The Canon Speedlite 430EX

Thumbnail: Dolly saucer 1

Thumbnail: Dolly saucer 2

The Canon Speedlite 430EX flash lets me take advan­tage of a 1/200 X‑sync speed, which means that high-speed shots such as these are now pos­si­ble in low light­ing con­di­tions. I picked one up this week, so most of my free time has been spent learn­ing the capa­bil­i­ties of an exter­nal flash unit. The tilt-and-swiv­el head means that I can bounce the flash off a ceil­ing to soft­en the light, or take advan­tage of the sur­round­ings, such as bounc­ing it off my stove (the pic­ture on the left) or off my fridge (the pic­ture on the right). There’s also a low-pro­file AF assist beam that’s a huge improve­ment over the seizure induc­ing on-board flash unit.

I decid­ed to go with a Canon brand flash so I could have full E‑TTL meter­ing sup­port (which fires an unde­tectable low-pow­ered pre-flash for eval­u­a­tive meter­ing done through the lens) to match the Rebel XT shell. One of the coolest things about the 430EX is that a set of motors auto­mat­i­cal­ly adjust the zoom range to match the lens, and it can be used as a slave unit that can be opti­cal­ly (which also means remote­ly) trig­gered from a mas­ter unit for up to four light sources.

Even though there are tons of oth­er acces­sories I’d like to have, such as a Sunpak hand strap (which would be a good com­pro­mise between the safe­ty of a neck strap and the con­ve­nience of no strap), some Kenko exten­sion tubes (for macro pho­tog­ra­phy), or a portable micro­drive, I thought that a flash would cur­rent­ly best serve my needs. This isn’t even to men­tion the options for some sweet glass, like a lens with image sta­bi­liza­tion, a tele­scop­ing range, or even some­thing from the L series which I’d have to put a sec­ond mort­gage on my house to afford. I think that I’m only begin­ning to under­stand how expen­sive a hob­by pho­tog­ra­phy is.

4 comments

  1. you’re right about expen­sive.

    I have nev­er used a flash to take “art­sy” pho­tos. My for­mal train­ing for­bade me to do so; I learned to make do with avail­able light. But I think, should I want to start using flash, I’d have to under­go anoth­er train­ing alto­geth­er just for that. It seems a bit too tricky.

    Nice cat pho­tos. I espe­cial­ly like the sec­ond one.

  2. That’s a fur­ry tongue…haha ;)

  3. I’ve nev­er had for­mal train­ing in pho­tog­ra­phy, so I’m nev­er exact­ly sure what I’m doing, but I’m sure there are some sce­nar­ios that require a flash (extreme low-light, more than 15 sec­onds for a prop­er expo­sure with a mov­ing sub­ject). Some even con­sid­er crop­ping or dig­i­tal manip­u­la­tion to be cheat­ing, but I’ve decid­ed that I’ll use the tools avail­able to me.

    And the milk does make the lit­tle bris­tles on Dolly’s tongue stand out, heh.

  4. I just refrain from shoot­ing under low-light con­di­tions. ; )

    Digital manip­u­la­tion. There are edit­ing tech­niques to be found in imag­ing soft­wares that one can do “tra­di­tion­al­ly” in a dark­room. I would glad­ly make use of those tools (brightness/contrast, grain, resize, crop ‑though I try not to crop- etc.) in Photoshop, but, as purist ‑or neo-purist- as it may sound, none that would make my pho­tos look too weird or too fan­cy, or alter them beyond recog­ni­tion.

Leave a Reply