Hi William,
Thank you for your views.
Since 1977 I have been an enthusiast for TTL auto
flash control. That is when I bought two Olympus
OM-2 bodies, and the off-the-film flash control
was a major factor in my choice.
Later, I moved to Nikon. The excellence of
Nikon's TTL flash control, with 1/250 sec fastest
synch speed on my FE2 and FA bodies, was very
much a factor in my choice.
I later wanted a rangefinder camera and started
with a Leica CL outfit, unfortunately it had
fungus in both lenses (40mm and 90mm) ... and we
all know that Leica fungus is the most expensive
in the world <g> ... but I quickly changed to a
Minolts CLE body and found much joy in TTL auto
flash control once more.
So now I find myself with Pentax because I like
the "look" of my chosen Pentax lenses, especially
my SMC Pentax 35mm f/2, which I call my "Japanese
Summicron", and my SMC Pentax-A 50mm f/1.4, which
I call my "Japanese Summilux".
I suppose it is inevitable that once again I want
TTL flash control, because it is there! But you
are right. The Metz 45CL-4 is a *very*
consistent performer using its own direct sensor.
Perhaps I am too obsessed with TTL suto flash
technology. There is no doubt that the Vivitar
283 is one of the most successful flashguns of
all time, and it does not have TTL flash control!
The only logical reason I can give for choosing
TTL flash against non-TTL is that the non-TTL
auto sensor in the Metz (or Vivitar) takes no
account of the focal length in use. It is always
taking its readings from a wide scene, even if I
am using the much narrower view of my 50mm or
70-210mm zoom.
But to be honest, my main focal length for flash
is 35mm on my LX, or 24mm on my *ist D, for event
photography. So my objections to using non-TTL
flash are more theoretical than practical.
You have made me think. I think I will wait
until Metz produces a P-TTL SCA adapter for the
*ist D. Until then I will follow your advice and
perfect my technique with the Metz in non-TTL
auto mode.
Thank you very much for sharing your knowledge
and experience.
Colin
> -------------- Original Message
----------------
>
> Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 15:50:18 -0600
> From: "William Robb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <pentax-discuss@pdml.net>
> Subject: Re: External flash for *ist D?
> Message-ID:
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Content-Type: text/plain;
> format=flowed;
> charset="iso-8859-1";
> reply-type=original
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Colin J"
> Subject: Re: External flash for *ist D?
>
>
> > Jens,
> >
> > Thanks for your comments. The reason for all
> the
> > "fuzz" is that my Metz 45CL-4 with SCA 372
> > produces inconsistent exposures with the *ist
> D,
> > but not with my LX or Super A. I want a
> set-up
> > that is as consistent with the *ist D as it
> is
> > with my film cameras.
>
> Ferget TTL with the istD and use your Metz in
> auto. It will be easily as
> accurate, and gives you off camera flash, which
> I don't believe Pentax has a
> good digital flash option for at the moment.
> TTL is good if you have a crappy flash with an
> innacurate sensor, your Metz
> has a 2ยบ sensor that is calibrated to within
> 1/10th of a stop.
> I fought with TTL with my istD for a year
> before deciding it just wasn't
> accurate, and yes, I did clean the contacts on
> several occassions.
>
> William Robb
>
___________________________________________________________
Yahoo! Messenger - NEW crystal clear PC to PC calling worldwide with voicemail
http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
