why does nobody care about flash sync?

I am at the same boat with you.

I shoot freeskiing and other action sports a lot and I also would love to be able to sync remotely with higher shutter speeds.

But I have to admit that I am a beginner in flash photography and I have seen a lot of great flash work from other people doing the same kind of shooting as I do. And with normal (slow) sync speeds. Like for example: http://www.danvojtech.cz/
So I guess I have much to learn yet :-).
--
MATiO (CZ)
http://www.MATiO.cz - photo galery
http://www.FreeSkiing.cz - FreeSkiing photos
http://www.flickr.com/photos/matio
 
i agree, i was shooting a horse in action in the field for advertising purposes, and being able to freeze his feet during various paces is important. This needs more than 1/250. I currently have a d70 and sb800 for this but was thinking of the new d300. It is a shame I cannot get a nikon solution to the problem without resorting to the old cameras.
 
I certanly care about flash sync, and low ISO too.

I have to use fill flash at daytime, no not just regular pictures, but on the beach with realy white sand and a lot of sun, therefore 1/500 flash sync for me is better in order to keep the aperture # low.

With an aperture of f16 the flash range could easily be reduced to 2 mtrs. or less, which makes it very dificult for the flash to be effective.

Robby
 
You seem to know all the answers, so why ask the question in your OP? Everybody wants a camera with 1/10000 flash sync, but nobody makes it. Why would that be? Think!

Work around it, whining doesn't help.
re studio strobes & medium format

come on guys, from the photos you should be able to at least
understand that I don't really have the ability to carry around a
studio in my bag. medium format tends to be big and bulky, and same
with studio strobes. i don't have the luxury of being able to drive
to every where we shoot. i often carry a backpack around for a day
(or even for weeks if we travel) riding from place to place. that's
just how it is.
--
Philip

 
a relatively slow shutter sync... you can, effectively, get a double image if not careful...esp with moving images

So shutter speed (sync speed ) can be quite important to some.

As the OP says.. FP is limited in functionality/practice, too

However 1/250 is progress for me from 1/60th. Can only get better can't it?

:)

--
Quote: If you think education is expensive, try ignorance.

Have fun :)
 
I don't like to use flash outdoors, so it's not a consideration for me. I do sometimes do studio setups with flashes and there I have no problem with 1/250s being fastest flash sync. It's certainly better than having 1/60s like in the old days.

If you can shoot at 1/500s or 1/1000s in the outdoors, why do you need the flash in the first place? I would imagine that using natural light would add to the documentary quality of the photograph, instead of adding your own light which takes the shot further away from what a spectator would see.
 
Hi Ilkka, The use of fill flash against a very bright background or even the sun can give unique results. Jamesyo has a valid compaint that I personally agree with.

Take a look at Jacob's gallery: http://www.jacobthephotographer.com/

He has done wonderful work using fill flash against bright outdoors.

Ammar
 
Steve:

I am reading that the 1/320 sync speed can be had with optional speedlights such as the SB-800 as well, but at reduced guide number. We will know in a couple of months. :-)
Guy
I also care especially I shoot a lot of hummingbirds. Being able to
use 1/500 is a big plus. But with the D300, I can still use 1/320.
The D300 simply has too many advantages over my D70, so I am
upgrading.
Guy
http://www.flickr.com/photos/guywong/
OK, maybe I'm not reading this right... under Sync Contact in the
Nikon D300 brochure:

X=1/250 s; flash synchronization at up to 1/320 s (FP) adjustable
with Built-in Speedlight or optional Speedlight (will reduce GN)

Doesn't that mean that the Sync speed is really 1/250s and they've
just given the built in flash the capability of using a focal plane
sync mode to get to 1/320s but with reduced power?

--
-Steve
===================
When everything is coming your way, you're in the wrong lane. ~ Larry
the Cable Guy
 
personally i'd love to see an elec shutter incorporated into the
sensor, along with the mechanical shutter, so you could choose if you
want to use electronic or mechanical shutter (electronic shutter does
have disadvantages), and when you use electronic shutter you can have
a higher non-ttl sync.
I think that most people aren't worried enough about flash sync to live with the disadvantages of the electronic shutter. You suggest having both mechanical and electronic shutter, but that wouldn't solve all of the problems. The electronic shutter would eat up sensor real estate that could be used for other things- larger well depth for better noise/dynamic range, overflow drains to limit blooming, etc. Adding a mechanical shutter won't give that sensor real estate back, and it won't solve the problems that extra space would help with. Note, for instance, that the D70 suffers from blooming and streaking even at slow shutter speeds where it's depending on its mechanical shutter.

So we're left with a tradeoff. One one side you get faster flash sync and maybe the ability to use a less expensive mechanical shutter. On the other side you get reduced blooming and a better tradeoff between sensitivity and noise. Your shooting style means that you want the flash sync, while my style demands low blooming and lower noise. It's not that one of use is right and the other is wrong, it's just that we need different things. Unfortunately for you, you seem to be in the minority.
--

As with all creative work, the craft must be adequate for the demands of expression. I am disturbed when I find craft relegated to inferior consideration; I believe that the euphoric involvement with subject or self is not sufficient to justify the making and display of photographic images. --Ansel Adams
 
Your circumstances are a bit more specialized than mine with your use of the radio controlled triggers. There are two other circumstances I’ve encountered where higher speed flash synchronization really helps:

Extended range fill with bright sun

Fast action under artificial light (on-camera flash)

The 1 stop x-sync electronic shutter speed advantage of the D70 provides about a 40% range advantage over the typical mechanical shutter limit of 1/250s. This can help when reaching across a pool or photographing your kids playing out in the surf. Even when the subject range is close enough using 1/250s, the flash does not need to fire as strong for a given distance when using 1/500s, so the flash can recycle faster.

Nothing freezes fast action motion like an electronic strobe. But for camera mounted flash one's going to get that deer-in-the-headlights lighting effect. Sync speed isn’t a big issue if one can hang lights or mount additional side lights to cover an event where the flashes are the dominant light source.

However, that’s not a practical option for a parent trying to get a nicely illuminated photo in a gym, or under field lights outside at night. You’ve got to take advantage of the available light and augment it when all one has is a single camera mounted flash. A shutter speed of 1/250s works for some conditions, especially if you’re trying to capture motion blur. But I find 1/400s more often works better.

I’ve found that in some gyms I can bounce off a tall white ceiling and achieve uniform lighting in reasonable balance with the available light. There’s no way that’s going to work with FP sync, unless I gang about four SB-800s together.

With the D300 and especially the D3 there is hope that I can dispense with the flash altogether and rely on their greater sensitivity and dynamic range to handle the poor lighting conditions found in elementary school gyms and municipal baseball fields. I’ll just have to get better at dealing with color correction. (Many of those artificial lights are constantly changing color during the electrical line’s AC cycle period, so preset WB isn’t a complete answer.)

When I first read about live preview for the D300 and D3 I thought they must have some sort of electronic shutter capability. Apparently it must not be fast enough -- like an interline CCD. My hopes where dashed when I read further into the specs and saw the old 1/250s second limit.
... and i dont choose to
use nikon flashes anyway (not enough power).
I'm curious. What flashes do you use?

Steve
 
Hi Ilkka, The use of fill flash against a very bright background or
even the sun can give unique results. Jamesyo has a valid compaint
that I personally agree with.

Take a look at Jacob's gallery: http://www.jacobthephotographer.com/

He has done wonderful work using fill flash against bright outdoors.

Ammar
These shots don't look natural to my eye. I understand that there may be a commercial need for such shots but I prefer to stick to natural light outdoors. Less glare and plasticy look. But I understand the complaint from a pro point of view.

I suspect Nikon doesn't implement it on their high end cameras because of technical problems e.g. with evenness of color and brightness across the frame. When the D70 came out initial units had problems with this.
 
I'm curious. What flashes do you use?
Sunpak 383 and Sunpak 555. 383 has a GN of 120 and 555 has GN of 150.

They are very basic flashes but they work well on radio triggers, where all you can do is operate manually (no ITTL).
 
These shots don't look natural to my eye. I understand that there may
be a commercial need for such shots but I prefer to stick to natural
light outdoors. Less glare and plasticy look. But I understand the
complaint from a pro point of view.

I suspect Nikon doesn't implement it on their high end cameras
because of technical problems e.g. with evenness of color and
brightness across the frame. When the D70 came out initial units had
problems with this.
I suspect you do not appriciate my complaint because you have not tried shooting in similar conditions. See first page for some shots. I have limited composition choices (because I have to incorporate the trick, the obstacle, and usually some surroundings).

Because of this, shooting under natural light makes it difficult to get the shadows right - each of those photos on the front page would have resulted in a underexposed, flat rider and bright background if i had attempted to shoot under natural ligght.
 
These shots don't look natural to my eye. I understand that there may
be a commercial need for such shots but I prefer to stick to natural
light outdoors. Less glare and plasticy look.
Fill-flash used on bright sunny days can be done in a way that it is not readily apparent that any flash was used while successfully reducing the exposure range of a scene. The images of the skaters are examples of fill-flash that was probably set between full-flash and -1 stop. Whether you care for the look or not is simply a matter of taste...

I tend to prefer strobe lighting that doesn't draw attention to itself... IMO the best lighting produces photos where it is virtually impossible to see the lighting techniques used to create the image.
 
metz have a flashgun that is good for a GN of 249 (ft) called the 76 MZ-5. not aware of the flash you are talking about.

i am aware of the existence of more powerful flashes. the sunpak 622 is probably more bang for buck than the above flash, with a GN of 200 and about half the price.

re your first post

i'm simply voicing a complaint about whats going on at nikon, since i've seen very little talk about it in the long time ive been on these forums.

at least i'm not whining about how DX is better than FX or that I wish the D3 was DX crop cause FX is useless for sport shooters blah blah blah...
I'm curious. What flashes do you use?
Sunpak 383 and Sunpak 555. 383 has a GN of 120 and 555 has GN of 150.

They are very basic flashes but they work well on radio triggers,
where all you can do is operate manually (no ITTL).
--
Philip

 
Example:

http://cgi.ebay.com/METZ-60-CT-1-FLASH-BATTERY-CHARGER-SYNCH-WARR-USED_W0QQitemZ280148151772QQihZ018QQcategoryZ103420QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem

It´s called Metz 60 CT-x. They produced 60 CT-1 through 60 CT-4. Best try to get the CT-4 (more expensive) which can be used (if memory serves) with iTTL provided you use the right cable. They´re powered by a 6V lead battery providing about 80 flashes at full power. In normal (wedding-style) work you use only a fraction per shot so one battery lasts sheer endless.

http://www.metz.de/en/service_support/service/bedienungsanleitungen/download.124.pdf
http://www.metz.de/en/photo_electronics/flashlights_digital.140.html

About the sync time, the electronic shutters provided too much trouble for mainstream usage. In some circumstances it´s better but the majority was complaining about blooming and streaking with sunset shots.

I do appreciate you´re not whining about DX vs FX :-)))
i am aware of the existence of more powerful flashes. the sunpak 622
is probably more bang for buck than the above flash, with a GN of 200
and about half the price.

re your first post
i'm simply voicing a complaint about whats going on at nikon, since
i've seen very little talk about it in the long time ive been on
these forums.

at least i'm not whining about how DX is better than FX or that I
wish the D3 was DX crop cause FX is useless for sport shooters blah
blah blah...
I'm curious. What flashes do you use?
Sunpak 383 and Sunpak 555. 383 has a GN of 120 and 555 has GN of 150.

They are very basic flashes but they work well on radio triggers,
where all you can do is operate manually (no ITTL).
--
Philip

--
Philip

 
You can also get an accessory for bot CT 60 and CT 45 that's called a 'televorsatz'. It's a plastic tube that clicks onto the head and contains a fresnell lens. It turns the flash into a spotlight with more than double flash output. The system is like 'better beamer', only better. I couldn't find one on ebay just now but once in a while you see them for $20-$40. They're available in many strengths (FOVs of the fesnell). I have two. It's awesome to light a small specific spot with loads of light. I often used it in the past to make book covers for detective novels.

--
Philip

 
Metz CT6 has a GN of 240 (meters).
Wow. Better advise the clients to wear eye protection and sunscreen. :-)

Assumming similar reflectors, that represents a light energy output 43 times that of an SB-800! Are you sure that's not in feet?

Steve
 

Keyboard shortcuts

Back
Top