What's new

Lens or Flash

There is a point that i perhaps missed in my statement.
Position of the flash itself.
if on camera, long distances usually wind up not working well.
Flash Off camera anc closer tot he subject give good effects. This is true.
But I am also making the general assumption that if the flash is on camera especially for street photography, there is a distance and conditions aspect involved.
 
I have two suggestions for you and will include pics,
But it will have to wait until the morning as I have a time lapse photo shoot running that is set for 6 hours
And requires the room in darkness. Therefore I am unable to get the specs
I would look at a cheaper flash and a different lens
Details of Both I will post once the time time lapse shoot is finished.
Just got fingers crossed that the batteries in the remote trigger system last.
 
Back in 1985 I did a lot of night photography using Kodachrome 64 and a flash powered by a Quantum turbo battery. I once photgraphed the University of Oregon's Johnson Hall, probably a 40,000 square foot building, at night, using a flash with an aperture of f/8 and about 20 flash pops. I was standing across the street probably 95 to 100 feet away. When you do light painting at night if you shoot from a fairly long distance there is almost no fall-off in the light ,meaning it is even in intensity to within less than 1/2 of a stop over a run of over 25 ft, which allows for pretty much seamless blending of light. starting at first the facade of a building and then firing three or four pops on the side that the camera can see one can do wonderful night works with flash.
 
Last edited:
A suggestion
If you are going out to do light painting of buildings at night. It could be worth contacting your local police and outlining your plans, a call out of politeness, it may save you being tapped on the shoulder and being asked what you are doing.
I have done night photos, not flash but light trails and painting with laser pointers. The local police arrived and asked what I was up to as members of the public had called in about my actions.
There was no problem and it was suggested at the time a call in advance may help.
 
Hi here is that image of the lens
7DF3B8D9-D000-4CF1-9CBB-AA6BFC7E3D95.webp

It is a bit wider range than the sigma you were talking about in post 1
 
Can’t do the flash at the mo as you can see the camera is set up on a time lapse, I dashed in between shots
 
Warning, you better handle the Sigma before you make a decision.
My school got one, and YUK.
The zoom throw is about 60 degrees, and STIFF (to turn).
The Tamron 17-50/2.8 has a much lighter 90 degree throw.
I found that STIFF 60 degree throw to be difficult to precisely set the zoom, when I was cropping in the camera.
 
Check out Tangents, the educational blog written by Neil Van Niekerk. After less than 10 minutes there you will understand why a speedlight flash is so important
 
I went to the Adorama webpage and looked at the Flash, which comes with the R2 remote trigger for Canon. The R2 system is quite nice and there are a lot of other products that Adorama sells that integrate into the R2 system. We have a couple of members here who have had pretty good results with the R2 system.

There are a number of Flashpoint studio lights that also use the R2 trigger system, and that is a real advantage of this particular brand of speedlight.
 
Add to the sigma comments
Not all sigma lenses play nice with all canon cameras. There is a web site on this
 
Thank you for everyone's assistance. I was looking at the Sigma mostly because of the constant f/2.8. I was thinking that would a better upgrade over the kit lens. After researching a bit and seeing mixed feelings on it due to sharpness vs the kit lens. I then thought since the kit lens is pretty good I could maybe overcome the variable and not as good f/stop with a flash. After seeing some opinions I think the kit lens with flash is probably the better way to go and it will provide me with more usefulness than a constant f/stop since I can use it with all my lenses both on and off camera.
 
I have been thinking of upgrading from my 18-55 kit lens to the Sigma 17-50 f/2.8 EX DC OS HSM.
I have also been thinking of getting a off camera flash https://www.adorama.com/fplfsmzcak2.html.
Which would give me the most benefit? I'm stuck pretty much on price range on the lens but obviously have room for suggestions on the flash.

The other option is the 18-135.
The school yearbook has stopped buying Canons with the 18-55 and instead has been buying with the 18-135.
The 18-135 is a more usable GP lens, and we don't have to get a 50-200 to go with the 18-55.
Granted it is not as well suited for lower light shooting as the 17-50/2.8.
 
Check out Tangents, the educational blog written by Neil Van Niekerk. After less than 10 minutes there you will understand why a speedlight flash is so important
Thanks for pointing me to the blog. There is a load of information there. I'll be spending some time there reading and learning.
 
I have a Canon 80D. I shoot some landscapes, birds, family and just some walk around stuff sometimes.
The lens you mention is faster than your current model & slightly better optically, unless your landscapes are shot at night it won't add a huge amount to your abilities. I'd wan't to add a fairly long telephoto much more if birds are a subject. If shooting at night I'd probably want a lens that's faster still so would switch to a prime :)

Lighting on the other hand adds a whole new world.
TTL simplifies usage considerably, but if your willing to put in a bit more effort any of a vast range of legacy flash units could give you light at much lower costs than new units. You do need to check the trigger voltage for legacy flash units - some will damage your camera or trigger.
I'm lazy enough to use TTL flash on a TTL cable much of the time, switching to manual flash with radio triggers when I want multiple lights/fancy modifiers or more camera-flash separation.
 
The flash bulb was invented in 1928, and professional studio flash is generally considered to have been invented in 1939.
Flash powder was in use long before then. Adding light has been the option of choice for many types of photography for over 100 years. :aiwebs_016:
It's a shame so many of us treat it so badly. (including me but not Derrel in the us)
 
Last edited:

Most reactions

Back
Top Bottom