6D Sync speed only 1/180s?
- Thread starter Britman
- Start date
- Status
So say if you really want to use the fill flash outdoors, and you narrow the aperture to lower the shutter speed required, is the problem then because the depth of field won't be optimized? Sorry for my smart*ss earlier posts. So say I'm using fill flash, at f/3.2, and shutter required is 1/800, is the problem here that you don't want to narrow the aperture because of depth of field issues, suppose at a wedding event? I'm just trying to understand the difference between 1/180s and 1/250s sync speeds. Again sorry, did not mean to be so offensive.
Typically outdoors if I'm doing flash I'll set my shutter to the sync speed, in this case 1/250s. If I had to set it at 1/180s is there no way to adjust aperture and/or ISO to accomodate this?
Typically outdoors if I'm doing flash I'll set my shutter to the sync speed, in this case 1/250s. If I had to set it at 1/180s is there no way to adjust aperture and/or ISO to accomodate this?
Upvote
0
One more opinion.... I shoot pro dance, and have a 1DMkIV, 1DMkIII, 5DMkIII, 5DmkII & 7D ... My flashes are multiple 580EX & 580EXII, and recently three 600EX-RT's. I have multiple PW TT5's and know about HSS. My big gripe on the 5D's is the 1/200 x-sync 
. I have read all of the above.... Most of the time I only use stage lighting is x-sync is not a factor. There are times that I have to shoot a large group of dancers under poor or very low/ uneven light (hence DOF and aperture setting are critical) and often they are quickly moving and require a 1/200 to 1/250 minimum shutter speed.
Frequently I have to use high iso and the 5DMkIII is amazing. I looked at the 6D as a backup for those situations.
On the rare occasion that flash is used, HHS can be problematic with insufficient power if any distance is involved. As I am usually shooting in a theater situation, using addition flash units are not usually possible. Small increases in shutter speed make a big difference. The difference in a spin if the hand is sharp or blurred. (sometimes the blur is ok)
I realize that the 6D's 1/180 shutter is probable due to physical limitations of a less than premium shutter unit (100,000 life, max 1/4000...) and will not affect most users. The reduction from 1/200 to 1/180 is small but if you compare 1/180 to 1/250, it makes a difference.
I would have expected 1/200 and a 150,000 life from a $2K FF camera.
If I decide to get one, would probably be used as a personal travel cam, which I think is one of the targeted uses. Wi-Fi without Eye-Fi is nice along with a faster SD reader.
. I have read all of the above.... Most of the time I only use stage lighting is x-sync is not a factor. There are times that I have to shoot a large group of dancers under poor or very low/ uneven light (hence DOF and aperture setting are critical) and often they are quickly moving and require a 1/200 to 1/250 minimum shutter speed. Frequently I have to use high iso and the 5DMkIII is amazing. I looked at the 6D as a backup for those situations.
On the rare occasion that flash is used, HHS can be problematic with insufficient power if any distance is involved. As I am usually shooting in a theater situation, using addition flash units are not usually possible. Small increases in shutter speed make a big difference. The difference in a spin if the hand is sharp or blurred. (sometimes the blur is ok)
I realize that the 6D's 1/180 shutter is probable due to physical limitations of a less than premium shutter unit (100,000 life, max 1/4000...) and will not affect most users. The reduction from 1/200 to 1/180 is small but if you compare 1/180 to 1/250, it makes a difference.
I would have expected 1/200 and a 150,000 life from a $2K FF camera.
If I decide to get one, would probably be used as a personal travel cam, which I think is one of the targeted uses. Wi-Fi without Eye-Fi is nice along with a faster SD reader.
Upvote
0
C
Canon-F1
Guest
bdunbar79 said:
yes... many photographer want that. it´s not as if that is a rare occasion.
part of the problem, yes.
movement, motion blur is another.
1/180s vs. 1/200s does not seem much of a difference.
but if you operate at the edge already with 1/200... it is.
you have less leverage in daylight balancing.
ISO effects both daylight and flash.
shutterspeed does not effect the flash power.
there is not much you can do trying to overpower the ambient light fiddling with ISO values.
so you either close the apperture (steals flash power, more DOF) or you use a faster shutterspeed.
i agree that it does not bother all users, but it sure is a concern for serious strobists.
Upvote
0
I can see it being a concern if you are doing a bride portrait outside and you have too much background in focus. That would be annoying. I agree, even at 1/250 outside when I shoot, the ISO is already at 100. I didn't mean for fill flash outside to seem rare, haha ;D
Thanks.
Thanks.
Upvote
0
There was a time when film SLR's had a maximum sync speed of 1/60s, and if you wanted a higher sync speed, you used a medium format system or something with a leaf shutter.
The same logic can easily apply now. If you need a higher sync speed, then use the tool that will give it to you. Sorry folks, not every camera can have every feature.
The same logic can easily apply now. If you need a higher sync speed, then use the tool that will give it to you. Sorry folks, not every camera can have every feature.
Upvote
0
neuroanatomist said:
Not to sound like an ass, but I know all that, and i don't care. we can put a man on the moon, but we can't figure out how to get a faster synch speed? I take it you are some sort of doctor or at least a very well educated man. That is great and we are glad you hang here, but surely there is a way to get this done. I see impossible things get done all the time.
bdunbar- HSS will get you the "correct" exposure at whatever f stop shutter speed you need, and it's very handy, but it has limits. i shoot weddings and most of the time i'm standing outside in the sun trying to light a large group of people. say you get an exposure of iso 100 f5.6 at 1/800th. with a camera that has a synch speed of 1/200 i'd be 2 stops over that. when the HSS synch fires it doesn't fire one blast(let's ignore TTL preflash here) when the shutter is completely open, it fires over and over again, at a lower level, each time draining the batteries. After a large shot like that your batteries are strained, and the flash't range is limited more and more as you move past that 1/200th limit. you want to light a group with a larger light source than a direct flash? well, that eats light power. want them all lit with roughly the same amount of light, that means back the light up, and that eats power. that's just for fill. you want to overpower the sun a bit, as i usually do? now your in big trouble. you shutter has to be open for 1/200. the sun is beaming down for 1/200 onto your target. you can't go faster to limit the sun, so you stop down. maybe to f16. cool, now your unflash lit areas are looking nicey nice. Now you just bring up the flash to the level you like. I hope you have some power, as now you are shooting into an f16 sized hole for only 1/200. i use a 580,550,2x430's. most of the time i borrow my helpers 580 and i gang it with my 550/430's as a super "a"channel(gaffer's taped together, really!). when that doesn't work, and i expected it not to work, i haul out my big black box of sun, a speedotron 2400ws powerpack. but it's really a pain to use in the field and the thought of dying or killing someone with it's high voltage isn't nice. if this all seems to be crap. go outside mid sunny day. shoot a target from 10-15ft away with your flash at full power(manual)and full synch speed. then see what you get with hss at 1/250-1/500. if your target is small and you are close(with your light) you will be fine. otherwise.... actually, i've been typing for so long i might even be starting to confuse myself, i hope this is of some use.
Upvote
0
i know a lot of people are complaining about this, but i'm not totally sure why.
i use flash(es) ALL THE EFFING TIME, so believe me, i understand the limitations of 1/180. however, this camera is not aimed towards people like that. this is basically a rebel/x0D series camera just FF.
I think the problem is that since its FF people are assuming that it's meant to be a pro body, but it's not. that's what the 1DX and 5D3 are for. If you're doing paid event gigs like weddings then you shouldn't even be considering this camera in my opinion. this thing is for casual shooters who just really want a FF, and that's it.
I don't think that Canon is going out of it's way to cripple this thing just to make the 1dx and 5d3 look better. they are trying to get a FF that is "affordable" and doing so means that they can't add all the other features to it - a high sync speed being one of them.
i'm no engineer, but i'd think that it costs more money to add higher sync speeds because of the components that go into it. i'd also assume that once you get around the 1/200 it starts costing much more to increase it just a little bit.
besides, the only time when this really matters is when you are shooting portraits in bright sunlight - that's the only time that you really need high sync speeds (not only, but pretty much). otherwise, you typically shoot anywhere from 1/20-1/100 in order to bring the background into the shot as well (depending on the room size of course).
either way, if you're doing paid gigs stop looking at this camera. it's meant for casual shooters who really want FF. canon already has bodies aimed at higher-end users.
i use flash(es) ALL THE EFFING TIME, so believe me, i understand the limitations of 1/180. however, this camera is not aimed towards people like that. this is basically a rebel/x0D series camera just FF.
I think the problem is that since its FF people are assuming that it's meant to be a pro body, but it's not. that's what the 1DX and 5D3 are for. If you're doing paid event gigs like weddings then you shouldn't even be considering this camera in my opinion. this thing is for casual shooters who just really want a FF, and that's it.
I don't think that Canon is going out of it's way to cripple this thing just to make the 1dx and 5d3 look better. they are trying to get a FF that is "affordable" and doing so means that they can't add all the other features to it - a high sync speed being one of them.
i'm no engineer, but i'd think that it costs more money to add higher sync speeds because of the components that go into it. i'd also assume that once you get around the 1/200 it starts costing much more to increase it just a little bit.
besides, the only time when this really matters is when you are shooting portraits in bright sunlight - that's the only time that you really need high sync speeds (not only, but pretty much). otherwise, you typically shoot anywhere from 1/20-1/100 in order to bring the background into the shot as well (depending on the room size of course).
either way, if you're doing paid gigs stop looking at this camera. it's meant for casual shooters who really want FF. canon already has bodies aimed at higher-end users.
Upvote
0
I am shocked at how many people don't get why 1/180s is a bad sync. It might have helped if I'd mention that it's bad for strobist style photography where you are fighting ambient light and flash power.
Aperture controls flash
Shutter (x-sync) controls ambient
Take the picture below taken with a Fuji X100, the shutter was set to 1/1000s and aperture to f/5.6. If my shutter was 1/180s the sky would be completely washed out. To combat it I'd have to increase the aperture but doing that means I'd have to increase the flash power to a point it would run out of steam, unless you have a very powerful flash.
Yes you can do it with HSS but that would require you to use a bare flash, very harsh light.
Aperture controls flash
Shutter (x-sync) controls ambient
Take the picture below taken with a Fuji X100, the shutter was set to 1/1000s and aperture to f/5.6. If my shutter was 1/180s the sky would be completely washed out. To combat it I'd have to increase the aperture but doing that means I'd have to increase the flash power to a point it would run out of steam, unless you have a very powerful flash.
Yes you can do it with HSS but that would require you to use a bare flash, very harsh light.
Upvote
0
I think Keith's statement would still stand though. If you are taking those types of photos, you're not buying a 6D, in all likelihood.
Or just do as my original suggestion that wasn't very helpful: Get a lens with f/0.2 or so and the aperture is so wide you don't require flash 8) 8)
Or just do as my original suggestion that wasn't very helpful: Get a lens with f/0.2 or so and the aperture is so wide you don't require flash 8) 8)
Upvote
0
S
SRHelicity
Guest
keithfullermusic said:
I only know a single Rebel owner that has an external flash -- everyone else uses the on-camera flash. That's the thing I don't get about the 6D. A lot of people are talking about how this is aimed at the casual / "soccer mom" photographer. However, why would Canon leave off the on-camera flash in such a case? In addition, if one must use an external flash, why limit it to 1/180s sync speed? In addition, why not add an articulating screen, seen by many (incorrectly, IMO) to be a consumer-line feature?
I also don't see this as the FF upgrade path for 7D owners. One of the primary highlights of the 7D, at the time it was released, was it's very sophisticated AF system. Heck, that's still one of the primary selling points over the other crop cameras. Are many 7D owners who bought it for the awesome AF system really going to go for the 6D, with it's 11 AF points + 1 cross-type? Yes, the AF will work in very low light levels, but it's still an extremely limited AF system for anyone coming from a 7D. Motion tracking with 11 pt AF? Oy.
Maybe it's for landscape photographers who don't use the flash much and who aren't worry much about fancy AF systems. I suspect the high ISO noise performance will be good, though I cannot imagine, for the life of me, that it'd be any better than that from the 1DX or 5D MKIII. After all, Canon wouldn't release a $2100 6D with better noise performance than the recently-released, $3500 (list) 5D MKIII. In addition, I can't imagine that Canon has "fixed" the shadow banding problem common to Canon sensors (see Fred Miranda's nice 5d MKIII vs. D800 comparison for this), otherwise they would have implemented it in the 5D MKIII.
Is the difference between the sensor in the 60D and the sensor in the 6D really $1100? The AF in the 60D is better, and the 60D has an articulating screen. Really, it looks like only real benefits of the 6D over the 60D are the dual-SD slots, the FF sensor, and the built-in WiFi and GPS. I know Canon sells add-on GPS units for ridiculous amounts of money, but GPS units are extremely cheap now-a-days, so it's not like adding GPS to a camera really costs Canon much money.
Upvote
0
L
Loswr
Guest
risc32 said:
If that was your intent, you missed the mark just a bit.
Sure, it's possible. So are cars that get 150 mpg, cures for cancer and the common cold, and provision of food and potable water to all people on the planet. It's just a question of will and resources.
If Canon's entire customer base demanded higher X-sync, we'd get it. But 4 pages of bitching about this vs. the 26-page and growing thread bitching about the other perceived 6D shortcomings pretty clearly says that people who know what X-sync speed is, much less care about it, are in the minority - and expending R&D resources to satisfy a minority of your customers does not make good business sense.
Upvote
0
@SRHelicity - agree that this isn't an upgrade from a 7D, which is why I said this is a FF Rebel/x0D series camera. The point about the flash is good, but I think they plan on selling that little 270EX or whatever it's called to go with it.
Upvote
0
- Status
Similar threads
