jason_hall5

<p>Victor, are you trying to use your flash in full manual only, or are you trying to use ETTL (auto exposure) with your flash? I am little confused by your post, mostly when you say you do not have a light meter. The flash can be used either way (manual or auto with compensation) and it does a good job at both. I have two (and the 40D) and use them both ways a lot.</p>

<p>Anyway, it apears to me that you are abit confused. You may need to take a step back from the camera and read a bit on your system. Then you can get a handle on what it can do and how it does it.</p>

<p>As always, Nadine has sound advice on the article by NK Guy. In case you missed it, here is the link</p>

<p><a href="http://photonotes.org/articles/eos-flash/">EOS Flash article</a></p>

<p>Once you learn how to get correct exposures with the system, it will be time to move on to use bounce flash and simple modifiers to get better quality of light, not just the right amount.</p>

<p>Jason</p>

<p>smugmug can do this rather well.</p>

<p>Here is my site to have a little look see... jphotoarts.com</p>

<p>Jason</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Maybe they just haven't been able to delete the <strong>deleted</strong> thread.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Yeah, I don't think that thing can be gotten rid of....to be honest it would a sad day if it did. What else would we do on days that we don't have anything else to talk about.</p>

<p>Jason</p>

<p>I think that often photographers with less experience tend to not weed out enough of the OK shots. I am not greatly experienced but I know that I did a terrible job of that early on and still have to really make myself be more critical of what I intend to deliver.</p>

<p>If I took 100 shots, it would be common to deliver 30 to 40. I realized that shots that were simply OK and technically sound did not do me or the client any justice. The shot must some real value to it. That does not mean the client likes every shot I give them (far from it), but they will be solid shots I can be proud to deliver.</p>

<p>Some people take on the attitude that as long as the shot is "OK" then they should let it go to the customer and let them decide if its worth useing or keeping. </p>

<p>Like Ray, I have gotten rid as many as 3/4 of the shots. Not they were all bad, but they just did not add value to the complete collection.</p>

<p>I know that for me, early on, I was afraid the client would be mad if I did not deliver a bunch of images. However that is not the case at all. I did have two clients ask for the other shots because they just wanted to see them. </p>

<p>Jason</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Flat photos is mostly due to flat lighting.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Good grief....I should proof my post more carefully. Let me reword that...</p>

<p>"Flat photos are typically a product of flat lighting"</p>

<p>Ok, now I feel better. :o)</p>

<p>Jason</p>

<p>About the UV filter...No.</p>

<p>Flat photos is mostly due to flat lighting. Start to study the photos that you see that you like and learn what it is that makes them great photos. Things such as lighting, depth of field, composition, and so on. Then start to learn what it take to acheive those elements.</p>

<p>Jason</p>

<p>

<p>Yes I know that EV is not directly tied to ISO, however in my example I used EV 15 on a typical sunny day (and this will change at different areas of the world and at different seasons). And as Kelly pointed out you would arrive at a different EV if you meter with at a different ISO. EV 15 with ISO 125 and EV 13 with ISO 25. Simply two stops difference in sensitivity so requiring a two stop shift in EV. Not sure if I am saying that just right, please forgive me. <br>

</p>

<br>

And Kelly, you are very right about the Retina IIIc tieing the aperture and shutter together. I have one in rather good shape. Well...if you don't count the stuck shutter and sticky rangefinder. I can not afford the CLA on it just yet, and intend to do the rather simple mod to remove the apeture and shutter interlock. I find it to be a pain.<br>

<p>Jason</p>

</p>

<p>Read here <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exposure_value">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exposure_value</a></p>

<p>Basicly, when you meter a scene you will determine a certain exposure value. For example a sunny day will give you EV 15. </p>

<p>There is are a number of shutter and aperture values that will give you the same EV. So EV 15 (aka sunny 16 rule for a sunny day) will give you f16 with 1/125. or I can dial in f11 with 1/250 or f8 with 1/500. All of these combos with equal EV15, assumeing ISO 100 (or ISO 125, which was more common with film).</p>

<p>See the chart at the bottom of the page a linked to earlier</p>

<p>to add to Matt's point, I would really not like to have to shoot a wedding reception (often poorly lit) at f5.6 (often the max aperture when zoom out on consumer zooms) and not a constant f2.8. As is with the Canon 17-55 and 70-200.</p>

<p>So the advantage is very much still there.</p>

<p>However, the OP asked for landscape, so widest aperture is of no concern. quality of the glass is. In general (with exceptions to every rule), the better lens are constant aperture lens. But I am very sure that there are many variable aperture (consumer level) lens that are very much up to the task. Even more so when they are stopped down to thier "sweet spot". Also, not every high end pro zoom lens is a constant aperture. The canon 100-400 comes to mind. I forget the aperture range...</p>

<p>Jason</p>

<p>Yep, just like Sarah points out, B&W photo paper and no development. Many folks use this to do what is called solargraphy. Photographing the arch of the sun from solstice to solstice. Make a pin hole canister and load with unexposed photo paper and in 6 months....their ya go.</p>

<p>Check out more here...<br /><a href="http://www.solargraphy.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=16&Itemid=18">Solargraphy from around the world</a></p>

<p>Hi Leigh, yeah I don't know, but just trying to cover all the angles. </p>

<p>Jason</p>

<p>Very true Leigh, my mistake. Of course if the camera is a TLR or a rangefinder a dirty aperture would not be an issue.</p>

<p>With that said, there still could be an issue with the shutter not calibrated correctly. In anycase, if the camera is an older one and has not been CLA'ed, I might would do that first before going much further. That is if the OP is not able to find another cause for their trouble.</p>

<p>Jason</p>

<p>Dan is very much correct if you are just trying to download your images. Don't bother with trying to connect the camera for this purpose. It is painfully slow.</p>

<p>Jason</p>

<p>Who ever edited the images use color overlay to get that look. Photoshop would be great but Lightroom can also do this.</p>

<p>Really no "easy" way to duplicate this in camera. That is in reguard to color and dynamic range.</p>

<p>Jason</p>

<p>Assumeing that every thing else was equal, I would think your shutter or aperture maybe off a bit. What kind of MF camera was this and what type of shutter does it use. If its an older camera with a leaf shutter, they are well known for gumming up a bit and sticking.</p>

<p>Also you said "Noisier". I am going to assume you mean grain. I mostly deal with B&W film but that is normaly a product of bad development methods (temps or times not right), or not handleing the film correctly. Getting to hot or being old. Of course folks modify exposure and development methods in a effort to increase grain. But 160ISO film in MF should be pretty darn clean if its good modern film handled and developed correctly.</p>

<p>Jason</p>

<p>I have the same issue with my 5D. No support for 64bit operateing system. I could make the driver load but it would not run no matter what I tried. I posted a couple time here about it and basicly there was no solution but to down grade to a 32bit system. I am useing Vista.</p>

<p><a href="../canon-eos-digital-camera-forum/00VpT6">My old post...</a></p>

<p>I like it! with over 4,000,000 hits on my name I am twice as reliable as Ansel! Go Me!</p>

<p>Jason</p>

<blockquote>

<p>My point is, the shots look so nice on the LCD but not as good on the computer. Is this just the nature of Camera LCD's?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Yes it is. Really, it has to do with seeing the image much smaller. Your eye can not see the details so over all it just looks better. Ever look at a web site and see an image thumbnail and looks like it would be a really cool image. When you click on it and see it much larger you can see it is not nearly as "cool" as you thought. Basicly, I have noticed this many times. More than once I have been bummed after seeing an image in post that I thought was a real keeper while chimping. Just determine what the photo lacks and learn from it.</p>

<p>Jason</p>

<p>Hi Dan, I hope you are still with us.</p>

<p>To try and directly answer your question....On your AE-1, you would shoot at a different ISO than your rated film speed to change your exposure time. By shooting a lower ISO you would increase the exposure.</p>

<p>This is simply "exposure compensation". On your Xti you simply adjust the exposure compensation to be above or below what the base reading of the meter is for a given scene. See the manual on adjusting EC.</p>

<p>If your goal, however, is better saturation, your are wise to simply shoot for correct exposure. Then to acheive the saturation and contrast that you want, adjust them in your camera if you are shooting JPEG. You can also make all the changes you want in post processing.</p>

<p>If you want to spend less time at the computer, then read your manual on how to adjust your camera and play with it until you get what you like.</p>

<p>Jason</p>

<p>While Nadine is right about the Omni Bounce and an Auto Thyristor flash (surprised no one else picked up on that, includeing myself), Sto Fen does make a hood adaptor that will sheild the eye from the broad wash of light from the OmniBounce. You WILL need this if you intend to continue to use this diffuser with the Vivitar.</p>

<p><a href="http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/52778-REG/Sto_Fen_SS_285_SS_285_Sensor_Shield_for.html">See here....</a></p>

<p>Jason</p>

<p>You maybe right Danzel, however the shutter count is the only thing available to give an idea on how much the camera as a whole has been used. Like on a car, mileage is not only an indicator for the engine, but the entire drive line and suspension system. On heavy equipment we use hours of operation and not mileage to guage amount of use.</p>

<p>With that said, from what I see, more folks post on here showing shutter and mirror problems than they do sensor issues.</p>

<p>Jason</p>

<p>Also, to be clear, you are saying that the images look fine when veiw in a normal image viewer (not photoshop) but something goes wrong after uploading to this site? You need to post some so we can see. Also give us a link to the maybe the same images on another site that seems to be working for you. This is so we can compare a see if it is an issue with photo.net.</p>

<p>Jason</p>