EOS Flash???!?!? vs N**on

anyone shoot along side a N**on user when using flash?


I shot 2nd at a wedding this weekend.. I was very happy all day untill nightfall.

The was using the 550Ex on my 20d and the other photographer was using a Fuji S2 with the comperable N**on flash (sorry I didn't get the model #) any way, we were both shooting the flash pointing straight up with an omnibounce (actually his was a nikon version that comes with their flashes) any way..

It seemed no mater what I did in ETTL(manual f2.8 1/60 | FEC +/- | AV center metered) I couldnt get the SOFT accurtat light he was getting. Granted I was just looking on his lcd, but I even had him shoot a Manual Exposed shot with no FEC on his S2, I replicated EXACTLY his settings and still did not feel confident about it


ANYONE??? T.I.A.

Do you mean soft like quality or quantity of light?

To me it seemed like "Quality" If i bumped the flash in FEC it seemed like I would get more light but it didnt seem as soft


Dunno.. am i making any sense what so ever?

I am finding that the most accurate flash exposures with the 20D & the 580EX are in P mode. In AV or manual the omnibounce isn't as consistent as I'd like. I am still practicing settings on the 20D so I don't know what other settings there are that are affecting my exposures with flash. I do know that since switching from the Sigma 500 Super DG to the 580EX my exposures are more consistent. No slam on the sigma though, it works fine for most situations, it's just that the 580EX seems much better and easier to use.

Did you try using P mode? If yes, what were your results compared to AV?

Lou

Well,. you choice of words has us confused as in the digital era we think of "soft" as "bad" ie,. "not sharp"


But your talking about a quality of light,. and I am guessing in this case "soft" is a good thing.

Either way,. it's still not really clear what you are saying.

Personally I think the omni bouce is a waste of money and batteries. With ETTL (or ETTL2) your camera simply sees the monibounce as a reduction in the exposure it is trying to acheive,. and it then compensates by trying to pump more light out.

Couple that with what I might assume is a white balance issue?

Try a lumiquest bounce and experiment,. it's hard for us to know what look you are trying to acheive but the Omnibounce I don't think is the answer.

P Vs. AV:

in P mode you are shooting fully automatic flash exposure,..

In AV or manual,. the flash is working as a fill flash.

You can get a lot of differences in flash quality just by using a different metering mode, especially if you have a bride's white dress in the center.

---Bob Gross---

That would be quantity I presume....
After having reread the OP, I would suggest trying the Nikon's 'omnibounce'. It might be more (or less) transparent, so it causes more light to bounce in all directions, whereas 'your' omnibounce throws more light directly at the subject... I don't agree with our mod CDS on the omnibounce being useless, but I do think in most cases just bouncing is a more effective solution, because it keeps you thinking, and you can influence the lightfall easier...
Having said that, it's difficult to seperate quality of light from quantity of light / proportion between flash and ambient by text. Can you post some samples?

Are you saying Nikon flashes have different temperature?

Changes in ISO as well as aperture and shutter speed will affect the balance between ambient light and flash. What was his ISO setting?

DocFrankenstein wrote:

Are you saying Nikon flashes have different temperature?

No, I wasn't saying that, cause that has nothing to do with either quality or quantity of light. It's a possibility though

Sorry, I wish I had samples, but with the company I was shooting for, the lead takes the CF cards with him/her right after the job.

I think you are on to something!!! the N**on bounce is WAAAAYYY less opaque. My flash was probably fighting the "loss of light". I am going to try direct flash for a while, or maybe even a lumiquest and see what happens

We were both shooting ISO 800 (his S2 my 20D).

I did take that into account and matched up manual exposure & ISO with his exactly.

If you matched camera settings to his, then having a different flash may have contributed to the difference. If his diffuser was less dense than yours, he may also have been getting some bounce out of it.

I say try the same type of shot without the omnibounce - The lens on the flash should scatter things adequately off the ceiling without having to diffuse (unless its a reflective or mirror ceiling). You could always try the flip-down diffuser as well to widen your flash's pattern.

The omnibounce is scattering light in all directions so some of the light is direct to the subject. You may want this effect for some shots, but it is not going to soften the light in full bounce situations.

You might want to experiment with putting the flash at one notch from straight up (the 75* mark or even the 60*) instead of straight up to bounce the flash a little farther between you and the subject.

You can also try the Lumiquest 80/20 if you want to get a bounce flash, but with a little catch light in the eyes.

They both shot bounce, but with different diffusers.