I just got back from shooting a wedding tonight and pretty much drained my battery 2 with the AF400T on Auto-Red. I use a Lumiquest Ultra Soft Bounce that sucks up about 2 1/2- 3 stops of light, but does a very good job of diffusing. But it put a big drain on the battery with that much flash punch. Right now I am considering another battery 2 to have as a spare. Tonight I could have used it.
Still thinking about the 540FGZ. -- Bruce Saturday, February 24, 2007, 10:03:34 AM, you wrote: PS> The recycle time for the 540 FGZ is fairly good with fresh batteries, PS> and since the Nimh maintain a good charge for quite a while that PS> works okay. I tried it with AAs, and that was a no go. I'm probably PS> going to get the Pentax Power Pack III. Although right now, if I had PS> to shoot another wedding without the power pack, I'd probably go with PS> the AF 400T and the battery 2. There's nothing wrong with that PS> combination, and while I can attest that the 540 FGZ provides good PS> exposures, the AF 400T on auto does rather well. PS> Paul PS> On Feb 24, 2007, at 12:40 PM, Bruce Dayton wrote: >> That is one big difference - I usually have to shoot some formal/posed >> shots where they are aware of the camera. Sometimes I can use my >> studio lights, but sometimes I have to use flash. >> >> I'm certainly considering picking up a 540FGZ and trying it out. I >> will need faster recycle times, however. >> >> -- >> Bruce >> >> >> Saturday, February 24, 2007, 2:35:03 AM, you wrote: >> >> PS> I've been using the Pentax 540 FGZP-TTL flash on the K10D. I >> shot a >> PS> wedding (about 300 frames) without a single blink. I also shot >> that >> PS> exercise class the other night, again without blinks. Exposures >> were >> PS> good. However, I shoot mostly candids and rarely tell anyone to >> look >> PS> at the camera. >> PS> Paul >> PS> On Feb 24, 2007, at 2:00 AM, Bruce Dayton wrote: >> >>>> My issue with the pre-flash technique is that people who tend to >>>> blink >>>> can be a real problem. The pre-flash starts them into the blink and >>>> you end up with shots with their eyes not fully open. I believe all >>>> brands have the same problem. >>>> >>>> For weddings I was shooting TTL with the *istD and now shooting Auto >>>> on the flash with the K10D - using my AF400T's for the time >>>> being. I >>>> use the AF360FGZ's during the day for daylight fill flash. >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Bruce >>>> >>>> >>>> Friday, February 23, 2007, 7:46:31 PM, you wrote: >>>> >>>> NW> For you (other) manual camera fans who might not have seen this >>>> yet, I >>>> NW> thought I'd mention that Vivitar has reintroduced their 285HV >>>> flash >>>> NW> units. They are selling brand new for just under $100 >>>> currently. And >>>> NW> they have trigger voltages of less than 6 volts, which means >>>> they are >>>> NW> safe to use on modern cameras too! Just got mine in the mail >>>> the other >>>> NW> day. In fact, I was so fed up with Canon's crazy ETTL I sold my >>>> $300 >>>> NW> Canon unit the day I heard the 285s were back! >>>> >>>> NW> And to put a vaguely Pentax spin on this post ... I'm curious if >>>> NW> Pentax's PTTL system is any good? A quick scan through the >>>> archives >>>> NW> found at least one person who wasn't so thrilled. I'd like to >>>> hear >>>> NW> more. Thanks! >>>> >>>> NW> -- >>>> NW> ~Nick Wright >>>> NW> http://blog.phojonick.com/ >>>> NW> http://www.phojonick.com/ >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >>>> [email protected] >>>> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >> >> >> >> >> >> -- >> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >> [email protected] >> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
