Hi Bruce,

TTL works on my *istDS to my satisfaction, by now, with those old 
flashes I have.
I have a flash meter and know how to use it, but I think this would not 
be wedding proof, e.g. Setting a flash to auto is OK too, the K100D I 
owned for a short ime even transmitted the f-stop to my Metz 40MZ-2.
But then, with auto flash and preset f-stop, my KX does the job as well 
- or my RB67, with 1/400 sync time ;-)

So why drop TTL for those who own old flashes, if it is apparently 
possible to implement both, at a not so high expense, I guess.

I always believe there is a conspiracy, if things are not going the way 
I want...

Pancho

Bruce Dayton schrieb:
> Hello Pancho,
> 
> My understanding of the move by all camera manufacturers away from TTL
> is that the reflectivity of the sensor/filter in front of it, made it
> problematic at best to read from that surface.  Every manufacturer has
> found it necessary to pre-flash and read to set proper exposure rather
> than meter on the surface during exposure.  If my *istD was any
> indicator, the Old TTL system was not too good.  I don't think there
> was any major conspiracy to force us to buy new flashes.
> 
> Nikon has been even worse going from TTL to D-TTL to I-TTL.  So
> incomparability is even a bigger problem - especially if you had a
> flash for the middle version.
> 

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net

Reply via email to