Another flash question - Is this right?

I've had my Digital Rebel since November and have read everything there is to know about it. Pretty much driven off all my friends and some relatives because that's all I talk about.

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif'

You didn't say if you were using a single focus point or if you tried Flash Exposure Lock.

E-TTL flash will bias the exposure for the focus point. It figures anything in focus is the subject and the camera should expose that properly. It's hard to tell from your picture where the focus point was.

At any rate, if you haven't discovered this site grab your favorite beverage and have a read.

http://photonotes.org/​articles/eos-flash/

Understanding how E-TTL works goes a long way to proper flash exposure. Just getting the 550EX for FEC won't help if you don't have a good grasp of E-TTL.

Pls post EXIF info

Oh yeah, I've read almost everything I can lay my hands on on E-TTL and been to that site many many times. Great info there for sure.

That particular shot I had set to P mode but auto selection of the AF point. It had the center one selected and it just between my son's ear and eye.

I've read about the tonality of different skin types and reflective meters used in these cameras, and it does seem to have something to do with it. I take the exact same shot of an African American friend of mine and it comes out GREAT! She has a coccoa toned skin. I do the exact same shot of my kids and I get underexposure.

Almost all my flash shots are interiors portrait style of my kids and they almost always have skin as the selected AF point.

If I do a FEL on something darker, then of course the shot comes out much better, but still seems a little on the dark side. Not to mention it just doesn't seem like it should be that hard to take a portrait shot. If I can't get a portrait style shot out of it without doing a FEC +1 when only caucaision skin is selected and the camera won't let me do a FEC without buying another flash... I think we're getting ripped.

I know they are different animals and aimed at a different target, but my G2, even using the 420EX would never give me a shot so dark.

I'm going to be down at another Wolf Camera this weekend. If they have another in stock I might play around with it to see how badly I can hose it's shots.

Oops, I thought clicking the picture would take you to the Pbase site, but it doesn't do what I thought. Here is the EXIF for the shot. I will also add it to the first post.

Camera Model: Canon EOS DIGITAL REBEL
Firmware: Firmware Version 1.1.1
Shutter speed: 1/60 sec
Aperture: 4.0
Exposure mode: Program
Flash: External E-TTL - 420EX, but can duplicate with internal as well
Metering mode: Evaluative
Drive mode: Single frame shooting
ISO: 400
Lens: 50.0 mm
Focal length: 50.0mm
AF mode: AI Focus AF
Image size: 3072 x 2048
Image quality: Fine
White balance: Auto
Color space: sRGB
Saturation: Normal
Sharpness: Normal
Contrast: Normal

Probably a silly question, but do you have any exposure compensation on that picture?

I made a basic levels adjustment in Photoshop Elements and came up with this:

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'text/html'

No exposure compensation nor flash comensation was applied. That shot is as plain as you can get without going to green box auto, and it will do the exact same thing in auto. Granted, auto will revert back to parameter 1 and I am shooting in parameter 2. I think auto will switch back to 100ISO as well when using the external flash, but stay at 400ISO for the internal. Doesn't matter, all flash shots with my kids as the subject come out underexposed.

The shots look pretty darned good if I use the 420 and bounce it off the ceiling. It is just those straight on shots. No matter if it is Auto, P, Av, one of those canned modes or whatever.

Non-Flash shots come out great.

I know you can edit it out. In fact I've started shooting RAW for everything and most assuridly when doing anything flash related so I can apply the exposure comensation during the RAW conversion to boost it. But the fact is you shouldn't have to shoot in RAW to get a simidecent shot particularly in Auto. I can't had this camera to my wife even set to auto and get anything worth a darned if the flash is used.

maybe you answered this already, but is the result the same with the built in flash, or just the 420EX? If its just the 420, then I'd borrow another EX flash and take a few shots. You want to use the process of elimination to isolate the probable cause of your problem.

All modes and all flashes.

Seems like a problem, unless other Reb owners can say they're getting the same results, which I doubt. See if you can "hose" another cam!!

Ilya

Try this...

-Keep the exposure compensation to +2/3 or +1 if you can. I need to do the same thing with my 420EX as well...I've learned to live with it.
-Continue to bounce off the ceiling it looks better anyway. Hey if your in a tiny room or have a wall immediately behind you point it backwards a bit.
-Get out of Auto mode and go to Manual mode set the shutter speed to 100 (with your 50mm lens) and set your aperature under 5.6 as desired.
-Change ISO to 200 or even 100 if you can get away with it.

Good luck!

-Clos

Remember, that in P EOS flash system will do everything to match the foreground to the background. Especially if you say that bounced off shots come up OK, I think this is the case. Try manual... I always shoot manual, unless I do fill in flash. Set your aperture to 4 or 5.6, time to 1/125 and try it. I know that the owner's manual is crappy, but the site that is mentioned at the beginning of this thread will explain everything to you. Of course - your background will be dark if you do that. Do that as an experiment, bounce the flash for your regular shots, it's the best technique anyways.

I took about 20 shots and almost all stink. My post the other night was with the 50mm f1.8, but all these were with the kit 18-55 lens; I wanted to be able to get wider than the 50 would allow. Doesn't matter much, I get the same effect with each lens.

http://www.mindspring.​com/~mlfrancis

You can hover your mouse over the thumbnails and it will give a comment in a popup. Click on the shot to get a 1024x768 version of the shot and full EXIF. (BreezeBrowser is great!)

I put comments under each image to specify which AF points were selected at the time the shot was taken. I also put all EXIF data for each shot. I took them in JPG mode and shrank to post, but that was all I did. I just wish I could post the histograms. Almost all are 2 solid stops from the right.

I took some with the internal flash, some with the external 420EX, some at 400ISO and some at 800ISO. Even a couple with EXP Comp +2. I waited to get the flash ready light and waited for the whine from the external to stop. Fresh batteries all the way around.

There are a few there that can be explained away, if the theory is right and it produces such bad shots, by the center AF point being selected over my daughter's face. However, there are just as many other shots that have more AF points selected over shirt, something in the back, and they are just as bad.

I didn't post it, but I did a FEL on my son's black shirt, then recomposed on him and the shot came out looking fairly well, a little over exposed, but not too bad at all. Trouble is it shouldn't have looked anywhere near alright! I FELed it on a dark black color and he was standing 4ft from me zoomed in for a headshot.

If you really want to see two that confuse me, the bottom row third from the last looks pretty good... the very next one has same settings and looks like crap. Granted there was only 14sec between the shots and even I would assume the flash wasn't charged, but the whine stopped and I had the ready light illuminated on the flash and in the viewfinder so it had to be ready, right?

I know it is a lot to ask, but can someone try something similar and let me see how different it looks? It would be much appreciated.

If you have made it this far into my rambling... Thank you very much.

Happy clicking,
Lynn

Although I don't have a rebel, I just can't believe its normal to take an underexposed picture with a 420EX, at 800 ISO with EC +2, at 1/60 F5.6. With my 10D and my 420EX at those setting, this image would be blown out to heck. Take it into a store where you can replicate the exact same shot with a new Rebel side by side.

I'm really hoping to this Saturday. Going to take a free Flash class at one of the local photo shops. Don't plan on getting much out of the class, but I hope they have a DR that I can compare with. Mine is going with me.

Thanks for the reply, now I am feeling a little better, or a little less crazy anyhow.