DigiReb & Sigma Flash

A new Sigma EF-500 DG Super ETTL flash showed up yesterday, so last night
I hooked it to my DigiReb when some friends came over, and took some indoor
shots. Nearly all of the them came out underexposed - anywhere from
"significantly" to "majorly" underexposed. I tried both in Av and automatic
modes, and both modes seemed to do about the same - most shots underexposed
(subject and foreground), and just a few where either the subject was at
least properly exposed, or (in a couple of cases) the entire scene was
properly exposed. Any ideas why that would be?

Earlier today, I shot a quick shot with and without the Sigma, and here's
what I got:

http://www.codon.com/flash

steve

Ron Lacey wrote:

I've found neither my D60 or 20D work with my two Vivitar Canon
dedicated flash units, the flash output is always too low when I use
the hot show in any exposure mode and the cameras don't recognize that
a flash unit is attached (ie it allows faster than sych shutter
speeds). My workaround was to connect the flash unit to the camera's
PC terminal and shoot manually using guide numbers.

Ron

I have also wanted a flash for a 300D, but here in NZ there is a
considerable waiting list for 550/580EX guns, and I have a wedding to do
in two weeks ... I had decided to use my old faithful EOS 10 film
camera one last time, because of the apparent exposure problems with
e-ttl, even if I could lay hands on a 580EX.

So, I decided to try my other old faithful - a Metz 45CL-4 handle-mount
flash unit (Guide number 148 (feet) at 100 ISO), with the SCA311 adapter
intended for the EOS 10. I checked the trigger voltage - 5 volts.
Great. Fitted it to the 300D, and Voila! it flashed. Now because it is
not communicating with the camera, I cannot use any metering from the
camera to the flash, so it has to be manual. The Metz has its own
exposure sensor on the handle, so you can set the gun to expose for,
say, 200 ISO and f:8, and it meters itself. I set the 300D to manual,
WB to 'flash', exposure 1/200 at f:8 at 200 ISO, and took some shots.
They were spot on! excellent exposures.

This now opens up a whole new range of possibilities. I can set the
camera for backgound exposure with Av (fixed aperture), fill flash by
setting the gun for 1 or 2 stops underexposure, and there it is. I can
fire the flash off-camera with its extension cord, and I can fire other
flashes with slaves, with no problems due to the e-ttl pre-flash, and I
am immune to the blink syndrome that the preflash induces in some
subjects. Not quite as automatic as a 580EX, maybe, but judging by the
problems some posters are having with erratic exposures, I think I have
a winner here.

So, 580EX no longer wanted, thanks.

Colin

Cool
hank

"Colin D" wrote in message
...


Ron Lacey wrote:

I've found neither my D60 or 20D work with my two Vivitar Canon
dedicated flash units, the flash output is always too low when I use
the hot show in any exposure mode and the cameras don't recognize that
a flash unit is attached (ie it allows faster than sych shutter
speeds). My workaround was to connect the flash unit to the camera's
PC terminal and shoot manually using guide numbers.

Ron

I have also wanted a flash for a 300D, but here in NZ there is a
considerable waiting list for 550/580EX guns, and I have a wedding to do
in two weeks ... I had decided to use my old faithful EOS 10 film
camera one last time, because of the apparent exposure problems with
e-ttl, even if I could lay hands on a 580EX.

So, I decided to try my other old faithful - a Metz 45CL-4 handle-mount
flash unit (Guide number 148 (feet) at 100 ISO), with the SCA311 adapter
intended for the EOS 10. I checked the trigger voltage - 5 volts.
Great. Fitted it to the 300D, and Voila! it flashed. Now because it is
not communicating with the camera, I cannot use any metering from the
camera to the flash, so it has to be manual. The Metz has its own
exposure sensor on the handle, so you can set the gun to expose for,
say, 200 ISO and f:8, and it meters itself. I set the 300D to manual,
WB to 'flash', exposure 1/200 at f:8 at 200 ISO, and took some shots.
They were spot on! excellent exposures.

This now opens up a whole new range of possibilities. I can set the
camera for backgound exposure with Av (fixed aperture), fill flash by
setting the gun for 1 or 2 stops underexposure, and there it is. I can
fire the flash off-camera with its extension cord, and I can fire other
flashes with slaves, with no problems due to the e-ttl pre-flash, and I
am immune to the blink syndrome that the preflash induces in some
subjects. Not quite as automatic as a 580EX, maybe, but judging by the
problems some posters are having with erratic exposures, I think I have
a winner here.

So, 580EX no longer wanted, thanks.

Colin

Colin D wrote:


So, I decided to try my other old faithful - a Metz 45CL-4 handle-mount
flash unit (Guide number 148 (feet) at 100 ISO),

Yoiks! Don't you need a permit from the atomic energy board to carry
around a small sun like that??

This now opens up a whole new range of possibilities. I can set the
camera for backgound exposure with Av (fixed aperture), fill flash by
setting the gun for 1 or 2 stops underexposure, and there it is. I can
fire the flash off-camera with its extension cord, and I can fire other
flashes with slaves, with no problems due to the e-ttl pre-flash, and I
am immune to the blink syndrome that the preflash induces in some
subjects. Not quite as automatic as a 580EX, maybe, but judging by the
problems some posters are having with erratic exposures, I think I have
a winner here.

So, 580EX no longer wanted, thanks.

Nice. My 420EX served well with my RebelG 35mm camera, and continues to
do so on my DRebel, but there've been times I might have wished for a
little more manual control...

Matt Ion wrote:

Colin D wrote:

So, I decided to try my other old faithful - a Metz 45CL-4 handle-mount
flash unit (Guide number 148 (feet) at 100 ISO),

Yoiks! Don't you need a permit from the atomic energy board to carry
around a small sun like that??

It's what I call the V8 syndrome - lazy power but *grunt* when you need
it {:-)

Colin

As a follow-up, if anyone cares, it seems to be a defective camera - I
tried the EF-500-DG Super E-TTL, a Quantaray digital flash (borrowed from a
friend who uses it on a DigiReb), and a Canon 520EX - all with exactly the
same results, severely underexposed pics. On most shots, the entire upper
half of the histogram would be completely zeros. So, the camera went back
for exchange today.

steve


"Steve Wolfe" wrote in message
...
A new Sigma EF-500 DG Super ETTL flash showed up yesterday, so last night
I hooked it to my DigiReb when some friends came over, and took some
indoor
shots. Nearly all of the them came out underexposed - anywhere from
"significantly" to "majorly" underexposed. I tried both in Av and
automatic
modes, and both modes seemed to do about the same - most shots
underexposed
(subject and foreground), and just a few where either the subject was at
least properly exposed, or (in a couple of cases) the entire scene was
properly exposed. Any ideas why that would be?

Earlier today, I shot a quick shot with and without the Sigma, and
here's
what I got:

http://www.codon.com/flash

steve

Are you SURE there is a defect rather than a setting on the camera ?

I'd really like to know because I may be suffering the same malady.

--
Dave




"Steve Wolfe" wrote in message ...
|
| As a follow-up, if anyone cares, it seems to be a defective camera - I
| tried the EF-500-DG Super E-TTL, a Quantaray digital flash (borrowed from a
| friend who uses it on a DigiReb), and a Canon 520EX - all with exactly the
| same results, severely underexposed pics. On most shots, the entire upper
| half of the histogram would be completely zeros. So, the camera went back
| for exchange today.
|
| steve
|
|
| "Steve Wolfe" wrote in message
| ...
| A new Sigma EF-500 DG Super ETTL flash showed up yesterday, so last night
| I hooked it to my DigiReb when some friends came over, and took some
| indoor
| shots. Nearly all of the them came out underexposed - anywhere from
| "significantly" to "majorly" underexposed. I tried both in Av and
| automatic
| modes, and both modes seemed to do about the same - most shots
| underexposed
| (subject and foreground), and just a few where either the subject was at
| least properly exposed, or (in a couple of cases) the entire scene was
| properly exposed. Any ideas why that would be?
|
| Earlier today, I shot a quick shot with and without the Sigma, and
| here's
| what I got:
|
| http://www.codon.com/flash
|
| steve
|
|
|
|
|
|

Are you SURE there is a defect rather than a setting on the camera ?

I'd really like to know because I may be suffering the same malady.

I can never be 100% sure. Because I didn't have the Canon 580ex in
hand, Canon's tech support was entirely unwilling to help me in any
way, shape, or form - the fact that I mentioned third-party flashes
meant more to them than the fact that even *their* flash did exactly
the same thing.

The Canon rep *did* dance around, trying to hint (without ever
saying) that because the DigiReb doesn't have flash compensation, I'd
be screwed. On the other hand, I'd used a friend's DigiReb with an
external flash, and it worked great.

So, I did a "reset all settings" (or whatever it's called) on my
camera, and borrowed my friend's. I went through all of his settings
to be sure they were identical to mine, then did side-by-side tests
with each of the flashes in each of the camera. In every case, his
exposed *far* more correctly than mine, although there his did
underexpose by a just a small amount on a couple.

At that point, when the problem was entirely reproduceable, where one
camera worked just fine and the other didn't - same scene, same
settings, same shooting - I decided that there just wasn't anything
else I could do, and it was up to Canon. If I get a new camera back
and it does the same thine, I'll feel awfully foolish - but the good
exposures with the other DigiReb make me believe that the new camera
will work much better than the last. We'll see in a couple of days!
steve