Well, the flash doesn't work out the exposure

The camera body works it out! (In P-TTL flash metering mode)

There are several reasons why you may get underexposure. Typical examples are reflective subjects - the preflash fires and the camera sees the reflection, thinks "whoah! that doesn't need much illumination" and fires little flash for the main exposure.

So, watch out for mirrors, really shiny surfaces, and reflective strips on coats.

But, as Dan points out the thread (or my e-book) may help a lot!
Matt

You set the zoom on the flash for the angle of coverage required from the flash's point of view.

For example, if you are using a 70mm lens, but have the flash mounted off-camera, let's say at 45 degrees to the subject then the flash zoom would depend how close the flash is to subject (ie if the flash is closer than the camera you probably want a wider zoom setting than 70mm).

Of course, you can try anything - you may want light to spill all over the place, so use a wide angle setting on the flash (irrespective of the camera's focal length). Alternatively you may want a focussed pool of light - so use the longer zoom of the flash.

Personally, I don't bother with a flash meter

Just put everything on fully manual (camera & flash) and take a few test shots - using the LCD & histogram to evaluate 'correct' exposure. Usually I can guess the exposure nearly correct, but normally takes just a couple of minutes to get right!

HTH!
Matt

* Shoot RAW - that gives you 12-bits per pixel.
* Use a RAW convertor - that will make use of the 12-bits per pixel
* Output to high quality JPG
* Stop worrying

(95% of my images are done this way!)

Most of the advantage comes at the RAW-to-TIFF or RAW-to-JPG stage. In fact, you don't even have to worry about how many bits really
Once you have converted the file to 8-bit JPG or TIFF you can do any final PP on it.

If you really, really want to throw the image around a lot then you might consider 16-bit TIFF, but I doubt you'll be able to tell the difference from a high quality JPG. You'll certainly not be able to see any difference in print!

Most print houses will work from a JPG anyway, and the good ones will require the images to be in a certain colour space... but I'm not going there (that's another huge subject in its own right!!)

Matt

It doesn't matter if the flash's zoom doesn't match the lens range

Just shoot away! With P-TTL the camera is controlling the exposure based on what it sees through the lens, so it will work fine with longer zooms.

Technically it'll work, however, for longer focal lengths you'll probably get a better quality of light by (a) bouncing, (b) diffusing, (c) mounting the flash off camera. The further your subject is away from the flash, the more "pin source" it appears and the more "cardboard cut out" the subject can become. Just experiment (and don't be afraid to try different zoom settings to get different qualities of light)

Obviously you'll only get wireless in a body that supports wireless with the pop-up (e.g. *ist-D, K10D, K20D, K200D, K7D). Other bodies that don't support wireless with the pop-up will require two AF360s... but then you probably knew that already

Matt

Kris,
I've even used the 12-24 on film
There's not a huge amount of vignetting at 12mm - but plenty, plenty of wide angle

I do have the FA24-90. Lovely lens indeed... may have to sell it on as it's not had much use since I bought the DA17-70. I'm torn because it works really well on the old *ist-D But it'd be a tad more than £20 (PM if you're interested though).

The F35-70 is quite a nice little lens. Macro ability fairly decent too.

Why not just use the manual lenses you have (or acquire some more)?
Matt

That's a good tip. In fact, for Windows at least, there's a whole pile of stuff that can be USB'd - see www.portableapps.com
(Check out Canabalt! Also available at www.canabalt.com - highly addictive game!!! LOL!)

Matt

I've been using PCs since DOS 3
(Programmer and general tech-head/geek/nerd)
Recently got the iMac 24" - and I love it

The operating system has a few differences that take some getting used to (like copying folders - the Mac replaces, while Windows merges). But, apart from that when it comes to general use the Mac wins hands down.

I use Firefox, Thunderbird, OpenOffice on both PC and Mac - all work a treat. Also use VirtualBox for testing on the iMac (Linux versions, Windows etc). It all "just works".

You'll read lots and lots about pros and cons of each system and get yourself seriously confused. Once you use a Mac for video and music work (even GarageBand is surprisingly versatile) you'll wonder why on earth Windows hasn't been able to get it that good

Don't forget the cost of migrating software - for me that's put a damper on complete migration at the moment. Some software includes licenses for both Mac & Win, but others you have to upgrade/replace/buy new.

Agree with the advice to go and see one demonstrated! Just DON'T see a Mac Pro running Photoshop CS4 - it'll make you cry when you see the speed!!!!

Matt

PM sent

Do I like Photoshop? Love it

Do I post process my images? Yup.

Does it look like I do? Maybe


Knowing how to use Photoshop efficiently is really important to me. But, I like to keep things in the realms of believable (well, generally speaking). My intent is to convey what I saw (even if that's in my mind's eye), rather than what the camera saw.

I've pondered on doing a Photoshop one-to-one or group session... but never got round to it. Always happy to share some techniques

Matt

Many thanks for the kind words regarding the e-book

Just a BIG thought...

If you ever take a flashgun apart you MUST (read that as MUST) take extreme care!
The capacitor holds an enormous charge at high voltage (probably around 300VDC). Getting your fingers on that is definitely not recommended

You should use insulated probes with a suitable resistor to safely discharge the capacitor before continuing with disassembly.

...and as George rightly says, getting it back together correctly can be entertaining (if you're masochistic that is )

Matt