Thanks, George; you cleared my confusion up. To control two lights you simply switched to Nikon. Neat. :-) Having read the Joe McNally books I'm aware of just how sophisticated that lighting system is.
I'm happily remaining low-tech and individually metering manually adjusted lights. Even just trying to use exposure comp with P-TTL makes me a little crazy. I sure hear you on travelling light. I discovered on my last location shoot that no stands at all and one umbrella softbox was all I needed. Instead of stands I brought two assistants (cost: one Tim Hortons tea and a hot chocolate), one held the softbox key and one a bare flash for a kicker/hair light. On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 4:46 PM, George Sinos <gsi...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Bruce - > > In general we don't work too differently. Yes, I'm controlling two > lights. With Pentax I only had a single control. I tried using the > contrast control mode with a second flash. It worked, but never i > really got it to work well enough. But still, It was usable if you > have a lot of patience. I think the Pentax flash system is a good way > to get started, but it's more limited than the Nikon. > > Since then I switched over to the Nikon world for this type of > photography. Nikon does a better job of letting you control multiple > flashes. With the just the body you can control two independent > groups of lights in the range from -3 to +1. Then, once you are happy > with the lighting ratio, you can increase or decrease all of the > groups at the same time with flash exposure compensation. Added to > that, the regular exposure compensation will change all of the > lighting groups together, including ambient. > > There are enough controls so you can get yourself thoroughly confused > if you're not careful. If you want to control 3 groups at the same > time you have to add the SU-800 controller for about $250 or so. I > haven't had the need to do that. I'm only using two flashes. If I > need a third light for a hair light or background light I have a > couple of really cheap LCD panels that have worked OK so far. Every > so often I wish for a remote control on the hair light, but not often > enough to spend money on it. > > That's a great idea about adding modelling lights with cheap LCD > panels and multiple hot shoes. You can find the panels really cheap > if you don't care about how well the color is controlled. > > I've learned that lighting adds an entirely new dimension to spending > money on photography. There are more lighting accessories and > modifiers than you can shake a stick at. I've been attempting to keep > my kit as simple as possible. As I get older I want to carry as > little as possible to a shooting location. > > gs > George Sinos > -------------------- > www.GeorgesPhotos.net > www.GeorgeSinos.com > > > On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 11:45 AM, Bruce Walker <bruce.wal...@gmail.com> wrote: >> I agree, George, and I used the built-in wireless features for a >> couple of years, but I found serious shortcomings and eventually gave >> it up. >> >> You seem to be suggesting that you are able to control two flashes in >> P-TTL from the popup. True? I could _never_ get that to work at all. >> Either one remote flash would fire or neither. >> >> Re light adjustment: you're talking about bumping the remote's output >> by +1 through -2 stops from the camera's menu, right? But this would >> adjust both remote flashes by the same amount. That's almost never >> useful for me; individual control is generally what's needed. >> >> I really hear you about the climbing up to or lowering flashes to >> adjust them. It's even worse if they're inside an umbrella-style >> softbox: lower stand, rip velcro, reach in and adjust flash, reattach >> velcro, raise stand. Ugh. >> >> But my answer is to start with a basic pose, create the lighting >> arrangement, establish the base levels at that point using the flash >> meter, then start shooting. I avoid the temptation to make minor light >> tweaks until I decide to radically change the pose, say from 3/4 to >> silhouette. Any minor light differences from subject movement can be >> fixed by dodge/burn in post. Adjusting the lights while shooting is >> similar to excessive chimping -- a sure buzzkill. >> >> A great answer to no modelling light is to use an LED video light. You >> can walk around with it handheld until you find the right spot, then >> move your flash into that position. Or even mount the LEDs into the >> light modifier along with the flash using a double shoe. >> >> If you are deep into studying subtle lighting variations, you might >> want to consider high power CFLs (45 watts and up). With a cheap AC >> umbrella adapter they can be used with umbrellas and umbrella-style >> softboxes, like the Westcott Apollo. True WYSIWYG and don't get too >> hot. >> >> >> On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 10:38 AM, George Sinos <gsi...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> I've been working with a two flashes trying to improve my portrait >>> skills for a while. I have to say the ability to adjust the flashes >>> from the camera position, either in TTL or Manual, is much more than >>> a convenience for me. >>> >>> Since the flash units don't have modeling lights I really like the >>> ability to make small changes in the light output to accommodate a >>> small pose change. Also, the flash may be high up on a stand with the >>> control panel out of reach or out of sight. An adjustment would >>> either require climbing a ladder or lowering the light stand then >>> trying to return it to the same position. All the while the subject >>> is sitting there getting out of the mood. >>> >>> Using the built-in flash in the 'command only" mode was a brilliant >>> design move. That allows amateurs on a budget to slowly move into >>> remote flash control without buying extra equipment. I think that >>> feature is under appreciated by many. >>> >>> Nikon works slightly better than Pentax for this, but both work well. >>> Canon is just now figuring out that remote flash is valuable and has >>> started to put those features into some of their equipment. >>> >>> Everyone doesn't work the same way, and I wouldn't suggest that they >>> should. But for me this method work pretty well. >>> >>> gs >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> George Sinos >>> -------------------- >>> www.GeorgesPhotos.net >>> www.GeorgeSinos.com >>> >>> >>> On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 10:57 PM, Larry Colen <l...@red4est.com> wrote: >>>> On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 01:07:23PM +1000, Rob Studdert wrote: >>>>> I just got myself a Metz 58 AF-2, it seems up to the task and is very >>>>> much more affordable here than the Pentax 540. >>>> >>>> I'm happy, though not ecstatic with my Metz. A few things are more >>>> awkward than they should be, like adjusting power in manual mode. >>>> >>>> I'm seriously looking at one of those midwest photo lumopros as a >>>> manual backup to the Metz. If I'm using multiple strobes I'm not >>>> going to be shooting in TTL mode anyways. >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Larry Colen l...@red4est.com >>>> http://red4est.com/lrc >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >>>> PDML@pdml.net >>>> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >>>> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and >>>> follow the directions. >>> >>> -- >>> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >>> PDML@pdml.net >>> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >>> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and >>> follow the directions. >> >> >> >> -- >> -bmw >> >> -- >> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >> PDML@pdml.net >> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and >> follow the directions. > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow > the directions. -- -bmw -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
