Kodak DX6490 Lens adapter and exposure problems

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Santa brought me a lens adapter and a UV filter for my Kodak DX6490 For
those not familiar with the camera, the adapter which is about 1.25" long
threads onto the front of the camera surrounding the lens to protect it when
it is extended, it also allows you to mount 55mm accessory filters
http://www.kodak.com/eknec/PageQue [...] ale=en_US.
This works very well; however, my problem is that now all my pictures (well
the ones I took Christmas Day where the on camera flash was used at full
wide, I have yet to try a test at zoom) are under exposed. I have tried
several shots at full wide using the same exposure settings in both auto and
manual mode ; with and without the adapter and with/without my UV filter and
the shots with the adapter (with/without a filter) in place are flat and
underexposed . I don't get a good result until I remove the adapter from the
camera. I haven't had a chance to try outdoor exposures yet, but I can't see
why things would be any different.
Can someone explain this and perhaps tell me how to compensate for it? Ron
Baird, has this been noted before it would be the same on the new DX7590?
Care to comment?

Brian

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

What he says is correct. You need to read the manual. It is mentioned in
there.


"Kenneth Miller" <kenm1@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:0g3Ad.1175479$Gx4.901307@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
> The adapter blocks part of the onboard flash and can't be used with the
> onboard flash. The adapter doesn't affect non flash operations.
> Ken Miller
> "Roots750" <Roots750REMOVETOREPLY@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:hzMzd.8783$nV.172172@news20.bellglobal.com...
>> Santa brought me a lens adapter and a UV filter for my Kodak DX6490 For
>> those not familiar with the camera, the adapter which is about 1.25" long
>> threads onto the front of the camera surrounding the lens to protect it
>> when
>> it is extended, it also allows you to mount 55mm accessory filters
>> http://www.kodak.com/eknec/PageQue [...] ale=en_US.
>> This works very well; however, my problem is that now all my pictures
>> (well
>> the ones I took Christmas Day where the on camera flash was used at full
>> wide, I have yet to try a test at zoom) are under exposed. I have tried
>> several shots at full wide using the same exposure settings in both auto
>> and
>> manual mode ; with and without the adapter and with/without my UV filter
>> and
>> the shots with the adapter (with/without a filter) in place are flat and
>> underexposed . I don't get a good result until I remove the adapter from
>> the
>> camera. I haven't had a chance to try outdoor exposures yet, but I can't
>> see
>> why things would be any different.
>> Can someone explain this and perhaps tell me how to compensate for it?
>> Ron
>> Baird, has this been noted before it would be the same on the new DX7590?
>> Care to comment?
>>
>> Brian
>>
>>
>
>

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Can you tell me what manual you are referring to and where the specific
reference can be found ? Is it for the manual for the DX6490 ? Mine was
printed in early 2003 before the lens adapter was developed.

"Toomanyputters" <rainydays@theswamp.com> wrote in message
news:8u3Ad.4507$aM4.748021@twister.southeast.rr.com...
> What he says is correct. You need to read the manual. It is mentioned in
> there.
>
>
> "Kenneth Miller" <kenm1@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
> news:0g3Ad.1175479$Gx4.901307@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
> > The adapter blocks part of the onboard flash and can't be used with the
> > onboard flash. The adapter doesn't affect non flash operations.
> > Ken Miller
> > "Roots750" <Roots750REMOVETOREPLY@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > news:hzMzd.8783$nV.172172@news20.bellglobal.com...
> >> Santa brought me a lens adapter and a UV filter for my Kodak DX6490 For
> >> those not familiar with the camera, the adapter which is about 1.25"
long
> >> threads onto the front of the camera surrounding the lens to protect it
> >> when
> >> it is extended, it also allows you to mount 55mm accessory filters
> >>
http://www.kodak.com/eknec/PageQue [...] ale=en_US.
> >> This works very well; however, my problem is that now all my pictures
> >> (well
> >> the ones I took Christmas Day where the on camera flash was used at
full
> >> wide, I have yet to try a test at zoom) are under exposed. I have
tried
> >> several shots at full wide using the same exposure settings in both
auto
> >> and
> >> manual mode ; with and without the adapter and with/without my UV
filter
> >> and
> >> the shots with the adapter (with/without a filter) in place are flat
and
> >> underexposed . I don't get a good result until I remove the adapter
from
> >> the
> >> camera. I haven't had a chance to try outdoor exposures yet, but I
can't
> >> see
> >> why things would be any different.
> >> Can someone explain this and perhaps tell me how to compensate for it?
> >> Ron
> >> Baird, has this been noted before it would be the same on the new
DX7590?
> >> Care to comment?
> >>
> >> Brian
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>
>

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Greetings Roots,

Just saw your note, Roots, and to my knowledge, no, that should not be an
issue. If you are referring to the use of the Wide Angle lens, however,
then yes it would be in the way of the flash. In either case, I always use
the external flash feature on the camera. It provides excellent lighting
(depending on flash features) that can illuminate a room and action at quite
a distance. There is no interferance in this mode.

Basically, however, lens adapter will not block the lens. I wonder if it is
possible that with the filter in place, and being at the outer edge of the
flash range, you are underexposing? Try setting the camera on a support,
with flash on, and taking a timed picture. Measure the distance to the
subject to be sure it is inside the flash range. Take another picture
without moving the camera and subject but put the filter in place. Review
these pictures to see if there is any flash fall off. Also, try zooming in
on the subject and take a flash picture with the lens attachment on and off.
Is there a difference. Remember, zooming shortens the flash range.

Flash range of the DX6490 = wide - 0.5 - 4.9 m (1.6 - 16.1 ft.); tele -
2.0 - 3.7 m (6.6 - 12.1 ft.)

Try these tests to see how you do and let us know.

Ron Baird
Eastman Kodak Company


"Roots750" <Roots750REMOVETOREPLY@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:hzMzd.8783$nV.172172@news20.bellglobal.com...
> Santa brought me a lens adapter and a UV filter for my Kodak DX6490 For
> those not familiar with the camera, the adapter which is about 1.25" long
> threads onto the front of the camera surrounding the lens to protect it
when
> it is extended, it also allows you to mount 55mm accessory filters
> http://www.kodak.com/eknec/PageQue [...] ale=en_US.
> This works very well; however, my problem is that now all my pictures
(well
> the ones I took Christmas Day where the on camera flash was used at full
> wide, I have yet to try a test at zoom) are under exposed. I have tried
> several shots at full wide using the same exposure settings in both auto
and
> manual mode ; with and without the adapter and with/without my UV filter
and
> the shots with the adapter (with/without a filter) in place are flat and
> underexposed . I don't get a good result until I remove the adapter from
the
> camera. I haven't had a chance to try outdoor exposures yet, but I can't
see
> why things would be any different.
> Can someone explain this and perhaps tell me how to compensate for it?
Ron
> Baird, has this been noted before it would be the same on the new DX7590?
> Care to comment?
>
> Brian
>
>

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On Mon, 3 Jan 2005 17:43:01 -0500, "Ron Baird" <ronbaird@kodak.com>
wrote:

>Greetings Roots,
>
>Just saw your note, Roots, and to my knowledge, no, that should not be an
>issue. If you are referring to the use of the Wide Angle lens, however,
>then yes it would be in the way of the flash. In either case, I always use
>the external flash feature on the camera. It provides excellent lighting
>(depending on flash features) that can illuminate a room and action at quite
>a distance. There is no interferance in this mode.

I'm thinking of getting an external flash for my DX6490. What flash
are you using? What type of mount?

Thanks, Dave

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Hi Dave,

I am personally using the flash I have had for some time, i.e. Sunpak 622.
I was a work horse for me in the past and so when digitals came along with
the external flash feature, I employed it there as well. Nice flash with
handle built in. Powerful as well. I suspect you do not need a flash that
powerful and there are many out there. I would review the features of the
flashes you consider as the camera will only send a pulse to fire the flash.
All funtions will work through the flash, i.e. sensors, capacitor, settings
for flash range, and so on. You can then set your camera accordingly.

I do know that there are many using Vivitar but that is just a brand that I
hear about. I had a 283 for quite a while as well. Those are personal
choices.

Talk to you soon,

Ron Baird
Eastman Kodak Company



"Dave" <dmjohn29@REMOVE.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:9ftjt0l31rt9povejqfnre4qpqrljiovq9@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 3 Jan 2005 17:43:01 -0500, "Ron Baird" <ronbaird@kodak.com>
> wrote:
>
> >Greetings Roots,
> >
> >Just saw your note, Roots, and to my knowledge, no, that should not be an
> >issue. If you are referring to the use of the Wide Angle lens, however,
> >then yes it would be in the way of the flash. In either case, I always
use
> >the external flash feature on the camera. It provides excellent lighting
> >(depending on flash features) that can illuminate a room and action at
quite
> >a distance. There is no interferance in this mode.
>
> I'm thinking of getting an external flash for my DX6490. What flash
> are you using? What type of mount?
>
> Thanks, Dave

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Dave wrote:
> You're right. At $700 it's a bit more flash than I need! :-)
>
> On Tue, 4 Jan 2005 08:57:45 -0500, "Ron Baird" <ronbaird@kodak.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>>Hi Dave,
>>
>>I am personally using the flash I have had for some time, i.e. Sunpak 622.
>>I was a work horse for me in the past and so when digitals came along with
>>the external flash feature, I employed it there as well. Nice flash with
>>handle built in. Powerful as well. I suspect you do not need a flash that
>>powerful and there are many out there. I would review the features of the
>>flashes you consider as the camera will only send a pulse to fire the flash.
>>All funtions will work through the flash, i.e. sensors, capacitor, settings
>>for flash range, and so on. You can then set your camera accordingly.
>>
>>I do know that there are many using Vivitar but that is just a brand that I
>>hear about. I had a 283 for quite a while as well. Those are personal
>>choices.
>>
>>Talk to you soon,
>>
>>Ron Baird
>>Eastman Kodak Company
>>
>>
>>
>>"Dave" <dmjohn29@REMOVE.hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>news:9ftjt0l31rt9povejqfnre4qpqrljiovq9@4ax.com...
>>
>>>On Mon, 3 Jan 2005 17:43:01 -0500, "Ron Baird" <ronbaird@kodak.com>
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Greetings Roots,
>>>>
>>>>Just saw your note, Roots, and to my knowledge, no, that should not be an
>>>>issue. If you are referring to the use of the Wide Angle lens, however,
>>>>then yes it would be in the way of the flash. In either case, I always
>>
>>use
>>
>>>>the external flash feature on the camera. It provides excellent lighting
>>>>(depending on flash features) that can illuminate a room and action at
>>
>>quite
>>
>>>>a distance. There is no interferance in this mode.
>>>
>>>I'm thinking of getting an external flash for my DX6490. What flash
>>>are you using? What type of mount?
>>>
>>>Thanks, Dave
>>
>

I use a $50 no-name brand flash and I get very nicely lit photos bouncing the
flash off the ceiling using my DX6490.

--
--
Ben Thomas - Software Engineer - Melbourne, Australia

My Digital World:
Kodak DX6490, Canon i9950, Pioneer A05;
Hitachi 37" HD plasma display, DGTEC 2000A,
Denon 2800, H/K AVR4500, Whatmough Encore;
Sony Ericsson K700i, Palm Tungsten T.

Disclaimer:
Opinions, conclusions, and other information in this message that do not
relate to the official business of my employer shall be understood as neither
given nor endorsed by it.

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Hi and thanks for the helpful comments,
I have tried many, many test shots and all of the shots with the lens
adapter mounted are under exposed.
Now that is with just the lens adapter mounted on the camera... no added
filter, no additional lens just the empty adapter. If I take two identical
shots, one with the adapter and then remove the adapter (which is
essentially a tube with a flared end) from the camera, the shot with the
adapter is underexposed. All my outdoor shots with the adapter alone and
with a filter are OK.
I think that the bottom portion of the flash pattern is being obstructed by
the adapter and therefore the subject is only being partially illuminated.
The camera was designed so that when the flash is used in Auto mode within
flash range and assuming full illumination, the ISO is set automatically to
80 with an f stop 2.8 and speed to 60, for anything less than full
illumination this combination results in an underexposed shot.
My indoor shots using my very inexpensive Sunpak 160 external flash are OK
with the adapter mounted (empty and with a filter) and without the adapter
mounted.
I bought the adapter to protect the lens when it is extended so I hate
taking it of for a flash shot and then putting it back on.
I posed the question to Kodak support, the first answer wasn't really an
answer they just asked me more questions. I have yet to get answer to my
reply.
So to sum up, pictures taken within flash range, using the on camera flash
with an empty lens adapter mounted on the DX6490 are consistently
underexposed.

"Ron Baird" <ronbaird@kodak.com> wrote in message
news:crchj8$ia5$1@news.kodak.com...
> Greetings Roots,
>
> Just saw your note, Roots, and to my knowledge, no, that should not be an
> issue. If you are referring to the use of the Wide Angle lens, however,
> then yes it would be in the way of the flash. In either case, I always
use
> the external flash feature on the camera. It provides excellent lighting
> (depending on flash features) that can illuminate a room and action at
quite
> a distance. There is no interferance in this mode.
>
> Basically, however, lens adapter will not block the lens. I wonder if it
is
> possible that with the filter in place, and being at the outer edge of
the
> flash range, you are underexposing? Try setting the camera on a support,
> with flash on, and taking a timed picture. Measure the distance to the
> subject to be sure it is inside the flash range. Take another picture
> without moving the camera and subject but put the filter in place. Review
> these pictures to see if there is any flash fall off. Also, try zooming in
> on the subject and take a flash picture with the lens attachment on and
off.
> Is there a difference. Remember, zooming shortens the flash range.
>
> Flash range of the DX6490 = wide - 0.5 - 4.9 m (1.6 - 16.1 ft.); tele -
> 2.0 - 3.7 m (6.6 - 12.1 ft.)
>
> Try these tests to see how you do and let us know.
>
> Ron Baird
> Eastman Kodak Company
>
>
> "Roots750" <Roots750REMOVETOREPLY@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:hzMzd.8783$nV.172172@news20.bellglobal.com...
> > Santa brought me a lens adapter and a UV filter for my Kodak DX6490
For
> > those not familiar with the camera, the adapter which is about 1.25"
long
> > threads onto the front of the camera surrounding the lens to protect it
> when
> > it is extended, it also allows you to mount 55mm accessory filters
> >
http://www.kodak.com/eknec/PageQue [...] ale=en_US.
> > This works very well; however, my problem is that now all my pictures
> (well
> > the ones I took Christmas Day where the on camera flash was used at full
> > wide, I have yet to try a test at zoom) are under exposed. I have tried
> > several shots at full wide using the same exposure settings in both auto
> and
> > manual mode ; with and without the adapter and with/without my UV filter
> and
> > the shots with the adapter (with/without a filter) in place are flat and
> > underexposed . I don't get a good result until I remove the adapter from
> the
> > camera. I haven't had a chance to try outdoor exposures yet, but I can't
> see
> > why things would be any different.
> > Can someone explain this and perhaps tell me how to compensate for it?
> Ron
> > Baird, has this been noted before it would be the same on the new
DX7590?
> > Care to comment?
> >
> > Brian
> >
> >
>
>