«

Hi, All.

Many of you are aware of the problems I've had getting
well-exposed, consistent exposed pictures when using
flash on my Nikon Coolpix 5700 with Sunpak's excellent
433D external when shooting cars in dark museum
settings. A few weeks ago, I bought a Nikon 8800 with
Nikon's SB-800 external, but results were even worse,
despite my best efforts, help from the camera store and
help on this NG. So, I returned it for a charge credit.

In a nutshell, I have no problems whatsoever in
daylight, but when I shoot car pictures in museums,
results vary considerably. About 1/3 are OK, another 1/3
are underexposed by 2 f/stops, while the rest are under
by 5-6 stops. I really don't want to get into another
long discussion about why I'm shooting flash and not
available light on a tripod, suffice that I want to.

I've long been enamored with EVF cameras because I could
see instantly if I did or did not get a decent exposure.
But, I'm being lobbied by the camera store and by others
that I'll /never/ get good flash with /any/ Nikon EVF
because their underlying flash exposure systems just
aren't up to the task. Maybe this is bunk or maybe
somebody's DSLR really is the best camera for me.

The camera most often recommended to me right now is
Canon's Digital Rebel XT with DIGIC II. My local store
recommends that I also buy Canon's Speedlite 550EX,
because it has the power I need and is fully adjustable
for EV. I'm not worried about buing a "pig in a poke"
because the store manager will give me a 10-day trial,
as he did with the Nikon 8800.

I'm looking for a recommendation for a new digital
camera, flash. 8 mega pixels is more than enough, I'll
actually be shooting at only 3 or 5 MP. I'm, of course,
interested in sharpness and low noise, which I would
normally expect in any camera in the price range of the
Canon Rebel XT.

I'm also looking for recommendations for a zoom lens for
the Rebel (or other EVF or DSLR) longer than the 28-85mm
equivalent that comes with the Rebel "kit". I'm looking
for something that is at least 35-150mm, preferably 28-
200mm equivalent.

Canon apparently has a wide angle-to-zoom lens to fit my
needs/wants but is pricey (sorry, I can't remember the
model number). I don't want to be "penny wise but dollar
foolish" and buy somebody else's glass, but would like
to get the best quality I can at a reasonable price (who
doesn't, right?)

I'll keep this post short for brevity but will gladly
answer any questions you may have to help guide me in my
quest. Thanks so much in advance.

--
ATM, aka Jerry

> The camera most often recommended to me right now is
> Canon's Digital Rebel XT with DIGIC II. My local store
> recommends that I also buy Canon's Speedlite 550EX,
> because it has the power I need and is fully adjustable
> for EV. I'm not worried about buing a "pig in a poke"
> because the store manager will give me a 10-day trial,
> as he did with the Nikon 8800.

I have a 300D and a 550EX and think that the XT + 550EX would be a very good
combo for you. What the heck; try them for 10 days!

> I'm also looking for recommendations for a zoom lens for
> the Rebel (or other EVF or DSLR) longer than the 28-85mm
> equivalent that comes with the Rebel "kit". I'm looking
> for something that is at least 35-150mm, preferably 28-
> 200mm equivalent.

Look at the Canon 75-300 IS lens. It's a good buy. Here is a shot taken
with that lens and a 300D at full-zoom and hand-held from a moving tram ride
in the Florida Everglades:
http://home.comcast.net/~charlesschu...8/site1056.jpg

Charles Schuler commented courteously...

> I have a 300D and a 550EX and think that the XT
> + 550EX would be a very good combo for you.
> What the heck; try them for 10 days!

Thanks for the fast reply, Charles! I need to be a
little circumspect here, though. I want to try to "do my
homework" before going back to my local store with a
lame "OK if I take another camera out for a test drive?"

> Look at the Canon 75-300 IS lens. It's a good buy.

I assume this is 75-300mm equivalent? What I'm after is
something that goes to 35mm or better still 28mm
equivalent at the wide end, and at least 150mm,
preferably 200mm at the tele end. I really don't want to
lug lenses with me.

Is my need/want even feasible?

> Here is a shot taken with that lens and a 300D at
> full-zoom and hand-held from a moving tram ride in
> the Florida Everglades:

> http://home.comcast.net/
~charlesschuler/wsb/media/291308/sit
> e1056.jpg

Great bird shot, Charles! Do you by chance "know" Ron
Lacey? He's also a terrific bird photographer.

Have you had any experience in museum shooting? Doesn't
necessarily need to be cars, although that's my first
and nearly only love! Museums are always a challenge
since the flash gets almost no help from ambient
lighting and there're plenty of things that can "fool"
the AE, particularly reflections off shiny car paint,
the old wide WSW tires, etc.

--
ATM, aka Jerry

> I assume this is 75-300mm equivalent? What I'm after is
> something that goes to 35mm or better still 28mm
> equivalent at the wide end, and at least 150mm,
> preferably 200mm at the tele end. I really don't want to
> lug lenses with me.

No, it's 1.6 x (equivalent) due to the smaller sensor in the 300D/350D/20D.
I also have an EFS 17-85 (27-135 equivalent) that I can recommend for use
with the 300D/350D/20D.

> Is my need/want even feasible?

Perhaps not.

> Have you had any experience in museum shooting? Doesn't
> necessarily need to be cars, although that's my first
> and nearly only love! Museums are always a challenge
> since the flash gets almost no help from ambient
> lighting and there're plenty of things that can "fool"
> the AE, particularly reflections off shiny car paint,
> the old wide WSW tires, etc.

Car museums allow flash photography whereas art museums do not (each, of
course, sets their own rules). In those that do allow flash, a diffuser or
the use of bounce flash is worth considering.

Charles Schuler commented courteously...

> Car museums allow flash photography whereas art
> museums do not (each, of course, sets their own
rules).
> In those that do allow flash, a diffuser or the use
> of bounce flash is worth considering.

Thanks again, Charles, but a diffuser won't help, as
what I encounter is /deep/ underexposure. Likewise,
bounch flash is infeasible as there isn't anything
overhead to bounch off - ceilings typically 12-15 feet
above the floor.

The real question is whether a Canon XT with their flash
is or is not likely to return well-exposed pictures of
/anything/ in a museum environment.

--
ATM, aka Jerry

"All Things Mopar" <> wrote in message
news:Xns966BA4DC8B0B3ReplyToken@216.196.97.131...

> I'm looking for a recommendation for a new digital
> camera, flash. 8 mega pixels is more than enough, I'll
> actually be shooting at only 3 or 5 MP. I'm, of course,
> interested in sharpness and low noise, which I would
> normally expect in any camera in the price range of the
> Canon Rebel XT.
>

Actually, let me ask first & foremost--why buy an 8 megapixel camera if
you're only going to be using 3 or 5 megapixels of it? You might as well
save a lot of money & get a 3-megapixel camera in the first place. (I've
never understood the point of buying a high-megapixel camera only to not use
all of it, seems like a waste of money to me.) Think a used Nikon Coolpix
990 or 995, they have an external flash connector; with proper adaptation,
you could probably hook up all the Vivitar 283's or 285's you want and you'd
have plenty of flash power.

I don't know that EVF cameras would do any differently than D-SLR cameras.
One thing about Nikon EVFs is that they don't have true TTL flash. They have
a conventional flash sensor mounted in the built-in flash that does the
metering, in that aspect they're like the old-time "classic auto" flashes
where you used "blue" or "red" mode & the corresponding aperture--only with
the Nikon you can use any aperture you please.

The Canon Rebel XT would be fine, and the 550EX would have the power. One
thing, though--the guy said the 550 was fully EV adjustable. Well the
Digital Rebel XT has flash exposure compensation, so that doesn't matter.
You could get the 420EX and still have the ability to vary your flash
output.

One last thing--a D-SLR would be hugely helpful if you shoot without
flash--I know, you said you want flash, but if you find it too problematic
getting enough flash power in such a huge setting, you might end up
resorting to no-flash output. In that case, a D-SLR is hugely advantagoeus
because of the much higher performance in high-ISO situations.

LRH

>
> I'm looking for a recommendation for a new digital
> camera, flash. 8 mega pixels is more than enough, I'll
> actually be shooting at only 3 or 5 MP. I'm, of course,
> interested in sharpness and low noise, which I would
> normally expect in any camera in the price range of the
> Canon Rebel XT.
>
> I'm also looking for recommendations for a zoom lens for
> the Rebel (or other EVF or DSLR) longer than the 28-85mm
> equivalent that comes with the Rebel "kit". I'm looking
> for something that is at least 35-150mm, preferably 28-
> 200mm equivalent.
>
> Canon apparently has a wide angle-to-zoom lens to fit my
> needs/wants but is pricey (sorry, I can't remember the
> model number). I don't want to be "penny wise but dollar
> foolish" and buy somebody else's glass, but would like
> to get the best quality I can at a reasonable price (who
> doesn't, right?)

My own flash experience is limited, but I do know that the 350D is an
excellent camera. I have just bought the Canon 580EX flash - and expect to
get some decent pictures in the right circumstances. I'm not sure that the
museum environment is the right place for a camera mounted flash. If you
can't bounce the flash off an adjacent surface then you are going to have
harsh shadows.

Try the 350D body with a high specfication wide angle lens. I have bought an
L series lens and they really are much much better than the cheaper lenses
(a second is on order). Also. the 350D has a sensor that is capable of using
high ISO without too much noise. A high spec lens and high ISO may help by
allowing you to use flash as fill in only.

John

Larry R Harrison Jr commented courteously...

> Actually, let me ask first & foremost--why buy
> an 8 megapixel camera if you're only going to be
> using 3 or 5 megapixels of it?
[snip]

Thanks so much for the reply, Larry!

The answer to your question is easy: I do /not/ want a
P&S, I want an advanced amateur or "pro-sumer" camera
with all the photometric bells and whistles, good glass,
tight sensors, low noise, etc., etc., and have a budget
of at least $1,400. The fact that I only want to shoot
(today) at 3-5 MP isn't really the issue. My main
interest, for the foreseeble future, is getting reliable
flash exposures of cars in museums as well as excellent
quality in daylight. The mega pixels I shoot at doesn't
mean diddly when it comes to exposure capability.

I know that many will dispute me, but for my purposes -
screen display and /not/ large prints - more than 3 MP
is just wasted CF card space. And, I see no need for RAW
right now, even though I understand why it is
advantageous.

> I don't know that EVF cameras would do any differently
> than D-SLR cameras. One thing about Nikon EVFs is
> that they don't have true TTL flash. They have a
> conventional flash sensor mounted in the built-in
> flash that does the metering, in that aspect they're
> like the old-time "classic auto" flashes where you
> used "blue" or "red" mode & the corresponding aperture
> --only with the Nikon you can use any aperture you
please.

This is true for the Coolpix 5700, but Nikon presumeably
redesigned it's TTL for the 8800, calling it iTTL, which
is why I bought that last month. Alas, it did not come
close to doing the job!

I posted a number of queries on this very subject whilst
I still had the Nikon 8800 under trial. No one could
explain what was going on, so I simply gave up and
returned it. I don't know why an EVF vs. a DSLR could
possibly make any difference, except if my store manager
is right - and Nikon just can't make a flash TTL/AE
system that works.

> The Canon Rebel XT would be fine, and the 550EX
> would have the power. One thing, though--the guy said
> the 550 was fully EV adjustable. Well the Digital
> Rebel XT has flash exposure compensation, so that
> doesn't matter. You could get the 420EX and still
> have the ability to vary your flash output.

I asked about the 420EX at my local camera store. I know
the manager, and I think he is a knowledgeable, reliable
dude, albeit one with a sales target. It is /he/ that
says the 420 isn't enough.

Where, besides dprewview.com, would you suggest I
investigate the various Canon flashes?

>
> One last thing--a D-SLR would be hugely helpful
> if you shoot without flash--I know, you said you
> want flash, but if you find it too problematic
> getting enough flash power in such a huge setting,
> you might end up resorting to no-flash output.
> In that case, a D-SLR is hugely advantagoeus
> because of the much higher performance in high-ISO
> situations.

Definitely! But, again, the problem is /not/ getting
enough flash power - my Sunpak 433D has GN=120 and the
Nikon SB-800 I used with the 8800 had GN=100. The
problem was that the flash pulse was shutting down
prematurely, underexposing the image.

For brevity I didn't mention my year-2000 FujiFilm 4900,
which did an outstanding job being it only had a small
built-in speedlight. I also tested my wife's Kodak 6330
($150) and my daughter's Kokak 7000 ($200) - each
performed flawlessly in the same museum shoots that both
my Nikon 5700 and the 8800 failed so miserably at
(within their flash range, of course).

That's why I simply refuse to believe that competant
pro-sumer cameras are incapable of good flash exposures,
particularly when I set up very detailed, elaborate
tests varying both camera and flash EV, ISO, metering
modes, etc., for both my 5700 and 8800, but could /not/
get good results.

The camera store guy was willing to take back the 8800
"no questions asked" because he'd predicted it would
fail. Now, the $64,000 question is: Why?

Thanks again for your insights.

--
ATM, aka Jerry

eatmorepies commented courteously...

> My own flash experience is limited, but I do know
> that the 350D is an excellent camera. I have just
> bought the Canon 580EX flash - and expect to get
> some decent pictures in the right circumstances.

> I'm not sure that the museum environment is the
> right place for a camera mounted flash.

John, I agree that museums nor anyplace else are not
good places to shoot with only one flash mounted atop
the camera. But, at the risk of sounded like an ingrate
for refusing your help and advice, the problem /still/
is underexposure. I have no complaints whatsoever with
flash glare or any of the other limitations of the way I
choose to shoot my cars.

> If you can't bounce the flash off an adjacent surface
> then you are going to have harsh shadows.

Yes, I will, but I am a "documentary" photographer, not
an artist. Hence my goal is to capture the car "in all
its glory" without regard to how "dramatic" or well-
composed the photos are. Thus, while I don't like harsh
shadows better than the next person, they don't bother
me nearly enough to do anything about them.

> Try the 350D body with a high specfication wide angle
> lens. I have bought an L series lens and they really
> are much much better than the cheaper lenses (a
> second is on order). Also. the 350D has a sensor
> that is capable of using high ISO without too much
> noise. A high spec lens and high ISO may help by
> allowing you to use flash as fill in only.

I don't understand what you mean by "high
specificication wide angle lens". What I want is
something in the range of 35mm-200mm equivalent. The
long end is for outdoor shooting of both cars and
general subjects, not the cars in the museums, where
wide angle-to-normal is normally necessary. I just don't
want buy nor haul around a bunch of lenses.

Please explain your take on "fill flash". I understand
the term and can do it but, again, the /issue/ is a
given camera's ability to properly expose images
consistently, /not/ reducing harsh shadows or much
anything else.

I apologize again for perhaps being abrupt with you, I
really don't mean to sound like a twit. It is just that
I am /so/ frustrated in not being able to explain what I
need/want without people giving me Photography 101
lessons. I appreciate that, of course, but it doesn't do
much for me if I can't get reliable exposures in the
first place.

--
ATM, aka Jerry

"All Things Mopar" <> wrote in message
news:Xns966BBAB73264EReplyToken@216.196.97.131...
>
> I know that many will dispute me, but for my purposes -
> screen display and /not/ large prints - more than 3 MP
> is just wasted CF card space. And, I see no need for RAW
> right now, even though I understand why it is
> advantageous.

I am stressing to be courteous here, but I am one of those people. Frankly,
I don't think cameras should give even users the OPTION to shoot at lower
resolutions. JPEG full-sized or RAW, that's it. If you don't need more than
3 or 5 megapixels of resolution, it's a total waste of resources to buy that
much & not use it. Sort of reminds me of those people who buy Corvettes and
never go above 35 mph. I'm like--WHY!!

I do apologize if I'm being a hard-one about that. CF card space is cheap,
so is CD storage on your computer. If your CF card is at least 512
megabytes, you can get over 150 or so photos even at Large/Fine JPEG.

You never know what you may use the photo for. It could end up being
published, or asked to be blown up if you're doing this for a client. In
that case, 3 megapixels isn't going to cut it. If 5 is enough, then maybe
the Canon EOS300D (the OLD Digital Rebel) should be considered as it shoots
at 6 and is a bit cheaper than the new Digital Rebel XT.

If you really want the SLR experience but no more than 3 megapixels, try
finding a used Canon EOS D30. That's a 3.5 megpixel D-SLR which you can find
used for almost nothing, right at $350. It would use any Canon flash like
the 550 or 420, too.

One other thing, too--if you go for any of the Canons and shoot in Av mode,
be prepared--the Canons are weird in that they assume "slow sync flash" in
Av mode--a characteristic I find peculiar. The other brands have "slow sync"
as a particular mode you deliberately enter into--otherwise, it keeps the
shutter speed near X-sync so you don't get blur. The Canons enter "slow
sync" in Av and it can lead to blur. (Except for the "old" Digital Rebel
without the Wasia hack, you can override this with a custom function.)

LRH