Red Eye Reduction purposely slows things down to give people's eyes time
to react, pre-flash for metering needs to occur as quickly as possible
to prevent movement from changing the needed exposure. Same technology,
applied in opposite manners.
-Adam
Jens Bladt 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
