How useful is a flash for the non-professional?

[eddyshoots]

Hey Suntan, thanks for the response.

The form factor of the SB flashes is terrible.

It's a matter of form following function.

Ahhh form following function. Obviously this is a tried and true design and engineering principle but for a successful implementation one has to truly identify all of the required functionality. The photographic industry as a whole hasn't shaken up these flashes in decades even though customer usage and much of the underlying technology has changed dramatically.

Even the phrase form follows function (actually "form ever follows function" different meaning in my mind) has begun to fall apart. There is a definite disconnect between the two in modern industrial design. Look at the recent works of Apple....surely function must ever follow form at Apple.

While I appreciate your response, I'm not going to let Nikon (and Canon and Metz and ...) off the hook on this one. "Form follows function" has devolved into a defense mechanism for lazy design.

First, the desire to eliminate red-eye forces the flash bulb to be at least a set distance from the lens centerline. No matter how you try and cover this up with industrial design, you're still going to be left with something that sticks out from the camera.

Right. To eliminate red eye (and I'll add, having the light path clear larger lenses) one must indeed move the flash several inches from the lens centerline... at the moment of the shot. There's the rub. We are only shooting for 1/60th of a second, yet we are moving, watching and waiting for many seconds, minutes and hours between these moments. Having the flash head six inches above the hot shoe while the photographer is moving through a crowded dance floor or through the pre dawn forest or sitting in a coffee shop with friends doesn't fit the function of safe and stealthy travel.

Second, the average photographer is very resistance to change. Making a hotshoe flash that doesn't look and act like a hotshoe flash is a recipe for slow sales.

Who moved my cheese? I don't know what the sales would be like for a next generation flash unit...I don't think you do either. But, if superior, I know where I'd put my bet.

Third, the typical hotshoe flashes do not appear as oversized and top-heavy on the larger bodied cameras, especially when mounted with larger, non-kit lenses. Although still awkward, they aren't as bad and so they just appear to be fish out of water to a lot of people that may operate smaller cameras.

This is untrue. The worst possible flash, body and lens combination is when you have larger lenses. The heavy lens forces the camera to hang in a nose down orientation which in turn forces the flash straight out from the body. It's extremely awkward to carry and downright dangerous for the vulnerable hot shoe connection. I absolutely hate having my larger flash (SB800s) on my camera with a 70-200 2.8 because it becomes a walking insurance claim. It's simply a poor design.

Let's look at a design that has evolved into something quite elegant....the on-board flash of all of our cameras. It's a sleek little design that is unobtrusive when it's not being used (appears to be one of it's primary functions). They can do a decent job for what little functionality they have been given. Most people don't give them a second thought....indicative of a successful evolutionary design, I think.

I think that if you gave a top industrial designer, one who embraced a more modern paradigm, a list of required functionality and a couple of days to stew on it, they could come up with something far superior.

If I gave you a simple phrase, you would come up with your own images in your mind...all of us would. My phrase for a next generation flash..."crouching tiger hidden flash"

--
eddyshoots

 

[wlad]

Ahhh form following function. Obviously this is a tried and true design and engineering principle but for a successful implementation one has to truly identify all of the required functionality. The photographic industry as a whole hasn't shaken up these flashes in decades even though customer usage and much of the underlying technology has changed dramatically.

Why do DSLRs look like film SLRs and digital rangefinders like film rangefinders ?

The same holds true for flashguns - It's a proven design that can not be completely redesigned due to the limits of the current technology. You would still end up with the same design.

Right. To eliminate red eye (and I'll add, having the light path clear larger lenses) one must indeed move the flash several inches from the lens centerline... at the moment of the shot. There's the rub. We are only shooting for 1/60th of a second, yet we are moving, watching and waiting for many seconds, minutes and hours between these moments. Having the flash head six inches above the hot shoe while the photographer is moving through a crowded dance floor or through the pre dawn forest or sitting in a coffee shop with friends doesn't fit the function of safe and stealthy travel.

gosh. just wait for those nano hyper teleporters to get released - you will keep your flashgun at home, and just teleport it to your hot shoe the moment you take the picture.

This is untrue. The worst possible flash, body and lens combination is when you have larger lenses. The heavy lens forces the camera to hang in a nose down orientation which in turn forces the flash straight out from the body. It's extremely awkward to carry and downright dangerous for the vulnerable hot shoe connection. I absolutely hate having my larger flash (SB800s) on my camera with a 70-200 2.8 because it becomes a walking insurance claim. It's simply a poor design.

how do you move in a crowded area with open scissors ? Must be poor design as well.

I think that if you gave a top industrial designer, one who embraced a more modern paradigm, a list of required functionality and a couple of days to stew on it, they could come up with something far superior.

not with today's technology

 

[blues4u]

Flash, the other half of photography.
It can be amazing & is worth every bit of research!

 

[eddyshoots]

Ahhh form following function. Obviously this is a tried and true design and engineering principle but for a successful implementation one has to truly identify all of the required functionality. The photographic industry as a whole hasn't shaken up these flashes in decades even though customer usage and much of the underlying technology has changed dramatically.

Why do DSLRs look like film SLRs and digital rangefinders like film rangefinders ?

Probably has more to do with the "who moved my cheese?" referenced above. Conservative design by ultra conservative companies. We no longer have two rolls stretching film across the light path...yet that is still what our cameras look like. I'm not an expert at ergonomics but it is almost a certainty that holding a relatively heavy object (big camera, big lens, big flash) three or four inches off to the side of the center of gravity is sub-optimal. This is overly conservative design, cowardly design rather than purely proven design that, in my opinion, is doing little to optimize the user experience.

The same holds true for flashguns - It's a proven design that can not be completely redesigned due to the limits of the current technology. You would still end up with the same design.

I think not. What more can I say? I think there is plenty of room for improvement in the way we take pictures and how we interact with the technology and you do not. Historically, predictions about how this type of science or that type of technology has been perfected are usually proven wrong.

Right. To eliminate red eye (and I'll add, having the light path clear larger lenses) one must indeed move the flash several inches from the lens centerline... at the moment of the shot. There's the rub. We are only shooting for 1/60th of a second, yet we are moving, watching and waiting for many seconds, minutes and hours between these moments. Having the flash head six inches above the hot shoe while the photographer is moving through a crowded dance floor or through the pre dawn forest or sitting in a coffee shop with friends doesn't fit the function of safe and stealthy travel.

gosh. just wait for those nano hyper teleporters to get released - you will keep your flashgun at home, and just teleport it to your hot shoe the moment you take the picture.

Wow, sounds great...but why not just teleport the whole camera to your hand? Or am I just being ridiculous?

This is untrue. The worst possible flash, body and lens combination is when you have larger lenses. The heavy lens forces the camera to hang in a nose down orientation which in turn forces the flash straight out from the body. It's extremely awkward to carry and downright dangerous for the vulnerable hot shoe connection. I absolutely hate having my larger flash (SB800s) on my camera with a 70-200 2.8 because it becomes a walking insurance claim. It's simply a poor design.

how do you move in a crowded area with open scissors ? Must be poor design as well.

Well you close the scissors first....that eliminates two sharp edges and one of the two points.

I think that if you gave a top industrial designer, one who embraced a more modern paradigm, a list of required functionality and a couple of days to stew on it, they could come up with something far superior.

not with today's technology

--
eddyshoots

 

[phantomB]

Here's an example of a useful flash in the challenges section of DP review. http://www.dpreview.com/challenges/Entry.aspx?ID=445416

 

[Suntan]

I'm not disagreeing with you. I'm just putting it like it is.

As you said yourself, cameras still have the same form factor as they did when the design required film to slide from one side to the other. We still reference an "ISO" file speed standard even when we no longer have film, etc. etc. Camera users as a whole are folk that are resistant to change.

As for your desire to have the flash pop up 6" at the time of taking the picture, no thanks for a multitude of reasons.

-Suntan

 

[eddyshoots]

As for your desire to have the flash pop up 6" at the time of taking the picture, no thanks for a multitude of reasons.

Well dude,

Without anyone designing anything, no top level industrial designer, without ever seeing a product or prototype, never having held or used said item, no reviews or previews ....nothin' You've soundly shot down even the idea of multiple position flash.

I think you've proved your point. Photographers don't like change.

Nobody better move your cheese.
--
eddyshoots

 

[Suntan]

I didn't say I was against a new design. I just said I have no interest in a flash that pops the strobe head up and down 6".

In any case, I'm not too bothered about the industrial design of my flash. There's a lot of things I'd rather have updated or changed with today's photo gear prior to worrying about its industrial design.

Oh, and you're about 8 years too late with the incessant "moved my cheese" references...

-Suntan

 

[sshoihet]

I work in product design so I'll take the challenge. You give me a napkin sketch of what your flash looks like and I'll model it up for you.

Product requirements:

• head must be as far away from the lens centerline as posible
• head must be able to zoom to cover 14-120mm
• head must rotate horizontally 180° to the left and right
• head must be able to tilt down to -7° or up to 90
• head must hold a white card and diffuser lens
• must hold light source
• must hold a power source
• must mount to camera hot shoe
• must be sturdy enough for it's intended use
• must hold associated electronics including a large capacitor, IR sensor, thermal cutout and electronics for manual and automated control including user interface with LCD screen.

It should have a limited number of moving parts because each joint increases the probability of product failure.

It should have universal appeal to both profesionals and amateur photographers.

I hear from people all day long about how something needs to be "better" but they can't tell me what that is. Often what they would like is impractical, lacks durability, and would lack market appeal because it would either be too heavy or too expensive. Just because you think something is needed, doesn't mean people will want to buy it.

I'm sure Nikon, Canon, Pentax and all the other camera manf. employ many industrial and mechanical design engineers who put a significant amount of thought into the form and function of their products. Sometimes there is a very good reason why nobody does something different... they already tested it out and it doesn't work very well.

 

[eddyshoots]

I'm not entirely sure the napkin sketch I would give you would live up to what a "top industrial designer" like a Johnathon Ive would produce. Therefor, I'll pass on your challenge.

I work in product design so I'll take the challenge. You give me a napkin sketch of what your flash looks like and I'll model it up for you.

Product requirements:

• head must be as far away from the lens centerline as posible

This is only true for shooting straight flash to eliminate red eye and lens shadow. While I understand that Nikon can't pull the rug out of all the straight on flash shooters....this is an 'almost' irrelevant requirement.

• head must be able to zoom to cover 14-120mm

For the same reasons as above...I don't really care if the camera head can automatically sense that I have a 200mm lens or a 24mm lens and adjust accordingly.

• head must rotate horizontally 180° to the left and right

Darn tootin'

• head must be able to tilt down to -7° or up to 90

I think the -7° is another throwback... a rarely needed feature that I would not mind removed from my flash....although like the features above, needed to sell the flash.

• head must hold a white card and diffuser lens

Both are a waste of time....but I guess we'd have to put it in.

• must hold light source
• must hold a power source
• must mount to camera hot shoe
• must be sturdy enough for it's intended use
• must hold associated electronics including a large capacitor, IR sensor, thermal cutout and electronics for manual and automated control including user interface with LCD screen.

It should have a limited number of moving parts because each joint increases the probability of product failure.

It should have universal appeal to both profesionals and amateur photographers.

I hear from people all day long about how something needs to be "better" but they can't tell me what that is. Often what they would like is impractical, lacks durability, and would lack market appeal because it would either be too heavy or too expensive. Just because you think something is needed, doesn't mean people will want to buy it.

I'm sure Nikon, Canon, Pentax and all the other camera manf. employ many industrial and mechanical design engineers who put a significant amount of thought into the form and function of their products. Sometimes there is a very good reason why nobody does something different... they already tested it out and it doesn't work very well.

Like you, I work in the product design business and would counter that much of what comes out of a company has little to do with the talent or numbers of engineers in an organization. A lot of my work is in the automotive business. GM in the eighties and nineties arguably employed more talented engineers and designers than any other company in the world....the patents, designs and prototypes that came out of GM during those decades were amazing. Yet they continuously produced crappier and crappier and less and less relevant vehicles. It was management...the company's personality that killed bold vehicles year after year.

Now they are a mere shell of a company compared to what they once were. But decisions are being made on a different level....now there is a confidence at GM that has been missing....their vehicles are relevant again. They don't have the R&D they once had, so they may never again become the world's idea engine like they once were...but things have improved on a product level for sure.

Similarly, I think these Japanese camera manufacturers are very conservative by their very nature. Because of this, I honestly don't think that things will ever change quickly on planet Nikon. They are geniuses at producing sharp lenses, higher ISO bodies and flash communication systems that outperform the competition but they do not appear to put much weight in new design, new software platforms, interactivity....etc.
--
eddyshoots

 

[sshoihet]

I can assure you that the features I listed are important to me and several others that use a flash. I have no problem with the current design and I can't even imagine why you think it needs changing.

If it doesn't stick up from the camera, how are you going to bounce it off the wall behind you?

Maybe the manf. actually realize that their flashes have to function well and not just look pretty; removing functionality from a product is almost never a good idea.

I have a canon 270EX flash, it's a nice little flash but it doesn't come even close to the usefulness of my SB-700 or a SB-910.

 

[David314]

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?

good flash technique will change your life

http://www.strobist.com

 

[eddyshoots]

I can assure you that the features I listed are important to me and several others that use a flash. I have no problem with the current design and I can't even imagine why you think it needs changing.

If it doesn't stick up from the camera, how are you going to bounce it off the wall behind you?

Maybe the manf. actually realize that their flashes have to function well and not just look pretty; removing functionality from a product is almost never a good idea.

I have a canon 270EX flash, it's a nice little flash but it doesn't come even close to the usefulness of my SB-700 or a SB-910.

Just to step back on where this came from, a previous poster used the phrase "pain in the ass to carry". I have participated in several SB400 posts over the last couple of years (probably more than I should have). In those SB400 posts it is a common theme, a very common theme, that the full featured flashes are just way to big to carry. My own experience with on-camera flash suggests that these can be very awkward, especially during event photography. Similarly, I've read numerous threads and articles (blogsphere type stuff) on broken flash mounts. The form factor causes problems for many people, be it damage or inconvenience. These things are not complete....the evolution of this design was stopped before it should have been. Even you, you felt some reason to go out and get that little Canon flash. Yet now that you have it you don't get quite enough "usefulness" from it (the SB400 would be similar). The flash manufacturers haven't put all the pieces together yet, I don't know if they ever will.

Do I have all the answers? Probably not. But as I suggested above, historically; those that have declared things to be finished...fully mature...nothing more to be done here.....are usually proven to be wrong. I see weakness in the current flash designs, I see too many things from a bygone era that have been continued without thought, I see an opportunity for a Yongnou or Sunpak or maybe even a Nikon to push through and design something that meets more of the needs in this world, not the last.

--
eddyshoots

 

[sshoihet]

I bought that little cannon flash because of the price and my SX10IS didn't really require anything better at the time. Now I need something better and I'd never have anything less than an SB-700 for primary use. I do have a Yongnuo 465II that I use when I need a second flash but only because was so cheap.

Anyway, i'm done discussing this, you want a flash that doesn't exist and there's probably a reason for that.

 

[wlad]

how do you move in a crowded area with open scissors ? Must be poor design as well.

Well you close the scissors first....that eliminates two sharp edges and one of the two points.

you mean something like taking the flash off the hot shoe ?

 

[eddyshoots]

how do you move in a crowded area with open scissors ? Must be poor design as well.

Well you close the scissors first....that eliminates two sharp edges and one of the two points.

you mean something like taking the flash off the hot shoe ?

No ... more like closing a pair of scissors. I'd feel silly dismantling a pair a scissors just to cross a room.

I'm being a smart ass but I do see your point. The removable nature of the flash is what makes it flexible and portable.

--
eddyshoots

 

[Winglet]

Well there is no good or bad way. Both options have there validity.

But a flash will only be usefull if you know how to use it. Otherwise its just a paperweight.

Other then that, if you are willing to know/experiment how to work with a flash.
It has its purpose and use at times.
A flash will expand your possiblilities to make/influence the shot.

If you want a flash I would either by the sb900 new or a good cheap used sb800.
Then lookup youtube for diy flash reflectors and diffusors and have fun.

 

[Ilkka Nissilä]

For photography of people indoors, bounced flash or flash on a remote stand with umbrella can be extremely useful. An easy way to get close to studio quality results indoors where available light often looks very bad on people's faces.