That's a great summary, Brian. Thinking about it, my flash needs are such that adding a 285HV probably makes the most sense over buying a dedicated flash. Cheap and effective is more useful to me than the dedicated, extended features which I seldom if ever need. A 285 or another 383, a couple of light stands, diffusers and such, will cost less than the Pentax 540...
G On Feb 24, 2007, at 11:39 AM, Brian Dunn wrote: > > The Vivitar 285HV and the Sunpack 383 are both nice flash units > with useful > power. They cost around $80-$100 USD and work on any brand of camera. > > The 285HV has a UV corrected bulb ( good for wedding dresses ) and > a manual > zoom head which does not swivel. The 383 does not have a UV > corrected bulb > ( I added some UV film over the front, which works well ), fits in > the camera > bag better, does not zoom, but does swivel. The 383's sync cord is > fragile > but their replacements are much better. > > The 383's control panel is easier to use than the Vivitar's. > > 285s chirp and flash red/green letting you know how weak the > batteries are. > The chirping can be annoying in a quiet setting. The 383s are > quieter but > don't provide as much feedback on the battery level, just a ready > light. > > So what can you do with these things? Get several, set them all to > an auto > mode, add a trigger to each, and light up the room from many > directions at > once. > > Compared to an expensive flash unit, you could get one of these and > use the > rest of the money for a nice lens. > > You can take them with you if you ever switch brands. > > The 383 in particular is very compact for its power. It also has a > full set > of manual power levels so you can use it in a studio for a hair or > rim light. > The 285 has one less power level setting but is also useful in the > studio. > > Use NiMH batteries. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
