> Your comments remind me of a time when I only had a cheap TTL-only
> flash (which broke), and I thought that A-TTL was somehow "better".
> It turned out that A-TTL only metered from a pre-exposure flash to
> "guess" at a minimum aperture and the camera still used simple TTL
> control for flash quenching.
>
> In my hands, TTL would not work well unless the subject filled more
> than one third of the frame. And my camera, like nearly all EOS
> cameras, could not use the A-TTL out-of-distance warning :-(
>
> Like its predecessor, E-TTL has features for both automatic and
> manual flash. The manual E-TTL features that cannot be replicated
> with TTL or A-TTL are the main factors that made me want to upgrade
> from a type B body to a type A EOS body:
>
> 1) FP flash - (no more ND filters for daylight fill flash :-)
> 2) Flash exposure lock - in effect, a metered manual flash mode
> 3) Wireless slave control with true ratio control
> 4) Compatibility with Canon digital cameras/camcorders
>
> I consider the other "automatic" features of E-TTL, such as
> linking to the active focussing point (AIM), and flash/ambient
> balance, are secondary in my estimation.
Thanks Julian, I'm getting more info why I might need E-TTL. I'm still
skeptical though, just want to get ideas from people who've really found
E-TTL to be a step forward.
I'll comment on the above 4 points.
1- True enough, if I've got my favorite 800 speed film in the camera and
want to use fill flash outdoors, I'll be out of luck as it is, at the best
I'll have to use a very small aperture. Might happen, but on those occasion
where I"m shooting a portrait and really care, I'll likely be packing Portra
NC 160 anyway, so this might not make a big difference to me.
2- I can see a situation with a smallish subject off center and maybe want
to get the exposure right on the subject, versus the background. I can do
that now using my old hotshoe flash though and just manually calculating the
distance and aperture. In fact, if I dialed in minus exposure compensation,
likely the background would go darker leaving my subject properly exposed.
Might take some experimenting though.
3- wouldn't apply to me - if I was doing location shooting using multiple
flashes, I'd have my RB 67 and my strobe kit with umbrellas, etc. And if I
was specializing in studio portraiture, I'd likely have dedicated studio
strobes to go with the RB as well. Seriously, I don't think 35mm is worth a
huge investment in multiple speedlights, expensive wiring, and the hassles.
There might be cases though for some photogs, I've no doubt about that.
Might be good down the road when using the D30 for example :-)
4- at this point in time I have neither camcorder or digital cameras.
The reason I'm going over all this in detail is to justify putting off
purchases a newer type EOS body and keep using my old 10 for now, while
putting my cash in lenses in the immediate future. I did buy a 380EX
speedlight to be able to upgrade and use E-TTL one day if I want, but like I
said, I'm so happy with the limited flash work I've done using TTL with the
380, that I'm beginning to wonder if E-TTL would suit me. Let's just say
that I would likely get some benefits from it at this point, and certainly
I'd like to have a nice new EOS 3 sitting here, but after looking at the new
7, there's no way I'm going to put up with that piece of amateur 'bleep' to
get E-TTL.
Just my opinion of course. I was thinking the EOS 50 would be nice, since I
can actually get a deal on a nice used BLACK one here in Japan, but after
seeing and holding it, I decided no way!
I should add that I love techno gizmos more than most people and can spend
hours investigating bells and whistles. I just don't like a camera with 1
switch or dial on every square centimetre of it...
Just my opinion of course.
*
****
*******
***********************************************************
* For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see:
* http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm
***********************************************************
