This message just displayed large blue letters saying invalid htmp. please forward to developers. no address, so not sure where it should go, so figured here was the place to start. This is a forwarded message From: Henry Heerschap <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Date: Friday, February 18, 2011, 9:08:28 AM Subject: [Canon5DMarkII] 580 EX II failures ===8<==============Original message text=============== I keep thinking about Syl Arena and his twelve Speedlites mounted on a 2x4 while he shot his son smashing pumpkins. He doesn't appear to have had any issues with the 580EX II. Of course, he was using Radio Poppers.
http://speedliting.com/how-to/freezing-action-with-high-speed-syn c/ One of the resulting photos ended up on the cover of his book. Henry On Fri, 18 Feb 2011 08:18 -0500, "J Bryan Kramer" <[email protected]> wrote: You know that's a good point. When you think about it, someone who is willing to spend $600 for a radio trigger has self selected themselves into a high flash use group. If I had one of these I would be very tempted to ventilate the head with a few small drill holes. Also I would not stop using my 580EX II if I had one, especially since I'm in the low use group. I might avoid extreme usage, flashing the unit over and over again at short intervals for an extended period. BK “"Only the print contains the artist's meaning and message." " ----- Ansel Adams J Bryan Krämer North Florida, USA photos at: [1]http://pbase.com/photoburner blog at: [2]http://www.photoburner.net On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 23:50, Henry Heerschap <[3][email protected]> wrote: The 580EX II has been on the market for over three years now and we’re just hearing about this. I read the article this morning and perused the PDF from LPA. Several observations: 1. why are we only hearing about this now? If this is as big a deal as they claim, we would have been hearing about it all along. Doing a quick Google search, I’m not seeing much of anything beyond this article. 2. The article indicates that LPA encourages people to use high speed sync a lot because they can multiply the units and make up for the decreased power. If you’re running your flash in HSS, you are pushing it a lot harder than would be typical. That might be the real source of the problem. 3. I’ve had mind since they originally came out, plus I’ve since bought two more. They’ve been rock solid performers. I’m not a super heavy user, but I’ve done a number of church directories and other large-ism things with them. 4. I did have one thing fail. I admit it. The rubber gasket at the foot of the unit broke on one of mine from jamming it into a flash bracket. Maybe I should sign onto that class-action suit. <g> I’m not especially impressed by any of this, but I’m see what happens next. Henry From: [4][email protected] [mailto:[5][email protected]] On Behalf Of J Bryan Kramer Sent: Thursday, February 17, 2011 5:00 PM To: [6][email protected]; canon-10d; digital-rebels; [7][email protected] Subject: [Canon5DMarkII] 580 EX II failures Well now I'm glad I was too cheap to buy the EX II and got a plain EX. It seems that the LPA tech team (make PocketWizards) has discovered that Canon has apparently been screwing 580EX II users at least the current ones. There is a serious design fault in the flash and Canon must have known this since they designed around the problem in the 480EX II. The problem: "It appears that some combination of elements comes together to create the risk and increased probability of an IGBT failure within the 580EX II. ‐ Sealed flash tube assembly (internal zoom carriage assembly) ‐ Misalignment of the flash tube within the reflector such that arcing is more probable ‐ Reduced optical feedback via the fiber optic sense cable in the flash head ‐ Dryer air where ozone can be generated more easily ‐ Electrical discharge through the reflector at a moment when the IGBT is turned off" <[8]http://www.canonrumors.com/files/580EXII.pdf> Quite technical meaning it will be tough going if you don't know much about electronics. The translation: The IGBT is one of the transistors on the 580EX II. It controls the flash duration. The head on the flash is sealed, multiple flashes build up ozone, since the unit is sealed the ozone is trapped in the flash head. By some unknown, at this, time mechanism, the increased ozone cause IGBT failure. Replacing the IGBT will lead to another failure quickly. Removing the glass plate and making the unit non-sealed leads to zero failures after IGBT replacement. Thus the ozone is the problem since removing the plate allows the unit to vent. The 580EX has a different design and the 480EX II has been designed with vents to allow ozone to vent off. Read the pdf even if you aren't techie with the above explanation you'll be able to follow along. Sounds like an opportunity for Bruce to jump back into the law game, file a national class action, make millions in the settlement where 580EXII owners will get a $3 off coupon for their next Canon purchase. Big atta-boy to LPA who bought failed unit to figure out what was happening; double extra large Awww Sh#$% to Canon and how stupid can they get? They are apparently charging $380 to repair the units. No mention if they quietly applied a design fix on the manufacturing line. This will sweep the Canon blogging world in nothing flat. BK “"Only the print contains the artist's meaning and message." " ----- Ansel Adams J Bryan Krämer North Florida, USA photos at: [9]http://pbase.com/photoburner blog at: [10]http://www.photoburner.net References 1. http://pbase.com/photoburner 2. http://www.photoburner.net/ 3. mailto:[email protected] 4. mailto:[email protected] 5. mailto:[email protected] 6. mailto:[email protected] 7. mailto:[email protected] 8. http://www.canonrumors.com/files/580EXII.pdf 9. http://pbase.com/photoburner 10. http://www.photoburner.net/ Henry Heerschap [email protected] ===8<===========End of original message text=========== -- Dwight A. Corrin 316.303.9385 phone ahead to fax dcorrin at fastmail.fm photo galleries at http://dcorrin.smugmug.com photo blog at http://dcorrin.aminus3.com http://photos.vfxy.com/photoblogs/5882 Using IMAP with The Bat! 5.0.0.141 BETA on Windows Vista version 6,0 (Service Pack 2)
--- Begin Message ---I keep thinking about Syl Arena and his twelve Speedlites mounted on a 2x4 while he shot his son smashing pumpkins. He doesn't appear to have had any issues with the 580EX II. Of course, he was using Radio Poppers. http://speedliting.com/how-to/freezing-action-with-high-speed-syn c/ One of the resulting photos ended up on the cover of his book. Henry On Fri, 18 Feb 2011 08:18 -0500, "J Bryan Kramer" <[email protected]> wrote: You know that's a good point. When you think about it, someone who is willing to spend $600 for a radio trigger has self selected themselves into a high flash use group. If I had one of these I would be very tempted to ventilate the head with a few small drill holes. Also I would not stop using my 580EX II if I had one, especially since I'm in the low use group. I might avoid extreme usage, flashing the unit over and over again at short intervals for an extended period. BK “"Only the print contains the artist's meaning and message." " ----- Ansel Adams J Bryan Krämer North Florida, USA photos at: [1]http://pbase.com/photoburner blog at: [2]http://www.photoburner.net On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 23:50, Henry Heerschap <[3][email protected]> wrote: The 580EX II has been on the market for over three years now and we’re just hearing about this. I read the article this morning and perused the PDF from LPA. Several observations: 1. why are we only hearing about this now? If this is as big a deal as they claim, we would have been hearing about it all along. Doing a quick Google search, I’m not seeing much of anything beyond this article. 2. The article indicates that LPA encourages people to use high speed sync a lot because they can multiply the units and make up for the decreased power. If you’re running your flash in HSS, you are pushing it a lot harder than would be typical. That might be the real source of the problem. 3. I’ve had mind since they originally came out, plus I’ve since bought two more. They’ve been rock solid performers. I’m not a super heavy user, but I’ve done a number of church directories and other large-ism things with them. 4. I did have one thing fail. I admit it. The rubber gasket at the foot of the unit broke on one of mine from jamming it into a flash bracket. Maybe I should sign onto that class-action suit. <g> I’m not especially impressed by any of this, but I’m see what happens next. Henry From: [4][email protected] [mailto:[5][email protected]] On Behalf Of J Bryan Kramer Sent: Thursday, February 17, 2011 5:00 PM To: [6][email protected]; canon-10d; digital-rebels; [7][email protected] Subject: [Canon5DMarkII] 580 EX II failures Well now I'm glad I was too cheap to buy the EX II and got a plain EX. It seems that the LPA tech team (make PocketWizards) has discovered that Canon has apparently been screwing 580EX II users at least the current ones. There is a serious design fault in the flash and Canon must have known this since they designed around the problem in the 480EX II. The problem: "It appears that some combination of elements comes together to create the risk and increased probability of an IGBT failure within the 580EX II. ‐ Sealed flash tube assembly (internal zoom carriage assembly) ‐ Misalignment of the flash tube within the reflector such that arcing is more probable ‐ Reduced optical feedback via the fiber optic sense cable in the flash head ‐ Dryer air where ozone can be generated more easily ‐ Electrical discharge through the reflector at a moment when the IGBT is turned off" <[8]http://www.canonrumors.com/files/580EXII.pdf> Quite technical meaning it will be tough going if you don't know much about electronics. The translation: The IGBT is one of the transistors on the 580EX II. It controls the flash duration. The head on the flash is sealed, multiple flashes build up ozone, since the unit is sealed the ozone is trapped in the flash head. By some unknown, at this, time mechanism, the increased ozone cause IGBT failure. Replacing the IGBT will lead to another failure quickly. Removing the glass plate and making the unit non-sealed leads to zero failures after IGBT replacement. Thus the ozone is the problem since removing the plate allows the unit to vent. The 580EX has a different design and the 480EX II has been designed with vents to allow ozone to vent off. Read the pdf even if you aren't techie with the above explanation you'll be able to follow along. Sounds like an opportunity for Bruce to jump back into the law game, file a national class action, make millions in the settlement where 580EXII owners will get a $3 off coupon for their next Canon purchase. Big atta-boy to LPA who bought failed unit to figure out what was happening; double extra large Awww Sh#$% to Canon and how stupid can they get? They are apparently charging $380 to repair the units. No mention if they quietly applied a design fix on the manufacturing line. This will sweep the Canon blogging world in nothing flat. BK “"Only the print contains the artist's meaning and message." " ----- Ansel Adams J Bryan Krämer North Florida, USA photos at: [9]http://pbase.com/photoburner blog at: [10]http://www.photoburner.net References 1. http://pbase.com/photoburner 2. http://www.photoburner.net/ 3. mailto:[email protected] 4. mailto:[email protected] 5. mailto:[email protected] 6. mailto:[email protected] 7. mailto:[email protected] 8. http://www.canonrumors.com/files/580EXII.pdf 9. http://pbase.com/photoburner 10. http://www.photoburner.net/ Henry Heerschap [email protected]
--- End Message ---
________________________________________________________ Current beta is 5.0.0.141 | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
