How useful is a flash for the non-professional?

Throwing the question out there for opinions....

For the non-professional that wants to take every day pictures, landscape shots, maybe some wildlife photos every now and then, pics of the family/kids, etc. how useful is a flash....more useful than putting that money towards better glass?

I am a non-professional, all of my pictures fall strictly to the following 2 categories:

• Pictures of family/kids around house/park/vacations
• Hobby pictures that I have time to setup, play wiht, experiment on how I like it to look.

For the first item I am finding my SB700 a must. It really evens out exposure on a sunny day out in the snow... my kid no longer looks like a black silouette against white snow. For indoors, flash is must for anythign that moves, even a 35 or 50mm 1.8 lens will not get you out of motion blur territory, so while you may still get decent low light shots of adults willing to sit still you need to up ISO and have very thin DOF. A flash is really what you need, espeically a bounce one.

All that said, the SB700 is a pain in the a$$ to carry on the camera, it is almost as big as my D3100

It's not professional vs non-professional photography, it's really bad vs. good photography.

What proper flash does in photography is remove dark shadows from a face that occurs even on a bright day, gets rid of the ridiculous requirement to have the sun behind the photographer, making everyone squint in the photo.

A separate flash which some people treat like it's an anvil allows - of course more power - and the ability to diffuse the light or bounce off a ceiling, making a natural photo indoors or the evening rather than the very amateur blast in the face of the subject with glare and then the black background.

I always say, always use flash in people/portrait photography.

--
http://www.sportsshooter.com/cyadmark
Ann Arbor, MI USA

Equipment in profile

mountws1 said:

Throwing the question out there for opinions....

For the non-professional that wants to take every day pictures, landscape shots, maybe some wildlife photos every now and then, pics of the family/kids, etc. how useful is a flash....more useful than putting that money towards better glass?

Click to expand...

I use SB900 indoors when needed and outdoors for fill flash in bright contrasty conditions.

That said it depends on camera and low light capability. D7000 and D700 often do not need flash even at night ...

... here's where I thought I needed flash for street performance at night and found the high ISO no flash just worked better for effect and ... so the flash went into my back pocket.

Recent night shots of Jessie Michaels

http://jbipix.com/?s=jessie

But then again to do so w/o flash you need better lens ... f2.8 of better. So there's no easy answer!
--
John from Toronto
JBIPix Photoblog - http://jbipix.com

The cost of even a basic flash like the SB-400 is far, far less than a faster lens than the kit zoom I assume that you have now; even the more effective and versatile choice, the SB-700, is only half the cost of something like a 3rd party 17-50 f2.8. As others have noted, high ISO and wide apertures can take you only so far. That being said, unless you bounce the flash (properly - the SB-400 is too limited in its bouncing) or get it off the camera and use it in remote mode (why the SB-700 is the better choice), you won't reap the benefits of proper flash use - which is a much more natural illumination in non-optimum conditions and the ability to tailor the light precisely to your needs. The disadvantage of a flash is that it is about as big as a small-body SLR, and to get the softer light you need to diffuse it, through bouncing or through an accessory device. Perhaps the best way to learn about the advantages of flash is to visit strobist.com, which has several excellent tutorials on the subject.

Ultimately, however, if you're taking mostly grab shots of the family and travel snaps, you'll be relying on high ISO and wide apertures with some "help" from the wimpy on-camera flash. Accessory flashes require time to set up and take up a good amount of room in your camera bag.

If you are willing to take the time to learn flash, it can actually keep your basic camera kit smaller than it would otherwise be with fast, expensive lenses. Perhaps the best course of action would be to split the difference; buy a fast standard prime (35mm DX) and a 2nd hand SB-600. You'll be ready for most anything then.

blue_cheese said:

I am a non-professional, all of my pictures fall strictly to the following 2 categories:

• Pictures of family/kids around house/park/vacations
• Hobby pictures that I have time to setup, play wiht, experiment on how I like it to look.

For the first item I am finding my SB700 a must. It really evens out exposure on a sunny day out in the snow... my kid no longer looks like a black silouette against white snow. For indoors, flash is must for anythign that moves, even a 35 or 50mm 1.8 lens will not get you out of motion blur territory, so while you may still get decent low light shots of adults willing to sit still you need to up ISO and have very thin DOF. A flash is really what you need, espeically a bounce one.

All that said, the SB700 is a pain in the a$$ to carry on the camera, it is almost as big as my D3100

Click to expand...

I fall completely into this catagory. As an example of the value of a flash unit (mine is also an SB700), my younger son's cub scout pack recently had their pinewood derby. The kept the lights low so that they didn't interfere with the track's timing equipment. I tried a few shots of the cars going down the track with my 50mm at 1.8f. It didn't come close to comparison with using the flash. Not a professional shoot by any means, but shots for my son's memories that he couldn't have had without the flash.

Depends. I almost never use it. When I do use it, it's for fill flash outside. Even then, I could easily never use it. When you have nothing in particular you need to capture in a photograph you can easily wait for the right conditions. For people shots indoors I look for north facing window light or dramatic light from an incandescent bulb illuminating half the face (think Eugene Smith and his bare bulb images). If light is harsh outdoors I'll look to move my subject under a tree for diffused illumination. Creativity trumps gear, whether it's flash or a new lens.

Edit

Think of the most indelible images of people in modern photography history. Almost none use flash. I equate flash with snapshots, crime scene investigations and 1950's photo journalism. They're more often flat a kind of hokey. For your personal images that stand the test of time, avoid flash.

mountws1 said:

Throwing the question out there for opinions....

For the non-professional that wants to take every day pictures, landscape shots, maybe some wildlife photos every now and then, pics of the family/kids, etc. how useful is a flash....more useful than putting that money towards better glass?

Click to expand...

I use my SB700 mostly for shooting my family & friends - I would pick a kit lens with SB700 over a fast prime for indoor shooting anytime.

The SB-600 was one of the first things I picked up. I have a D40 and some of the lenses I have like the Sigma 10-20, the built in flash isn't tall enough to clear the lense so you get a lense shadow in your picture if you don't have an external flash. Plus an external flash has a lot more range than the built in one.

Chuck Yadmark said:

It's not professional vs non-professional photography, it's really bad vs. good photography.

Click to expand...

I agree with Chuck.

It's not pro vs. amateur.... it's good lighting vs. bad lighting.

Period.

I'd like to know your opinions on flash too. Is Flash not very useful, slightly useful, or quite important ?

I just got the SB-700, and I've tried a few shots indoors. I'm completely surprised that I can shoot at 1/250th with ISO 200-400 indoors under incandescent light. Normally, without flash, I should set ISO 1600-6400 and around 1/60.

If you like shooting nature, you really need to start thinking about a good flash.

Here are a couple of shotsa as a comparison more at http://birdsnbugs.wordpress.com/2010/12/15/so-why-carry-a-flash-in-the-daylight/

Without flash



With flash



I also find the SB-800 very, very handy for macro work when working handheld chasing bugs. You can set the camera to manual, the shutter way up there, the aperture at f16 and let the Nikon CLS figure out how much light to pump out.

This was taken with a 105mm VR Micro-Nikkor with a TC-14E TC and the SB-800 with the head tilted down. EXIF shows it at 1/320 so, I think I had it on a monopod at the time.



--
My photo blog: http://birdsnbugs.wordpress.com
My camera club porfolio: http://www.pacameraclub.com/bgrant.htm
RF Stock Portfolio - http://www.dreamstime.com/resp129611
EXIF is embedded in photos WSSA #51 as bg5700

Great conversation folks. Thank you for the insight.

I'd say a flash is the next most useful thing after a mid range zoom like the 18-105mm kit lens. I'd buy a flash before I'd spend money on expensive glass, I use my flash way more often than I do my fast primes.

A large aperture lens isn't a replacement for a flash, can't always use a large aperture because you require deeper dof and a fast lens will not fill shadows or help with a backlit scene. I use my SB-700 frequently for photographing birds and for foreground fill with sunsets. If i'm out with my camera, i take my flash whether i think i'll need it or not.

Plan on spending some time to learn how to use it properly.

mountws1 said:

Throwing the question out there for opinions....

For the non-professional that wants to take every day pictures, landscape shots, maybe some wildlife photos every now and then, pics of the family/kids, etc. how useful is a flash....more useful than putting that money towards better glass?

Click to expand...

I don't understand your reference to non-professional .

I use flash of some kind almost all the time for all genres of photography. Even landscape sometimes. I really can't abide the general muddiness of 'available light' images - although there can be exceptions.

David

mountws1 said:

Throwing the question out there for opinions....

For the non-professional that wants to take every day pictures, landscape shots, maybe some wildlife photos every now and then, pics of the family/kids, etc. how useful is a flash....more useful than putting that money towards better glass?

Click to expand...

A single on-camera bounced flash will improve your indoor photography tremendously. That usage has nothing to do with whether you are a professional. People here spend loads of money to improve high ISO performance, then add fast glass, in hopes that they can make miracles happen in the absence of light. A nice flash unit will add a dimension to your photography that you and your subjects (whose skin will no longer be odd-colored from all that "natural" lighting) will appreciate.

Pros, on the other hand, will do wonders with flash. But this will involve off-camera usage, often combining several strobes with modifiers (soft boxes, umbrellas, reflectors, etc.), sometimes using far more powerful lights than the speedlights you are considering.

Long story short: to get started, get yourself a SB-700. Wonderful flash.
--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Seeking the heart and spirit in each image



Gallery and blog: http://imagesbyeduardo.com
Google plus: http://www.gplus.to/imagesbyeduardo
Flickr stream: http://www.flickr.com/photos/imagesbyeduardo/

Photography is all about capturing light. Although technology has reduced the amount of illumination required to capture an image a flash can still be used to improve the quality of the lighting.

A pro can effectively use flash to advantage supplementing the existing light when the need arises. You should aspire to that level of skill and use learn how and when to use flash.

Bringing Your Own Light is an important aspect of photography.

Keep on flashing! John

mountws1 said:

Throwing the question out there for opinions....

For the non-professional that wants to take every day pictures, landscape shots, maybe some wildlife photos every now and then, pics of the family/kids, etc. how useful is a flash....more useful than putting that money towards better glass?

Click to expand...

Without reading any of the posts - yes, it is a must have and no fast glass can add light - it can only work with existing light, which is not always optimal. With external flash you can control the amount, quality and direction of light you want to add (unlike with the built in flash), still working with existing light. Ideally it would be great to have both, but talking priorities (and taking in account indoor family shots) flash comes first IMO.

cheers

Flash is worth more than fast glass for most indoor shots almost all the time for me.

blue_cheese said:

I am a non-professional, all of my pictures fall strictly to the following 2 categories:

• Pictures of family/kids around house/park/vacations
• Hobby pictures that I have time to setup, play wiht, experiment on how I like it to look.

For the first item I am finding my SB700 a must. It really evens out exposure on a sunny day out in the snow... my kid no longer looks like a black silouette against white snow. For indoors, flash is must for anythign that moves, even a 35 or 50mm 1.8 lens will not get you out of motion blur territory, so while you may still get decent low light shots of adults willing to sit still you need to up ISO and have very thin DOF. A flash is really what you need, espeically a bounce one.

All that said, the SB700 is a pain in the a$$ to carry on the camera, it is almost as big as my D3100

Click to expand...

The form factor of the SB flashes is terrible. None of the manufacturers have put an ounce of thought into the design of these flashes in the last, oh, thirty years. The SB700 looks the same as my dad's old Vivitar flash. It's not the size of the flashes that's terrible, it's the fact that they stick out 90° from the "line" of the camera. This makes the flash many times more awkward when carrying than just the size. Who on earth designs a portable flash unit that just isn't very portable? I think that's why so many people are so passionate about that little SB400...it's not constantly getting in the way. These things need to be completely redesigned...and not by engineers! That's what Nikon is getting backwards. They should hire Jonathan Ive to design their next generation of flash....then the engineers can figure out how to make the guts fit.
--
eddyshoots