on 11/26/01 5:28 PM, Devon Derksen ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > With Christmas around the corner, family members are trying to get gift > ideas out of me. What has the list's experience with on-flash Soft Boxes > from Lumiquest, or was it Lumidign(?) been? For those situations when > packing lights around is not a viable option, have any of you used on flash > softboxes for portraiture with the 540 EX? What were your impressions and > cost in Canadian dollars if this is known? Does it interfere with E-TTL by > blocking the sensor? Any other known drawbacks? Are there any other > options that would make decent gift recommendations for the family? I am > looking specifically for non studio-lighting, highly portable options.
I currently use a Westcott Micro Apollo, which does a good job of providing soft-ish lighting from an on-camera flash. The only problem is that it is easily knocked out of alignment, and it blocks the AF assist beam and possibly the receiver for wireless flash. The Lumiquest products have a cutout at the bottom so it clears the AF assist beam (and sensors for those using flashes in Automatic mode), but the shadows are more obvious. Results from both types of flash diffusers can be seen on my website (http://www.fobpro.com/). With E-TTL, the flash metering is done through the lens. If you are indoors in a room with white walls and a low white ceiling, a Sto-fen Omnibounce or a Lumiquest UltraBounce will work much better with a flash head tilted up 45 degrees. Since I'm frequently shooting in large ballrooms, the Omnibounce isn't used as much. -- John Chennavasin | This article contains material which may inform and [EMAIL PROTECTED] | may be quoted, printed, forwarded, or redistributed www.fobpro.com | as long as the original attribution remains intact. * **** ******* *********************************************************** * For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see: * http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm ***********************************************************
