When using an external sensor it's possible to dial in values, that will make the flash give LESS light than it normally would (My Metz sensor will allow this). For instance by telling it, that it's a ISO 400 film, even though it's in fact a ISO 200 film/sensor setting. This way the flash will give 1 F-Stop less light, thus making the picture look less like "normal" flash photograph, which I dislike very much. Fill flash is for filling and softening shadows caused by the main light - like the sun. I don't want the potograph to look like the flash is THE MAIN LIGHT, like there's no other light source. Fill in flash should not be noticed by others than photographers :-) It should do what a reflector screen normally does. But who want's to use a refelction screen at a wedding? Regards
Jens Bladt Arkitekt MAA http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt -----Oprindelig meddelelse----- Fra: Godfrey DiGiorgi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 13. september 2005 21:25 Til: PDML Emne: Re: *ist D or DS & AF500FTZ for Weddings? I'm not entirely certain why using an external auto-flash sensor would be termed "cheating the flash". I've used electronic flash in my photography with greater or lesser frequency since 1969. Auto-flash control and TTL flash metering are great conveniences for when they do the appropriate thing. When the situation I'm trying to light gets tough, however, I find it much easier to pull out the flash meter and set the flash units on manual operation. Is that cheating too? Another technique: I often use the flash meter to obtain a Guide Number and then just set aperture per distance, control ambient light fill via shutter speed. I guess that's more than just cheating. ;-) Godfrey On Sep 13, 2005, at 12:12 PM, Jens Bladt wrote: > This is what I meant by "cheating the flash"... > >> Another solution is to eschew P-TTL or TTL flash: use an external >> flash with its own flash sensor. I've used the Sunpak 383 so far, >> fitted with a Lumiquest Mini-Softbox. It returns excellent results >> with the *ist DS. >
