3rd Party Flashes... What to Buy.
Mike
than my built in one. I am looking for a TTL one with with option to
do Bounce flash. (make sence?) Flash should be fully compatable and
fully work with my camera's AF.
I have a Nikon F50 (N50), and my widest lens is a 24mm prime (so the
flash should go atleast to 24mm, my built in only goes to 35mm).
Even though I own a Nikon, I am open minded on 3rd party equipment, so
its fine if its a Phoenix, Vivitar, Sigma, ect.. flash.
The main problem is that I don't know what is fully compatable and
what isn't. (is there an easy way to know what is?)
Looking for suggestions on what to buy.
Thanks for your time.
Mike LePard
email: michael...@home.com
smit...@my-deja.com
equivalent, and have most of the same features. In fact, I'd heard
somewhere that the 4000AF was built to the specs of the SB-26. I just
wish it had swivel as well as tilt. The 5000AF is my new flash of
choice. It has an auto zoom head that covers 24mm to 135mm, and it is
very powerful. It has more features than I know what to do with. Jst
my favorites.
-Brett
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Yeti Man
(can you hear the choir ?)
Quantum Mechanics.... The dreams stuff is made of.
Gene Windell
wrote:
>Ok, I'm new to flashes and have no experience with them at all other
>than my built in one. I am looking for a TTL one with with option to
>do Bounce flash. (make sence?) Flash should be fully compatable and
>fully work with my camera's AF.
The main purpose of TTL flash metering is to relieve the photographer
from learning anything about lighting technique. Lighting is where
photography begins and ends. Though lighting technique is far more
important than anything do do with cameras or lenses, lighting is
usually the last thing a photographer ever learns - and most never
learn it. By simply reading a $25 book on lighting technique, you can
save yourself many thousands of dollars foolishly spent on TTL
lighting equipment.
Gene Windell
Obakesan
In article <38bf0fd7...@news.psci.net>, ewin...@psci.net (Gene
Windell) wrote:
>On Mon, 28 Feb 2000 17:39:04 GMT, michael...@home.com (Mike)
>wrote:
>
>>Ok, I'm new to flashes and have no experience with them at all other
>>than my built in one. I am looking for a TTL one with with option to
>>do Bounce flash. (make sence?) Flash should be fully compatable and
>>fully work with my camera's AF.
>
>The main purpose of TTL flash metering is to relieve the photographer
>from learning anything about lighting technique. Lighting is where
dear cynic ... the main purpose of TTL is to provide the photographer
with another tool to perform a job. And it does that well.
In the studio I use my flash meter (not cos I don't trust my TTL, but
because I know that meters responce, and since it's incident, can decide
what I want to do about dark and light that upsets reflectance metering)
In the field, when I'm using a telephoto and wanting fill flash, rather
than waste time (and maybe loose a shot) I use TTL and get results that
I expect. Know how it works, and then using that understanding work with
the tool.
>photography begins and ends. Though lighting technique is far more
>important than anything do do with cameras or lenses, lighting is
>usually the last thing a photographer ever learns - and most never
>learn it. By simply reading a $25 book on lighting technique, you can
>save yourself many thousands of dollars foolishly spent on TTL
>lighting equipment.
I agree that lighting is it ... after all that's what we are capturing
right? But really I don't think that one needs to spend thousands, to
take advantage of TTL ... I have a few flashes that are TTL and I didn't
spend even $500 on them.
--
See Ya
(when the bandwidth gets better ;-)
Chris Eastwood Please remove undies for reply
Photographer, Stunt Programmer
Motorcyclist and dingbat
Obakesan
In article <89n6d1$3q...@inetbws1.citec.com.au>,
cjundie...@powerup.com.au (Obakesan) wrote:
>In the field, when I'm using a telephoto and wanting fill flash, rather
>than waste time (and maybe loose a shot) I use TTL and get results that
>I expect. Know how it works, and then using that understanding work with
>the tool.
I'll add to that , when I have the time, I try and use guide numbers,
and manual settings .... I find it handy to have a flash that has
variable power settings too, mine has 1 stop increments down from full
power to 32nd.
Gene Windell
(Obakesan) wrote:
>dear cynic ... the main purpose of TTL is to provide the photographer
>with another tool to perform a job. And it does that well.
If so, what is the original poster complaining about? Why is it that
users of manual and old fashioned automatic flash units never seek
advice in this forum about how to operate their equipment or improve
their flash pictures?
I'm not saying that TTL flash metering doesn't work within its
limitations. I'm saying that reliance on TTL flash metering
discourages a beginner from learning the fundamentals of flash
photography, forever being held hostage by a Japanese software
engineer who will ultimately prove disappointing.
Lighting technique is the essential ingredient which raises a
photographer from shooting mundane shapshots to creative expression.
Lighting technique is not a burdensome chore to be avoided by means of
a computer, but rather the liberation that frees the snapshooter from
his constraints. TTL flash metering not only discourages one from
learning lighting technique, but gives the false conception that there
is nothing to be learned short of pushing a button on a computer.
Gene Windell
Obakesan
In article <38bf4a18...@news.psci.net>, ewin...@psci.net (Gene
Windell) wrote:
>On Fri, 03 Mar 2000 02:04:02 GMT, cjundie...@powerup.com.au
>(Obakesan) wrote:
>
>>dear cynic ... the main purpose of TTL is to provide the photographer
>>with another tool to perform a job. And it does that well.
>
>If so, what is the original poster complaining about? Why is it that
I guess they are seeking advice, as they are ignorant. Seeing that TT-L
is the most common thing now, I guess that's where the questions come
from. In the past I often explained guide numbers to people, and after
that I often had to explain how to use the "new" auto flashes.
I suppose since they aren't around so much now, that the amount of
questions is down.
I agree that RTFM would apply, or as you suggested read a basic book.
Perhaps I was feeling expansive when I chose to answer the person. It
seems that today it's all to easy to cast out a question onto a NG and
see what you get ... its easier than reading the manual 8-)
>I'm not saying that TTL flash metering doesn't work within its
>limitations. I'm saying that reliance on TTL flash metering
>discourages a beginner from learning the fundamentals of flash
too true ... there is no substitue for knowing what you are doing.
Actually I am tending to feel that I prefer working with tungsten
anyway, as the old timers often say, "one flash and its in the trash"
>photography, forever being held hostage by a Japanese software
>engineer who will ultimately prove disappointing.
or a German one if you have a Metz ;-)
take care :-)
Anders Svensson
> On Fri, 03 Mar 2000 02:04:02 GMT, cjundie...@powerup.com.au
> (Obakesan) wrote:
>
> >dear cynic ... the main purpose of TTL is to provide the photographer
> >with another tool to perform a job. And it does that well.
>
> If so, what is the original poster complaining about? Why is it that
> users of manual and old fashioned automatic flash units never seek
> advice in this forum about how to operate their equipment or improve
> their flash pictures?
>
> I'm not saying that TTL flash metering doesn't work within its
> limitations. I'm saying that reliance on TTL flash metering
> discourages a beginner from learning the fundamentals of flash
> photography, forever being held hostage by a Japanese software
> engineer who will ultimately prove disappointing.
>
> Lighting technique is the essential ingredient which raises a
> photographer from shooting mundane shapshots to creative expression.
> Lighting technique is not a burdensome chore to be avoided by means of
> a computer, but rather the liberation that frees the snapshooter from
> his constraints. TTL flash metering not only discourages one from
> learning lighting technique, but gives the false conception that there
> is nothing to be learned short of pushing a button on a computer.
>
> Gene Windell
TTL flash dosage is certainly convinient for those who are into fast paced
photography and where getting something at all is more important than
getting it just right. I see a resemblance with AF here, and in both
cases, automation is increasing productivity, possibly (or even likely) at
the expense of quality. That said, I like AF and can see the benefit of
automatic fill flash.
But, I am under the impression that flash is generally a evil thing that
is best avoided :-). That is probably because I have enough problems to
handle light as it comes naturally, and the added complication of adding
my own personal sun (or several) to that is not trivial.
One of the major drawbacks with modern TTL flashes is that many people
belive that the TTL function (getting the right amount of light) is more
important than making the light come from the right direction(s), so they
firmly mount the flash on the camera. Just to add some spice to the
discussion, how about making it an offense to not deliver a 6 foot TTL
cord with every TTL capable flash ? Or, even better, make that happen via
a IR link ?
--
-----------------------------------------------------------
Anders Svensson
Anders.-.Ei...@swipnet.se
-----------------------------------------------------------
Jack Daynes
> On Fri, 03 Mar 2000 02:04:02 GMT, cjundie...@powerup.com.au
> (Obakesan) wrote:
>
> >dear cynic ... the main purpose of TTL is to provide the photographer
> >with another tool to perform a job. And it does that well.
>
> If so, what is the original poster complaining about? Why is it that
> users of manual and old fashioned automatic flash units never seek
> advice in this forum about how to operate their equipment or improve
> their flash pictures?
>
> <SNIP>
And what an honor to be graced here by such SUPERIOR photographers as
Gene, Chris, and Anders, to talk down to the rest of us low life, limited
creatures. I have so much enjoyed being condescended to.
--
Jack
;~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~;
/ Remove ".NOSPAM." for email replies /
\____________________________________/
X-No-Archive:yes
Stephen Syrotiak
Anders Svensson wrote:
> Just to add some spice to the
> discussion, how about making it an offense to not deliver a 6 foot TTL
> cord with every TTL capable flash ? Or, even better, make that happen via
> a IR link ?
With the hope that decision makers are monitoring this inane discussion,
I'll say AMEN to that!
--
Stephen Syrotiak
Southern Connecticut
http://pages.cthome.net/stephen
cbar...@my-deja.com
pose a few questions to help me better use my Vivitar 285HV with my
Nikon N70. I almost opted for a SB-28 or SB-26, but wanted to work on
my skills and not rely on computers to expose my film. I have a Nikon
FM that I use too, but I want to shoot these with the N70.
I'm about to shoot a few working portraits. One will be at a local
indoor pool and the other will be at my daughters school. I want to
light the main subject in a way that makes them jump out at you, but
not completely lose the background. Can you help me understand how to
meter this to make sure that I get the effect I am looking for? The
plan is to have some subtle funny things happening in the background
that are related to the job function of the subject.
Any lighting help is appreciated.
Harvey H. King
>> limitations. I'm saying that reliance on TTL flash metering
>> discourages a beginner from learning the fundamentals of flash
>> photography, forever being held hostage by a Japanese software
>> engineer who will ultimately prove disappointing.
>>
I am a "manual everything" kind of guy, until today, I use manual
exposure, Center-weighted metering with 99% of my shot. However, in
the field of flash, I have to admit that I *LIKE* TTL flash.
Here is the reason why I like TTL... as the alternative are as followed:
1. All-manual flash. Well, there is nothing wrong with all-manual flash,
except one thing: you need the natual talent of being able to tell the
distance between your subject and the flash. This can be quite discouraging,
honestly. Of course, there are way to get by it, such as reading off
the focus helixoid of the lens. However, this trick doesn't work too well
if you happened to have wide-angle lens (anything beyong 2 meter is
"infinity," not that useful to gauge the distance), or when you try
to bounce off the ceiling...
2. "Automatic Flash." I am sure those who are against TTL flash must
also against "automatic flash." right? I don't really see the difference
between the automatic flash and TTL, except one uses the light meter on the
flash, versus TTL flash meter off the camera's meter. Automatic flash
is almost an "inferior" version of TTL, as typically there are only 3
apature settings, and one will need to compensate if she;/he put filters
at front of the lens which flash's light meter cant' see.
Further, there are times where light meter can be fooled, such as
back-lite situation. It is a bit more tricky to deal with automatic flash,
as one may not know how badly was the meter get fooled, and one can only
guess, and compensate with apature and apature only...
* * * * * * *
Despite I am "manual" exposure kind of guy, I still rely on that
center-weighted meter in my camera. For me, TTL flash just simply allow
me using the very same center-weighted meter in the camera to make
decisions. TTL allow me to fire flash at apature of f/1.4 or f/2
with ease, it allows me to compensate back-lit/off-center subject
rather easily.
what is the big deal about TTL?
--
AlexZN
I think you are operating under the premise that the use of
automatic equipment is detrimental to the use of a person's
brain. Relax, it is just a tool that if used correctly and
sensibly can make some jobs easier. Having said that, I need to
point out that it is important to understand how the automation
functions and what its limittions are. If you don't know what you
ae doing, you will screw up anyway, regardless of what you are
using- an auto flash or manual flash. I do own a TTL flash which
I sometimes use on a non-TTL body and I still get good results
although a lot more slowly, since I need to think about distance
and guide numer etc. However when I need to shoot fast, TTL comes
in very handy. Of course there are cases when you need to
compensate, but that's what the brain is for and in some weird
way it does involv almost the same amount of thinking as using a
manual flash would. However if this is a pice to pay for
convenience I will pay it.
Just to rephrase: automation is not a univrsal evil as long as yo
know what you are doing and how the automation works. In that
case it can be fairly convenient and liberating. Dumb trust in
automation never pays off:)
Alex
In article <38bf0fd7...@news.psci.net>, ewin...@psci.net
(Gene Windell) wrote:
>On Mon, 28 Feb 2000 17:39:04 GMT, michael...@home.com (Mike)
>wrote:
>
>>Ok, I'm new to flashes and have no experience with them at all
other
>>than my built in one. I am looking for a TTL one with with
option to
>>do Bounce flash. (make sence?) Flash should be fully compatable
and
>>fully work with my camera's AF.
>
>The main purpose of TTL flash metering is to relieve the
photographer
>from learning anything about lighting technique. Lighting is
where
>photography begins and ends. Though lighting technique is far
more
>important than anything do do with cameras or lenses, lighting
is
>usually the last thing a photographer ever learns - and most
never
>learn it. By simply reading a $25 book on lighting technique,
you can
>save yourself many thousands of dollars foolishly spent on TTL
>lighting equipment.
>
>Gene Windell
>
>
* Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network *
The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!
Robert Krawitz
> 1. All-manual flash. Well, there is nothing wrong with all-manual flash,
> except one thing: you need the natual talent of being able to tell the
> distance between your subject and the flash. This can be quite discouraging,
> honestly. Of course, there are way to get by it, such as reading off
> the focus helixoid of the lens. However, this trick doesn't work too well
> if you happened to have wide-angle lens (anything beyong 2 meter is
> "infinity," not that useful to gauge the distance), or when you try
> to bounce off the ceiling...
Except in studio-type situations where you can place the subject,
lighting, and background very precisely and use an incident flash
meter to set the flash level or aperture. In that case, manual flash
won't be fooled by a subject that's something other than 18% gray,
like TTL flash can.
--
Robert Krawitz <r...@alum.mit.edu> http://www.tiac.net/users/rlk/
Tall Clubs International -- http://www.tall.org/ or 1-888-IM-TALL-2
Member of the League for Programming Freedom -- mail l...@uunet.uu.net
Project lead for The Gimp Print -- http://gimp-print.sourceforge.net
"Linux doesn't dictate how I work, I dictate how Linux works."
--Eric Crampton
Gene Windell
<jack...@ho.NOSPAM.me.com> wrote:
>And what an honor to be graced here by such SUPERIOR photographers as
>Gene, Chris, and Anders, to talk down to the rest of us low life, limited
>creatures. I have so much enjoyed being condescended to.
Jack,
Surely there has been some time in your life when you discovered
something, and then said to yourself "gee, I wish someone had told me
that ten years ago!" In almost every instance, someone did tell you
that 10 years ago - but you weren't yet ready to listen.
Most of the questions asked in this forum are asked by young people
who are just getting started in photography. Those who are best
qualified to answer their questions are old timers who are about to
retire from photography and die.
The old timers would like to spare the beginners from making the same
mistakes that they themselves have made over the years.
Unfortunately, what the more experienced people have to say is
sometimes so far removed from what the beginners perceive as reality
that it is quite difficult to bridge the gulf.
Back on topic, I must reiterate that lighting is the only thing that
can change a mundane snapshot into an impressive, dramatic looking
picture. TTL flash metering will usually give an acceptably accurate
exposure with a single, on-camera flash unit. But getting an accurate
exposure is not the real objective. It is the characteristics of the
light itself that make or break the image, and getting an accurate
exposure is only a peripheral matter. In other words, if the way a
scene is lighted sucks pond water - then the final print will suck
pond water, no mater how well the light was metered.
Light has several characteristics that create the mood and emotion
evoking drama in a picture. These are:
A. Size of the light source relative to the subject. This determines
the character of the shadows as the transition is made from the
lightest to darkest areas. The larger the light source, the more
gradient the shadows will be. The smaller the light source, the more
dense the shadows will be.
B. Direction of the main light source. Frontal lighting erases all
shadows, and creates a flattening effect. It is the shadows caused by
side lighting that reveal the surface texture and shape of 3
dimensional objects. Backlighting causes shadows to be cast forward,
but highlights the edges of the objects in a scene - which helps
separate the subject from the background adding depth and dimension to
the picture.
C. Contrast quality of the light. High contrast light expands the
brightness range of all the objects in a scene. It makes bright
objects brighter and dark objects darker. Low contrast light has the
opposite effect, contracting the brightness of all the objects in a
scene. It narrows the difference in brightness between the light and
dark areas of the scene. High contrast light results from
unobstructed transmission from a point light source, such as the sun
or an electronic flash tube. Diffusion, such as a cloud passing in
front of the sun or a translucent panel in front of the a flash tube
lowers the contrast quality of the light.
D. Color of the light source. This is measured in degrees Kelvin,
and refers to the range of colors from red to blue to white. Amber or
reddish colors have lower color temperatures, and are called "warm."
Blue and white colors of light have higher color temperatures, and are
called "cool." The warm colors communicate the feeling of the setting
sun or gentle indoor lighting. The cool colors give a more harsh
feeling, like the harshness of mid-day sun or the clinical feel of a
hospital operating room.
E. The brightness of the light source. This is probably the least
important characteristic of light in determining the dramatic quality
of a photograph. Brightness affects nothing but the f/stop and
shutter speed that must be used to properly expose the film.
Brightness affects picture quality only in so far as it affects how
much depth of field the picture has, and how much the subject movement
is frozen.
There is an old saying that: "a good flash picture is one where you
can't tell that flash was used." The reason for this is because
electronic flash combines all the worst characteristics of light -
virtually assuring that a terrible looking picture will result. The
only good thing about electronic flash is its brightness - which
allows creating light where none existed before.
When a portable flash unit is mounted on the camera, the axis from the
flash reflector to the subject is unlike anything found in nature.
Natural lighting always descends from above - from the sun, the moon,
the sky or whatever. Blasting a human subject straight in the face
with electronic flash creates the "deer-caught-in-the-headlights"
look, which not only looks quite unnatural but is also very
unflattering. The frontal lighting erases all of the shadows, and the
depth and dimension of the image along with them.
If the flash unit is too near the camera lens, the "red-eye" effect
will result. Electronic flash is extremely high in contrast quality,
burning out the highlights while causing loss of detail in the dark
areas. If there is a light colored wall behing the subject, garish
shadows will be created. In summary, an electronic flash mounted on
camera creates the worst possible of all lighting effects - and is
guaranteed to make your subject look as bad as it can possibly look.
So whether you meter the flash's brightness by TTL metering or some
other means is really irrelevant. TTL metering automates the process,
but the picture will still look like crap - so what's the point?
The only thing that electronic flash has going for it is brightness -
but at least that is something to work with. The first improvement
comes from moving the flash unit away from the lens, to eliminate the
red-eye effect if nothing else. By connecting the flash to the camera
by a cord, it can be removed from the hot-shoe and hand-held above the
photographer's head at arm's length. This enables the light to
descend on the subject from above, which creates a more natural
looking effect. It creates subtle, barely detectable shadows under
the pores of the skin on a human subject which depicts texture and
depth in the image. Photojournalists and wedding photographers use a
flash bracket, which attaches to the camera and elevates the flash 9
to 12 inches above the lens. This is usually high enough to make the
light descend onto the subject from above.
Unfortunately, the small size of the flash reflector relative to the
subject will create very dense shadows under the nose and chin on a
human subject. Studio photographers use large umbrellas and softboxes
to increase the size of the light source, which softens the shadows.
There are smaller versions of the softbox, such as the Lumiquest
Softbox and Westcott Micro-Apollo which can be fitted onto a small
flash unit. But they don't have much effect on softening the shadows
unless the subject is very close - like less than 4 feet away. These
work extremely well for close-up and macro photography.
What the small, camera-mounted softboxes can do is lower the contrast
quality of the direct flash output by diffusion. By lowering the
contrast, glare is reduced on the oily parts of the human face such as
nosetips, foreheads, and the bald heads on men. Glare on eyeglasses
is reduced, and more even skin tones result because the difference in
brightness between skin blemishes and the surrounding skin area is
reduced.
If using one of the small softboxes is not practical, a frosted
diffusion panel mounted directly in front of the flash reflector will
still diffuse the light and lower the contrast just as well. The
Sto-fen Omnibounce is a small, low-cost device which not only diffuses
the light but also scatters it all around the room. This changes the
direction of the light, making it come from all directions. This
creates an almost shadowless effect. The low-cost solution is to
simply use a thickness of paper facial tissue or a white handkerchief,
held over the flash reflector with a rubber band.
The easiest way to avoid all of the problems of frontal lighting is to
use the ambient light as the main light source, and use the flash to
fill in the shadows caused by the ambient light. Indoors, this may
require using slow shutter speeds with the camera mounted on a tripod.
Outdoors, it requires using an f/stop which properly exposes the
background - and setting the flash to output between 1 and 2 f/stops
less light on the subject.
The other way to avoid the problems of frontal lighting is to move the
flash away from the camera - so the light is striking the subject at
an angle of 30 or 45 degrees. A reflector can be placed on the
opposite side of the subject to fill in the shadows. Or you can use 2
flash units, with the on-camera flash filling in the shadows created
by the off-camera flash which is firing on the subject at an angle.
An optical slave costing about $15 can be used to trigger the
off-camera flash.
The color of electronic flash can be changed by simply mounting a
colored filter, gel material or piece of colored cellophane in front
of the reflector. A light amber filter can give the flash the color
of late afternoon sunlight.
These are the basic principles of lighting. But these basic
principles can be twisted into thousands of different lighting
techniques - which will result in thousands of different effects.
Yet, the most commonly seen lighting effect is the worst of all -
direct, on-camera flash. This is the only one that is guaranteed to
produce the worst possible effects. This is why I wince and flinch
when a beginner asks "what kind of TTL flash should I buy." Ten or
twenty years down the road, he will probably be saying "gee, if only I
knew then what I know now."
The kind of flash to buy will depend on what you plan to use it for.
I have about 10 different flash units, which I use for specialized
purposes. None are ideally suited for everything. Shooting football
games at night imposes very different requirements than shooting
portraits in your living room, or a newborn baby in the nursery.
TTL flash metering works fine with a single, on-camera flash. But as
I've explained, that is the scenario that is guaranteed to produce the
worst possible lighting effect. And as soon as you start moving the
flash off-camera, or using multiple lighting effects - TTL flash
metering gets very expensive and is very limited in its capabilities.
If one's ambitions don't go beyond producing terrible looking
shapshots - then buy the cheapest TTL flash unit that has the most
convenience features. If one would like to learn new lighting
techniques and improve the quality of their images as they gain
experience, then spending the same money on a Sunpak 383 Super and a
hand-held flash meter will prove far more rewarding.
Gene Windell
Tony Spadaro
local sources as well as email contacts. I usually get one of two
recommendations:
1) Get the brand name (in your case Nikon) as it will work with your
current camera and future models.
2) Get a Sunpak. Some of the models mentioned are PZ4000, PZ5000, 555
and 120J. I honestly don't know what the differences are. I've heard
more than too much to remember which does what.
--
Digital Photo restoration in Chapel Hill N.C.
cbar...@my-deja.com
Jack Daynes <jack...@ho.NOSPAM.me.com> wrote:
> Gene Windell wrote:
>
> > On Fri, 03 Mar 2000 02:04:02 GMT, cjundie...@powerup.com.au
> > (Obakesan) wrote:
> >
> > >dear cynic ... the main purpose of TTL is to provide the
photographer
> > >with another tool to perform a job. And it does that well.
> >
> > If so, what is the original poster complaining about? Why is it
that
> > users of manual and old fashioned automatic flash units never seek
> > advice in this forum about how to operate their equipment or improve
> > their flash pictures?
> >
> > <SNIP>
>
> Gene, Chris, and Anders, to talk down to the rest of us low life,
limited
> creatures. I have so much enjoyed being condescended to.
>
> Jack
> ;~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~;
> / Remove ".NOSPAM." for email replies /
> \____________________________________/
> X-No-Archive:yes
>
I think you have me wrong in all this. I have not tried to
condescend. I'm seeking advice which is what I thought these forums
were for. I prefer a "manual" flash right now because I think it will
help me think through my lighting choices. Once I feel comfortable and
confident in how to light all of the situations I'm in I will probably
go back and forth between TTL and manual. I'm not concerned with what
others think is best more convenient of even cool. I just want to get
my skills up so that I can make the images that I want.
smit...@my-deja.com
He just wants TTL. The ONLY thing TTL controls is the duration of the
light. Size, direction, contrast, etc., etc. has nothing to do with TTL
vs. Non-TTL.
-Brett
Gene Windell
>That's great Gene, but the original poster didn't ask about all of this.
> He just wants TTL.
I don't think he just wants TTL. He already has TTL with his camera's
built-in flash. Though he didn't say it, I think what he really wants
is better flash pictures. Getting a larger TTL flash unit is not
going to do anything for him except provide more brightness. As I
attempted to explain in my dissertation, brightness is the least
important characteristic of light when it comes to improving the
quality of flash pictures.
>The ONLY thing TTL controls is the duration of the
>light.
The term TTL implies a lot more than just controlling the duration of
the light. All TTL flash units incorporate "dedicated" features which
automatically set the camera's shutter speed, lens aperture, and turn
on a recycle ready light in the camera's viewfinder. In effect, TTL
flash metering takes over control of camera operation.
Granted, most all TTL systems have a provision for accepting user
inputs to over-ride the fully automatic control. But many beginners
have difficulty in understanding when manual adjustments would be
desirable, or how to accomplish them. Because auto-everything is the
default mode, making adjustments can seem like a requirement to
outsmart the computer. I think most beginners would find it easier to
learn the relationships between lens aperture, flash brightness,
flash-to-subject distance, and flash sync shutter speed by using a
non-computerized flash unit.
> Size, direction, contrast, etc., etc. has nothing to do with TTL
>vs. Non-TTL.
Controlling the size, direction, contrast quality and color of the
light is the only way a photographer can improve the quality of his
flash pictures. And you can't control these things unless you first
understand them. TTL flash metering not only inhibits developing the
understanding, but also limits the degree to which they can be
controlled.
TTL flash metering is at its best in full-auto, point and shoot mode.
But if a photographer's ambitions turn to using off-camera and
multiple lighting techniques, TTL metering becomes very expensive and
very limited. I think one should ask themselves what they hope to
accomplish by ever starting down the road of TTL flash metering to
begin with.
Gene Windell
Harvey H. King
> I think you have me wrong in all this. I have not tried to
>condescend. I'm seeking advice which is what I thought these forums
>were for. I prefer a "manual" flash right now because I think it will
>help me think through my lighting choices. Once I feel comfortable and
>confident in how to light all of the situations I'm in I will probably
>go back and forth between TTL and manual. I'm not concerned with what
>others think is best more convenient of even cool. I just want to get
>my skills up so that I can make the images that I want.
>
I personally would buy TTL just because it's only $20 more than the
equalvent manual model.
Having said that, I personally am very frustrated with my phtos taken
by flash.
1. The inheirant "harsh light" nature of the flash is due to the size
of its light source, and no matter it's TTL or Manual, nothing is going
to change that... not even most of the soft boxes.
2. If you want to do anything relative creative, then, you will need
to mount your flash somewhere else than the top of the camera. This
means that you either need cable, or some sort of trigger device (hint:
optical slave unit).
3. which lead to the 3rd point... I discover that if you want do anything
fun, you will need at least 2 flash to play with. Though I am a big "fan"
of the TTL flash, I can tell you that as soon as you play with more than
one flash, TTL is close to useless.
let me know when you get somewhere.
Harv
--
Robert Krawitz
> On Sat, 04 Mar 2000 19:42:17 GMT, smit...@my-deja.com wrote:
>
> >That's great Gene, but the original poster didn't ask about all of this.
> > He just wants TTL.
>
> I don't think he just wants TTL. He already has TTL with his camera's
> built-in flash. Though he didn't say it, I think what he really wants
> is better flash pictures. Getting a larger TTL flash unit is not
> going to do anything for him except provide more brightness. As I
> attempted to explain in my dissertation, brightness is the least
> important characteristic of light when it comes to improving the
> quality of flash pictures.
Well, a TTL shoemount flash does a number of other things, too:
1) It moves the flash away from the lens axis.
2) It can bounce (the on-camera flash can't realistically be used that
way).
3) It can be mounted on a bracket, or handheld, off the camera (with a
cord).
4) You can put accessories on it.
And yes, it is more powerful. The on-camera flash is pretty weak.
> >The ONLY thing TTL controls is the duration of the
> >light.
>
> The term TTL implies a lot more than just controlling the duration of
> the light. All TTL flash units incorporate "dedicated" features which
> automatically set the camera's shutter speed, lens aperture, and turn
> on a recycle ready light in the camera's viewfinder. In effect, TTL
> flash metering takes over control of camera operation.
Well, if I put my camera in aperture priority mode with a TTL flash
mounted on it, the camera will honor my setting and the flash will put
out an appropriate power level (in practice, I almost always use flash
in program mode, when I'm trying to grab a shot, or in manual mode,
because I want to partially balance the flash against ambient light.
Aperture priority doesn't really do that correctly). I don't see how
one learns very much by not being able to set a shutter speed faster
than the flash sync speed or by having to wait for the flash, as
opposed to the camera, to display recycle ready.
Gene Windell
King) wrote:
Harv,
>1. The inheirant "harsh light" nature of the flash is due to the size
>of its light source, and no matter it's TTL or Manual, nothing is going
>to change that... not even most of the soft boxes.
The size (diameter) of the light source, relative to the subject,
affects only the shadow edges. A large light source will create
shadow edges that are gradient, and look like they were painted with a
spray can. A small light source will create shadows that look solid
and dense, like they were painted with a paint brush.
What is often described as "harsh light" is the result of light that
is excessive in contrast quality. High contrast light expands the
brightness range of all the objects in the scene, making light objects
look lighter and dark objects look darker. This often results in
highlights that are lacking in detail - overexposed because the film's
exposure lattitude has been exceeded. The contrast quality of light
can be lowered by placing one or more diffusion panels in front of the
flash tube.
Another solution to the "harsh light" or high contrast problem is to
use a lower contrast film - such as Fuji NPS or Kodak Portra 160NC.
When using one of these films, it is possible to use too much
diffusion with the flash. This can results in too little image
contrast, and a "flat" appearance where the colors lack vibrance.
Gene Windell