2014 Nov 06 - Thu at 15:32 re:Re: [OM] Flash adapter EOS<=>T32? …
Chuck Norcutt <olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>wrote
>It doesn't have to be Canon nor does it even have to have the 8-stop
>manual power range of the Canon 540EZ that I suggested you buy. The
>T-32 only has two manual ranges but its auto mode is fairly accurate out
>to modest distances. Simply use auto mode and take a test shot. It
>will be somewhere in the ball park. Then chimp and adjust either
>aperture or ISO or both to home in on the correct exposure.
That works well if the environment, subject, and distances are fairly static, a
single flash is used and the aperture is
moderate.
It is less practical taking casual portraits in celebrations where you want to
concentrate on expressions and
relations rather than histograms, you are bouncing the flash up or sideways
various distances, or are using multiple
flashes or wide apertures - like f/1.8
>Dean would find this hard to do while shooting extreme macros of moving
>bugs in the field but even that may be possible if you can settle on a
>fixed shooting distance and, thus, fixed exposure. With enough very
>close-in flash you can maybe out-power the sun such that it's not much
>of a consideration in total exposure. Just my conjecture... Dean can
>tell you I'm not much of a bug shooter and haven't actually tried that.
> But I do think it would work.
Attaching some big translucent white thing, like a plastic bleach or milk
bottle, or translucent plastic sheet through
which the lens is poking, can aid in both cutting the amount of light and
reducing harsh shadows. White balance
care would be necessary with serendipitous objects.
TTL is useful here to avoid exposure calculations, especially if the distances
change - which affects both light and
exposure loss due to close focussing.
Hmm, the calculations are complementary (closer focus = less lite thru lens;
closer lite = more lite on subject) —
maybe a fixed flash output might work for a range of distances if the light is
well positioned on the camera?
tOM
>Dr. Flash
>
>
>On 11/5/2014 11:34 PM, Moose wrote:
>> On 11/5/2014 12:38 PM, Mike Gordon via olympus wrote:
>>>>>> That's a start. But TTL? Any electical compatibilities discovered
>>>>>> and usable with a little rewiring(of an adapter)?
>>
>> I'm not sure I see a point, other than "because it's there". With Canon
>> digital, it's so easy to histo-chimp one's way into the perfect
>> exposure. I did that in a dark church building with what I thought were
>> excellent results with a nicely adjustable manual flash, in one of my
>> very few ventures into the world of flash in the last few decades. I
>> don't see how TTL would have been any better.
>>
>> OTF-TTL on OM is the cat's meow, but is far behind me.
>>
>> But then, I'm now,
>> Dr. No Flash
-- Absum! -- Quidquid latine dictum sit altum viditur.
tOM Trottier +1 613 860-6633
tOM@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Skype:Abacurial
114 Clarendon AV, Ottawa ON Canada K1Y 0P9
http://Information.Architecture.Abacurial.com
P Est-ce c'est necessaire d'imprimer ce courriel ?
Do you really need to print this email?
PUBLIC NOTICE: Any use of this message, in any
manner whatsoever, will increase the amount of disorder
in the universe. Although no liability is implied herein,
the consumer is warned that this process will ultimately
lead to the heat death of the universe.
The following section of this message contains a file attachment
prepared for transmission using the Internet MIME message format.
If you are using Pegasus Mail, or any other MIME-compliant system,
you should be able to save it or view it from within your mailer.
If you cannot, please ask your system administrator for assistance.
---- File information -----------
File: tom.jpg
Date: 11 May 2007, 2:46
Size: 11601 bytes.
Type: Unknown
tom.jpg
Description: Binary data
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|