>> as I am composing the picture my over/under exposure >(via viewfinder) shows over exposed before I take the picture > >That is showing you the ambient exposure, the one that does >not include the flash. In this case you appear to have gotten >completely lucky, since the exposure shown in the screen snap >shows at least two stops underexposure. Yes, the exposures >you posted above are pretty close - they are a bit >underexposed to my taste, but not much. That means that the >flash gave you almost but not quite enough to compensate for >the under exposure of the ambient. > >Edit: I see that you were in TTL, not manual, on the flash. >That's why the exposure is very close - the flash metered the >scene, discovered that the ambient was two stops underexposed >(or whatever it was) and it set the flash to light the scene >appropriately. I think it was a little short, but not much.
I was actually in manual mode on the flash, I tried to set the flash on TTL and meter the picture but I would end up with a shutter speed of 4 seconds or more. With TTL I would need to used a tripod but as I stated all of these pictures were spontaneous. Bellow you can see the histogram of both pictures and if I am reading them correctly the exposure on both were dead on center. Anyone is welcome to correct me if I am wrong.