Flash 580ex VS Metz

Bodley

Trying to get a handle on flash photography and I've read over at DP that for the 1DmkII the Canon 580ex using ETTL II doesn't hold a candle to the Metz Flashes using auto.

I hate to hear this since I have the 580ex and 550ex flashes already (w/ LSII on the way). But, if the Metz are that much better maybe I should sell my Canons and switch.

Anyone used these flashes? Results / Recommendations? Which Metz Unit?

Thanks,
Greg

Shay Stephens

In what way? How is the metz described as better?

Just to let you know, I don't use either. I use Sunpak 555 all in manual mode and have not had any trouble that would lead me to lust after the Canon or Metz

But I am always open to new ideas hehehe

Bodley wrote:

Trying to get a handle on flash photography and I've read over at DP that for the 1DmkII the Canon 580ex using ETTL II doesn't hold a candle to the Metz Flashes using auto.

I hate to hear this since I have the 580ex and 550ex flashes already (w/ LSII on the way). But, if the Metz are that much better maybe I should sell my Canons and switch.

Anyone used these flashes? Results / Recommendations? Which Metz Unit?

Thanks,
Greg

Bodley

Shay Stephens wrote:

In what way? How is the metz described as better?

Exposure Accuracy and Consistency - Canon 1DmkII w/ Metz in auto vs Canon 1DmkII w/ 580/550 in ETTL II (ETTL II being a function of the camera)

Shay Stephens

Oh. Well, auto is auto. Have a machine do a persons job (creativity) and, well, it can be a coin toss hehehe.

You're on your own man

Bodley wrote:

Exposure Accuracy and Consistency - Canon 1DmkII w/ Metz in auto vs Canon 1DmkII w/ 580/550 in ETTL II (ETTL II being a function of the camera)

mercphoto

Shay has a point about letting a machine do a person's job. he probably uses light meters to get the light HE wants.

That said, I've found the 580EX took some learning for me to use in ETTL mode. Indoors, or close distance outdoors, I find very predictable results with the unit up 45 degrees and the bounce shield extended, with -2/3 FEC. Notice this works outdoors even w/o a ceiling to bounce off of (the point of the bounce shield).

Outdoor sports the flash is pointed straight ahead at -2/3 FEC. In sports, no time to take a light meter reading.

Bear in mind that what is in the image frame can sometimes really fool ETTL metering. Very shiny surfaces, such as polished metal or mirrors or certain plastics can cause issues.

The amount of FEC is personal taste.

Bodley

mercphoto wrote:

Shay has a point about letting a machine do a person's job. he probably uses light meters to get the light HE wants.

The majority of my shooting is sports. The ump's and ref's get ticked-off when I run on the field during the action with a light meter .

Shay's correct and I'm sure his abilities far surpass mine and he doesn't need any help. Unfortunately, I don't currently posses such great flash talent and when I put down $4,000.00 plus dollars on a camera flash combo I do want it to help out when called upon.

(when I read this it sounds like I'm being negative toward Shay - this is not my intention)

Shay Stephens

Ok, here's a question for you. If you are shooting sports just how much variable light do you need? Or does the flash pretty much shoot at constant levels? If there is not much change in the flash output, then why do you need ttl, e-ttl, x-ttl, t-ttl, etc?

The reason I use manual flash is because I don't really find a need for wildly changing flash power. I can almost allways set the flash power to a certain level and leave it there.

Benefit, cheaper flash units

Bodley wrote:

The majority of my shooting is sports. The ump's and ref's get ticked-off when I run on the field during the action with a light meter .

Shay's correct and I'm sure his abilities far surpass mine and he doesn't need any help. Unfortunately, I don't currently posses such great flash talent and when I put down $4,000.00 plus dollars on a camera flash combo I do want it to help out when called upon.

(when I read this it sounds like I'm being negative toward Shay - this is not my intention)

Khaos

I was under the impression that when it came to ETTL2, the lens made the difference in communicatintg to the camera and then to the flash.

How does Metz know how to use this info? I don't think Canon made any of this open source.

Nikolai

My 0.0000002 lumen

Shay Stephens wrote:

Ok, here's a question for you. If you are shooting sports just how much variable light do you need? Or does the flash pretty much shoot at constant levels? If there is not much change in the flash output, then why do you need ttl, e-ttl, x-ttl, t-ttl, etc?

The reason I use manual flash is because I don't really find a need for wildly changing flash power. I can almost always set the flash power to a certain level and leave it there.

Benefit, cheaper flash units

With all my fairly limited 25 years experience I could NEVER get any decent flash exposure from all those auto modes.

I was doing pretty good with my old all manual flash back in USSR times. Then I moved to US and started to use what theoretically supposed to be a much better/smarter hardware (simply due to the fact that I now could actually afford it:-) - and all my flash-aided pictures were total cr4p.:-(

This whole situation changed a few weeks ago, when, following Shay's advice, I acquired Sunpak 555.
I set it to full manual (since there is no ttl adapter for my Sony 828) - and rarely missed a shot since that time.
I still don't have a light meter (I will:-), so it usually takes a few test shots in the very beginning to set the things right. But it's essentially the only price I have to pay. Sunpak's extensive controls on the back of the unit make it *very* easy to setup in the first place, so quite often even my first shot is right on the money.

And I agree with Shay on the other aspect: whether you're shooting sports or a portraits, light usually stays the same. So from my personal perspective all this fancy xyz-TTL auto light metering only steals a valuable time form the actual shooting.. Flash is reading the same settings over and over - and you get a missing jump, or a smile..

I'm not a Luddite, and quite often various auto features are very handy. Also, sometimes you simply don't have a chance to set the light right or do the test shot, so you kinda have to rely on automatic. But so far my experience with lighting leads me to a conclusion that in this area manual process is hard to beat..

Strictly MHO, and no pun whatsoever..

robscomputer

I just was reading about the Sunpak 555 and Googled it. Shay's 555 page was the first result.

http://www.shaystephens.com/sunpak555.asp

I'm very interested in this flash and how difficult it would be to start shooting manual instead of using TTL. Since it's less than half the cost of the 580EX it's price is great. Also since I'm shooting mostly the same subject, I think going fully manual might half better results than letting the camera call my exposure.

Flash photography is a department I really need to learn more about. All these years I've been going auto.

Rob

Bodley

Shay Stephens wrote:

Ok, here's a question for you. If you are shooting sports just how much variable light do you need? Or does the flash pretty much shoot at constant levels? If there is not much change in the flash output, then why do you need ttl, e-ttl, x-ttl, t-ttl, etc?

Since I have never really learned that much about flashes, I have not been using a flash at all. Bought faster lenses to offset. Since talking with others with positive results, I may try some flash shots during the games.

Before, during and after games I have been shooting a lot of sideline, warm-up and impromptu T&I shots in which speed is of the essence and lighting always s#&%s. Also may be shooting 25 feet then 8' then 100' then 4' all very quickly and back to back. Thinking if I incorporate a flash I might improve the end results.