Crazy camera setting - BIF
Forum rules
No more than three images or three external links allowed in any post or reply. Please trim quotations and do not include images in quotes unless essential.
No more than three images or three external links allowed in any post or reply. Please trim quotations and do not include images in quotes unless essential.
- sury
- Subsuming Vortex of Brilliance
- Posts: 5419
- Joined: Sun Jun 17, 2007 6:58 am
- Location: San Jose, California, USA
- Contact:
Crazy camera setting - BIF
Today I took my HVL58-AM with me for the walk at the Bay Trail in Mountain View, California instead of my usual HVL20.
I wanted to try some HSS shots. This may be the first time you heard about using a flash as fill flash on a bird in flight.
A900 + 70-400 + HVL58. Shutter 1/6400, f5.6, ISO 800. I cropped the image and tweaked shadows in Picasa. Since today's
experiment was all about high speed shooting, I wanted to know if the HSS can help or hurt the shots.
By the way, my camera is due for lens cleaning.
DSC36542shdwcrop by BigSury, on Flickr
I wanted to try some HSS shots. This may be the first time you heard about using a flash as fill flash on a bird in flight.
A900 + 70-400 + HVL58. Shutter 1/6400, f5.6, ISO 800. I cropped the image and tweaked shadows in Picasa. Since today's
experiment was all about high speed shooting, I wanted to know if the HSS can help or hurt the shots.
By the way, my camera is due for lens cleaning.
DSC36542shdwcrop by BigSury, on Flickr
Minimize avoidable sufferings - Sir Karl Popper
- KevinBarrett
- Emperor of a Minor Galaxy
- Posts: 2449
- Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2008 5:32 pm
- Location: Seattle, Washington, USA
- Contact:
Re: Crazy camera setting - BIF
I doubt very much that the flash could have done anything at this range, especially considering that it loses effective power in HSS mode.
Kevin Barrett
-- Photos --
-- Photos --
Re: Crazy camera setting - BIF
I agree with Kevin. Flash is used in bird photography as fill, catch light and getting those microscopic details in the plumage in your image. Most use manual flash settings and almost never HSS.
Mark
Mark
Re: Crazy camera setting - BIF
Hi Sury - I'll leave the flash discussion to those that know more about it than me. The seagull looks a bit grumpy but not sure if this down to the flash or over anthropomorphisation on my part
I assume you mean 'sensor cleaning' rather than 'lens'? Looks like a dust spot to me.
I assume you mean 'sensor cleaning' rather than 'lens'? Looks like a dust spot to me.
Nex 5, Nex 6 (IR), A7M2, A99 and a bunch of lenses.
- sury
- Subsuming Vortex of Brilliance
- Posts: 5419
- Joined: Sun Jun 17, 2007 6:58 am
- Location: San Jose, California, USA
- Contact:
Re: Crazy camera setting - BIF
Kevin, Mark,
Makes sense.
Andy,
Yes, I meant sensor cleaning. I guess the bird did not like being "flashed".
Sury
Makes sense.
Andy,
Yes, I meant sensor cleaning. I guess the bird did not like being "flashed".
Sury
Minimize avoidable sufferings - Sir Karl Popper
- Greg Beetham
- Tower of Babel
- Posts: 6117
- Joined: Sun May 27, 2007 3:25 pm
- Location: Townsville, Qld. Australia
- Contact:
Re: Crazy camera setting - BIF
Sury I’ll have a dab at it for you, HSS flash is pretty feeble, the approximate guide number available (looking at the HSS GN table for the F58 flash) for ISO 800 and a shutter speed of 1/6400 would be around 4.8 X 3 = 14.4 (I made the gain linear because you would no doubt have the flash head zoomed to maximum 105mm) normally the gain would have been only a factor of 1.5 (ISO 100 – ISO 800) due to the inverse square law.
If you divide the f-stop (5.6) you used into the approximate guide number I arrived at the result will be the distance over which the flash would have had any effect. If the subject was any further away it would have had almost none.
So if we divide 14.4 / 5.6 you get 2.6 M (approx.)
I make it that the bird would have to be no further away than about 8.5 feet otherwise there would be no visible effect from the flash. As the underneath of the gull looks fairly darkish I think most likely the bird was out of range for HSS.
Greg
If you divide the f-stop (5.6) you used into the approximate guide number I arrived at the result will be the distance over which the flash would have had any effect. If the subject was any further away it would have had almost none.
So if we divide 14.4 / 5.6 you get 2.6 M (approx.)
I make it that the bird would have to be no further away than about 8.5 feet otherwise there would be no visible effect from the flash. As the underneath of the gull looks fairly darkish I think most likely the bird was out of range for HSS.
Greg
- sury
- Subsuming Vortex of Brilliance
- Posts: 5419
- Joined: Sun Jun 17, 2007 6:58 am
- Location: San Jose, California, USA
- Contact:
Re: Crazy camera setting - BIF
Greg,
That makes sense. My intent on using the flash was precisely for these birds flying close by and NOT
"stadium" usage you see at concerts and sports events. These birds were flying low and sometimes few
feet from you. This one was backlit by Sun and it was about 6 feet (~2M away). Hence my excitement
though I admit I had no idea about distance calculations you had in your post. I was going by proximity I
observed on my outing couple of weeks ago.
What I cannot say for sure, is that given the high ISO, was the flash a factor at all. But then at 1/6400,
I could not say for sure it did not. Hence my post so that I can get better insight. I had a hypothesis in
mind and played it out and learned that the hypothesis did not hold water. On to other experiments
and learning.
On the positive side, it was a mention in one of the posting (I can't remember who mentioned it, might have been Mark)
that don't ever try birds in flight at below 1/1600 as a rule of thumb was the piece of wisdom I needed.
As the saying goes, it you succeed, lead with it, if you fail, be guided by it.
As an aside, it was fun observing people wondering what the heck I was doing with flash firing on a nice bright day.
With best regards,
Sury
That makes sense. My intent on using the flash was precisely for these birds flying close by and NOT
"stadium" usage you see at concerts and sports events. These birds were flying low and sometimes few
feet from you. This one was backlit by Sun and it was about 6 feet (~2M away). Hence my excitement
though I admit I had no idea about distance calculations you had in your post. I was going by proximity I
observed on my outing couple of weeks ago.
What I cannot say for sure, is that given the high ISO, was the flash a factor at all. But then at 1/6400,
I could not say for sure it did not. Hence my post so that I can get better insight. I had a hypothesis in
mind and played it out and learned that the hypothesis did not hold water. On to other experiments
and learning.
On the positive side, it was a mention in one of the posting (I can't remember who mentioned it, might have been Mark)
that don't ever try birds in flight at below 1/1600 as a rule of thumb was the piece of wisdom I needed.
As the saying goes, it you succeed, lead with it, if you fail, be guided by it.
As an aside, it was fun observing people wondering what the heck I was doing with flash firing on a nice bright day.
With best regards,
Sury
Minimize avoidable sufferings - Sir Karl Popper
- Greg Beetham
- Tower of Babel
- Posts: 6117
- Joined: Sun May 27, 2007 3:25 pm
- Location: Townsville, Qld. Australia
- Contact:
Re: Crazy camera setting - BIF
As usual Sury there is plenty of room for error trying to work out what flash might be capable of doing or not doing in daylight at high shutter speeds, at 6 feet you were almost at the minimum focus of the lens, the flash might not have been zoomed to maximum perhaps? One would think at that distance there should have been some small input from the flash.
But one thing is for sure HSS has no range at high shutter speeds.
Greg
But one thing is for sure HSS has no range at high shutter speeds.
Greg
- KevinBarrett
- Emperor of a Minor Galaxy
- Posts: 2449
- Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2008 5:32 pm
- Location: Seattle, Washington, USA
- Contact:
Re: Crazy camera setting - BIF
At six feet, it's hard to think that the flash couldn't have contributed anything, but in broad daylight and a shutter that can go up to 1/8000, the flash couldn't hurt anything either.
Kevin Barrett
-- Photos --
-- Photos --
- Greg Beetham
- Tower of Babel
- Posts: 6117
- Joined: Sun May 27, 2007 3:25 pm
- Location: Townsville, Qld. Australia
- Contact:
Re: Crazy camera setting - BIF
There is another aspect as well, at such a fairly close distance the flash is looking down on the subject more than looking up under it as the bird is more or less side on.
Also we don’t know the zoom position of the flash head, if it wasn’t zoomed to maximum then it would most likely not even make 6 feet, the guide no available falls away rapidly as the zoom angle gets wider.
Greg
Also we don’t know the zoom position of the flash head, if it wasn’t zoomed to maximum then it would most likely not even make 6 feet, the guide no available falls away rapidly as the zoom angle gets wider.
Greg
Re: Crazy camera setting - BIF
If you look at the image, the telltale sign of flash usage aren't there.
The shadows are very dark, so the flash didn't fill that much or at all. Also, the only visible catch light in the eye comes from above the bird, not the position the flash would be.
I agree that a bit of trial and error could make the flash useful in these situations. I would try manual flash full power first and go from there.
Mark
The shadows are very dark, so the flash didn't fill that much or at all. Also, the only visible catch light in the eye comes from above the bird, not the position the flash would be.
I agree that a bit of trial and error could make the flash useful in these situations. I would try manual flash full power first and go from there.
Mark
- sury
- Subsuming Vortex of Brilliance
- Posts: 5419
- Joined: Sun Jun 17, 2007 6:58 am
- Location: San Jose, California, USA
- Contact:
Re: Crazy camera setting - BIF
Gentlemen,
You have given me enough to better my understanding of HSS flash and flash in general.
I am going to hit the books (aka Internet) and get some (more) understanding. It was a
flash in the pan (no pun intended) and it served to improve my understanding.
With best regards,
Sury
You have given me enough to better my understanding of HSS flash and flash in general.
I am going to hit the books (aka Internet) and get some (more) understanding. It was a
flash in the pan (no pun intended) and it served to improve my understanding.
With best regards,
Sury
Minimize avoidable sufferings - Sir Karl Popper
Re: Crazy camera setting - BIF
sury, have a look at the flash section in this guide. It's a bit dated but has some very useful info about using flash for bird photography.
http://digitalbirdphotography.com/contents.html
Mark
http://digitalbirdphotography.com/contents.html
Mark
- sury
- Subsuming Vortex of Brilliance
- Posts: 5419
- Joined: Sun Jun 17, 2007 6:58 am
- Location: San Jose, California, USA
- Contact:
Re: Crazy camera setting - BIF
Mark,
Thank you. Will read up on it. Also, I feel stupid for not trying the beam extender gizmo I have for flash.
It could have been a good experiment to have the flash in manual, with the beam extender and try it.
Well, another day, another experiment.
Sury
Thank you. Will read up on it. Also, I feel stupid for not trying the beam extender gizmo I have for flash.
It could have been a good experiment to have the flash in manual, with the beam extender and try it.
Well, another day, another experiment.
Sury
Minimize avoidable sufferings - Sir Karl Popper
Re: Crazy camera setting - BIF
Oh, you have a Better Beamer or some other device to focus your flash? Do use it, it will help the output!
Mark
Mark
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 135 guests