Rant on!! A100 and flash exposure!!

I have just returned from a night at the in laws, and am once again stewing from the inability of my a100 to take decent, CONSISTENT, flash photos. I have been through this forum and read thread after thread on the flash problems, and I am just TIRED of having to guess and reshoot photos because the camera/flash can't seem to get it's act together. I have tried adding flash comp, subtracting flash comp, changing the settings from auto to fill flash, changing from pre flash ttl to ADI flash, you name it, I've tried it..pop up flash vs. accessory flash, etc. etc. etc...ARRGH!!

I know I'm not this stupid in photography, I've been shooting for over 20 years and I can't for the life of me figure this out.....and to top it all off, a friend at the in laws had a D40 she didn't even KNOW HOW TO USE , and she still got better flash shots!! I am THIS close to trading everything in and starting over w/ Nikon, but the expense is the only thing stopping me right now.

I just want a well exposed, sharp flash photo that I don't have to take 10 minutes adjusting settings to get.....

PLEASE, some one tell me the A700 has resolved this issue....I am so frustrated with this, I'm starting to look elsewhere...........

Thanks for hearing me out, I needed to get that off my chest......
--
Sony A100
Sigma 17-35 APO 2.8/4.5
Sony HVL-F56AM Flash
Minolta 600si
Minolta 28-105 3.5
Sigma 70-200 2.8 APO
Sigma 2x Converter APO
Minolta 20mm 2.8

Beating a dead horse here, I have been all through this countless times myself. I agree that it should not be as difficult as you say.

Get ready to be told that it is your fault, it is up to the shooter. Sorry but that is what many responders to your post will end up telling you. I have argued my point and complained to Sony myself. I have posted shots on here as have others making counterpoints when they don't even possess the A100 themselves. Others will tell you that you should just accept it and, you dummy you should just spend $1300.00 more (US) to take a decent flash picture. Of course I'm talking about buying the A700 body. Unfortunately it doesn't shoot as sharp without tweaks and it doesn't actually shoot an actual "RAW" shot without applying Noise Reduction automatically.

I'm dealing with the shoe mounted flash issue the best I can until I see how the next Sony body performs. I'm wearing my life vest but haven't jumped ship as of yet.

I hope Sony gets their next camera lined out and corrects these problems form the past.

As others have stated, the Metz 54MZ-4i flash almost completely solves the issues you spoke of. My Metz is the first choice over my F56AM in most situations I run into. Unless you are very experienced or LUCKY you will probably struggle with the A100 and the Sony flash. Good luck and keep trying.

Merry Christmas,
Stephen
http://www.stephenhane.com

But it's not your fault. The A100 can't use TTL flash. Period. Just like Stephen mentioned. Don't let people make you think it has to do with you, the user. All the problems you faced are mentioned by many many other experienced photographers. In the past I've tried several different A100 bodies with different Sony flashes all leading to one conclusion. The A100 does a very bad job with flashing.

It's a camera flaw. Which seems to be solved with the A700 BTW. Just get rid of the Sony flash and buy the Metz54. Or any other Metz type. They just released (I think the Metz48) for a very reasonable price.

If the Metz hadn't been there I would have left the Sony system. Just cannot afford to miss oppportunities becasue of heavy (2 stops or more!) underexposure.

So it's not needed to buy the A700. Which is a great camera BTW and I do not agree with Stephen on that one.

--
Today's oppressed become tomorrow's oppressors...

I have also posted on this subject. It does get very aggravating because the flash exposure on the A100 is so inconsistent. I found that using my F36 flash with an omnibounce diffuser at a 45 degree angle, gives me the best results. I have not tried the Metz flash but several others have said it works well with the A100.

kennyf said:

I just want a well exposed, sharp flash photo that I don't have to
take 10 minutes adjusting settings to get.....

PLEASE, some one tell me the A700 has resolved this issue....I am so
frustrated with this, I'm starting to look elsewhere...........

Click to expand...

Metz (54 MZ-3 and MZ-4) solved this problem years ago.....

--
Leitz (Klaas Bloem)

My 'toys' are in my profile

kennyf said:

I have just returned from a night at the in laws, and am once again
stewing from the inability of my a100 to take decent, CONSISTENT,
flash photos. I have been through this forum and read thread after
thread on the flash problems, and I am just TIRED of having to guess
and reshoot photos because the camera/flash can't seem to get it's
act together. I have tried adding flash comp, subtracting flash comp,
changing the settings from auto to fill flash, changing from pre
flash ttl to ADI flash, you name it, I've tried it..pop up flash vs.
accessory flash, etc. etc. etc...ARRGH!!

Click to expand...

Hi Kenny,

I've been there and done that, and as Stephen (2nd post) mentioned, Metz flash will save you a lot of aggrevation. To me the A100, Flash performance was one of it's weak points, for exactly the same reasons you have stated, inconsistent results of under/over exposure, and for me lazy eyes. The easiest most cost effective work around is to get the Metz Flash. The most expensive, as Stephen points out is to purchase the A700... !

I totally understand your frustration. But the A700 has indeed fixed this issue, I no longer have inconsistent exposures nor does my niece suffer from lazy eyes!

Although I was able to "workaround" these issues by using a flash diffuser (Gary Fong's whaletail) and having my niece pre-blink before the shot. I personally did not wish to work this way any longer and instead of buying a Metz, I picked up the A700.

Bottom line, I'm not telling you to purchase an A700, because there are other cost effective solutions available but as you're staying with the A100, you'll need to work around the "system"... Metz, Flash diffuser and blink before shot....

Good Luck!

kennyf said:

I know I'm not this stupid in photography, I've been shooting for
over 20 years and I can't for the life of me figure this out.....and
to top it all off, a friend at the in laws had a D40 she didn't even
KNOW HOW TO USE , and she still got better flash shots!! I am THIS
close to trading everything in and starting over w/ Nikon, but the
expense is the only thing stopping me right now.

I just want a well exposed, sharp flash photo that I don't have to
take 10 minutes adjusting settings to get.....

PLEASE, some one tell me the A700 has resolved this issue....I am so
frustrated with this, I'm starting to look elsewhere...........

Thanks for hearing me out, I needed to get that off my chest......
--
Sony A100
Sigma 17-35 APO 2.8/4.5
Sony HVL-F56AM Flash
Minolta 600si
Minolta 28-105 3.5
Sigma 70-200 2.8 APO
Sigma 2x Converter APO
Minolta 20mm 2.8

Click to expand...

--
-Alex

From the minds of Minolta to the imagination of Sony, Alpha, like no other.

http://www.pbase.com/lonewolf69

Thanks all for replying...To clarify, I ENJOY using my Alpha, and have gotten some really great photos (IMHO, ) but I get an anxiety attack every time that cursed flash comes out. Now, I understand the METZ flash has basically solved this problem, but this will require yet another investment in the system to the tune of almost $400!!

I have been looking at the A700, and was looking to upgrade, and IF this issue is truly solved with this camera, I would do this rather then spending ANOTHER $400. on a new flash. (if the FV56 works fine on the 700)

I am still seriously considering leaving SONY for good, but the $$$$$$ to get me up to a similar setup is scary......stay tuned, I might have some stuff for sale!!

Thanks again for the help....

--
Sony A100
Sony 18-70 3.5
Sony FV56 Flash
Minolta 600si
Minolta 28-105 3.5
Sigma 70-200 2.8 APO
Sigma 2x Converter APO
Minolta 20mm 2.8

I saw a good used Metz 54MZ-4 on KEHdotCOM last week for $225.00 even if you get a Nikon or Canon one on eBay a simple module change makes it a KM/Sony flash. The modules are like $50-60. Mine had a Hassy module that I sold immediately to offset the purchase. I got mine used for $200. New with warranty is always better of course. Ultimately the Metz wins for me because it is interchangeable between brands of DSLR bodies, that is forward thinking!

--
Keep it real,
Stephen
http://www.stephenhane.com

kennyf said:

Thanks all for replying...To clarify, I ENJOY using my Alpha, and
have gotten some really great photos (IMHO, ) but I get an anxiety
attack every time that cursed flash comes out. Now, I understand the
METZ flash has basically solved this problem, but this will require
yet another investment in the system to the tune of almost $400!!

I have been looking at the A700, and was looking to upgrade, and IF
this issue is truly solved with this camera, I would do this rather
then spending ANOTHER $400. on a new flash. (if the FV56 works fine
on the 700)

Click to expand...

Here are two links from my A700 with F56 flash...

Real world photos not TEST shots
http://www.pbase.com/lonewolf69/a700_flash_pictures&page=all

Test shots for Stephen (Post #2)
http://www.pbase.com/lonewolf69/new_a700_flash_test

The shots in the first URL were done with FLASH straight on with NO BOUNCING and WHITE SATIN/SILK dresses, using ADI. On the A100, it would have been severely under exposed...

The shots in the 2nd series with done on a TRIPOD, for the bouquet. dim backbround due to TOTAL darkness, the A700 was able to nail AF in total darkness and expose the bouguet really well, harsher shadow = no diffuser, so shadow equals diffuser and lightened background is with chandelier lit overhead...

So yes, I'm EXTREMELY happy with the A700 for FLASH photos, sometihng the A100 SHOULD have been able to do without my spending the $$$ for a better camera, which is a very VERY valid concern that Stephen has. With the A700, I was able to shoot the FLASH the way other cameras without having to worry about over/under exposure...

Good Luck!

--
-Alex

From the minds of Minolta to the imagination of Sony, Alpha, like no other.

http://www.pbase.com/lonewolf69

hanephotographycom said:

I saw a good used Metz 54MZ-4 on KEHdotCOM last week for $225.00 even
if you get a Nikon or Canon one on eBay a simple module change makes
it a KM/Sony flash. The modules are like $50-60. Mine had a Hassy
module that I sold immediately to offset the purchase. I got mine
used for $200. New with warranty is always better of course.
Ultimately the Metz wins for me because it is interchangeable between
brands of DSLR bodies, that is forward thinking!

Click to expand...

Hi Stephen,

Did SONY make good on their promise and deliver another F56 flash for you to test out? If so how did it work out for you?

Just curious...

--
-Alex

From the minds of Minolta to the imagination of Sony, Alpha, like no other.

http://www.pbase.com/lonewolf69

lonewolf69 said:

The shots in the first URL were done with FLASH straight on with NO
BOUNCING and WHITE SATIN/SILK dresses, using ADI. On the A100, it
would have been severely under exposed...

Click to expand...

{snip}

lonewolf69 said:

So yes, I'm EXTREMELY happy with the A700 for FLASH photos, sometihng
the A100 SHOULD have been able to do without my spending the $$$ for
a better camera, which is a very VERY valid concern that Stephen has.
With the A700, I was able to shoot the FLASH the way other cameras
without having to worry about over/under exposure...

Click to expand...

I wouldn't describe the output from the A700 as shown as being how other cameras behave. Actually, it could be described as being defective (ignoring all user responsibility) given how the white clothes have been blown out.

However, it seems that type of output is what many Sony users want from their cameras so Sony might be best advised to just set all future cameras that way and keep the users likewise extremely happy.

It would be nice if they could offer to reset A100s but they most likely will not. So it is probably the Metz or the A700 going forward.

Good luck to the OP. Perhaps he could try to ask Sony to reset the camera to produce the same output as the A700.

--
http://dakanji.com

I've only been a Sony dslr forum member for about a year, the entire time I've owned the a100. What camera do you use? I've noticed that you jump all over the forum brand map and seem to post onerous comments that iritate end users of whatever brand forum that you visit. I've noticed that your comments on the Sony forum are often meaningless and add nothing to the educational process that forums are intended to be. Maybe you could stay on the brand forum that you use and try to "contribute" something of value to your own people.

That's why I would like to know what camera do you actually use.

CHaCHa

kennyf said:

I am THIS close to trading everything in and starting over w/ Nikon, but the
expense is the only thing stopping me right now.

Click to expand...

I ultimately made that move--for a number of reasons--and though I occassionally miss the SSS, I'm much happier with my Nikon gear. I have a D80 and a $105 SB-400 Nikon flash that absolutely cannot miss. The difference between Nikon's flash implementation and everyone else's (particularly Canon's) is stunning.

lonewolf69 said:

So yes, I'm EXTREMELY happy with the A700 for FLASH photos, sometihng
the A100 SHOULD have been able to do without my spending the $$$ for
a better camera, which is a very VERY valid concern that Stephen has.
With the A700, I was able to shoot the FLASH the way other cameras
without having to worry about over/under exposure...

Good Luck!

--
-Alex

Click to expand...

Is this problem present only when using the A100's "internal" flash? ...or with mounted flashes also? I have a "legacy" Minolta 5600HS flash unit with which (on my A100) I see none of these mentioned exposure problems. This with TTL exposure control.

Larry

Well.... I am not really considering trading my camera for something new right now, but it certainly IS a thought!

I too spent much of the day shooting pics of the grandkids, relatives, etc. My pics, as well, were VERY inconsistent.... one would be overexposed by maybe 1.5, and the next would be underexposed by the same amount. I would adjust for the 2/3 underexposure (as suggested on another thread in this forum), and would get a great shot or three, then for some ungodly reason, the next three would be over or under exposed!

And I waited for the flash to fully recharge in between!!!

What galled me, is something similar to the OP.... the brother-in-law has a little P&S Olympus. EVERY shot he took was perfectly exposed every time!!!! (and he had live view!!!!.... not that I want it, but hey, what the heck!?).

It was very frustrating to have so many poorly exposed images. I took maybe 500 altogether, but only kept about 150.... all the others were poorly exposed.

I am glad I am not paying for developing!

I have been shooting and developing since 1958!!!! I have had numerous cameras, and had the Pentax LX for 20 years. Yeah, it had TTL exposure, but that makes this all that much sadder that a 25 year old camera produced substantially superioru images time and time again.

Hell, I used to shoot weddings regularly, and always had great exposures.... now, the facial expressions may have been odd at times, but I had greatly exposed pictures.... even if the wrong thing was in focus!

I used the Maxxum 5 for about 6 years, and had good results there.

I find myself frustrated with flash so often with the A100. Probably my biggest headache with the camera.

So, I can really, really sympathize with the OP!!!

I too want to know if the A700 does significantly better. I am saving up for a new camera, and hope to get something in a year or so. I will NOT be going Nikon or Canon, but will be considering the Pentax and Samsung as well as the A700, and will definitely be going the Pentax/Samsung way if the Sony offering has the same level of flash production. The sharpness of the lenses is great, but the basic operation of the flash is getting to me! This thread just confirmed my feelings.

And, no, available light was/is not an option. I tried it, and with the level of light inside at these events is being so low, I had perfectly exposed blurs most of the time. It would be great if the subjects were adults, but there were about 10 grandkids and their cousins, all in the 2-8 range. Available light is NOT realistic for what I take pictures of a lot of the time.

--
Gil
Sardis, BC
Canada

snave said:

I have also posted on this subject. It does get very aggravating
because the flash exposure on the A100 is so inconsistent. I found
that using my F36 flash with an omnibounce diffuser at a 45 degree
angle, gives me the best results. I have not tried the Metz flash but
several others have said it works well with the A100.

Click to expand...

My best results, too, are with the Omni-Bounce diffuser off the ceiling... but
I have found that 45 degrees does not work best for me.... to get even
coverage, I have to point it straight up.

But, I STILL get too many NON-usable shots!!! (See my other rant.)

--
Gil
Sardis, BC
Canada

Alex, I sent the sample shots to the Sony guy and he confirmed they got them. He offered another F56AM for testing IF I got back about it by the 20th but I didn't have a chance for extensive testing until after then. They are on holiday so I haven't talked any more about it. I tested my own F56AM EXTENSIVELY for all my family Christmas casual shots with various settings and diffusers. I did seem to have some luck when fiddling with the EV and FC while using the double blinky ADI and the Stoffen Omni-Bounce diffuser at around 45 degrees.

I'm going through my 2GB of shots from today, later and will see how it did under closer inspection. I'm not pleased with how easily it was "tricked" but it is usable if you can make many adjustments on the fly and keep track of what worked and what didn't. I used my Stroboframe 120 this time and a mini ball head, then the Sony flash on its off camera cable. I might post some if I see any good examples of missed shots that were due to the A100 problem.

I'm probably going to stick with my Metz but I wanted to see how the sony did in a noncritical situation.
I doubt the problem is my flash even though Sony guy thought it probably was.
See you later,
Stephen

http://www.stephenhane.com

Leitz said:

Metz (54 MZ-3 and MZ-4) solved this problem years ago.....

Click to expand...

Not really.... you just side-stepped it!

--
Gil
Sardis, BC
Canada

consider using bounce flash? Adding a deflector card or difusing hood?

chacha1 said:

I've only been a Sony dslr forum member for about a year, the entire
time I've owned the a100. What camera do you use? I've noticed that
you jump all over the forum brand map and seem to post onerous
comments that iritate end users of whatever brand forum that you
visit. I've noticed that your comments on the Sony forum are often
meaningless and add nothing to the educational process that forums
are intended to be. Maybe you could stay on the brand forum that you
use and try to "contribute" something of value to your own people.

That's why I would like to know what camera do you actually use.

Click to expand...

Dear Chacha1

I don't see this site as being divided into "peoples". As for whether some might get irritated by my posts, well that is up to them.

You infer that what I worte is meaningless so let us go over it.

chacha1 said:

chacha1 said:

I wouldn't describe the output from the A700 as shown as being how other cameras behave. Actually, it could be described as being defective (ignoring all user responsibility) given how the white clothes have been blown out.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

The question you should be asking yourself is whether those whites are indeed blown out or not and whether other cameras from other brands would have exposed in the same way or not.

chacha1 said:

chacha1 said:

However, it seems that type of output is what many Sony users want from their cameras so Sony might be best advised to just set all future cameras that way and keep the users likewise extremely happy.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

If one's customers want something, isn't it a good idea to simply give it to them?

chacha1 said:

chacha1 said:

It would be nice if they could offer to reset A100s but they most likely will not. So it is probably the Metz or the A700 going forward.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

I cannot figure out what you find objectionable in that statement. I think most will agree with me that Sony is not likely to offer a reset for the A100.

chacha1 said:

chacha1 said:

Good luck to the OP. Perhaps he could try to ask Sony to reset the camera to produce the same output as the A700.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Again I am baffled at what you find distasteful about this.

As for the camera I use, don't you think that is rather irrelevant when the issues I have post on are simple middle of the road issues? Try to get past viewing posters in relation to camera user clans and perhaps then you might see a bit more meaning in stuff.

Happy New Year.

--
http://dakanji.com