This one time, at band camp, Bruce Dayton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hello Kevin,
>
> What film do you use?
I use Fugi Sensia
Kind regards
Kevin
--
__
(_ \
_) )
| / / _ ) / _ | /
Hello Kevin,
What film do you use? If negative, could still be the latitude of the
film that is rescuing you from the underexposure. Digital responds more like slide
film.
What happens if you do an outdoor shot manually with an external meter reading on both
slide film and *istD.
Seems to me t
This one time, at band camp, Frits Wüthrich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I mostly use studio type flash and have experienced the same underexposure.
> I assume you mean you were using TTL here which gave you at least one
> stop underexposure?
No, I do not use TTL for flash.
I set everything m
On Sat, 2004-01-31 at 23:14, Kevin Waterson wrote:
> This one time, at band camp, Frits Wüthrich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Try shooting at ISO 400 when using a flash. I get underexposure at ISO
> > 200 with my Metz 40MZ-2, with the build in flash unit it works OK at 200
> > though.
>
> I m
Hello Kevin,
That sounds a bit odd. Since the camera is not involved at all in the
exposure setting (I assume). When I use studio flash (Alien Bees) and
meter with my Gossen Luna Pro Digital F, the exposures are just about
right. I would think that perhaps your meter is calibrated just a bit
of
This one time, at band camp, Frits Wüthrich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Try shooting at ISO 400 when using a flash. I get underexposure at ISO
> 200 with my Metz 40MZ-2, with the build in flash unit it works OK at 200
> though.
I mostly use studio type flash and have experienced the same underex
Try shooting at ISO 400 when using a flash. I get underexposure at ISO
200 with my Metz 40MZ-2, with the build in flash unit it works OK at 200
though.
On Sat, 2004-01-31 at 16:07, Kevin Thornsberry wrote:
> Oh, man. Am I glad you wrote that. I have been having the same problem and it
> has be
> -Original Message-
> From: Bruce Dayton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Saturday, January 31, 2004 1:05 PM
> To: William Robb
>
> Tom will be able to give the best report, but from my memory
> and others I have heard, ANY digital camera doesn't seem to
> be as consistent with TTL fl
and Canon DSLR owners.
--
Best regards,
Bruce
Saturday, January 31, 2004, 7:20:03 AM, you wrote:
WR> - Original Message -
WR> From: "Kevin Thornsberry"
WR> Subject: Underexposed *istD w/ AF360FGZ (Was:D - Not Pentax but an
WR> interesting . . .)
>> Ho
Wasn't there a discussion about this some weeks ago - I think that the
underexposure related to the ISO settings? Can't remember exactly but would
be very grateful if someone would enlighten me so that I don't have to face
the same problems when mine arrives!
TIA,
tan.
> Oh, man. Am I glad you
- Original Message -
From: "Kevin Thornsberry"
Subject: Underexposed *istD w/ AF360FGZ (Was:D - Not Pentax but an
interesting . . .)
> How many people are experiencing this problem and what are you doing about
it?
> I've tried some to use camera exposure compens
Oh, man. Am I glad you wrote that. I have been having the same problem and it
has been driving me insane. It's haunted me for the past two months. I've
searched all over the flash and camera for some setting that I have wrong. The
whole issue is exasperated by the fact that when not using the
12 matches
Mail list logo