needed.

Remember the transition from ETTL-I to ETTL-II: The old EZ-flashes used light reflected off the film, and the ETTL-II uses pre-flashes. Incompatible, because ETTL-I flashes just can't produce a pre-flash. While ETTL-II flashes can fall back to ETTL-I and so be used on the old cameras, the new cameras couldn't use the old flashes.

The same will be likely in a II ==> III transition: New bodies will almost certainly be necessary to use ETTL-II and will potentially not work with ETTL-II flashes.


----------



## cosmopotter (May 4, 2015)

Brought to mind Keurig coffee makers with their Keurig 2.0 with built in copyright protection (no unlicensed coffee pods). Maybe Canon can build in the RT transmitter with the new metering system and protect it all with proprietary encryption to defend against Yong Nuo et al. :


----------



## sulla (May 4, 2015)

Ah, encryption in the Camera <==> Flash communication. Entirely possible technically. And licences to encryption keys would be expensive... I don't know if this would get anti-trust approval, but technically entirely possible.

And while encryption is used, why not also encrypt Camera <==> Lens communication? A brilliant move against Sigma, Tamron and the like...

Oh no, what a horrible idea!


----------



## Rudeofus (May 4, 2015)

sulla said:


> Remember the transition from ETTL-I to ETTL-II: The old EZ-flashes used light reflected off the film, and the ETTL-II uses pre-flashes. Incompatible, because ETTL-I flashes just can't produce a pre-flash. While ETTL-II flashes can fall back to ETTL-I and so be used on the old cameras, the new cameras couldn't use the old flashes.



I think you got that mixed up. Old EZ flashes never supported E-TTL of any flavor, and every incarnation of E-TTL uses a preflash. New digital cameras can't use EZ flashes, at least not in automatic flash metering mode, but even the oldest 420EX will work on any Canon dSLR sold today. It remains to be seen whether E-TTL III requires new cameras, new flashes, or both.


----------



## sulla (May 4, 2015)

Ups, sorry. Yes indeed you're right of course, the EZ flashes used TTL, the EX used E-TTL of any flavour (I or II).
So there's a chance ETTL-III could be compatible with existing cameras.

Thanx for reminding me. Those EZ times have been gone for sooooooooooooooo long


----------



## Jim Saunders (May 5, 2015)

I'd take health monitoring on the lights themselves (particularly for identifying weak external battery packs) over different metering options in the body, but to each their own.

Jim


----------



## jdramirez (May 5, 2015)

Pixel said:


> I'd love to know how you sell for more than you bought? Are you even USING this equipment?



It isn't impossible... If retail is X... and then "like new" used is generally 80% of X. But there is variation in the used market... and you can chart the variation @ amazon... so you can tell whether the price you are getting from Craigs List or otherwise is a historically low price. 

then you buy like new, with a recent manufacturing date. Obviously the more recent the manufacture date, the more perceived value it has. 

Then when you sell, you just have a higher price than you purchased with consideration of the commision... and done. 

Have a great reputation, understand what information the buyer is interested in (like manufacture date)... and done. it isn't complex... buy low, sell high.


----------



## JonB8305 (May 5, 2015)

Not a fan of my 600 EX-RT, i'm switching over to a profoto b1 or b2 whenever i get enough coin.


----------



## emko (May 5, 2015)

how can a flash improve metering? I though the metering was done in the camera? is that not what TTL stands for? Evaluative-Through The Lens. E-TTL II is implemented in the body, not the flash unit, and therefore can use existing E-TTL flash units and EF lenses.

So new metering system in the cameras? does this need a new flash?


----------



## pwp (May 5, 2015)

neuroanatomist said:


> eosuser1234 said:
> 
> 
> > Please just make a DSLR with 1/500 sync.
> ...


1/500 sync. Yes it was the 1D's major saving grace. Photographers who grumble about DR should be glad they never had a 1D. Yet at the time it was a red hot camera, easily the best performer I'd ever owned. When I updated to the 1D MkIIn, there was little that I missed about the 1D, except for that 1/500 sync.

This announcement may slam the brakes on 600 EX-RT sales. Anyway the update will be entirely welcome.

-pw


----------



## JonAustin (May 5, 2015)

bear said:


> I don't mind current metering, what I miss (I own st-e3, 4x600ex-rt):
> 
> - simple RT-slave for firing studio flashes (sync cable).
> - RT master built into camera body (or GPS receiver in every camera)
> ...



I could be hallucinating, but I just recently (last month) used a four-flash setup (one on body, three on stands, all 600-EX RT's) over the course of three days, recharging the batteries each evening, and it seems to me that the flashes remembered which master / slave state they were in prior to the battery change. (This stuck with me, because I purposefully moved them around (reassigned their groups), to even out their use (master being pre-flash only, B & C groups 1-2 stops below group A).)

I _would _like to see Canon build RT transmitters into future bodies, as well as produce a successor to the ST-E3-RT that includes an AF-assist light.



pwp said:


> This announcement may slam the brakes on 600 EX-RT sales. Anyway the update will be entirely welcome.
> -pw



It may, indeed. That might, in turn, drop their prices enough for me to purchase a 5th (and possibly 6th) unit.


----------



## pwp (May 5, 2015)

AcutancePhotography said:


> jdramirez said:
> 
> 
> > Mark me down as annoyed because I have my preferred number of 600ex rt, 3, and now I may finding my self upgrading one at a time... I know I don't have to.... But I'm anal like that.
> ...


It may come as a surprise,  but the 600 ex-rt's will still work perfectly...just like the 580EX's I retired a few months ago. But yeah...I know the feeling.

-pw


----------



## JonAustin (May 5, 2015)

pwp said:


> It may come as a surprise,  but the 600 ex-rt's will still work perfectly...just like the 580EX's I retired a few months ago. But yeah...I know the feeling.
> 
> -pw



Yep, the 580EX II's I owned worked great, but the radio transmission and improved menu system on the 600's is a dream. I never have to refer to the manual anymore. I even stopped carrying one with me to remote shoots.


----------



## deleteme (May 5, 2015)

Chaitanya said:


> What is wrong with E-TTL II? from my expirience I have been getting consitent results with Canon ttl in varying lighting situations without any glitches. Compared to that Nikon Matrix metering shows a lot of variable results even within the same lighting scenario.



I get just as many exposure errors as my Nikon friends ( we all shoot professionally). Both systems do OK in unchallenging environments of medium contrast but fail in high contrast situations. We generally use manual in most indoor events as that gives us a much higher keeper rate.


----------



## deleteme (May 5, 2015)

sulla said:


> As Lee Jay rightly said: The metering system is not in the flash, it's in the camera.
> 
> So, to make an ETTL-III work, new cameras alongside new flashes would be needed.
> 
> ...


I agree that the cameras are the key to the new ETTL implementation. However I remember when Olympus introduced the concept of TTL flash back on the OM-2. Everyone was excited at the prospect of spot on exposure once and for all.
Actually never happened. Cameras still make dumb decisions whether reading off film, a bounced pre-flash exposure or through the photocell on an old auto-flash.
I am very skeptical that we will see any significant improvement in flash exposure in the near future. 
I have just seen too many "improvements" to believe in any of them.


----------



## Hillsilly (May 5, 2015)

Sorry for the possibly dumb question, but I'm curious....

In what ways are Canon lagging behind Nikon with flash systems?

I thought the recent radio triggering, 600EX RT etc put them ahead (if not equal)?


----------



## stefang (May 5, 2015)

Rudeofus said:


> sulla said:
> 
> 
> > Remember the transition from ETTL-I to ETTL-II: The old EZ-flashes used light reflected off the film, and the ETTL-II uses pre-flashes. Incompatible, because ETTL-I flashes just can't produce a pre-flash. While ETTL-II flashes can fall back to ETTL-I and so be used on the old cameras, the new cameras couldn't use the old flashes.
> ...


And that's yet another mixup 
My old 540EZ used A-TTL. Not literally E-TTL, but it did use a preflash too.
If you want to know the details: the definitive resource on the Canon flahs system is available at http://photonotes.org/articles/eos-flash/
A must-read for anyone wanting to know the details about the EOS flash system...


----------



## RGF (May 5, 2015)

I believe Nikon has used distance information for years.

The disadvantage of E-TTL is that a reflective object in front of the main subject (at the focal distance) can kick back lots of light and cause the flash/camera to underexpose the scene.


----------



## LDS (May 5, 2015)

Machaon said:


> Yeh, it's a pretty weak excuse. After all, if they can admit visible wavelength electromagnetic radiation through a whopping great hole in the front of the body then they can sort out an antenna for radiofrequency...



Good idea... put an antenna in every lens, thereby you would need new body + new flashes + new lenses...


----------



## AcutancePhotography (May 5, 2015)

sulla said:


> Ah, encryption in the Camera <==> Flash communication. Entirely possible technically. And licences to encryption keys would be expensive... I don't know if this would get anti-trust approval, but technically entirely possible.
> 
> And while encryption is used, why not also encrypt Camera <==> Lens communication? A brilliant move against Sigma, Tamron and the like...
> 
> Oh no, what a horrible idea!



Cripes! Don't give them ideas! 

I am not sure there would be any anti-trust issues. 

But then the competitors would work hard to find a workaround. They always do..... which is good for the customer.


----------



## AJB (May 5, 2015)

sulla said:


> Ups, sorry. Yes indeed you're right of course, the EZ flashes used TTL, the EX used E-TTL of any flavour (I or II).
> So there's a chance ETTL-III could be compatible with existing cameras.



As I understand it, the ONLY difference between E-TTL and E-TTL II was the software in the body. An old flash made before E-TTL II had been invented would behave as E-TTL II when used on a new body with the II flash metering software.

So, if E-TTL III was a similar upgrade, then all current flashes would use the new E-TTL III when used with a new body. Similarly future flashes not yet released would use E-TTL II metering when on a current body, or E-TTL metering when used on a really old body.

The EZ flashes' A-TTL system used light reflected off the film, which digital bodies can't really do and don't have a sensor for. I think I'm right in saying that when E-TTL first came out, though, the new E-TTL film bodies supported both; E-TTL on new EX flashes and A-TTL with EZ flashes. And I think that even the newest flashes still support A-TTL if used on an old film body.

So I'd expect that whatever Canon do next would be pretty compatible with old bodies and old flashes.


----------



## InterMurph (May 5, 2015)

sulla said:


> Ah, encryption in the Camera <==> Flash communication. Entirely possible technically. And licences to encryption keys would be expensive...


Encryption software is free: http://www.openssl.org/.

Encryption software is difficult to use, and very difficult to use properly. That's why most products just don't use encryption, and that's likely why Yongnuo was able to produce compatible products.


----------



## iowapipe (May 5, 2015)

JonAustin said:


> bear said:
> 
> 
> > I don't mind current metering, what I miss (I own st-e3, 4x600ex-rt):
> ...



Since 'many' who are posting here seem to be more likely to have the added battery-grip, why couldn't Canon integrate an antenna into that part? Sure seems like the material is some sort of plastic/poly/etc. material that wouldn't be as likely to block the signal.


----------



## Marsu42 (May 5, 2015)

InterMurph said:


> Encryption software is difficult to use, and very difficult to use properly. That's why most products just don't use encryption, and that's likely why Yongnuo was able to produce compatible products.



Canon might not be interested in strong encryption making 3rd party products impossible, but be happy to delay them and generate lotsa r&d costs for the competition. After all, where would Canon be w/o 3rd party lenses and flashes with these prices for original parts? Anyone wanting to buy a €500 flash for a €500 Rebel camera?

I know for a fact that Canon doesn't want to encrypt their camera firmware, it's still a weak xor with the same key that enables Magic Lantern to make Canon cameras boot 3rd party fw at all. If they wanted it, there would be no problem makeing at least very, very hard to break a real fw update protection.


----------



## Ozarker (May 7, 2015)

Marsu42 said:


> InterMurph said:
> 
> 
> > Encryption software is difficult to use, and very difficult to use properly. That's why most products just don't use encryption, and that's likely why Yongnuo was able to produce compatible products.
> ...



I actually had 3 Canon 600EX-RT flashes and an ST-E3-RT when I was shooting with a Rebel T5i. I'm up to seven 600EX-RT flashes now and shoot with a 70D. So yes, I think there are people who have Canon flashes for their Rebels. I don't think I'm all alone either. From what I've seen personally, the magic is in the lenses, flashes, and flash modifiers (And how they are used creatively along side the camera). I am far from being a pro. I've never made a dime from my gear. I've never had a paid shoot. I'm just a hack enthusiast. A real HACK.

I think the 600EX-RT is a great product. Not perfect, but great. Should the prices fall when something new is introduced... I'll work towards 15 flashes as quickly as I can. I just enjoy the creative outlet that photography is for me. The 600 EX-RT will keep me happy for a long time. I'll skip the next upgrade. I need a full frame camera and more L glass first.


----------



## PerfectSavage (May 9, 2015)

pwp said:


> AcutancePhotography said:
> 
> 
> > jdramirez said:
> ...



Exactly. I'm still using 580EXs and a couple 550EXs with zero issues...and the little 270EXII for family stuff. Do I misfire? Of course, but always my error. Would I like to lose the RTs with the 5s for the built-ins on the 600? Of course, but it just isn't a real issue for me. Improved metering would be interesting to see how overall IQ improves but if you're having consistent issues with flash/metering, I'd suggest it's probably user error, not your equipment. I also can't see them coming out with new flashes and metering that would only work with post-5DS bodies either...like the 5D4 and 1DX2....but they might. You can make the argument people certainly aren't looking to shoot with shoe flashes on the 5DS/SR so it could be a 5D4/1DX2 compatible thing. That would certainly be a major reason to upgrade for all the 5D3/1DX users on the fence, right?...especially the 5D3 wedding/event shooters.


----------

