[K-M - Sony] Damn! Now let's move on...

"Douglas" <reply DeleteThis @the.group> wrote in message
news:pLpAf.223140$V7.205310@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>
> "Mark²" <mjmorgan(lowest even number here)@cox..net> wrote in message
> news:7alAf.15030$V.829@fed1read04...
>
>>
>> I've not heard this described anywhere until reading this post...but
>> that's exactly what I do as well.
>> -Mark
>>
> We are all agreed then? The basic functionality of a Canon EOS DSLR has to
> be ignored in order to obtain correct flash exposures. Wonderful. The
> world of ETTL II flash exposures is all Canon bullshit. You have to take
> this wonderful, highly computerised, state of the art camera and it's
> equally sophisticated speedlite and use the camera in manual mode to make
> the flash work like a Nikon or Olympus flash does.
>
> After all the postulating and position manoeuvring, it is finally back to
> what I said in the beginning. The 5D and all Canon DSLRs before it except
> the 1D series are sadly lacking in basic functionality. Thank you
> gentlemen.

Sorry, I dont' agree. What if you WANT to use a lower shutter speed for your
flash in AV mode? Can you do it on a Nikon? If not, isn't the Nikon lacking
in basic functionality?

I agree that it's different, that's all. If you don't like it, use something
else. Very simple, really.

>
>
 >> Stay informed about: [K-M - Sony] Damn! Now let's move on... 

David J. Littleboy wrote:
> Spotmetering is the only way I know of to get correct and reliable readings
> with reflected metering. This is true in spades for flash work, where often
> the vast majority of the frame will be underexposed. And where else to place
> the spot than the point the photographer chose to place the plane of focus?
>
> What's your better idea here???

David,

You have a bit of catching up to do. ETTL-II got rid of spotmetering
on the active focus point(s). It uses the same evaluative metering
zones as are used for ambient metering. Furthermore, ETTL-II can
utilize, when reported by supporting lenses, distance information to
regulate flash output.

On the face of it, this would seem to be a better solution, in general,
than spotmetering. Some Canon DSLRs have very few and ill-placed focus
points, which really cuts down on compositional flexibility.

--
Steven
 >> Stay informed about: [K-M - Sony] Damn! Now let's move on... 

In article <ktpat1dfhp87uuri8pe5t7iprc2btf84n6.RemoveThis@4ax.com>,
Tony Polson <tp.RemoveThis@nospam.co.uk> wrote:
>Sarah Brown <sarahlizzy.RemoveThis@ntlworld.no_uce_please.com> wrote:
>>
>>I've not used Nikon's system, so what does it do differently that gets me
>>something I'm not getting now? As it is, autoexposure seems to work, flash
>>autoexposure seems to work, and I can combine them or not depending on what
>>mode I put the camera in. I'm quite happy to believe that Nikon does
>>something much better, but what you've said so far is a bit non-specific.
>
>The Nikon system works flawlessly whether you are using flash as the
>sole source of illumination or as a fill to ambient. The Canon system
>doesn't work consistently in fill mode, balancing ambient and flash,
>and there is simply no predictability as to the manner in which it
>doesn't work.

I can't say I've been particularly unhappy with the results I have been
getting in either of those scenarios, so it's possible that I wouldn't see
any particular benefit from the Nikon system?

>OK, Canon's system works fine if you are using flash as the sole
>source of illumination. But so does any old Metz flash in non-TTL
>auto mode, which was the point I was trying to make.

Certainly I have had good results when using an autothyristor flash on a
Canon DSLR, and there are certain types of scene where it's all that's
needed, but for more awkward types of illumination, the ability to use FEL,
FEC and what is effectively flash spot-metering is a real benefit. YMMV.
 >> Stay informed about: [K-M - Sony] Damn! Now let's move on... 

"Sander Vesik" <sander.RemoveThis@haldjas.folklore.ee> wrote:
> In rec.photo.equipment.35mm David J. Littleboy <davidjl.RemoveThis@gol.com> wrote:
>>
>> "Bill Tuthill" <can.RemoveThis@spam.co> wrote in message
>> news:43d513cf@news.meer.net...
>> > In rec.photo.equipment.35mm Douglas <reply.RemoveThis@the.group> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> On the Nikon flash control thing... Olympus also have excellent flash
>> >> control. The puzzle is why Canon do not.
>> >
>> > Minolta and Pentax also have excellent flash systems.
>>
>> Canon does, too. People who figure out that Canon flash is a spotmetering
>> system (and know how to use a spotmeter) get excellent exposure every
>> time.
>> People who don't know how to use one of the most basic and most powerful
>> tools in photography complain.
>
> If you are happy with just spot metering - and fairly limited choice of
> spot
> for the flash system - the sure you get all. But shouldn't a 21st century
> flash system pull a bit more weight than that?

Spotmetering is the only way I know of to get correct and reliable readings
with reflected metering. This is true in spades for flash work, where often
the vast majority of the frame will be underexposed. And where else to place
the spot than the point the photographer chose to place the plane of focus?

What's your better idea here???

David J. Littleboy
Tokyo, Japan
 >> Stay informed about: [K-M - Sony] Damn! Now let's move on... 

<slin100.TakeThisOut@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1138133914.864977.89220@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...

> On the face of it, this would seem to be a better solution, in general,
> than spotmetering. Some Canon DSLRs have very few and ill-placed focus
> points, which really cuts down on compositional flexibility.

I won't use a meter that thinks it's smarter than I am.
 >> Stay informed about: [K-M - Sony] Damn! Now let's move on... 

I did on my FD mount system. My eyes are not they used to be, and my
current camera doesn't have any focus aids (i.e. split or micro prism),
so I seldom have any choice but to use autofocus.

Anyway, the point is irrelevant since the subject was ETTL-I
spotmetering using the active focus point.
 >> Stay informed about: [K-M - Sony] Damn! Now let's move on... 

"John A. Stovall" <johnastovall RemoveThis @earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:lc4dt1tebnnf4v5f9kutso43tdk3raqfbr@4ax.com...
> On 24 Jan 2006 12:18:34 -0800, slin100 RemoveThis @yahoo.com wrote:
>

> Ever learned how to us manual focus?

John, most digiphiles can't manually focus or set exposures to save their
lives. Besides, all but the high-end pro stuff does about all it can to make
it difficult.
 >> Stay informed about: [K-M - Sony] Damn! Now let's move on... 

"David Dyer-Bennet" <dd-b.RemoveThis@dd-b.net> wrote in message
news:87lkx5z48k.fsf@gw.dd-b.net...

> Nonsense. Cheap digital P&S cameras are much more likely to support
> manual exposure than cheap film P&S cameras are.

Shows ya how stupid I am.
I'd like to see one. Seriously.
They adjust aperture and shutter speed?
 >> Stay informed about: [K-M - Sony] Damn! Now let's move on... 

David Dyer-Bennet <dd-b.TakeThisOut@dd-b.net> writes:
> I seem to remember the Nikon 2100 doing so, also.

That would surprise me since the 3100 doesn't (unless I haven't
spotted it).
 >> Stay informed about: [K-M - Sony] Damn! Now let's move on... 

"ah2" <twoie DeleteThis @ah.com.net> wrote in message
news:11td5ihl715q92a@news.supernews.com...
> "John A. Stovall" <johnastovall DeleteThis @earthlink.net> wrote in message
> news:lc4dt1tebnnf4v5f9kutso43tdk3raqfbr@4ax.com...
>> On 24 Jan 2006 12:18:34 -0800, slin100 DeleteThis @yahoo.com wrote:
>>
>
>> Ever learned how to us manual focus?
>
> John, most digiphiles can't manually focus or set exposures to save their
> lives. Besides, all but the high-end pro stuff does about all it can to
> make it difficult.


Manual focus is a pain in the ass on most
digicams, at least the two I own (G2 and 10D.)

Better off letting the camera do it, most of the time.

YMMV and all that.


rafe b
www.terrapinphoto.com
 >> Stay informed about: [K-M - Sony] Damn! Now let's move on... 

Sarah Brown <sarahlizzy RemoveThis @ntlworld.no_uce_please.com> wrote:
>
>I can't say I've been particularly unhappy with the results I have been
>getting in either of those scenarios, so it's possible that I wouldn't see
>any particular benefit from the Nikon system?

If you're happy, there's no need to look elsewhere. Period.

>>OK, Canon's system works fine if you are using flash as the sole
>>source of illumination. But so does any old Metz flash in non-TTL
>>auto mode, which was the point I was trying to make.
>
>Certainly I have had good results when using an autothyristor flash on a
>Canon DSLR, and there are certain types of scene where it's all that's
>needed, but for more awkward types of illumination, the ability to use FEL,
>FEC and what is effectively flash spot-metering is a real benefit. YMMV.

My mileage *does* vary, because for the more awkward shots, I would
always choose something I know and trust (and can control) over
something automatic. But if it works for you, that's great.
 >> Stay informed about: [K-M - Sony] Damn! Now let's move on... 

"no one noteworthy" <only.RemoveThis@the.group> wrote:
> "David J. Littleboy" <davidjl.RemoveThis@gol.com> wrote:
>>
>> That's complete BS. The Canon system works fine if you realize that the
>> flash exposure is a spotmetering system based on the active AF point.
>>
>> Once you figure that out, it creates exactly the ambient/flash balance
>> you select.
>>
> As an owner of both Nikon, Olympus and Canon systems, I'm confused by your
> explanation of Canon speedlites here, David. Let's suppose your theory of
> a spot metering flash is right (it probably is but I have a niggling
> suspicion it may not be).

That's how it works on the 300D. The ambient exposure is determined by the
normal metering, and the flash exposure by what lies under the active AF
point. Put the wrong thing under the AF point used, and you get the wrong
exposure.

Exposure is completely consistent if you select the AF point and put it on
the subject's face.

> Using the centre spot to meter a subject is normal practice but it is not
> that point the flash needs to meter on in order to fulfil it's role of
> illuminating areas below correct exposure, if you use a means of diffusion
> to soften the flash. In this condition, all it will do is produce a
> correct exposure for the point you already have correctly metered. This
> excludes using the flash in swivel mode, firing into a brolly, does it
> not?

If you use focus and recompose, you have to persuade the flash to prefire at
exposure lock time and lock flash exposure at that point. I'm under the
impression that it is supported on the better Canon flashes. Maybe.

Otherwise, you have to do pre-exposure lock, recompose, and focus with a
non-center focus point.

But with flash, you don't want to spotmeter ambient, you want to measure
ambient everywhere but the subject; the subject is the flash's job.

> Olympus have an adaptive flash metering system. If you spot meter, the
> flash will too but if you use ESP metering, the flash will also.
> Swivelling the head of the flash to fire into a brolly, still produces
> correct exposure for the metering mode you choose. This is true TTL
> metering in harmony with the camera's metering system.

Spotmetering flash with the Oly shouldn't work at all, since you don't have
a spot at the subject during exposure (if you meter and recompose; you can't
meter and recompose with the Oly since it does real-time metering and the
spot will be at the wrong place); Canon does have a (flash) spot at the
subject during exposure if you select the AF point and use AE lock.

But, as I've pointed out, flash and ambient metering have different
requirements: flash is responsible for the subject, ambient for the
background.

> Your description would have a person using spot metering when they really
> need to meter for a broader range

No. The idea of fill flash is for the flash to expose the subject correctly.
So spotmetering the flash is a very good idea.

> yet as I understand your description of the flash meter, it still meters
> in spot mode regardless of any wishes of the photographer or custom
> functions which have been programmed into it.

I don't understand any more than the basics (E-TTL-II is claimed to take
more stuff into account): but I don't understand why you'd want anything but
spot metering _assuming you have a subject_.

> This would result in highly variable results - which incidentally I get
> when using Canon Speedlites with any Canon DSLR.

Try selecting the AF point.

> A (relatively) cheap Metz Mecablitz 38C-2 manual/auto flash produces more
> consistent and predictable results than the 580EX does with 20D or 5D,
> DSLRs. Why would this be?

Well, my claim is operator error (for example, using all the AF points<g>).
My 300D is very consistent about flash exposure; it consistently nails the
exposure at the active AF point.

> Presumably when you purchase a speedlite, it is not your intention to use
> it in spot metering mode and the fact it has a swivel head, suggests in
> itself, you can expect accurate results without spot metering.

Why would the desire for spot metering differ depending on whether or not
the head is swivelled? It doesn't know whether or not you are bounced, and
you don't want it to know.

(Truth in advertising: I don't own a bouncable Canon flash. But logic would
have it that the flash metering system shouldn't be able to tell the
difference between bounce and direct flash.

> And what happens with your description when all the points are used for
> metering?

My understanding is that when all the points are used, the camera selects
one, and that's the subject. The camera decides what the subject is and
meters it correctly. Since it will decide differently every time, you'll get
different exposures every time according to what's under the AF point
actually used.

> Is it still in spot mode and if so, which sensor is the flash using? It
> surely can't be all of them because this is when the most variation in
> flash exposures occur.

If you let the camera decide what the subject is, it will decide according
to its own criteria.

David J. Littleboy
Tokyo, Japan
 >> Stay informed about: [K-M - Sony] Damn! Now let's move on... 

On Tue, 24 Jan 2006 23:02:02 GMT, John A. Stovall
<johnastovall.RemoveThis@earthlink.net> wrote:

>On Tue, 24 Jan 2006 17:04:03 -0500, "rafe b" <rafeb.RemoveThis@foobar.com> wrote:

>>Better off letting the camera do it, most of the time.
>>
>
>Not really with a good screen. I have no problems with my 20D.


OK, so where do I get "a good screen" for my 10D and
how difficult is it to install?

All I know is that the finder has *no* manual focusing
aids, and is considerably "smaller" in feel than any
35 mm SLR I've ever used.

A split-screen or microprism would have been nice.

It also pisses me off that the electronic focusing aids
are useless with any "legacy" lens. I bought a
Novoflex adapter with the 10D, hoping to use my
old Nikon AIS lenses, and the electronic focus
indicators simply don't work in that configuration.


rafe b
www.terrapinphoto.com
 >> Stay informed about: [K-M - Sony] Damn! Now let's move on...