Joseph, Photography

You Asked For It – Electronic Flash

Today I would like to talk a little about electronic flash.  We have all seen photos and the harsh light that is created by using a cameras built in flash.  Sure the people in the photos are exposed fairly good but are those monsters lurking in the background or are they large shadows created by on camera flash ?  The flash units that are built into DSLR’s and mirrorless cameras are at best used for fill flash (outdoor photography supplemented by the onboard flash to fill in harsh shadows bright sunlight causes).

A couple of Friday’s ago I briefly discussed the benefits of the Nikon CLS system (Creative Lighting System) and how easy it was to use. Hmmm, I really can’t go there now because last week I had told you that I traded all of my Nikon gear for Fuji gear but I had withheld a couple of items to sell on my own.  Those couple of items happen to be a Nikon SB-910 Speedlight and two Nikon SB-700 Speedlights.  I also have an older Nikon SB-28DX Speedlight but more about that later.

OK Joe why would you save Nikon Speedlights and switch to Fuji equipment ?  The next thing you are going to tell us is the Nikon Speedlights will work with the Fuji.

Actually the answer is yes and no.

Huh ?

The Nikon CLS system will not work with the Fuji but the flash units will work in manual or automatic mode. Most of you won’t remember automatic modes on flash units but being I am “older than dirt”  I do remember. Most flash units have automatic modes on them. You input what ISO your camera is set to and place your camera to manual mode. You then place your flash to “auto” mode and set your shutter speed to its maximum flash synchronization speed. The LCD on the back of the flash will inform you which aperture to set your camera to and what your working distance will be. You should already know what your cameras maximum flash sync speed is. If you don’t please check your manual. Most focal plane shutters sync from 1/200 of a second and down. There are exceptions of course and some cameras sync at higher speeds and some lower.

So how do we improve the quality of light from flash units ?

One way to get more flattering light using on camera flash is to try to diffuse the light.

Huh ?

Did you ever notice on a bright sunny day the sun produces harsh distinct shadows ? This is because the light is known as “Point source light”. When it is overcast the lighting is a lot more pleasing and even.  This is because the clouds are diffusing the light. The sun is still the same size and brightness but its just being diffused. So we could say that a diffuser tends to convert a small point source light source into a larger looking or diffused light source.

There is a whole aftermarket for these diffuser products that can be purchased and some electronic flash manufacturers include small diffusing domes with their units. Some of the better portable diffusers are sold by a companies like Lumiquest, Stofen and Photoflex. They are an inexpensive way to improve the quality of light when using electronic flash.

The product below is made by Lumiquest and is called the “Pocket Bouncer” and works well if you are on a budget. It simply mounts to the top of your flash unit with Velcro and instead of facing your flash at the subject you pion your flash up and bounce the light off the diffuser. There are a multitude of products that are available to diffuse light from flash units including ones that fit over the built in pop up flash.

Figure1 (1 of 1)

Personally I am a big fan of Soft Boxes, and convertible umbrellas (umbrellas are far less expensive), but in order to utilize these items you have to move your flash off camera. This was easy when I owned the Nikon because I just used the CLS system and raised the pop up flash in the camera as a Commander for the external flash units to control them automatically and wirelessly. There are a number if ways you can trigger your off camera flashes. You can use a cable but I’m not too keen on using cables. Remember to take “Murphy’s Law” into account when thinking about using cables (If anything can go wrong, it will). Most of the time someone will trip on cables or knock your expensive flash units over. So what is the solution ?

Pocket Wizard to the rescue. OK, ok for those with dirty minds its not what you think :)

Below is a photo of basic Pocket Wizard transceivers.

Figure2 (1 of 1)

Pocket Wizards are automatic radio transceivers (auto sensing transmitting and receiving). You mount one on the hot shoe of your camera and you plug the other one into the PC port on your external flash. You then set them to the same channel and it works like magic. You can place your external flash up to 1500 feet from the camera and fire it wirelessly. The units I purchased were the Pocket Wizard Plus X and are fully manual units but Pocket Wizard also makes units called TT5 and Mini which are fully CLS compatible and work with your cameras TTL flash metering.

So why did you only buy two Pocket Wizards when you said you had four flash units ?

Because I only needed a way to trigger my SB-28DX Speedlight wirelessly from my camera. The SB-910 and SB-700 units have what they call optical triggers built into the units. It’s called SU-4 mode and the way it works is when the flash unit in SU-4 mode senses another flash firing, it fires. Being I will be working in full manual mode it really does not matter whether the units are being fired wirelessly or optically.

Please note: Never mount an older flash unit to the hot shoe on your newer digital camera. Older flash units use a much higher trigger voltage than the newer units designed for todays cameras and can wreak havoc on newer electronic systems. This is one of the beautiful things about the Pocket Wizard system. Only the radio gets mounted to your hot shoe and the receiver to your flash. If you are using an older flash unit the Pocket Wizard is designed to work with low and high trigger voltages.

There are many brands of radio systems available to trigger your off camera flash but I find the Pocket Wizard brand to just work every time. They have ten switchable channels so if you are working in the vicinity of other photographers who are also using Pocket Wizards you can set yours to different channels.  They are very reliable triggers and for the price ($179 for the 2 pack) I feel they are with the price.

Below is a photo of a portable softbox made by Lastolite called the EzyBox.  This unit folds flat and sets up in minutes.

Figure3 (1 of 1)

From the rear you can see the opening where you would insert the flash.

Figure4 (1 of 1)

From the front you can see the white diffuser material that helps spread the light out evenly. The interior of this unit is coated with a silver reflective material so it does not reduce the power of your flash unit drastically.

Any way you look at it the quality of flash photos greatly improves by simply removing your flash from the camera. You can shape the light, diffuse the light, concentrate or feather the light or even just use the light to create different effects.

In the photo below I used the Pocket Wizard radios combined with an older Nikon SB-28DX Speedlight mounted high on a lightstand and set to manual mode, 1/64th power. I exposed for a black background then added the flash without changing the exposure. I then had my wife look up towards the flash (she looks thrilled doesn’t she) as if she is seeing some sort of light from a divine source or maybe a spaceship, LOL.

Moonlit (1 of 1)

 

I hope you will consider trying off camera flash if you already own an external flash unit or you are planning to get one, or a few.  There are numerous websites that describe off camera flash techniques.  One of my favorite sites is David Hobby’s – Strobist  There is a wealth of off camera flash information on this site.

Here is a YouTube video of David Hobby taking the Cheap Camera Challenge from Kai Wong of DigitalRev TV   It will show you that it is technique and not equipment that matters.  DigitalRev TV also has videos of Chase Jarvis and Zack Arias taking the cheap camera challenge.  They are both funny and cool videos that will really make you think.

Standard
Joseph, Photography

DSLR Or Mirrorless ?

First I would like to say this post is purely my opinion so please don’t think I am singling out any particular manufacturer or promoting one system over another. I am giving my reasons for switching and my thoughts are probably out of sync with the majority of readers so as I said in last weeks post “to each their own”.

Well I finally took the plunge into the mirrorless camera world wholeheartedly yesterday. I had been building a Fujifilm system along side of my Nikon System for about a year now and I had found myself using the Nikon less and less, sorry about that West :)

I already was using a Fujifilm X-T1 so when the opportunity arose to get another X-T1,  Vertical battery grip, 56mm f/1.2, 23mm f/1.4, Fuji Flash and a handful of Fuji batteries and other goodies I jumped at it. I’m sure you are saying “Oh No Joe” you must have spent a small fortune on that gear. Actually I swapped my Nikon gear for the Fuji gear (except for some items which I will sell separately) so it didn’t cost me a penny. Now I am not the first person to jump ship from a DSLR to the mirrorless world but at least I have had the opportunity to use the Fuji gear side by side with the Nikon gear to sway my final decision.

Why in the world would you do a silly thing like that Joe ?

To me it the glass (lenses) is a very important aspect in deciding which system to go with. It also has a lot to do with the camera controls but more on that later. You see way back when I was an eager young buck I remember deriving great joy from going out for a days worth of shooting with prime lenses on my Canon F-1 film camera. I had a lot of those marvelous Canon FD prime lenses and all of them were fast. I don’t remember having any lens that was slower than f/2.0. I did not own a single zoom lens. My images were really good with those fast lenses and then Canon had to go and upset the whole apple cart by changing the design of their lens mount.

You might be saying to yourself “I don’t remember Canon changing their lens mount Joe” but they did. They had to change the mount design to one that would accommodate the newer cameras that were beginning to appear with electronics.

Those great Canon lenses were called breech-lock lenses and they were machined so well that all you would have to do was face the camera lens mount up and line up the dots and the lenses would practically mount themselves. All you would have to do is twist the breech-lock ring about 1/3 of a turn and your lens was securely mounted. There was no twisting of the lens against the camera body. The only thing that moved was the breech-lock ring so there was no lens mount wear or wobbly lenses. Yes those were the good old days.

So when Canon changed their mount I traded in all my gear for Nikon. One of the great things that Nikon had been able to do is retain their original mount design so not to alienate users who had accumulated years worth of lenses. Every Nikon F mount lens will fit every Nikon SLR camera no matter how old it is. The older lenses might not meter on the newer cameras but they will fit. Why Nikon was able to build upon their original mount design to accommodate electronics and Canon did not is beyond my scope, but to say the very least I was pissed. So for the next 35 years I built a Nikon system.

The time seemed to fly by and every couple of years when Nikon announced a new camera I was at the local camera shop checking it out, and most of the time buying it. Each new generation of Nikon added more and more features, so many in fact that I was sure I never use all of them. I noticed a strange thing that happened along the way though (and I am strictly talking about myself here). The more features that were added to the cameras the less I would enjoy using them. Either you would have to twist a wheel in front of the camera to change the aperture, or hold a button while twisting a wheel to adjust exposure compensation. Some features were only accessible by diving into the menu system.

Thats great, something else I have to remember.  Besides getting the correct exposure and composing my shot I had to remember dials, wheels, buttons and menus. Don’t get me wrong, having a bunch of features is great but I just didn’t feel right to me the way these features were implemented. I fully embrace technology when its enjoyable. I’m not an analog man in a digital world.

OMG look at all those glorious dials :)

XT1 (1 of 1)

I guess I’m just old school, I like aperture rings on the lenses and knobs to twist with numbers on them. This is one of the reasons I started to like the Fuji cameras more and more. Besides having some of the best APS-C sensors in the business they have dials for shutter speeds, ISO, and exposure compensation. They have aperture rings on the lenses where some of us think they should be on every make of camera.  I like the way the Fuji X-Trans sensor reproduces color and B&W, and I do believe it has something to to with the non-traditional layout of the sensor (it is not a Bayer type layout).  I also liked the fact that Fuji has eliminated the AA filters on the sensor (anti-aliasing).  I know other manufacturers have removed these filters also but not at this price point. Across the entire Fuji line these filters are gone so the sharpness of the images is more to my liking.  Originally before jumping ship I was hoping when Nikon announced the df camera I would love it but, to me the Fuji X-T1 has better ergonomics.

The Fuji glass is also impressive. They have a complete lineup of fast prime lenses and the only zoom I have felt a need to buy is the 55-200 Optically Stabilized lens (yes Gale VR or OS lenses do work). Almost all of the lenses are tack sharp also. I enjoy using the fast lenses a lot, it reminds me of my days with my Canon F-1. The fact that the X-T1 has dials instead of wheels (it has wheels but you can choose not to use them) is just icing on the cake for me.

I was also very impressed with the quiet operation of the camera. If you turn the beep off you can hardly hear the shutter. There is no mirror slap as on a DSLR when you press the shutter, so I can use slower shutter speeds with a mirrorless and get sharper slightly images. There is no optical pentaprism to add weight to the camera. There is an electronic viewfinder and it is a superb one. I could look in the viewfinder and adjust the exposure compensation wheel  and see in real time what the image will turn out like without removing my eye from the viewfinder and looking at the rear screen.

When doing time or long exposures with a DSLR you have to cover the eyepiece or it will affect your images. There is no need to cover the eyepiece on a mirrorless.

Over the years I have used and owned a lot of Canon and Nikon glass and I have really never had any complaints with the sharpness of the images.  I do find that most of the Fuji glass has a “bite” to it for lack of a better word (looks a bit sharper).  As far as the Canon and Nikon bodies go I have never had any major issues almost all of them were totally reliable (my Nikon D200 had over 190,000 shutter actuations) on the original shutter and was still going strong.  I want to be very clear that I have nothing against these big manufacturers.  The Fuji system just fits my slower deliberate style of photography better.

Just because the Fuji system fits me does not mean everyone will like it. Some reviews I have read indicate that Fuji’s are not beginners cameras or are “Quirky” but I don’t find that the case at all. For anyone looking into upgrading or buying a DSLR camera I suggest you take a look at mirrorless along with DSLR’s. There are a lot of mirrorless brands such as Sony, Fuji, Olympus and Panasonic Lumix (Olympus and Panasonic are micro 4/3 sensors which are smaller than APS-C sensors) that offer considerable bang for the buck. Mirrorless technology is rapidly maturing and when image quality is compared to DSLR’s it is almost indistinguishable.

I’m sure in time I will find some disadvantages to mirrrorless also but the way I see it the advantages will far outweigh the disadvantages.

Here is a video clip that Patti K. sent me in a comment (Patti is one of our Main Contributors on Monochromia).  This is a pro that decided to go mirrorless and a lot of the reasons I switched were similar.  I hope you enjoy the clip and thank you to Patti for sending it – Why I moved to mirrorless

Standard
Joseph, Photography

You Asked For It: Photo Editing Programs

Today I would like to discuss some of the various photo editing programs available to post process your images.  I will also give you my views on Macintosh versus Microsoft Windows systems.  Please note I am not advocating or endorsing one type of computer OS over the other I am merely stating my experience with both.  Todays post was actually inspired by a question from Gale in Florida about post processing.

Why I Prefer Macintosh

Lets discuss computers first because I want to be brief on this subject. I personally prefer the Macintosh OS over Windows (and this is coming from a person who owned a computer business for ten years building generic computers running Microsoft Windows). Like I said I am not endorsing I am merely stating my preferences. I find the Macintosh systems seem to require less system resources than Windows systems while running the same programs.

Huh ?

Okay let me give you an example. I sometimes will edit images on my Macbook Air computer which only has 4 GB of RAM without issue. Of course I would prefer to edit images on my Mac Mini with 16 GB of ram and a big screen but sometimes I would rather just sit on the couch with my wife and edit images on my Macbook. If I were using a Windows based system with the same processing power and 4 GB of RAM, running Adobe Lightroom 5 would be frustrating for me. In my experience the Mac programs seem to load faster than the Windows counterparts and take up less hard drive space. Some of you might say RAM is pretty cheap these days so why not just add some memory and use the Windows systems. That’s wonderful if Windows is your preference but when comparing apples to apples (no pun intended) the Mac system will load programs faster with the same processing power and memory, and I am confident saying that. The other thing I prefer about the Mac system is all of the Apple software such as word processing, spreadsheet and presentation is free and will import Microsoft Word or Excel files. The OS (operating system) upgrades are also free so I don’t have to spend money when the next generation of software is available. If I wanted to start processing RAW files immediately iPhoto is already on the Mac so if I didn’t have the extra cash to spend on Adobe Lightroom at the time I could still shoot RAW images with my camera and post process them. These are some of the reasons the Mac system is a better fit for me. As I stated previously I am not endorsing or suggesting one system over another, I am just stating which works better for me, and why I prefer it.

Image Editing Programs

Okay so lets get to the meat of the post, image editing programs now that I started the controversy about computers above.

When you buy a camera most of the time it will come with a CD that has their own brand of image editing software. These proprietary programs are used if you shoot RAW images because for some stupid reason every camera manufacturer has their own RAW files. With Nikon the files have an .NEF extension, with Olympus they end in .ORF.

Why these files are different is beyond my scope of understanding but it would just make a little more sense to me if all these manufacturers would get together and standardize a file format for RAW images. They did it with .JPG images so why not RAW.

Adobe Lightroom is in my opinion the standard for post processing images for people like me (advanced amateur).   You can import just about any file format including RAW images into one program.

But Joe why would I spend money on Lightroom if my camera already came with a software CD ?

Thats a really good question Joe, I’m glad I asked me. Lets use me as an example.

I am a long time Nikon user as most of you already know. Lets say I was a loyal user of the software provided by Nikon to post process images. I took the time to learn all aspects of the Nikon software and I am so familiar with it I can process images with my eyes closed (which would be a pretty neat trick).

Now I decide to buy a Fuji camera because I heard great things about their image quality. I’m very excited when I get my new Fuji home and while I am waiting for the battery to charge I decide to load the software that came with my new camera. I eagerly await for the software to finish installing and as soon as it finished I quickly open the program.

What the hell is this ?

This is nothing like the Nikon software I am accustomed to. Oh crap this is totally different and now I have to learn a whole different program to process my Fuji RAW files.

This is the exact reason you invest in Adobe Lightroom. You take the time to learn Lightroom and it will import any brand of camera RAW files along with .JPG’s of course. You learn one program and use it for all of your post processing needs. By taking the time to learn Lightroom you streamline your post processing immediately.

Another great feature of Lightroom is Plug Ins. Practically every manufacturer of image editing programs provides Plug Ins for Lightroom. For example I use NIK software’s Silver EFEX Pro sometimes to process my black and white images. They provide a Plug In so I can run Silver EFEX from within Lightroom. I just drop down one of the menus in Lightroom choose to edit my image in Silver EFEX and when I am done it automatically exports my image to Lightroom and puts me right back to where I was before I dropped down the menu. I actually use the complete suite of NIK software programs but since Google purchased the company I find myself using a suite of programs fro onOne software called Perfect Photo Suite (which by the way is a free download). When onOne comes out with new versions of their image editing suites the make the previous versions available for free. I would imagine they do this in hopes you will love their software and upgrade to their latest version, which is not free. To me the current version is well worth the $89 they charge for it. The NIK software suite is also very nice but I just find myself using the onOne software more recently.

There are free programs available such as Google Picasa that you can use for post processing your images which is fine. I just don’t think anything can match the power and versatility of Adobe Lightroom and the Plug Ins capability is just an added bonus to me.

So I hope all of you found this post of some use and I hope I cleared up some questions that you had Gale.

Standard