Hi, Definitely looks, to me, as if they have got the column headings reversed. A simple typographical mistake.
Maybe your 360 has a typo in the LCD 8-) m Rob Brigham wrote: > > That would make sense, but I am sure the flash head reads 58mm when I > have my 24-90 at 90mm. This agrees with the chart, but not with what > you/Wylwester/I think it should work. > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Bruce Dayton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: 22 October 2003 18:06 > > To: Rob Brigham > > Subject: Re[2]: Flash on *istD > > > > > > Rob, > > > > Back when I had some AF360FGZ's, I find a setting on them to > > tell them what kind of film format was being used - 35, 645, > > 67. By setting that, the zoom head on the flash would show > > correct focal length for the format being used (85mm on 35, > > 165 on 67). My hunch is that they just have the columns that > > you are viewing reversed. Basically, if you are shooting > > with a 55-58mm on the *ist D, the zoom head on the flash > > should be at 85. Does that make sense? Works pretty well for > > me because I was switching back and forth between 35mm and 67. > > > > --- > > Bruce > > > > > > Wednesday, October 22, 2003, 9:08:26 AM, you wrote: > > > > RB> I think so, but it is confusing the hell out of me at the > > moment. I > > RB> just don't see how they could have got this so wrong?!? > > How could > > RB> they realise it was worth compensating, then compensate the wrong > > RB> way? Surely I am missing something? > > > > RB> Mind you, it shouldn't matter if the flash FOV is wider than the > > RB> area covered by the sensor on the camera - just means less range > > RB> than would have otherwise been possible. > > > > >> -----Original Message----- > > >> From: Sylwester Pietrzyk [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > >> Sent: 22 October 2003 17:01 > > >> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > >> Subject: Re: Flash on *istD > > >> > > >> > > >> on 22.10.03 17:22, Rob Brigham at > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > >> > > >> > To me it looks like Pentax have got it wrong. A 24mm lens > > >> on the istD > > >> > should require a flash angle equivalent to a 35mm lens. > > >> I think Rob it is not wrong. The values shown, shows rather > > >> field of coverage of the flash. Thus 85mm flash coverage will > > >> cover field of view of 58mm lens on APS-sized-CCD camera > > >> (which is equal to field of view of 85mm lenns on 35mm > > >> camera). So, zoom head in AF360FGZ is able to cover at max. > > >> telephoto setting field of view of 58mm lens on *istD. Am I right? > > >> > > >> -- > > >> Best Regards > > >> Sylwek > > >> > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > >
