So, this is a monitor problem not a Flash/Camera problem? Are you using a laptop or a desktop? Is your desktop connected to your monitor via VGA, DVI, or HDMI?
I Absolutely HATE my SB-400!
(87 posts) (11 voices)-
Posted 3 years ago #
-
Not sure. Is it a monitor problem? Do you agree with Soap's take on the exposure of the photos or alphanikonrex? We both have decent reasons to believe our take is right. ;)
The one nagging thing which makes me doubt my answer is that most LCD monitors ship way too bright. Bright and oversaturated sells. I would have expected alphanikonrex to err the other direction if it were a monitor issue.
(On the other hand the average CRT monitor starts to lose brightness after 16 months.)
Posted 3 years ago # -
Soap: I don't know how many customers bring in pictures to print and don't understand that what they had showing on their home computer is not what we end up printing, I would say a calibrated monitor is a most if you are doing any work on your pictures.
And Alpha, your D300 will try to even out the exposure without things looking like they are been blown out by the flash, unless you like that "deer caught in the headlight look" your SB400 does not have a lot of power, but did you try to bounce into a white card, and just shoot in P, don't fight the camera
Pete
Posted 3 years ago # -
I agree with you soap. The photos of taken in i-TTL at reasonable ISO's all look fine to me. The one of the little kid which he thinks is exposed properly is definitely blown out.
Posted 3 years ago # -
Thanks for the feedback. At this point I think it's completely a matter of preference. So does anybody know why I don't get metering when I use the flash in manual?
Posted 3 years ago # -
Monitor calibration is objective, not subjective (not subject to individual preference).
The first photo of the boy is objectively bleached out and details have been lost. There is no point buying a better lens (unless you want to play the e-penis game on forums) if you're throwing away the data delivered to your sensor by your current lens.
Posted 3 years ago # -
Soap, I appreciate you pushing me to get this $50 Spyder calibrator, but that's still a lot of money to me. I'm not going to be pushed—so far EVERYBODY in my real world has been happy with the images that come from my monitor. Right now, that's good enough for me. I mean, if I was having real problems with my monitor, I most likely would have done something about it already.
Oh, and the point of the better lens is so that I don't have to use flash! I hate flash—only use it when I have to. That's why I bought a monopod—so I can use 1/15 as my shutter speed when I'm shooting for the school yearbook and such.
Posted 3 years ago # -
I'm not pushing you to get it. I'm simply correcting incorrect statements. Monitor calibration is not subjective.
Posted 3 years ago # -
Monitor calibration is not subjective if you use good quality calibrator like 200$ Spyder.
If you use some software so called calibration utility it is not only subjective it is usually useless.Posted 3 years ago # -
mb - I was quoting used prices, not some new-fangled discount brand.
Posted 3 years ago # -
Then I guess I use the useless stuff :^) Monitor calibration really isn't my problem right now, and I don't want to worry about it unless I have too. Nobody's said anything until now, so why should I worry? If suddenly everybody complains, I'll calibrate it, but otherwise I still don't see what it's worth.
Posted 3 years ago # -
I understood that much soap and I think used Spyder is just as good as a new one especially for personal use.
And one more thingy, I am now one happy camper with my monitor calibrated and my printed photos being exactly what I wanted.Posted 3 years ago #
Reply
You must log in to post.
