Charles Maring Video: Game Changers Are Rare But Real

 Legends behind the lens Charles and Jennifer Maring photograph a limited number of weddings each year all over the world, based primarily by referral. Among the most awarded photographers, their style received international acclaim and has gained quite a celebrity following. Portrait and wedding commissions include notables as Donald and Melania Trump, Tom Clancy, Star Jones, David Tutera and even Walt Disney World for their most lavish events. So when Charles volunteered to be the subject, showing how HyperSync has changed the game for him, we were all eyes — and ears. Out came the video camera and here are the results. Game, set and match! All changed, thanks to PocketWizard’s Mini and Flex.

Bookmark and Share

9 Responses to “Charles Maring Video: Game Changers Are Rare But Real”

  1. I’m a Nikon user!! :)

  2. Jack Miller says:

    I received my Calumet catalog today and found reference to this cool new product. I was all set to order a pair, but I elected to do a little research. I came across this set of videos which caused me to reevaluate my plan:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7fyB0OQz2h0&feature=channel_page

    You mention the following limitation on your compatibility page (reference: http://www.pocketwizard.com/products/transmitter_receiver/36/TT1-C/compatibility/):

    “3. RF noise emitted by the 430EX, 580EX and 580EX II flash units limits the reception range of FlexTT5 to approximately 50 feet when flash is normally mounted. Reception can be increased using steps described in the Instruction manual. It can be greatly improved by separating the flash from the FlexTT5 by using the Canon OC-E3 cord.”

    First of all, I think it is a bit misleading for PW to not include this info in the FAQ or the specification section and for the retailers to advertise 800′ when the practical limitation is more like 50 or less. But that is another topic, really.

    The above video suggest that the range is more like 35 feet and that the separation does little to improve the range. To obtain better range, the video suggests that the person holding the PW is acting as an antenna, but I wonder if perhaps the interference from the 580EXII was being transmitted through the light stand to the receiver. I would be interested in a test which isolates the receiver in a way that separates it from the light stand without someone holding it. I honestly have no idea if this would matter. Just a hypothesis at this point.

    At any rate, 50 feet is pretty lame for a product like this that is supposed to set the photographer free from the limitations of IR comm. Thirty-five feet is definitely not much help. I have tested the IR systems and found them to work fine in that range in bright sunlight, of course still with the line of sight limitation.

    Can PW produce some comparable test results showing the true range of its new units? I would like to see that. If they can show results in the 800′ range for standard Canon equipment (i shoot with a 1D-Mark III and 580 EX II flashes), then I will put my Radio Poppers on EBay in 1/8000 of a sec. The PW seems like a much cleaner package if it works. If not, then I’ll stick with the Radio Poppers.

  3. danny says:

    patrick…
    hey there got mine in and am working on mine. i also read the rob gal release for the firmware upgrade. will this start to remedy some of this?

    could you guys speak in on the dwf community about these new pw.

    love the look btw. thanks for the rsvp.

  4. patrickclow says:

    Danny:

    The new firmware addresses a few things (my next big project is detailing it), but it won’t do anything for range. It will deal with the Custom Function issue, though.

    Here is another link since the link I gave above still needs to get moderated in:

    http://www.flickr.com/groups/pocketwizards/discuss/72157615511292912/72157615498646615/

    I am not yet a member of that community!

    Thanks for the comments!

    Patrick

  5. Martin says:

    Maybe one day we will see a video explaining why the remote cable for triggering my D300 is $95? AIG must be helping PW with their pricing (extortion). MIne are going back where I bought them. They were great but this cable crap is too much to take.

  6. patrickclow says:

    Martin: In the not-too-distant past, some cables were priced over $200! The reason? Those Nikon parts are expensive. So we engineered our own.

    We’ve worked hard to bring the cable prices down over the years and in-line with other quality cables from OEMs like Nikon and Canon.

    But we’ve also worked hard to create *really good* cables. Our remote cables have precision locking mechanisms, just like their OEM counterparts. We offer cables with special features like pre-trigger capabilities. The wire itself is supple, yet strong and time-tested. The miniphone connectors are correctly sized and angled for use with PocketWizards. Inside some of them are diodes or circuit boards tailored to our products and specific cameras. You get the point.

    I’m not a salesman. I’m a tech guy. I don’t think cables should be a barrier to PocketWizard use, and wish the prices were lower, too. But I also know that a cable is often the weakest link in any triggering system. Nothing is worse than having a cable fail rendering your thousands of dollars of camera and glass useless. Quality cables reduce that dramatically. And quality doesn’t often come cheap.

    I am sorry you experienced that sticker shock, though!

    Patrick from PocketWizard.