Question on Using Off-Camera Speedlite

[keith_bogut]

<p>Having just received my new 430ex II this week, I’m brand new to flash photography. I’m using a basic set-up recommended by the strobist.com; my speedlite, mounted to a light stand, with an umbrella. I’ve successfully set my 7D to control the flash wirelessly, and that seems to work pretty well, the flash goes off when I trip the shutter. My problem is that the amount of flash hitting the subject seems uncontrolled.</p>

<p>My 7D’s ‘Flash Control’ menu is set to ETTL II. As I understand ETTL, the flash uses two pieces of information from the camera to determine the amount of flash to use. It reads the focus distance from the camera lens (I’m using a 24-105, so it perfectly matches the 430’s zoom spread), and it sends a pre-flash just before the shutter is released to evaluate the frame and determine the amount of light needed. This seems to work fine when the flash is mounted on the camera, but using the speedlite off camera and behind an umbrella seems to defeat both these mechanisms. With the flash off-camera, the lens to subject distance is moot, and with the flash behind the umbrella, ETTL can’t evaluate the scene.</p>

<p>Is this right? If so, it seems like my only option is to manually select the flash output on the speedlite (the strobist didn’t mention <em>that</em> ;-). If I do that, do I also have to select ‘Manual’ on the camera’s Flash Control menu? </p>

<p>It could also be that when I set the camera to control the flash wirelessly, it automatically omits the lens to subject distance from the light evaluation formula, but that still leaves the flash behind the umbrella problem. </p>

<p>Thanks in advance for your help.</p>

[Gary Naka]

<p>The strobist used a lot of MANUAL control of the flash.<br />The flashes that the strobist used to recommend were NOT capable of communicating with the camera. You had to shoot them in full manual mode.</p>

<p>In TTL, the light is always read by the camera, not by the flash. You could put the flash behind a box and the camera will read the light correctly.</p>

<p>Basic trouble shooting<br>

Simplify the problem then solve one part at a time.<br>

First setup the off camera flash w/o the umbrella. <br />Will the camera get a good exposure when you point the flash directly at the subject?<br>

- If the answer is NO, then you need to solve this problem first, before you add the umbrella to the mix. </p>

<p>READ the manual for your camera and flash, to understand how the camera and flash communicate with each other.</p>

[ellis_vener_photography]

Are you using the built in flash to trigger the 430 EX II?

[Mattman944]

<p>I normally use manual, but this is something I should know how to do. Here are the settings to use the 430ex II off-camera with ETTL. </p><div></div>

[Mattman944]

<p>Camera settings. I use "M". If you use "Av", you need to set the CFn7 to not use auto, or the camera will drag the shutter and the ambient light will negate what you are probably trying to do. </p><div></div>

[Mattman944]

<p>Example photo is next. Here the ratio to 2:1, that means the off-camera flash has twice the power of the on-camera flash. Note the two highlights in the ball. </p>

<p>I didn't have a diffuser, but it shouldn't matter, The camera is measuring the amount of light TTL (thru the lens), this will compensate for any lost light.</p>

<p>The Flash exp. comp will affect both flashes equally, use this to adjust your overall exposure if necessary. Here I had hot spots on the ball, so I had to dial it down slightly. You can also use the buttons/dials on the camera for this adjustment. If you had this set +2 for example, that could be why everything was overexposed for you.</p><div></div>

[ellis_vener_photography]

My question about using the built in flash to trigger with is whether the receiver on the 430 EX II can clearly see the signal

from your on board master.

 

I have no problems using a 430 EX II or 580 EX II as an off camera flash but if the optical signal ( from a 580 EX II

usually, I don't have a Canon with a built in flash) is being used the slaved flash(es) need to be able to see the signal from

the master - and the optical aystem only works within a limited range of about 25 feet.

 

If you want off camera E-TTL controlled flash to work reliably and consistently the easiest way is to either hardware it to

the camera (I use the the 16 and 33 foot cables from http://www.ocfgear.com) or use the Pocketwizard ControlTL system.

There is also the RadioPopper radio system but you need a 580EX II to act as a master.

 

Beyond the Strobist blog you should get the Canon Speedlite focused book "Speedliter's Handbook: Learning To Craft

Light with Canon Speedlites" by Syl Arena. Arena is also the guy behind OCFgear and he is sort of the Canon gear world

equivalent of Joe McNally in terms of tech tips and ideas.

[keith_bogut]

<p>Gary, I like your idea of simplifying the problem and solving one part at a time. You said " the light is always read by the camera, not by the flash". This is not what I assumed. I thought the flash read reflected light too. I'll review the manuals and see if I missed something. I have read the manuals for both camera and flash, and while neither is elaborately detailed, my understanding is that in wireless mode, the communication is one-way. The on-board flash signals the off-camera flash when to fire, and that's it. I'll re-read them both.</p>

<p>Ellis, yes, I am using the on-board flash to trigger the 430, and it works well. I've never had the problem of a failure to fire. I was awaree of the need for a clear line-of-sight connection and took care to establish it. Syl Arena's book is on my Amazon Wish List. I had put off buying it until I had a flash to work with, so it's probably time. I have read, and really enjoyed Bryan Peterson's "Understanding Flash". I find his explanations very understandable, and I love how he uses multiple photos of the same shot (i.e. with flash and without) to convey to readers the impact of the change he's discussing. I wish more photography writers used this technique.</p>

<p>Matthew, your picture of the 430 ETTL settings is what I see too. I neglected to mention in my original post that my camera was set to manual mode. I did say that the speedlite was set to ETTL II and I wondered if, like the camera mode, it should also be set to manual. Sorry, but your point on CFn7 is lost on me. On my 7D, in the 'Flash Control' menu, under 'External flash C. Fn setting', function 7 is the 'Test firing with autoflash' and the settings are 1/32 or full flash. That doesn't sound like what your camera says. The camera settings for my on-board flash for wireless func. is set to external only, not on-board and external, as shown in your photo. As Gary suggests, I was trying to keep it simple and just get the external flash working before trying to split it between on-board and external flash.</p>

<p>To all, I get the strong sense that I need to set the speedlite to manual too (not just the camera) and select the level that works for the existing flash to subject distance (1/4, 1/16, etc). I may be falsely assuming that all the communication features that exist when the speedlite is mounted on the camera, exist when the flash is off-camera and in wireless mode.</p>

<p>Thanks to all for your help. I'll keep working on it and post back on my progress (or lack thereof).</p>

[ellis_vener_photography]

Does your on board flash have a "master" mode?

[keith_bogut]

No. The choices are E-TTL II, Manual Flash, or Multi flash.

[ellis_vener_photography]

Have you tried multi-flash?

[keith_bogut]

No. I don't really know what that is, and just want to start with as few variables as possible.

[Mattman944]

<p>I just tried wireless func: external only, it works fine for me. You <strong>should</strong> be able to use TTL with the off-camera flash. <br>

<br>

However, a lot of people choose to use manual mode, for many reasons. When you have many speedlites, the Canon off-camera system starts to get complicated. If you are using studio flash, you must use manual. In manual mode, the exposure stays constant and you don't need to adjust it when your subject changes significantly (a subject that is mostly white will need some + compensation). <br>

<br>

Optical triggering doesn't work as well outside, so RF is a better choice. RF triggers with TTL capability are expensive. But, a $32 Yongnuo RF-603 will work in manual flash mode.<br>

<br>

The custom function I was referring to is "flash sync speed in Av mode" (C.Fn I-7). I mentioned this since it is a common mistake, if you use the camera in manual mode this doesn't apply. </p>

[ellis_vener_photography]

These are all shot with Speedlites in cordless E-TTL MODE. Sometimes one sometime up to five.

Optical: http://www.ellisvener.com/EVp1208_HavertyDolls/index.html

 

http://www.ellisvener.com/#a=0&at=0&mi=2&pt=1&pi=10000&s=0&p=0

 

ControlTL:

http://www.ellisvener.com/#a=0&at=0&mi=2&pt=1&pi=10000&s=6&p=0

http://www.ellisvener.com/#a=0&at=0&mi=2&pt=1&pi=10000&s=18&p=0

http://www.ellisvener.com/#a=0&at=0&mi=2&pt=1&pi=10000&s=25&p=0

http://www.ellisvener.com/#a=0&at=0&mi=2&pt=1&pi=10000&s=12&p=3

http://www.ellisvener.com/#a=0&at=0&mi=2&pt=1&pi=10000&s=9&p=4

http://www.ellisvener.com/#a=0&at=0&mi=2&pt=1&pi=10000&s=10&p=5

[sherman_peabody]

<p>Just to clarify something - I believe the basic premise of the whole Strobist technique is the use of off-camera flashes in manual mode, as opposed to using ETTL. I think Mr. Hobby's position is that while ETTL may be good for on-the-go photo-journalism using on-camera flash, where you may have only one chance to get the shot, it only makes life difficult when using off-camera flash under controlled situations. The reason is that with ETTL every time you move the position of the camera, or the subject, or frame the shot a bit differently, you're going to get a new calculated solution which has nothing to do with the previous shot, and it may not be one you like.</p>

<p>So let's say you take an ETTL shot, and find that you need to make a compensation adjustment. Then you make that adjustment, but take the next shot from a bit different position, or framed a little differently. Well, the camera is going to calculate a new solution, with your adjustment built in, but depending on exactly how you've framed the shot, the adjustment may no longer be appropriate. So you end up chasing your tail. It just becomes an exercise in frustration.</p>

<p>Hobby would say that for off-camera lighting where you have some control and can take multiple shots, it's easier to get good, consistent results setting both your camera and your flashes to full manual mode. This not only saves money on the flashes and triggers, but also lets you learn about lighting since you have to make all the decisions. I should also say that Joe McNally and Syl Arena appear to disagree with this point of view, and frequently use ETTL for off-camera lighting. I've never had the luxury of using ETTL, or even master/slave flashes, but have found that full manual works quite well for me, and I learned to be pretty good at it pretty quickly. Anyway, my point is that I think "Strobist" implies the use of manual flashes.</p>

<p> </p>

[ellis_vener_photography]

You can believe what you want to believe but the bulk of your post, especially your admission that you've never used TTL

controlled flash or multiple TTL controlled flashes reveals that your belief is based in ignorance. That you believe David

Hobby is saying is your (very natural and understandable) attempt to justify your all manual method of working.

 

Arena, Hobby, McNally -along with others who objectively know what they are doing like David Tejada, Kirk Tuck, and

myself all advocate is intelligent use and exploitation of modern flash and in camera metering systems. TTL control of

smart flashes is hardly new. I've been using those features as far back as the early '90s starting with the Nikon F4 and

N90 bodies with SB-24 speedlights shooting assignments on unforgiving of exposure errors slide film for magazine,

corporate, and advertising assignments where I might not see the results until hours, days, and sometimes weeks later.

 

Did every exposure work back then? No, and while the technical failures are far fewer today, they still happen. But that

isn't a bad thing. Making mistakes is how you learn and grow as long as you're learning from them and do not continue

blindly making them.

 

Photography where you know how things are going to work before hand? That's stifling.

[ellis_vener_photography]

There's a caveat to my last post: Sometimes repeatability of lighting from one frame to the next is extremely desirable.

When that's the case don't use small battery powered flashes use AC powered lights. You can buy a state of the art high

powered (up 640 and down to about 3 watt-seconds, controllable in tenth of stop increments) with stable color

temperature monolight, with a 250 watt modeling light for around $500.00. It is the Paul C. Buff Einstein 640. It has other

very desirable features as well like a very large range of both OEM and non-OEM light modifiers and works with their own

wireless control system and the Pocketwizard ControlTL system so you can control output from the camera position. The

ControlTL system.

[sherman_peabody]

<p>No, Ellis, my belief about what David Hobby says is based on watching his Strobist video series from start to finish. It's all about manual flashes with manual power settings, and learning to light that way. That point is emphasized over and over, from the equipment selection video all the way through his workshop classes. In hour after hour, it's nothing but manual power settings and non-ETTL radio triggers. I'm sure David uses ETTL when he thinks that's best, but the "Strobist" idea as he uses it is all about manual flashes.</p>

<p> </p>

[bebu_lamar]

<p>I watched a number of videos in which Joe McNally was using ettl flashes. I don't recall any one time when he got his shot the first time. He seems always have to make test shots then adjust. </p>

[ellis_vener_photography]

And those of us who grew up on film and learned make interesting light used a meter and Polaroid. Is there a difference?

Well yes: Polaroids cost a lot more money and time.

[ellis_vener_photography]

Edit to my prior post

And those of us who grew up on film and learned to make interesting light used a meter and Polaroid. Is there a

difference? Well yes: Polaroids cost a lot more money and time than quickly making a setting change based on what we

see on a camera's preview screen.