On camera flash and ISO 100 film? And Leica Flash Question

[scott_mcloughlin]

I've shot some Delta 100 and FP4 with studio strobes, but not

with on-camera flash (IIRC). Given the lower sensitivity, are

flash shots with Delta 100 likely to be "flashier looking" than

using a 400 speed film? Would this be more an issue with

wide shots vs. "narrow" shots (50mm closer up or a 85-105mm

lens) due to how much area the flash has to cover evenly?

 

Also, I have an SF24 for my M6 TTLs, but I'm wondering if bouncing

the big Vivitar 285 might give better results. I've heard one

can use TTL and bounce with the SF24 using the Nikon

extension chord (which I have), but I've never tried it myself.

Any feedback on these two flash unit options?

 

I'm trying to figure out my kit to take up to holiday events, so

thanks for any advice.

 

Scott

[Ed_Ingold]

These small flash units are hard to use with ISO 100 because of the low guide numbers. You are limited in distance and might find you have to use wider apertures than you would like. I prefer ISO 400 for general use, typically at f/5.6 to f/8, at normal candid distances, usually with a diffusion dome except in bright sunlight.

 

Flash is flash, and the quality of the lighting and/or image is up to you and your skill in deploying it. With two or more flash units, it's easier to get good results in manual mode, using a flash meter, than with automatic exposure.

[mark u]

Here are some comments on using the SF20/24 and also a Vivitar 285 with an M6:

 

http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00COic&tag=

 

Flashy look is something I associate with apparent inverse sqaure falloff (which depends on the flash to subject distance), and flashy spectral reflections. You can get the same lighting effect using a 2 stop wider aperture with ISO 100 than you would with ISO 400, assuming the same shutter speed and flash power - or equivalently, 2 stops slower shutter speed and 4 times the flash power (i.e. 2 stops more flash). Flashiness depends in part on the ratio between ambient and flash lighting in the capture.

 

Bounce flash has the advantage of giving a softer, more even light than direct flash - substantially reducing the flashy look. At least with B&W film you don't have to worry about colour casts from bounce flash which can plague colour photography. It can make sense to rig a small index card with an elastic band to bounce some of the light forwards to give catchlights in the subjects' eyes and to avoid the overhead sunshine look with shadows under noses etc. if bounce is too vertical - effectively making two lights out of one. If you have the remote sensor attachment for your Vivitar, you could even bounce it into a corner of the room behind you - otherwise you need to ensure that its sensor is pointed at your subject to have the benefit of auto flash.

 

Here is a flash master at work:

 

http://www.planetneil.com/faq/flash-techniques.html

[justin_goeden]

The film speed has nothing to do with "flashy" looking pics or not. The film speed is just the films sensitivity to light. Maybe a refresher on ISO will get you far.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Film_speed

[steve_hovland]

The problem with using shoe flashes and 100 speed film is painfully slow recycle time.

 

If you use a battery pack you get faster recycle but risk melting down the flash.

 

ISO 400 makes a huge difference, and 800 helps in really dark places.