Better Beamer flash extender - aye or nay

I’ve just posted a photo of a Violet Sabrewing hummingbird in the Avian section:

http://www.naturephotographers.net/imagecritique/ic.cgi?a=vp&pr=116203&CGISESSID=bd637ef66e8a282d2d2e4d83a3c29b4c&u=26691

I took the photo in Costa Rica using a "Better Beamer" flash extender and got a comment recommending not using it.

I would like to ask your opinion. How many of you using "Better Beamer” and what is the good and bad about it?

Thanks all!

ps: I do use "Better Beamer" with the lens with focal lenght 420mm.

Alexander, I haven't seen the thread. Did you use too much flash and wash out the bird? That's possible whether a BB is used or not.

Forgive me if I'm about to say things you already know.

Anyway, a BB is an excellent inexpensive tool to put in the box. By more tightly focusing the flash beam, it both extends the native range of a flash and, at closer distances, allows you to dial in far less flash to get just enough fill to kill shadows. The lower the power setting your flash is on, the faster it recharges and the more times it will fire during a burst, and the more times it fires during a burst, the more likely it'll be firing during that one frame in a burst of 8 or so that seems to be head and shoulders above the rest.

When I'm set up shooting birds from a tripod or monopod, the BB and flash these days are always on the camera. I don't always use them but I always want them there in case I need them. With avian, the situations that require flash can come and go with the beat of a wing, leaving no time to fumble with gear (and often barely enough time to turn on the flash) in order to get the shot.

So that's all to the good. Bad is it's easy to get too hot a flash if you're not used to the BB because of how it intensifies the flash. Bad also is it's a bit clumsy when you have to move gear around. Sometimes it's hard enough to collapse and move a tripod at a moment's notice, especially in close quarters like taking it in and out of a vehicle or moving through the woods. Practice, however, makes perfect.

New capabilities opened up for me when I finally got around buying and dialing in my BB. Now, after about a year, I don't even need to think about what to set my flash at. It's second nature.

Edit: I just looked in on your hummer image. It's very hot, with the flash strong enough to turn the background black, a telltale that the shot does not "look natural." If such a natural look doesn't matter to you and you are just satisfying yourself, go for it. If you want a BG and a subject that look like they normally occur in nature, then dial the strength of the flash down far enough so all it's doing is providing a bit of fill to kill shadows and add vividness to the colors. I frequently set up just past the MFD of my 400mm lens (about 11 feet) and shoot birds, including hummers, with the BB and the flash set very low, with so-called "natural" results. With Canon gear/flash, I typically use the BB with the flash set to high-speed synch and flash exposure compensation dialed in from -1 to -3 EC, depending on a lot of factors including ambient light, distance from subject and reflectivity of feathers. Most often with the BB, less is more.

Hi Alexander, It seems that a lot of people use the Better Beamer with good results. For me personally I find it difficult not to add too much flash with a highly reflective subject (hummingbird). Even in the rain forest, I prefer to use no flash and look for the best light I can find. If I do use flash it is just the small built in flash on the D700, or maybe the flash without the BB and a diffuser. Even these seem like too much usually. Some people are very good at adding just the right amount of flash, but I am not one of them. Maybe someday I will learn to be good at it. Look at some of KC Choo's photos. For example:

http://www.naturephotographers.net/imagecritique/ic.cgi?a=vp&pr=30109&CGISESSID=7bd1e234c12e4a33e19ad1c36a2b6abd&u=25109

He is someone I consider to be consistently good at this. To me it looks like your hummingbird photo was overflashed and you tried to bring back the detail, but I can't be sure. There are some areas with no detail

I have one, use it less than I could not too much avian work but used correctly it works well. I have had the privilege in the past of shooting with some outstanding avian photographers and when they use them in the proper situations the results are outstanding. So it’s a Good Tool that can help you in when used correctly

Alexander - I think you've got good advice already, and I agree...but my two cents anyway : Seems to me that people weren't really recommending not using the BB at all. I think they were responding to the fact the the flash became you're main light for that shot, as opposed to being fill flash. And as such it created some obvious bright front lighting ("nuked" it, if you will). That also creates the darker BG and blown tail, but in this case it's kind of neat. Not a typical shot, so maybe it catches people the wrong way, but if you like the effect, I don't see a problem with using a BB this way.

I agree BB is a great tool. You have to learn how to use it, but after that it is pretty indispensable in many situations. I have been using it for over 4 years and pretty happy with the results. You right David; the hummingbird's photo is not typical, but that was my intention, to highlight the bird’s colors, which are still not as brilliant as they were in real life. It was my artistic twist on an old subject, if you wish.

Thank you all for your responses.

Oh, sorry, Alexander, my assumption based on your post was that you were new to the BB, but you knew exactly what you were doing all along.

Hi Steve,
Actually I learned from your post too. Thank you! I just wanted to know if there are some people that absolutely hated BB and why. Photography is never ending learning process.

I've lead tours in Costa Rica as well and find the BB is absolutely necessary for that environment. To get more "natural results" I often use it at 1/16-1/64 power.