What features to consider when selecting a ring flash?
Clash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP
.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty margin-bottom:0;
I have a Nikon d7200 camera and managed to get my hands on Tamron 90mm f2.8 macro lens. While trying to take some shots at 1:1, I found lighting a big issue if I am stopping my lens down. I was suggested to buy a ring flash.
My question is, how do I select a ring flash? What parameters should I be looking at? I am not a professional, just a beginner trying it out as a hobby. Only flash I have at present is the pop up flash that is built into the body. Thanks.
equipment-recommendation macro ring-flash
add a comment |
I have a Nikon d7200 camera and managed to get my hands on Tamron 90mm f2.8 macro lens. While trying to take some shots at 1:1, I found lighting a big issue if I am stopping my lens down. I was suggested to buy a ring flash.
My question is, how do I select a ring flash? What parameters should I be looking at? I am not a professional, just a beginner trying it out as a hobby. Only flash I have at present is the pop up flash that is built into the body. Thanks.
equipment-recommendation macro ring-flash
1
what do you want to photograph?
– aaaaaa
Mar 13 at 17:28
Insects mainly. Other interest is patterns of leaves or flowers. But, that I manage by moving it indoors where there is sufficient light. With insects, I mean, live ones.
– Anand Mohan
Mar 13 at 23:15
add a comment |
I have a Nikon d7200 camera and managed to get my hands on Tamron 90mm f2.8 macro lens. While trying to take some shots at 1:1, I found lighting a big issue if I am stopping my lens down. I was suggested to buy a ring flash.
My question is, how do I select a ring flash? What parameters should I be looking at? I am not a professional, just a beginner trying it out as a hobby. Only flash I have at present is the pop up flash that is built into the body. Thanks.
equipment-recommendation macro ring-flash
I have a Nikon d7200 camera and managed to get my hands on Tamron 90mm f2.8 macro lens. While trying to take some shots at 1:1, I found lighting a big issue if I am stopping my lens down. I was suggested to buy a ring flash.
My question is, how do I select a ring flash? What parameters should I be looking at? I am not a professional, just a beginner trying it out as a hobby. Only flash I have at present is the pop up flash that is built into the body. Thanks.
equipment-recommendation macro ring-flash
equipment-recommendation macro ring-flash
edited Mar 13 at 8:40
xiota
11.8k41864
11.8k41864
asked Mar 13 at 5:03
Anand MohanAnand Mohan
305
305
1
what do you want to photograph?
– aaaaaa
Mar 13 at 17:28
Insects mainly. Other interest is patterns of leaves or flowers. But, that I manage by moving it indoors where there is sufficient light. With insects, I mean, live ones.
– Anand Mohan
Mar 13 at 23:15
add a comment |
1
what do you want to photograph?
– aaaaaa
Mar 13 at 17:28
Insects mainly. Other interest is patterns of leaves or flowers. But, that I manage by moving it indoors where there is sufficient light. With insects, I mean, live ones.
– Anand Mohan
Mar 13 at 23:15
1
1
what do you want to photograph?
– aaaaaa
Mar 13 at 17:28
what do you want to photograph?
– aaaaaa
Mar 13 at 17:28
Insects mainly. Other interest is patterns of leaves or flowers. But, that I manage by moving it indoors where there is sufficient light. With insects, I mean, live ones.
– Anand Mohan
Mar 13 at 23:15
Insects mainly. Other interest is patterns of leaves or flowers. But, that I manage by moving it indoors where there is sufficient light. With insects, I mean, live ones.
– Anand Mohan
Mar 13 at 23:15
add a comment |
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
My first concern would be...
Do I need a ring flash?
Yes, having your big lens in front of a bug will cast shadows, and yes, a ring flash solve most cases, but it has a very particular look.
Here are some macro photos where you can see the light source is not a ring flash.
They are using lateral diffused light.
https://blazepress.com/2015/01/magical-macro-photography-bugs-vadim-trunov/
This one has the light above the bug (Cenital-ish)
https://guttikar.com/photography-news/macro-photography-tip-using-normal-lens-turned-around/
So, a normal radio trigger and an external Speedlight (probably with a softbox, even a small one) could be what you need.
But answering your question
- Will it fit my lens?
2. Does it have enough power if I need to lower the aperture to have better Depth of field?
3. Can you change the power output?
Real flash or Continuous light.
Bulkiness.
Do you want to use it later, for portrait photography?
For macro photography, you do not need much power. So any led based light will do at a basic level.
Point 1 is pretty obvious.
Point 2 and 3 are the ones that will give you flexibility.
The rest is ok to consider.
add a comment |
If you want a true ring flash, depending on your kind of macrophotography:
- Still objects, plenty of time: you can work in manual, do test short... about any flash will do. No need for much power at close range.
- Shooting outdoors, handheld, moving objects (bugs, etc...): something that is compatible with the camera TTL exposure will allow you to shoot using the camera auto modes.
If you do very close shots, there are also circular LED lights that aren't technically flashes but are much less expensive and can do the job (Canon has a macro lens where such LED are built-in).
Being able to use only one half of the device for side lighting is a useful feature (full ring flash tends to produce flat, shadow-less images).
Why would camera TTL be a deciding factor? Isn't it generally the case with macro that a lot of parameters are under control and the light is not usually rapidly changing?
– mattdm
Mar 13 at 8:09
2
Depends on the kind of macro you do. Spiders and butterflies are rarely under my control, as are the leaves around them when there is some wind. No time for lengthy setup and test shots (this said, for this kind of macro I prefer the natural light).
– xenoid
Mar 13 at 10:02
That certainly makes sense for those situations — maybe put it in the answer?
– mattdm
Mar 13 at 11:31
@mattdm Edited.
– xenoid
Mar 13 at 12:10
add a comment |
Especially in case you are considering a legacy device, especially if non-TTL, check how low in power it can go.
One example of a device hard to use nowadays is the Soligor AR-20 not infrequently found on the used market - this is a computer (external photocell) ring flash which is only specified for 20cm and more subject distance, and is designed to serve at either f/8 or f/16 at ISO 100.
Some DSLRs/DSLMs do not even have ISO 100 anymore, and f/8 leaves you terribly little maneuvering space if you need to get closer or need to tone down a stop or two - you easily end up with your iso cranked all the way down, your aperture at f/22 (great DoF but you are in deep in diffraction territory here ... and when have you last cleaned your sensor? :) ), and still overexposing....
I’m guessing Soligor never created some ND attachments for their not-too-flexible flash?
– Hueco
Mar 13 at 14:18
An ND attachment would be consummately pointless with a computer flash :)
– rackandboneman
Mar 13 at 16:05
I’m unfamiliar with them. Will have to look it up!
– Hueco
Mar 13 at 17:09
1
Computer flash (aka, even more incorrectly, thyristor flash): There is a photocell on the flash head itself, that will stop the flash output as soon as it got sufficient light reflected back into it to expose at an aperture and iso selectable (often not independently) on the flash unit. Like TTL, but more potential for metering error in complex setups, more potential for user error, no post-sync communication with camera needed at all. Most 1970s flashes work that way, so do most non-dedicated 1980s/1990s flashes (some dedicated ones can do both, TTL and comp.).
– rackandboneman
Mar 13 at 19:08
add a comment |
There are some cheap and cheerful ring flash adaptors if you've got an external flash. They work surprisingly well for close range considering they're basically just light guides, thought the one I have doesn't deliver as much light at the bottom as at the top/sides and needed a little modification to fit nicely. This isn't much of an issue if you're shooting landscape.
Because they're dumb light guides, the TTL in your flash functions as it normally would.
The only shot I've got to hand taken with it has blown highlights and was taken at annoyingly high ISO, which I forgot to change after shooting at dusk with a long lens. It was also cropped from a resized image I was using as a desktop background. But here it is anyway:
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "61"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fphoto.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f105905%2fwhat-features-to-consider-when-selecting-a-ring-flash%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
My first concern would be...
Do I need a ring flash?
Yes, having your big lens in front of a bug will cast shadows, and yes, a ring flash solve most cases, but it has a very particular look.
Here are some macro photos where you can see the light source is not a ring flash.
They are using lateral diffused light.
https://blazepress.com/2015/01/magical-macro-photography-bugs-vadim-trunov/
This one has the light above the bug (Cenital-ish)
https://guttikar.com/photography-news/macro-photography-tip-using-normal-lens-turned-around/
So, a normal radio trigger and an external Speedlight (probably with a softbox, even a small one) could be what you need.
But answering your question
- Will it fit my lens?
2. Does it have enough power if I need to lower the aperture to have better Depth of field?
3. Can you change the power output?
Real flash or Continuous light.
Bulkiness.
Do you want to use it later, for portrait photography?
For macro photography, you do not need much power. So any led based light will do at a basic level.
Point 1 is pretty obvious.
Point 2 and 3 are the ones that will give you flexibility.
The rest is ok to consider.
add a comment |
My first concern would be...
Do I need a ring flash?
Yes, having your big lens in front of a bug will cast shadows, and yes, a ring flash solve most cases, but it has a very particular look.
Here are some macro photos where you can see the light source is not a ring flash.
They are using lateral diffused light.
https://blazepress.com/2015/01/magical-macro-photography-bugs-vadim-trunov/
This one has the light above the bug (Cenital-ish)
https://guttikar.com/photography-news/macro-photography-tip-using-normal-lens-turned-around/
So, a normal radio trigger and an external Speedlight (probably with a softbox, even a small one) could be what you need.
But answering your question
- Will it fit my lens?
2. Does it have enough power if I need to lower the aperture to have better Depth of field?
3. Can you change the power output?
Real flash or Continuous light.
Bulkiness.
Do you want to use it later, for portrait photography?
For macro photography, you do not need much power. So any led based light will do at a basic level.
Point 1 is pretty obvious.
Point 2 and 3 are the ones that will give you flexibility.
The rest is ok to consider.
add a comment |
My first concern would be...
Do I need a ring flash?
Yes, having your big lens in front of a bug will cast shadows, and yes, a ring flash solve most cases, but it has a very particular look.
Here are some macro photos where you can see the light source is not a ring flash.
They are using lateral diffused light.
https://blazepress.com/2015/01/magical-macro-photography-bugs-vadim-trunov/
This one has the light above the bug (Cenital-ish)
https://guttikar.com/photography-news/macro-photography-tip-using-normal-lens-turned-around/
So, a normal radio trigger and an external Speedlight (probably with a softbox, even a small one) could be what you need.
But answering your question
- Will it fit my lens?
2. Does it have enough power if I need to lower the aperture to have better Depth of field?
3. Can you change the power output?
Real flash or Continuous light.
Bulkiness.
Do you want to use it later, for portrait photography?
For macro photography, you do not need much power. So any led based light will do at a basic level.
Point 1 is pretty obvious.
Point 2 and 3 are the ones that will give you flexibility.
The rest is ok to consider.
My first concern would be...
Do I need a ring flash?
Yes, having your big lens in front of a bug will cast shadows, and yes, a ring flash solve most cases, but it has a very particular look.
Here are some macro photos where you can see the light source is not a ring flash.
They are using lateral diffused light.
https://blazepress.com/2015/01/magical-macro-photography-bugs-vadim-trunov/
This one has the light above the bug (Cenital-ish)
https://guttikar.com/photography-news/macro-photography-tip-using-normal-lens-turned-around/
So, a normal radio trigger and an external Speedlight (probably with a softbox, even a small one) could be what you need.
But answering your question
- Will it fit my lens?
2. Does it have enough power if I need to lower the aperture to have better Depth of field?
3. Can you change the power output?
Real flash or Continuous light.
Bulkiness.
Do you want to use it later, for portrait photography?
For macro photography, you do not need much power. So any led based light will do at a basic level.
Point 1 is pretty obvious.
Point 2 and 3 are the ones that will give you flexibility.
The rest is ok to consider.
edited Mar 13 at 20:38
answered Mar 13 at 20:23
RafaelRafael
14.2k12244
14.2k12244
add a comment |
add a comment |
If you want a true ring flash, depending on your kind of macrophotography:
- Still objects, plenty of time: you can work in manual, do test short... about any flash will do. No need for much power at close range.
- Shooting outdoors, handheld, moving objects (bugs, etc...): something that is compatible with the camera TTL exposure will allow you to shoot using the camera auto modes.
If you do very close shots, there are also circular LED lights that aren't technically flashes but are much less expensive and can do the job (Canon has a macro lens where such LED are built-in).
Being able to use only one half of the device for side lighting is a useful feature (full ring flash tends to produce flat, shadow-less images).
Why would camera TTL be a deciding factor? Isn't it generally the case with macro that a lot of parameters are under control and the light is not usually rapidly changing?
– mattdm
Mar 13 at 8:09
2
Depends on the kind of macro you do. Spiders and butterflies are rarely under my control, as are the leaves around them when there is some wind. No time for lengthy setup and test shots (this said, for this kind of macro I prefer the natural light).
– xenoid
Mar 13 at 10:02
That certainly makes sense for those situations — maybe put it in the answer?
– mattdm
Mar 13 at 11:31
@mattdm Edited.
– xenoid
Mar 13 at 12:10
add a comment |
If you want a true ring flash, depending on your kind of macrophotography:
- Still objects, plenty of time: you can work in manual, do test short... about any flash will do. No need for much power at close range.
- Shooting outdoors, handheld, moving objects (bugs, etc...): something that is compatible with the camera TTL exposure will allow you to shoot using the camera auto modes.
If you do very close shots, there are also circular LED lights that aren't technically flashes but are much less expensive and can do the job (Canon has a macro lens where such LED are built-in).
Being able to use only one half of the device for side lighting is a useful feature (full ring flash tends to produce flat, shadow-less images).
Why would camera TTL be a deciding factor? Isn't it generally the case with macro that a lot of parameters are under control and the light is not usually rapidly changing?
– mattdm
Mar 13 at 8:09
2
Depends on the kind of macro you do. Spiders and butterflies are rarely under my control, as are the leaves around them when there is some wind. No time for lengthy setup and test shots (this said, for this kind of macro I prefer the natural light).
– xenoid
Mar 13 at 10:02
That certainly makes sense for those situations — maybe put it in the answer?
– mattdm
Mar 13 at 11:31
@mattdm Edited.
– xenoid
Mar 13 at 12:10
add a comment |
If you want a true ring flash, depending on your kind of macrophotography:
- Still objects, plenty of time: you can work in manual, do test short... about any flash will do. No need for much power at close range.
- Shooting outdoors, handheld, moving objects (bugs, etc...): something that is compatible with the camera TTL exposure will allow you to shoot using the camera auto modes.
If you do very close shots, there are also circular LED lights that aren't technically flashes but are much less expensive and can do the job (Canon has a macro lens where such LED are built-in).
Being able to use only one half of the device for side lighting is a useful feature (full ring flash tends to produce flat, shadow-less images).
If you want a true ring flash, depending on your kind of macrophotography:
- Still objects, plenty of time: you can work in manual, do test short... about any flash will do. No need for much power at close range.
- Shooting outdoors, handheld, moving objects (bugs, etc...): something that is compatible with the camera TTL exposure will allow you to shoot using the camera auto modes.
If you do very close shots, there are also circular LED lights that aren't technically flashes but are much less expensive and can do the job (Canon has a macro lens where such LED are built-in).
Being able to use only one half of the device for side lighting is a useful feature (full ring flash tends to produce flat, shadow-less images).
edited Mar 13 at 12:07
answered Mar 13 at 8:05
xenoidxenoid
4,4191621
4,4191621
Why would camera TTL be a deciding factor? Isn't it generally the case with macro that a lot of parameters are under control and the light is not usually rapidly changing?
– mattdm
Mar 13 at 8:09
2
Depends on the kind of macro you do. Spiders and butterflies are rarely under my control, as are the leaves around them when there is some wind. No time for lengthy setup and test shots (this said, for this kind of macro I prefer the natural light).
– xenoid
Mar 13 at 10:02
That certainly makes sense for those situations — maybe put it in the answer?
– mattdm
Mar 13 at 11:31
@mattdm Edited.
– xenoid
Mar 13 at 12:10
add a comment |
Why would camera TTL be a deciding factor? Isn't it generally the case with macro that a lot of parameters are under control and the light is not usually rapidly changing?
– mattdm
Mar 13 at 8:09
2
Depends on the kind of macro you do. Spiders and butterflies are rarely under my control, as are the leaves around them when there is some wind. No time for lengthy setup and test shots (this said, for this kind of macro I prefer the natural light).
– xenoid
Mar 13 at 10:02
That certainly makes sense for those situations — maybe put it in the answer?
– mattdm
Mar 13 at 11:31
@mattdm Edited.
– xenoid
Mar 13 at 12:10
Why would camera TTL be a deciding factor? Isn't it generally the case with macro that a lot of parameters are under control and the light is not usually rapidly changing?
– mattdm
Mar 13 at 8:09
Why would camera TTL be a deciding factor? Isn't it generally the case with macro that a lot of parameters are under control and the light is not usually rapidly changing?
– mattdm
Mar 13 at 8:09
2
2
Depends on the kind of macro you do. Spiders and butterflies are rarely under my control, as are the leaves around them when there is some wind. No time for lengthy setup and test shots (this said, for this kind of macro I prefer the natural light).
– xenoid
Mar 13 at 10:02
Depends on the kind of macro you do. Spiders and butterflies are rarely under my control, as are the leaves around them when there is some wind. No time for lengthy setup and test shots (this said, for this kind of macro I prefer the natural light).
– xenoid
Mar 13 at 10:02
That certainly makes sense for those situations — maybe put it in the answer?
– mattdm
Mar 13 at 11:31
That certainly makes sense for those situations — maybe put it in the answer?
– mattdm
Mar 13 at 11:31
@mattdm Edited.
– xenoid
Mar 13 at 12:10
@mattdm Edited.
– xenoid
Mar 13 at 12:10
add a comment |
Especially in case you are considering a legacy device, especially if non-TTL, check how low in power it can go.
One example of a device hard to use nowadays is the Soligor AR-20 not infrequently found on the used market - this is a computer (external photocell) ring flash which is only specified for 20cm and more subject distance, and is designed to serve at either f/8 or f/16 at ISO 100.
Some DSLRs/DSLMs do not even have ISO 100 anymore, and f/8 leaves you terribly little maneuvering space if you need to get closer or need to tone down a stop or two - you easily end up with your iso cranked all the way down, your aperture at f/22 (great DoF but you are in deep in diffraction territory here ... and when have you last cleaned your sensor? :) ), and still overexposing....
I’m guessing Soligor never created some ND attachments for their not-too-flexible flash?
– Hueco
Mar 13 at 14:18
An ND attachment would be consummately pointless with a computer flash :)
– rackandboneman
Mar 13 at 16:05
I’m unfamiliar with them. Will have to look it up!
– Hueco
Mar 13 at 17:09
1
Computer flash (aka, even more incorrectly, thyristor flash): There is a photocell on the flash head itself, that will stop the flash output as soon as it got sufficient light reflected back into it to expose at an aperture and iso selectable (often not independently) on the flash unit. Like TTL, but more potential for metering error in complex setups, more potential for user error, no post-sync communication with camera needed at all. Most 1970s flashes work that way, so do most non-dedicated 1980s/1990s flashes (some dedicated ones can do both, TTL and comp.).
– rackandboneman
Mar 13 at 19:08
add a comment |
Especially in case you are considering a legacy device, especially if non-TTL, check how low in power it can go.
One example of a device hard to use nowadays is the Soligor AR-20 not infrequently found on the used market - this is a computer (external photocell) ring flash which is only specified for 20cm and more subject distance, and is designed to serve at either f/8 or f/16 at ISO 100.
Some DSLRs/DSLMs do not even have ISO 100 anymore, and f/8 leaves you terribly little maneuvering space if you need to get closer or need to tone down a stop or two - you easily end up with your iso cranked all the way down, your aperture at f/22 (great DoF but you are in deep in diffraction territory here ... and when have you last cleaned your sensor? :) ), and still overexposing....
I’m guessing Soligor never created some ND attachments for their not-too-flexible flash?
– Hueco
Mar 13 at 14:18
An ND attachment would be consummately pointless with a computer flash :)
– rackandboneman
Mar 13 at 16:05
I’m unfamiliar with them. Will have to look it up!
– Hueco
Mar 13 at 17:09
1
Computer flash (aka, even more incorrectly, thyristor flash): There is a photocell on the flash head itself, that will stop the flash output as soon as it got sufficient light reflected back into it to expose at an aperture and iso selectable (often not independently) on the flash unit. Like TTL, but more potential for metering error in complex setups, more potential for user error, no post-sync communication with camera needed at all. Most 1970s flashes work that way, so do most non-dedicated 1980s/1990s flashes (some dedicated ones can do both, TTL and comp.).
– rackandboneman
Mar 13 at 19:08
add a comment |
Especially in case you are considering a legacy device, especially if non-TTL, check how low in power it can go.
One example of a device hard to use nowadays is the Soligor AR-20 not infrequently found on the used market - this is a computer (external photocell) ring flash which is only specified for 20cm and more subject distance, and is designed to serve at either f/8 or f/16 at ISO 100.
Some DSLRs/DSLMs do not even have ISO 100 anymore, and f/8 leaves you terribly little maneuvering space if you need to get closer or need to tone down a stop or two - you easily end up with your iso cranked all the way down, your aperture at f/22 (great DoF but you are in deep in diffraction territory here ... and when have you last cleaned your sensor? :) ), and still overexposing....
Especially in case you are considering a legacy device, especially if non-TTL, check how low in power it can go.
One example of a device hard to use nowadays is the Soligor AR-20 not infrequently found on the used market - this is a computer (external photocell) ring flash which is only specified for 20cm and more subject distance, and is designed to serve at either f/8 or f/16 at ISO 100.
Some DSLRs/DSLMs do not even have ISO 100 anymore, and f/8 leaves you terribly little maneuvering space if you need to get closer or need to tone down a stop or two - you easily end up with your iso cranked all the way down, your aperture at f/22 (great DoF but you are in deep in diffraction territory here ... and when have you last cleaned your sensor? :) ), and still overexposing....
answered Mar 13 at 9:32
rackandbonemanrackandboneman
3,093817
3,093817
I’m guessing Soligor never created some ND attachments for their not-too-flexible flash?
– Hueco
Mar 13 at 14:18
An ND attachment would be consummately pointless with a computer flash :)
– rackandboneman
Mar 13 at 16:05
I’m unfamiliar with them. Will have to look it up!
– Hueco
Mar 13 at 17:09
1
Computer flash (aka, even more incorrectly, thyristor flash): There is a photocell on the flash head itself, that will stop the flash output as soon as it got sufficient light reflected back into it to expose at an aperture and iso selectable (often not independently) on the flash unit. Like TTL, but more potential for metering error in complex setups, more potential for user error, no post-sync communication with camera needed at all. Most 1970s flashes work that way, so do most non-dedicated 1980s/1990s flashes (some dedicated ones can do both, TTL and comp.).
– rackandboneman
Mar 13 at 19:08
add a comment |
I’m guessing Soligor never created some ND attachments for their not-too-flexible flash?
– Hueco
Mar 13 at 14:18
An ND attachment would be consummately pointless with a computer flash :)
– rackandboneman
Mar 13 at 16:05
I’m unfamiliar with them. Will have to look it up!
– Hueco
Mar 13 at 17:09
1
Computer flash (aka, even more incorrectly, thyristor flash): There is a photocell on the flash head itself, that will stop the flash output as soon as it got sufficient light reflected back into it to expose at an aperture and iso selectable (often not independently) on the flash unit. Like TTL, but more potential for metering error in complex setups, more potential for user error, no post-sync communication with camera needed at all. Most 1970s flashes work that way, so do most non-dedicated 1980s/1990s flashes (some dedicated ones can do both, TTL and comp.).
– rackandboneman
Mar 13 at 19:08
I’m guessing Soligor never created some ND attachments for their not-too-flexible flash?
– Hueco
Mar 13 at 14:18
I’m guessing Soligor never created some ND attachments for their not-too-flexible flash?
– Hueco
Mar 13 at 14:18
An ND attachment would be consummately pointless with a computer flash :)
– rackandboneman
Mar 13 at 16:05
An ND attachment would be consummately pointless with a computer flash :)
– rackandboneman
Mar 13 at 16:05
I’m unfamiliar with them. Will have to look it up!
– Hueco
Mar 13 at 17:09
I’m unfamiliar with them. Will have to look it up!
– Hueco
Mar 13 at 17:09
1
1
Computer flash (aka, even more incorrectly, thyristor flash): There is a photocell on the flash head itself, that will stop the flash output as soon as it got sufficient light reflected back into it to expose at an aperture and iso selectable (often not independently) on the flash unit. Like TTL, but more potential for metering error in complex setups, more potential for user error, no post-sync communication with camera needed at all. Most 1970s flashes work that way, so do most non-dedicated 1980s/1990s flashes (some dedicated ones can do both, TTL and comp.).
– rackandboneman
Mar 13 at 19:08
Computer flash (aka, even more incorrectly, thyristor flash): There is a photocell on the flash head itself, that will stop the flash output as soon as it got sufficient light reflected back into it to expose at an aperture and iso selectable (often not independently) on the flash unit. Like TTL, but more potential for metering error in complex setups, more potential for user error, no post-sync communication with camera needed at all. Most 1970s flashes work that way, so do most non-dedicated 1980s/1990s flashes (some dedicated ones can do both, TTL and comp.).
– rackandboneman
Mar 13 at 19:08
add a comment |
There are some cheap and cheerful ring flash adaptors if you've got an external flash. They work surprisingly well for close range considering they're basically just light guides, thought the one I have doesn't deliver as much light at the bottom as at the top/sides and needed a little modification to fit nicely. This isn't much of an issue if you're shooting landscape.
Because they're dumb light guides, the TTL in your flash functions as it normally would.
The only shot I've got to hand taken with it has blown highlights and was taken at annoyingly high ISO, which I forgot to change after shooting at dusk with a long lens. It was also cropped from a resized image I was using as a desktop background. But here it is anyway:
add a comment |
There are some cheap and cheerful ring flash adaptors if you've got an external flash. They work surprisingly well for close range considering they're basically just light guides, thought the one I have doesn't deliver as much light at the bottom as at the top/sides and needed a little modification to fit nicely. This isn't much of an issue if you're shooting landscape.
Because they're dumb light guides, the TTL in your flash functions as it normally would.
The only shot I've got to hand taken with it has blown highlights and was taken at annoyingly high ISO, which I forgot to change after shooting at dusk with a long lens. It was also cropped from a resized image I was using as a desktop background. But here it is anyway:
add a comment |
There are some cheap and cheerful ring flash adaptors if you've got an external flash. They work surprisingly well for close range considering they're basically just light guides, thought the one I have doesn't deliver as much light at the bottom as at the top/sides and needed a little modification to fit nicely. This isn't much of an issue if you're shooting landscape.
Because they're dumb light guides, the TTL in your flash functions as it normally would.
The only shot I've got to hand taken with it has blown highlights and was taken at annoyingly high ISO, which I forgot to change after shooting at dusk with a long lens. It was also cropped from a resized image I was using as a desktop background. But here it is anyway:
There are some cheap and cheerful ring flash adaptors if you've got an external flash. They work surprisingly well for close range considering they're basically just light guides, thought the one I have doesn't deliver as much light at the bottom as at the top/sides and needed a little modification to fit nicely. This isn't much of an issue if you're shooting landscape.
Because they're dumb light guides, the TTL in your flash functions as it normally would.
The only shot I've got to hand taken with it has blown highlights and was taken at annoyingly high ISO, which I forgot to change after shooting at dusk with a long lens. It was also cropped from a resized image I was using as a desktop background. But here it is anyway:
answered Mar 13 at 15:20
Chris HChris H
3,27511014
3,27511014
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Photography Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fphoto.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f105905%2fwhat-features-to-consider-when-selecting-a-ring-flash%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
1
what do you want to photograph?
– aaaaaa
Mar 13 at 17:28
Insects mainly. Other interest is patterns of leaves or flowers. But, that I manage by moving it indoors where there is sufficient light. With insects, I mean, live ones.
– Anand Mohan
Mar 13 at 23:15