The old TTL could be really effective at freezing action. But - the AF
on Pentax cameras back in those days was not the most sensitive or
accurate and I usually found snap in focus to be hit or miss at best.
And the old TTL flash was not quite as accurate as the P-TTL.
I've not seen any issues with inconsistencies with the AF360FGZ.
Exposures are not 100% but fairly reliable. I have always had issues
with the white balance not being right with the flash - always too blue.
I've tried adjusting the settings but nothing seems to work, so I jsut
take care of it when adjusting the raw files. For field macros where the
flash is just fill I would like the WB to remain the same whether the
flash fires or not. There is a specific menu setting for this but the WB
is always different when the flash fires.
Mark
On 5/1/2016 3:47 AM, Jostein wrote:
The old TTL system was better IMHO, because of its off-the-film/CCD
metering sensor inside the mirror house. The camera would quench the
flash output when there was enough light, just like a good ol' LX on
auto metering. I loved that for macro.
Have you noticed any sample variation between your 360FGZ's?
I remember I gave up on my 540 FGZ because of variation in both output
power and color temperature even in manual flash. The Metz units I
have now are much more consistent, even across camera models.
I wonder if the transition to P-TTL was actually brought about by a
shift in the way of thinking about high-speed flash. The old TTL units
(like A400-T or 500 FTZ) could quench the flash output very fast, and
thereby freezing motion while moving the shutter at sync-speed.
The advent of P-TTL, OTOH, coincided with development of the "hi-speed
sync" where the flash duration is much longer and the camera shutter
speed does the motion freezing. In this case, the camera and flash
needs to know in advance how much light to supply, hence the preflash.
Jostein
Den 01.05.2016 00.29, skrev Mark C:
Ok - it does do that and the old TTL system did it as well. I just shoot
in manual mode and dial in flash compensation. Each DSLR model that I've
used has been different in terms of how accurate the flash has been -
same lens, same flash, same technique so presumably the body is the
factor. Once the adjustment is made it's been reasonably accurate
(though not 100% consistent.) I've only used the AF360FGZ though - going
with a lower powered unit specifically to minimize overexposure.
On 4/30/2016 10:56 AM, Jostein wrote:
Interesting. In my experience, the P-TTL flashes overexpose at macro
distances in combination with A-series lenses.
When used with F-series or newer, P-TTL incorporates focal distance
communicated from the lens to set the right exposure. For A-series
lenses I believe the camera defaults to a sort of "program flash
range", like between 1.5 and 4 meters, depending on the flash GN.
I totally agree about P-TTL and snap-in. :-)
My experience is with two Metz flashes, the ring flash and the 540 FGZ.
Jostein
Den 30.04.2016 15.32, skrev Mark C:
Except for the Pentax ring flash I've not had any problems with P-TTL
and A lenses. I'm on my thrid AF360 FGZ used for in field macros.
Unfortunately P-TTL and snap in focus is a bit of a problem simply
because of the delay due to the pre-flash - the camera and subject cna
move a lot in the 1/15 of a second or so between the pre flash and
actual flash firing. I used snap in focus a lot with the Pz-1p but
basically stopped when PTTL came along.
Mark
On 4/30/2016 6:09 AM, Jostein wrote:
Very nice shot indeed, Bill.
I used to have the A*200/4 macro but sold it when I realised that
P-TTL didn't work properly with A-series lenses. I miss the snap-in
focus, though. That was handy with bugs.
Then I bought Stan's FA* 200/4 a year and a half ago. Hope I'll be
able to give it a good workout this summer.
Jostein
Den 30.04.2016 10.59, skrev Steve Cottrell:
On 29/4/16, Bill, discombobulated, unleashed:
Not the A, but I do have one of the very rare FA* 200/4 Macros.
It's
very nice.
I read somewhere that there were only 200 made. I don't know if
that is
true or not.
Here's a picture taken with it:
http://users.accesscomm.ca/wrphoto/pictures/wetrock.html
Never seen that before. Jesus I hope that's going in a pdml
annual at
some point. Stunning!
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
[email protected]
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
the directions.
