PDA

View Full Version : Wedding Metering


rvt1000
9th of February 2006 (Thu), 17:02
Ok, so I've searched and read a bunch of links and threads on metering and zone system and now I've finally confused myself.

In a wedding setting, asides from the difficulties of controlling more variables, why shoot in Av or Tv vs M? I understand that in M you only take in the camera's opinion on exposure and then you EC yourself by moving your SS and Ap around. But when in Av or Tv when you're only controlling one of the two variables, is metering best used as spot? It seems that if a bride's white dress comes into the picture, evaluative metering may not cut it and spot may be the best?

So why worry about camera's EC when in Av/Tv and how metering, when one can just use M and EC yoruself via controlling SS/Ap? I guess for the fast pace of weddings, Av and spot might be best but when composing portraits, maybe M?

So I guess my question is what's the best metering and shooting mode for a wedding and do you find yourselves switching around much?

CyberPet
9th of February 2006 (Thu), 17:10
Well, it's all a matter of taste, I know a professional (my mentor) who have shot thousands of weddings, only shoots in Av mode, seldome M, and he swears by it. He also swears by shooting in JPEG only, while others swears by M mode and RAW only.

My choice is to shoot with one focus point (middle) and mainly Av mode, although I do use M and Tv as well as P mode, all depending on the situation. I don't swear by anything really, it all depends on what situation I'm in. But I do prefer half-auto, so I can react fast to something - I often have the camera set to maybe f/5.6 and if I need more shallow DOF I set it to 2.8 or whatever, and if I want more DOF I set it to f/11 or whatever.

byso
9th of February 2006 (Thu), 17:22
Cyber, when using the flash do you use FEL and AEL without flash often I find it to be quite accurate for skin tones.

CyberPet
9th of February 2006 (Thu), 17:25
You gonna laugh at this one... but I often use P mode for flash - works great when you want fill flash. Some adjustments might be required on the flash, depending on the background, but it often works way better than I thought. So I'm lazy that way. :D

byso
9th of February 2006 (Thu), 17:30
So you rarely use FEL then?

I also think P mode gives adequate results especially when pushed for time and I agree that f/5.6 is a good safe aperture to use to make sure the subject is in focus.

CyberPet
9th of February 2006 (Thu), 17:40
I use FEL on the flash yes, not in the camera.

ricohcam01
9th of February 2006 (Thu), 18:38
I shoot in M and Raw only. I like the chance to change what I see if I don't like it. I recommend this type of shooting to anyone.

Wilt
9th of February 2006 (Thu), 19:48
Two general schools of thought...
1. Use the meter for example, on Av), then use EC to 'adjust' what the meter tells you about the scene. So take a reading in the snow, then dial in EC= +1 and shoot.
2. Use the meter on M, setting your choice of shutter speed or aperture. Match up with manual exposure meter 'needle', then adjust the exposure according to what your experience tells you (e.g. "open up aperture or use slower shutter speed than what the meter tells you to use, when you're on the beach"

I can tell you that in using an Olympus OM-4 for many years, I never used the EC control...I simply took the camera off Auto, and set the desired combination of f/stop and shutter speed directly! On the other hand, I now use EC on my 20D.

3. A third technique that I use all the time is to have my meter on Spot mode (OK...'Partial' on 20D) and simply choose the area I wish to use to meter from. I find it better to think "this area should be 'medium gray' in brightness" and not to think "I need to add 1/2 EV exposure".


Different stroke for different folks...or even for different cameras, as I do!

tim
9th of February 2006 (Thu), 21:36
My approach is 90% AV with EC and FEC as required. It doesn't really matter what mode you use, as long as you confident you can capture any scene with it.

kawter2
9th of February 2006 (Thu), 22:38
I think weddings are the bigest challenge for ETTL the stark contrast between on shot being a bride in all white then one with the black tux.. the flash will meter diferently

I usually shoot receptions around 1600 2.8 1/30 all nite long

tim
10th of February 2006 (Fri), 00:55
You have steadier hands than me kawter! I shot F1.4 and 1/30th at one reception (my first) and had a proportion of the photos come out kinda blurry.

kawter2
10th of February 2006 (Fri), 01:25
You have steadier hands than me kawter! I shot F1.4 and 1/30th at one reception (my first) and had a proportion of the photos come out kinda blurry.


actually believe it or not if you would have shot at 2.8 they would have been sharper.. the only way you can drag the shutter is with a decent flash pop.. at 1.4 your flash was probably putting out very little light, so you were relying on your hands to freeze the motion vs the flash

Pachekin
10th of February 2006 (Fri), 02:21
hi all,,im the newest member here,,,,im a wedding photographer..i live in sonora mexico....i use to take my pics in AV and jpg works for me

tim
10th of February 2006 (Fri), 03:02
actually believe it or not if you would have shot at 2.8 they would have been sharper.. the only way you can drag the shutter is with a decent flash pop.. at 1.4 your flash was probably putting out very little light, so you were relying on your hands to freeze the motion vs the flash

I was using natural light only, F1.4, 1/30th, ISO1600 on a 20D. For that sitution now i'd go to ISO3200 on all natural light. I would also consider flash, dragging the shutter, and accepting less ambient light.

ricohcam01
10th of February 2006 (Fri), 08:27
Hey Kweter and Tim:

I would love to see a 3200 ISO shot in natural light and one with flash. Is there not a lot of noise with this high ISO with the 20D I find with 5D I get some noise. Can you post a couple of examples.

gregory71
30th of July 2006 (Sun), 02:59
Interesting Topic. I'm on my 10th wedding and don't have this figured out yet. So many variables! I just want to emulate a pro like Joe Buesnik (if that's how you spell his name?), figure out what he does, and then do it. I'm not trying to reinvent how to shoot weddings.

What is interesting is that I'm shooting for another company and feel I'm learning bad photography. They have us using Flash Brackets and a ton of Fill Flash. They also do a ton of formal posed shots. I'd like to do more natural light. However when I try natural light and even turn my flash off, I'm getting total darkness much of the time. My meter says it should be looking good, however it's usually wrong.

With that said. I'm looking to find the total pro hear from in the forum with some work to show and how he meters, and the all the factors involved.

1. M, AV, P ?
2. Partial Metering, Full Matrix?
3. What do you think about flash brackets?
4. How are you locking in exposures? ETC.
5. Are you using reflectors/assistants......

I would for someone to go into TOTAL detail on this.

Please help.....I would appreciate it so very much as others will too.

Thanks,

Greg

ofdphoto
30th of July 2006 (Sun), 10:00
Hi Greg,

Sheesh, you don't want much! A full run-down eh. I'll have a stab at a couple of questions... (Not that I'm a pro, but I'm learning from one...)

1. Everyone is different. Some swear by M and flick into Av only when things are moving too fast to keep up, others use Av for all outdoor stuff and switch to M for indoor stuff, others always use P! I don't recommend the latter if you want good creative control. I generally use Av until it's reception time (i.e. for daylight shots) ... then it's M all night. You'll need to work out how you like to shoot for yourself. And after 10 weddings, I would hope you're starting to figure that out ... ;-)

2. Again, your choice of metering mode will come with experience. The pro I work with only ever uses evaluative. I've started to mix evaluative and partial. Have a play with what your camera offers.

3. Flash brackets are a pain in the hindparts. I've just returned my Manfrotto 233B and am using a Flip-it to soften light and control shadows. Admittedly the 233B is a pretty useless bracket ... cumbersome to handle and with no support for vertical orientation ... and I'd like to replace it with a Stroboframe one day ... but if you have a ceiling to bounce off, you don't need a bracket. If you don't have a ceiling to bounce off, a good bracket (which allows for quick camera rotation) will give you good control over shadows with direct flash. But you'll still probably want to diffuse the flash with an omnibounce or a bounce card. Personally, I intend to use my Flip-it in 95% of situations. In the other 5% I'll find some way of coping without a bracket until I can justify one ...

That's all I have time for. Incidentally, you've basically asked for a pro to tell you everything he knows about taking pictures. Which is, shall we say, a little broad for a first post ;-) I hope my contribution is helpful, but there is no substitute for reading what has already been written and most importantly, experimenting.

All the best.

daclozer
30th of July 2006 (Sun), 12:55
I would agree that there is no magic setting, every situation is a little different. With the fastpace of a wdding, I usually shoot in av mode if the ambient lighting is adequate to use the flash for fill. In darker settings, it has to be in manual to be able to use as much of the avaialable light as possible or you will be relying on your flash as a main source of light, which makes more wro kfor you in post processing. I don't use a bracket, but rely on bounce and reflector to even out the light. What I am having trouble with is shooting outside in bright light on suny days. If anybody has some suggestions on what they use settings wise, I am listening. The last one I shot, it was extemely sunny, no shady areas to use. I was following the meter, but I was still getting a bit blown out. I shot in raw, so I was able to correct most of it, but I spent way too much time in pp because of it. I tried both av and m, with partial metering. I metered with the dress predominate and then metered the dark tux and averaged. I bracketed ss 1 up and 1 down, but was stil getting overexposed.

gregory71
30th of July 2006 (Sun), 14:38
Thanks for the post guys!

I know I'm asking a lot, it's just so interesting to hear that pros like David Jay, Becker, and others are using "NO" fill flash. Ive been studying their work quite a bit and love what they do. What's interesting is that the people I am freelancing for produce OK work, but use in my opinion way to much fill flash. Less natural.

I'm just finding now in my experimentation that it's tough to shoot without any fill.

What's interesting to note, is that these guys shoot very natural and then apply a "Velvia Snap" or "Punch Effect" to their photos in post to boost it all up, where as with the fill you aleady have a bit more even color to start with. With that said, you can never really take away that flash effect.

Anyway, keep the post coming. I'd love to hear everyones way of shooting and what seems to work the best. I'd love to throw my bracket in the trash if I could!

Thanks,

Greg

ofdphoto
30th of July 2006 (Sun), 19:43
Thanks for the post guys!

I know I'm asking a lot, it's just so interesting to hear that pros like David Jay, Becker, and others are using "NO" fill flash. Ive been studying their work quite a bit and love what they do. What's interesting is that the people I am freelancing for produce OK work, but use in my opinion way to much fill flash. Less natural.

I'm just finding now in my experimentation that it's tough to shoot without any fill.

What's interesting to note, is that these guys shoot very natural and then apply a "Velvia Snap" or "Punch Effect" to their photos in post to boost it all up, where as with the fill you aleady have a bit more even color to start with. With that said, you can never really take away that flash effect.

Anyway, keep the post coming. I'd love to hear everyones way of shooting and what seems to work the best. I'd love to throw my bracket in the trash if I could!

Thanks,

Greg

I'd have to imagine that high-end pros are shooting with top-end glass with apertures as wide as 1.2 or even 1 sometimes. Which gives you a lot more options when using ambient lighting.

That said, sometimes ambient lighting sucks. And at a wedding you have no control over it. Which is where fill flash comes in handy -- it gives you the control you need to turn mediocre ambient lighting into lighting that brings out the details in people's faces. I'm not surprised that those who shoot without flash have a lot of PP to get acceptable results. In my mind, that defeats the purpose of using the camera effectively!

You mention always having "that flash effect". I disagree. Those who learn how to use flash well should be able to achieve natural-looking exposures with it. If your subjects 'pop' out of the picture too much, dial in lower FEC. Or diffuse your flash. Or use gels (not that I've ever needed gels, so far).

Using dedicated flash units effectively is a black art, but IMHO, it's worth mastering to save you a heck of a lot of PP time ;-)

ofdphoto
30th of July 2006 (Sun), 19:58
What I am having trouble with is shooting outside in bright light on suny days. If anybody has some suggestions on what they use settings wise, I am listening. The last one I shot, it was extemely sunny, no shady areas to use. I was following the meter, but I was still getting a bit blown out. I shot in raw, so I was able to correct most of it, but I spent way too much time in pp because of it. I tried both av and m, with partial metering. I metered with the dress predominate and then metered the dark tux and averaged. I bracketed ss 1 up and 1 down, but was stil getting overexposed.

The pro I work with handles situations like this by:

* Dialling in 100% flash (manual)
* Metering the camera off a highlight

I'm yet to try it. I prefer to shoot in shade, but if it's unavailable you've just got to do what you can by minimising the highlight area as much as possible, and pumping your flash as hard as it will go (using +3 FEC in bright situations is actually the same as +1 2/3 because the flash does auto fill reduction unless disabled on camera).

Hope that helps.

Su-Hannie
31st of July 2006 (Mon), 02:25
I shoot in full M. mostly in Jpg, but the shots that can't be repeated or go by very fast (like kiss in church) I'll shoot in Raw

beaconlightboy
31st of July 2006 (Mon), 08:17
I was using natural light only, F1.4, 1/30th, ISO1600 on a 20D. For that sitution now i'd go to ISO3200 on all natural light. I would also consider flash, dragging the shutter, and accepting less ambient light.

could you post some of those 1600 ISO images. i have been playing with ISO 1600 a few times when i get a chance at weddings and i still find my exposures to noisy for albums. B/W work ok, but i can't do an entire wedding like that, maybe i'm doing something wrong.

i would also like to see some of those 1.4's. are you using those for ceremony shots too?

jwilson
31st of July 2006 (Mon), 12:23
Great thread...for me, I struggle with the flash inside the church but have no problems with it outside for fill. Typically, for outside I'll use Av with -1 1/3 or -1 2/3 FEC for fill or even set the camera on P with the same FEC and my outdoor photos are good. But 2 wks ago, I shot a wedding (inside the church), used P, and FEL'd off the bride's face. Throughout the ceremony, I'll admit...I was chimping. The pics looked good. But when I downloaded them to the computer and started PSing, I was PO'd. They don't look good at all. Now, I'm embarrassed to tell the B&G. Fortunately, they're friends of mine so this was more of a wedding gift from me to them but still...my reputation will be damaged. At this point, I think my only option to "save" the church formals is to convert them to B&W or sepia.

Next time, I'm shooting all manual (inside the church). I did some experimenting the other night to find the settings I wanted. Then I wrote them down on a little piece of paper and taped that to the back of my flash to remind me next time. I don't what I would do if these were paying clients!

beaconlightboy
31st of July 2006 (Mon), 15:30
Great thread...for me, I struggle with the flash inside the church but have no problems with it outside for fill. Typically, for outside I'll use Av with -1 1/3 or -1 2/3 FEC for fill or even set the camera on P with the same FEC and my outdoor photos are good. But 2 wks ago, I shot a wedding (inside the church), used P, and FEL'd off the bride's face. Throughout the ceremony, I'll admit...I was chimping. The pics looked good. But when I downloaded them to the computer and started PSing, I was PO'd. They don't look good at all. Now, I'm embarrassed to tell the B&G. Fortunately, they're friends of mine so this was more of a wedding gift from me to them but still...my reputation will be damaged. At this point, I think my only option to "save" the church formals is to convert them to B&W or sepia.

Next time, I'm shooting all manual (inside the church). I did some experimenting the other night to find the settings I wanted. Then I wrote them down on a little piece of paper and taped that to the back of my flash to remind me next time. I don't what I would do if these were paying clients!


for fill light, and i don't know about the rest of you, but i find that when im outside in the shade, i push my camera above 1/250th by going to ISO 200 or 400 and then use FEC -1 with the exposure set to expose to the ambient light.

this seems to work for me. I don't think i ever use 100 unless im in dead sunlight. Also, if your going to FEL. i recommend using FEL on the dress with +1 2/3 or 1 1/3 depending on the reflectiveness. This is a lot more reliabe than skin tones. Works great for white. Just FEL on the dress. you can cheat with groomsmen too. just set your FEC to -3 and FEL the black tuxes.

overall, i'm trying to get away from FEL and use FEC more. i find it hard to FEL moving targets. for most shots FEC + 2/3 works, but sometimes it doesnt. it really matters what ends up in that center circle of your viewfinder. that's all the flash sees.

hope that helps.

jwilson
31st of July 2006 (Mon), 18:00
Thanks for the advice, I'll try that along with manual at the next wedding (the benefit of shooting with 3 cameras!).

kawter2
31st of July 2006 (Mon), 18:16
Interesting Topic. I'm on my 10th wedding and don't have this figured out yet. So many variables! I just want to emulate a pro like Joe Buesnik (if that's how you spell his name?), figure out what he does, and then do it. I'm not trying to reinvent how to shoot weddings.



haha i just saw this, but Joe shoots P mode.. bet you would have never guessed

gregory71
1st of August 2006 (Tue), 01:45
Hey Eric,

Did you go to one of his workshops. Knowing now that your in the OC I bet your familiar with Mike Colon and Becker as well. I hear their kicking some butt down there.

Would love to hear more about Joe however if you have info. I can't afford any workshops out of town at the moment.

Cheers,

Greg

kawter2
1st of August 2006 (Tue), 02:09
Hey Eric,

Did you go to one of his workshops. Knowing now that your in the OC I bet your familiar with Mike Colon and Becker as well. I hear their kicking some butt down there.

Would love to hear more about Joe however if you have info. I can't afford any workshops out of town at the moment.

Cheers,

Greg


I don't think I have ever been to a workshop other than little seminars at wppi, I'm not against them, I just don't know that I would get a good return on my dollar at this phase in my life

yah i'm a little familiar with Becker and Mike ;) they do pretty well down here.



where are you from?

gregory71
1st of August 2006 (Tue), 02:52
I'm up here in Portland, Oregon. There is a pretty good wedding market here and this is my first year. I'm working 3-4 weddings per month right now, but most with another studio I'm freelancing with.

I'm just not liking the way thay work the wedding. A ton of posed shots, formals, etc.

Right now, I'm wanting to work more with available light and my 70-200 2.8 lens. I know Colon and Joe do this a ton. Let the action take place away from you. Send your couple out on a walk with "some" direction and let them have some fun.

Just trying to get my own style down. My inspiration is Joe, Mike Colon, David Jay, and these new guys that Becker has been hyping up. There hosting a workshop in Austin along with one of your mentors. Forgot the name.

Anyway..............just can't afford a workshop at the moment and trying to learn all I can now.

Cheers,

Greg

Anymore input is much appreciated.

Phil V
1st of August 2006 (Tue), 05:21
If what you're wanting to achieve is completely existing light shooting, the key is the quality of light. I use the term existing - because your light source can be natural or any artificial source that happens to be there.

Firstly when you go to a venue you need to analyse the quality and direction of the light. Then you need to position your subjects and yourself to take advantage of the light. Of course, if you're planning on not posing shots the last bit is doubly difficult, all you can do is position yourself, and wait.

Take out a couple of friends for the afternoon, if you buy them coffee and promise some free 8x10s you can experiment in different lighting situations. For instance in harsh overhead light, most photographers complain that eye sockets produce 'panda eyes' , but if you tilt the brides head up towards the light and have the groom look down into her eyes, now both their faces are in a soft(ish) shadow. The drawback to this method is that the quickest way of learning the effects of light quality and direction is by studying the use of studio flash.

And:
NEVER SHOOT WITH THE SUN ON YOUR BACK...NEVER SHOOT WITH THE SUN ON YOUR BACK...NEVER SHOOT WITH THE SUN ON YOUR BACK...NEVER SHOOT WITH THE SUN ON YOUR BACK...NEVER SHOOT WITH THE SUN ON YOUR BACK...NEVER SHOOT WITH THE SUN ON YOUR BACK...

tim
1st of August 2006 (Tue), 06:23
And:
NEVER SHOOT WITH THE SUN ON YOUR BACK...NEVER SHOOT WITH THE SUN ON YOUR BACK...NEVER SHOOT WITH THE SUN ON YOUR BACK...NEVER SHOOT WITH THE SUN ON YOUR BACK...NEVER SHOOT WITH THE SUN ON YOUR BACK...NEVER SHOOT WITH THE SUN ON YOUR BACK...

I agree. Another reason to do this is because people squint when faced into the sun.

Phil V
1st of August 2006 (Tue), 07:15
Tim, That wasn't a question it was a statement, I was using it as a MANTRA, does the rest of that post look like I wouldn't know??

tim
1st of August 2006 (Tue), 07:24
Tim, That wasn't a question it was a statement, I was using it as a MANTRA, does the rest of that post look like I wouldn't know??

I was giving another reason to support your statement, sorry if I wasn't clear.

kawter2
1st of August 2006 (Tue), 11:28
And:
NEVER SHOOT WITH THE SUN ON YOUR BACK...NEVER SHOOT WITH THE SUN ON YOUR BACK...NEVER SHOOT WITH THE SUN ON YOUR BACK...NEVER SHOOT WITH THE SUN ON YOUR BACK...NEVER SHOOT WITH THE SUN ON YOUR BACK...NEVER SHOOT WITH THE SUN ON YOUR BACK...

So you want the subject looking into the dark? what does that do to the eyes? I understand your reasoning, but I think your statement could mislead some people

Phil V
1st of August 2006 (Tue), 13:04
So you want the subject looking into the dark? what does that do to the eyes? I understand your reasoning, but I think your statement could mislead some people
NOPE, Bearing in mind this was an answer to someone trying to figure out how to shoot in natural light, I disagree entirely, when is positioning your subject facing the sun better than any other scenario?
First choice - Don't shoot in open sunshine, If you have to shoot in open sunshine - shoot into it - not with the sun on your back.
There is no argument to be had here. We are not shooting on ISO 25 film where the amount of light might be more important than the quality (just so we can get an exposure). We're trying to take attractive photo's of people (the purpose of my original statement), so we use soft light / open shade and hopefully we can angle it to create a subtle 3d lighting effect. Or have I been studying the wrong photo's / paintings?
And if that misleads people then they're too stupid to be dealing with all of this stuff.

wilky95
1st of August 2006 (Tue), 16:22
Prat...... you had to learn or did it just come to you in a flash of bright light ?.

Martin


And if that misleads people then they're too stupid to be dealing with all of this stuff.[/quote]

Yella Fella
15th of October 2006 (Sun), 11:22
interesting read... i followed my pro to slough yesterday shooting at wedding at a golf course... the lighting was very even as overcast day... however, when using Av mode (plus was trying partial metering), i was getting mixed exposure settings from 1/600 down to 1/30, it was well weird. It averaged out around /125 to 1/200, maybe i should of set it to manual to get the bang on exposure with a bit of fill flash.

The wedding was quite short in an essense, only had approx 2 hours to shoot as wedding was around 4-6pm. But the lighting was quite cool by then, especially as the sun was slowly setting

But on a general consensus, i try to shoot Av outdoors and daytime, i switch to manual at night and sometimes indoors.

I have yet to try out spot metering on a different camera to see how good that is. Just dont know how good that is when i shoot mainly candids and PJ style.

And another note with manual is... (especially those with two cameras at weddings), i sometimes forget to dial down ISO and change back to Av when i move from indoors to outdoors. So i get a fair pics all blown in the highlights... not good!!

Phil V
15th of October 2006 (Sun), 15:19
I've pointed this out before, but most people like to over-complicate it. Exposure is exposure, it's either right or wrong. Understanding exposure values has nothing whatsoever to do with the choice of AV, TV, M or P. These are methods a photog uses to prioritise (or not) one of the variables, to create the DoF or whatever else is the photog's priority for the image.

The (slightly) more important camera function re exposure is choice of metering pattern (or selection of a handheld meter). However, the MOST important part is still to UNDERSTAND what the meter is telling you and to deal with it appropriately.

kawter2
16th of October 2006 (Mon), 00:40
Prat...... you had to learn or did it just come to you in a flash of bright light ?.

Martin


And if that misleads people then they're too stupid to be dealing with all of this stuff.[/QUOTE]

do you spell potato with an e too?



reference to your signature

Phil V
16th of October 2006 (Mon), 18:22
Prat...... you had to learn or did it just come to you in a flash of bright light ?.

Martin


And if that misleads people then they're too stupid to be dealing with all of this stuff.
I missed this when it was posted, I suppose that's because the quote of me was done incorrectly (what does that say?).

I really object to a; being called a prat, and b; having someone question my lack of helpfulness. During this thread I posted tons of useful information, the throwaway remark at the end was in answer to Kawter2 who'd questioned the 'over-simplification' he felt I'd given. It's ironic that he then jumped to my defence (THANKS)! Martin, if you'd like to re-read all my comments on this thread and reconsider your opinion I'll accept an apology or explanation either on here or by PM.

It's exceedingly unhelpful to join threads and not offer anything, either by way of answers or further questions. The word coined for this on Forums is TROLL. However Martin - you may have used a more succinct one;).

Philco
17th of October 2006 (Tue), 01:26
Indoors w/ flash I have learned to leave it on M. I meter for room manually, and let the flash meter for the foreground, adjusting the FEC as needed. Typically in a dark ballroom reception, camera is always set to F2.8 at iso 400 or 800, depending. 1/30th is common, or even slower.
To freeze dancing, etc. I use direct flash, and for everthing else I bounce.

gcobb
17th of October 2006 (Tue), 21:18
If I'm not shooting scenery or vehicles I use the flash for fill. I also use the Pro-T (I think) stroboframe. I don't think you gain anything except control when shooting in manual. I read in another thread where if you use a flash in AV it only serves as a fill anyway.