5D Mark 3 and Flash = Underexposed

Hello 5D Mark 3 Users,

I recently upgraded my Canon camera from the 60D to the 5D Mark 3. I am delighted with the 5D Mark 3 however I have encountered an issue when using a flash unit such as the 580EX II and 600EX RT, shooting, say indoors on manual mode (1/60, F4 using the 24 to 105 kit lens, flash on ETTL) the photos look underexposed and this is confirmed looking at the histogram. I have ruled out a problem with the flash units as I have tested it on the 60D and there are no issues. I am wondering if there is a problem with the 5D Mark 3. The settings I have been using are AWB, ISO 200, E-TTL II Evaluative, default CFn on the flash unit.

When I give it flash compo of +1, it looks normal. Note I have the most up to date firmware 1.2.3

I have gone back to the store where I purchased the camera from and have shown them the underexposed photos and they agree it looks underexposed. I was able to talk to a Canon Rep who was there at the time and he could not shed much light on the matter, offering only to use custom white balance. Huh???

Do you think I have a dud camera? Its still under warranty so I can get it replaced.

Were you bouncing your flash? Also did you check from the camera lcd screen or on a computer?

I was using direct flash and I looked at the LCD and checked the histogram.

Try increasing your ISO speed to 600 or 800 and I think you'll see much better results. I shoot manual flash with a 5D2/580EX and always use ISO 800 f/6.3 @ 160th using a home made flash defuser that is half bounce and half direct and get good results.

At the risk of bringing scorn down upon myself, I have to say that I've never been especially happy with the E-TTL implementation. I've just come to accept that some +FEC is almost always going to be required, the amount to be determined by examination of histograms and trial and error. I just think of it now as a Canon canon, if you'll excuse the pun.

xarqi wrote in post #16436290
At the risk of bringing scorn down upon myself, I have to say that I've never been especially happy with the E-TTL implementation. I've just come to accept that some +FEV is almost always going to be required, the amount to be determined by examination of histograms and trial and error. I just think of it now as a Canon canon, if you'll excuse the pun.

Agreed. In fact, most of the time I prefer using manual settings :P. ETTL gets you in the ballpark where Lightroom can help.

xarqi wrote in post #16436290
At the risk of bringing scorn down upon myself, I have to say that I've never been especially happy with the E-TTL implementation. I've just come to accept that some +FEV is almost always going to be required, the amount to be determined by examination of histograms and trial and error. I just think of it now as a Canon canon, if you'll excuse the pun.

Agreed. Canon should really just poach one of Nikon's flash engineers, and sort out their flash issues once and for all.

adamo99 wrote in post #16436338
Agreed. Canon should really just poach one of Nikon's flash engineers, and sort out their flash issues once and for all.

Shhhh, we are not to talk about the dark side :P

adamo99 wrote in post #16436338
Agreed. Canon should really just poach one of Nikon's flash engineers, and sort out their flash issues once and for all.

If that happened, would we all be FECless?

Ratjack wrote in post #16436313
Agreed. In fact, most of the time I prefer using manual settings :P. ETTL gets you in the ballpark where Lightroom can help.

Yeah, pretty much. When I lived in a place with white walls, I almost always had +2/3 FEC dialed in. Now that I've moved and the walls are a darker Earth-tone with white ceilings, its more like +1/3. Either way, I'd always found Canon to error on the side of underexposure whether its the camera or the flash.

Hi all,
I know, strobes are supposed to blend in neatly with the subject but mostly we use the flashes because we are surrounded bij darkness.
In those cases the problem with ETTL it can't cope with white!
It does a pretty good job overall but whenever it encounters something white (a colon, a tablecloth, a shirt or whatever white in the shot) the processor seems to miscalculate and overcompensate, hence underexposed shots.
Thank god for having RAW on the side for the sake of manual correction
So we have the option of the painstaking manual setting or the gamble with ETTL. Both subject are sensitive to post-corrections.
Good luck and have fun!
Greetings,
Alain,

Mathboy wrote in post #16436133
Hello 5D Mark 3 Users,

I recently upgraded my Canon camera from the 60D to the 5D Mark 3. I am delighted with the 5D Mark 3 however I have encountered an issue when using a flash unit such as the 580EX II and 600EX RT, shooting, say indoors on manual mode (1/60, F4 using the 24 to 105 kit lens, flash on ETTL) the photos look underexposed and this is confirmed looking at the histogram. I have ruled out a problem with the flash units as I have tested it on the 60D and there are no issues. I am wondering if there is a problem with the 5D Mark 3. The settings I have been using are AWB, ISO 200, E-TTL II Evaluative, default CFn on the flash unit.

When I give it flash compo of +1, it looks normal. Note I have the most up to date firmware 1.2.3

I have gone back to the store where I purchased the camera from and have shown them the underexposed photos and they agree it looks underexposed. I was able to talk to a Canon Rep who was there at the time and he could not shed much light on the matter, offering only to use custom white balance. Huh???

Do you think I have a dud camera? Its still under warranty so I can get it replaced.

So knowing that +1 looks normal just apply it when your in the field. On my 580exII +1 is normal. When I want normal I +1, when I want a little more +2, and so forth.

Or go M and adjust aperture or distance etc..

I leave my EC & FEC at +2/3 on both my 5D and 60D almost all of the time.

xarqi wrote in post #16436446
If that happened, would we all be FECless?

If you just want to balance flash with ambient, yes. The Nikon flash system, IMO, does a terrific job of this.

You can still use FEC, if there's a specific look you're trying to achieve - but you can leave it at 0, shoot direct flash, bounce at any angle, use diffusers, bounce cards, etc- and the pre-flash calculates exactly how much light is needed.