300D flash -- it stinks!!!

[rkoshy]

Okay... for those of you who have commented on the 300D's flash... "I should have listened...." :cry:

The built in flash on the 300D stinks at anything more than 5-6 feet... Coming from using a Minolta for over 6 years, this came as a real surprise... My minolta would easily handle anything to around 10-15 feet with the built in flash... I've done a few weddings and other occasions with it.

My sister just got married this past weekend... and I decided to have someone use my 300D to take some pics... stuff that the "pro" wouldn't be shooting. Well, sure enough, between the church and the reception, I have a whole lot of "really dark" photos... which are probably okay on a screen with a bit of post-processing, but definitely too dark to do any sort of reasonable adjustment and print.

So... I'm online now, ordering my 550ex...

To all the newbies to the 300D -- GET A DECENT FLASH!!!

[Alexandre Gabriel]

Didn't you use a high ISO setting? Do you have the kit lens only?
Anyway, don't expect a big performance from ANY built-in flash.
I think you should buy a 420EX + some lenses, starting with a 50mm f1.8 @ 75 USD. I will buy these for my film EOS (don't have the budget for a 300D or 10D yet... :( )
This recent topic is about "decent" flashes:
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=35535

[drisley]

I would ALWAYS recommend getting a good extrenal flash for any SLR.

The 300D flash is known to underexpose by about 2/3 stop.
Just upping the flash output with FECset may have helped.
Actually, even if you get an external flash, increasing the flash output by about 2/3 stop does wonders.
http://revolution.cx/rcx/fecset.htm

[robertwgross]

The built in flash on the 300D stinks at anything more than 5-6 feet...
...
So... I'm online now, ordering my 550ex...


The built-in flash has a guide number of 13. The 550EX has a guide number of 55. That tells the story.

---Bob Gross---

[rkoshy]

Didn't you use a high ISO setting? Do you have the kit lens only?
Anyway, don't expect a big performance from ANY built-in flash.
I think you should buy a 420EX + some lenses, starting with a 50mm f1.8 @ 75 USD. I will buy these for my film EOS (don't have the budget for a 300D or 10D yet... :( )
This recent topic is about "decent" flashes:
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=35535

For some reason, I guess the camera gets confused... I guess it thinks the flash will actually light up the subject, even though it's approx 10-12 feet away, and hence you get a really underexposed image when using the flash.

Personally, I have been able to tweak ISO settings before to get "better" overall pictures, but it still doesn't match my Minolta SLR (film)... However in this case, the guy taking the pictures isn't used to DSLR's ...

I think the G5 takes decent pictures when used by a point-and-shoot operator, and they also have a heck of a nicer flash on it -- I've done side-by-sides, and the 300D always fares worse in a situation where I really need a flash...

[rkoshy]

I would ALWAYS recommend getting a good extrenal flash for any SLR.

The 300D flash is known to underexpose by about 2/3 stop.
Just upping the flash output with FECset may have helped.
Actually, even if you get an external flash, increasing the flash output by about 2/3 stop does wonders.
http://revolution.cx/rcx/fecset.htm

I've always carried my Vivitar around with the Minolta, but especially when trying to be inconspicuous, the built in flash worked wonders... I've done some really nice shots in complete darkness upto around 12 feet or so for single subject shots. Of course for anything which requires a nice coverage, I needed the Vivitar... (( ARGH -- kicking myself yet again ))

[Chazs]

It is what it is...an emergency flash when you don't have any thing else. On my recent trip to Europe I visted Kronborg castle. Underneath the castle (in the casemates) it's VERY dark, just candle light. A flash was necessary, but all I had was the built-in one. Here is a shot without and with the flash. I'd say the people in "without" are a good 25-30 feet away. As far as I cen tell, the built-in flash works quite good. BUT, it is imperative to use a higher ISO (400-800).

I'll still get another flash, but it's good in a pinch; especially now for those that boost the FEC. :wink:

http://members.isp01.net/snevetsc/photos/kronborg.jpg

[timmyquest]

Love the 550EX!


http://www.antiwall.com/march2004/images/6self.jpg

[rkoshy]

It is what it is...an emergency flash when you don't have any thing else. <... text removed ... > As far as I cen tell, the built-in flash works quite good. BUT, it is imperative to use a higher ISO (400-800).


Ok... just put on my Sigma 70-200 2.8 on this bugger and adjusted the lighting in my living room to similar conditions at the wedding... then tried a bunch of shots with the built-in flash... it seems to come out pretty decent! So maybe the lens is also part of the problem?? I don't get it...

[drisley]

Either that, or the subject under the focus point was white.
That will most definately cause underexposure of the flash.