tom_patrick

<p>Hi</p>

<p>My question isnt really answered. Changing the guide number is something i dont understand as necessary. Apparently the flash is suited perfectly to the camera.</p>

<p>I just need to know the best settings to use in various situations, ideally just highlighting the variation between using the hx14 and the sb20</p>

<p>Hi<br>

<br />Just got an sb-20 flash to use with my hexar.<br>

<br />Can anyone give me some tips on getting the best from the pair? Does the hexar use the ttl mode on the nikon (obviously using the cameras meter not actually through the lens)<br>

<br />Also, do i just use the flash how i would with a nikon camera. As in, the setting on the back for manual mode? And how do i change the output of the flash to compensate? Change the aperture on camera/flash?<br>

<br />Thanks. Im pretty new to flash photography so any help will be great!</p>

<p>Thanks very much people....</p>

<p>Decided on a mamiya i think! Looking for a pro TL at a reasonable price. Or perhaps just a pro, as there does not seem to be a lot of difference (???)</p>

<p>As for the lenses mentioned, they are both C, not N, models. They are however fairly reasonable compared to ebay prices. Are they worth getting or is it a lot better to hold out for N versions?</p>

<p>Thanks again for all help! </p>

<p>I live in England so that ones out! Shame as that would have been useful. </p>

<p>It looks like for now i can only afford a cheaper kit. Mamiya or Bronica by the sounds of it. I assume mamiya has the better optics, but will need to research which are best to go for. I have found reasonably priced 45 and 55mm models and their pics look okay but need someone with experience with them. </p>

<p>Yes the super wide looks like an absolute dream. Checking its results on flickr makes me want to weep. Far too pricey for now though, i'll put it on the list next to an M7!</p>

<p>So a CM is what i want, although i would prefer a metered finder. And if i can only afford an older lens i have to make sure i check it with slow shutter speeds. I would have thought this would have been to do with the body though? I know the shutter is in the lens but surely it is timed by the body? Perhaps not it seems to make sense if i consider it! The body is basically just a mirror then.</p>

<p>(edit) - Just checked and the 50mm lenses are going for about £800. Thats double my absolute maximum budget with no body. </p>

<p>.... what about the mamiya sekor 45 and 55mm lenses, both 2.8?</p>

<p>Hi Philip</p>

<p>I would ideally like the option of shooting eye level but with ground glass waist level there too. I have always thought of this way of composing as something quite poetic for some reason. Probably from old photography documentaries or something!</p>

<p>So say i opt for a hasselblad 500, what body is the better and why? Also what half decent lens at around about 50mm (as i want about 28/35mm field of view in 35mm film terms)</p>

<p>Same goes for a mamiya or bronica, which of the 50/60mm or thereabouts lenses are ones to watch for?</p>

Thanks everyone.

 

The mamiya sounds about right. Looked at a Fuji rangefinder with a 60mm lens but looks a bit rubbish and i assume it

won't be as nice an experience.

 

Why the bronica etrs over a mamiya 645?

<p>Hi Russ</p>

<p>I tend to prefer a landscape frame, but i guess i could get used to it, as i have seen lots of beautiful street shots in 6x6.</p>

<p>Thinking about it, i assume looking through a 645 viewfinder would be in portrait, and to get landscape would need to be turned on its side? With waste level VF surely this is impossible!?</p>

<p>Also, obviously with 645 i lose some size, so really would be just the same shooting square and cropping? (providing i can visualise properly when shooting)</p>

<p>So i assume your advice would be to get a hassy 500?</p>

<p>Hi</p>

<p>I want to buy a medium format camera, to be used for some landscapes etc but mostly street style photography. I am not rich but want something i'll get okay sharpness with that isnt made from cheap plastic!!! Probably round about £300 I would hope to pay, but am flexible!</p>

<p>What i want is a quick enough shutter (500 min), not huge and heavy and ideally with a meter, or option of using a metered prism. Also want to be able to use it manual, and if possible the option of aperture priority. Want a 35mm equivalent lens or thereabouts, so it would be good if the model i chose has a decent standard lens available at not too high a price!</p>

<p>I have looked at hasselblad 500's, and mamiya 645's, and ideally would like the 645 format, but could deal with square if other factors made it more attractive.</p>

<p>Any ideas? And tops for buying second hand (ie what lens to look for etc)</p>

<p>Any help will be very much appreciated!</p>

<p>Hi</p>

<p>Not sure if this will get seen now since its quite old!</p>

<p>Regarding the outputting - i understand the term lossless, but in this context it refers to the reproduction etc of the film. However, if i output from any scanning program as a TIFF and have clipped highlights (for example) there is no way to get them back in photoshop. What is saved is saved. So what im saying is that you can not just scan totally flat because if it isnt bright enough, turning brightness up after saving as a tiff will create nouse, and if it is too bright, you will lose detail when turning it down.</p>

<p>So what can be done apart from getting it right when scanning!???</p>

<p>Thanks people. But these techniques are similar to what i used before, and are far too long a process really. Just wanted a tool to brighten or darken areas simply, in the same way as dodging and burning. </p>

<p>Cheers for all your responses though!</p>

<p>Hi</p>

<p>Thanks for your response. What i mean is when dodging and burning, i have the option of dodging or burning either the highlights, midtones or shadows. I would like to dodge or burn the entire exposure at once is certain areas, with a simple tool and not having to do anything more than something similar to dodge and burn.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Hi</p>

<p>Is there a way to dodge or burn all of the above at once instead of separately with the same tool? Otherwise i would apply changes and paint them out around the areas i changed, but this would take a long time and effort for each area</p>

<p>Thanks</p>

<p>Thanks bill.</p>

<p>I have found that using epson and pinching the histogram for each colour individually produces good results. I still cannot see how saving from epson as a TIFF (which is the most RAW i can get??) will allow me to properly adjust in PS though. If it is saved as a certain way, adjusting it within another program cannot bring out colours or luminances or the relationship between them without degrading quality im sure? Logically that seems right</p>

<p>James - Yeah, i meant the camera was set for 400 film, and therefore the flash exposed as if using 400 film, which it is. But the aperture was set for 100</p>

<p>The camera works by adjusting flash output automatically as it meters the scene, not ttl. It would have metered assuming it was 400 film. The only problem being the aperture setting or 400 is two aperture stops down. </p>

<p>I will just develop as normal, perhaps with a little decrease in time. As Craig says the latitude of the film should mean the pictures are not too bad and i should be able to scan them properly. </p>

<p>To be honest this was more of a question for future reference and to further my learning in using the flash and developing accordingly. I did some tests with various settings and it seems as though it should be okay. Happily i found the aperture setting can be used to good effect for flash compensation, which i need to use in future when bouncing and/or using a diffuser over the flash.</p>

<p>Thanks for all the informed and detailed responses. I plan to move to fully manual flash in future once i get my head round the concept and figure out proper metering for flash photography.</p>

<p>Tom</p>

<p>James - yes, but the meter that controlled the flash thought it was a 400 film and adjusted flash output accordingly</p>

<p>Thanks Charles, as always!</p>

<p>Yes it was the HX14 flash. I was setting the shutter speed manually, but obviously that does not matter in terms of what we are talking about now. </p>

<p>Id love to understand this better. So i had my camera set to 400, as i would usually with delta. Obv the only error i made was the aperture was set to 4 instead of 8. So the only difference will be the distance the flash was effective for? I would have thought it would make the flashed areas of the frame far too bright? Apparently the HX14 adjusts automatically to achieve correct exposure based on the on camera meter. </p>

<p>Flash is something i have never known much about, as i dislike its effects, but recently has become something i would like to use creatively. I understand that (same as digital) the effective range of the flash corresponds with ISO/film speed, but changing the aperture from what it should be with a certain speed should surely affect results. But you say use normal development?? </p>

<p>No, the way the flash works is that it adjusts output to suit the shutter speed, and this is metered by what the cameras ISO is set to. When using 400 film you set the aperture to 8, 200 to 5.6, 100 to 4. If i set only the aperture to the correct setting for each speed of film and this is the only variable then in theory any speed film would work the same, but obviously that wouldnt be the case. The iso setting on the camera certainly affects the flashes output.</p>

<p>I get what you mean though, and it seems odd since surely only one thing (aperture setting or iso) affects the flash output. But both definitely matter to the exposure. </p>

<p>So, let me get this right. Scanning completely flat in epsonscan on all colours (RGB) does not matter and no info will be lost if i adjust each channel in PS? Because it is pretty grey on preview and seems difficult to get right afterward. Surely it applies the settings before the save??</p>

<p>Thanks...</p>

<p>but then the flash itself was flashing less brightly, as it treated the film as 400</p>

<p>Hi</p>

<p>I shot a few rolls at a friends wedding, and ended the night on a roll of delta 400. I was drunk at this point and got the settings on my konica hexar wrong. This is what i did...</p>

<p>The camera was set to manual, and i was using flash at various SS's. Because i was using the flash, i had the aperture set as stated on the flash unit, but not for 400 film, but for 100. So the camera was set at 400 (meaning the flash output the right amount to get correct exposure using 400 film) but the aperture was set as if using 100asa. </p>

<p>How should i shoot the remainder of the roll, and how would i develop? I thought since i have kind of exposed it as if it is 100 asa i could pull the delta to 100, but since the flash thought it was 400, that might not be enough,</p>

<p>Thoughts?</p>

<p> </p>

<p>And no, it meters from a small meter to the side of the lens.</p>

<p>Please show me one!</p>

<p>Bump???</p>