PDA

View Full Version : Canon auto mode controversy question


inward/outward
6th of March 2008 (Thu), 08:26
Picturecrazy put a very good experiment for us all to see here in the forum testing the 580EX II auto mode with that of an old Canon and the Nikon flash.

I have some questions about this test and possible reasons why the auto mode of teh 580 EX II resulted in underexposure...

Here is the link to the experiment I am referring to:
Canon auto mode experiment (http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=431513&highlight=580EX+II+auto+off+camera)

In my opinion, the hot (bright) window is throwing off the auto mode sensor. I would need more info on your settings, ie. aperture and ISO and guide number read.

If I understand auto mode sensors on flashes, here is what I think is happening...

The Canon 580EX II has a larger guide number than the other two flashes (especially the older Canon flash, but is probably close to the Nikon's range) for a given zoom.

Perhaps this being the case results in the Canon having a longer effective range for its auto mode than the others for the same aperture and ISO settings. I fully understand for a given distance, if a flash is able to effectively light at that distance, the same ISO and aperture settings should result in the same exposure; however, my issue is with the effective range of the auto mode's sensor.

If this is the case, one would think that if the Canon auto sensor reaches further in evaluating the light level of the scene, then it is possibly reaching the window and compensating downward; where the other flashes are not reaching that far with their auto mode sensor. If they are not reaching that far, they will evaluate the scene as darker and expose for the subject better (at least in Picturecrazy's situation).

My suggestion is to understand first what the ISO and aperture inputs where and the distance between the flash and subject and the flash and the window.

If the Canon has a longer effective range for the auto mode than the other flashes and its sensor can reach further, then wouldn't it make sense we would have to move the Canon back further from the subject (in Picturecrazy's scenario) to keep Canon's effective auto mode range from reaching the window?

If you can tell me that the effective distance (guide no read from the back of the flash for the given ISO and aperture input for Picturecrazy's scenario) for the auto sensor indicated it was shorter than the distance to the window, but would reach the subject; AND it still under exposed, now that is a problem. BUT; however, if you the flash indicated its effective range would reach the window, then underexposure is perfectly understood and moving the flash back, or reducing the aperture input into the flash's auto mode settings would be required.

If this has already been vetted, please ignore, but I read through the post and wasn't satisfied this had been addressed exactly.

Picturecrazy, can you provide the information, please? The reason I am so interested is because I was thinking of auto mode being a viable off camera alternative to manual mode.

Thanks,
IO

cosworth
6th of March 2008 (Thu), 08:32
Start about here:

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=392233&highlight=mirror+ball&page=4

Maybe a page or two back

Curtis N
6th of March 2008 (Thu), 09:23
If this is the case, one would think that if the Canon auto sensor reaches further in evaluating the light level of the scene, then it is possibly reaching the window and compensating downward; where the other flashes are not reaching that far with their auto mode sensor. The photocell on a flash unit can't tell how far the light is travelling. All it can do is measure light.

An automatic flash unit measures this light very quickly and quenches the flash in real time when proper exposure is reached. This happens so fast (usually 1/1000 second or less) that ambient light sources, even very bright ones, are not likely to influence the measurement.

There are differences between flash units when it comes to the coverage angle of their sensors. The coverage of the 580EX II is narrower than most, but this alone doesn't explain the underexposure behavior of the unit.

inward/outward
6th of March 2008 (Thu), 09:29
Ok Curtis, gotcha.

Then it appears that the better the ability for the sensor to measure light from the flash, and adjust by shutting down output at the right time, that is the issue. Canon's simply isn't taking care of business as well as other, proven models (I say this because auto is new on the 580EX II even though you would think Canon could get it right).

The funny thing I have run into is I have heard others have great results from auto flash on the 580EX II.

If it, on average, isn't as good as it should be, then I would think people should be letting Canon know.

IO

Curtis N
6th of March 2008 (Thu), 09:33
The funny thing I have run into is I have heard others have great results from auto flash on the 580EX II.True. Cosworth is one of the few.

But there are enough reports of underexposure or inconsistency from accomplished shooters like Lloyd (picturecrazy) and Leo (PacAce) to lead me to believe there is a real problem with this unit.

And it's rather disgusting to me that Canon hasn't fessed up and offered to fix the problem like they did with the submirror problem on the 1D Mk III.

Rant over ;)

cosworth
6th of March 2008 (Thu), 09:33
You could just bump the flash power up a bit on auto mode.

I'm quite sure Canon knows what their flash does and I'd love hear what the R&D team would say about it. They know a little more about it than we do.

cdifoto
6th of March 2008 (Thu), 09:36
Canon auto mode controversy question
What controversy? It's a fact that Canon Auto sucks.

inward/outward
6th of March 2008 (Thu), 09:41
Perhaps the fix is a 580EX Mark III? Since you cannot update the firmware (it that was a problem) in the Canon flashes, they either have to recall, or produce a new unit.

cosworth
6th of March 2008 (Thu), 11:16
I must live in the Canon Flash inverted Bermuda Triangle. Funny that, I actually have lived inside the Bermuda Triangle...

cdifoto
6th of March 2008 (Thu), 11:21
I must live in the Canon Flash inverted Bermuda Triangle.

That's Vancouver for ya.

cosworth
6th of March 2008 (Thu), 11:22
Love the new sig CDI.

FlashZebra
6th of March 2008 (Thu), 11:40
I must live in the Canon Flash inverted Bermuda Triangle. Funny that, I actually have lived inside the Bermuda Triangle...
I will ask again, do you have any of those spiffy and colorful shorts?

Do humans actually wear those shorts in Bermuda.

I was astounded in Paris when I actually saw a man walking down the street wearing a beret, with a long "French" bread loaf under his arm, and walking a poodle, .

Enjoy! Marlene

Wilt
6th of March 2008 (Thu), 11:46
I was astounded in Paris when I actually saw a man walking down the street wearing a beret, with a long "French" bread loaf under his arm, and walking a poodle, .

I wonder how much that guy gets paid, by the Paris Chamber of Commerce :rolleyes: ;)

cosworth
6th of March 2008 (Thu), 12:01
I will ask again, do you have any of those spiffy and colorful shorts?

Do humans actually wear those shorts in Bermuda.

I was astounded in Paris when I actually saw a man walking down the street wearing a beret, with a long "French" bread loaf under his arm, and walking a poodle, .

Enjoy! Marlene

Yes, I have a pair of the spiffy shorts. Since moving back to Canada my body decided to bulk up on fat to protect me from harsh winters so my shorts don't fit sadly.

Only North Americans wear those shorts in general. Others wear speedos. :cool:

mnealtx
7th of March 2008 (Fri), 04:59
There are differences between flash units when it comes to the coverage angle of their sensors. The coverage of the 580EX II is narrower than most, but this alone doesn't explain the underexposure behavior of the unit.


Curtis - Could this be due to that NEVEC thing?