430EX II shots blown out when shooting in manual

R

RichieRich

Suspended / Banned
Messages
223
Edit My Images
No
I've noticed that my 430EX II flash seems to be incapable of low-power shots when shooting in manual mode (or at least, that's the way it seems).

For example. Let's say that I'm shooting with the following settings in a fixed-light environment:

1/80th sec, f3.2, ISO 800. No exposure or flash compensation applied.

When shooting in ETTL mode the images are fine. However, if I switch the flash to manual the images are completely blown out, even if I drop its power down to 1/64. In fact, the images are about 3 stops brighter at 1/64 than when running in ETTL.

Has anybody got any ideas what I could be doing wrong here?

Thanks
 
I'm no flash expert but if you increased the speed or apature would that reduce the light and compensate for the flash?
 
Obviously changing those things affects the exposure, but the point is that with ISO, aperture and shutter speed fixed, when shooting with manual flash power control the minimum power seems to be much higher than that available in ETTL mode.
 
Okay, fair enough - if you don't get much help here try the lighting and studio section.
 
RichieRich said:
1/80th sec, f3.2, ISO 800
Click to expand...

Unless the ambient light levels are very low, those settings are going to be plenty bright enough without a flash.

You should try it with the ISO as low as it goes which I assume is 100.


Steve.
 
Just to see what the flash is doing, set the camera to whatever its flash sync shutter speed is (I assume about 1/200). set the ISO to 100 then start with the aperture at about f8.

Take some shots without the flash and vary the aperture until you get a dark picture in which you can just make out some detail.

Then turn on the flash starting at its minimum power and work it up through its range to see what difference it makes.


Steve.
 
Thanks for the advice - I'll try that.

However, I fundamentally don't understand how the flash set at 1/64 (minimum power) is giving me a far brighter image than when I shoot in ETTL mode, with all other settings being the same.
 
When in ETTL mode, can the camera adjust the settings to suit the ambient light or is the camera still in manual mode?


Steve.
 
I'm shooting fully manual - all camera settings in addition to the ambient light, the shooting position, and the subject, are fixed.
 
Put simply, it seems that the lowest power which is available manually is far higher than the minimum power which the flash is actually capable of - and this is only accessible when shooting in ETTL mode. I can't think of any other explanation.
 
I don't know much about ETTL. Have you checked the image information to confirm that the shutter, ISO and aperture settings did not change?


Steve
 
Possibly its flash duration rather than power output - purely a guess, not even sure it would have that effect but just found this page via google that shows the durations vary depending on output - so I'm guessing it may be possible the camera/flash can adjust the flash duration to even shorter time maybe to compensate for not being able to reduce power to something appropriate for the ettl metered values its wants ? :shrug: :thinking:

http://speedlights.net/2011/03/30/canon-430ex-ii/#Flash-Duration

Also of course, I am assuming your distance from flash to subject remained identical for each picture?

Is it possible to post the samples together with full exif, just in case you have missed something?



edit: something else, in ettl I assume it will adjust the zoom in the flash to suit the focal length - in manual, is it possible it was zoomed so its using an intense beam, whilst you were using a lens that was wider angle?
 
RichieRich said:
....For example. Let's say that I'm shooting with the following settings in a fixed-light environment:

1/80th sec, f3.2, ISO 800. No exposure or flash compensation applied....
Click to expand...

Are those just example settings or are those the settings used?

To be fair, the key elements of the exposure are ISO 800 and f/3.2 - that's a pretty sensitive setup where flash is concerned. What's the subject-to-flash distance?
 
Last edited:
Thanks for all the responses.

Firstly, I can confirm that I'm not making a mistake with the camera settings - I'm shooting in manual and I recreate the problem consistently.

Yes, those were actual shot settings which I gave. Note that I'm choosing settings to investigate the problem - not because they would be my ideal shot settings.
 
buzzlightweight said:
shutter effects ambient light, aperture effects flash light, up your aperture to reduce exposure.

drop flash power.
Click to expand...

You're missing my point about why the minimum power of the flash when set to manual is producing a far brighter image than when using ETTL - all else being equal.
 
Thanks, yes, I took a look at that. Although it doesn't indicate how it may be modified for different modes.

I've just done some test shots of a wooden door. I upped the ISO to see how the ETTL metering coped compared with manual power control - which I set to 1/64 (the lowest output).

The shot settings for both are:
f/4
1/200 sec
ISO 1600 (set this high for the purpose of the experiment)
focal length 22mm

I've just added a 'test shot's folder to my flickr account'. You'll see how one of the shots is completely blown out. This is the one with the power set to minimum on the flash.

Note that if I up the ISO to 3200 the problem get's worse, while ETTL still copes.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/38241283@N04/sets/72157633373777754/

I hope you can access that - give me a shout if not.
 
Ok, the zoom thing.... you are shooting at 22mm, so in ettl the camera makes the flash all wide and lovely for shooting that wide, nicely spread out light [it will actually be at 24mm, which the widest that flashes zoom drops to but you get the idea, big wide pool of spread out light].

IF, and its a very big if, when the flash is in manual, its zoom is set to 105mm, which is its longest zoom length then what its doing is giving a much more centrally focused intense 'beam' of light, if that makes sense, so could easily blow the centre of that image as shown on flickr - however, whether that simple adjustment would blow it THAT much is the thing I don't know - I have never tested the same feature on my Nikons to see. But it is the only variable I can thing of that could play a part in the effect you are getting. :thinking:
 
Thanks very much for taking the time to provide this info Yv. The point which you raise is a good one, although the flash indicates a zoom of 24mm in both cases.

I simply suspect that Canon isn't offering the full range of control that ETTL can achieve - which is annoying as it does limit the usefulness of the flash in manual mode. Then again, there could be something which I'm yet to discover.
 
Yv said:
no problem, but its the only variable you can't check via exif, so worth asking about.

Trouble is, you know when you get the feeling you are missing the flamin obvious :suspect: :bonk: :lol:
Click to expand...

Absolutely. To be honest I don't usually get tripped up by things like this - I'm one of those people who actually reads instruction manuals etc. But this has me truly stumped. I'll contact Canon and see what they have to say.
 
RichieRich said:
Absolutely. To be honest I don't usually get tripped up by things like this - I'm one of those people who actually reads instruction manuals etc. But this has me truly stumped. I'll contact Canon and see what they have to say.
Click to expand...

One of my Canon guns, 580EX, once did something similar - fine in auto, but in manual would only fire at one fixed output, 1/4 power in my case, despite the LCD showing different settings.

Took the batteries out and left overnight ready to send off to Canon, then thought I'd give it another go. It worked fine, and has been okay ever since.
 
I'd be curious if you'd let me know too, since I suffered exactly the same problem with the exact same model of flash. I shoot concerts and in a small venue where use flash, the eTTL was getting confused by the changing lights and the flash power it was choosing ranged from blown-out to next to no light at all. I was shooting in manual, so the only variable was flash power. I decided to use manual and even at 1/64th, it's just too bright. I like to use flash simply as a slight fill flash and leave some of the concert lighting in, but even at the lowest power, it's completely washing out the concert lights. Changing the ISO wouldn't affect that for me, it would just adjust the exposure, it wouldn't bring back the concert lighting. Like you, I've seen the camera/flash do it through eTTL, so obviously the hardware is capable of doing what I want, Canon just don't seem to let me set it the way I need. If you discover anything, please let us know.
 
Firstly I wouldn't be surprised if ettl can give a lower power than 1/64.

But you'll need to test the flash to see what's really happening, it may be that it's faulty, the variable I haven't seen above is the flash to subject distance, which ought to give you clues about flash exposure.
 
Phil V said:
Firstly I wouldn't be surprised if ettl can give a lower power than 1/64.

But you'll need to test the flash to see what's really happening, it may be that it's faulty, the variable I haven't seen above is the flash to subject distance, which ought to give you clues about flash exposure.
Click to expand...

I did my test shots with a tripod. The flash to subject distance, along with all other variables, was constant.

My experiments indicate that the lowest power available when shooting the flash on manual is as much as 4 stops brighter than the minimum power achievable with ETTL. If you hunt around you'll find other posts online about it....but they aren't easy to find.
 
I agree. I was shooting at the same venue as where I'd used eTTL. The stage is small and the drummer is always in the same place, so distance to subject was not the issue. The issue simply seems to be that eTTL can lower the flash power way below what you can set manually, which is pretty stupid when you think about it.
 
I don't really see the issue with this,

If ETTL decides that the flash output is 1/128th of full power then that's what it fires out. If the user decides that it needs less power than the 1/64th available then should a better Canon flash be on the shopping list? ie: 580/600EX
 
RichieRich said:
I did my test shots with a tripod. The flash to subject distance, along with all other variables, was constant.

My experiments indicate that the lowest power available when shooting the flash on manual is as much as 4 stops brighter than the minimum power achievable with ETTL. If you hunt around you'll find other posts online about it....but they aren't easy to find.
Click to expand...

If you've done tests, and you know that the minimum of 1/64 is too bright for the settings you've chosen, I'm confused, what's the question?

I thought you were unsure whether the flash was performing as expected? Then you say it's documented elsewhere that minimum manual setting isn't as low as ettl.:thinking:
 
admirable said:
I don't really see the issue with this,

If ETTL decides that the flash output is 1/128th of full power then that's what it fires out. If the user decides that it needs less power than the 1/64th available then should a better Canon flash be on the shopping list? ie: 580/600EX
Click to expand...

The point is - why doesn't manual control provide the user with access to the full range. Actually, in ETTL it goes far lower than 1/128 anyway - hence the 580 doesn't provide you with complete manual control either.

It really is an annoying 'feature', which makes shooting manual when very little flash is required very difficult / impossible.
 
admirable said:
I don't really see the issue with this,

If ETTL decides that the flash output is 1/128th of full power then that's what it fires out. If the user decides that it needs less power than the 1/64th available then should a better Canon flash be on the shopping list? ie: 580/600EX
Click to expand...

would seem a little disingenuous of Canon to produce a flash that is capable of producing, for example, 1/128 power, but not allowing the user to chose that. One would almost say mean.
 
Phil V said:
If you've done tests, and you know that the minimum of 1/64 is too bright for the settings you've chosen, I'm confused, what's the question?

I thought you were unsure whether the flash was performing as expected? Then you say it's documented elsewhere that minimum manual setting isn't as low as ettl.:thinking:
Click to expand...

The tests showed that the minimum power available when shooting manually is about 4 stops brighter than that available when shooting in ETTL. Not sure how else I can put it.
 
RichieRich said:
The tests showed that the minimum power available when shooting manually is about 4 stops brighter than that available when shooting in ETTL. Not sure how else I can put it.
Click to expand...
I've re-read your original post, and I'm happy to confirm, it never looked like you understood what was going on.
RichieRich said:
I've noticed that my 430EX II flash seems to be incapable of low-power shots when shooting in manual mode (or at least, that's the way it seems).

For example. Let's say that I'm shooting with the following settings in a fixed-light environment:

1/80th sec, f3.2, ISO 800. No exposure or flash compensation applied.

When shooting in ETTL mode the images are fine. However, if I switch the flash to manual the images are completely blown out, even if I drop its power down to 1/64. In fact, the images are about 3 stops brighter at 1/64 than when running in ETTL.

Has anybody got any ideas what I could be doing wrong here?

Thanks
Click to expand...
 
Phil V said:
I've re-read your original post, and I'm happy to confirm, it never looked like you understood what was going on.
Click to expand...

I was investigating the problem, and I performed more tests after I'd posted, some of which were based on feedback which I'd received. My original findings surprised me, and led me to post here to see if others have encountered similar issues - I've since discovered that they have, both here, and through Google searches.

After doing this research I've come to the conclusion that the minimum power offered in manual mode is as much as 4 stops higher than when working in ETTL.

My next step will be to chat to Canon about it - in the meantime if anybody can point out a mistake which I'm making, I'm all ears. In fact, I'd be delighted to learn what I'm doing wrong.

I won't respond to you again Phil as I'm finding your comments more argumentative than constructive.
 
It's well known that most guns (perhaps all) will run lower than minimum manual power setting in auto.

But why would you want that? It's a very low output indeed, flash duration around 1/40,000sec and not easy to control exposure or colour reliably at that level. That's what Canon will tell you, and they probably have a good point.
 
Just thinking out loud...

Your settings: 1/80th sec, f3.2, ISO 800 and 1/64 power.

1/64 is six stops away from full power.

ISO 800 is three stops in the other direction (from 100) so -3 stops total so far.

Lets call f3.2 f2.8 for now. Go up three stops and it's at f8

So all this messing about means that 1/64 power at your settings is equivalent to using full power at ISO 100 at f8 (more likely between f8 and f11)

The guide number for that flash is 25 metres (from a quick search)

Divide 25 by 8 gives 3.125 metres (or 10.3 feet)

So if your flash is closer than this to the subject, 1/64 power is too much light for your settings (if it's further away then I don't know what is happening).

In ETTL mode I suspect that it can turn off the flash quicker and give less than 1/64 power.

EDIT: The guide number of 25 is in it's wide setting. In any other setting, it will put out more light.


Steve.
 
Last edited:
HoppyUK said:
It's well known that most guns (perhaps all) will run lower than minimum manual power setting in auto.

But why would you want that? It's a very low output indeed, flash duration around 1/40,000sec and not easy to control exposure or colour reliably at that level. That's what Canon will tell you, and they probably have a good point.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the reply. Sorry, but I don't get the 1/40,000 sec bit.

Also, if Canon thinks that a certain power is available with ETTL I'm not sure how the logic of restricting it in manual stacks up. After all, most people have discovered this issue when switching to manual during a shoot, only to find that images are totally blown out.

Imagine if you bought a camera body and you discovered that it wouldn't let you set the ISO to anything lower than 1600 when setting it manually! I think that most people would be disappointed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top