I've been a long-time proponent of Canon Speedlites, and also an avid follower of Metz flashes. I always liked the Metz for its sturdy quality and reliability--I'd owned a Metz potato masher (handlemount, in the old vernacular). But when I switched to the Canon EOS system, I became a devout Canon shoe-mount advocate, finding these flashes dependable and robust. I watched Canon Speedlites evolve over the years, to the point where it seemed to make no sense to use anything else. When the 580EX came along, I immediately bought one to supplant my 550EX as my main flash. (I also keep the smaller, less-powerful 430EX around for less-demanding tasks, and because it's handy for multi-flash setups.) Then the Metz unit appeared on the scene, and I was tempted. But before I had a chance to act, Canon revamped the 580EX and came up with the 580EX II. With this flash, Canon finally had a shoe mount with an auto-thyristor control option as an alternative to E-TTL/E-TTL II (Canon calls it "external metering"--and there's a catch to the way it works). So, should I scrap my 580EX and replace it with the newer 580EX II, or switch to the Metz 58 AF-1C? After all, the two shoe mounts have much in common. Not an easy choice. (I should add that there is a Nikon compatible Metz 58 AF-1N. You can get more information at Bogen's website, or at www.metz.de/en.)

(Above Top): Flash Front--Shown seated in the included mini-stands, the two flash units have much in common, including an auto-sensor on the front--something new to Canon flash units, providing auto-thyristor control in addition to E-TTL/E-TTL II and TTL flash. (Center): Flash Foot--The Canon flash foot (right) is now metal for enhanced durability, in contrast to that on the Metz unit. You'll also note that the Metz features the traditional thumbwheel to secure the flash to the camera's hot shoe, whereas the Canon employs a locking lever with release for speed and added security. (Above): Flash Back--While the flash-ready signal is green on one, red on the other, more significant differences lie in the way functions are accessed on the two strobes. The Canon (right) clearly labels the basic functions. That said, such things as wireless operation are actually easier to set on the Metz flash. You'll also note that the battery compartment on the right side of the Canon flash has a release latch--something new that sets this flash apart as well.

The Good And The Quirky
Simply stated, practically anything you could ever want in a shoe-mount strobe is found in these two flash units. They both offer E-TTL II, E-TTL, and TTL control with compatible Canon EOS cameras (standard TTL is less reliable); flash exposure compensation and auto flash bracketing (remember: settings on the flash override those made on the camera); high-speed sync; flash coverage that corresponds to image sensor size; swivel and tilt (including macro tilt); stroboscopic flash; modeling flash; and wireless remote operation, to name some of the more salient features. However, there are some differences in the way each flash unit can be set up to deliver a few of these features or in the scope of these functions (see Table below).