>
> Hi
>
> I'm about to buy a 550 EX flash. After reading Neil K. excelent new page
> on flash photgraphy (Flash photography with Canon EOS Cameras) I'm still
> left with a doubt: for portrait photography which is more advisable:
> lumiquest or omnibounce? I've already visited both manufacturers
> homepages, but the choise is so large I just can't figure out what's
> best. Feedback from users of both systems would be great appreciated.
> Thanks
>
> Hugo

Hi Hugo,

What works and what works well varies with the shooting situation.  For
example, indoors with good natural light, indoors with no natural light, big
light colored room, big dark room, small light colored room, small dark
room, outdoors daylight, outdoors night time etc. all of the lighting is
different.

IMO, if you want to buy the most effective product and are going to buy only
one type of solution to soften the light of a shoe mounted flash you will
need to buy a diffuser with the largest possible area the sends diffuse
light directly to the subject.

In looking at the designs you mention you need to understand the way they
work.  The Omnibounce works just like it sounds, it relies on the room to
provide a surface to bounce the flashhead's light off of and hopefully
toward the subject.  This actually works in small white rooms quite well and
can look pretty natural IF the room is very small with white ceiling and
walls and there is little on the walls to absorbed the limited light of the
flash.  This assumes that you are using the Omnibounce the way the maker
recommends tilted up at about 45 degrees, I find that the best angel is one
that allows the light to hit the ceiling and bounce down to the subject and
this can vary with distance and ceiling height.  If you chose to ignore what
the instructions say and point the flash head directly at your subject what
happens is a VERY slight softening of the light hitting your subject and the
flash will chew through batteries faster.  This is because you are wasting a
lot of the flash head's light by leaking it out around the sides of the
Omnibounce panel.  Obviously the Omnibounce won't work very well outdoors
with no walls or ceiling and if used in the direct mode offers minimal
diffusion and increased battery consumption.  Remember, the Omnibounce can
be a good tool under the right conditions and used as such a perfectly good
product BUT IMO one of limited applications.

The Lumiquest works by bouncing the light off of a large white reflector and
then through a large diffuser panel directly towards your subject.  This is
very effective as this method does not rely on the room for the bounce
allowing you to get reliable, repeatable exposures and COLOR with excellent
softening of the light directed towards your subject.  All of this is
independent of the room or environment.  If you can use the EOS TTL flash
metering system you'll get excellent exposures with very good softening of
the light and much better battery life and faster cycle times.

The softening effect of any diffuser panel is dependent on the area of the
apparent light source.  Look at the amount of area facing the subject, a
Lumiquest Ultrasoft has about 3 times the area of an Omnibounce or bare
550/540 flash head  This is why the Lumiquest is a more effective softener
of light than the Omnibounce!  BUT it the Omnibounce is used in a small
white room with white, normal or low ceilings the area of the Omnibounce is
much larger than the Lumiquest.

Like I said, it depends.  So for a single diffuser panel the Lumiquest is
more versatile and works more of the time and works better more of the time
and uses less battery power most of the time.  BUT under certain, rather
narrow conditions an Omnibounce may offer as good or possibly better
solution for softening the light hitting your subjects.

Hope this helps!


Regards,

Chip Louie



BTW, I own and use both types of diffusers with my 540EZ.




*
****
*******
***********************************************************
*  For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see:
*    http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm
***********************************************************

Reply via email to