RE: Fill flash in low light - balancing natural and flash
Hi all First off, many thanks to those who offered advice. Apologies if this reply is misplaced, I am subscribed to the digest and it sometimes gets a bit confusing as to who replying and whee I should be replying to. I have one quick question to Tom, who kindly went through quite a bit regarding flash: I understand that I can manually set the camera 2 stops underexposed and set the flash exposure to 2 stops over, Well, you could do that, but your shots would have 2 stops too much flash. I'm confused as to why I'd be exposing incorrectly on this - if I deliberately ask the camera to underexpose ambient by two stops, and after that simply ask the flash to take this setting and add two stops to it (at least that's my assumption of what +2 flash comp would do), wouldn't that therefore be the correct exposure? The only way I can see this not being the case is if the flash TTL exposure takes absolutely no notice of the camera exposure settings, and simply works out what it thinks is best, in which case my two stops flash compensation would indeed be two stops overexposure. If anyone can fill me in on this (pun not intended) I'd really be very grateful. I think, on the balance of it, I may just have to go with ambient light as it's patently obvious I don't really understand how flash works, and I'd rather have slightly soft, grainy pictures (ISO 3200 film) than shots of drummers looking like startled bunnies in car headlights. After having seen how Frank's shots came out, I'd be more than happy with anything looking like those (http://www.photo.net/photodb/folder? folder_id=383331 for those who haven't got the link from the previous message). Unfortunately I have a student lighting engineer who seems to enjoy using rear lighting a bit too much for my liking, so there are few (if any) kickers lighting the face. That would be one area where I might just have a crack with some standard fill flash - in which case I'll just turn on the flash with no compensation and leave it entirely to it's own devices. Someone suggested a Pz-1 and 500FTZ combo, well I can borrow a Pz-1 but I'm stuck with the 400FTZ unfortunately - limited funds mean everything is bought used as and where it turns up. Is it reasonable to suggest that Pentax have made this balancing ambient and flash thing unnecessarily difficult to do with the MZ series (to recap, I have an MZ-3 and 400FTZ)? By the way, what's PUG and PAW? Thanks for all your comments, the battle of the bands is tonight and I've just realised I'm down to 2 fast films. I'll let you know how I get on, and will try to get the photos up somewhere. Cheers Matt
RE: Fill flash in low light - balancing natural and flash
Hi Morgan, many thanks for reply. I think there's something you're might be missing here... I shot a band for the second time under very similar circumstances two weeks ago. It was my first attempt at using a flash at all, and so I found and read everything I could about it (which BTW is not a lot). I think you should really look at and try to figure out the Guide Numbers for your flash. I'm trying to infer information from your post, but it sounds like you want a very high level of detail on the film. I think you want a.) everything in focus -and- b.) everything well lit. If you were outside in bright sunlight, this would be no problem. Just close the aperture down for a big depth-of-field, and you can use all that available light to create a great high-detail negative. Unfortunately, those are not the circumstances you are working with. It took me a while to wrap my brain around how the throw distance of my flash works. Basically, as the aperture opens up, you can use your flash to expose a greater distance of space. As your aperture closes down, the total distance that you can effectively expose with the flash will decrease. So basically, you could use a relatively fast shutter speed and a small aperture (which would produce big depth of field in normal lighting), but you would get a very short throw distance from your flash. Thus, your fast shutter, small aperture combination would result in a black background because the aperture wasn't open enough for the flash light. Likewise, you could open the aperture up and get small depth of field, but everything illuminated. I'd be willing to bet there's a way to get what you want, but I'm not sure without knowing a.) the distances between you, the subject, and the background -and- b.) the length of your lens. Hope I could help and not exacerbate the problem... -m You're partially right in deciphering my question, having reread what I have written I didn't perhaps phrase it as well as I could, so I'll try again now. I really want to do away with flash, and shoot as I would in daylight. I can do this with certain compromises, as in fast film, slow shutter and wide aperture. However, I'd like to improve pretty much all of these but only by very slight amounts. The real problem is shutter speed, as I am getting blurred hands etc., and the lighting really is not that great so I am stuck with it. What I want to be able to do is to get as close to being able to take the photo WITH THE APERTURE AND SHUTTER AT SETTINGS I WANT, NOT THOSE REQUIRED FOR THE CORRECT EXPOSURE (apologies for caps, I don't know how to italicise in this email package!). All I want the flash to do is to bring the exposure up to what it should be, thereby using the absolute bare minimum amount of flash for my needs. I have use full auto flash before and it just flooded everything - the flash has a guide of 40, it's quite powerful and the stage isn't that big. I also much prefer the effect of stage lighting, and would like to keep some idea of this in the photo. I hope this clarifies, thanks again for your commnets Matt. p.s. If I reply in this way, does it fit into the thread structure of PDML properly?
RE: Fill flash in low light - balancing natural and flash
-Original Message- From: M D Giess [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] I have one quick question to Tom, who kindly went through quite a bit regarding flash: I understand that I can manually set the camera 2 stops underexposed and set the flash exposure to 2 stops over, Well, you could do that, but your shots would have 2 stops too much flash. I'm confused as to why I'd be exposing incorrectly on this - if I deliberately ask the camera to underexpose ambient by two stops, and after that simply ask the flash to take this setting and add two stops to it (at least that's my assumption of what +2 flash comp would do), wouldn't that therefore be the correct exposure? The only way I can see this not being the case is if the flash TTL exposure takes absolutely no notice of the camera exposure settings, and simply works out what it thinks is best, in which case my two stops flash compensation would indeed be two stops overexposure. The compensation dial always measures compensation from the meter. In other words, the compensation isn't measured in relation to your settings, it's set in relation to what the camera sees through the lens. Basically, shifting to manual mode shifts the compensation calculation from the ambient meter to the ttl flash meter. I think, on the balance of it, I may just have to go with ambient light as it's patently obvious I don't really understand how flash works, and I'd rather have slightly soft, grainy pictures (ISO 3200 film) than shots of drummers looking like startled bunnies in car headlights. I think that's probably the way to go, but it couldn't hurt to experiment with flash a bit. Blow a roll or 2 in experimentation just to get a feel for how it works. tv
RE: Fill flash in low light - balancing natural and flash
Tom, many thnaks for your reply. My apologies for labouring the point slightly, but I've another question regarding the use of flash. The compensation dial always measures compensation from the meter. In other words, the compensation isn't measured in relation to your settings, it's set in relation to what the camera sees through the lens. Basically, shifting to manual mode shifts the compensation calculation from the ambient meter to the ttl flash meter. If this is the case, then if I manually set the camera to underexpose by two stops and just turn the external flash on with no compensation, would this balance the ambient and flash light correctly? In other words, the ttl flash side of things would just use the camera meter and decide, for itself, how much flash to use for correct exposure, and the fact I'm underexposing would just cause the background to be slightly underexposed and the areas reached by the flash would be fine? I'm a bit unsure of what is meant re. shifting to manual (the second paragraph I've quoted), does this mean I can only ever use flash compensation in manual? I was under the impression that, even in aperture priority, when flash was used the dual purpose exposure dial became flash compensation (and actual exposure compensatio is no longer possible). Just to clarify, I take it now from your comments that I can only use flash compensation in manual mode, is this correct? Sorry to lumber you with so many questions, I hope I'm slowly iterating towards actually figuring out what the hell is going on with flash Matt
RE: Fill flash in low light - balancing natural and flash
-Original Message- From: M D Giess [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Basically, shifting to manual mode shifts the compensation calculation from the ambient meter to the ttl flash meter. If this is the case, then if I manually set the camera to underexpose by two stops and just turn the external flash on with no compensation, would this balance the ambient and flash light correctly? The flash would expose correctly, the ambient would be 2 stops under. Generally this would mean that your subject would be correctly exposed, your background would be a bit dark. In other words, the ttl flash side of things would just use the camera meter and decide, for itself, how much flash to use for correct exposure, and the fact I'm underexposing would just cause the background to be slightly underexposed and the areas reached by the flash would be fine? In a nutshell, yes. I'm a bit unsure of what is meant re. shifting to manual (the second paragraph I've quoted), does this mean I can only ever use flash compensation in manual? Yes, I believe this camera lacks a separate flash compensation dial. I was under the impression that, even in aperture priority, when flash was used the dual purpose exposure dial became flash compensation (and actual exposure compensatio is no longer possible). In aperture priority the comp dial affects both ambient and flash. Just to clarify, I take it now from your comments that I can only use flash compensation in manual mode, is this correct? Yes. 2 things about flash that might help you understand it little better - - The flash meter is independent and distinct from the ambient (regular) meter. - TTL flash works (generally) in the following manner - 1. Shutter opens. 2. Flash and ttl flash meter are turned on simultaneously. 3. When the ttl meter sees enough light, it turns off the flash. None of this has anything to do with shutter speed or aperture. tv
RE: Fill flash in low light - balancing natural and flash
On Tue, 23 Mar 2004, tom wrote: -Original Message- From: M D Giess [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] I'm a bit unsure of what is meant re. shifting to manual (the second paragraph I've quoted), does this mean I can only ever use flash compensation in manual? Yes, I believe this camera lacks a separate flash compensation dial. Yes, it does not have a separate dial. I think no, you can use flash compensation in other modes; please read on. I was under the impression that, even in aperture priority, when flash was used the dual purpose exposure dial became flash compensation (and actual exposure compensatio is no longer possible). In aperture priority the comp dial affects both ambient and flash. Tom, I set the MZ-5n (same thing as MZ-3 with a slower shutter, methinks) to Av and lifted the flash. I then played with the exposure compensation dial and the Aperture-Shutter combination did not move. I interpret this to mean that exposure compensation in this case (and in all 4 modes that I tried) affects the flash (except when it thinks the flash can no longer be limited enough, in which case it closes the aperture). I agree with all the rest. Kostas
RE: Fill flash in low light - balancing natural and flash
On Tue, 23 Mar 2004, Morgan Cooper wrote: Of particular interest/confusion to you will be page 21 (that's page 23 of the .pdf). That table will show you what your flash will illuminate for your lens-length/aperture-setting/film-speed combination. You might find In the heat of the moment, you may want to trust the TTL-flash indicator on the viewfinder and the flash. Secondly, plan to shoot half the set with a flash, half without. And possibly use different film. I have read here that people dislike the Delta 3200 with flash; you will no doubt tell us your opinion :-) Third, diffuse that bad-boy. You can make yourself a pretty good diffuser by angling your flash head up, and rubber-banding an index card or piece of white foamcore to the back of it. It looks silly, but you'll be in the dark anyway. I think this will take a stop or two off of what the TTL flash metering will guess (so plan accordingly-or maybe don't so you get strong stage lighting effect). I don't think there is a TTL-meter guess. Well it is a guess, but it reads light off the film while the shot is taken, so if it thinks it did not get enough light (because the flash ran out, for example), it will let you know through the indicators. With a powerful flash like the AF400FTZ or the AF500FTZ (or even better the AF400T), the chance of this happening are less. Kostas
RE: Fill flash in low light - balancing natural and flash
Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2004 19:33:58 + (GMT) From: Kostas Kavoussanakis [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Fill flash in low light - balancing natural and flash Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Secondly, plan to shoot half the set with a flash, half without. And possibly use different film. I have read here that people dislike the Delta 3200 with flash; you will no doubt tell us your opinion :-) It suited my needs very well. I was attempting to shoot some uhh, gritty photos in low light with the backgrounds dropping off into black. However, when I was testing the film in better lit conditions, and with a flash, I was honestly amazed at the level of gradiation recorded on the film. I was just shooting chairs at various distances away with some overhead flourescent light and using my flash at various power settings and stepping through the aperture settings. A lot more detail than I was looking for or expected showed up. But, I also have a (maybe silly) personal preference to use the products of smaller companies. Nanny-nanny-boo-boo Kodak! Third, diffuse that bad-boy. You can make yourself a pretty good diffuser by angling your flash head up, and rubber-banding an index card or piece of white foamcore to the back of it. It looks silly, but you'll be in the dark anyway. I think this will take a stop or two off of what the TTL flash metering will guess (so plan accordingly-or maybe don't so you get strong stage lighting effect). I don't think there is a TTL-meter guess. Well it is a guess, but it reads light off the film while the shot is taken, so if it thinks it did not get enough light (because the flash ran out, for example), it will let you know through the indicators. With a powerful flash like the AF400FTZ or the AF500FTZ (or even better the AF400T), the chance of this happening are less. Kostas Ah-hah, I was always under the impression that the TTL metering worked by recording the amount of light that the film was receiving and then firing the flash at a predetermined level to compensate. But what you're saying is that the flash fires until enough light has been received, and then turns the flash off. Is this correct? I'd really like to know. I've been shooting a ZX-M with (almost uselessly) a 500-FTZ. Since my ZX-5n is in the mail, I've been really looking forward to actually using the TTL flash metering and moving beyond shooting the flash manually -m _ Get tax tips, tools and access to IRS forms all in one place at MSN Money! http://moneycentral.msn.com/tax/home.asp
RE: Fill flash in low light - balancing natural and flash
-Original Message-
From: M D Giess [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
I am confused
as to how to set the camera to automatically use flash to
supplement low light levels, where I can shoot off aperture
priority but underexpose by two stops and use the flash to
bump the light back up these two stops. I can't figure out
how to do it, as on the MZ-3 the exposure and flash
compensation are done by the same dial.
I don't believe you can set ambient and flash compensation independently if
you're not in manual mode with this camera.
If I set the flash
compensation dial to take 2 stops off, I assume that the
camera will (under aperture priority) simply set the shutter
speed for 'correct' exposure and use the flash for fill only,
which hard-won experience shows is too slow ('soft' hands and
drumsticks etc.).
Your exposure will be 2 stops underexposed. The ratio of ambient to flash
will depend on the ambient light level, and whether or not that particular
camera decides to go with the lowest safe handheld speed or sets a really
long shutter speed.
I understand that I can manually set the
camera 2 stops underexposed and set the flash exposure to 2
stops over,
Well, you could do that, but your shots would have 2 stops too much flash.
but there's so much going on I always miss shots
if I have to manually balance exposure - poor AF doesn't
help, and the shutter speed dial is a pig to turn with the
flash mounted (little camera and big
fingers!) I would hence like to automate the process, does
anyone know if this is possible?
First, are you sure you're allowed to use flash? Are you sure you want to
use flash in this situation? A flash is going to kill all the ambience of
that sort of situation...Studdert does this sort of thing all the time,
maybe he'll chime in here...
Anyway, if you want to proceed, your best option is to drag the shutter. In
manual mode set a fairly long shutter speed, maybe 2 or 3 stops slower than
your safe handholding speed. Set your aperture as wide as you're comfortable
with. Leave your compensation dial at zero.
OTOH, this might not work very well in this situation because it mostly
works to bring up backgrounds. If your subjects are spotlit the backgrounds
will be almost black.
A common error is to think that you can make up for underexposure with a
little blip of flash. It doesn't really work that way...if you're
underexposing with your ambient settings, you must set your flash comp to
zero. Either your ambient or your flash must be the correct exposure. If
both are under, then you're under.
Flash/ambient compensation math -
-1 + -1 = -1
-2 + 0 = 0
-2 + +2 = +2
Your exposure is whichever of the 2 is higher.
In order to mix ambient and flash, both have to be pretty close to the
correct exposure. If it's really dark, there just isn't enough ambient to
mix in
tv
RE: Fill flash in low light - balancing natural and flash
The optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. The pessimist
fears it is true. -J. Robert Oppenheimer
From: M D Giess [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Fill flash in low light - balancing natural and flash
Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2004 19:42:08 +
Hi all
This is my first post, so hello to everyone.
I have a question regarding flash I'd like to ask. I am taking photos of a
band in quite a small, dark venue and I usually just use a fast lens with
high
speed film without flash. I'm after a bit more quality (i.e. smaller
aperture
and slower film) and would like to experiment a bit, but unfortunately I
have
to print a few photos for band members so I can't mess up too badly!
I have got an MZ-3 with a 400FTZ flash and when I use flash in normal
situations I simply shoot in aperture priority and let the camera work out
the
shutter and TTL flash, and if I only want a bit of fill flash I take 1 to 2
stops off using the Exposure Compensation dial which doubles as the flash
compensation dial.
The problem I am facing is using flash to supplement low light levels, in
effect how to balance natural light and flash. I have always considered
fill
flash as something that simply lights up a few shadows, where the exposure
would be correct without the flash but that little burst just puts a bit
more
light where the scene is a bit dark. I am confused as to how to set the
camera to automatically use flash to supplement low light levels, where I
can
shoot off aperture priority but underexpose by two stops and use the flash
to
bump the light back up these two stops. I can't figure out how to do it,
as
on the MZ-3 the exposure and flash compensation are done by the same dial.
If
I set the flash compensation dial to take 2 stops off, I assume that the
camera will (under aperture priority) simply set the shutter speed
for 'correct' exposure and use the flash for fill only, which hard-won
experience shows is too slow ('soft' hands and drumsticks etc.). I
understand
that I can manually set the camera 2 stops underexposed and set the flash
exposure to 2 stops over, but there's so much going on I always miss shots
if
I have to manually balance exposure - poor AF doesn't help, and the shutter
speed dial is a pig to turn with the flash mounted (little camera and big
fingers!) I would hence like to automate the process, does anyone know if
this is possible?
As you can probably see, I'm quite new to the flash area, any advice or
comments would be greatly appreciated.
Many thanks
Matt
_
MSN Premium with Virus Guard and Firewall* from McAfee® Security : 2 months
FREE*
http://join.msn.com/?pgmarket=en-capage=byoa/premxAPID=1994DI=1034SU=http://hotmail.com/encaHL=Market_MSNIS_Taglines
Re: Fill flash in low light - balancing natural and flash
That's very interesting Frank, but what do you think Oppenheimer would say about this flash issue? Christian - Original Message - From: frank theriault [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, March 22, 2004 5:45 PM Subject: RE: Fill flash in low light - balancing natural and flash The optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. The pessimist fears it is true. -J. Robert Oppenheimer
RE: Fill flash in low light - balancing natural and flash
Hi, Matt,
Well, I think I'll actually type something this time, before sending off my
sage advice, as it were. vbg
First, welcome aboard. I hope you stick around after your flash question is
answered. You'll find this forum a quite lively place, and a great source
of information about Pentaxes, photography in general, and all sorts of
other things, from Old English Sports Cars to ramps (which thanks to Stan,
I recently found out is a cross between a leek and a garlic - or something
like that). Not that we're supposed to engage in such OT traffic -
indeed, some are pretty touchy about too much OT. Whatever...
But, there I go, wandering again...
Oh yeah, flashes. Well, I don't know much about them. Tom knows way more,
so listen to him. Listen to anyone else who posts on that topic. Not me.
I was just going to agree with tom when he asked if flash is necessary or
even desirable? It does sound like you've shot some with available light.
What was it about those results that you didn't like? You mention wanting
to shoot smaller apertures and slower film speeds. Why is it that you think
that you'll get better quality that way?
I'm not trying to take you to task here. It may be simply that you want a
different look, just to see how it looks. Maybe you feel you've done all
you can do with available light. And, that's fair enough. I guess I just
wonder about your better quality comment.
As tom said, it may be that a flash will not be appreciated. I recently
shot a band with available light. I told them that I'd be using available
light, to which they replied, Good, because we wouldn't really want a flash
to be used anyway. The music they play is quiet and comtemplative - they
do a lot of improvising, so they need to be able to hear each other, and
concentrate on the music. A flash would have been very disruptive.
OTOH, I've shot several shows of a friend's Loud Rock Band. They didn't
care if I used flash - in fact, at one point I was using a 19mm lens, about
18 inches from them, and they didn't even notice. It was fine with them,
and they liked the results (even if I didn't).
If you've already considered all of these things, then I apologize for
sticking my nose in. Simply do as the rest of the list does, and ignore me.
vbg
Whatever you decide to do, I hope it turns out, and you should post the
results so we can see. Here's my last shoot with the quiet band, my first
shoot at available light in these circumstances - not great stuff to be
sure, but better than I thought it might turn out:
http://www.photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=383331
BTW, do you know about PUG and PAW? I don't know how long you've been
lurking (if at all), so you may be up to speed on this stuff. If not, we
can fill you in if you're interested.
Thanks for your indulgence on a long and rambling post - I'm amazed that you
actually read this far down!! vbg
cheers,
frank in Toronto,
Canada
The optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. The pessimist
fears it is true. -J. Robert Oppenheimer
From: M D Giess [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Fill flash in low light - balancing natural and flash
Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2004 19:42:08 +
Hi all
This is my first post, so hello to everyone.
I have a question regarding flash I'd like to ask. I am taking photos of a
band in quite a small, dark venue and I usually just use a fast lens with
high
speed film without flash. I'm after a bit more quality (i.e. smaller
aperture
and slower film) and would like to experiment a bit, but unfortunately I
have
to print a few photos for band members so I can't mess up too badly!
I have got an MZ-3 with a 400FTZ flash and when I use flash in normal
situations I simply shoot in aperture priority and let the camera work out
the
shutter and TTL flash, and if I only want a bit of fill flash I take 1 to 2
stops off using the Exposure Compensation dial which doubles as the flash
compensation dial.
The problem I am facing is using flash to supplement low light levels, in
effect how to balance natural light and flash. I have always considered
fill
flash as something that simply lights up a few shadows, where the exposure
would be correct without the flash but that little burst just puts a bit
more
light where the scene is a bit dark. I am confused as to how to set the
camera to automatically use flash to supplement low light levels, where I
can
shoot off aperture priority but underexpose by two stops and use the flash
to
bump the light back up these two stops. I can't figure out how to do it,
as
on the MZ-3 the exposure and flash compensation are done by the same dial.
If
I set the flash compensation dial to take 2 stops off, I assume that the
camera will (under aperture priority) simply set the shutter speed
for 'correct' exposure and use the flash for fill only, which hard-won
experience shows is too slow ('soft' hands and
Re: Fill flash in low light - balancing natural and flash
Christian, I think that's my most lucid post in months, no? cheers, frank ps: you smart-ass! vbg The optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. The pessimist fears it is true. -J. Robert Oppenheimer From: Christian [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Fill flash in low light - balancing natural and flash Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2004 17:50:44 -0500 That's very interesting Frank, but what do you think Oppenheimer would say about this flash issue? _ Tired of spam? Get advanced junk mail protection with MSN Premium http://join.msn.com/?pgmarket=en-capage=byoa/premxAPID=1994DI=1034SU=http://hotmail.com/encaHL=Market_MSNIS_Taglines
Re: Fill flash in low light - balancing natural and flash
Frank is your tag line a comment on this thread, (it might be), or are
you just having a bad day?
frank theriault wrote:
The optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. The
pessimist fears it is true. -J. Robert Oppenheimer
From: M D Giess [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Fill flash in low light - balancing natural and flash
Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2004 19:42:08 +
Hi all
This is my first post, so hello to everyone.
I have a question regarding flash I'd like to ask. I am taking
photos of a
band in quite a small, dark venue and I usually just use a fast lens
with high
speed film without flash. I'm after a bit more quality (i.e. smaller
aperture
and slower film) and would like to experiment a bit, but
unfortunately I have
to print a few photos for band members so I can't mess up too badly!
I have got an MZ-3 with a 400FTZ flash and when I use flash in normal
situations I simply shoot in aperture priority and let the camera
work out the
shutter and TTL flash, and if I only want a bit of fill flash I take
1 to 2
stops off using the Exposure Compensation dial which doubles as the
flash
compensation dial.
The problem I am facing is using flash to supplement low light
levels, in
effect how to balance natural light and flash. I have always
considered fill
flash as something that simply lights up a few shadows, where the
exposure
would be correct without the flash but that little burst just puts a
bit more
light where the scene is a bit dark. I am confused as to how to set the
camera to automatically use flash to supplement low light levels,
where I can
shoot off aperture priority but underexpose by two stops and use the
flash to
bump the light back up these two stops. I can't figure out how to do
it, as
on the MZ-3 the exposure and flash compensation are done by the same
dial. If
I set the flash compensation dial to take 2 stops off, I assume that the
camera will (under aperture priority) simply set the shutter speed
for 'correct' exposure and use the flash for fill only, which hard-won
experience shows is too slow ('soft' hands and drumsticks etc.). I
understand
that I can manually set the camera 2 stops underexposed and set the
flash
exposure to 2 stops over, but there's so much going on I always miss
shots if
I have to manually balance exposure - poor AF doesn't help, and the
shutter
speed dial is a pig to turn with the flash mounted (little camera and
big
fingers!) I would hence like to automate the process, does anyone
know if
this is possible?
As you can probably see, I'm quite new to the flash area, any advice or
comments would be greatly appreciated.
Many thanks
Matt
_
MSN Premium with Virus Guard and Firewall* from McAfee® Security : 2
months FREE*
http://join.msn.com/?pgmarket=en-capage=byoa/premxAPID=1994DI=1034SU=http://hotmail.com/encaHL=Market_MSNIS_Taglines
Re: Fill flash in low light - balancing natural and flash
Peter, Which do you think? vbg -frank ps: neither - I just hit send in error - surely it takes more than that to constitute a bad day!! g The optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. The pessimist fears it is true. -J. Robert Oppenheimer From: Peter J. Alling [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Fill flash in low light - balancing natural and flash Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2004 18:25:22 -0500 Frank is your tag line a comment on this thread, (it might be), or are you just having a bad day? _ MSN Premium helps eliminate e-mail viruses. Get 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?pgmarket=en-capage=byoa/premxAPID=1994DI=1034SU=http://hotmail.com/encaHL=Market_MSNIS_Taglines
