More or less. It's just way faster. I don't think one can call that lag. Maybe for some time critical shots but really, you don't feel any lag.
On 4/4/06, Jens Bladt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I would have thought that it's something like the red eye reduction pre > flash, which I find very annoying and time consuming (the shot is taken > quite a bit after I have pressed the button). I never use it for the same > reason - and it gives unnatural looking (small) pupils. > Regards > > Jens Bladt > http://www.jensbladt.dk > > -----Oprindelig meddelelse----- > Fra: Adam Maas [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sendt: 3. april 2006 22:38 > Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net > Emne: Re: DL TTL flash madness > > > It does take time, but maybe 10-15ms. It's imperceptible. > > -Adam > > > > Jens Bladt wrote: > > So the pre-flash doesn't take time? > > Regards > > Jens > > > > > > Jens Bladt > > http://www.jensbladt.dk > > > > -----Oprindelig meddelelse----- > > Fra: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sendt: 3. april 2006 20:02 > > Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net > > Emne: RE: DL TTL flash madness > > > > > > And P-TTL does not cause shutter lag. > > > > -------------- Original message ---------------------- > > From: "Jens Bladt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > >>What is E-TTL? > >>I don't know. > >>All I know is, that I'm not interested in using ANY preflash - at all. > >>It's bad enough, that the people I photograph must put up with one flash > >>light. I would never use a flash system that requires more than one flash > >>burst. > >> > >>First of all, it will give me a "shutter lag" - I can't capture the right > >>moment. Secondly I believe that more than one flash is an unnecessary > >>annoyance for the people being photographed. > >> > >>I almost exclusively use bounced flash (ceiling or other surfaces (except > >>for studio photography and outdoor photography). > >>A direct flash is not very polite. is it?. It leaves people "blind" for > >>several minutes. This is often quite unacceptable. > >>A direct flash provides a very unnatural looking light (horizontal in > > > > stead > > > >>of vertical). > >>Direct flash will result in over exposure of the foreground and under > >>exposure of the background. Thus very unpleasant pictures. > >>A direct flash will result in long horizontal shadows, which are not very > >>pleasing IMO. > >> > >>No pre flash system for me, thank you very much! > >> > >>One flash light is actually one flash too many, as far as I'm concerned. > >>I just want noiseless 12800 ASA . > >>I guess my grand children will have this feature in - let's say - 20 years > >>time ;-) > >>Regards > >>Jens > >> > >> > >>Jens Bladt > >>http://www.jensbladt.dk > >> > >>-----Oprindelig meddelelse----- > >>Fra: Jens Bladt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>Sendt: 3. april 2006 19:00 > >>Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net > >>Emne: RE: DL TTL flash madness > >> > >> > >>BTW, I didn't know that my PENTAX *ist D was their very cheapest DSLR? > >>I knew it was their first one, though. > >>Regards > >>Jens > >> > >>Jens Bladt > >>http://www.jensbladt.dk > >> > >>-----Oprindelig meddelelse----- > >>Fra: Jens Bladt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>Sendt: 3. april 2006 17:29 > >>Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net > >>Emne: RE: DL TTL flash madness > >> > >> > >>Who said only? > >>Jens > >>Jens Bladt > >>http://www.jensbladt.dk > >> > >>-----Oprindelig meddelelse----- > >>Fra: Aaron Reynolds [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>Sendt: 3. april 2006 15:49 > >>Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net > >>Emne: Re: DL TTL flash madness > >> > >> > >> > >>On Apr 3, 2006, at 2:22 AM, Jens Bladt wrote: > >> > >> > >>>Crippled or not. > >>>If the new 10 MP Pentax body doesn't support ordenary TTL flash, I > >>>won't be > >>>buying it. > >>>I have too many flashes - I guess 7 or 8 TTL flahses, one of which is > >>>a Metz > >>>60-CT2. > >> > >>Why on earth would you expect that the new top-end body would have only > >>the feature set of the very cheapest DSLR that Pentax makes? > >> > >>-Aaron > >> > >>-- > >>No virus found in this incoming message. > >>Checked by AVG Free Edition. > >>Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.3.4/299 - Release Date: 03/31/2006 > >> > >>-- > >>No virus found in this outgoing message. > >>Checked by AVG Free Edition. > >>Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.3.4/299 - Release Date: 03/31/2006 > >> > >>-- > >>No virus found in this incoming message. > >>Checked by AVG Free Edition. > >>Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.3.4/299 - Release Date: 03/31/2006 > >> > >>-- > >>No virus found in this outgoing message. > >>Checked by AVG Free Edition. > >>Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.3.4/299 - Release Date: 03/31/2006 > >> > >> > >>-- > >>No virus found in this incoming message. > >>Checked by AVG Free Edition. > >>Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.3.4/299 - Release Date: 03/31/2006 > >> > >>-- > >>No virus found in this outgoing message. > >>Checked by AVG Free Edition. > >>Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.3.4/299 - Release Date: 03/31/2006 > >> > > > > > > -- > > No virus found in this incoming message. > > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > > Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.3.4/299 - Release Date: 03/31/2006 > > > > -- > > No virus found in this outgoing message. > > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > > Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.3.4/299 - Release Date: 03/31/2006 > > -- > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.3.5/300 - Release Date: 04/03/2006 > > -- > No virus found in this outgoing message. > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.3.5/300 - Release Date: 04/03/2006 > > -- ---------------------- Thibouille ---------------------- *ist-D,Z1,SFXn,SuperA,KX,MX, P30t and KR-10x ...
