Hi Bruce, I use the Power Pak II with the 540 FGZ as well. I think my recycle times are a bit faster. I know I have it set to draw on both the in-flash batteries and teh Power Pak Ii simultaneously. There are some options for battery use. I don't remember how to set them, but it's in the 540 FGZ manual.
I found when shooting a reception with the Lumiquest reflector that I had trouble getting enough distance for some shots. So I switched to the Lumiquest soft box. With the lightsphere I'm going to be able to switch from the heavy diffusion mode for close-in shots to a softbox mode just by tilting the head and shooting through the cover. I expect it to work great. It was designed for wedding shooters and seems to be the first choice of most these days. Paul -------------- Original message ---------------------- From: Bruce Dayton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > The light loss is where my concern is. In some venues, that would > not be an issue. But for a wedding, there are two big issues. One > is distance - too much light loss and you are going to start > underexposing. The other is recycle time for the flash. I don't > consider the 4 AA batteries fast enough now with any kind of light > modification. For the 540FGZ I am using the Pentax Power Pak II > which brings recycle times down to about 2-3 seconds after a full > power burst - still a little slow for things like processionals and > such. > > -- > Best regards, > Bruce > > > Wednesday, June 18, 2008, 5:18:24 AM, you wrote: > > WH> I agree. Plus, it is a lot more compact. However, it does suck up a > WH> LOT of light. I have to try the clear one at some time. > > WH> Walt > > WH> On 6/17/08, Jack Davis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Not that this is the reason you posted these two shots, but the > >> Lightsphere > exposure is more to my liking. > >> > >> Jack > >> > >> > >> --- On Tue, 6/17/08, Walter Hamler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> > >> > From: Walter Hamler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >> > Subject: Lightsphere vs Lumiquest > >> > To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List" <pdml@pdml.net> > >> > Date: Tuesday, June 17, 2008, 5:40 PM > >> > Paul's thread got me to thinking. I have a Lightsphere, > >> > the cloudy > >> > looking version. I have tried it on the Sigma 500 flash > >> > with poor > >> > results that I attribute to P-TTL. May be wrong. > >> > Anyway, today I purchased a Vivitar 283 and put the velcro > >> > on it to > >> > attach my Lumiquest bounce hood. The initial tests reminded > >> > my again > >> > why I liked the Vivitar and Sunpak flash units with the > >> > simple auto > >> > feature. > >> > Then I decided to see how the Lightsphere would react. Not > >> > bad, but > >> > there are some subtle differences between the two. The > >> > attached > >> > photo's show. I believe each is captioned to show which > >> > was which. > >> > > >> > Walt > >> > > >> > http://walthamler.smugmug.com/gallery/4592986_mrB5J#315094136_KwVvH-XL-LB > >> > > >> > http://walthamler.smugmug.com/gallery/4592986_mrB5J#315094132_wiZxw-XL-LB > >> > > >> > -- > >> > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > >> > PDML@pdml.net > >> > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > >> > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link > >> > directly above and follow the directions. > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> -- > >> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > >> PDML@pdml.net > >> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > >> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and > >> follow > the directions. > >> > > > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow > the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
