Want to buy a new digital camera to replace my Nikon 5700,..

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Paul Rubin commented courteously...

> Set the SB-800 to 1/1 (full power), manual mode, and
> take a picture.
>
> Is it underexposed? If yes, you need a more
> powerful flash. If no, you are on the right track,
> so adjust exposure until the picture looks good.

Now who's acting like a troll? Do the math: GN=100
divided by say, 12 feet = f/8 at 1/60 or 1/125. Don't
you think I already tried that?

--
ATM, aka Jerry

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

All Things Mopar <noneofyour@busi.ness> writes:
> > Is it underexposed? If yes, you need a more
> > powerful flash. If no, you are on the right track,
> > so adjust exposure until the picture looks good.
>
> Now who's acting like a troll? Do the math: GN=100 divided by say,
> 12 feet = f/8 at 1/60 or 1/125. Don't you think I already tried that?

I don't know. Did you? You set the camera to manual exposure, f/8 at
1/60, and the flash to manual exposure, 1/1 (full power)? What was
the result? Did you have the flip-down diffuser in front of the
flash? GN=100 at ISO 100 sounds about right for no diffuser, with the
zoom head at the wideangle position and the flash pointed directly at
the car. If the diffuser was in place, or if you were using a light
modifier like a bounce gizmo, the GN would be a lot lower and you'd
have to make adjustments.

Weren't you leaving?

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

All Things Mopar <noneofyour@busi.ness> writes:
> I never asked for advice on how to take pictures of cars
> in museums. I /only/ asked what the /best/ camera/flash
> combo would be.

Well, the /best/ combo would be a Nikon D2X with a Chimera
F2 Component Lightbank. You may want to check it out.

But if want something less expensive, I would recommend
either a Nikon Coolpix 5700 with a Sunpak a 433D, or
a Nikon Coolpix 8800 with a Speedlight SB-800. Both
are known to produce reliable results in the hands of
a skilled operator.
--
- gisle hannemyr [ gisle{at}hannemyr.no - http/folk.uio.no/gisle/ ]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Kodak DCS460, Canon Powershot G5, Olympus 2020Z
------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Gisle Hannemyr commented courteously...

> But if want something less expensive, I would
> recommend either a Nikon Coolpix 5700 with a Sunpak a
> 433D.

That is exactly what I own today.

> a Nikon Coolpix 8800 with a Speedlight SB-800.

And, this is what I evaluated for 500+ shots a couple
weeks back. You may have missed my posts while I was
testing the 8800, where I described in detail what I was
doing and the results I got.

> both are known to produce reliable results in the
> hands of a skilled operator.

True, but how can you judge my skill or lack thereof,
sitting there reading a text-only NG postings (other
than simply saying if I get underexposures it is expost
facto my problem)? Again, please see my comments to you
and others about operator error.

There isn't anything magical about pointing the camera
at the car and getting "good" results! "Great" results
takes much more work, but I don't think I'm all that
bad, and I do not expect "exceptional" results.
Exposures +/- 1-2 stops would be fine for my purposes.
And, again, why can a $150 Kodak P&S do much better in
identical situations to a Nikon 8800 and SB-800 flash?

--
ATM, aka Jerry

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

All Things Mopar <noneofyour@busi.ness> writes:
> And, again, why can a $150 Kodak P&S do much better in
> identical situations to a Nikon 8800 and SB-800 flash?

The SB800 seems to lack the ability to automatically set exposure by
pure distance (guide number). I'd consider that a deficiency, though
it's apparently not a problem all that much of the time. You happen
to be in one of the weird situations where it's a problem. The
workaround is to set the exposure manually.

I don't know what the Kodak is doing. Maybe it's using GN for
exposure setting. Maybe it's simply firing its flash at full power
because the subject is beyond its "good" flash range and it can't
think of anything better to do, and using full power turns out to be
optimal.

You're beginning to sound like some kind of troll. OK, you've tried
the automatic modes and they're not doing what you want. That's why
the manual modes are there. Use them and stop whining.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Paul Rubin commented courteously...

> You're beginning to sound like some kind of troll.

So now I'm a troll because I don't choose to follow your
advice? And, if I were a troll - which I'm not - why
have you been so easy to hook?

> you've tried the automatic modes and they're not doing
> what you want. That's why the manual modes are there.
> Use them and stop whining.

I'm not "whining". Once more, since you obviously don't
comprende Anglais, I originally asked for advice on what
to try for /better/ results, /not/ for Photography 101.
You've yet to "advise" anything new to me, other than
ever-increasing personal criticism.

It's like an off-hand comment I made about PSP 9 vs.
PSE. It's as if the dam broke loose! I really don't care
who uses what graphics app nor do I care what camera
people like to use for their own needs/wants nor do I
care if people think that shooting at less than 8MP
makes me "the village idiot".

Think and do whatever pleases you. I'm gone...

--
ATM, aka Jerry

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

All Things Mopar <noneofyour@busi.ness> writes:
> Think and do whatever pleases you. I'm gone...

Don't let the door hit you on the butt on the way out.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

All Things Mopar <noneofyour@busi.ness> writes:
> I discovered only recently that upping the ISO on my 5700 from 100
> to 200 or 400 produces /much/ better flash pictures, albeit with
> significantly more noise.

If upping the ISO works, you may be underpowered.

> Your experience is superior to mine, but I can't accept
> it completely since my crummy old Fuji worked so well.
> Even my wife's Kodak $150 6330 worked well at the WPC
> side-by-side with the 5700 and 8800 (so long as I stayed
> under its 10' flash range).

But if the feeble built-in strobes P&S cameras gives enough
light, then there should be enough power in the external
guns you've used!

Anyway - I would suggest you try to go fully manual.
Shoot with 100% flash power and the largest aperture.
If it still is underexposed, then your flash is not
powerful enough and you need a more powerful flash.

If it is overexposed, just close down the aperture until the
exposure is right.
--
- gisle hannemyr [ gisle{at}hannemyr.no - http/folk.uio.no/gisle/ ]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Kodak DCS460, Canon Powershot G5, Olympus 2020Z
------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Gisle Hannemyr commented courteously...


> If upping the ISO works, you may be underpowered.

Underpowered? Are you joking?

The Sunpak 433D's GN=120! And, the SB-800 GN=100. That
gives a theoretical range with either of in excess of 30
feet! The /max/ I shoot cars in museums is a paltry 12-
15' The problem is, for reasons I haven't been able to
determine, that the flash pulse shuts down prematurely.
And, please, no more talk about glare "confusing" the
TTL sensor!
>
>> Your experience is superior to mine, but I can't
accept
>> it completely since my crummy old Fuji worked so
well.
>> Even my wife's Kodak $150 6330 worked well at the WPC
>> side-by-side with the 5700 and 8800 (so long as I
stayed
>> under its 10' flash range).
>
> But if the feeble built-in strobes P&S cameras gives
enough
> light, then there should be enough power in the
external
> guns you've used!

Yes, so what?

> Anyway - I would suggest you try to go fully manual.
> Shoot with 100% flash power and the largest aperture.
> If it still is underexposed, then your flash is not
> powerful enough and you need a more powerful flash.

Now you're having the same comprehension problem as
"Paul". What part of "it didn't work on manual" don't
you understand? I try to read what posters say /in their
entirety/ before I "run off at the mouth" with a reply.
You're now mis-replying when I just previously clarified
the exact point you're refuting.

> If it is overexposed, just close down the aperture
until
> the exposure is right.

Never got overexposures unless I was way off on distance
or simply mis-set the aperture/shutter.

--
ATM, aka Jerry

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

All Things Mopar <noneofyour@busi.ness> writes:
> To be as sure as I could be, I reset both the SB-800 and the 8800 to
> factory defaults and reshot a series. Total junk. From an operator
> error standpoint, what obvious thing(s) am I missing here?

The car is shiny. Both in auto and iTTL mode, the SB-800
measures the light reflected back from the object - it then
uses this reflected light to compute how much power the flash
should output. (Canon's E-TTL system work in a similar fashion.)

If the car is shiny, the flash see itself reflected back as
from a mirror, and believe the scene is much brighter than it
actually is, resulting in an underexposure.

The consumer P&S cameras you've mentioned has flash systems that are
much less sophisticated than Nikon's and Canon's dedicated systems.
Their flash output is not adjusted based upon reflected light.
This results - in this case - in a more correct exposure.

If the above is what happens, the solution is to switch to
manual. That will "turn off" the iTTL logic and in effect
turn the SB-800 into a "stupid" flash like those you find
as the built-in flash in cheap consumer digicams.
--
- gisle hannemyr [ gisle{at}hannemyr.no - http/folk.uio.no/gisle/ ]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Kodak DCS460, Canon Powershot G5, Olympus 2020Z
------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

All Things Mopar <noneofyour@busi.ness> writes:
> Gisle H.:

> The problem is, for reasons I haven't been able to
> determine, that the flash pulse shuts down prematurely.
> And, please, no more talk about glare "confusing" the
> TTL sensor!

Ooops! I've already done that.

And for the life of me, I can't understand why this should not be
mentioned.. After all - there must be a reason for this problem
only appearing in car museums, and glare seems to me to be the
most likely culprit.

>> Anyway - I would suggest you try to go fully manual.
>> Shoot with 100% flash power and the largest aperture.
>> If it still is underexposed, then your flash is not
>> powerful enough and you need a more powerful flash.

> Now you're having the same comprehension problem as
> "Paul". What part of "it didn't work on manual" don't
> you understand? I try to read what posters say /in their
> entirety/ before I "run off at the mouth" with a reply.
> You're now mis-replying when I just previously clarified
> the exact point you're refuting.

OK - I get it now. You don't really want to be able to take
correctly exposed images in car museums. You just want
somebody to recommend to you to buy some new gear that probably
is not going to work any better in car museums than the excellent
equipment you've already tried.
--
- gisle hannemyr [ gisle{at}hannemyr.no - http/folk.uio.no/gisle/ ]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Kodak DCS460, Canon Powershot G5, Olympus 2020Z
------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Jerry,

I've followed this thread and the previous ones, and I'd like to suggest a
different approach which has worked for me in museum situations - albeit
not cars. Perhaps if you camera dealer will allow you another test, you
may bet some better results?

- use natural light, not flash

- use a camera allowing longer hand-held exposures - e.g Panasonic FZ20.
This has an image-stabilised lens giving about three stops gain in what
you can hand-hold at. So with a 100mm equivalent focal length you might
be able to hand-hold down to 1/12s or even longer.

- (perhaps) get a monopod to allow slower shutter speeds, without the
inconvenience of a tripod.

If you do try the FZ20, I recommend keeping it on ISO 100 to avoid the
noise being too great.

Yes, do try it with flash as well, but just perhaps the natural light will
work as well. If it does, and you want to have something better, then you
could also consider a DSLR with wide-aperture lenses. The DSLR would
deliver lower noise or allow the use of a higher ISO and hence faster
shutter speeds.

Yes, I know you /want/ flash - but just perhaps without flash may give you
the consistency you seek.

Cheers,
David

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

David J Taylor commented courteously...

I'm afraid not, David. I simply refuse to believe that it isn't
possible with a $1000 camera to do the same thing a $150 one can
do. Maybe the "good" camera is "too good", but I do not and will
not shoot available light. End of discussion on that subject.

> Jerry,
>
> I've followed this thread and the previous ones, and I'd
> like to suggest a different approach which has worked for
> me in museum situations - albeit not cars. Perhaps if you
> camera dealer will allow you another test, you may bet some
> better results?
>
> - use natural light, not flash
>
> - use a camera allowing longer hand-held exposures - e.g
> Panasonic FZ20. This has an image-stabilised lens giving
> about three stops gain in what you can hand-hold at. So
> with a 100mm equivalent focal length you might be able to
> hand-hold down to 1/12s or even longer.
>
> - (perhaps) get a monopod to allow slower shutter speeds,
> without the inconvenience of a tripod.
>
> If you do try the FZ20, I recommend keeping it on ISO 100
> to avoid the noise being too great.
>
> Yes, do try it with flash as well, but just perhaps the
> natural light will work as well. If it does, and you want
> to have something better, then you could also consider a
> DSLR with wide-aperture lenses. The DSLR would deliver
> lower noise or allow the use of a higher ISO and hence
> faster shutter speeds.
>
> Yes, I know you /want/ flash - but just perhaps without
> flash may give you the consistency you seek.
>
> Cheers,
> David
>
>
>



--
ATM, aka Jerry

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

David J Taylor
: <david-taylor@blueyonder.co.not-this-bit.nor-this-part.uk.invalid>
: wrote:
: Jerry,

: I've followed this thread and the previous ones, and I'd like to
: suggest a different approach which has worked for me in museum
: situations - albeit not cars. Perhaps if you camera dealer will allow
: you another test, you may bet some better results?

: - use natural light, not flash

: - use a camera allowing longer hand-held exposures - e.g Panasonic
: FZ20. This has an image-stabilised lens giving about three stops gain
: in what you can hand-hold at. So with a 100mm equivalent focal length
: you might be able to hand-hold down to 1/12s or even longer.

: - (perhaps) get a monopod to allow slower shutter speeds, without the
: inconvenience of a tripod.

: If you do try the FZ20, I recommend keeping it on ISO 100 to avoid the
: noise being too great.

: Yes, do try it with flash as well, but just perhaps the natural light
: will work as well. If it does, and you want to have something better,
: then you could also consider a DSLR with wide-aperture lenses. The
: DSLR would deliver lower noise or allow the use of a higher ISO and
: hence faster shutter speeds.

: Yes, I know you /want/ flash - but just perhaps without flash may give
: you the consistency you seek.

: Cheers,
: David

Along the same lines. If you have a camera with a B (bulb) setting (mostly
on DSLRs) you could actually "paint" with your flash. Place the camera on
a tripod, use lowest ISO, close down the lens (highest f-stop) and lock
the shutter open. Then walk around the subject (car) with a flash with a
"test" button, flashing it at intervals with special emphasis on any
special feature that you like. Then close the shutter and wait for the
camera to do its thing. It is possible to take a full min to paint the
light around and get a nice clear picture. And as a side benefit, if there
are a few people wandering around your subject, anything that is moving
tends to blur out and so they may tend to disappear. And this scheme works
best in an area that is rather dark. I have seen photos in caves where the
shutter was open for upwards of half an hour with several hundred
individual flashes from a single flash unit.

Randy

==========
Randy Berbaum
Champaign, IL

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

All Things Mopar wrote:
> David J Taylor commented courteously...
>
> I'm afraid not, David. I simply refuse to believe that it isn't
> possible with a $1000 camera to do the same thing a $150 one can
> do. Maybe the "good" camera is "too good", but I do not and will
> not shoot available light. End of discussion on that subject.

No problem, Jerry, I so hope you find a solution.

Cheers,
David