AndyT Loc: Hampstead, New Hampshire

Although I normally plan things out carefully in advance, I had no time. I was just switching on pocket wizards as my son in law pulled my granddaughter out of a warm tub into the colder room air. Because the background was no great shakes I wouldve shot at 1/125 or 1/250. I wouldve set my lens for f/8 and my iso for 100. There is nothing set for automatic in my camera, so this shot, the first shot, had those settings. I know that I was lucky to get the image. Just dont get the 1/350th of a second with flash, turning out at all.

jdubu Loc: San Jose, CA

Since your flash was on manual, the Pocket Wizards (Flex 5) would not auto set to high speed sync, Perhaps you were the recipient of hyper flash, wherein the falloff of the light output out of the umbrella was still sufficient to be captured by the just faster shutter speed. Just a thought.

Rick36203 Loc: Northeast Alabama

I tried to shoot an image using your settings on my D7000. It would not let me set my shutter above 1/250 if it detected an active trigger in the hotshoe (unless I used an Auto FP setting). I'm sure the D7100 is the same.

Using Auto FP 1/250, shutter speed 1/320, a trigger, and a flash at 1/2 power (that is not capable of HSS), I WAS able to expose an entire frame evenly.

But, my EXIF indicates Flash fired compulsory, no return detected. This is what I expect when not using TTL. Yours said, "flash off- did not fire". Either the camera did not recognize the trigger as active and still fired it, or your light source was not from your flash.

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

Makes sense. Sometimes, in the heat of the moment, things happen that are not what we intend. You got the photo, nonetheless!

RichardSM Loc: Back in Texas

Hi Andy
The way I read your Exif file your flash sync did not fire at all you were using available light. Actually the photo looks real good I like it.

AndyT Loc: Hampstead, New Hampshire

I know it says the flash did not fire, but it doesnt seem to pick up in the Exif date when I use the pocketwizard. I had some windows at least 10 feet behind me. With a shutter speed of 1/350th at f/22, even with the crazy iso of 800, theryre couldnt possibly be as much light as there is in the image without a flash.

GoofyNewfie Loc: Kansas City

Cheaper than a Softar!

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

Certainly.

When I was in the lab, we had all sorts of issues with the transition from film to digital photography. Herff Jones had inherited a lot of older photographers from another company they acquired. That company specialized in photographing large groups of school seniors (and bands, choruses, ROTC companies, fraternities, sororities, etc.). They used 8x10 view cameras to do that! Of course, f/96 is a nice aperture on 8x10 film when you have a lot of rows in your group of 400! So these old hard-headed guys were used to using very small apertures.

When we switched them off of 8x10, they had no concept of the laws of physics, and how a full frame Canon 5D could capture sufficient depth of field in a group at f/8 or so. They simply didn't trust our depth-of-field calculator verified, field-tested, proven recommendations... They would set the Tamron zooms to f/32 and wonder why their senior panoramas were completely fuzzy. Sometimes they would combine that with bad AF settings that focused on the closest foreground in an image, and OOPS! Instant reshoot. Never mind the fact that they refused to CHIMP. ("We never had to do that before!")

It's not fun to be the guy who has to explain things to someone who thinks you're crazy for not letting him use film any more. It's also not a lot of fun to be that guy, and tell a principal she has to call the entire senior class to the football field for the second (sometimes third!) reshoot. Eventually, they all learned, but getting people who grew up using small apertures to stay away from that end of the aperture scale is challenging!

RichardSM Loc: Back in Texas

I use on my Samsung S6 cell a free program it's called Photo EXIF file. it's fairly detailed it does explain a lot of what's going on, I don't know if it available for use on a computer. ISO 800 is often use in dimly lit rooms without showing noise as your photo did not show. as was mentioned f22 at close as you were worked well, where I would have used f8 or f4 for that shot!