Back to your photo of the African American wedding couple and settings: 1/200th @ f1.6 @ 1600 ISO. Shortly after that you listed six different settings that all contribute to the outcome – but you did not mention focal length. The reason I bring this up is that, with an aperture of f1.6 the depth of field captured within the subject – is amazing. What was your focal length in order to get this much depth of field at f1.6 within the subject (the couple dancing)? Or – how far away were you from them? Or – what part of whose body did you focus on? (His ear?) I now notice that his hand is slightly out of focus but otherwise the depth of focus on the couple has to be at least two feet – I just can’t see it at f1.6.

Adi … at some point, the need for a lower ISO and higher shutter speed overrides the need for the ambient light to play a large part in the final image. When you’re starting to hit 3200 ISO, then you’re at that point. ; )

So in the scenario you have there, I wouldn’t be concerned with what the camera’s meter says … but instead just rely on the TTL flash exposure (or manual flash) to take care of the exposure.

Neil vN

Adi … then you improvise and adapt. Change things.

It’s impossible to give advice that will cover every possible scenario. So with that in mind, you have to consider the information on this website, take it on .. mull over it .. practice it .. and make it your own. Having an understanding of these techniques and how certain things inter-relate, such as:
– shutter speed, aperture, ISO
– balancing flash with ambient light,
– direction of light,
then you will be able to use these techniques in various other ways.

Much of the material on this website isn’t quite a strict “how to” guide, but rather information for you to get to that aha! moment when things start to make sense.

The info is there. Connect the dots. : )

Neil vN

Neil, by doing this don’t you run the risk of having an under-expose background when you are in a big room and the flash would not have the power to reach the back of the room?

Yes and no. In other words, not quite. But yes.

This is how you’d take an ambient reading. Of course, you have to take the tonality of the scene and subject into consideration. Just like you did there for the snow scene.

This is what I meant by taking an ambient light reading using your camera’s built-in meter. This doesn’t necessarily relate to flash. It is something you’d do anyway for pretty much any kind of photography.

In my opinion, it is essential to do this when you do any kind of non-studio photography with flash. You need to start with the ambient light, and then add a certain amount of flash to it.

The point I am trying to make, is that you’d do this independent of whether you’d be using flash or not.

Now, when you use flash, you need not expose correctly for your ambient light. Quite often you don’t want to.

For example, you might want to under-expose your ambient light, and then use flash as a main source of light to bring the exposure up to correct levels.

But your intent and your approach will vary, depending on the scenario you find yourself in.

Neil vN

Thanks Carol

Hi there Lisa ..

If you set your flash to Auto, it works closer to the way TTL works, in that there is some kind of automation with the flash exposure metering. With Auto, the flash exposure is metered via a sensor on the flashgun itself, and controlled by the flash. But your approach in working with an Auto flash isn’t too dissimilar from working with a TTL unit.

I’m not au fait with the Metz unit at all, so can’t give specific advice on why the different modes would differ. The best I can offer is the advice to just get accustomed to how the flash responds in the different modes, and learn how to adapt to it. Just like you have there.

The spot-metering might be something that is throwing your flash off, since some cameras take spot-metering into account when using TTL flash. Personally, I keep my cameras to Matrix / Evaluative metering when using flash.

best of luck

Neil vN

Thanks!