Got'cha!

Ken Ramos · Post by **Ken Ramos** » Thu May 18, 2006 6:43 pm

Canon EOS 20D (manual)
1/1000 sec. @ f/6.3 ISO 100
Canon 100mm f/2.8 macro
Midday, sun

MikeBinOKlahoma · Post by **MikeBinOKlahoma** » Thu May 18, 2006 7:13 pm

Neat behavior capture--I have a ruthless small boy's fascination with predation shots. And good job avoiding blowing out the whites.

I've noticed you are mostly using f/6.3 and similar f/stops on your shots with the new rig. I'm betting you'll find that you can get good results and a bit more DOF with f/8, f/11, and even f/16. Especially when you are using flash as main light. Try it out on some non-chance of a lifetime shots first, and see how it works.

You're getting some good ones with the new camera!

Ken Ramos · Post by **Ken Ramos** » Fri May 19, 2006 3:07 am

Thanks for the comments and tips Mike.

I was thinking the other way around however, because I think my images are looking a little too dark and considered shooting at f/5.6 with the flash as the main light. Especially in the shade.

However I read a post on another photography site where they mentioned the Canon 100mm f/2.5 macro had a sweet spot around f/11 and f/16. The shutter speed on this was much higher than I wanted or expected and I did not notice because my eyeglasses make it difficult to see the info displayed in the lower portion of the viewfinder and I was very anxious to get the shot. I need to take a little more time and compose myself along with the photograph.

MikeBinOKlahoma · Post by **MikeBinOKlahoma** » Fri May 19, 2006 10:19 am

Thinking about what you said, you may be having a problem with getting the light from your flash onto the subject. Since it is pretty close to your 100mm lens, the bulk of the light may be going "high". For most Canon flashes, including the 430EX (I'm pretty sure), you can point the flash slightly downward at -7 degrees so that it illuminates things close in front of the lens. When you do this, a little flashing side view of the flash shows on the LCD. Are you doing this for your shots? You have to depress the button on the side that lets you change the angle of flash, and press it slightly down. Check your manual if this isn't clear. Your 430EX should be creating plenty of light, it is brighter than a 420EX, and I've used one of those with no problems for macro.

Ken Ramos · Post by **Ken Ramos** » Fri May 19, 2006 3:47 pm

Nope, it comes down level with the camera and no further. I was thinking of using a reflector and bouncing the light downward. It would diffuse it making it a little less harsh. I used to do this years ago, bouncing the flash, when I shot 35mm and larger formats but then again I was photographing models quite a bit back then, wahoo! $\:D/$

, when I was in San Diego. A lot of the camera manufacturers would have live beautiful models to promote their cameras and lenses at photo exhibitons every so often. So professionals and amateurs were welcomed to come to these photo exhibitons and use the models for free, while browsing over and/or purchasing new equipment. Sure was a fun way to spend a weekend!

MikeBinOKlahoma · Post by **MikeBinOKlahoma** » Fri May 19, 2006 4:19 pm

Hmm, I just checked my 420EX, and it doesn't swivel downward. And poking around online, I can't find anyplace that says that the 430EX will adjust "negative". Best reason I know to get a 550EX or 580EX instead of a 430EX! That's too bad.

You're on the right track, I'd try manually setting the flash to a wider-angle (50mm, maybe) and mounting a reflective white card (or maybe even a card covered with aluminum foil? up above the flash "bulb".

Of course, the simplest way to solve the problem is to run out and buy a 180mm lens....The longer minimum focus distance will put your subject right out in the main beam of the flash!

Sue is shooting with a 100mm lens, you might ask if she has this problem.

Ken Ramos · Post by **Ken Ramos** » Fri May 19, 2006 4:32 pm

At the moment I don't think it is a problem with the flash and the focal length of the lens, it's probably more of a problem with the photographer at the moment.

I have been looking for an off camera flash mount, something similar to or like Jody Melanson's. I may look around for one tomorrow when I go to Asheville. I got my bill for my new toy yesterday and now its time to cough up the dough to pay for it. I think its worth it!

MikeBinOKlahoma · Post by **MikeBinOKlahoma** » Fri May 19, 2006 4:49 pm

Yep, an off-camera flash mount would work. I shoulda thought of that!

nephiliim · Post by **nephiliim** » Fri May 19, 2006 11:28 pm

Love the softness of the whites, great behavioural shot to I have to agree.

I wil check out some specs for off mount flashes for you. We just got a new one for nikon last week, probably will get the new one for canon to. Considering that te 20D has remote TTL, using the flash as a loose one will give excelent light setups.

All the best,

Tom Burger

Wim van Egmond · Post by **Wim van Egmond** » Sat May 20, 2006 4:47 am

About the flash. I have been experimenting recently and I made a simple device that looks like what they put on dogs if they schould not scratch themselves. You can make it from paper or plastic. On the inside you can even put some reflecting material aluminium foil, or silver tape to light the highlights up. It works quite well.

But with very shiny objects, beetles etc. It is better to have an illumination more form the sides! less frontal.

Wim

Wim

Ken Ramos · Post by **Ken Ramos** » Sat May 20, 2006 4:49 am

Thanks Wim. I have been thinking along those lines also.

Wim van Egmond · Post by **Wim van Egmond** » Sat May 20, 2006 4:55 am

I hope you succeed in making something, it works quite well, but you will look a bit redicilous with such a device!

Wim

Ken Ramos · Post by **Ken Ramos** » Sat May 20, 2006 5:27 am

Wim wrote:

I have been experimenting recently and I made a simple device that looks like what they put on dogs if they schould not scratch themselves.

I hope you succeed in making something, it works quite well, but you will look a bit redicilous with such a device!

O.k. I will take your advice and put it on the flash. I don't scratch that much anyway.

Wim van Egmond · Post by **Wim van Egmond** » Sat May 20, 2006 5:43 am

Ken, I don't put it on the flash! I put it on the lens of the camera! I'll see id I can make a drawing of it. I have the device at home so I can't take a picture right now. I use a type of plastic they use to wrap furnitur ein. With little bubles in it. It is light and firm.

Wim

Wim van Egmond · Post by **Wim van Egmond** » Sat May 20, 2006 5:58 am

This is how it looks, just a fast sketch. It is is connected to the lens. The reflecting surface inside lights up the shadows. With this you need one flash on the camera.

Wim