Using sunpack 383 outdoors.

[Azzure_7]

I'm happy using my just bought sunpack 383 indoors. I can get it right easily and I like it. Ussually I just bounce it.

Yesterday, at noon, I tied it outside. and it is a nightmare for me. I used the flash directly, but getting it right is crazy hard.

try using diffuser and it did not help.

Try it in the evening(sunset). still I can't get something decent. it's either overexposed by a lot or simply annoying images. LOL


Note that I need something light and convenience. so no lightstand and more flashes are used.

will an e-ttl flash helps this problem as it automatically measure the amount of light?

[Curtis N]

Samples?

[PacAce]

I'm happy using my just bought sunpack 383 indoors. I can get it right easily and I like it. Ussually I just bounce it.

Yesterday, at noon, I tied it outside. and it is a nightmare for me. I used the flash directly, but getting it right is crazy hard.

try using diffuser and it did not help.

Try it in the evening(sunset). still I can't get something decent. it's either overexposed by a lot or simply annoying images. LOL


Note that I need something light and convenience. so no lightstand and more flashes are used.

will an e-ttl flash helps this problem as it automatically measure the amount of light?
Will an ETTL flash help? Most likely, yes. Or, at least, it'll make it easier for you to get, more or less, properly exposed shots.

But, you can also try resolving your 383 exposure issues so that you can do better with the flash the next time. If you are getting overexposed pictures, then you should be lowering the flash output power. You can also decrease your aperture and/or your ISO to reduce the flash exposure.

If you haven't come to this realization yet, the distance of your subject from your flash has the greatest impact on your flash exposre if you are using direct flash. The closer the subject is, the less flash power you'll need for a given camera setting. The amount of light you need will quadruple (increase by two stops) every time you double the subject distance. Or, you'll need 1/4 the power (decrease by two stops) if you half the distance. So, if a subject 10 feet away exposes properly at a given camera setting, moving the subject to 5 feet will require you to decrease the flash power to 1/4 (stop stops lower) of that used at 10 ft. And increasing the distnace to 20 ft. will require you to quadruple (two stops higher) your flash output to properly light the subject. Or, instead of decreasing and increase the flash level, you can also adjust the aperture and/or the ISO by the same number of stops.

If you want to work in one stop increments, then multiply (or divide) the distance by 1.4. For example, increasing the distance by 1.4 will require a one stop increase in light and decreasing it by 1.4 will require a one stop decrease in light.

[Azzure_7]

http://i294.photobucket.com/albums/mm103/muliadiS/_MG_1157.jpg

http://i294.photobucket.com/albums/mm103/muliadiS/_MG_1124.jpg

http://i294.photobucket.com/albums/mm103/muliadiS/_MG_1169.jpg

http://i294.photobucket.com/albums/mm103/muliadiS/_MG_1479.jpg

[Azzure_7]

Looking back at my shots, I think noticed my error...
http://i294.photobucket.com/albums/mm103/muliadiS/_MG_1157.jpg

I'm using 12mm on crop. As you can see, I use direct flash. using a diffuser did not help. still it's wide. so I think the problem is because of using wide lens.

http://i294.photobucket.com/albums/mm103/muliadiS/_MG_1124.jpg

Problem from this image is highlight is harsh.

Hard Shadow cast when I'm not looking at this effect at the moment.

reason: flash is too near to the object and too strong.

Another reason I can blame is shooting in the middle of an afternoon with an adequate equipment. (only a single strobe)

http://i294.photobucket.com/albums/mm103/muliadiS/_MG_1169.jpg

Problem: harsh shadow. shooting from another angle would be a better idea. I guess.

http://i294.photobucket.com/albums/mm103/muliadiS/_MG_1479.jpg[/quote]

Well, indoor isn't easy as I thought earlier. this place took place at the corridor. I barely had space.

[DC Fan]

The Sunpak 383 has exposure and setting guides on the back of the case. Use them, and you'll be close to the correct exposure.

[Curtis N]

http://i294.photobucket.com/albums/mm103/muliadiS/_MG_1157.jpg
The Sunpak 383 is designed to cover a 35mm lens (full frame) which is about 22mm on a 1.6x camera.

http://i294.photobucket.com/albums/mm103/muliadiS/_MG_1124.jpg
The shadows from the sun are still very prominent, which makes me believe it's overexposed from ambient light, not flash.

http://i294.photobucket.com/albums/mm103/muliadiS/_MG_1169.jpg
This one really isn't too bad. One thing to remember when using a traditional automatic flash outdoors is that the sensor on the flash needs to see light reflected from itself. The sensor on the Sunpak 383 has a 15 degree angle of view, and my guess is that it "saw" a lot of background in this shot. Since a distant background won't reflect light from the flash, the result is overexposure. This is a common problem with off-center subjects or when shooting two people with space between them.

http://i294.photobucket.com/albums/mm103/muliadiS/_MG_1479.jpg
Side shadows from a hotshoe-mounted flash are a common problem with vertical shots. Bouncing the flash will help with this somewhat.

[jcolman]

I use 383's outside and I love them. This pic was taken with two of them. The key light was diffused with a soft box (prophoto) and the rim light was a bare light (no diffusion). Metering was done via chimping the histogram and viewing the image in the camera's LCD. It took me two or three test shots to get the balance the way I wanted.

http://i182.photobucket.com/albums/x148/jcolman_photo/girls-7.jpg

This was a one light shot. 383 shot thru the softbox

http://i182.photobucket.com/albums/x148/jcolman_photo/girls-33.jpg

Another two light set up, same as the first shot.

http://i182.photobucket.com/albums/x148/jcolman_photo/leahgraduation-48-Edit.jpg

I now own a sekonic lightmeter that makes it so much easier to get the exposure right.

[Azzure_7]

http://i294.photobucket.com/albums/mm103/muliadiS/_MG_1157.jpg
The Sunpak 383 is designed to cover a 35mm lens (full frame) which is about 22mm on a 1.6x camera.

http://i294.photobucket.com/albums/mm103/muliadiS/_MG_1124.jpg
The shadows from the sun are still very prominent, which makes me believe it's overexposed from ambient light, not flash.

http://i294.photobucket.com/albums/mm103/muliadiS/_MG_1169.jpg
This one really isn't too bad. One thing to remember when using a traditional automatic flash outdoors is that the sensor on the flash needs to see light reflected from itself. The sensor on the Sunpak 383 has a 15 degree angle of view, and my guess is that it "saw" a lot of background in this shot. Since a distant background won't reflect light from the flash, the result is overexposure. This is a common problem with off-center subjects or when shooting two people with space between them.

http://i294.photobucket.com/albums/mm103/muliadiS/_MG_1479.jpg
Side shadows from a hotshoe-mounted flash are a common problem with vertical shots. Bouncing the flash will help with this somewhat.

Thanks Curtis. That made me sure what I was doing wrong all this time. I wish I had been hanging around in this section more than the lens section.. . .

I use 383's outside and I love them. This pic was taken with two of them. The key light was diffused with a soft box (prophoto) and the rim light was a bare light (no diffusion). Metering was done via chimping the histogram and viewing the image in the camera's LCD. It took me two or three test shots to get the balance the way I wanted.

http://i182.photobucket.com/albums/x148/jcolman_photo/girls-7.jpg

This was a one light shot. 383 shot thru the softbox

http://i182.photobucket.com/albums/x148/jcolman_photo/girls-33.jpg

Another two light set up, same as the first shot.

http://i182.photobucket.com/albums/x148/jcolman_photo/leahgraduation-48-Edit.jpg

I now own a sekonic lightmeter that makes it so much easier to get the exposure right.

Very nice.