What settings do you use for subjects that fill 50-75% of the frame...

[h_._jm]

<p>Hi fellow photographers;</p>

<p>I just returned from overseas where I did extensive shooting with my extended family. Most shots indoor. Poor lighting. So much that I found myself using max ISO 1600 on my 5dC..with results being grainy and much messier than ISO 400 on my 1000D I shot 3 years ago when I was there! (I think their lighting got worse or something)</p>

<p>The question is I found that ISO 1600 is bad on 5DC<br>

At the same time, any group shot or even couple shot (if couple not close to each other) requires an aperture of F4 at the most. F2.8 is BAD. F5.6-F8.</p>

<p>But with my 5DC bad ISO 1600, I can go to 1000 at most for my taste; and thus my only option to shoot group family photos is to slower the shutter speed. Now since they are static in >90% of pics; I am thinking now that Image Stabilization is a huge plus for me.</p>

<p>I am now thinking to return to the 24-105L next time I go there, or get Tamron 24-70 VC.<br>

I put below links to two photos of what I mean by family group photos. Notice in first one I used F2.2 and I was lucky all were sharp, but Usually I Miss close to half of the people out of focus. The second one was at F1.4 and I missed the guy in the foreground not surprising!</p>

<p>First one:<br>

http://www.flickr.com/photos/eljamali/7740089398/in/photostream<br>

<br />Second one:<br>

http://www.flickr.com/photos/eljamali/7740076704/in/photostream</p>

<p>Any advice if you were shooting in such a situation and want similar group photos what would you use? lenses and settings and body? I am just thinking for these photos the 24-105L or the tamron 24-70 VC with it's image stabilization will serve me much better than my 24-70L given the poor lighing and static subjects. </p>

<p>THE OTHER question killing me PLEASE help me: I want a fully automatic mode that focuses on faces just like any point and shoot sony camera my cousins have overseas! or at least some auto mode without all these focus points and one which doesn't miss much, because when I choose all points it's useless and misses most of the time. If the 5DIII has something in it's autofocus geared towards faces/people please let me know. </p>

 

[SCL]

<p>I don't use Canons, but if the lighting is poor forcing you to use wide open apertures, effectively giving you very narrow depth of field, you should consider using a bounced flash...you'll be able to stop down and increase the DOF as well as have much better lighting control. Alternatively, shoot outside when you have daylight. You should be able to select a single focus point so that you can better manage portraits, I'm sure Canon has that in the menus, just as most other manufacturers do. Check your manual for the details.</p>

[arie_vandervelden1]

<p>How about: Manual mode, iso 200 or 400, f/4 to f/5.6, 1/90 or 1/125 s, and hotshoe flash bounced off of the wall behind you.</p>

<p>As for focus, be sure to stop down for sufficient dof. I often use center-point-only, then focus-recompose.</p>

<p>Edit to add: Stephen you beat me to the answer</p>

[h_._jm]

<p>I do use the 430 ex II all the time with the bouncing straight to the roof...maybe I need to get the stronger one? It is high ceiling for sure like 4 m's</p>

<p> </p>

[arie_vandervelden1]

<p>430EX2 should be plenty of power. Just be sure to use M. Other modes will meter for ambient, which is pointless if the flash is your main light source. Use the above settings and let the flash do its thing.</p>

[h_._jm]

<p>So I just learnt one mistake is me using AV or TV mode i.e. semi auto/manual...so I should use manual mode and when I use bounced flash there is no need for exposure to be fully right isn't that what you guys mean?</p>

[scott_ferris]

<p>Both those images would be improved greatly with a simple bounced on camera flash.</p>

<p>The 5D MkIII does have face detect AF and high iso performance is considerably better than the 5D.</p>

[hjoseph7]

<p>You might try using a Tripod or Monopod next time. I also had those issues with my 5Dc but at 1600 the pictures were very acceptable(depending on tastes). Actually 1600 is not that high of an ISO indoors. I am often forced to use ISO 3200 and above.<br>

Sometimes bouncing the flash or any flash at all is either impossible or not allowed. Shooting groups wide open is bound to create blury disapointing shots. Low shutter values will cause ghosts and movement in the photos, so in those situations you have no choice other than to use a tripod.</p>

[RobertChura]

<p>I found that 1600 on my 5D was unacceptable.</p>

[arie_vandervelden1]

<p>Yes indeed. In this case ambient exposure doesn't matter. Your bounced flash is going to fill the entire room. </p>

<p>Suppose you were in a very large hall and you used the above settings (underexposed from ambient) then the background (distant parts of the hall not lit by the flash) would be underexposed, but the flash will light foreground correctly irregardless of exposure (unless it runs out of power).</p>

<p>However in your case everything is foreground, lit by flash. So exposure is not important - just think of aperture needed (dof) and shutterspeed needed to freeze motion.</p>

[h_._jm]

<p>Scott: but these two shots above had the flash 430exii; so what you mean by bounced on? The flash was pointed up to the ceiling with a simple diffuser. if this isn't good enough maybe I should have a bigger flash like 580ex or bounce it backwards to the wall behind me? whichever direction gives more light?</p>

<p>Also thanks for letting me know 5d Mk III has face detect that is '''A MUST''' for me, since many of my shots involve me giving the camera to some noobs in my family (so I can appear in the photo!) who often miss the whole focus completely.</p>

[h_._jm]

<p>Robert: I really think 1600 on 5dc is unacceptable too. Trust me I was shocked to see ISO 400 on 1000D was like infinitely better than ISO 1600 on 5DC. ISO 800 though on 5dC is great and 800 on aps-c is bad.<br>

Arie: thanks for explanation great stuff</p>

 

[paddler4]

<p>A 430 EXII should be enough even with a ceiling of 4m. Notice on the second photo that the tops of the heads are brighter than the faces--what you would expect if you are bouncing off the ceiling, but not what you want.</p>

<p>I would get a big bounce card to direct some of the light forward. A good one that is not too expensive is the Demb flip-it.</p>

<p>Then try these settings: manual mode, f/4.5, 1/60 (the flash will freeze motion), and ISO 400. that would be a good starting point. f/4.5 is probably about as open as you can go and still have enough depth of field for the group. You can adjust from there, depending on how that looks. using the 430EXII in its default, E-TTL mode is just fine for this. </p>

[h_._jm]

<p>Thanks Dan, I will try your advice and Arie's one of "Manual mode, iso 200 or 400, f/4 to f/5.6, 1/90 or 1/125 s, and hotshoe flash bounced off of the wall behind you."</p>

<p>I do believe given how static they are 1/60 will suffice</p>

<p>As such I really don't need to even think about lenses, it's the lighting and settings here which matter :)</p>

<p>GREAT!</p>

[scott_ferris]

<p>If you can only achieve 1600 iso @ f1.4 with those subject distances inside with a flash you have a major issue. Either your flash is faulty or the diffuser is eating all your power. Try the same thing at home in similar illumination without the diffuser.</p>

[cabbiinc]

<p>If you're bouncing the light off the ceiling there is no purpose for the diffuser. It will only cut down the light from the flash, possibly cutting it to much for a proper exposure.</p>

[tom_mann1]

<p>To re-phrase what others have said, you were almost certainly shooting in a mode where the camera first determined the ambient light exposure, and then automatically added about the same amount of light from the flash unit. This is fine when you want fill flash, but is not what you want in this sort of situation where flash needs to be the primary light source. </p>

<p>Some of the previous posters have suggested having the entire exposure come from the flash. I wouldn't go this extreme. I would manually adjust the ambient to be about 2 or 3 stops under what would give a good exposure, and then let the remainder come from your flash. I recommend this because it tends to give a more natural look, especially if you have gelled the flash to be the same color as the ambient lights. </p>

<p>The 2 or 3 stop underexposure of the ambient light will allow you to stop down a bit to get more depth of field. Your 430EX will easily be able to output enough light to give a good exposure at the smaller aperture. FWIW, I use a bounced 430EX regularly at f/4 or f/5.6 (ISO 400-800) in rooms that size and it works just fine.</p>

<p>Tom M</p>

[JDMvW]

<p>I'd say that if you found the features on P&S shoot models better for what you are doing, then maybe you'd be better off with a P&S. The whole reason for a dSLR is that you want to take control of the variables.<br>

There's no shame at all in using tools that do what you want to do and that serve you well.</p>

 

[tom_mann1]

<p>I would also add that while bouncing a flash can yield wonderful results with respect to reducing the deer-in-the-headlights look typically associated with on-camera flash, it can generate its own problems. For example, bounced light can be too flat, it can take on odd color casts from the walls, and sometimes is not quite uniform across the frame and/or not brightest where you typically want it to be, ie on your subjects. However, a few seconds in an image editor can work wonders with such problems. For example, attached is a version I tweaked in ACR (mostly color corrections, some dodging and burning, straightening perspective, and cropping).</p>

<p>Tom M</p><div></div>

[tom_mann1]

<p>... and for comparison, here's the original.</p><div></div>

[William Michael]

<blockquote>

<p>“you were almost <strong><em>certainly shooting in a mode where the camera first determined the ambient light exposure, and then automatically added about the same amount of light from the flash unit.</em></strong> This is fine when you want fill flash, but is not what you want in this sort of situation where flash needs to be the primary light source.”</p>

</blockquote>

<p>100% correct.</p>

<p>I read the EXIF on BOTH samples stating that Av Mode was used – on the first shot F/2.2 was selected and on the Second shot F/1.4 was selected: Evaluative Metering was selected for both.</p>

<p>If Av Camera Mode is selected and E-TTL Flash is employed, the Flash will act as FILL to the FOREGROUND.<br />In both samples – the foreground is reasonably lit by the ambient light (i.e the ambient room light is more or less evenly spread) – so the flash, to be used as fill, is comparatively quite weak: which is exactly how it should work.</p>

<p>If you wish to use Flash as the KEY LIGHT (and bouncing the Flash as described is a very good idea), it is simplest to use Manual Camera Mode and Flash Exposure Compensation.</p>

<p>In the first image the Evaluative metering was reading a large area of white – it occurs to me that the image is under-exposed: Under-exposure at high ISO (even ISO800 which appers was used) will result in MUCH more noticeable noise.</p>

<p>In the second image – I note that the young male in the centre is reasonably correctly exposed as the Flash is almost dominate to the ambient – but the Subjects in the middle row and at the rear are all under-exposed.</p>

<p>WW</p>

<p>PS -<br />Tastes vary but I have little issue with <a href="../photo/10738709">using ISO1600 on a 5D</a>: I reiterate that Underexpose will greatly increase the noticeable noise – also noise is more noticeable on the screen than in the print.<br />There are other examples in the portfolio - some using ISO3200 ('H' on the 5D), most have the shooting specs mentioned an dcan be viewed "big" for interrogation.</p>

<p> </p>

[scott_ferris]

<p>Ah yes, as always William comes in to find the error in my ways :-)</p>

<p>I couldn't read the EXIF, so didn't realise H.JM was in AV, mystery solved. H.JM please get <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Speedliters-Handbook-Learning-Craft-Speedlites/dp/032171105X">this book,</a> it is the missing manual and an absolute wealth of information for Canon flash users.</p>

[William Michael]

<p>Sly Arena's book is excellent: <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Mastering-Canon-EOS-Flash-Photography/dp/193395244X/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1344465872&sr=1-1&keywords=NK+Guy+EOS+FLASH">so too is this.</a><br />I suggest BOTH books, the second is quite specific and invaluable to understanding the nuances of EOS Flash.</p>

<p>WW</p>

<p>Hello Scott! I am very tired - too much OLYMPICS!</p>

[h_._jm]

<p>Sorry for late reply fellow photographers; I had internet issues..</p>

<p>thanks for the book suggestions. will surely check them out! <br>

<br />cheers</p>

[keith reeder]

<p>1600 ISO should be easy enough for a 5D - it's not "high" ISO by today's standards, and even though the 5D is an old body, the FF sensor should be able to collect enough light to work at 1600 - <em>assuming that the image isn't badly underexposed and that it's converted/processed properly. </em><br /> <br />I routinely use <a href="http://www.capture-the-moment.co.uk/tp/tfu29/upload/norfolk_april_2012/redshank_pensthorpe_RT_1.jpg">my Canon 7D at 1600 ISO</a> and above, and it's excellent well into four-figure ISOs. I'm forever being told that FF is <em>always</em> better than APS-C at higher ISOs, so the 5D should have no trouble at 1600 ISO...</p>