On Wed, 31 Jan 2001, Michael Quack wrote:
> > From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Hugo_G=E4vert?= <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >
> > On Mon, 29 Jan 2001, Michael Quack wrote:
> > >
> > > Monitor http://www.photoquack.de/tutorials/diylights.htm
> > > I am working on the translation, and have links to more
> > > pages with a lot more detail to that.
> >
> > Since it seems that you have just started...
>
> Yes, but I will add more tonight. Translation is a business
> I am fast in.
I hope so ;-) ;-)
> > Also, I'm still confused about firing these, is it through
> > the PC-socket as normal studio flashes?
>
> No, they fire as slaves if a primary flash or an IR trigger
> flash is firing.
So with EOS 3, I'd need to use my 550EX just for triggering them. So, not
to get an effect from the main flash it would have to be directed
somewhere else than directly to the subject and set to either min power or
at least -2 stops of compensation.
[jumping a bit...]
> > > Because you lose control over what you are doing, and in
> > > situations with high contrasts you can almost be sure that
> > > the transmitter won't trigger the remote flash.
> >
> > What? What kind of situations would prevent the wireless flash commands
> > from trasmitting? I have never heard that anybody would have had any
> > problems with them - specially inside. What are you talking about?
>
> When using a second (third, fourth) flash to separate
> from the background or as a splash into dark corners,
> you naturally flag off the remote flash in order not to
> get straying light into your lens. This means you will
> not be able to see the remote flash. In a studio setup
> any flash you can see from your lens position is with
> deadly precision ruining your setup.
>
> A remote flash sitting in blackwrap flags or shielded with
> black cardboard in order not to spill into the camera but
> lighten just your subject will very often not fire.
But you just said above, that these slaves are triggered by the main
flash. And as I don't want my main flash to be from the camera, this same
problem applies to your cheap system also. Actually even more if the main
flash needs to be at the lowest setting. The wireless flash commands from
550EX use 1/32 power of the flash if I remember correctly (could also be
1/64). At my home (the place where I would take the photos) the flash
commands will bounce very well from many surfaces. This will not be a
problem with the wireless E-TTL system. But now that you mentioned it, it
could be a problem with the system you are proposing.
> > > No. You need a reproducable, calculatable output.
> > > In camera metering is nice for flat lighting from
> > > the camera, but it doesn't do much good elsewhere.
> >
> > Well this isn't quite what others have said about E-TTL.
>
> In June this year I will host a big workshop and
> will produce some imagery to back my statements then.
> Or maybe earlier, if I find the time.
>
> > Have you used the wireless multiflash E-TTL system?
>
> No, the cable based Metz TTL system. But metering
I hope you will use wireless E-TTL at your workshop too. After all
many people here have reported that they have gotten good results with it.
You say that it doesn't work even though you have not tried it. It's not
really convincing (even though I agree with many things).
Best regards,
Hugo.
************************************************************
** Hugo Gävert **
** [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.hut.fi/~hugo **
************************************************************
*
****
*******
***********************************************************
* For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see:
* http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm
***********************************************************
