What the heck happened here?!?!?!

[markubig]

I took my Tamron 28-75 off my 20D today to get some work in with my 50/1.8II. I stuck on the lens, put on my 550ex flash in bounce position, pressed the shutter and got the below result. Saw a screen full of "blinkies" so I proceeded to take another shot, and got the same result . . . What on earth did I do wrong?

Here is the EXIF info:
20D w/ EF 50mm f/1.8 II
Manual Mode
1/100s
f/8
ISO400
Flash: Fired, Compulsory Mode
Metering: Partial

AF point was on the face of women 2nd from the right

[CyberDyneSystems]

Is the aperture diaphram stuck?

See what happens without the flash, if when stopped down it still over exposes.

[markubig]

Is the aperture diaphram stuck?

See what happens without the flash, if when stopped down it still over exposes.After the 2 shots, things went back to normal . . . * well, not exactly 'cause I am still running in into other blowout problems (See this thread (http://www.photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?p=575546#post575546)) . . .http://www.photography-on-the.net/forum/images/smilies/icon_redface.gifhttp://www.photography-on-the.net/forum/images/smilies/icon_redface.gif

Anyway, is that possible on the 501/8 for the aperture diaphram to stick? Could that have contributed to my day-long overexposure headache? or am i just a complete moron under the sun? http://www.photography-on-the.net/forum/images/smilies/icon_mad.gifhttp://www.photography-on-the.net/forum/images/smilies/icon_mad.gif

[lostdoggy]

In manual mode set ur aperture to the smallest setting , I think its f/22. While looking thru the Viewfinder depress DOF preview!!! it should darken. If that is not the problem make sure ur Exposure Compensation is on zero and your FEC is on zero. Make sure all ur CFn are correct. Take off the lens and see if the little mirror behind the large mirror is in the down position.

[J.A.F. Doorhof]

Did you set your flash to highspeed sync ?

[SkipD]

It appears that your camera was in manual mode. I suspect you just selected the wrong aperture for the ISO speed and distance to subject. I'm not sure, but I believe that the camera does not control flash exposure in manual mode.

[tim]

You probably should have used "save as" not "save for web" so we could see the original EXIF data.

[snibbetsj]

The camera does provide ETTL-II in M. Perhaps you had your flash on manual instead of TTL.

[SkipD]

The camera does provide ETTL-II in M.You really have to read between the lines to understand that from the manual..... Glad you pointed out that out, though. Thanks.

[markubig]

It appears that your camera was in manual mode. I suspect you just selected the wrong aperture for the ISO speed and distance to subject. I'm not sure, but I believe that the camera does not control flash exposure in manual mode.the 1st 2 pictures looked like that and then the 3rd came out normal . . . i usually keep those setting when i'm walking around the house snapping away, so those settings should have worked ok . . . maybe it's what CDS said that the aperture diaphram was stuck?

[markubig]

Did you set your flash to highspeed sync ?Hi Frank . . . no, it was not set to highspeed sync . . . you only need to do that w/ shutter speeds faster than 1/200s right?

[markubig]

You probably should have used "save as" not "save for web" so we could see the original EXIF data.i posted the original EXIF data and posted the picture as it came out. . . i only resized. i shoot raw only (not raw+jpg) so it's hard to "save as" the picture to a less than 100K and still make it a decent viewable size.

[snibbetsj]

If your flash is on ETTL you might try setting the aperture to 1.8, thus telling the ETTL that it is 1.8 and taking the shot (or a similar one since this may not be easily reproduced) again. Then try stopping down the lens, it may be a stuck aperture. Maybe try a few different shutter speeds also. It's possible that the ambient light may have been so high that your f4, 1/100, ISO 400 may have already overexposed the photo. I'd also go to ISO 100 myself.

[snapper27]

i had this problem too - the flash was not screwed on tightly - make sure you screw it down.
Also, make sure you have the custom setting for flash set to evaluative.

[J.A.F. Doorhof]

Highspeed has to be used a speeds over 1/250 or 1/200 depends on camera.
I happens often that when shooting the speed will go over this, it happened to me more than once.

[DavidEB]

The depth of field in the background looks more like f8 than f1.8.

In M mode the camera should have been adjusting the flash output to provide exposure to the average in the image (though I can't figure out if this means ovarall average or center-weight), regardless of focus points. It doesnt adjust ISO or Av, so it's only choice is reducing the flash output. Looks like your flash fired at full strength.

I agree with the comment about checking the mechanical connection -- if it isn't attached right, exposure info may not be communicated to flash.

Also see if you flash is set as some kind of slave, or group other than A.

good luck,

[Todd Jacobsen]

Based on your shutter/apeture setting, your flash probably fired full power which caused the shot shown above.

I got even worse results when I placed a snoot on a flash. I was experimenting with setups and after I thought I had it dialed in (using diffusers), I said hey, what would happen if I used a snoot.

Five minutes later, I could see again...I was a white blob and no facial features in the photo.

[markubig]

Thanks for your help all . . . I'll try to monitor my equipment and settings more closely in case it happens again, so maybe I'll be able to pinpoint the problem.

[glangston]

It appears that your camera was in manual mode. I suspect you just selected the wrong aperture for the ISO speed and distance to subject. I'm not sure, but I believe that the camera does not control flash exposure in manual mode.

That's exactly what happened to me. I showed the camera to a friend and probably twisted the dial to M and didn't notice until I saw all the blown out highlights. Had me going for a bit. :confused:

[topaz]

I'm not sure, but this seems like it might just be straightforward overexposure of the ambient light. When I set my camera to ISO 400, f/8, 1/100 in M mode and take a shot of a bright room with a window in the background - without a flash - the picture is badly blown out. In fact, before pressing the shutter, the meter was pegged at +2, so this is the result I expected. Turning on the flash will not cause the aperture to close down, nor the shutter to close faster, so the same overexposure would have occurred if I used the flash.

markubig, did you notice the position of the exposure meter when you took the shot? Is it possible the room was just too bright for f/8 1/100 at ISO 400?

The good old trick of just firing away in M mode works reasonably well when you're underexposing ambient light, since the flash metering will fix up the foreground. But the flash can't darken a scene that's overexposed otherwise. I think maybe your picture would have come out OK at ISO 100.

[markubig]

markubig, did you notice the position of the exposure meter when you took the shot? Is it possible the room was just too bright for f/8 1/100 at ISO 400?My exposure meter was all the way to the left, showing underexposure. The room was lit no different than other times when I had taken pictures at those settings . .. that's why I was puzzled at the result.

[CyberPet]

It might be me, but the AF doesn't seem to be exactly on the woman to the left (right next to the guy), so maybe the flash was tricked to exposure for something else. I don't know how it works with the flash and partial metering, but it feels like it could be a problem. I know that when I shoot my Siamese cats (who have very dark faces but bright bodies) the flash sometimes get fooled and over-expose the images.

[Tom W]

F/8, 1/100, ISO 400 should give you a good balance between the flash and ambient exposure, with bias towards the flash on the subject. E-TTL II should be taking care of the flash portion of the exposure. Appears that the flash went full-output for some reason. I agree with David WRT depth-of-field. Looks like f/8 to me (or at least f/5.6) though the overexposure makes it hard to see exactly what is in good focus.