Dual accessory shoe vs. flash bracket

[bijoux.perdus]

Dear all,

I’m not very much a flash user, but occasionally I would benefit of having one with me. My setup is an m4 and a 28mm lens with the metal external viewfinder, which i adore. I didn’t find reviews neither on the Keks dual shoe adapter or the classic voigtlander one, so I was wondering if someone has experience with any of them.
The flash i’m using is a small Panasonic PE-20s. It’s small, lightweight and works with sync chord.

Another thought was to use the Leica CTOOM bracket, but it looks heavy and obviously larger and I fear I would leave it home after a while, so i lean towards using a shoe adapter, nevertheless i’m interested in pros and cons and your thoughts on it.

Thanks! 🙏🏻

 

[Cascadilla]

Will your flash cover the whole area of a 28 mm lens? Most of the shoe mount flashes that I've used don't do very well at the edges and corners of the frame for this. There is also the question of light quality--on camera flash leads to flat lighting and red eye, which might be what you want, but which you will definitely get. When I used to shoot weddings on film I used a bracket to get the flash away from the lens a bit to improve the light quality and minimize red eye. Unless you feel that you have to use a Leica product for this I would suggest looking at a Stroboframe bracket that will also pivot and allow for the flash to be over the camera for vertical shots as well as horizontal.

 

[Coldkennels]

Honestly? Just get the CTOOM.

They did two - a metal and a plastic one - and my metal one is just 120g. I find it makes the whole arrangement balance much better than slapping a flash on top of the camera, double-shoe and VF or not, and it also pivots to reposition the flash above the camera for vertical shots like the one Cascadilla suggested.

It only really becomes unwieldy when you end up with this convoluted mess...

 

[bijoux.perdus]

Thanks to both of you!

@Cascadilla Surely there’s a bit of vignetting but it never bothered me and I’m using it very very rarely (i have it for a few years now and can count on my two hands how many times i actually took it out 😀), but handy in “streetish” situations like demonstrations or outdoor events, when it gets really dark. I use it either with slower shutter speeds, or a 50th of a sec. depending on how much ambient light is available and i want to have on the picture. I bet the light quality could also be better. If I used a flash more often, surely it’d make sense changing the system, but the simplicity of this no-settings, no TTL, no-nonsense flash fits better to my shooting style. The only thing i’d enjoy is the simultaneous use of the external finder while keeping everything small, simple, lightweight.

@Coldkennels that setup though…! 😀 i kinda dig the look of the CTOOM. I was hoping someone would recommend me using the shoe adapter 😀

Interesting that both of you mentioned the issue with vertical shots which made me wondering… why is it different?

 

[Cascadilla]

With the flash on the camera you get shadows on one side of the image with vertical shots which tend to look a bit strange. But in a street situation where the background may be far away that wouldn't matter much.

 

[Coldkennels]

It's also important to consider for bounce flash. With the unit you're using, that's not a consideration... but if you're shooting indoors, a tiltable head like the one on the Vivitar pictured above allows you to bounce the light off a ceiling or side wall to get a more even and natural illumination; I used to shoot a lot of house parties that way in my 20s.

As such, having a bracket that can tilt the flash is very important in those situations; you don't want to be angling your flash down a corridor when you turn the camera to shoot in portrait orientation!

You could also shoot the way Bruce Gilden did/does... Leica pre-focused in the right hand, the flash primed and held off-camera with the right. Bring them both up to your face in a split second, and shoot.

(That might be the first and last time I ever suggest anyone does anything like Gilden!)

 

[bijoux.perdus]

Oh yeah, these explanations both make sense. Didn’t Gilden fire the flash from hand? Anyway, I also find his technique questionable, or rather I’d say it’s questionable applying it today (too many people started copying him, while people in general are more sensitive for being photographed than they were in the 60s/70s). The real value in it (at least for me) was its uniqueness.

 

[Coldkennels]

The real value in it (at least for me) was its uniqueness.

I think the problem is that not only is Gilden's technique unnecessarily aggressive, but it (ironically) results in a body of work where every frame looks much the same; he may be unique amongst other photographers of his day, but there's not one single photograph he's taken that I could say stands out from the others - just an endless sea of shocked, angry-looking people with the same stark flash exposure.

Terry Richardson is much the same: as much as I loathe the man for his history as a sexual predator, his "work" isn't even interesting in the slightest.

 

[bijoux.perdus]

I think the problem is that not only is Gilden's technique unnecessarily aggressive, but it (ironically) results in a body of work where every frame looks much the same; he may be unique amongst other photographers of his day, but there's not one single photograph he's taken that I could say stands out from the others - just an endless sea of shocked, angry-looking people with the same stark flash exposure.

Terry Richardson is much the same: as much as I loathe the man for his history as a sexual predator, his "work" isn't even interesting in the slightest.

Interesting point. Some of his photos i like, but he’s not the photographer whose work inspires me or to whom I turn when I want to learn something.
But going further with this thought: whose work, style and technique was really diverse after HCB in the street/documentary photo scene? (Who by the way I respect but not consider my favorite - God forgive me). I’m not sure that those I like has a very diverse portfolio in terms of these aspects. Yet, I very much enjoy their compositions and perspective/view, like Gilles Peress, Abbas, Jane Evelyn Atwood, Jason Eskenazi, Salgado, Nikos Economopoulos, Koudelka, Fabio Ponzio, William Klein, J. Nachtwey, etc. There are a lot of people who inspires me and whose work I find valuable and aesthetically pleasing. I guess in documentary and street photography it’s different then from fashion, where creativity is more required and emphasized. Maybe i’m wrong but I’m not sure that it’s necessarily a bad thing to have a visually recognizable style, which might be considered boring too.
My opinion is that T. Richardson is/was not very creative, so he can’t ever reach to the real masters of fashion photography, like Erwin Blumenfeld, Irving Penn, Man Ray, Philippe Halsman, or even Helmut Newton.
He was active in another era, when the effect of some “good” old hype already couldn’t be neglected. 🙂