Need Flash Recommendations/Help

[videoguy]

I have been shooting many candid events lately and am having a problem with my flash proving sufficient lighting. I expect a photo to look well lit as it did in my old flash bulb days (am I asking too much ?). I prefer to bounce the flash (when possible) for indirect lighting, usually no problem when in close quarters. The major problem occurs when I am in a large room or shooting a small group (I use 3 strobe lights for large groups). The area surrounding the subject and background are totally dark which makes the entire photo look dark and poorly exposed. The larger open spaces just seems to suck up the flash like as sponge. I use a "Lumiquest" light modifier often and it helps, but again only in smaller rooms and close work. I do not like DRO+ at all, the photos only produce tons of grain, which adds to PP work. I also prefer to shoot no higher than ISO 400, and F 5.6 to F8 (for depth of field). My primary equipment: flash-Sony F58AM (with three sets of rechargeable batteries); camera-A850; lens-Sony/Zeiss 2.8/24-70mm. Backup is a A750 with Zeiss 16-80mm and Sigma 18-250mm.
I'm considering purchasing a large watt strobe with large reflector and external battery pack (belt attached) to give me more light. Any recommendations ?? Not to break the bank please.
I appreciate any help and/or recommendations with my flash technique.

Videoguy

[David Kilpatrick]

I use a vintage Mecablitz CT60-4 - cost £100 used, new battery included, huge capacity, 4X the actual light output of the 58.

David

[videoguy]

Thanks David !! I looked up the Metz 60CT4 and it appears that that model is discontinued. However there is a Metz 76MZ-5 which may be the replacement and looks like want I need. What do you think of the "Quantum Q flash t-5DR" as an alternate ?
videoguy - Dave

[David Kilpatrick]

We have had the Quantum flash on test and it's a very good way to spend a LOT of money on something which is not actually much better than alternatives like the 58.

The new Metz is also expensive, but you certainly get what you pay for!

David

[videoguy]

Thanks David for the quick reply. The metz MZ76-5 has a GN of 76, and the Quantum T5Dr has a GN of 160. Costs of both are about $1,000.00, with battery (US). Are you saying that the Quantum produces about the same amount of light as the Sony 58 ?? The Quantum looks better to me.
thanks

[David Kilpatrick]

Quantum GN 160? I think that is in feet, not metres. GN relative to the Metz is 48 metric for the Quantum I fear.

David

[Greg Beetham]

I hope the Quantum flash units are a little less klutzy than their website seems to be,http://www.qtm.com/?page=3211&sub_page= ... ifications you're quite correct David the GN for the T5d-R model is quoted by themselves at 50 (M). The Quantum design doesn't lend itself to a zoom reflector, so no variable GN like the Metz. But one good thing about the Quantum is you can replace the flash tube itself easily if required.
Greg

[pakodominguez]

We have had the Quantum flash on test and it's a very good way to spend a LOT of money on something which is not actually much better than alternatives like the 58.

The new Metz is also expensive, but you certainly get what you pay for!

David

Hello

The Metz 76 is about 1000 us$ with the Minolta/Sony TTL module.

I haven't use it on my system (I use the 60 and I'm ver happy with it, even with the weight of the battery pack...) but on a friends Canon 5DII -the only problem I found while bouncing the flash is that the flash's have a sort of security system that make hard moving the head to the sides or to the back. In that regard, the 60 goes smoother but it can get broken easily too.

The metz 60 is easy to find on eBay and it is not that expensive. A new Dryfit (battery) will cost less than 80 US$ and if the thristor works properly, we are talkin about an old-trusty flash.

Regards

[videoguy]

Thanks ALL for your help. Looks like the Sony 58 is likely the best for me to stay with right now, but that Metz sure looks good. I just have to adjust my shooting style and go back to shooting in Manual Mode on both the flash unit and camera. I did this (M) with my A-100 and Sigma flash both in M because that was the ONLY mode which seemed to provide consistent results. I ran some tests on Manual (58 flash & 850 camera) and the results are good. I have LOTS of light and the backgrounds, so far, are reasonably illuminated even while bouncing the flash. Auto WB adjustment does NOT work when the flash in in M, thus I have to set WB to "Flash". The 850 has a very neat "Preview function" which helps tremendously when setting up in M mode. Here I can preview and adjust the exposure through the histogram button, and continue to shoot in those settings (F stop & speed) within reasonable distances. I'll likely continue to work with "camera M" and "flash ADI" when close-in shooting environments happen.

videoguy (Dave)

[Chris Malcolm]

I find I can easily brightly light the whole of a small church hall with two ceiling bounced Metz 60s. With a bit of local front flash fill I can run around snapping groups of people at f8 and ISO 400. I was recently in a large 50 foot high church hall where I was reduced to having to use f6.3 and ISO 800. But the entire hall was well lit.

Having plenty of spare flash power solves so many flash lighting problems I'll never go back to hot-shoe mountable flashes. If I buy any more flashes they'll be old Metz hammerheads or something more powerful.