henry_myka Posted October 7, 2006 Share Posted October 7, 2006 Using Rebel XT in manual with Paterson 300w Monolight/umbrella set up via a sync cord on the hot shoe. The camera does not seem to sync with the light. 1000sec at 2.8 produces a dark image with a small strip at frame top exposed okay. 500sec at around 5.0 produces a dark image with half exposed okay. The slower the shutter, seems the camera is picking up some light. Any thoughts?<div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thomas_hardy1 Posted October 7, 2006 Share Posted October 7, 2006 The fastest sync speed of that camera is 1/200 sec. It has a focal plane shutter which needs to be open for at least 1/200 s for the full frame or sensor to be exposed. When the shutter speed is set faster than the cameras flash sync speed only part of the film or sensor is exposed hence the dark strips at faster dpeeds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marknagel Posted October 7, 2006 Share Posted October 7, 2006 Henry, I used to have the Stellar 300's. There is no need to go beyond 1/200 (max sync of your camera) with those strobes. The flash duration is 1/1000-1/3000 so it will stop any motion if that is your concern. I alway used 1/250 (my 20D's max sync speed). Turn the strobes down or move them back if you need f/2.8. Mark Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pmind Posted October 7, 2006 Share Posted October 7, 2006 ...also, consider using an ND filter on your lens if you need help getting to f/2.8. Paul Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pmind Posted October 7, 2006 Share Posted October 7, 2006 Remember, when using strobes the exposure is mostly controlled by adjusting aperture, not so much by shutter speed (as long as you can freeze the subject, it's fast enough). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
henry_myka Posted October 8, 2006 Author Share Posted October 8, 2006 Thanks all for the advice. It makes sense now. Perhaps I should get 150w strobes? The Stellar 300's were at the lowest power. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garry edwards Posted October 8, 2006 Share Posted October 8, 2006 Henry, You've been given the right answers. My advice is to get neutral density gels for when you can't reduce the power enough. Something like 0.9, which reduces the light by 3 stops. Fit the gel, which is basically a sheet of darkened plastic, over the light. If it doesn't cut the light down enough you can double it, or even quadruple it. Gels are cheap and effective. IMO they're better than putting a filter over the because they won't affect the brightness of the scene through the viewfinder and won't cause difficulties with autofocussing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chad_worthman1 Posted October 8, 2006 Share Posted October 8, 2006 When using strobe, I think of the shutter speed controlling the balance of flash and ambient, and aperture controls the exposure of the subject. In any case, you've exceeded your flash sync, if you really need a fast flash sync, you could get a Nikon D70. It uses an electronic shutter over 1/500 (I think that's the speed) and can sync well over 1/1000 via PC cord. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thomas_hardy1 Posted October 8, 2006 Share Posted October 8, 2006 Hi Henry, I'm just curious but exactly what are you wanting to do? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
henry_myka Posted October 8, 2006 Author Share Posted October 8, 2006 Hi Thomas, The paterson lights are my friend's that he uses with a nikon. I'm trying his lights with my canon because I want to purchase lights myself. So I'm now wondering if I should look into less powerful lights so I can get a larger aperture if desired. All, excuse my lack of knowlege with flash photography. I've always shot with natural light. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thomas_hardy1 Posted October 8, 2006 Share Posted October 8, 2006 I have a set of mono lights which I use sometimes (I like natural light also). I think they will adjust downward to a very small amount of light output. There is a switch which allows two ranges to be used and then another dial to allow more fine adjusting. I don't know the Paterson, but I would almost bet that the power could be adjusted down to use those wide open apertures. I have seen people discussing needing MORE power, especially when you want to have more DOF.... f/16 or higher, ie. in a large room , big group of people, or photos of any large object . Try this if you have not yet. Set the power all the way down, set the aperture to 2.8 or whatever, and the shutter speed to 1/125. Take a photo then look at the histogram, how is the exposure? If it is overexposured yes, you do need some way to reduce the output even further. Look into a set of lights which give you that capability, but I don't think I would buy lights with a really low maximum output. According to the literature that kit can reduce power to 1/32 of full power, that is about 9 w/s if my thinking is correct. Post some of the results. Good luck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thomas_hardy1 Posted October 8, 2006 Share Posted October 8, 2006 Hey , I just noticed you were using a flash meter. What does it say when you measure the light output? Turn the power down, pop the light and see what f stop needed for "proper" exposure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
derek_simpson Posted October 9, 2006 Share Posted October 9, 2006 Had a similar eye opener with Bowens (Calumet in USA ?) monoligts synching at 1/125th maximum . Bit of a shock after using up to 1/500th with on camera flash. Neutral density gels are my answer - had some in stock from theatre lighting - they come in stop reductions (Rosco supply for film so make all sorts of useful daylight/tungsten/fluorescent converters as well) - get a sheet of 1/2 stop and add layers until you get the speed you want - watch out for modelling lamp burning out the centre if too close . Cheaper and more flexible than on lens filters and if they have a speck of dust it doesn't matter whereas a speck of dust on a filter gives you extra work at best. Theatre lights have a filter holder - photo lights rely on bulldog clips wherever you can attach them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garry edwards Posted October 9, 2006 Share Posted October 9, 2006 Generally, I agree with Derek on this but with the exception of <i>"get a sheet of 1/2 stop and add layers until you get the speed you want"</i><p>My reason for suggesting 3-stop ND filters is that they are only used when the light has already been set to its minimum power and more reduction is needed. It therefore makes sense IMO to reduce the effective light output by 3 stops and then adjust the power upwards if necessary.<br>Cheaper and easier than building up layers of 1/2-stop gels.<p>Derek also made a good point about gel holders - you don't need them, it's easier and quicker to attach them using clothes pegs or masking tape, neither of which require cutting the gels to size. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
derek_simpson Posted October 9, 2006 Share Posted October 9, 2006 The logic of 3 stop is good. I had 1 and 1/2 stop in stock - makes sense to gel brutally and fine adjust on the light - presuming you have fine adjust. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
henry_myka Posted October 23, 2006 Author Share Posted October 23, 2006 Thanks all for the great advice. I tested the lights again with good results this time. Funny that Canon couldn't trouble shoot this for me when I called them. I set the ISO to 100, shutter at 1/200 and the aperture at 5.0. Since the power was at 1/32 down already, I'll get some 3- stop ND filters as Garry and many mentioned to get to to a larger aperture. I'll post results also if anyone may be interested.<div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now