Flashbulbs in arenas are telltale signs of beginners?

You're confusing guide number and range. The guide number of the 550ex is 180 feet. To get the range out of this you divide this number by your aperature. If you have an f/4 lens your range is 45 feet. This works only for ISO 100 however.

If you're running ISO 50 here's the math:

(50/100)^2 = .707

So now you multiply 45 feet by .707 and get 32 feet. Fill in whatever ISO you're running at in place of the 50 above.

Jason

mike savad said:

my 550 ex has a range of 180ft. i havn't had the pleasure to see if
it can really fire at that range. but at normal power i know i can
fire at least 50ft as a fill flash.

Click to expand...

AussieAndrew said:

OK I'll bite - Anyone got an example ?

Click to expand...

Here's some example photos I made comparing the internal flash with the 420ex. I turned off the lights inside the house and the yard light so it was really totally dark out there. You can see the fairly dramatic difference between the internal and external flash. Here is the URL:
http://www.pbase.com/fotoman/flash

How funny, I was watching the semi finals of the world cup at work the other day when I brought this same topic up.

To be honest, I really think most people just don't know or care what their camera does. i.e. They want a device that promises great photo's with the click of one button.

Few of the flashes you see (if any) from the crowd in a stadium are people thinking in terms of how far their flash rating can be pushed.

Afterall, for those of you living in a major city, look up at night at the observation platforms in high skyscrapers, and all the flashes that go off there. The height of the observation deck on the CNN tower is 342m (1,122feet for those people in other dimensions) Now, does any photographer really think that their flash will:

a) light up the entire city of Toronto
b) light up at least the streets below
or c) do anything but reflect back into the camera

;O)

These are the same lads at the stadium.

Jo'

--
For those inclined, I can be found here:
http://www.pbase.com/jchambers
or
http://www.photosig.com/users.php?id=3042

--

Brian D. Schneider said:

Another sign of a beginner is calling them flash"bulbs"

Click to expand...

I'll watch the episode again and see if they actually used the word 'flashbulbs', although the word gives the sentence a nice rhythm.

One variable people don't always remember is that many of the real cheap cameras don't even let you override the flash to turn it off.

Jason

Jo' Chambers said:

How funny, I was watching the semi finals of the world cup at work
the other day when I brought this same topic up.

To be honest, I really think most people just don't know or care
what their camera does. i.e. They want a device that promises great
photo's with the click of one button.

Few of the flashes you see (if any) from the crowd in a stadium are
people thinking in terms of how far their flash rating can be
pushed.

Afterall, for those of you living in a major city, look up at night
at the observation platforms in high skyscrapers, and all the
flashes that go off there. The height of the observation deck on
the CNN tower is 342m (1,122feet for those people in other
dimensions) Now, does any photographer really think that their
flash will:

a) light up the entire city of Toronto
b) light up at least the streets below
or c) do anything but reflect back into the camera

;O)

These are the same lads at the stadium.

Jo'

--
For those inclined, I can be found here:
http://www.pbase.com/jchambers
or
http://www.photosig.com/users.php?id=3042

Click to expand...

Gus Stangeland said:

Here's some example photos I made comparing the internal flash with
the 420ex. I turned off the lights inside the house and the yard
light so it was really totally dark out there. You can see the
fairly dramatic difference between the internal and external flash.
Here is the URL:
http://www.pbase.com/fotoman/flash

Click to expand...

QED.

Excellent examples.

No wonder the flash costs so much - that's a lot of light.

So long as you use that power for good instead of evil.....

Makes you think about where this thread started from - proving how useless the standard flash of a camera is when going for distance.

You'd be lucky to find 10% of the crowd using anything close to the 420 ex, and hence a fancy flash display for the benefit of video cameras and a TV audience.

cheers,
Aussue Andrew

--
G2 photos - http://www.pbase.com/aussieandrew/galleries
Melbourne, Australia

mike savad said:

problem is, you may be able to hold still, but the player won't.
the flash will fire at about 100ft or so.

Click to expand...

Verrrry few flashes work well at 100 ft.--operative word is WELL!!!

mike savad said:

my 550 ex has a range of 180ft. i havn't had the pleasure to see if
it can really fire at that range.

Click to expand...

Mike, there is no such thing as saying "my flash has a range of XXX feet."

The "180" you were referring to is the flash GUIDE NUMBER at (and this is IMPORTANT) at ISO 100, Measured in feet (guide number in meters is different) and at the max flash zoom (not the lens but the flash zoom).

Ergo, a higher ISO is going to have a higher guide # and a lower ISO a lower guide #. Also, if you are shooting at a wider angle than 105mm (35mm equiv) the guide number will decrease.

Also, remember the light varies as the square of the distance --it is not a linear function.

Mike, I don't like climbing over you but you're a prolific poster and many times you come up with stuff like this. Why not lay off the posts for awhile and read up on the BASIC stuff before you post and give out erroneous info that newbies may take to heart.
--
**** S, Temecula, CA
'Capturing The Essence'

I guess this shows that people read what they want to out of a post. I never read anything about on-board flashes in the original poster's comments. Later, after I mentioned off-board flashes, he still didn't say he meant on-board flashes.

AussieAndrew said:

Makes you think about where this thread started from - proving how
useless the standard flash of a camera is when going for distance.

Click to expand...

Hi,

Just had to add my .02 to this.

This is a truly great forum that I enjoy and learn much from. Generally speaking I have been extremely impressed with the courtesy and manners of the posters when responding to questions that some may call uninformed [read stupid].

Lets keep in mind that anyone who is regularly browsing a forum such as this is somewhat of a photography enthusiast and has decided to spend some (and in some cases a lot) of their time in learning and experimenting with photography.

But also realize that we are in the vast minority. The vast majority of the people that are using cameras (digi or film) don't care about anything but getting a picture. For many people, the simpler the better. They couldn't be bothered by having to adjust anything on the cam.

Now I know I am speaking in generalities here. There are probably plenty of regular visitors to this forum who have a circle of friends who are very technologically astute, or who work in a technical environment where many of the employees are of the same ilk, but, for the most part, the general populace knows nothing (and in many instances couldn't give a hoot) about guide numbers, ISO or anything else other than point and shoot.

For what its worth I've been considering the purchase of the 420ex for my G2, but I'm not sure if I want to justify the expense right now. But I LOL when I read the previous poster's observation of someone using it in the bounce position in the open air arena.

I hope I wouldn't laugh at someone else doing it, but it's hilarious to think that
could have been me : ) - thanks for the (not so obvious for some) tip!

And keep up the great assistance to many of us newbies (while quietly chuckling to yourselves)

George Chang said:

Hi Everyone,

Thanks for everyone who helped me understand how my 420EX will
enhance my G2 photos (when they both arrive!).

Now that I have this knowledge about flash range, etc, I have a
burning question to ask.

In the Olympic Opening Ceremonies, for example, which takes place
at night, I constantly see many flashbulbs going off in the stands
as the event unfolds. Same thing at NBA arenas where they turn off
the lights for player introductions. The crowd is going wild and
the flashbulbs are going off everywhere.

What are they thinking? Do they think the flash on their camera is
going to illuminate the arena or the stadium for their photo? From
what I have learned, the best way to go would be to disable flash
and have a tripod. Am I right about this?

There is also a battery commercial out now where we see an overhead
shot of a stadium at night and everyone is taking pictures (with
flashbulbs going off) but eventually only one flash has the power
to remain operational. Good battery. But it seems like he's
wasting more film then all the rest of the people.

Perhaps there is a big difference between film and digital? I know
my S100 can hardly capture anything in low light, so no light is
out of the question. But perhaps it turns out well in film? What
do you think?

George

Click to expand...

**** S said:

mike savad said:

problem is, you may be able to hold still, but the player won't.
the flash will fire at about 100ft or so.

Click to expand...

Verrrry few flashes work well at 100 ft.--operative word is WELL!!!

**** S said:

my 550 ex has a range of 180ft. i havn't had the pleasure to see if
it can really fire at that range.

Click to expand...

Mike, there is no such thing as saying "my flash has a range of XXX
feet."
The "180" you were referring to is the flash GUIDE NUMBER at (and
this is IMPORTANT) at ISO 100, Measured in feet (guide number in
meters is different) and at the max flash zoom (not the lens but
the flash zoom).
Ergo, a higher ISO is going to have a higher guide # and a lower
ISO a lower guide #. Also, if you are shooting at a wider angle
than 105mm (35mm equiv) the guide number will decrease.
Also, remember the light varies as the square of the distance
--it is not a linear function.
Mike, I don't like climbing over you but you're a prolific poster
and many times you come up with stuff like this. Why not lay off
the posts for awhile and read up on the BASIC stuff before you post
and give out erroneous info that newbies may take to heart.
--
**** S, Temecula, CA
'Capturing The Essence'

Click to expand...

you do know that people are allowed to be wrong once in a while.

---Mike Savad

--
http://www.pbase.com/savad/

http://www.photosig.com/userphotos.php?id=9050

I did think it was a bit excessive since I already pointed out the error. My concern is giving people correct information, not making a big deal about how people made a mistake.

Jason

mike savad said:

you do know that people are allowed to be wrong once in a while.

---Mike Savad

--
http://www.pbase.com/savad/
Added - More Closeups, Flowers, Buildings, and Still life.

http://www.photosig.com/userphotos.php?id=9050

Click to expand...

Jason Hutchinson said:

Jason Hutchinson said:

Makes you think about where this thread started from - proving how
useless the standard flash of a camera is when going for distance.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Does it need to be stated explicitly? What percentage of people at a large stadium do you think are using an external flash? Certainly not more than 10%, maybe closer to 5%.

Mark

Chrissy said:

Chrissy said:

Another sign of a beginner is calling them flash"bulbs"

Click to expand...

I'll watch the episode again and see if they actually used the word
'flashbulbs', although the word gives the sentence a nice rhythm.

Click to expand...

Actually, "flash bulb" is not a sign of a beginner, but rather an very old seasoned one. That term is a holdover from the pre-strobe days. Pros would use falsh-bulbs the size of household lamps. I've got a collection of unused ones that will screw into a normal lightbulb socket. Those can put out quite a wallop. I did a practical joke one day by substituting one ine a regular lamp.
Any way, strobes use a bulb too. Just shaped a little different.