Nikon CLS v. Canon E-TTL II
Previously, I promised that I’d comment on some of the tidbits I’ve gleaned from various documentation about Canon’s E-TTL II flash and the corresponding wireless control, and how it relates to the Nikon CLS system.
From a basic standpoint, they’re pretty much the same thing. Both systems allow for wireless remote control of a number of compatible slaved flash units, including various automatic or manual exposure modes and lighting ratios. Both systems have their pros and their cons.
For instance … You can get basic wireless control with Nikon’s system using just a D70(s), D80 or D200 and a single off camera flash. The pop-up on-camera flash can take on the role of the “commander”, with varying degrees of control, depending upon the camera model. The pop-up flash will control a Nikon SB-600 or SB-800, and also control the SB-R200 close-up flashes. To add more lights to the system, you must buy the three aforementioned Nikon SB flashes for full control. Further, if you want independent control of the slaved flashes, you must mount an SB-800 flash (or an SU-800 master controller) on the camera. Any other combination either won’t work, or is limited in its control capabilities. You cannot use flashes made by other manufacturers as of this writing.
With the Canon system, the pop-up on-camera flash is completely useless as a part of the E-TTL II wireless flash system. In order to use the E-TTL II wireless system at all, you need to mount an 580EX-II or compatible flash unit on the camera, or use Canon’s little commander gizmo. One thing to note in my previous sentence is the phrase “or compatible flash unit,” which means that certain flash units from manufacturers other than Canon will work correctly with their wireless flash system — for example, the Sigma EF 500 DG Super. The Sigma flash has 100% of the capability of the 580EX-II, at a fraction of the cost! Certain models of Metz flashes (for instance, the Metz Mecablitz 58 AF-1 C) will also work seamlessly with the Canon wireless flashes, at a price that falls somewhere between the Sigma and Canon models.
One item of interest is that Canon’s system refers to the varying amounts of light produced by each flash in photographer-friendly lighting ratios, while Nikon has you alter the individual flash outputs in EV steps. Not a big deal, I guess. Just a different mindset — almost as if the Canon system was actually designed by photographers, and the Nikon, by engineers. Certainly not important, but, for some, the Nikon way is a little harder to “get.”
Post Revisions:
There are no revisions for this post.

Gee………I must be smarter than I thought………..I have absolutly no problems with the NIKON LIGHTING SYSTEM. I find it VERY easy to use and understand.
It is very easy to use. That’s one of the things I really like about it. It’s just “different” in that the traditional method of setting lighting is by ratios, not EV steps.
BTW, Sony/Minolta, as well as Pentax, also have similar systems, which I presume work “brilliantly,” also.
We all know that they are made by a little Chinaman in a 4×4 room………..he just puts different lables on them…..:0
Well, there’s a little more difference than that — otherwise, I’d be able to use my Nikon SBs on the Canon.
The Metz flashes look really intreaguing (specifically, the Mecablitz 58 AF-1 models), both in the Canon and Nikon variants. They’re not much less expensive than the camera manufacturers’ models, but they may be slightly more capable in some ways.
I’m also curious, since both Canon and Nikon tend to be very protective of the communications protocols, how well the third party flashes would work in conjunction with their Canon or Nikon counterparts…
I use to use Metz when I was doing wedding with my twin lens……..they are very good.