S
Jens Bladt wrote:
I don't reallyh believe that. Flash light is often just 1/50.000 of one second. I find it hard to believe that reciprocity failure makes more than a marginal difference - hardly visible to the human eye. The problem must lie eleswhere. Jens Bladt mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt
-----Oprindelig meddelelse----- Fra: graywolf [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 20. april 2004 00:23 Til: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Emne: Re: TTL flash with the *ist D
Perhaps the sensor has difficulty with 1/15,000th of a second exposures? It seems to have problems with 1 second exposures on the other end too.
This it called with film.
--
Jens Bladt wrote:
...I wonder why they can't seem to cut off the flash light at the right time?????. This isn't exactly new technology - at least 20 years old. Jens
The nature of DSLR's in general seems to be weak TTL flash. I have heard the same complaint from both Nikon and Canon users.
Jens Bladt mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt
-----Oprindelig meddelelse----- Fra: John Forbes [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 19. april 2004 19:48 Til: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Emne: Re: TTL flash with the *ist D
I agree. I have the AF400FTZ and the AF240FT, and they are both hopeless with the *ist D. Sadly, the problem is not consistent, so you can't reliably compensate for it.
What does work well, for me, is the AF240Z, which is a smallish dedicated, non-TTL, flash with zoom, bounce and swivel. It works fine when both flash and camera are in program mode.
John
On Mon, 19 Apr 2004 08:58:41 -0600, William Robb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
----- Original Message ----- From: "Joseph Tainter" Subject: TTL flash with the *ist D
So...has anyone found a shoe-mounted flash that will do ordinary
TTL
with the *ist D, at the full ISO range? I mean, one that works
about
like it would on a 35 mm. body without glaring exposure problems.
The istD analogue TTL works more or less OK at ISO 400, not very well at 200, and I haven't tried it at faster speeds. The nature of DSLR's in general seems to be weak TTL flash. I have heard the same complaint from both Nikon and Canon users.
Question 2:
While I'm at it, what is everyone's experience with the rtf? I
tried it
the other day, at ISO 400, with the SMC F 70-210, at -0.5 EV. It
was a
portrait of my dog's face, taken from about 3 meters. Even with the negative exposure compensation, I thought it was a bit overexposed, though nothing that I couldn't correct in PS.
The RTF will have the same acuracy weakness as the larger flash, without the range to go along with it. I haven't found it to be overly accurate. I think the best option is a dedicated, non TTL flash. I am thinking the AF 280T might be a good one to try.
William Robb
-- Using M2, Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/
-- graywolf http://graywolfphoto.com/graywolf.html
