First Flash

[Artshot]

Looking to purchase my first flash, and would appreciate some advice. I've got a Nikon D750 and want to use the flash mainly for macro. Trying to figure out Nikon flash history and compatibility makes you wonder if they are the same company that makes lenses.

What makes the top of my list is the new SB-500. Supposedly works wirelessly and even has a movie light. $300.

I could also pick up a used SB-29 macro flash for the same price, but how much more difficult is it to use?

The new macro setup with 2 lens mounted flashes is as good as it gets, but is it really going to get noticeably better photos? Hate to spend $300 only to find I need to spend another $700 to be happy.

While my D750 is a pricy camera, what I stick on the front are mostly vintage manual focus lenses. So spending less is always a good thing. It is an impossible question but I'd be glad to hear your personal experience.

[dje]

Art I have an SB500 which I use with my D610 and it does the job well for me. However I only use it for general people photography around the house. I don't do macro so I can't comment on that.

It is a nice compact unit and is powered by two AA batteries but of course it is not as powerful as the higher end units. There are no manual controls on the unit itself, but it can be manually adjusted via the camera. It is fully i ttl compatible and can be used remotely via optical triggering. I've never used the movie light!

This link gives a good summary of the different SB units.

Dave

[Stagecoach]

Art,

Looking to purchase my first flash, and would appreciate some advice. I've got a Nikon D750 and want to use the flash mainly for macro.

Ok, so I'll concentrate on 'macro' useage.

What makes the top of my list is the new SB-500. Supposedly works wirelessly and even has a movie light. $300.

If you get into macro photography the chances are you will use a flash such as the SB-500 either on camera or bracketed to the side. In addition to this there is a good chance you will make some sort of snoot to get the light up front with a large diffuser area to spread the light on the subject. This will reduce flash power on the subject and I have found at times with my SB-600 (more powerful than the 500) that I'm limited when shooting with smaller apertures to maximise DoF.

This may or may not be a problem, but if I was buying another Nikon flash at this time I would choose one that is more powerful to assist with this specific mode of use.

I could also pick up a used SB-29 macro flash for the same price, but how much more difficult is it to use?

I have never used a ring light but my concern would whether it had adjustable power for each side so as not to get a flat lit subject.

The new macro setup with 2 lens mounted flashes is as good as it gets, but is it really going to get noticeably better photos? Hate to spend $300 only to find I need to spend another $700 to be happy.

I have had the R1C1 kit for many years and love it, but it is used far less for macro work than the on or off camera SB-600 with a variety of snoots and diffusers. I like to shoot live bugs up close and they move, necessitating a constant re-arrangement of the SBR-200 positions which also often get in the way of items such as branches and rocks. If the subject is relatively stationary it a dream system to use.

Do I get noticeably better photos with it as opposed to the SB-600 and snoots/diffusers, no.

It is an impossible question but I'd be glad to hear your personal experience.

So my advice would be as you have no flash at present go for something you can use for normal photography and macro (with some homemade snoots/diffusers) but seriously consider getting something more powerful than the SB-500.

[billtils]

Art

Like you, I have a D750 and an interest in macro. I've been on a couple of "wildlife" macro workshops run by 2 experienced and very capable instructors who have totally different views on flash: one never uses it and the other uses a ring flash all the time.

The "flash" enthusiast has a low cost Chinese unit that he uses in manual mode, and I followed suit and purchased a Viltrox JY670 Macro Ring Light Flash for £80. It is a manual unit but there is now a TTL version for a little more. It works well, has a good range of power settings and the 'A' and 'B' tubes can be set independently. At that price it was (and I'd suggest, for you would be) worth a try. However ... I am yet to be convinced that it makes any difference! This is not a scientific conclusion supported by objective testing, as I've not done shots of the same subject with and without or in a range of lighting conditions - it's just an overall impression.

... now there's an idea for some Project 52 shots ... check back in a few weeks!

[Shadowman]

Art,



Ok, so I'll concentrate on 'macro' useage.



If you get into macro photography the chances are you will use a flash such as the SB-500 either on camera or bracketed to the side. In addition to this there is a good chance you will make some sort of snoot to get the light up front with a large diffuser area to spread the light on the subject. This will reduce flash power on the subject and I have found at times with my SB-600 (more powerful than the 500) that I'm limited when shooting with smaller apertures to maximise DoF.

This may or may not be a problem, but if I was buying another Nikon flash at this time I would choose one that is more powerful to assist with this specific mode of use.



I have never used a ring light but my concern would whether it had adjustable power for each side so as not to get a flat lit subject.



I have had the R1C1 kit for many years and love it, but it is used far less for macro work than the on or off camera SB-600 with a variety of snoots and diffusers. I like to shoot live bugs up close and they move, necessitating a constant re-arrangement of the SBR-200 positions which also often get in the way of items such as branches and rocks. If the subject is relatively stationary it a dream system to use.

Do I get noticeably better photos with it as opposed to the SB-600 and snoots/diffusers, no.



So my advice would be as you have no flash at present go for something you can use for normal photography and macro (with some homemade snoots/diffusers) but seriously consider getting something more powerful than the SB-500.

I also like the R1C1 not only for the ring flash positioning, just have to remember to manually focus or you could damage the lens; and also the option of positioning the two included flashes at different angles. Also, you can buy additional flashes for the ring attachment if two lights aren't enough.

[Artshot]

Thanks for the replies. Looks like I'll go for a more powerful flash. I've already got some great advice here on how to build a support rig and make a diffuser, so being wireless won't be much of an attraction.
Last summer I got some great bug shots around mid day when the light was to harsh for anything else. Just getting tired of waiting for the sun.

[Manfred M]

Art - as I am not into macro photography, I can't give you any suggestions. I am very much into flash photography (I own four studio flash units, two speed lights and a battery powered bare bulb flash).

1. The flash built into your camera is very limiting. It's position cannot be adjusted and sits very close to the optical axis of the camera, so it delivers a very flat, uninteresting light. I've used it as a fill light, when I had nothing else available and use it to trigger remote flashes (master unit) when I don't have my radio triggers along.

2. Ring flash delivers very flat light as well. It is excellent for documenting a scene, as an example, my dentist use it to validate the colour of teeth when preparing a crown or other dental device where the colour / shade is important. Good output for that purpose, but it is definitely not "art".

3. The basic rules of lighting (direction, quantity, quality and colour) all apply to flash photography as well. These apply to all photographic genres, including macro work:

(a) Direction - on camera or ring flash are more or less along the optical axis and light a scene with flat and low contrast lighting and the resultant image tends to be two-dimensional. This is usually not desirable lighting. Off axis lighting produces areas of highlights and shadows, which makes the subject look three dimensional, so this is often what is sought after.

(b) Quantity - it seems to be one of those "laws of photography" that there is never enough light. As Dan has pointed out, this is especially true for macro work when dealing with small apertures to maximize depth of field. Get the most powerful flash you can afford as chances are you will use it at full power for some of your work.

(c) Quality - this describes the feeling that the light gives to the subject. A light source that is large and close to the subject provides a soft and diffuse look, but the light drops off quickly (inverse square law at work). A light source that is farther away provides a hard, edgy look and the drop off is more subtle. Even a speedlight, which is generally considered to be a small light source in general photography tends to be a large light source when working on a macro scale.

(d) Colour - Speedlights tend to emulate daylight (colour temperatures around 5500K). If it is the only light source in your image, no issue from a white balance standpoint, but if other colour temperature light sources come into place, you will get a mixed light situation that may or may not be desireable. While not used a lot in macro work, colouring the light using gels can be used creatively by changing the colour temperature and associated mood of the image.

[Geoff F]

If you have plenty of flash power, Art, you can easily reduce the output by simply adjusting the output compensation, in much the same way as you would vary exposure compensation adjustments. You will also use the flash for other things where having sufficient power will be useful.

With macro insect photography using the Canon 600 flash unit mostly for fill flash use on the shadows or adding a bit of extra brightness on dull days I often shoot with +1 to +2 flash output compensation. With typical settings of 1/200 F14 Iso 400.

But it is difficult to give firm advice without knowing more about your intended subjects, lens size and distance from the subject.

[DanK]

My two cents: particularly if you are thinking you might do macro photography of things that move, only get a TTL flash, or whatever through-the-lens flash metering is called in the Nikon world. It makes things vastly easier and faster. For example, in shooting bugs, I set the flash on auto and the camera on manual, generally around 1/125 and f/13. I leave it at ISO 100 unless the background is such that I need more ambient light, in which case I up it to 200 or 400. The camera does the rest, leaving me free to concentrate on framing and focus, which take all of my concentration. You can always turn a TTL flash to manual mode if you want, but you can't do the reverse.

[rpcrowe]

First, I will consider ring lights... Ring lights do produce relatively flat lighting however many ring lights have a way to control the two sides of the ring separately. This can be used to produce some shadowing in the image. Yongnuo has a ring light which is a pretty close copy of the Canon MR 14 EX, Yongnuo designates this as the YN-14EX. They even copied the designator.

The Yongnuo has the two sided adjustment to change the intensity of the light on either side of the ring to get some shadow sculpting. However, you must realize that the primary use of a ring light is for flat, shadow free lighting. The Yongnuo is available for Nikon cameras as well as Canon and has an assortment of various size attachment rings which will fit most any lens.



The image above illustrates my Siegelite articulating flash bracket with Canon 550EX flash modified with Lumiquest mini softbox. This bracket is no longer produced however, it is often available used on eBay (most often for less than $20 USD). The flash is connected to the camera with a Canon Off Camera Sync Cord. Both the cord and softbox are available as Chinese knock-offs from eBay at a very low price. This setup is shown on a tripod for illustration purposes but, I most often use it hand-held in order to follow the little creepy-crawlies which I photograph.

It is capable of fairly nice lighting either as a fill light outdoors or a main light indoors...



When you are using a softbox, the closer the softbox is to the subject, the softer and more flattering the light will be. So, when shooting with the softbox six to twelve inches from your subject, even a low powered hotshoe flash will have enough power to get a small f/stop. A Manual flash is O.K. but, I would opt for a flash capable to through the lens metering.

I have been thinking of a macro rig with two flashes. On a bar with the camera mounted between. The flashes could be be the small and inexpensive Viltrox JY 610 type flashes. They could be mounted on a tiny ball head and use a clod shoe for that attachment. You could use a small and cheap "shower cap" diffuser on each flash. https://www.ebay.com/itm/4x-Universa...EAAOSwq1NZiKh8
I have seen these diffusers as low as $1.88 USD.

If your cmera allows flash triggering with the built-in flash, that is all you need. The entire rig would cost less than fifty U.S. Dollars. I am ashamed to admit that I have all the gear together with the intention of fabricating this rig but, due to lazinessm I have not gotten around to doing so.

I have "heard" of photographers using a diffuser like this one for macro work but, don't know the results,
https://www.ebay.com/itm/White-Color....c100005.m1851

[shreds]

For macro, another vote here for the Nikon R1C1 set up as you can place the lights to create direction as you wish.

The kit comes with two units but I think it can take up to eight, if going for all around the lens, but this would be very flat at the end of the day and understanding the rules of lighting and contrast etc are important considerations. It is also quite heavy with all those mini flash guns attached.

The book Light, Science & Magic by Hunter et al. is a fundamental tool book for the understanding of lighting and photography and will help an understanding of 'directional' light and how to make the most of macro (and other) subjects.

I would beware of some so called diffusers.

Again this is a whole subject on its own.

Think of the sun as the brightest diffused light possible. Emulate that with a large softbox, but without creating hotspots from flash units can work well for macro. Reflectors in the form of neutral coloured sheets or panels are also important in creating the right amount and direction of light on a subject.

For macro the use of 'flags' to absorb light too is another part of the whole game plan. These can be made from easily cut cheap black rubberised foam sheet, to block or direct light and are much easier and cheaper to create than to buy some overpriced branded products. A metre long roll can be used and cut for projects for years with suitable gaffer tape used to position and fix it according to the subject.

Bending and blending, directing and enhancing light are all considerations for best effect.

[DanK]

I think we ought to take this back to basics. What kinds of macro do you want to do?

If you do bugs, you are going to be limited, unless the bugs are dead or frozen. They move, and they often move fast. That means you don't have time to set up fancy lighting arrays. Most of the time, you will need whatever you are using with the flash--for example, a diffuser--attached so that you can move the camera, flash, and everything else as one unit.

If you do flowers, you have more flexibility, particularly if you do them indoors. However, I strongly suggest that you start simple. You need suitably soft light from the right direction. You can do this with one light, but I find it is better to use two.

I use continuous lighting rather than flash for flower macros. This allows me to see what the effect is as I move lights around, and as I don't have studio strobes with modeling lights, flash doesn't let me do that. My most common lighting is very simple: one light bounced off an umbrella, for soft general lighting, and one direct light with a diffuser on the front. With apologies to those who have seen this, this is a typical arrangement for me:



except that now I use an opaque, silver umbrella to get more reflected light. That has an effect somewhat like a large softbox. The direct light, which is usually from the side, is to create some shadows and depth. I'll post a few that I did with only two lights like this:





Here's one done with a single light:



As you can see, I am relying both on reflection and physical diffuser (a couple of sheets of baking parchment paper I took from our kitchen) to keep the light soft enough. At macro distances, that is not always enough, and lately I have been playing with using a polarizer. If you are going to do this with flash, some sort of diffusion will be important. And if you want to do flowers, you will need some way to hold the flash away from the camera to get the angle of lighting you want. You can use a cord, but they don't reach far, or you can use one that can be controlled wirelessly. And you will need something to hold the flash in position. What I use for the continuous lights are cheap hair light stands. They cost me about $100 each.

I don't own any flags or softboxes, and the only snoot I own is the coke-can diffuser I constructed for bugs. I don't use reflectors other than the umbrella for this kind of work. That's not to say that they aren't handy. I suspect that if I had more of that stuff, I would use it. I'm just suggesting that you start small and add things as you find them useful. Otherwise, it might seem overwhelming.

Even though I don't use a flash for flower macros, I do use one for bugs and for candids of kids.

[Artshot]

I just bought a brand new SB-700. Was looking for used and more power but didn't see anything reasonably priced. The next model up cost more than a nice camera. This will be a multipurpose flash to experiment with all it's possible uses, but for now I want to photo some macro moss, fungus, and lichen on these dark winter days. My summer bug shots have been surprisingly good with pure sunshine.



An hour ago I opened the box and reluctantly grabbed the manual. First thing I see is " For CPU lenses only".
All my favourite lenses including my macro are Non-CPU. They work great with my camera, but now I'm not sure if I will be keeping the flash.

Anyone have any experience with this?

[dje]

I just bought a brand new SB-700.

An hour ago I opened the box and reluctantly grabbed the manual. First thing I see is " For CPU lenses only".
All my favourite lenses including my macro are Non-CPU. They work great with my camera, but now I'm not sure if I will be keeping the flash.

Anyone have any experience with this?

Art I think this is referring to “i ttl” only. With non CPU lenses, you will have to use manual mode for the flash.

Dave

[Manfred M]

The "for CPU lenses only" likely suggests that the i-TTL flash will not work without CPU lenses. I don't know the SB-700 so can't say for sure, but I can use my SB-600 and SB-900 as a normal manual flash. What i-TTL does is uses a weak pre-flash that is fired just before the main flash goes to determine the "correct" amount of light output required, through the camera's metering system.

Although most of my lenses are CPU style lenses, I often use my flash on manual as it give me more control. I find i-TTL is fine for "gun & run" shooting, but in other work, I will tend to shoot on manual only.

My Nikon flashes work quite nicely on my Panasonic cameras, in manual mode. There is definitely no communication between the flash / camera / lenses when I do that.

[JBW]

I've also been considering a flash. Some of the better macro shooters use twin flashes. here is a link to one.

[Artshot]

I returned the SB-700. What I need to work with non-cpu lenses is auto aperture mode in a flash. Nikon only makes this available in their most expensive flash. So I'm waiting for a SB-900 to show up on the used market. There are also some powerful flashes from 3rd party sources that have good reviews and cost 1/5 of what a Nikon flash does. They all have the same features and they are all made in China.

[xpatUSA]

Think of the sun as the brightest diffused light possible.

Please explain. I thought that diffused light comes from a layer of stratus cloud and that the sun itself is close to being a point source of light.

[rpcrowe]

Right you are Ted. Despite the sun being many times the size of the earth, it's distance makes it a point source except when diffused with clouds or a diffusing tool.

Diffused light sources such as softboxes are at their top diffusion when closest to the subject.

A mini softbox at eight to twelve inches from the subject is a large light source in comparison to the ares covered by a macro lens at 1:1 ratio.

If the sun were only closer to our planet we wouldn't have to worry about diffusing it because we would be melted from the heat! Luckily, a flash doesn't generate any appreciable amount of lasting heat!

Ring lights are not diffused but generate a light with minimum or no shadows. Because of the flat lighting, they are not always the most creative way to light a subject. But in certain cases like ultra-macro photography, the lens has to be so close to the subject that a ring light is the easiest option for lighting. Most decent ring lights are separated into at least two quadrants with each quadrant being controlled separately. This allows some generation of shadows to give a less flat look.

BTW: the Yongnuo YN-14 EX TTL Macro unit is a pretty darn nice ring light at a fairly good price. It is a copy of the Canon ring light at a far lower price ($99 USD vs. $549 USD).
https://www.amazon.com/s/?ie=UTF8&ke...wqr3vtgo_e_p38

It is available for Canon, Nikon and other brand cameras.

This photographer shoots her reversed lens macro shots using the built in flash on her camera

https://petapixel.com/2015/05/01/sho...reversed-lens/

If it works, don't knock it and if indicated by the images she has posted, her technique obviously works!

[Manfred M]

I returned the SB-700. What I need to work with non-cpu lenses is auto aperture mode in a flash. Nikon only makes this available in their most expensive flash. So I'm waiting for a SB-900 to show up on the used market. There are also some powerful flashes from 3rd party sources that have good reviews and cost 1/5 of what a Nikon flash does. They all have the same features and they are all made in China.

If you don't want a flash from a Chinese company, have a look at both Nissin (Japan) and Metz (Germany). Both companies have been making small flash for a very long time (well before Nikon made any). If you do want to go with a Chinese company, Godox is considered to be the best of those manufacturers. Some of the other Chinese companies have been rather hit and miss from a quality standpoint.

I do have the SB-900 and am not aware of that operational mode. I'm going to have to try it with one of my newly acquired non-CPU lenses to see if I can figure it out. If you are looking for a used flash, the SB-910 does not have the overheating problem that the SB-900 has, but that might not be an issue for you if you are using it primarily for macro work.