tomsphotography1664882219

<p>Thanks Ruben and William for your responses. I am comfortable with my metering, FEC and FEL though was unaware of the different metering applied when using flash, i assumed the same metering was used for both. For flash I have always left it in evaluative and like William describes often left with under exposed shots.<br>

This was more of a specific question relating to this shoot, but having now done some experimenting ave does seem to throw up more reliable results.<br>

Thanks again, fingers crossed :-)</p>

 

<p>Hi, I have an event soon which will be in a fairly small room and very full of people. The ceiling is quite low so will probably use bounced flash most of the time.<br>

My question is when using flash in this sort of scenario would evaluative or average be more reliable? I have tried both but seem to get slightly more under exposed shots on the evaluative. I anticipate being quite close to my subjects with a wide lens.<br>

I will be using a 7D with nissin di 866 mk II, EFS 17-55 2.8, with spot metering probably on an ISO of 800 upwards as it is very low light.<br>

Which setting do you use for flash metering ave or eval?</p>

<p>Thanks</p>

 

<p>Rodeo thanks for your response. Can i pick your brain one more time? So the master is the on camera and that, if on normal full power, is also the key light? If the slave is put in group A then the overall amount of light is controlled by the setting of the master? Unless the output is individually controlled by adjusting the group A output? If this is so would adjusting the output of group A only affect the slave? Think my learning is being done mainly by trial and error but i am trying to get understanding of what I'm doing!<br>

Thanks again for your help</p>

<p>Help! I am using a canon 40D with a Nissin DI866 II and a 430exII<br>

I am trying to use a two flash set up with the 866 as the on camera master and 430 as slave. I'm trying to work out how to group the flashes, the 866 has the following A B C and M, do i need to have the on camera master assigned to the M group or do i set the master as A and the slave as B and if so which then becomes the key light? i have trialed lots of diferent combination sna d got some good results but not sure how i got them!!<br>

please help if you can!!! all seems very confusing even in the manual and have not yet found an online explanation!!!<br>

Tom</p>

<p>Thumbs up for the EFS17-55, had it on a 40D for last year and is an excellent lens. It has collected some dust inside but very little and NOT visible on any test shots. I disagreed with the principle of it, but i have just added a protector filter (hoya) to stop the dust, with a filter on the vents are inside the filter and this elimantes the dust suction.GET IT it's a great lens.</p>

<p>Mark you're right, sorry I meant MB megabytes not MP, my thought process was that from a 12.3 mb file to a final one of 2.5mb seems considerably smaller. Whilst I am aware that i have both cropped and compressed it to a JPEG, I was curious as to the image quality that would be produced by such a small sized file in terms of MB or is there no corelation here at all?<br>

from a 2.5mb file size in jpeg what size picture with high to good image quality could i make?</p>

<p>I shoot with a 40d and a 17-55 f2.8<br>

My image is of a group (4persons full lenght) wedding scene at 12.3mp CR2 RAW, this reads as 3888x2592. I then crop to 1998x2497.<br>

Using lightroom 3 I then convert to jpeg for printing and i am now left with a file of only 2.53mp<br>

In LR3 i leave the image quality as 100% at 320ppi.<br>

I am concerned that I have started with a file of 12.3mp and now left with only 2.53mp for printing. Is this right or am i going wrong somewhere?<br>

For printing i use photobox.<br>

What is the biggest size high quality print I could expect from this and am I doing anything wrong in the process to get the final print size?</p>

<p>Thanks<br>

Tom</p>

<p>Matt, I was going with the cable to reatin E-TTL. Am I right in my assumption that the use of radio triggers would mean manual flash mode? If so I'm not sure my skills are there yet, though i agree no cable would be far more useful.</p>

 

<p>If you could only buy one of these two which would it be and why?<br />Off camera flash cord or set of reflectors<br />I photograph for fun and mainly family portraits and gatherings. (Though i do have a wedding soon which I am doing!)<br />I have a 40D with canon EFS17-55 is, EF28-135, and a nifty fifty. Oh yes and a Canon Speedlite 430ex<br />I am interested in developing my skills and wondered which of the above two items would be the next best thing to start experimenting with. Please don't factor in costs, I am only interested in which would be best for creating better shots and allow more creativity.<br />Thanks</p>

<p>If you could only buy one of these two which would it be and why?<br />Off camera flash cord or set of reflectors<br />I photograph for fun and mainly family portraits and gatherings. (Though i do have a wedding soon which I am doing!)<br />I have a 40D with canon EFS17-55 is, EF28-135, and a nifty fifty. Oh yes and a Canon Speedlite 430ex<br />I am interested in developing my skills and wondered which of the above two items would be the next best thing to start experimenting with. Please don't factor in costs, I am only interested in which would be best for creating better shots and allow more creativity.<br />Thanks</p>

<p> </p>

<p>This was taken at a family wedding. I particulary like the relaxed and happy feelings it potrays.<br>

Canon 350D sigma 18-125mm<br>

125mm iso 200 f13 at 1/200sec fill flash 480ex<br>

post process in lightroom 2 though not a great deal done, slight cropping and sharpening but not much more.<br>

This was taken a couple of years ago and I have been bitten by the bug. I no longer have any of that kit upgrading to a 40D with 17-55ef-s. I am shooting a family wedding this summer and would appreciate feedback from this shot.</p><div></div>

<p>OMG Abraham do you really need all that kit to take a decent picture. With all that kit at a wedding I think most folk would get pretty fed up waiting around while you set up each shot. Who needs three flashes?</p>

<p>Thanks David, look forward to it.</p>

<p>So should we all, as a matter of course, be taking our new lenses back to the dealer with our own bodies to get them calibrated?</p>

<p>Again, thanks for all your useful comments.<br />Nadine it is useful if not surprising to know that a pro is using this lens for pro shoots.<br />The original question still remains though!....... has anyone tried out the new Tamron VC version yet?<br />Have Tamron made any modifications to the glass or build or is the only new addition the VC?</p>

<p>Hmm, Craig thanks for that. Perhaps it's the thought of going through three lenses before getting a good one that puts me off the Tamron!</p>

<p>Thanks for all your responses so far. As usual these all seem pretty similar to previouse posts on these two lenses. I get the feeling that from you are saying the VC should be a winner but my original Q still remains that this with the new price will only be £200 differnce to the Canon. Geuss I'll have to wait till a few reviews have been done.<br>

24-70L is, for me, not wide enough on a crop body. Thanks though!</p>

 

<p>Thanks for the responses. I don't believe this is faik as it is being sold by one of the UK's biggest camera sellers <a href="http://www.jessops.com/online.store/categories/Accessories/Camera%20Accessories/Lenses/products/Tamron/SP%2017-50mm%20VC%20Di%20II%20Lens%20for%20Canon-76776/Show.html">http://www.jessops.com/online.store/categories/Accessories/Camera%20Accessories/Lenses/products/Tamron/SP%2017-50mm%20VC%20Di%20II%20Lens%20for%20Canon-76776/Show.html</a> <br>

The question was is the new one with vc any better than the old?</p>

<p>I need a new lens for my 40D. The primary uses will be for weddings and portraiture. I need the 2.8 for the obvious low light capabilities.<br>

The old Tamron 2.8 non vc has some very poor reviews for its build and focusing issues. Though would appear to do well on IQ. I have read only two reviews so far on the new vc version and they would appear to suggest both these issues have been modified for the better.<br>

I would love to save myself £200 which is the price difference in Canon Vs Tamron but can not afford to loose shots through bad focus issues.<br>

Has anyone yet tested or bought the new Tamron VC or should I stick with the Canon 17-55 2.8?<br>

Any thoughts please.</p>

 

<p>Please let us know what the lens is like. As yet I haven't managed to find any reviews on it and I am torn between this and the 17-55 ef-s.</p>

<p>I too am in the same dilema. I need this focal range and aperture for weddings, I am not wealthy so every penny counts (cent for those of you across the water!). I have read and read and read every review going, and having just looked at the above link for a test comparison the Tamron would appear to be streaks ahead on IQ. Is this so and if so is focusing the only issue with the Tamron. How bad is the focusing....what % of shots am I likely to loose due to poor focus?</p>

<p>I have just bought my first ef 50mm 1.8 on a 40D and i am loving the DOF .... but you must get the focus point spot on or it is wasted. In both your shots there is a tack sharp point, in the first one it is in the stone and weeds just in fornt of the subject and in the second it is on the boys t-shirt at the point where the v neck opening sticks out indicating again that your point of focus was forward.<br>

your cure is easy, lots of practice. The slightest movement in your subject either by the them moving or you and the pic will seem out of focus but if you look closely you will see the focal point will be there somewhere just not where you want it.<br>

It is a great lens once mastered.</p>

<p>Mike, the IS was on, should it be switched off at faster shutter speeds? I would have thought at 1/200 there was little chance of camera shake? It was shot free hand no tripod and from memory I think I was squatting slightly. Yes I agree about capturing their sole attention, that's me being a bit shy and lacking confidence in my photography! Your'e right next time I wll shout at them and make sure I get their attention.<br>

Thanks</p>

 

<p>Thansk Chris, I only used the centre focus point, I only ever select one at a time would using all have bettered the focus?</p>

 

<p>AT LAST, sorry my skills at uploading obviously are somewhat lacking this link <a href="http://www.photo.net/photodb/member-photos?user_id=3918039">http://www.photo.net/photodb/member-photos?user_id=3918039</a> should now take you to a size that shows what I have been trying in words to explain, so sorry for all the previous attempts and waste of your time.<br>

I'm sure i needn't explain but if you click on the image it enlarges it to a workable size.<br>

Again sorry for wasting your time before.</p>