Never mind the YN560, how about...........

[Kaouthia]

There's 2 devices that I saw Graham,

One looks like the ST-E2, and one looks like the SU-800. So perhaps there's manufacturer-specific transmitters (for the different TTL systems), but they all use the same flash receiver.

 

[Flash In The Pan]

There's 2 devices that I saw Graham,

One looks like the ST-E2, and one looks like the SU-800. So perhaps there's manufacturer-specific transmitters (for the different TTL systems), but they all use the same flash receiver.

The ST-E2 lookalike is exactly that, a clone of the Canon product in form and function, the one that pertains to the 460-Rx/Tx is based on a copy of the SU800 -two entirely different things

 

[Kaouthia]

Ahhhh.

 

[HoppyUK]

Yes, but unless I want to use ONLY YN-460RX flashes, I'm kinda screwed. Yes, I would want to put an RF-602 on the bottom of it, because then I could use it with my regular YN-460s, SB-600 and SB-900 flashes.


I'm getting less enthralled with each post I read.

Fixed zoom head @ 35mm, not compatible with radio triggers, or existing eTTL/iTTL systems, meaning it stands all on its own as a system. It's probably great if you currently do not own *any* speedlights and are looking into a cheap all-in-one solution, but if you want to add to an existing speedlight setup, not all that good.

If it were in a YN-560 flash, with zoomable head, more than twice the power output of the YN-460II, repeat flash, etc, etc. Then I might be a little more impressed.


That's the only positive thing I can see about this. Forcing Canon & Nikon to wake up and go radio.

I think you're commenting on the specific products, while I'm making a point about the system. The system could be applied any any product.

If it's what I'm guessing, and this is not rocket science, it's a radio triggered version of the Canon E-TTL auto flash system. It's the radio bit that's significant, not IR, which is the thing people pay hundreds of pounds for with the TTL Pocket Wizards and Radio Poppers.

Here we could have a much neater and compact system, at a fraction of the price - a transmitter (with AF assist light) unit, plus a remote flash unit with integrated radio receiver. It's like an Canon ST-E2 master, plus a remote slave flash gun; or a Nikon SU-800 commander plus a remote receiver flash.

Whether of not YN choose to make it RF-602 compatible etc is a marketing decision.

err.....

so because it's on a Canon, even though it looks like a Nikon SU800 it's actually a clone of an ST-E2?

It might look like an SU800, but the red front is only an AF assist light, not a commander flash. So in that sense it's actually not like an ST-E2 either! It just performs the same function, via radio. This is further confused by the third product, which actually is an ST-E2 clone as you say

The point is, one unit is a radio master/commander/transmitter, and the other is a radio slave/receiver/flash unit.

 

[Kris]

It will not be compatible with RF-602.
------------------------------------

That is not good.

 

[Kaouthia]

I think you're commenting on the specific products

Yeah, because this thread is about a specific product, the YN460-Rx/Tx set

while I'm making a point about the system. The system could be applied any any product.

But the system is built into the product in this case.

If it's what I'm guessing, and this is not rocket science, it's a radio triggered version of the Canon E-TTL auto flash system. It's the radio bit that's significant, not IR, which is the thing people pay hundreds of pounds for with the TTL Pocket Wizards and Radio Poppers.

Let's switch Canon E-TTL over to Nikon iTTL just for the sake of argument (because I know nothing about Canon speedlights).

Let's say I've got this YN460-Tx on my camera. Great, now I get full radio remote control of my YN460-Rx flashes via TTL or manual power. Ok, now I want to add my three SB-900 flashes into the mix. Oh wait, they don't have a radio receiver; I'm screwed. They also don't have an optical slave mode that works in conjunction with TTL lights (in the way that S2 mode does on the YN460-II), and why would they? they're TTL flashes designed to work with CLS; I'm still screwed.

So, I decide well, I can deal with wandering around to each flash, so I'll just use my RF-602 gear. I put the RF-602 transmitter on my hotshoe, I put receivers on each of my three SB-900s, I put RF-602 receivers (I'm not talking about built-in compatibility with a signal sent from an RF-602 transmitter, I'm talking about physically connecting an RF-602 receiver to the YN460-Rx foot), and my SB-900s go off, and my YN460-Rx flashes don't.

As I said, makes them kind of useless if you want to try to mix them into a pre-existing system if I can't throw the YN460-Rx flash unit onto an RF-602 receiver as well (for when I need to).

Here we could have a much neater and compact system, at a fraction of the price

And a fraction of the power and versatility if they're original YN460 flash units (it doesn't say whether they're based of YN460 or YN460-II flashes).[/quote]

Whether of not YN choose to make it RF-602 compatible etc is a marketing decision.

One that means I'll be sticking with SB-900s & RF-602 gear when line of sight fails (which isn't all that often to be honest).

 

[HoppyUK]

<snip>

I see your point, but if you're happy with manual flash, then you don't want this new system anyway.

Thinking about it, I don't see any reason why the flash units should not be RF-602 compatible, or at least could be triggered by one, in the same way as any other gun can be.

If YN chose to, they could put the new system on exactly the same frequency as the RF-602, in which case an RF-602 transmitter would fire the new flash guns without an extra receiver, obviously in manual only. And they could put an optical slave in it with S2 slave mode in it they felt like it.

Marketing decisions, probably based on cost, rather than technical blocks.

 

[Kaouthia]

I see your point, but if you're happy with manual flash, then you don't want this new system anyway.

Being happy with manual flash and being able to control the manual power output of all your flashes in multiple groups without ever leaving your shooting position are not mutually exclusive.

This is why I use my Nikon speedlights at manual power settings with CLS, instead of just throwing them all into SU-4 mode as regular optical slaves.

The only difference is that the signal is sent over 2.4Ghz wireless rather than optically.

Thinking about it, I don't see any reason why the flash units should not be RF-602 compatible, or at least could be triggered by one, in the same way as any other gun can be.

I don't either, which is why I'm hoping for a clarification on their "not compatible with RF-602" statement. Are they just talking about the flash's in-built ability to "hear" a signal from an RF-602 trigger? That's fine, I can live with that, as long as the potential is there to combine this with my pre-existing flashes. Or, will an RF-602 receiver not trigger them via the foot?

Marketing decisions, probably based on cost, rather than technical blocks.

Aye, possibly. But, compatibility options aside, I think I'll be passing on these in favour of YN-560 flashes for more power and versatility, and suffer with walking over to each flash head manually to adjust the power.

Once these hit the streets, depending on how the technology pans out, and compatibility with existing flash/wireless systems, I might wait until they do a YN560-Tx/Rx set for the extra functionality.

At least, for now, I can still trigger my camera with RF-602 gear and shoot tethered as I stand at each flash without having to go back to the camera for every little adjustment.

 

[The23rdman]

A Chinese friend of mine told of these guys were working on version of Pocket Wizard's TTL5's. Looks like these are them.

 

[Kaouthia]

PocketWizard TT5's? You mean we'll only have a Canon version for 12 months and keep getting strung along with "Yup, should be ready by next month" every month for Nikon versions?

 

[HoppyUK]

Being happy with manual flash and being able to control the manual power output of all your flashes in multiple groups without ever leaving your shooting position are not mutually exclusive.

This is why I use my Nikon speedlights at manual power settings with CLS, instead of just throwing them all into SU-4 mode as regular optical slaves.

The only difference is that the signal is sent over 2.4Ghz wireless rather than optically.


I don't either, which is why I'm hoping for a clarification on their "not compatible with RF-602" statement. Are they just talking about the flash's in-built ability to "hear" a signal from an RF-602 trigger? That's fine, I can live with that, as long as the potential is there to combine this with my pre-existing flashes. Or, will an RF-602 receiver not trigger them via the foot?


Aye, possibly. But, compatibility options aside, I think I'll be passing on these in favour of YN-560 flashes for more power and versatility, and suffer with walking over to each flash head manually to adjust the power.

Once these hit the streets, depending on how the technology pans out, and compatibility with existing flash/wireless systems, I might wait until they do a YN560-Tx/Rx set for the extra functionality.

At least, for now, I can still trigger my camera with RF-602 gear and shoot tethered as I stand at each flash without having to go back to the camera for every little adjustment.

The 'problem' with what you're wanting is that all the signals used for remote power adjustment, even in manual, are all sent by morse code. It might not be auto-TTL operation, but it is using the same system.

The RF-602 cannot do that. All it does is send a firing signal (and also a wake-up call signal).

PocketWizard TT5's? You mean we'll only have a Canon version for 12 months and keep getting strung along with "Yup, should be ready by next month" every month for Nikon versions?

Sounds about right.

Certainly, if anyone is thinking about some new flash kit now, don't wait. It could be a while yet for this.

 

[Kaouthia]

The RF-602 cannot do that. All it does is send a firing signal (and also a wake-up call signal).

I know it can't. But, if I'm wanting to mix and match various different makes and models flashes, a firing signal is all I want.

My point is, that if I get YN460-RX units (or whatever they end up being when they hit the streets). I don't want to have to be locked into only using them on their own. I want to be able to utilise *ALL* my flashes at the same time, if need be, one way or another. If these Rx units can *only* be triggered by the Tx unit, they're kinda useless to anybody who already owns a flash head.

 

[david1701]

I know it can't. But, if I'm wanting to mix and match various different makes and models flashes, a firing signal is all I want.

My point is, that if I get YN460-RX units (or whatever they end up being when they hit the streets). I don't want to have to be locked into only using them on their own. I want to be able to utilise *ALL* my flashes at the same time, if need be, one way or another. If these Rx units can *only* be triggered by the Tx unit, they're kinda useless to anybody who already owns a flash head.

you can always trigger the rf602 with the cameras pc port

or su4 the nikon guns

 

[Kaouthia]

Yeah, RF-602 trigger on the camera's PC port is always a way, but then I've got an RF-602 transmitter dangling a couple of feet below my camera and not on the hotshoe where it normally resides.

There's ways around everything if you look hard enough, but to me, going with a YN-only dedicated system is a waste when I've already got the capabilities of CLS when I need it with my Nikon speedlights, and RF-602 gear to give wireless functionality to *any* flash.

So, big deal, I have to manually walk to each flash to adjust the power settings. Well, I'd have to do that anyway with the YN460-Tx/Rx set if I wanted to add the YN460-II or SB-900 flashes as optical slaves.

If they were doing this with YN560 flash units, and not the most primitive flash head they ever made, then I might consider looking more seriously into it and working around the potential problems. But as it is, even with multiple group wifi abilities, these would be the least powerful and least versatile flashes in my bags.

 

[david1701]

I do see your point, for ttl I'm probably going to invest in several more canon guns as they work on 602s aswell

might be a contender in a few years with something really good, I mean in theory they could make hotshoe modules that link canon guns in......

 

[Kaouthia]

My expectations are too high. It's really an impossible task to expect a company to produce a flash that's both compatible with (in my case) Nikon CLS and offer WiFi support simultaneously.

Unless there's some way to control Nikon's power output via the hotshoe and some kind of 2.4Ghz YN adapter is released, it'd be impossible for them to really be able to communicate in a TTL, or even manual power, in a flash group style fashion.

For me, this would be the ultimate compromise....

A YN560-TX unit, that offers all that this YN460-TX unit seems offer, but also a 3rd mode that offers an "RF-602 Mode" that essentially makes it act like your standard RF-602 transmitter (all flashes being in a single group on one channel at their own individually set manual power settings, just as you'd do right now with RF-602 Tx/Rx sets).

A YN560-RX unit. Basically a WiFi flash compatible with the above Tx, but at YN-560 spec instead of the much less useful (imo) YN-460 flash unit. With all the wireless features the YN460-TX looks like it'll have, plus a built in RF-602 mode with manual power settings made on the flash.

Then I could have the best of both worlds and pick and choose what I wanted to use without having to hook up extra gear.

If they can produce the above, I'd be extremely interested. If not, then it's YN-560s and more RF-602 receivers for me.

 

[Selbosh]

If they were doing this with YN560 flash units, and not the most primitive flash head they ever made, then I might consider looking more seriously into it and working around the potential problems.

Got to start somewhere. The fact that the flash is primitive makes it easier to develop, and then they can add more advanced features as they go. Just like the transition from the YN460 last year to the YN468 and YN560 today. We'll have to wait and see.

 

[Kaouthia]

Got to start somewhere.

Perhaps, but it still seems like 1 step forward, 2 steps back to me.

 

[Selbosh]

Perhaps the market-ready version (in 6 months or so) will have more features.

 

[HoppyUK]

Perhaps, but it still seems like 1 step forward, 2 steps back to me.

You're very hard to please John

If YN can get a radio auto-TTL product out there, that works, works well, works reliably, and at a good price, I think that will be a heck of a good start.

Pocket Wizard haven't managed it yet.

 

[Flash In The Pan]

Got to start somewhere. The fact that the flash is primitive makes it easier to develop, and then they can add more advanced features as they go. Just like the transition from the YN460 last year to the YN468 and YN560 today. We'll have to wait and see.

I'm of the mind that both YongNuo and Phottix are trying to be major players without really having the skills to do so. It's all very well reverse engineering someone else's product and flogging a knock-off at bargain basement prices, or selling cheap-and-cheerful flashguns, but trying to take such brands head-to-head with the likes of Nikon, Canon and Pocket Wizard seems, to me at least, to be a tad foolhardy.


Time, I suppose though, will tell.....

 

[Kaouthia]

You're very hard to please John

I'm in training to be a miserable old git. Victor Meldrew is my idol.

If YN can get a radio auto-TTL product out there, that works, works well, works reliably, and at a good price, I think that will be a heck of a good start.

Yeah, it's a good start, but it's taken long enough. Don't get me wrong, I love YN, I think they're great. I'm not really all that bothered about TTL to be honest. It's about as useful as sticking your camera in P mode and letting it figure out everything for you.

But I'm not *that* hard to please. Manual power setting groups controlled from my hot-shoe will do me just nicely, as long as I'm doing it with flashes that have a decent amount of power, zoomable head and quick recycle time (YN-560, or SB-900 if they can come up with a 2.4Ghz receiver that talks with Nikon flashes via the hotshoe). With the ability to add other flashes on RF-602 receivers with their power set the old fashioned way.

I certainly don't get why it's taken the likes of high profile high end companies like PocketWizard this long to still fail to produce something useful with TTL though.

 

[The23rdman]

I'm of the mind that both YongNuo and Phottix are trying to be major players without really having the skills to do so. It's all very well reverse engineering someone else's product and flogging a knock-off at bargain basement prices, or selling cheap-and-cheerful flashguns, but trying to take such brands head-to-head with the likes of Nikon, Canon and Pocket Wizard seems, to me at least, to be a tad foolhardy.


Time, I suppose though, will tell.....

You say that, but the RF602's are just as reliable as PW's seem to be.

 

[Flash In The Pan]

You say that, but the RF602's are just as reliable as PW's seem to be.

Up to a point, yes. However, we're not talking about £30 triggers with this new generation, more like £100+ by the time they hit these shores and what's acceptable at one price point isn't necessarily so at one 3 or 4 times as much.

 

[The23rdman]

Up to a point, yes. However, we're not talking about £30 triggers with this new generation, more like £100+ by the time they hit these shores and what's acceptable at one price point isn't necessarily so at one 3 or 4 times as much.

Yes, true enough. I guess it really does come down to wait and see. ...Anyway, this isn't getting us any closer to YN560's. Any idea when you'll have them?

 

[Flash In The Pan]

Yes, true enough. I guess it really does come down to wait and see. ...Anyway, this isn't getting us any closer to YN560's. Any idea when you'll have them?

At the moment I'm getting from them on shipping times :shrug:

 

[The23rdman]

At the moment I'm getting from them on shipping times :shrug:

The initial launch was very small, wasn't it?

 

[Rob.Marsh]

Interesting thread, I tend to agree with FITP's comments on the trying to be major players.

On a side not, anyone know if they have sorted the sync problem with th RF602s and pentax/samsung cameras yet?

(PS, fully expecting to be told no, just get a nikon to fix the problem!! )

 

[Flash In The Pan]

Interesting thread, I tend to agree with FITP's comments on the trying to be major players.

On a side not, anyone know if they have sorted the sync problem with th RF602s and pentax/samsung cameras yet?

(PS, fully expecting to be told no, just get a nikon to fix the problem!! )

 

[Rob.Marsh]

:bang::bang::bang::bang::bang::bang:

If I could afford it, i would go nikon now, believe me. but alas, I can't!:thumbsdown:

 

[Flash In The Pan]

:bang::bang::bang::bang::bang::bang:

If I could afford it, i would go nikon now, believe me. but alas, I can't!:thumbsdown:

You can't afford not to

 

[HoppyUK]

I'm in training to be a miserable old git. Victor Meldrew is my idol.


Yeah, it's a good start, but it's taken long enough. Don't get me wrong, I love YN, I think they're great. I'm not really all that bothered about TTL to be honest. It's about as useful as sticking your camera in P mode and letting it figure out everything for you.

But I'm not *that* hard to please. Manual power setting groups controlled from my hot-shoe will do me just nicely, as long as I'm doing it with flashes that have a decent amount of power, zoomable head and quick recycle time (YN-560, or SB-900 if they can come up with a 2.4Ghz receiver that talks with Nikon flashes via the hotshoe). With the ability to add other flashes on RF-602 receivers with their power set the old fashioned way.

I certainly don't get why it's taken the likes of high profile high end companies like PocketWizard this long to still fail to produce something useful with TTL though.

I don't know why either, but I think it's fair to say that PW know what they're about and are trying very hard. TBH this whole strobist thing is still very new - post digital, it didn't really exist with film, for all sorts of reasons.

Graham might be right in what he's saying about YN etc trying to punch above their weight. There seems to be a fundamental difficultly in getting an auto-TTL radio trigger to work, to work fast and reliably while it's trying to punch a whole stream of lightning speed coded pulses over distance and against a background of general RF noise. And to do it with all brands of camera and flash, cheaply, internationally, and legally.

My YN RF-602 triggers work really well for me, like you John. Most other folks seem to be equally pleased (if not 100%). But I only use them with one Canon camera and flash, I don't shoot side by side with twenty other togs, live next to a taxi rank, my mobile phone seems to operate on a compatible band, and the kids up the road don't run their radio controlled cars nearby.

While it's certainly true that this stuff is technically challenging, I have half an idea that part of the reason why we haven't already got it up and working already is that until now the market didn't really exist, and basically nobody has really tried. And the reason for PW's problems is becuase they are stuck with the more difficult lower radio frequency due to reverse compabability issues with thousands of existing users. The 2.4Ghz frequency that Radio Popper use (and the RF-602) seems better but I'm not sure about international legal standards there. Eg, there is no European version of the Radio Popper.

What I would really like to see is Nikon and Canon to do it, and to do it properly. No hassle, no compatability issues, just pure functionality. It will cost, but in the overall scheme of things maybe not that much. Keep the existing optical auto-TTL system because it's cheap and works very well for most (ordinary ) people, but then have a custom RF module that plugs in neatly to form a flush integrated unit, overrides the optical system, adds all the fab hypersync and HSS stuff from Pocket Wizard, and can be operated either from the normal flash controls, or the camera. I would be prepared to pay a premium for that. Either way, interesting times

 

[Kaouthia]

Yeah, it's relatively new, but I was doing it 6 or 7 years ago with my D100 and SB-28/50/80 flashes. Digital's been around a while now. The D70 had iTTL and that's been around since 2004, and the D2h (which also supports iTTL) hit the shelves a year before that.

I've never had an issue with the RF-602s and interference. 433Mhz triggers *all* the time whenever I've had a play with them (people keep trying to convince me to give them a second chance; so I do, then they fail).

I think a lot of people who slate them and have never even used them, simply don't know that they're something different than all the 433Mhz crap that adorns eBay. Even PocketWizard have had their issues using 433Mhz frequencies.

To be honest, I think even less of PW for trying to cling on to old, clogged up, fire-the-flash-when-somebody-halfway-down-the-street-turns-on-the-microwave frequencies. Nikon did it when they went from Film to Digital, changing from regular TTL to (the miserable, crappy) D-TTL, then doing it all over again with the much improved iTTL and CLS.

My SB-900 flashes won't work on the D100, the SB-50DX flashes won't work on the D300s (not with TTL at least). Sometimes you just have to say "Yeah, this is old crap, we're starting over, screw compatibility with older units, we'll just offer them a trade-in deal on their old equipment so we can sell more and make more profit!). But perhaps that's just too obvious an idea.

Or, here's an idea. Put a switch on the side that lets them choose between 433Mhz and 2.4Ghz? That way, those that don't want to be left behind in the dark ages don't have to be, and it provides an aid to transition for those using older PW equipment. Again, perhaps that's just too obvious a solution?

I'm not really sure why we don't get RadioPoppers over here, I'll have to do some digging, but 2.4Ghz is certainly not an illegal frequency. Most wireless phones in the home these days use it, all the radio control car/boat/helicopter/plane guys are switching over to 2.4Ghz, and anything on your WiFi network uses it - although there are definitely differences on HOW the 2.4Ghz frequency is used.

For example, 2.4Ghz WiFi in the UK for computers offers 2 more channels than 2.4Ghz WiFi in the US. You can see this by simply looking at the WiFi grips Nikon offers. For the D200, that would be the WT-3, and the WT-3A ("A" for "American"). The American grip is fully functional over in the UK, but 2 of the channels on the British version would not be usable over in the US.

I'm with you. Let's bug Nikon and Canon to get their arse in gear and produce proper 2.4Ghz versions rather than have it limited to just optical.

 

[david1701]

what would be proper nice is a global set up of frequency bands - what goes where ect

would make life sooooo much easier for everyone

But ride on John am with you on needing oem wireless solutions

 

[HoppyUK]

Not only are you hard to please John, you're impatient

I don't suppose any of the things we've been discussing are beyond the wit of PW, and others. Maybe they are just hung up on the reverse-compatability thing - I agree it looks like a mistake and your idea of a frequency switch is a good one but it can only add cost to a product that is already 400 quid.

He's my best take on it. Maybe it can be technically done at 2.4Ghz without too much difficulty and if you are not troubled by any patent issues, then the opportunity is there for the right company with the right mix of skills. Maybe Yongnuo is that company

 

[Kaouthia]

Maybe Yongnuo is that company

Hopefully

 

[HoppyUK]

Hopefully

Here's an idea that might work, assuming that one of the problems is transmitting all that master/commander data reliably at such incredibly high speed. And it clearly is a problem, hence the lack of max x-sync with RF-502, which is even worse with the real cheapo triggers. And with optical mastering, there is a bit of a delay in remote control shooting while the data is transmitted and collected - it's only a tenth of a second or so, but that can be quite a long time.

The point is, you only need all this speed when you haven't got time to mess about and the flash exposure has to be right first time. When you have more time, and the subject is staying in the same place for a several shots (typical strobist shoot) then there is no reason why all the master/commander data cannot be transmitted separately ahead of time, just as it does when you use the FEL button.

All that stuff can be sent at a relative snail pace, leaving just the firing pulse to go out when the shutter opens (as it does now with manual exposure triggering). For the next shot, no pre-flash or command data would be required and the flash would just fire again at the same level. If the situation changes or the subject distance changes, fire another pre-flash manually and the the exposure is reset with fresh data.

I don't see why that wouldn't work and would do everything you/I/we want, without the need for expensive high-speed processors and complex technology that just isn't needed. And if it actually speeded up the important business of flash sync with multipe remote auto-TTL, which it would, that would be a bonus.

 

[Kaouthia]

hence the lack of max x-sync with RF-602 with Canon bodies

Fixed. No problem shooting 1/250th for me on any of my bodies (even the decrepit old D100).

I've actually had as fast as 1/800th without any black bars (don't remember my flash power output tbh) using the "SB-900 on the hotshoe with a sync cable to the RF-602 transmitter to get high speed sync with crap flashes" method - I've heard some have even managed to get the full 1/8000th with some flashes and Nikon bodies with RF-602 triggers using this trick (but no idea what combos off-hand).

And I get rear curtain sync.

 

[HoppyUK]

Fixed. No problem shooting 1/250th for me on any of my bodies (even the decrepit old D100).

I've actually had as fast as 1/800th without any black bars (don't remember my flash power output tbh) using the "SB-900 on the hotshoe with a sync cable to the RF-602 transmitter to get high speed sync with crap flashes" method - I've heard some have even managed to get the full 1/8000th with some flashes and Nikon bodies with RF-602 triggers using this trick (but no idea what combos off-hand).

And I get rear curtain sync.

I won't comment on that nasty strobist bodge John

But the x-sync slow down on most radio triggers is something different and is caused by the processing time it takes between the camera providing the fire signal and the transmitter translating it into a radio signal, the receiver translating it back again, and then actually firing the flash.

By the time all that has happened, the second curtain has already started on its way. PW's don't seem to suffer from it because they have very fast processors, and the auto-TTL Pocket Wizards can even enhance the regular x-sync speed (Hypersync) by sending the firing signal slightly ahead of the 'normal' timing and making the absolute max of the available x-sync window. Basically, most cameras will x-sync at slightly higher than the stated speed, if you are able to customise the timing precisely to your individual camera.

 

[Kaouthia]

That's very odd. I do think it might be a Canon thing though.

As I said, never seen that issue with any Nikon body, and I don't know anybody else that has either, but I hear about it all the time with Canon bodies - sometimes it'll synch to 1/200, with people recommending 1/125-1/160th, sometimes you have to be as slow as 1/60. All seems very dodgy to me.