tdigi Posted July 23, 2008 Share Posted July 23, 2008 Why does that 5D not have one? Ok, I know its kinda bad, but sometimes its nice to have like when you travel or if your external died on you. You can always dial it down or diffuse it to soften it. So why don't they just put a pop up on every camera? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
g dan mitchell Posted July 23, 2008 Share Posted July 23, 2008 That is an interesting question, and one that evokes different opinions. One point of view is that you can't get "professional" results by using a built in flash for a variety of reasons, and that a "serioius" photographer would use external flash anyway... so why bother, especially since it would make the camera larger, heavier, and more complicated. Another point of view is similar to yours: it could be useful as fill flash or even to trigger remote flash units so, on balance, it could be a good thing to have. Dan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mark u Posted July 23, 2008 Share Posted July 23, 2008 It takes space from the pentaprism, so you end up with a poorer viewfinder (especially on a full frame body) or an extra large protuberance on top of the camera. I have to say that on cameras that have one, I have used it about once in the past 10 years when I unexpectedly encountered the need for some fill flash quicker than I could put a flash on the hotshoe (and fortunately I didn't need high speed sync) - I always have a more versatile hotshoe flash with me. That might change if it offered ST-E2 like capability to trigger slave flash. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike dixon Posted July 23, 2008 Share Posted July 23, 2008 The 5D has a much larger viewfinder and, consequently, a much bigger pentaprism than the APS-sensor cameras. Adding a built-in flash would add a sizable lump on the top of what is supposed to be a more-compact full-frame camera. I've never seen an effective diffuser for a small, built-in flash. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tdigi Posted July 23, 2008 Author Share Posted July 23, 2008 I use my 40D for mostly hobby and rarely use the built in flash but there are times I just carry my camera and say a 28 1.8 or a 24-105 and I don't want to carry a flash unit so the pop up is nice to have for that just in case. There are diffusers, I think Gary Fong makes one ( the puffer I think ) but I never used one, I just dail the flash down a stop or so just to add some more light when needed. Considering the size of the 5D I guess that makes sense since the flash will ad extra weight, size etc. I just always hear people complaining about having a pop up flash. seemed strange. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stillbound Posted July 23, 2008 Share Posted July 23, 2008 i hear the arguements about "humps" etc but the d700 has it without a noticeable "hump" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jim_rais Posted July 23, 2008 Share Posted July 23, 2008 <p align="justify"> Both Mark U and Mike Dixon got it right, but there is another one consideration for pro and semi-pro models not to have a built-in flash. A built-in flash will weaken the (supposed to be) strongest point of these cameras: weather resistance which is demanded by pros working under variety of weather circumstances.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
derek_linney Posted July 23, 2008 Share Posted July 23, 2008 I don't buy the weather resistance argument. Olympus with the E-3 have a highly waterproofed camera with .... a pop up flash. They have even demonstrated it held upside down with the flash underwater! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Laur Posted July 23, 2008 Share Posted July 23, 2008 As a Nikon guy using a D200, I can tell you that I use the built-in flash regularly. But mostly as very quick way to set up control of one or more remote speedlights - not to contribute directly to the exposure. On those rare occasions that I've actually wanted to use to use it for a little fill itself, it's been pretty nice to have it... though I've been known to grab a paper napkin or something else to improvise a quick diffusing or bouncing surface. Where it really shines (especially given Nikon's very good CLS system) is in talking to other strobes. It's nice not to have to hang a radio device or a cable off of the camera when you just want to quickly pop your real strobe up on top of a bookshelf or behind a potted plant to help fill a room. Works like a charm for those quick situations. I don't use it much, but when I do, I'm very glad to have it. I'm pleased Nikon chose to include it on their new D700. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arthur_reyes1 Posted July 23, 2008 Share Posted July 23, 2008 I've wondered the same thing too. I myself would prefer to have a pop up flash. I'm glad my Elan IIe has one. Do I use it a lot? No. But when I do need it, it has come in very handy. I have both the 220ex and 420ex. The 220ex is nice and compact and I use it when I want to travel light. But there are times when I want to travel with even less (ie on a hike and just want to carry my camera). If I'm in the shadow of some trees and want to take a picture of the kids, the pop up flash is perfect to add some light. Its probably not the best, but it gets the job done. I was actually quite pleased when I saw that Nikon put a pop up flash on a full frame DSLR. Now maybe Canon will follow suit and make something similar. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alan_myers Posted July 23, 2008 Share Posted July 23, 2008 Well, on the other hand, I would very much prefer a camera that didn't have a built in flash. Why? 1. It's located in the worst possible place for ugly shadows and redeye. 2. It draws power from the camera, shortening battery life. 3. It adds complexity. It's just one more thing to possibly break down and require the entire camera take a trip in for repair. 4. It adds some unnecessary cost to the camera, as far as I'm concerned. Maybe not much, but some. 5. If possible, I'd rather see the space devoted to a better viewfinder and a one piece top on the camera to provide improved weather sealing. Maybe there are ways to do both with a built-in flash, but I'm pretty sure not having one would help facilitate either of these objectives, both of which are far more important to me than a built-in flash. 6. Built in flashes are pretty anemic and overly automated for my purposes. 7. Also I cannot speed up recycling and support it with an auxiliary battery pack, like I do with my accessory flashes. 8. It can't bounce, swivel, tilt or zoom. Also can't put a tele extender on it. 9. It's absolutely worthless for macro. 10. I can probably count on one hand the number of times I've actually used one in my lifetime, and I use flash a lot. At some events, I use flash for literally thousands of shots, all weekend long, but always an auxiliary flash that gives me far more control and better results than a built in ever could. Now here's a thought... Offer a model with it for those who want it, and a parallel model without for those who don't. Really shouldn't be all that difficult. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisjb Posted July 23, 2008 Share Posted July 23, 2008 I don`t like it bur have used it in emergency for when normal flash batts died at an event. It is severely limited, I used it recently to trigger studio lights when in live view when sortin 40d, and once before when reciever batts died. There is no control for speedlights all needs to be manual. My thought is for some pro models there should be no reason not to have a builtin popup ST E2, this would handy in studio and small field jobs? Mot sure how Nikon`s work but the flashes are triggered off camera by the body :o) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
willhl Posted July 23, 2008 Share Posted July 23, 2008 Would love it if the pop up flash could trigger other flashes like the Nikon system bus as a light on it's own it isn't great, particulary if you have a slightly larger lens and/or a lens hood, they cast a nasty shadow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mendel_leisk Posted July 23, 2008 Share Posted July 23, 2008 That is the one thing I truly miss on my 5D. I would think a lot of others feel the same. Maybe they'll put it on the next version of the 5D. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trebor_navilluso Posted July 23, 2008 Share Posted July 23, 2008 I use the built in flash on my 30D sometimes for catch lights. And on cloudy days it adds some nice pop to subjects when used as a fill. I think it's a handy feature if used properly and I would like to see it added to the pro models if they could do it without compromising the pentaprism. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bkpix Posted July 24, 2008 Share Posted July 24, 2008 I use it regularly on a 20D for fill, in bright sunlight. Works like a charm. This is an area where many top-line cameras are actually lacking a useful feature. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
William Michael Posted July 24, 2008 Share Posted July 24, 2008 I have made several references to the (lack of) PUF of my 5D: the last was when I put the 5D in the washing machine and gave it a spin. . . My (serious) bottom line: I am with Matt Mendel, Trebor and Bob and others: if I had a PUF on my 5D I would definitely use it. It is not a perfect tool, it is limited and not for all the time use but, handy to have: even if it means a bigger bump on the top. Like G Dan implied up front, basically there are two camps, and very rarely is there movement between the two. *** I wonder if the main driver of the lack of a PUF was to make the 5D ``more professional`` upon its release, rather than any of the other aforementioned considerations? WW Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike dixon Posted July 24, 2008 Share Posted July 24, 2008 <i>i hear the arguements about "humps" etc but the d700 has it without a noticeable "hump"</i><P> If you compare the profile views of 5D and D700, you'll see that the Nikon does indeed have a hump relative to the Canon, though it sticks forward more than up. Even so, the Nikon is 0.4 inch taller than the Canon, and a bit heavier as well. I'm hoping the next generation of the 5D will be a bit more compact than the current model. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bjscharp Posted July 24, 2008 Share Posted July 24, 2008 Funny how everyone here who does use the PUF (has that term been coined yet?) uses it for fill, not main light. I have the FEC on all my bodies with a PUFs dialed down permanently to -1.7. That's just enough to remove the deer-in-headlights look, but still provides enough light to actually `fill' a slightly dark scene. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Landrum Kelly Posted July 24, 2008 Share Posted July 24, 2008 "A built-in flash will weaken the (supposed to be) strongest point of these cameras: weather resistance which is demanded by pros working under variety of weather circumstances." Perhaps William W. had it right: "I wonder if the main driver of the lack of a PUF was to make the 5D ``more professional`` upon its release, rather than any of the other aforementioned considerations?" That is, it was more about trying to establish an aura of professionalism about the 5D than anything else. That said, by forcing me to carry a good external flash, I wound up getting some great shots indoors that otherwise would have been afflicted by the usual glare of pop-up flashes. Let me show you a shot of one of my grandkids. . . . --Lannie<div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flash445 Posted July 24, 2008 Share Posted July 24, 2008 There is also a sense of elitism. How do you identify a professional camera from a consumer camera? The consumer camera has a built in flash, and the pro camera does not, end of story. So how did such a silly tradition get started? Well it's not silly as the reasons above clearly point out. But it is a tradition that reinforces the reasons stated above, and there is a resistance to buying a "pro" camera with a pop up, at least by some photographers. I am not saying that if somebody came out with a great camera that worked everywhere, everytime, after getting run over by a train, and spit out by a submarine, that happened to have a built in flash, pro's wouldn't buy it at all, but it would have to to overcome a significant handicap. I am just a wanna be, but I would rather have a camera with a reputation of a professional tool instead of a consumer toy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbauer Posted July 24, 2008 Share Posted July 24, 2008 Not sure that I would call the Canon 20D/30D/40D a "consumer toy"........too well built and too many "pro" features. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jim_rais Posted July 24, 2008 Share Posted July 24, 2008 <p align="justify"> <TT>I don't buy the weather resistance argument. Olympus with the E-3 have a highly waterproofed camera with .... a pop up flash. They have even demonstrated it held upside down with the flash underwater!</TT><br> <br>That's precisely why the "real" photographers don't recognise the E-3 as a pro camera. It's all about outer appearance and (mis)perception of how a pro / semi-pro camera has to look like: sturdy, big and tough like a submarine. I remember in those good old days of analogue photography that one of the arguments to categorize a pro camera is that it should be weather resistant. Some tester had succesfully held a Contax RTS III under water and made the camera suffer from mud, sand and everything. The good camera survived without one protest at all. Yet, if you asked the "real" photographers at that time, they did not recognise the particular Contax as a pro camera. The key word was Nikon F3 / F4 back then. That's what I'm trying to say.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Landrum Kelly Posted July 24, 2008 Share Posted July 24, 2008 Jim, it certainly is not even true in the case of the 5D. The camera is not particularly weather resistant. --Lannie Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tdigi Posted July 24, 2008 Author Share Posted July 24, 2008 I agree with the appearance of it looking pro is probably the reason. Same reason you don't have a portrait or sports mode on a 5D. I am sure that has nothing to do with weather sealing or weight but a pro would never use those features on the dial ( I don't even use them ) but having that would look more "prosumer" and take away from the professional look of the camera. People can say look how high end my camera is there are no auto modes and not even a pop up flash. I can live without the modes but the pop up flash would be nice to have as many other agree. 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