<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" version="2.0"><channel><title>Digital Photography Tips and Techniques - Latest Comments in Over-exposed Flash Shots with Tamron AF 17-50 F/2.8 XR Di II</title><link>http://dptnt.disqus.com/</link><description>All about digital photography - DPTnT.</description><atom:link href="https://dptnt.disqus.com/over_exposed_flash_shots_with_tamron_af_17_50_f28_xr_di_ii/latest.rss" rel="self"></atom:link><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Wed, 15 Oct 2008 08:07:47 -0000</lastBuildDate><item><title>Re: Over-exposed Flash Shots with Tamron AF 17-50 F/2.8 XR Di II</title><link>http://dptnt.com/2007/10/over-exposed-flash-shots-with-tamron-af-17-50-f28-xr-di-ii/#comment-3063373</link><description>&lt;p&gt;If you increase ISO on the camera, it can reach further than 3.71m. So 3.98m is not necessarily its limit.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Max&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">picmax</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 15 Oct 2008 08:07:47 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Over-exposed Flash Shots with Tamron AF 17-50 F/2.8 XR Di II</title><link>http://dptnt.com/2007/10/over-exposed-flash-shots-with-tamron-af-17-50-f28-xr-di-ii/#comment-356776525</link><description>&lt;p&gt;If you increase ISO on the camera, it can reach further than 3.71m. So 3.98m is not necessarily its limit.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Max&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">picmax</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 15 Oct 2008 06:07:47 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Over-exposed Flash Shots with Tamron AF 17-50 F/2.8 XR Di II</title><link>http://dptnt.com/2007/10/over-exposed-flash-shots-with-tamron-af-17-50-f28-xr-di-ii/#comment-3061170</link><description>&lt;p&gt;No, I haven't noticed any under-exposure because I bought SB600 just recently. Before that, I used the D80 build-in flash which has a guide number of 13. Given the max aperture f/3.5 of the lens, the built-in flash only reaches 3.71m. So 3.98m is beyond its capacity anyway.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;I will do some test using my SB600, and let you know the result.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Wu Yongzheng</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 15 Oct 2008 03:37:27 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Over-exposed Flash Shots with Tamron AF 17-50 F/2.8 XR Di II</title><link>http://dptnt.com/2007/10/over-exposed-flash-shots-with-tamron-af-17-50-f28-xr-di-ii/#comment-356776524</link><description>&lt;p&gt;No, I haven't noticed any under-exposure because I bought SB600 just recently. Before that, I used the D80 build-in flash which has a guide number of 13. Given the max aperture f/3.5 of the lens, the built-in flash only reaches 3.71m. So 3.98m is beyond its capacity anyway.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;I will do some test using my SB600, and let you know the result.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Wu Yongzheng</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 15 Oct 2008 01:37:27 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Over-exposed Flash Shots with Tamron AF 17-50 F/2.8 XR Di II</title><link>http://dptnt.com/2007/10/over-exposed-flash-shots-with-tamron-af-17-50-f28-xr-di-ii/#comment-2723850</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Very interesting.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Do you have flash exposure problem with this lens? I'd expect it to under-expose for subject more than 3.98m away in TTL-BL mode.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Max&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">picmax</dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 29 Sep 2008 01:59:19 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Over-exposed Flash Shots with Tamron AF 17-50 F/2.8 XR Di II</title><link>http://dptnt.com/2007/10/over-exposed-flash-shots-with-tamron-af-17-50-f28-xr-di-ii/#comment-2723803</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Really nice discovery and analysis. I found out that my nikon 18-135 lens also gives incorrect distance information. For distance less than 3.98m, it reports correctly. For distance more than 3.98m, it always reports 3.98m.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;I have checked some pictures taken by other people using this nikon 18-135 lens. They share the same problem. If fact I haven't found out any sample taken by this lens with recorded focus distance larger than 3.98m.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Wu Yongzheng</dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 29 Sep 2008 01:49:51 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Over-exposed Flash Shots with Tamron AF 17-50 F/2.8 XR Di II</title><link>http://dptnt.com/2007/10/over-exposed-flash-shots-with-tamron-af-17-50-f28-xr-di-ii/#comment-356776523</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Very interesting.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Do you have flash exposure problem with this lens? I'd expect it to under-expose for subject more than 3.98m away in TTL-BL mode.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Max&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">picmax</dc:creator><pubDate>Sun, 28 Sep 2008 23:59:19 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Over-exposed Flash Shots with Tamron AF 17-50 F/2.8 XR Di II</title><link>http://dptnt.com/2007/10/over-exposed-flash-shots-with-tamron-af-17-50-f28-xr-di-ii/#comment-356776521</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Really nice discovery and analysis. I found out that my nikon 18-135 lens also gives incorrect distance information. For distance less than 3.98m, it reports correctly. For distance more than 3.98m, it always reports 3.98m.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;I have checked some pictures taken by other people using this nikon 18-135 lens. They share the same problem. If fact I haven't found out any sample taken by this lens with recorded focus distance larger than 3.98m.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Wu Yongzheng</dc:creator><pubDate>Sun, 28 Sep 2008 23:49:51 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Over-exposed Flash Shots with Tamron AF 17-50 F/2.8 XR Di II</title><link>http://dptnt.com/2007/10/over-exposed-flash-shots-with-tamron-af-17-50-f28-xr-di-ii/#comment-2514012</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Ed,&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Thanks for reminding me! Hopefully I will have time during the holidays to work on it.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Max&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">picmax</dc:creator><pubDate>Sat, 22 Dec 2007 08:28:53 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Over-exposed Flash Shots with Tamron AF 17-50 F/2.8 XR Di II</title><link>http://dptnt.com/2007/10/over-exposed-flash-shots-with-tamron-af-17-50-f28-xr-di-ii/#comment-2514011</link><description>&lt;p&gt;when will the article you reference below be available??&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;The technical details behind Nikon’s 3D Matrix TTL-BL flash is quite complex. I will be writing an article about it in near future&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Ed W Grenzig</dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 21 Dec 2007 17:19:45 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Over-exposed Flash Shots with Tamron AF 17-50 F/2.8 XR Di II</title><link>http://dptnt.com/2007/10/over-exposed-flash-shots-with-tamron-af-17-50-f28-xr-di-ii/#comment-2514010</link><description>&lt;p&gt;I have the Nikkor 18-70mm from the D70 package a while ago. It is a very good value. I was curious why Nikon was no able to squeeze out a f/2.8 DX lens since both Tamron and Sigma also have the same 67mm filter thread size. However I found f/2.8 to be very valuable especially for low light situations.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">picmax</dc:creator><pubDate>Sun, 16 Dec 2007 16:42:20 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Over-exposed Flash Shots with Tamron AF 17-50 F/2.8 XR Di II</title><link>http://dptnt.com/2007/10/over-exposed-flash-shots-with-tamron-af-17-50-f28-xr-di-ii/#comment-2514009</link><description>&lt;p&gt;I used to have the Tamron 17-50mm and ended up selling it.  It did over-expose frequently with flash and also, I noticed the images always had a slight orange tinge to them...as if the white balance was overly warm.  Yes, colour correction could be done, but I prefer minimizing post work.  I ended up buying the 18-70mm Nikon which is obviously less fast, but the image quality is considerably better and for some reason I find this lens incredibly easy to hand hold. (1/5th at 18mm and 1/15th at 70mm is possible for some odd reason, perhaps I have very stable hands or something)&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Guest</dc:creator><pubDate>Sun, 16 Dec 2007 14:39:32 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Over-exposed Flash Shots with Tamron AF 17-50 F/2.8 XR Di II</title><link>http://dptnt.com/2007/10/over-exposed-flash-shots-with-tamron-af-17-50-f28-xr-di-ii/#comment-2514007</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Tom,&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Thank your for commenting. It is not difficult to find people who love all of the three lenses. If you can afford one, the Nikon 17-55mm is probably the best. The Tamron is 1mm wider than Sigma.So the best suggestion is to test all of them and choose the one you like the most.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Max&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">picmax</dc:creator><pubDate>Sun, 04 Nov 2007 21:49:29 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Over-exposed Flash Shots with Tamron AF 17-50 F/2.8 XR Di II</title><link>http://dptnt.com/2007/10/over-exposed-flash-shots-with-tamron-af-17-50-f28-xr-di-ii/#comment-2514008</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Thanks for the research on this subject. I've been looking at the Tamron, Sigma and the Nikon 2.8 in that range. Do you have any thoughts on the subject??? I found this at Dp and will be bookmarking this site for further reading.&lt;br&gt;Thanks&lt;br&gt;Tom&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Tom</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 25 Oct 2007 10:39:38 -0000</pubDate></item></channel></rss>