Diffuser or Flash

Started 4 months ago | Questions
Bob
Bob Veteran Member • Posts: 3,204
It’s junk
2

Light has three characteristics

  1. power
  2. size
  3. distance

That little plastic diffuser doesn’t change any of those.  All it accomplishes is moving $8.00 out of your wallet.

A real flash is not a big deal.  Clip it on,  set it to TTL and bounce it off the ceiling.  Not that hard.

OP Jcbailey Forum Member • Posts: 82
Re: It’s junk

Bob wrote:

Light has three characteristics

  1. power
  2. size
  3. distance

That little plastic diffuser doesn’t change any of those. All it accomplishes is moving $8.00 out of your wallet.

A real flash is not a big deal. Clip it on, set it to TTL and bounce it off the ceiling. Not that hard.

Where can I get this red flash?

 Jcbailey's gear list:Jcbailey's gear list
Canon PowerShot SX530 Canon EOS 80D Canon EF-S 18-135mm F3.5-5.6 IS Apple iPhone 12
PhotoTeach2 Forum Pro • Posts: 12,501
Re: Diffuser or Flash

Jcbailey wrote:

PhotoTeach2 wrote:

hobbit mob wrote:

Jcbailey wrote:

Tried the diffuser yesterday and it sucked. You have to be really close for it to take effect. I need to start looking into speedlights

Thanks

Haven't shopped for speedlights/flashes for a while, but be sure you get one with a head that can rotate/point up that way you can bounce it off the ceiling. It's the easiest way to get nice, evenly lit indoor pictures. Also, many flashes come with a snap on diffuser, that's all I ever use. I tried out some sort of globe diffuser (can't remember the name), and couldn't see enough of a difference to justify the extra size/time/weight over the snap on diffuser that stays on my flash all the time.

Good luck!

90% of "diffusers" are sold to SUCKERS who are not really getting the benefit they think they are.

The only type I use are a "large" (area) type of "fresnel" lens that redirects/restricts the width of the beam.

The POINT of a "diffuser" is that the light is no-longer a "POINT"-of-light.

But you do not need to "diffuse" because all that (diffused) light is WASTED. Many have an illusion that the light reflects from walls/ceiling and then adds to the "direct" light, ... BUT ... by the time the (diffused) light travels and reflects back onto the subject, it is much, much, much less bright than the "direct" light and does not really add.

Note that I am NOT demeaning "bounce" flash, where ALL the original light is indeed directed to ceiling/walls, so that ONLY the "bounced/reflected" light is finally reaching the subject.

Thanks.

Should I just get a faster lens or invest in flash? You probably read my other post but I need something for low light/ Night Photography of my kids indoors. there is light but not enough I'm guessing.

my current lens 3.5-5.6 and 4-5.6 which isn't enough. looking at flash or a 50mm 1.8

What do you recommend?

Both very different answers ..

The faster lens will indeed allow lower-light shooting (even outdoors at night).

The flash will STOP-ACTION for kids playing ... "bounce" lighting can be better than direct flash but can also create shadows ... and because "bounce" still reduces effective power of any flash, it often requires a relatively "large" flash to really do effective bounce for nay distance.

OP Jcbailey Forum Member • Posts: 82
Re: Diffuser or Flash

PhotoTeach2 wrote:

Jcbailey wrote:

PhotoTeach2 wrote:

hobbit mob wrote:

Jcbailey wrote:

Tried the diffuser yesterday and it sucked. You have to be really close for it to take effect. I need to start looking into speedlights

Thanks

Haven't shopped for speedlights/flashes for a while, but be sure you get one with a head that can rotate/point up that way you can bounce it off the ceiling. It's the easiest way to get nice, evenly lit indoor pictures. Also, many flashes come with a snap on diffuser, that's all I ever use. I tried out some sort of globe diffuser (can't remember the name), and couldn't see enough of a difference to justify the extra size/time/weight over the snap on diffuser that stays on my flash all the time.

Good luck!

90% of "diffusers" are sold to SUCKERS who are not really getting the benefit they think they are.

The only type I use are a "large" (area) type of "fresnel" lens that redirects/restricts the width of the beam.

The POINT of a "diffuser" is that the light is no-longer a "POINT"-of-light.

But you do not need to "diffuse" because all that (diffused) light is WASTED. Many have an illusion that the light reflects from walls/ceiling and then adds to the "direct" light, ... BUT ... by the time the (diffused) light travels and reflects back onto the subject, it is much, much, much less bright than the "direct" light and does not really add.

Note that I am NOT demeaning "bounce" flash, where ALL the original light is indeed directed to ceiling/walls, so that ONLY the "bounced/reflected" light is finally reaching the subject.

Thanks.

Should I just get a faster lens or invest in flash? You probably read my other post but I need something for low light/ Night Photography of my kids indoors. there is light but not enough I'm guessing.

my current lens 3.5-5.6 and 4-5.6 which isn't enough. looking at flash or a 50mm 1.8

What do you recommend?

Both very different answers ..

The faster lens will indeed allow lower-light shooting (even outdoors at night).

The flash will STOP-ACTION for kids playing ... "bounce" lighting can be better than direct flash but can also create shadows ... and because "bounce" still reduces effective power of any flash, it often requires a relatively "large" flash to really do effective bounce for nay distance.

This makes me not want to do flash and invest in a fast lens. seems like flash just freezes the motion as you say. with a fast lens can do everything

 Jcbailey's gear list:Jcbailey's gear list
Canon PowerShot SX530 Canon EOS 80D Canon EF-S 18-135mm F3.5-5.6 IS Apple iPhone 12
Teila Day
Teila Day Veteran Member • Posts: 5,454
Diffused or not (your choice) .. pics

What looks better will depend on who you ask, when you're asking, and what's being photographed. It's an aesthetic / personal opinion type of thing. You don't HAVE to diffuse your studio strobe or any other kind of flash if you don't want to. It's all about what you like.

Forget those cheap diffusers. As people have mentioned, all that gimmicky crep that people sell is just that... total crep.

Below is a near 20 year old Nikon SB800 flash (speed light) with a built in diffuser - you pull it out and down over the flash head. It also has a diffuser cap that one may put on as well. They work fine. I would pull the diffuser plate down over the flash head, and found that if I wanted less of a flashy look, and I have enough ambient light - I just lessen the power and that's that. I don't even bother with TTL / ETTL, etc...

I just manually adjust the power of the flash to my liking based on the prevailing ambient light and shoot. If I want a more flat/diffused light, I just bounce it off a ceiling, wall, or whatever else I can use.

Basically, you just need a decent flash or studio strobe and that's all.. and decent software to process your files to your liking. Buy pre-made "actions" for your favorite software (lightroom, photoshop, capture one, etc..) and that'll save you time as well.

https://kubotaimagetools.com/collections/photoshop-products

Nikon SB800 sitting next to a diffuser dome that came with the flash. The flash also has a built-in pull down diffuser panel that is useful. When you don't need it, you just lift it up and slide it out of the way. In this pic., the diffuser panel and bounce card are hidden in a slot at the top edge of the flash.

This is the diffuser panel pulled out and down over the flash, whereby scattering the light from the flash to give a more even less pronounced hard light. A somewhat "softer" light if you will.

This is the flash with the diffuser dome affixed to the flash head. It just snaps on. It further diffuses the light, and the SB800 is easily powerful enough to get a nice dose of diffused light onto your subject, especially if you're photographing kids playing in your living room, or a grandchild sitting in a high chair, and you just want a quick photograph with nice diffused light with or without ambient (simply means "other" than that from your flash... can be natural or artificial) light in the room.

Get at least one powerful flash, for taking candid shots, etc.. once you get used to using flash, you'll see that using just the bare flash is often easy enough to get what you want just by turning the power down for a smooth light across the subject mixed with ambient light. You'll have to experiment to get the experience.

FOCUSED or SOMEWHAT "HARD" LIGHT

The differences between the examples can be more mild or far more stark, depending on many variables.. such as distance between the light and subject... size of the light, whether the light has a grid on it, etc...

I hope that helps some

Best of luck and best in photography to all of you!

Teila K. Day
http://teiladay.com

PhotoTeach2 Forum Pro • Posts: 12,501
Re: Diffuser or Flash

Jcbailey wrote:

PhotoTeach2 wrote:

Jcbailey wrote:

PhotoTeach2 wrote:

hobbit mob wrote:

Jcbailey wrote:

Tried the diffuser yesterday and it sucked. You have to be really close for it to take effect. I need to start looking into speedlights

Thanks

Haven't shopped for speedlights/flashes for a while, but be sure you get one with a head that can rotate/point up that way you can bounce it off the ceiling. It's the easiest way to get nice, evenly lit indoor pictures. Also, many flashes come with a snap on diffuser, that's all I ever use. I tried out some sort of globe diffuser (can't remember the name), and couldn't see enough of a difference to justify the extra size/time/weight over the snap on diffuser that stays on my flash all the time.

Good luck!

90% of "diffusers" are sold to SUCKERS who are not really getting the benefit they think they are.

The only type I use are a "large" (area) type of "fresnel" lens that redirects/restricts the width of the beam.

The POINT of a "diffuser" is that the light is no-longer a "POINT"-of-light.

But you do not need to "diffuse" because all that (diffused) light is WASTED. Many have an illusion that the light reflects from walls/ceiling and then adds to the "direct" light, ... BUT ... by the time the (diffused) light travels and reflects back onto the subject, it is much, much, much less bright than the "direct" light and does not really add.

Note that I am NOT demeaning "bounce" flash, where ALL the original light is indeed directed to ceiling/walls, so that ONLY the "bounced/reflected" light is finally reaching the subject.

Thanks.

Should I just get a faster lens or invest in flash? You probably read my other post but I need something for low light/ Night Photography of my kids indoors. there is light but not enough I'm guessing.

my current lens 3.5-5.6 and 4-5.6 which isn't enough. looking at flash or a 50mm 1.8

What do you recommend?

Both very different answers ..

The faster lens will indeed allow lower-light shooting (even outdoors at night).

The flash will STOP-ACTION for kids playing ... "bounce" lighting can be better than direct flash but can also create shadows ... and because "bounce" still reduces effective power of any flash, it often requires a relatively "large" flash to really do effective bounce for nay distance.

This makes me not want to do flash and invest in a fast lens. seems like flash just freezes the motion as you say. with a fast lens can do everything

Not necessarily ... they are BOTH DIFFERENT and essential for different situations.

A flash-duration is between 1/1000s and 1/50,000s ... that can be fast enough to stop "bullets".  (I assume your kids are not faster than "bullets" ???)

But flash is also only usable at a limited range.

A fast(er) lens will only get you an extra 3-stops, which can indeed help, but will not "stop" action (like a flash will).

But a faster lens works w/ all (ambient) light, at ANY distance, (even moon-light landscapes).

Mark Scott Abeln
Mark Scott Abeln Forum Pro • Posts: 17,897
Re: Diffuser or Flash
2

Jcbailey wrote:

This makes me not want to do flash and invest in a fast lens. seems like flash just freezes the motion as you say. with a fast lens can do everything

Flash is a higher quality solution, giving you the ability to use optimal settings on your camera to get sharp, low noise images. As mentioned, a flash can stop anything.

A fast lens, if you open it up all the way to let in more light, will have a narrow depth of field and most of your scene is likely to be blurry. Also, the stuff that is in focus will likely be blurry as well due to lens aberrations.

Sure, I use fast lenses anytime I’m not in direct sunlight, but if I want truly quality results, I’ll use a flash.

 Mark Scott Abeln's gear list:Mark Scott Abeln's gear list
Nikon D200 Nikon D7000 Nikon D750 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 35mm F1.8G Nikon AF Nikkor 28mm f/2.8D +4 more
OP Jcbailey Forum Member • Posts: 82
Re: Diffused or not (your choice) .. pics
1

Teila Day wrote:

What looks better will depend on who you ask, when you're asking, and what's being photographed. It's an aesthetic / personal opinion type of thing. You don't HAVE to diffuse your studio strobe or any other kind of flash if you don't want to. It's all about what you like.

Forget those cheap diffusers. As people have mentioned, all that gimmicky crep that people sell is just that... total crep.

Below is a near 20 year old Nikon SB800 flash (speed light) with a built in diffuser - you pull it out and down over the flash head. It also has a diffuser cap that one may put on as well. They work fine. I would pull the diffuser plate down over the flash head, and found that if I wanted less of a flashy look, and I have enough ambient light - I just lessen the power and that's that. I don't even bother with TTL / ETTL, etc...

I just manually adjust the power of the flash to my liking based on the prevailing ambient light and shoot. If I want a more flat/diffused light, I just bounce it off a ceiling, wall, or whatever else I can use.

Basically, you just need a decent flash or studio strobe and that's all.. and decent software to process your files to your liking. Buy pre-made "actions" for your favorite software (lightroom, photoshop, capture one, etc..) and that'll save you time as well.

https://kubotaimagetools.com/collections/photoshop-products

Nikon SB800 sitting next to a diffuser dome that came with the flash. The flash also has a built-in pull down diffuser panel that is useful. When you don't need it, you just lift it up and slide it out of the way. In this pic., the diffuser panel and bounce card are hidden in a slot at the top edge of the flash.

This is the diffuser panel pulled out and down over the flash, whereby scattering the light from the flash to give a more even less pronounced hard light. A somewhat "softer" light if you will.

This is the flash with the diffuser dome affixed to the flash head. It just snaps on. It further diffuses the light, and the SB800 is easily powerful enough to get a nice dose of diffused light onto your subject, especially if you're photographing kids playing in your living room, or a grandchild sitting in a high chair, and you just want a quick photograph with nice diffused light with or without ambient (simply means "other" than that from your flash... can be natural or artificial) light in the room.

Get at least one powerful flash, for taking candid shots, etc.. once you get used to using flash, you'll see that using just the bare flash is often easy enough to get what you want just by turning the power down for a smooth light across the subject mixed with ambient light. You'll have to experiment to get the experience.

FOCUSED or SOMEWHAT "HARD" LIGHT

The differences between the examples can be more mild or far more stark, depending on many variables.. such as distance between the light and subject... size of the light, whether the light has a grid on it, etc...

I hope that helps some

Best of luck and best in photography to all of you!

Teila K. Day
http://teiladay.com

Thanks for the feedback.

Just told my wife right now that I'm thinking of photographing the kids playing inside and different things in the house and I need a flash. I told her like $99 she was like hmm lol  anyway I will get the flash soon and play with it. I will probably use the TTL/ETTL cause its automated and really not teaching me anything. I will use manual and just adjust power.

Thanks for the reply

 Jcbailey's gear list:Jcbailey's gear list
Canon PowerShot SX530 Canon EOS 80D Canon EF-S 18-135mm F3.5-5.6 IS Apple iPhone 12
(unknown member) Regular Member • Posts: 462
Re: Diffuser or Flash
2

Jcbailey wrote:

Kaspah wrote:

Yes, using flash is not too intimidating once you get your head around the basics.

1. When using flash you have two exposures - amount of light that hits the sensor per unit area - to deal with.

a) the exposure from the ambient light.

b) the exposure from the flash.

2. Both aperture and shutter speed affect the ambient exposure and you set those as you would normally. Shutter speed has no effect at all on the flash exposure. Aperture does affect the flash exposure.

You can set the flash power either manually or through ETTL.

Both the ambient and flash exposures have their own EC which can be adjusted independently of each other.

Getting back to the effect of a diffuser, I use the clip on diffuser that came with my Canon Speedlight.

The manual says that the Speedlight knows whether the diffuser is clipped on or not and so the Speedlight compensates for the diffuser. I can't remember off the top of my head how it compensates.

Thanks

No problem. You're welcome.

If you get a portable flash, try to get one that can be fired remotely from the camera so that you can use it off-camera. That will give you much more flexibility in being creative with your lighting.

PhotoTeach2 Forum Pro • Posts: 12,501
Re: Diffuser or Flash

Kaspah wrote:

Jcbailey wrote:

Kaspah wrote:

Yes, using flash is not too intimidating once you get your head around the basics.

1. When using flash you have two exposures - amount of light that hits the sensor per unit area - to deal with.

a) the exposure from the ambient light.

b) the exposure from the flash.

2. Both aperture and shutter speed affect the ambient exposure and you set those as you would normally. Shutter speed has no effect at all on the flash exposure. Aperture does affect the flash exposure.

You can set the flash power either manually or through ETTL.

Both the ambient and flash exposures have their own EC which can be adjusted independently of each other.

Getting back to the effect of a diffuser, I use the clip on diffuser that came with my Canon Speedlight.

The manual says that the Speedlight knows whether the diffuser is clipped on or not and so the Speedlight compensates for the diffuser. I can't remember off the top of my head how it compensates.

Thanks

No problem. You're welcome.

If you get a portable flash, try to get one that can be fired remotely from the camera so that you can use it off-camera. That will give you much more flexibility in being creative with your lighting.

Excellent point ...

Gerry Winterbourne Forum Pro • Posts: 19,059
Re: Diffuser or Flash

Jcbailey wrote:

PhotoTeach2 wrote:

Jcbailey wrote:

PhotoTeach2 wrote:

hobbit mob wrote:

Jcbailey wrote:

Tried the diffuser yesterday and it sucked. You have to be really close for it to take effect. I need to start looking into speedlights

Thanks

Haven't shopped for speedlights/flashes for a while, but be sure you get one with a head that can rotate/point up that way you can bounce it off the ceiling. It's the easiest way to get nice, evenly lit indoor pictures. Also, many flashes come with a snap on diffuser, that's all I ever use. I tried out some sort of globe diffuser (can't remember the name), and couldn't see enough of a difference to justify the extra size/time/weight over the snap on diffuser that stays on my flash all the time.

Good luck!

90% of "diffusers" are sold to SUCKERS who are not really getting the benefit they think they are.

The only type I use are a "large" (area) type of "fresnel" lens that redirects/restricts the width of the beam.

The POINT of a "diffuser" is that the light is no-longer a "POINT"-of-light.

But you do not need to "diffuse" because all that (diffused) light is WASTED. Many have an illusion that the light reflects from walls/ceiling and then adds to the "direct" light, ... BUT ... by the time the (diffused) light travels and reflects back onto the subject, it is much, much, much less bright than the "direct" light and does not really add.

Note that I am NOT demeaning "bounce" flash, where ALL the original light is indeed directed to ceiling/walls, so that ONLY the "bounced/reflected" light is finally reaching the subject.

Thanks.

Should I just get a faster lens or invest in flash? You probably read my other post but I need something for low light/ Night Photography of my kids indoors. there is light but not enough I'm guessing.

my current lens 3.5-5.6 and 4-5.6 which isn't enough. looking at flash or a 50mm 1.8

What do you recommend?

Both very different answers ..

The faster lens will indeed allow lower-light shooting (even outdoors at night).

The flash will STOP-ACTION for kids playing ... "bounce" lighting can be better than direct flash but can also create shadows ... and because "bounce" still reduces effective power of any flash, it often requires a relatively "large" flash to really do effective bounce for nay distance.

This makes me not want to do flash and invest in a fast lens. seems like flash just freezes the motion as you say.

Which is exactly what you want. Bounce flash (off the ceiling) is much the best option - as several people explained to you in your "fast lens" thread.

with a fast lens can do everything

Not so. Unless you are prepared to have most of your photos out of focus because the depth of field is so shallow there is very little a fast lens can do that a slow lens can't.

-- hide signature --

Gerry
________________________________________________________________________
I'm happy for anyone to edit any of my photos and display the results
_________________________________________________________________________
First camera 1953, first Pentax 1985, first DSLR 2006
http://www.pbase.com/gerrywinterbourne
gerry.winterbourne@ntlworld.com

Bob
Bob Veteran Member • Posts: 3,204
Re: It’s junk

Jcbailey wrote:

Bob wrote:

Light has three characteristics

  1. power
  2. size
  3. distance

That little plastic diffuser doesn’t change any of those. All it accomplishes is moving $8.00 out of your wallet.

A real flash is not a big deal. Clip it on, set it to TTL and bounce it off the ceiling. Not that hard.

Where can I get this red flash?

People normally use colored gels to modify the light.  See this…

https://www.google.com/search?rlz=1C9BKJA_enUS659US659&hl=en-US&sxsrf=ALeKk03QdkZAr1qF2jK4Ebg-oE9h4E6QFQ:1629555316705&q=color+gel+flash+photography&spell=1&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjvsKzOpsLyAhVGEFkFHaQaBawQBSgAegQIARAC&biw=1194&bih=703#imgrc=-OqrfNH8KLir0M

Keep in mind, the flash unit doesn’t need to be attached to the top of your camera.  It can be triggered remotely.

Example:

https://digital-photography-school.com/colored-gels-creative-off-camera-flash-photography/

OP Jcbailey Forum Member • Posts: 82
Re: Diffuser or Flash

Gerry Winterbourne wrote:

Jcbailey wrote:

PhotoTeach2 wrote:

Jcbailey wrote:

PhotoTeach2 wrote:

hobbit mob wrote:

Jcbailey wrote:

Tried the diffuser yesterday and it sucked. You have to be really close for it to take effect. I need to start looking into speedlights

Thanks

Haven't shopped for speedlights/flashes for a while, but be sure you get one with a head that can rotate/point up that way you can bounce it off the ceiling. It's the easiest way to get nice, evenly lit indoor pictures. Also, many flashes come with a snap on diffuser, that's all I ever use. I tried out some sort of globe diffuser (can't remember the name), and couldn't see enough of a difference to justify the extra size/time/weight over the snap on diffuser that stays on my flash all the time.

Good luck!

90% of "diffusers" are sold to SUCKERS who are not really getting the benefit they think they are.

The only type I use are a "large" (area) type of "fresnel" lens that redirects/restricts the width of the beam.

The POINT of a "diffuser" is that the light is no-longer a "POINT"-of-light.

But you do not need to "diffuse" because all that (diffused) light is WASTED. Many have an illusion that the light reflects from walls/ceiling and then adds to the "direct" light, ... BUT ... by the time the (diffused) light travels and reflects back onto the subject, it is much, much, much less bright than the "direct" light and does not really add.

Note that I am NOT demeaning "bounce" flash, where ALL the original light is indeed directed to ceiling/walls, so that ONLY the "bounced/reflected" light is finally reaching the subject.

Thanks.

Should I just get a faster lens or invest in flash? You probably read my other post but I need something for low light/ Night Photography of my kids indoors. there is light but not enough I'm guessing.

my current lens 3.5-5.6 and 4-5.6 which isn't enough. looking at flash or a 50mm 1.8

What do you recommend?

Both very different answers ..

The faster lens will indeed allow lower-light shooting (even outdoors at night).

The flash will STOP-ACTION for kids playing ... "bounce" lighting can be better than direct flash but can also create shadows ... and because "bounce" still reduces effective power of any flash, it often requires a relatively "large" flash to really do effective bounce for nay distance.

This makes me not want to do flash and invest in a fast lens. seems like flash just freezes the motion as you say.

Which is exactly what you want. Bounce flash (off the ceiling) is much the best option - as several people explained to you in your "fast lens" thread.

with a fast lens can do everything

Not so. Unless you are prepared to have most of your photos out of focus because the depth of field is so shallow there is very little a fast lens can do that a slow lens can't.

So if getting a fast lens runs me the risk of getting my photos out of focus why is YouTube so adamant about fast glass and bokeh? Bokeh looks cool and I would like it but I would rather have sharp photos with everything in focus 99% of the time. mom a hobbies as you can tell or probably can’t but the wife and I agreed that I need to get more familiar or use the camera a lot more before we invest more into it. I really like photography. But I keep getting different answers all the time.

Maybe I will stop asking on Reddit and Facebook and ask here full time. I thought you guys got tired of my questions so I ask elsewhere.

Thanks for the reply again

 Jcbailey's gear list:Jcbailey's gear list
Canon PowerShot SX530 Canon EOS 80D Canon EF-S 18-135mm F3.5-5.6 IS Apple iPhone 12
OP Jcbailey Forum Member • Posts: 82
Re: It’s junk

Bob wrote:

Jcbailey wrote:

Bob wrote:

Light has three characteristics

  1. power
  2. size
  3. distance

That little plastic diffuser doesn’t change any of those. All it accomplishes is moving $8.00 out of your wallet.

A real flash is not a big deal. Clip it on, set it to TTL and bounce it off the ceiling. Not that hard.

Where can I get this red flash?

People normally use colored gels to modify the light. See this…

https://www.google.com/search?rlz=1C9BKJA_enUS659US659&hl=en-US&sxsrf=ALeKk03QdkZAr1qF2jK4Ebg-oE9h4E6QFQ:1629555316705&q=color+gel+flash+photography&spell=1&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjvsKzOpsLyAhVGEFkFHaQaBawQBSgAegQIARAC&biw=1194&bih=703#imgrc=-OqrfNH8KLir0M

Keep in mind, the flash unit doesn’t need to be attached to the top of your camera. It can be triggered remotely.

Example:

https://digital-photography-school.com/colored-gels-creative-off-camera-flash-photography/

I want the hot shoe flash so I can get used to it. Plus it looks cool

 Jcbailey's gear list:Jcbailey's gear list
Canon PowerShot SX530 Canon EOS 80D Canon EF-S 18-135mm F3.5-5.6 IS Apple iPhone 12
hobbit mob
hobbit mob Regular Member • Posts: 383
Re: Diffuser or Flash
3

Jcbailey wrote:

Gerry Winterbourne wrote:

Jcbailey wrote:

PhotoTeach2 wrote:

Jcbailey wrote:

PhotoTeach2 wrote:

hobbit mob wrote:

Jcbailey wrote:

Tried the diffuser yesterday and it sucked. You have to be really close for it to take effect. I need to start looking into speedlights

Thanks

Haven't shopped for speedlights/flashes for a while, but be sure you get one with a head that can rotate/point up that way you can bounce it off the ceiling. It's the easiest way to get nice, evenly lit indoor pictures. Also, many flashes come with a snap on diffuser, that's all I ever use. I tried out some sort of globe diffuser (can't remember the name), and couldn't see enough of a difference to justify the extra size/time/weight over the snap on diffuser that stays on my flash all the time.

Good luck!

90% of "diffusers" are sold to SUCKERS who are not really getting the benefit they think they are.

The only type I use are a "large" (area) type of "fresnel" lens that redirects/restricts the width of the beam.

The POINT of a "diffuser" is that the light is no-longer a "POINT"-of-light.

But you do not need to "diffuse" because all that (diffused) light is WASTED. Many have an illusion that the light reflects from walls/ceiling and then adds to the "direct" light, ... BUT ... by the time the (diffused) light travels and reflects back onto the subject, it is much, much, much less bright than the "direct" light and does not really add.

Note that I am NOT demeaning "bounce" flash, where ALL the original light is indeed directed to ceiling/walls, so that ONLY the "bounced/reflected" light is finally reaching the subject.

Thanks.

Should I just get a faster lens or invest in flash? You probably read my other post but I need something for low light/ Night Photography of my kids indoors. there is light but not enough I'm guessing.

my current lens 3.5-5.6 and 4-5.6 which isn't enough. looking at flash or a 50mm 1.8

What do you recommend?

Both very different answers ..

The faster lens will indeed allow lower-light shooting (even outdoors at night).

The flash will STOP-ACTION for kids playing ... "bounce" lighting can be better than direct flash but can also create shadows ... and because "bounce" still reduces effective power of any flash, it often requires a relatively "large" flash to really do effective bounce for nay distance.

This makes me not want to do flash and invest in a fast lens. seems like flash just freezes the motion as you say.

Which is exactly what you want. Bounce flash (off the ceiling) is much the best option - as several people explained to you in your "fast lens" thread.

with a fast lens can do everything

Not so. Unless you are prepared to have most of your photos out of focus because the depth of field is so shallow there is very little a fast lens can do that a slow lens can't.

So if getting a fast lens runs me the risk of getting my photos out of focus why is YouTube so adamant about fast glass and bokeh? Bokeh looks cool and I would like it but I would rather have sharp photos with everything in focus 99% of the time. mom a hobbies as you can tell or probably can’t but the wife and I agreed that I need to get more familiar or use the camera a lot more before we invest more into it. I really like photography. But I keep getting different answers all the time.

Maybe I will stop asking on Reddit and Facebook and ask here full time. I thought you guys got tired of my questions so I ask elsewhere.

Thanks for the reply again

For what you want to do (get pictures of kids running/playing indoors) you don’t need a fast lens. Natural light indoor portraits/photos is possible with a fast lens only, but much harder. Your best bet would be to get a speed light, set your camera to f5.6-f8, your ISO to 400-800, your shutter speed to 1/200, then point the speed light at the ceiling and adjust the power accordingly (if you’re taking lots of photos quickly, it’s best to stay under 1/4th or 1/8th power for quicker recycle times). This will give you nice, in focus, evenly lit pictures that will freeze the action.

-- hide signature --

Accelerating Entropy

 hobbit mob's gear list:hobbit mob's gear list
Fujifilm X100F Canon EOS-1D Mark III Canon EOS 5D Mark III Fujifilm X-E2 Fujifilm X-T1 +12 more
Bob
Bob Veteran Member • Posts: 3,204
Re: It’s junk
1

Jcbailey wrote:

Bob wrote:

Jcbailey wrote:

Bob wrote:

Light has three characteristics

  1. power
  2. size
  3. distance

That little plastic diffuser doesn’t change any of those. All it accomplishes is moving $8.00 out of your wallet.

A real flash is not a big deal. Clip it on, set it to TTL and bounce it off the ceiling. Not that hard.

Where can I get this red flash?

People normally use colored gels to modify the light. See this…

https://www.google.com/search?rlz=1C9BKJA_enUS659US659&hl=en-US&sxsrf=ALeKk03QdkZAr1qF2jK4Ebg-oE9h4E6QFQ:1629555316705&q=color+gel+flash+photography&spell=1&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjvsKzOpsLyAhVGEFkFHaQaBawQBSgAegQIARAC&biw=1194&bih=703#imgrc=-OqrfNH8KLir0M

Keep in mind, the flash unit doesn’t need to be attached to the top of your camera. It can be triggered remotely.

Example:

https://digital-photography-school.com/colored-gels-creative-off-camera-flash-photography/

I want the hot shoe flash so I can get used to it. Plus it looks cool

Yes - definitely!

OP Jcbailey Forum Member • Posts: 82
Re: Diffuser or Flash

hobbit mob wrote:

Jcbailey wrote:

Gerry Winterbourne wrote:

Jcbailey wrote:

PhotoTeach2 wrote:

Jcbailey wrote:

PhotoTeach2 wrote:

hobbit mob wrote:

Jcbailey wrote:

Tried the diffuser yesterday and it sucked. You have to be really close for it to take effect. I need to start looking into speedlights

Thanks

Haven't shopped for speedlights/flashes for a while, but be sure you get one with a head that can rotate/point up that way you can bounce it off the ceiling. It's the easiest way to get nice, evenly lit indoor pictures. Also, many flashes come with a snap on diffuser, that's all I ever use. I tried out some sort of globe diffuser (can't remember the name), and couldn't see enough of a difference to justify the extra size/time/weight over the snap on diffuser that stays on my flash all the time.

Good luck!

90% of "diffusers" are sold to SUCKERS who are not really getting the benefit they think they are.

The only type I use are a "large" (area) type of "fresnel" lens that redirects/restricts the width of the beam.

The POINT of a "diffuser" is that the light is no-longer a "POINT"-of-light.

But you do not need to "diffuse" because all that (diffused) light is WASTED. Many have an illusion that the light reflects from walls/ceiling and then adds to the "direct" light, ... BUT ... by the time the (diffused) light travels and reflects back onto the subject, it is much, much, much less bright than the "direct" light and does not really add.

Note that I am NOT demeaning "bounce" flash, where ALL the original light is indeed directed to ceiling/walls, so that ONLY the "bounced/reflected" light is finally reaching the subject.

Thanks.

Should I just get a faster lens or invest in flash? You probably read my other post but I need something for low light/ Night Photography of my kids indoors. there is light but not enough I'm guessing.

my current lens 3.5-5.6 and 4-5.6 which isn't enough. looking at flash or a 50mm 1.8

What do you recommend?

Both very different answers ..

The faster lens will indeed allow lower-light shooting (even outdoors at night).

The flash will STOP-ACTION for kids playing ... "bounce" lighting can be better than direct flash but can also create shadows ... and because "bounce" still reduces effective power of any flash, it often requires a relatively "large" flash to really do effective bounce for nay distance.

This makes me not want to do flash and invest in a fast lens. seems like flash just freezes the motion as you say.

Which is exactly what you want. Bounce flash (off the ceiling) is much the best option - as several people explained to you in your "fast lens" thread.

with a fast lens can do everything

Not so. Unless you are prepared to have most of your photos out of focus because the depth of field is so shallow there is very little a fast lens can do that a slow lens can't.

So if getting a fast lens runs me the risk of getting my photos out of focus why is YouTube so adamant about fast glass and bokeh? Bokeh looks cool and I would like it but I would rather have sharp photos with everything in focus 99% of the time. mom a hobbies as you can tell or probably can’t but the wife and I agreed that I need to get more familiar or use the camera a lot more before we invest more into it. I really like photography. But I keep getting different answers all the time.

Maybe I will stop asking on Reddit and Facebook and ask here full time. I thought you guys got tired of my questions so I ask elsewhere.

Thanks for the reply again

For what you want to do (get pictures of kids running/playing indoors) you don’t need a fast lens. Natural light indoor portraits/photos is possible with a fast lens only, but much harder. Your best bet would be to get a speed light, set your camera to f5.6-f8, your ISO to 400-800, your shutter speed to 1/200, then point the speed light at the ceiling and adjust the power accordingly (if you’re taking lots of photos quickly, it’s best to stay under 1/4th or 1/8th power for quicker recycle times). This will give you nice, in focus, evenly lit pictures that will freeze the action.

Thanks

 Jcbailey's gear list:Jcbailey's gear list
Canon PowerShot SX530 Canon EOS 80D Canon EF-S 18-135mm F3.5-5.6 IS Apple iPhone 12
Gerry Winterbourne Forum Pro • Posts: 19,059
Re: Diffuser or Flash
2

Jcbailey wrote:

Gerry Winterbourne wrote:

Jcbailey wrote:

PhotoTeach2 wrote:

Jcbailey wrote:

PhotoTeach2 wrote:

hobbit mob wrote:

Jcbailey wrote:

Tried the diffuser yesterday and it sucked. You have to be really close for it to take effect. I need to start looking into speedlights

Thanks

Haven't shopped for speedlights/flashes for a while, but be sure you get one with a head that can rotate/point up that way you can bounce it off the ceiling. It's the easiest way to get nice, evenly lit indoor pictures. Also, many flashes come with a snap on diffuser, that's all I ever use. I tried out some sort of globe diffuser (can't remember the name), and couldn't see enough of a difference to justify the extra size/time/weight over the snap on diffuser that stays on my flash all the time.

Good luck!

90% of "diffusers" are sold to SUCKERS who are not really getting the benefit they think they are.

The only type I use are a "large" (area) type of "fresnel" lens that redirects/restricts the width of the beam.

The POINT of a "diffuser" is that the light is no-longer a "POINT"-of-light.

But you do not need to "diffuse" because all that (diffused) light is WASTED. Many have an illusion that the light reflects from walls/ceiling and then adds to the "direct" light, ... BUT ... by the time the (diffused) light travels and reflects back onto the subject, it is much, much, much less bright than the "direct" light and does not really add.

Note that I am NOT demeaning "bounce" flash, where ALL the original light is indeed directed to ceiling/walls, so that ONLY the "bounced/reflected" light is finally reaching the subject.

Thanks.

Should I just get a faster lens or invest in flash? You probably read my other post but I need something for low light/ Night Photography of my kids indoors. there is light but not enough I'm guessing.

my current lens 3.5-5.6 and 4-5.6 which isn't enough. looking at flash or a 50mm 1.8

What do you recommend?

Both very different answers ..

The faster lens will indeed allow lower-light shooting (even outdoors at night).

The flash will STOP-ACTION for kids playing ... "bounce" lighting can be better than direct flash but can also create shadows ... and because "bounce" still reduces effective power of any flash, it often requires a relatively "large" flash to really do effective bounce for nay distance.

This makes me not want to do flash and invest in a fast lens. seems like flash just freezes the motion as you say.

Which is exactly what you want. Bounce flash (off the ceiling) is much the best option - as several people explained to you in your "fast lens" thread.

with a fast lens can do everything

Not so. Unless you are prepared to have most of your photos out of focus because the depth of field is so shallow there is very little a fast lens can do that a slow lens can't.

So if getting a fast lens runs me the risk of getting my photos out of focus why is YouTube so adamant about fast glass and bokeh?

First, YT is populated by lots of people who don't know what they are talking about. The larger the aperture the shallower the depth of field; and the DOF is the zone of distances where things look acceptably sharp. Everything nearer or further than that zone is out of focus (= blurred).

This shot at f1/4 shows that clearly - it doesn't matter here that the hand is out of focus but it would if you had a group of people at slightly different distances. This lens has pretty smooth bokeh (see below).

It's easy to find a situation where the DOF is adequate for that situation and put it in a video. But that doesn't mean that every situation suits.

Bokeh looks cool

Bokeh doesn't mean blur - so if you've picked that up from YT it just emphasises what I mean about not knowing what they are talking about. Bokeh is the quality of the blurred areas - are they smooth or rough, what shape are out-of-focus circles and so on.

This is an example of harsh bokeh, where the "circles" are actually rather jagged.

and I would like it but I would rather have sharp photos with everything in focus 99% of the time.

That's impossible. A lens can focus at only one distance; everything else is out of focus to some extent. However, our eyes can accommodate a small amount of out-of-focus blur and see things as sharp. The amount of blur depends on aperture (as above) so up to a point a small aperture (which doesn't help in low light) gives a deep DOF but even so not everything is in focus.

This is why flash is often - perhaps usually - the better option.

mom a hobbies as you can tell or probably can’t but the wife and I agreed that I need to get more familiar or use the camera a lot more before we invest more into it. I really like photography. But I keep getting different answers all the time.

Maybe I will stop asking on Reddit and Facebook and ask here full time. I thought you guys got tired of my questions so I ask elsewhere.

I believe I suggested that about a week or so ago. Not everyone here knows everything but at least you can see where disagreements exist and explore further.

-- hide signature --

Gerry
________________________________________________________________________
I'm happy for anyone to edit any of my photos and display the results
_________________________________________________________________________
First camera 1953, first Pentax 1985, first DSLR 2006
http://www.pbase.com/gerrywinterbourne
gerry.winterbourne@ntlworld.com

Teila Day
Teila Day Veteran Member • Posts: 5,454
Re: Diffuser or Flash
1

Gerry Winterbourne wrote:

Jcbailey wrote:

So if getting a fast lens runs me the risk of getting my photos out of focus why is YouTube so adamant about fast glass and bokeh?

First, YT is populated by lots of people who don't know what they are talking about.

100%. Also filled with people giving opinions on products that they don't use or own, but have only fiddled with it for a short time. I'm glad you've mentioned YT realistically.

Bokeh looks cool

Bokeh doesn't mean blur ...

It needed to be said, and needs to be repeated.

Bokeh is the quality of the blurred areas - are they smooth or rough, what shape are out-of-focus circles and so on.

This is an example of harsh bokeh, where the "circles" are actually rather jagged.

I'm glad you brought this to people's attention.

Thanks

-- hide signature --

Teila K. Day
http://teiladay.com

Klaus dk
Klaus dk Veteran Member • Posts: 8,104
Re: Diffuser or Flash

Jcbailey wrote:

[…]

So if getting a fast lens runs me the risk of getting my photos out of focus why is YouTube so adamant about fast glass and bokeh? Bokeh looks cool and I would like it but I would rather have sharp photos with everything in focus 99% of the time. mom a hobbies as you can tell or probably can’t but the wife and I agreed that I need to get more familiar or use the camera a lot more before we invest more into it. I really like photography. But I keep getting different answers all the time.

YouTube has some very good advice and a lot of witless waste of time. The trouble is being able to distinguish the good (rare) from the bad (abundant). Piecemeal info taken from YouTube clips or Q&A forums doesn't help you much if you haven't got the basics in place.

I gave you a link to The Strobist's 101, and while there's a lot to be learned there, he is a manual flash only photographer. I employ TTL whenever useful, so even the best authorities can be questioned. Getting the full picture has taken me more than 50 years ... and I'm still learning.

As others have written, the two-stop advantage from f/3.5 to f/1.8 does not get you much stopping power.

 Klaus dk's gear list:Klaus dk's gear list
Sony RX100 II Canon EOS R Canon EOS R5 Canon EF 135mm F2.8 SF Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro USM +14 more
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads