Reading mode: Light Dark

anyone using long-neck Omnibounce?

Go to last post
T

Todd Walker

Veteran Member
Messages
6,091
Reaction score
1
Location
USA, LA, US
I have been thinking about purchasing one of these:

http://secure.mycart.net/catalogs/catalog.asp?prodid=1509567&showprevnext=1

and I am interested if anyone here has one and what they think about it. I have a regular Omnibounce for my 420EX but the results are a bit too "direct flash" looking. If anyone can provide some sample shots using the long-neck that would be great too.

Thanks
Todd

--
Todd Walker
Canon 10D
28-70/2.8L, 80-200/2.8L, 50/1.8
Sony F707
http://www.toddwalker.net
http://www.twphotography.net
http://www.pbase.com/twalker294
 
Todd Walker said:
I have been thinking about purchasing one of these:

http://secure.mycart.net/catalogs/catalog.asp?prodid=1509567&showprevnext=1

and I am interested if anyone here has one and what they think
about it. I have a regular Omnibounce for my 420EX but the results
are a bit too "direct flash" looking. If anyone can provide some
sample shots using the long-neck that would be great too.

Thanks
Todd

--
Todd Walker
Canon 10D
28-70/2.8L, 80-200/2.8L, 50/1.8
Sony F707
http://www.toddwalker.net
http://www.twphotography.net
http://www.pbase.com/twalker294
Click to expand...
--
 
Gabriel Philipson said:
Interesting. However, don't the examples on the website look a bit
under-exposed to you?

I get really nice results with the Omni bounce when you either
still bounce it or tilt it vertically about 45 degrees. Just don't
point it straight on.

Here are a couple

http://www.bklynphoto.com/gallery/Portraits_GIP/823_2386

http://www.bklynphoto.com/gallery/Portraits_GIP/812_1269
Click to expand...
Those are the same kind of results that I get and don't like -- the lighting is too flat IMHO. I'm looking for something that will give more defined shadows but still with a bit of fill. Actually a bounce card on top of the flash works just as I want, as does the Lumiquest 80/20 bounce, but the index card looks cr@ppy and the Lumiquest is too big and bulky.

--
Todd Walker
Canon 10D
28-70/2.8L, 80-200/2.8L, 50/1.8
Sony F707
http://www.toddwalker.net
http://www.twphotography.net
http://www.pbase.com/twalker294
 
Todd Walker said:
Those are the same kind of results that I get and don't like -- the
lighting is too flat IMHO. I'm looking for something that will give
more defined shadows but still with a bit of fill. Actually a
bounce card on top of the flash works just as I want, as does the
Lumiquest 80/20 bounce, but the index card looks cr@ppy and the
Lumiquest is too big and bulky.

--
Todd Walker
Canon 10D
28-70/2.8L, 80-200/2.8L, 50/1.8
Sony F707
http://www.toddwalker.net
http://www.twphotography.net
http://www.pbase.com/twalker294
Click to expand...
I see. However, the examples they provide on the website don't look good at all to my eye at least.
 
Well, if you do experiment w/ other methods, I'd be interested to know your results. I find I am generally happy with portraits resulting from the Omnibounce. I believe them to be significantly nicer than direct flash results. I understand your concern regarding the flat lighting and do tend to agree that the results are not comparable to results gained by using multiple lighting sources. That is to be expected though. You say that you are more pleased with other things you have tried compared to the Omnibounce. By any chance, do you have any examples?
 
Todd Walker said:
I have been thinking about purchasing one of these:

http://secure.mycart.net/catalogs/catalog.asp?prodid=1509567&showprevnext=1

and I am interested if anyone here has one and what they think
about it. I have a regular Omnibounce for my 420EX but the results
are a bit too "direct flash" looking. If anyone can provide some
sample shots using the long-neck that would be great too.

Thanks
Todd

--
Todd Walker
Canon 10D
28-70/2.8L, 80-200/2.8L, 50/1.8
Sony F707
http://www.toddwalker.net
http://www.twphotography.net
http://www.pbase.com/twalker294
Click to expand...
 
Gabriel Philipson said:
Well, if you do experiment w/ other methods, I'd be interested to
know your results. I find I am generally happy with portraits
resulting from the Omnibounce. I believe them to be significantly
nicer than direct flash results. I understand your concern
regarding the flat lighting and do tend to agree that the results
are not comparable to results gained by using multiple lighting
sources. That is to be expected though. You say that you are more
pleased with other things you have tried compared to the
Omnibounce. By any chance, do you have any examples?
Click to expand...
Sure. This was taken with a bounce card on top of the flash head:



This is the method that I have found produces the best results. Here is a picture of what I'm talking about:



You can make the card narrower than the flash head if you wish and reflect less light, which causes a bit more shadow depth. The one that I was using for the above picture I believe is about 2/3 the width of the flash head.

--
Todd Walker
Canon 10D
28-70/2.8L, 80-200/2.8L, 50/1.8
Sony F707
http://www.toddwalker.net
http://www.twphotography.net
http://www.pbase.com/twalker294
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top