I'm just about to buy an E0S-5/A2. I would like to know if the much derided flash capabilities of this camera can be improved with a sophisticated handlemount gun such as a METZ MZ-50.

I want the EOS-5/A2 because it is quiet and solidly built. The EOS-50/Elan II may have E-TTL and improved eye-control focusing etc, but the actual "camera" is inferior. The EOS-3 is off-limits, and Nikon don't have anything near the EOS-5/A2 in that price range. The N90/F90 is an ergonomical mess, as are most Nikons apart from the F100 & F5. I'm not interested in eye-control and ultrasonic lens motors; I just want a solid camera, and the EOS-5/A2 fits this requirement.

But the flash is awful. I know Nikon's system is much better, but I can't afford an F100(well I can, but I need some glass).

Question:

Do the on-camera flash abilities of various bodies really matter when using an external fully-programmable flash. The last professional I saw was using a cheap Minolta manual body linked to a very sophisticated bounce flash/umbrella set-up. He wasn't concerned about A-TTL, E-TTL, 3D Quantum Slipsteam Matrix Fill-In modes... should I be?

-- Matthew (u05mdp@abdn.ac.uk), May 31, 1999

Answers

Go with the A2 and Metz flash. The E-TTL is not going to improve your flash shots enough to make that much difference. Unless your going to take a very high percentage of 'direct' flash pictures or maybe your a photojournalist then you can live without E-TTL or 3D matrix.

-- Gary Wilson (gwilson@ffca.com), May 31, 1999.

I couldn't have been persuaded that Nikon's 3D flash could be much of a benefit over regular TTL until I tried it in some difficult situations with glass windows in the background and for daylight fill flash. My SB-28 has made a difference in my photography over my old Sunpak 433D. I have no stong feelings over Cannon vs. Nikon and beleive that both have their strong suites, but I love the Nikon's flash technologies and am surprised that you say that the N90(s) is an "ergonomical mess." I've used both the EOS's and the Nikon and though they are different, I find the N90 very intuitive and comfortable to handle. In fact, I like having the aperture adjustments on the lens (where they should be IMO.) The Nikon as a bit more "heft" that makes me "feel" that I'm using a solid piece of equipment. To each his own but suggest that if you haven't, try to try out the Nikon system for a day or two. That said, it's probably best to pick the system that has the features to fit your needs. If flash is your top priority, Minolta may be the ticket, if fast, quiet focusing is it, I could see the Cannon winning out and I believe that Nikon provides a good compromise between the two. My .02 JLee

-- JLee (jlee@sccoast.net), June 03, 1999.

If you want an awesome flash system then minolta's is pretty impressive. Check out photo.net then follow the links to the minolta section and finally to the part that says how minolta stacks up to the other brands follow that and there is a link to a professional photographer who uses minolta and has a lot of great examples of the understated power commanded by the minolta flash system. Its pretty impressive stuff. Off camera wireless with no additional equipment, built in modelling light, 2:1 ratios automatically...its a very well thought out and functional system that with all due respect should have more professionals drooling if they knew about it. Good luck with whatever you choose!

-- Bill Brock (wfb@cisunix.unh.edu), June 18, 1999.