Site Supporter
- Followers
- 30
- Following
- 1
- Joined
- Aug 18, 2020
- Posts
- 3,766
- Likes Received
- 4,632
- Name
- Uncle Kev
- Country
- United Kingdom
- City/State
- Ormesby St Margaret
- CC Welcome
- Yes
As the title suggests, a post about using a flash with Macro, and the use of OSS with it.
In the past I have always shot with the OSS on, given that I rarely use shutter speeds above 1/160th for my handheld macro it seemed to make sense, even though I am using a small, low powered flash, but there was something not quite right about them in my eyes, Yes they looked ok, and I've posted a few in the past, but I thought I'd try without the OSS. This has transformed the images, much sharper than with it on. So why? I'm really not steady holding the macro, I actually find it harder than with the zoom, so you would again think OSS makes sense, but it clearly conflicts with the flash, which I am aware should freeze any movement anyway, but if that's the case, why would it m=not freeze movement caused by OSS?
Thoughts? It's an interesting discovery (from my point of view at least)
In the past I have always shot with the OSS on, given that I rarely use shutter speeds above 1/160th for my handheld macro it seemed to make sense, even though I am using a small, low powered flash, but there was something not quite right about them in my eyes, Yes they looked ok, and I've posted a few in the past, but I thought I'd try without the OSS. This has transformed the images, much sharper than with it on. So why? I'm really not steady holding the macro, I actually find it harder than with the zoom, so you would again think OSS makes sense, but it clearly conflicts with the flash, which I am aware should freeze any movement anyway, but if that's the case, why would it m=not freeze movement caused by OSS?
Thoughts? It's an interesting discovery (from my point of view at least)