Metz 54 MZ-4 vs Canon 580EX

lynnesite

I need a better flash than the 420EX and Will from shootsmarter had recommended this one, used in Auto mode and manual rather than TTL. Primarily I am into natural light, but occasionally have to shoot either in dark indoor arenas which I'm NOT intending to use flash, that's best done with remotes or strobes, am ok with high ISO stuff under those conditions.

Have a gig coming up where I will have to shoot people and horses indoors in mostly static situations (auction). I have a folding stroboframe, off camera shoe cord, will buy the appropriate diffuser for the new unit as necessary. 20D body, 70-200 2.8 IS (I know, beyond a flash's range) and 24-70L. And 50 1.8.

Any advice would be welcome. Labor Day in Tyngsboro MA, staying in Nashua.


from Fred Miranda--one guy's experience
The "A"uto Mode on the Metz uses the flash's onboard light sensor to determine how much light to emit. Usually, it is dead on. To use it with your Canon, you need to set your camera to Manual mode. Otherwise, your shutter will lock to 1/250th or aperture to f22 in Av and Tv respectively.

I use eTTL with High Speed Synch (HSS) for outdoor fill-in flash photography for shutter speeds faster than 1/250th. In indoor conditions, I find that eTTL results in overexposure. Also, eTTL works with Av and TV modes, but the corresponding camera-picked shutter and aperture are as if there were no flash present.

Thus, it is much easier to use Auto mode on Metz, and Manual mode in the camera. A good setting that I like using is ISO 400, f8, 1/20th, with 2nd flash synch...varying the aperture and shutter speed depending on action in the shot. The slow shutter speed enables some of the ambiant interior light to show.

tmlphoto

Hey Lynne,
I have no experience with the Metz, but I have been very happy with the 580EX. I have been using it with a Gary Fong Lightsphere II diffuser. Using the camera on Manual & setting to flash to E-TTL has worked well for me for flash as main light type shots. I like to set the shutter speed as low as I think I can handhold and set the ISO as high as I can tolerate in order to get as much ambient light as possible. I usually have to adjust the Flash Exposure Compensation (FEC) about +2/3 with the lightsphere, but this varies with conditions. The ETTL does a nice job. For fill flash the ETTL works well in either Av or Tv mode in my experience. JUst tweak with FEC as needed. HOpe this helps a little. If you are going to use the flash with the 70-200 you might consider a "Better Beamer" to add to the flash. This is used by nature photographers to extend the reach of their flash for fill flash when shooting birds and animals. Never used one myself. Good luck with your decision.

ziggy53

Hi Lynne,

One problem I've run into with a situation similar to what I suppose you will encounter, if there is significant distance between the subject and background, the auto feature of most flashes is going to get confused. (I understand even E-TTL can get it wrong if there is a lot of background in the shot.)
Effectively, they will try to average out the scene, finding more background, and washout the foreground trying to illuminate the background. In this situation, E-TTL should be much better, which would indicate either one of the Canon EX series flashes, the 580EX being the most powerful, or the Sigma EF-500 DG Super. Both of these flashes also support High Speed Sync. I have read a couple of users that thought the E-TTL was more consistent with the Canon flash than the Sigma. I don't have either, so this is just collected information.

If you are consistently in the same position, relative to the subject, a manual flash may give wonderful results after you figure out the correct exposure. In this regard, a handle-mount flash might be appropriate in that you can get considerably more powerful flashes. The Metz 70 MZ-5 is about as punchy as it gets, but at $700+ it should be. You may also need to regulate the trigger voltage from this flash with a Wein Safe-Sync High Voltage Sync Regulator, for instance.

You may still need to separately illuminate the background in order to make the setting realistic.

If you are the "official" photographer, you might even consider studio flashes and umbrellas, if you can get permission (and electricity, site, etc.)


ziggy53

pathfinder

tmlphoto wrote:

Hey Lynne,
I have no experience with the Metz, but I have been very happy with the 580EX. I have been using it with a Gary Fong Lightsphere II diffuser. Using the camera on Manual & setting to flash to E-TTL has worked well for me for flash as main light type shots. I like to set the shutter speed as low as I think I can handhold and set the ISO as high as I can tolerate in order to get as much ambient light as possible. I usually have to adjust the Flash Exposure Compensation (FEC) about +2/3 with the lightsphere, but this varies with conditions. The ETTL does a nice job. For fill flash the ETTL works well in either Av or Tv mode in my experience. JUst tweak with FEC as needed. HOpe this helps a little. If you are going to use the flash with the 70-200 you might consider a "Better Beamer" to add to the flash. This is used by nature photographers to extend the reach of their flash for fill flash when shooting birds and animals. Never used one myself. Good luck with your decision.

I will second Thomas' opinion re: the 580ex. Using the 580ex on ETTL and a 1 series camera on manual, I get lovely results, that frequently are hard to distinguish from available light. The biggest problem with any small light source, is that the farther away from the subject the harsher the lighting will look. Is there anyway to use a bounce flash where you are going to be? Using flash at greater than 10-15 feet is going to require more than one light source, or shooting in AV with ETTL which will expose the background with available light and the foreground with the flash.
I think in an arena I would try to set up at least two flashes - controlled by the Canon wireless controller that fits in the hot shoe of the camera body.

lynnesite

Thanks for the great information, I'm going off in to my corner to digest it and probably come back with more questions.

Zig, I usually do not photograph shows and avoid them entirely if they are indoors. This upcoming event is more of a documentation/photojournalistic exercise than selling much to the participants, though I aim to get some stock shots along the way. I think the indoor is small enough to be able to use the 24-70 at the long end, though I'd rather use the 70-200 IS for the IS part, and the flash is sort of in reserve in case I need it. I *do* want flash for the people shots at the indoor auction/black tie dealie on a different day, and for portraiture/fill for general use.

Off to read, thanks soooo much for the details!

lynnesite

tmlphoto wrote:

Hey Lynne,
I have no experience with the Metz, but I have been very happy with the 580EX. I have been using it with a Gary Fong Lightsphere II diffuser. Using the camera on Manual & setting to flash to E-TTL has worked well for me for flash as main light type shots. I like to set the shutter speed as low as I think I can handhold and set the ISO as high as I can tolerate in order to get as much ambient light as possible. I usually have to adjust the Flash Exposure Compensation (FEC) about +2/3 with the lightsphere, but this varies with conditions. The ETTL does a nice job. For fill flash the ETTL works well in either Av or Tv mode in my experience. JUst tweak with FEC as needed. HOpe this helps a little. If you are going to use the flash with the 70-200 you might consider a "Better Beamer" to add to the flash. This is used by nature photographers to extend the reach of their flash for fill flash when shooting birds and animals. Never used one myself. Good luck with your decision.

Thomas, thanks so much--the Better Beamer info says it's for 300mm and up, I suppose that's before the mag factor? So the 70-200 shot at 200 being effectively 280 is why you're recommending it? It looks GREAT and exactly what I need for horses. And it's cheap enough to buy and experiment a bit.

I've used a Stofen diffuser in the past for the indoor stuff of people--you prefer the Lightsphere for that, I'm guessing?

lynnesite

OK, another question. Canon CPE3 Compact Battery Pack

Anyone used this battery pack for the 580ex? Thinking about it for the action shots indoors with the Better Beamer (what a cool thing that is).

ian408

lynnesite wrote:

OK, another question.

Anyone used this battery pack for the 580ex? Thinking about it for the action shots indoors with the Better Beamer (what a cool thing that is).

Yes. I've got a Quantum. There are others but this one does the job
nicely.

Ian

tmlphoto

lynnesite wrote:

OK, another question. Canon CPE3 Compact Battery Pack

Anyone used this battery pack for the 580ex? Thinking about it for the action shots indoors with the Better Beamer (what a cool thing that is).

I have it and it seems to work well. Keeps the recycle times very fast and it is not too heavy. YOu can stick it in your pocket or attach it to you belt or put it in a fanny pack. The cord is fairly long.

lynnesite

tmlphoto wrote:

I have it and it seems to work well. Keeps the recycle times very fast and it is not too heavy. YOu can stick it in your pocket or attach it to you belt or put it in a fanny pack. The cord is fairly long.

I read one guy attaches it to his stroboframe. What sort of batteries are you using in yours--NiMH rechargeables? And if so, is the power curve good enough? (and are they above 1800 mA or so?) TIA!

tmlphoto

lynnesite wrote:

I read one guy attaches it to his stroboframe. What sort of batteries are you using in yours--NiMH rechargeables? And if so, is the power curve good enough? (and are they above 1800 mA or so?) TIA!

I have some NiMH 2300 mAh rechargeable batteries now. I have used ordinary AA alkalines and they seemed to work well. I used it when I shot a wedding, and the recycle time held up all day, but I'm sure the NiMH's are better.

tmlphoto

lynnesite wrote:

Thomas, thanks so much--the Better Beamer info says it's for 300mm and up, I suppose that's before the mag factor? So the 70-200 shot at 200 being effectively 280 is why you're recommending it? It looks GREAT and exactly what I need for horses. And it's cheap enough to buy and experiment a bit.

I've used a Stofen diffuser in the past for the indoor stuff of people--you prefer the Lightsphere for that, I'm guessing?

I think the better Beamer would work with a shorter lens, but may not be necessary depending of the quide number of your flash unit. I haven't personally used it, but I would think it would work just fine at the working distances involved with the effective 280 zoom. If your are closer than that you probably don't need it.

I like the lightsphere, but it is a little cumbersome. If you have a good ceiling to bounch off of the stofen is certainly very usable. I still use both depending on the situation. Niether really works well without a good ceiling and hopefully some walls to bounce the light off of. They claim the lightsphere works somewhat outdoors, but I have my doubts. I suppose if you are very close it would give a larger softer light source. The front area of the lightsphere is about 10x the size of a normal flashhead. I do think that the lightsphere is worth the $50 investment for sure. I would get it and play around with it some prior to your shoot.

lynnesite

tmlphoto wrote:

I think the better Beamer would work with a shorter lens, but may not be necessary depending of the quide number of your flash unit. I haven't personally used it, but I would think it would work just fine at the working distances involved with the effective 280 zoom. If your are closer than that you probably don't need it.

The Better Beamer rocks, I played with it tonight, with the flash head at 45 degrees it worked really well. Here's one shot from it, at f4.5 1/250th but only 85mm.

tmlphoto wrote:

I like the lightsphere, but it is a little cumbersome. If you have a good ceiling to bounch off of the stofen is certainly very usable. I still use both depending on the situation. Niether really works well without a good ceiling and hopefully some walls to bounce the light off of. They claim the lightsphere works somewhat outdoors, but I have my doubts. I suppose if you are very close it would give a larger softer light source. The front area of the lightsphere is about 10x the size of a normal flashhead. I do think that the lightsphere is worth the $50 investment for sure. I would get it and play around with it some prior to your shoot.

I think I'll pick up a Stofen, so much more packable than the lightsphere. Might be able to shoot in available light during the day, but I feel "equipped" now. Still need to practice more. I did shutter priorty mostly. Will try more tomorrow.

tmlphoto

lynnesite wrote:

The Better Beamer rocks, I played with it tonight, with the flash head at 45 degrees it worked really well. Here's one shot from it, at f4.5 1/250th but only 85mm.

I think I'll pick up a Stofen, so much more packable than the lightsphere. Might be able to shoot in available light during the day, but I feel "equipped" now. Still need to practice more. I did shutter priorty mostly. Will try more tomorrow.

Looking forward to seeing some more of your work.

lynnesite

tmlphoto wrote:

Looking forward to seeing some more of your work.

Thanks, more from that dark night. :uhoh Shooting into the last light, did get foreground detail I wouldn't have without the flash/BB.

lynnesite

Or this one, earlier in the evening, shooting straight into the sun. Strangely interesting to me, others seem to like it. I am such a natural light girl, I guess it's fun to think differently.

ian408

lynnesite wrote:

Or this one, earlier in the evening, shooting straight into the sun. Strangely interesting to me, others seem to like it. I am such a natural light girl, I guess it's fun to think differently.

These two are nice shots because they look so natural.

Ian

lynnesite

ian408 wrote:

These two are nice shots because they look so natural.
Ian

Natural, as in it's not obvious that flash was used? I'm such a flash n00b, have only used one when there was no other choice, and that was mainly for fill flash indoor-people stuff.

pathfinder

lynnesite wrote:

Natural, as in it's not obvious that flash was used? I'm such a flash n00b, have only used one when there was no other choice, and that was mainly for fill flash indoor-people stuff.

That is precisely why I like fill flash on the EOS system. With the 580EX or Canon's macro flashes I can fill the foreground with fill flash at -1 1/3 stops and no one is the wiser but me. And it is so easy to do - set it in Av and punch in - 1 1/3 on the flash and I'm good to go.

Nice shots Lynn.

ian408

lynnesite wrote:

Natural, as in it's not obvious that flash was used? I'm such a flash n00b, have only used one when there was no other choice, and that was mainly for fill flash indoor-people stuff.

Exactly. Not obvious (at least to me).

DavidTO

Lynne,

How dare you bury such awesome shots in a thread that's so dryly named after two competing flash systems. Love the dark blue shot and your use of th e flash in it.

lynnesite

pathfinder wrote:

That is precisely why I like fill flash on the EOS system. With the 580EX or Canon's macro flashes I can fill the foreground with fill flash at -1 1/3 stops and no one is the wiser but me. And it is so easy to do - set it in Av and punch in - 1 1/3 on the flash and I'm good to go.

Nice shots Lynn.

I do like how easy it is to do FEC on the 580! My first flash was the 420EX which had no ability to do anything right on the flash.

What distances are you shooting at to drop it that far? I like the little catchlight thingie for close shots, here's one from yesterday, though idiot-girl forgot to check her ISO first (it was at 800!) and the DOF is too short at f4.5. It looks like the EXIF doesn't show flash exposure comp, only the in-camera choice? Makes it harder to do bracketing/what if comparisons.


Thanks again, Ian, and Dave--I'm learning here! I'll have to print the blue one out and see how it looks.

lynnesite

OK, maybe I can be a flash photographer. This was 400 ISO, servo mode, TV, 1/200th @ f3.5, 200mm focal length, Bettah Beamer, 6:14 pm after the sun had left this part of the property. I think flash exposure compensation was - 1 1/3.

pathfinder

lynnesite wrote:

OK, maybe I can be a flash photographer. This was 400 ISO, servo mode, TV, 1/200th @ f3.5, 200mm focal length, Bettah Beamer, 6:14 pm after the sun had left this part of the property. I think flash exposure compensation was - 1 1/3.

FEC on the 580ex is the cat's meow, isn't it Lynn?? If you did not tell your viewers that you used flash for this picture, how many would have noticed it?? Darn few, I'll bet!! Very nice!!

ian408

velcro is a very pretty kitty!

Ian

lynnesite

pathfinder wrote:

FEC on the 580ex is the cat's meow, isn't it Lynn?? If you did not tell your viewers that you used flash for this picture, how many would have noticed it?? Darn few, I'll bet!! Very nice!!

Yes, you're right, even without reading glasses which is handy. I ordered the Weston book "Essential Lighting" to learn more theory. I didn't use the Stroboframe last night, used it on camera. That made it considerably less bulky to handle, though vertical shots weren't always lit right since I couldn't rotate like when I flip the Stroboframe.

I'm not satisfied about higher speed shooting though (yet). The camera's max flash sync speed is 250, but when first shooting last night I didn't have the flash on high speed (tiny icon, but now I know what it looks like when displayed in the LCD panel). So I've gotta try some more. At the end last night, in the dark, I played shooting against my storage container using different levels of flash compensation, ending at the max 200mm distance--it's amazing how well the BB works.

Thanks, Ian, she is a much loved kitty, 16 now, and a very willing model.

I'm trying to learn how not to get flash effect in the eyes, think maybe I should have dialed down the FEC on this shot, what do you think, Path?

pathfinder

lynnesite wrote:

Yes, you're right, even without reading glasses which is handy. I ordered the Weston book "Essential Lighting" to learn more theory. I didn't use the Stroboframe last night, used it on camera. That made it considerably less bulky to handle, though vertical shots weren't always lit right since I couldn't rotate like when I flip the Stroboframe.


I'm trying to learn how not to get flash effect in the eyes, think maybe I should have dialed down the FEC on this shot, what do you think, Path?

I think this looks very nice - If the catchlights are too bright, they are easy to manage in PS. The horse looks like it is in the shade compared to the brighter background but only slide shooters know that film/digital sensors really can't handle lighting variation that well without flash. To casual inspection, I don't see the flash - no harsh shadows. Regarding the catchlights - I think that is best evaluated by the print.

As for rotating to a vertical format with flash... Check out Reallyrightstuff.com and their flash extender for telephotos. If you attach a bar forward beneath the L-bracket on your camera body and attach the RRS flash extender bracket to that - you can then rotate the flash and the camera body in the sensor plane independently of each other. In other words, you CAN have the flash superior to the visual axis in both landscape and portrait mode - food for thougt, no??!! Nice for wedding shooting too.


http://reallyrightstuff.com/mpr/index.html - Attach this to the L bracket forward underneath your lens and attach the flash bracket to this - now the flash can rotate 180 degrees about the lens axis - Voila!! Portrait city!
http://reallyrightstuff.com/tutorials/telephoto/index.html

And yes, I usually use fill flash at 1/200th. Too bad Canon's focal plane synch is not as high as Nikons. It is just a minor cross we have to bear though for the superiority of our glass Flame away Nikonians!! :beatwax

lynnesite

Aren't I kind of getting the same deal (though less elegantly) with the Stroboframe flip bracket? I find it easy to flip it from landscape to portrait, it's just that the bottom bracket isn't fitted to the body the way the RRS is.

As someone who shoots 95% handheld and of course the upper body strength of a female (well, a female who has been hoisting a 5-6 lb setup for 50K+ images), is the RRS the way to go? And since I don't shoot with flash very much although I might use it more now that I'm learning its benefits...the limited 250 speed is a concern with horse action but yeah, the glass is sweet.

The other thing that makes me reluctant to do the RRS thing is the expense--I hope to be able to afford a 1D2 within the next year, and these look really custom to the camera (as well they should be) though the resale value is probably good.

Thanks for all your advice!