K10D and Ring flash
It is common knowledge that the K10D does not have the capability to do TTL flash metering. While there are options to buy dedicated PTTL strobes for mounting on the hotshoe, there are no options currently for a PTTL ring flash. I do not use flash very much and for general work my Sunpak 383 in "auto" mode does a decent job. However, I used Sunpak Auto DX-12R Ringflash with the PT-2D Pentax TTL module for a lot of close up work. It does not have an Auto mode, nor would that really work for close up work. So I am stuck using it in full manual mode and adjusting each exposure by trial and error. I have asked the folks at Sunpak (ToCAD) via email if they are planning on a PTTL module, but have not gotten a response yet. Anyone know if Pentax is planning on selling a PTTL capable ring flash? I guess this is one reason to keep the *istD. For extreme close up work it required dialing in quite a bit of exposure compensation but was fairly consistent after initial adjustment. Perry. -- <> Perry Pellechia Primary email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Alternate email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Home Page: http://homer.chem.sc.edu/perry <> -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
K10D and Ring flash
Perry - Promaster lists one on their web site that they claim, with their Pentax module, will work with the Pentax DSLRs, including the K10. Light output is GN 35 at ISO 100. -P - I forgot about this one. But I suspect that it has the same problem as a flash from Sigma. You need to replace the chip when you get a new camera model. Joe -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
K10D and Ring flash
Sigma's ringflash is supposed to be forthcoming in P-TTL form. Now that Sigma has a copy of the K10D, it may appear soon. I hesitate to buy one, though. Every time you buy a new body, you have to send the flash back to Sigma for a new chip. I, too, wish Pentax would bring one out. After all, the macros were two of Pentax's first digital lenses. Joe -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
K10D and Ring flash
P.S. There is a company that puts out an LCD ringlight. Since it goes on and off like a flashlight, you don't need to worry about P-TTL. Just turn it on and your meter does the work. B&h may list it. Or do a Google search. The limitation is that the light is pretty weak, so you really need to be close in to use it. Joe -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
K10D and Ring flash
Thanks Joe, This is an excellent suggestion. I have seen these before but I totally forgot about them. However, the nice one at B&H runs $250. The cheapo Phoenix is less. http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?A=details&Q=&is=REG&O=productlist&sku=365518 http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=Search&A=details&Q=&sku=425083&is=REG&addedTroughType=search I guess what I really want is a PTTL module for my Sunpak. - Re: LCD ringlights: From the little I have heard about these, you will get better (more even) results from the ones with more lights. Joe -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K10D and Ring flash
I'm not a heavy flash user ... With a film camera, having TTL flash metering was useful, without it one tends to waste a lot of film. With a digital camera, a fully manual flash seems perfectly fine: I shoot a couple of test frames, check them with the histogram, and just leave those settings in place. I usually remember them easily and just set the camera for similar situations when next I pick up the flash unit. I use the same Sunpak 383 but most often leave it in manual, non-metered mode and just set up the exposure with the power control and aperture. I can't see how this is difficult for when one might need a ring flash ... What situation are you shooting that doesn't allow a couple of test exposures? Where a dedicated flash would be most useful for me is for changing daylight: I could dial in -1.5 to -1 EV flash compensation and let it work the fill requirements nicely. That's why I have the Pentax AF540FGZ on my B&H wishlist, but haven't punched the button to order it yet. G On Dec 11, 2006, at 7:58 AM, Perry Pellechia wrote: > It is common knowledge that the K10D does not have the capability to > do TTL flash metering. While there are options to buy dedicated PTTL > strobes for mounting on the hotshoe, there are no options currently > for a PTTL ring flash. > > I do not use flash very much and for general work my Sunpak 383 in > "auto" mode does a decent job. However, I used Sunpak Auto DX-12R > Ringflash with the PT-2D Pentax TTL module for a lot of close up work. > It does not have an Auto mode, nor would that really work for close > up work. So I am stuck using it in full manual mode and adjusting > each exposure by trial and error. > > I have asked the folks at Sunpak (ToCAD) via email if they are > planning on a PTTL module, but have not gotten a response yet. Anyone > know if Pentax is planning on selling a PTTL capable ring flash? > > I guess this is one reason to keep the *istD. For extreme close up > work it required dialing in quite a bit of exposure compensation but > was fairly consistent after initial adjustment. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K10D and Ring flash
My wife is an avid shell collector and I often photograph what she finds for record keeping and to help her identify the species. The size varies a lot, so the camera to object distance changes often during a shoot. Every time there is a change in position, the exposure has to be re-determined using manual corrections (trial and error). With TTL metering the exposure compensation does not change unless the camera to object distance changes a lot (more than a foot). The situtation with running full manual with digital is not impossible, but it is a pita to have to make so many changes to the exposure settings. On 12/11/06, Godfrey DiGiorgi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I'm not a heavy flash user ... > > With a film camera, having TTL flash metering was useful, without it > one tends to waste a lot of film. > > With a digital camera, a fully manual flash seems perfectly fine: I > shoot a couple of test frames, check them with the histogram, and > just leave those settings in place. I usually remember them easily > and just set the camera for similar situations when next I pick up > the flash unit. I use the same Sunpak 383 but most often leave it in > manual, non-metered mode and just set up the exposure with the power > control and aperture. I can't see how this is difficult for when one > might need a ring flash ... What situation are you shooting that > doesn't allow a couple of test exposures? > > Where a dedicated flash would be most useful for me is for changing > daylight: I could dial in -1.5 to -1 EV flash compensation and let it > work the fill requirements nicely. That's why I have the Pentax > AF540FGZ on my B&H wishlist, but haven't punched the button to order > it yet. > > G > > > On Dec 11, 2006, at 7:58 AM, Perry Pellechia wrote: > > > It is common knowledge that the K10D does not have the capability to > > do TTL flash metering. While there are options to buy dedicated PTTL > > strobes for mounting on the hotshoe, there are no options currently > > for a PTTL ring flash. > > > > I do not use flash very much and for general work my Sunpak 383 in > > "auto" mode does a decent job. However, I used Sunpak Auto DX-12R > > Ringflash with the PT-2D Pentax TTL module for a lot of close up work. > > It does not have an Auto mode, nor would that really work for close > > up work. So I am stuck using it in full manual mode and adjusting > > each exposure by trial and error. > > > > I have asked the folks at Sunpak (ToCAD) via email if they are > > planning on a PTTL module, but have not gotten a response yet. Anyone > > know if Pentax is planning on selling a PTTL capable ring flash? > > > > I guess this is one reason to keep the *istD. For extreme close up > > work it required dialing in quite a bit of exposure compensation but > > was fairly consistent after initial adjustment. > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > -- <> Perry Pellechia Primary email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Alternate email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Home Page: http://homer.chem.sc.edu/perry <> -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K10D and Ring flash
I tend to shoot that stuff with a tabletop setup, not a ringflash. I bought one of the Lightcubes ... makes it a breeze. Set the flash up with a cable so it's a fixed distance from the outside of the cube, put a stage in the cube for the object, and use a zoom (the F35-70 Macro does a pretty nice job of it) to nail the image size issue without moving the camera. Would work well with a dedicated P-TTL flash too. Godfrey On Dec 11, 2006, at 9:22 AM, Perry Pellechia wrote: > My wife is an avid shell collector and I often photograph what she > finds for record keeping and to help her identify the species. The > size varies a lot, so the camera to object distance changes often > during a shoot. Every time there is a change in position, the > exposure has to be re-determined using manual corrections (trial and > error). With TTL metering the exposure compensation does not change > unless the camera to object distance changes a lot (more than a foot). > The situtation with running full manual with digital is not > impossible, but it is a pita to have to make so many changes to the > exposure settings. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K10D and Ring flash
Thanks Paul for the suggestion. They do say that is works with the K10D with the correct module. The output should be fine for what I need. I will have to check out a source and price. On 12/11/06, Paul Sorenson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Perry - > > Promaster lists one on their web site that they claim, with their Pentax > module, will work with the Pentax DSLRs, including the K10. Light > output is GN 35 at ISO 100. > > -P > > Perry Pellechia wrote: > > It is common knowledge that the K10D does not have the capability to > > do TTL flash metering. While there are options to buy dedicated PTTL > > strobes for mounting on the hotshoe, there are no options currently > > for a PTTL ring flash. > > > > I do not use flash very much and for general work my Sunpak 383 in > > "auto" mode does a decent job. However, I used Sunpak Auto DX-12R > > Ringflash with the PT-2D Pentax TTL module for a lot of close up work. > > It does not have an Auto mode, nor would that really work for close > > up work. So I am stuck using it in full manual mode and adjusting > > each exposure by trial and error. > > > > I have asked the folks at Sunpak (ToCAD) via email if they are > > planning on a PTTL module, but have not gotten a response yet. Anyone > > know if Pentax is planning on selling a PTTL capable ring flash? > > > > I guess this is one reason to keep the *istD. For extreme close up > > work it required dialing in quite a bit of exposure compensation but > > was fairly consistent after initial adjustment. > > > > Perry. > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > -- <> Perry Pellechia Primary email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Alternate email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Home Page: http://homer.chem.sc.edu/perry <> -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K10D and Ring flash
Perry - Promaster lists one on their web site that they claim, with their Pentax module, will work with the Pentax DSLRs, including the K10. Light output is GN 35 at ISO 100. -P Perry Pellechia wrote: > It is common knowledge that the K10D does not have the capability to > do TTL flash metering. While there are options to buy dedicated PTTL > strobes for mounting on the hotshoe, there are no options currently > for a PTTL ring flash. > > I do not use flash very much and for general work my Sunpak 383 in > "auto" mode does a decent job. However, I used Sunpak Auto DX-12R > Ringflash with the PT-2D Pentax TTL module for a lot of close up work. > It does not have an Auto mode, nor would that really work for close > up work. So I am stuck using it in full manual mode and adjusting > each exposure by trial and error. > > I have asked the folks at Sunpak (ToCAD) via email if they are > planning on a PTTL module, but have not gotten a response yet. Anyone > know if Pentax is planning on selling a PTTL capable ring flash? > > I guess this is one reason to keep the *istD. For extreme close up > work it required dialing in quite a bit of exposure compensation but > was fairly consistent after initial adjustment. > > Perry. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K10D and Ring flash
On 12/11/06, Joseph Tainter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Perry - > > Promaster lists one on their web site that they claim, with their Pentax > module, will work with the Pentax DSLRs, including the K10. Light > output is GN 35 at ISO 100. > > -P > > - > > I forgot about this one. But I suspect that it has the same problem as a > flash from Sigma. You need to replace the chip when you get a new camera > model. > > Joe > > -- Promaster includes the K10D as a supported camera. Maybe they did a better job reverse engineering the Pentax spec than Sigma. -- <> Perry Pellechia Primary email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Alternate email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Home Page: http://homer.chem.sc.edu/perry <> -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K10D and Ring flash
Some the shells I have had to shoot are less than 3mm and require bellows, reversed lens or both.These situations make it very difficult to illuminate the subject without shadow problems. The ring light is the only thing I have tried that really works for all situations. On 12/11/06, Godfrey DiGiorgi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I tend to shoot that stuff with a tabletop setup, not a ringflash. I > bought one of the Lightcubes ... makes it a breeze. Set the flash up > with a cable so it's a fixed distance from the outside of the cube, > put a stage in the cube for the object, and use a zoom (the F35-70 > Macro does a pretty nice job of it) to nail the image size issue > without moving the camera. Would work well with a dedicated P-TTL > flash too. > > Godfrey > > On Dec 11, 2006, at 9:22 AM, Perry Pellechia wrote: > > > My wife is an avid shell collector and I often photograph what she > > finds for record keeping and to help her identify the species. The > > size varies a lot, so the camera to object distance changes often > > during a shoot. Every time there is a change in position, the > > exposure has to be re-determined using manual corrections (trial and > > error). With TTL metering the exposure compensation does not change > > unless the camera to object distance changes a lot (more than a foot). > > The situtation with running full manual with digital is not > > impossible, but it is a pita to have to make so many changes to the > > exposure settings. > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > -- <> Perry Pellechia Primary email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Alternate email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Home Page: http://homer.chem.sc.edu/perry <> -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K10D and Ring flash
Thanks Joe, This is an excellent suggestion. I have seen these before but I totally forgot about them. However, the nice one at B&H runs $250. The cheapo Phoenix is less. http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?A=details&Q=&is=REG&O=productlist&sku=365518 http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=Search&A=details&Q=&sku=425083&is=REG&addedTroughType=search I guess what I really want is a PTTL module for my Sunpak. On 12/11/06, Joseph Tainter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > P.S. There is a company that puts out an LCD ringlight. Since it goes on > and off like a flashlight, you don't need to worry about P-TTL. Just > turn it on and your meter does the work. B&h may list it. Or do a Google > search. The limitation is that the light is pretty weak, so you really > need to be close in to use it. > > Joe > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > -- <> Perry Pellechia Primary email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Alternate email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Home Page: http://homer.chem.sc.edu/perry <> -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K10D and Ring flash
Very interesting subject matter! I'd like to see some pictures. Godfrey On Dec 11, 2006, at 9:52 AM, Perry Pellechia wrote: > Some the shells I have had to shoot are less than 3mm and require > bellows, reversed lens or both.These situations make it very > difficult to illuminate the subject without shadow problems. The ring > light is the only thing I have tried that really works for all > situations. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K10D and Ring flash
Interesting devices ... I think I'd like them better than a flash as you can see the modeling and highlights more easily. Godfrey On Dec 11, 2006, at 9:31 AM, Perry Pellechia wrote: > Thanks Joe, This is an excellent suggestion. I have seen these before > but I totally forgot about them. However, the nice one at B&H runs > $250. The cheapo Phoenix is less. > > http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home? > A=details&Q=&is=REG&O=productlist&sku=365518 > http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home? > O=Search&A=details&Q=&sku=425083&is=REG&addedTroughType=search > > I guess what I really want is a PTTL module for my Sunpak. > > > On 12/11/06, Joseph Tainter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> P.S. There is a company that puts out an LCD ringlight. Since it >> goes on >> and off like a flashlight, you don't need to worry about P-TTL. Just >> turn it on and your meter does the work. B&h may list it. Or do a >> Google >> search. The limitation is that the light is pretty weak, so you >> really >> need to be close in to use it. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K10D and Ring flash
When I was at EKU, I used a copystand/pin register set-up and frequently lit very small artifacts with a fiber optic tube. It took longish shutter speeds, but it was a great way to light stuff. Plus, it was a hell of a lot of fun. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K10D and Ring flash
On 12/11/06, Joseph Tainter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Thanks Joe, This is an excellent suggestion. I have seen these before > but I totally forgot about them. However, the nice one at B&H runs > $250. The cheapo Phoenix is less. > > http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?A=details&Q=&is=REG&O=productlist&sku=365518 > http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=Search&A=details&Q=&sku=425083&is=REG&addedTroughType=search > > I guess what I really want is a PTTL module for my Sunpak. > > - > Re: LCD ringlights: > > From the little I have heard about these, you will get better (more > even) results from the ones with more lights. > Makes sense. Should lead to more even illumination. -- <> Perry Pellechia Primary email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Alternate email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Home Page: http://homer.chem.sc.edu/perry <> -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K10D and Ring flash
Godfrey, I do not have access to my later photos here at work. I have some earlier shots I can show. At the time I was trying to decide the best way of getting these images. This set compares using a reversed Vivitar 28mm lens and a Tamron 90mm F2.8 macro lens and teleconverter. I think these are 1:1 comparison crops that may have been resized. http://homer.chem.sc.edu/perry/shells/compare.jpg http://homer.chem.sc.edu/perry/shells/compare2.jpg http://homer.chem.sc.edu/perry/shells/compare3.jpg http://homer.chem.sc.edu/perry/shells/compare4.jpg Last shell is about 2mm. These are full frame shots: http://homer.chem.sc.edu/perry/shells/imgp1656.jpg http://homer.chem.sc.edu/perry/shells/imgp1964.jpg (Note the grains of sans) The ruler above shows mm scale. I know there is not much "art" to these but it is a fun way to combine both our hobbies. Perry. On 12/11/06, Godfrey DiGiorgi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Very interesting subject matter! I'd like to see some pictures. > > Godfrey > > > > On Dec 11, 2006, at 9:52 AM, Perry Pellechia wrote: > > > Some the shells I have had to shoot are less than 3mm and require > > bellows, reversed lens or both.These situations make it very > > difficult to illuminate the subject without shadow problems. The ring > > light is the only thing I have tried that really works for all > > situations. > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > -- <> Perry Pellechia Primary email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Alternate email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Home Page: http://homer.chem.sc.edu/perry <> -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K10D and Ring flash
That does sound like an interesting way to go. One or more LEDs would be an way too. I might experiment with this approach. On 12/11/06, Doug Brewer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > When I was at EKU, I used a copystand/pin register set-up and frequently > lit very small artifacts with a fiber optic tube. It took longish > shutter speeds, but it was a great way to light stuff. > > Plus, it was a hell of a lot of fun. > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > -- <> Perry Pellechia Primary email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Alternate email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Home Page: http://homer.chem.sc.edu/perry <> -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K10D and Ring flash
Neat stuff! These shells are very beautiful. The ringlight gives a somewhat flat, clinical lighting ... more of a scientific recording than capturing their beauty. Probably fine for the purposes you have articulated, but I think you could do better justice to the subject matter, artistically, with more directional lighting. Doug's notion of using a fibre optic light source sounds very interesting ... ! Godfrey On Dec 11, 2006, at 11:08 AM, Perry Pellechia wrote: > Godfrey, > > I do not have access to my later photos here at work. I have some > earlier shots I can show. At the time I was trying to decide the best > way of getting these images. This set compares using a reversed > Vivitar 28mm lens and a Tamron 90mm F2.8 macro lens and teleconverter. > I think these are 1:1 comparison crops that may have been resized. > > http://homer.chem.sc.edu/perry/shells/compare.jpg > http://homer.chem.sc.edu/perry/shells/compare2.jpg > http://homer.chem.sc.edu/perry/shells/compare3.jpg > http://homer.chem.sc.edu/perry/shells/compare4.jpg > > Last shell is about 2mm. > > These are full frame shots: > > http://homer.chem.sc.edu/perry/shells/imgp1656.jpg > http://homer.chem.sc.edu/perry/shells/imgp1964.jpg > > (Note the grains of sans) > The ruler above shows mm scale. > > I know there is not much "art" to these but it is a fun way to combine > both our hobbies. > > Perry. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K10D and Ring flash
Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: >With a film camera, having TTL flash metering was useful, without it >one tends to waste a lot of film. > >With a digital camera, a fully manual flash seems perfectly fine: I >shoot a couple of test frames, check them with the histogram, and >just leave those settings in place. This is just what I've been thinking throughout this thread. For macro shooting of non-moving objects in a controlled setting, I wouldn't use TTL, P-TTL or any other kind of automatic flash. Straight manual seems the way to go. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
RE: K10D and Ring flash
Me too, I would love to see some photos. Have you also tried to put the shells on a white handkerchief or fabric and then on a glass plate and give some additional lightening from the bottom/back of the glass? I had some nice effects with clay figures with that and 2 additional flashes softened with baking paper . greetings Markus -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Godfrey DiGiorgi Sent: Monday, December 11, 2006 7:17 PM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: K10D and Ring flash Very interesting subject matter! I'd like to see some pictures. Godfrey On Dec 11, 2006, at 9:52 AM, Perry Pellechia wrote: > Some the shells I have had to shoot are less than 3mm and require > bellows, reversed lens or both.These situations make it very > difficult to illuminate the subject without shadow problems. The ring > light is the only thing I have tried that really works for all > situations. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
RE: K10D and Ring flash
I understand how small the shells are but I nevertheless expected the photos to be a lot sharper. I woul as well try with a completely white and a black background instead of the "natural" gray. I could imagine them to be nice in black and white too. greetings Markus -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Perry Pellechia Sent: Monday, December 11, 2006 8:09 PM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: K10D and Ring flash Godfrey, I do not have access to my later photos here at work. I have some earlier shots I can show. At the time I was trying to decide the best way of getting these images. This set compares using a reversed Vivitar 28mm lens and a Tamron 90mm F2.8 macro lens and teleconverter. I think these are 1:1 comparison crops that may have been resized. http://homer.chem.sc.edu/perry/shells/compare.jpg http://homer.chem.sc.edu/perry/shells/compare2.jpg http://homer.chem.sc.edu/perry/shells/compare3.jpg http://homer.chem.sc.edu/perry/shells/compare4.jpg Last shell is about 2mm. These are full frame shots: http://homer.chem.sc.edu/perry/shells/imgp1656.jpg http://homer.chem.sc.edu/perry/shells/imgp1964.jpg (Note the grains of sans) The ruler above shows mm scale. I know there is not much "art" to these but it is a fun way to combine both our hobbies. Perry. On 12/11/06, Godfrey DiGiorgi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Very interesting subject matter! I'd like to see some pictures. > > Godfrey > > > > On Dec 11, 2006, at 9:52 AM, Perry Pellechia wrote: > > > Some the shells I have had to shoot are less than 3mm and require > > bellows, reversed lens or both.These situations make it very > > difficult to illuminate the subject without shadow problems. The ring > > light is the only thing I have tried that really works for all > > situations. > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > -- <> Perry Pellechia Primary email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Alternate email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Home Page: http://homer.chem.sc.edu/perry <> -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K10D and Ring flash
See my earlier post for examples. A white background would not work too well with most "subjects" A lot of the species found along our coast (South Carolina) are rather light in color. You have to get to more tropical waters to get more darker and vivid colors. On 12/11/06, Markus Maurer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Me too, I would love to see some photos. > Have you also tried to put the shells on a white handkerchief or fabric and > then on a glass plate and give some additional lightening from the > bottom/back of the glass? I had some nice effects with clay figures with > that and 2 additional flashes softened with baking paper . > > greetings > Markus > > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of > Godfrey DiGiorgi > Sent: Monday, December 11, 2006 7:17 PM > To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List > Subject: Re: K10D and Ring flash > > > Very interesting subject matter! I'd like to see some pictures. > > Godfrey > > > > On Dec 11, 2006, at 9:52 AM, Perry Pellechia wrote: > > > Some the shells I have had to shoot are less than 3mm and require > > bellows, reversed lens or both.These situations make it very > > difficult to illuminate the subject without shadow problems. The ring > > light is the only thing I have tried that really works for all > > situations. > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > -- <> Perry Pellechia Primary email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Alternate email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Home Page: http://homer.chem.sc.edu/perry <> -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K10D and Ring flash
These were taken a while back. Later images are better. Most of the "softness" are due to limited DOF using the reversed lens. On 12/11/06, Markus Maurer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I understand how small the shells are but I nevertheless expected the > photos to be a lot sharper. > I woul as well try with a completely white and a black background instead of > the "natural" gray. > I could imagine them to be nice in black and white too. > > greetings > Markus > > > > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of > Perry Pellechia > Sent: Monday, December 11, 2006 8:09 PM > To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List > Subject: Re: K10D and Ring flash > > > Godfrey, > > I do not have access to my later photos here at work. I have some > earlier shots I can show. At the time I was trying to decide the best > way of getting these images. This set compares using a reversed > Vivitar 28mm lens and a Tamron 90mm F2.8 macro lens and teleconverter. > I think these are 1:1 comparison crops that may have been resized. > > http://homer.chem.sc.edu/perry/shells/compare.jpg > http://homer.chem.sc.edu/perry/shells/compare2.jpg > http://homer.chem.sc.edu/perry/shells/compare3.jpg > http://homer.chem.sc.edu/perry/shells/compare4.jpg > > Last shell is about 2mm. > > These are full frame shots: > > http://homer.chem.sc.edu/perry/shells/imgp1656.jpg > http://homer.chem.sc.edu/perry/shells/imgp1964.jpg > > (Note the grains of sans) > The ruler above shows mm scale. > > I know there is not much "art" to these but it is a fun way to combine > both our hobbies. > > Perry. > > > On 12/11/06, Godfrey DiGiorgi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Very interesting subject matter! I'd like to see some pictures. > > > > Godfrey > > > > > > > > On Dec 11, 2006, at 9:52 AM, Perry Pellechia wrote: > > > > > Some the shells I have had to shoot are less than 3mm and require > > > bellows, reversed lens or both.These situations make it very > > > difficult to illuminate the subject without shadow problems. The ring > > > light is the only thing I have tried that really works for all > > > situations. > > > > > > -- > > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > > PDML@pdml.net > > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > > > > > -- > <> > Perry Pellechia > > Primary email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Alternate email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Home Page: http://homer.chem.sc.edu/perry > <> > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > -- <> Perry Pellechia Primary email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Alternate email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Home Page: http://homer.chem.sc.edu/perry <> -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K10D and Ring flash
On 12/11/06 3:20 PM, "Perry Pellechia", <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > These were taken a while back. Later images are better. Most of the > "softness" are due to limited DOF using the reversed lens. I used to shoot various jewelries for website display for my wife's business. Jewelries are difficult subjects to shoot because of reflection and size. Flash, ring or otherwise is usually no no. Reflection from glittering surface often makes colours completely off balance and contrast is too harsh. It has much to do with wave length etc. Most famous is gold turning black in print, even though in finder, it looks gold. My solution was, yes, you guessed it, that is, do what jewelers do. They never use any sort of flash, but natural lighting only. Popular stuff is "cloud dome" which is nothing more than just translucent dome but it mimic cloudy day, even lighting and makes macro shooting of small objects so much easier. http://www.clouddome.com/ Its price is ridiculously high so I recommend DIY staff, such as translucent garbage box etc which I also fabricated for larger objects. I used a copy stand, cloud dome and often black velvet as a background for jewelleries. It is nothing more than a diffuser but works so well, and no wonder jewelers use it. You can use it under any light, and even ordinary TTL flash which will give light outside of diffuser but it hardly create shadow. If you view your object thru finder without diffuser, and with cloud dome or any equivalent subject, difference is so great and natural colour and texture are brought out. I have many example shots but I am too lazy to dig them out and put on my web page :-). Maybe I should begin to exhibit my "art" work :-). Ken -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K10D and Ring flash
- Original Message - From: "Godfrey DiGiorgi" Subject: Re: K10D and Ring flash > Neat stuff! > > These shells are very beautiful. The ringlight gives a somewhat flat, > clinical lighting ... more of a scientific recording than capturing > their beauty. Probably fine for the purposes you have articulated, > but I think you could do better justice to the subject matter, > artistically, with more directional lighting. One can put bits of masking tape on a ringlight to give the light some modelling. William Robb -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K10D and Ring flash
- Original Message - From: "Perry Pellechia" Subject: Re: K10D and Ring flash > My wife is an avid shell collector and I often photograph what she > finds for record keeping and to help her identify the species. The > size varies a lot, so the camera to object distance changes often > during a shoot. Every time there is a change in position, the > exposure has to be re-determined using manual corrections (trial and > error). With TTL metering the exposure compensation does not change > unless the camera to object distance changes a lot (more than a foot). > The situtation with running full manual with digital is not > impossible, but it is a pita to have to make so many changes to the > exposure settings. It may be possible to shoot from a few set distances if you can live with some cropping from time to time. If you can manage that, then perhaps stringing the subject distance could be done. A four foot string with a knot tied every stop of distance, for example, might speed things up for you. With really close stuff, I suspect trial and error is the best you are going to get, though you will get more accurate sooner with practice. William Robb -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K10D and Ring flash
Duh, maybe a one foot string.. William Robb -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
RE: K10D and Ring flash
There is no such thing as laziness for a PDML member :-) An interesting way since I had indeed some problems photographing reflecting clay figures. Baking paper in front of the 2 flash from about 1 Meter distance from the side was a good solution. greetings Markus . I have many example shots but I am too lazy to dig them out and put on my web page :-). Maybe I should begin to exhibit my "art" work :-). Ken -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K10D and Ring flash
On 12/12/06, William Robb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > It may be possible to shoot from a few set distances if you can live > with some cropping from time to time. > If you can manage that, then perhaps stringing the subject distance > could be done. > A four foot string with a knot tied every stop of distance, for example, > might speed things up for you. > With really close stuff, I suspect trial and error is the best you are > going to get, though you will get more accurate sooner with practice. > Bill, This is a pretty good suggestion. My home-made copy stand is actually a modified enlarger. There is already a "ruler" on the enlarger upright, so generating a exposure table based on the height of the camera would not be difficult. Cropping in not really a problem. Most of these images are used for web page presentation so they are usually reduce anyway. Thanks for the suggestion. Perry. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
RE: K10D and Ring flash
Of course Pentax brought out it's top of the line AF500 FTZ flash which I purchased in '99... which is now rather useless on it's DSLR's. At least Sigma updates their flash. With Pentax you need a whole new unit. Tom C. >From: Joseph Tainter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List >To: pdml@pdml.net >Subject: K10D and Ring flash >Date: Mon, 11 Dec 2006 10:15:27 -0700 > >Sigma's ringflash is supposed to be forthcoming in P-TTL form. Now that >Sigma has a copy of the K10D, it may appear soon. > >I hesitate to buy one, though. Every time you buy a new body, you have >to send the flash back to Sigma for a new chip. > >I, too, wish Pentax would bring one out. After all, the macros were two >of Pentax's first digital lenses. > >Joe > >-- >PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >PDML@pdml.net >http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
RE: K10D and Ring flash
On Wed, 13 Dec 2006, Tom C wrote: > At least Sigma updates their flash. With Pentax you need a whole new unit. Och aye! Sigma updates their TTL flashes to become P-TTL? Kostas -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K10D and Ring flash
It's much better on the DS (firmware v2.0), but still not perfect. Still when I get a K10D I'll keep the D as backup and plan to sell the DS, for whatever I can get for it. William Robb wrote: > - Original Message - > From: "Kostas Kavoussanakis" > Subject: Re: RE: K10D and Ring flash > > > > >> Not sure what you are saying here, William. The AF-500FTZ is digitally >> controlled, isn't it? It's the rear-facing sensor for TTL that is >> omitted, because it did not work well with the CCDs. Am I wrong? >> > > Sorry, I didn't realize the 500 was a digital flash. > My experience with TTL flash control on the istD was very dissapointing. > > William Robb > > > > -- Things should be made as simple as possible -- but no simpler. --Albert Einstein -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K10D and Ring flash
William Robb wrote: > - Original Message - > From: "Kostas Kavoussanakis" > Subject: Re: RE: K10D and Ring flash > > > >> Not sure what you are saying here, William. The AF-500FTZ is digitally >> controlled, isn't it? It's the rear-facing sensor for TTL that is >> omitted, because it did not work well with the CCDs. Am I wrong? > > Sorry, I didn't realize the 500 was a digital flash. > My experience with TTL flash control on the istD was very dissapointing. > > William Robb > > > The AF500FTZ is digital TTL flash, the Digital SLR's require P-TTL (Ie Preflash TTL)(other than the D, DS and DS2 which all can do digital or analog TTL). -Adam -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K10D and Ring flash
Does the AF500FTZ not have an Auto-Thyristor mode? I know the AF400FTZ and AF540FGZ do. Auto flash works extremely well on digital. -Adam Tom C wrote: > It's not an argument at all. I'm simply stating that since I paid, at the > time, a pretty penny, and haven't used it that much, I'm disappointed. > > Why would I shoot film just to use my flash unit? > > > Tom C. > > > >>From: Kostas Kavoussanakis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List >>To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List >>Subject: Re: RE: K10D and Ring flash >>Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2006 16:49:25 + (GMT) >> >>On Thu, 14 Dec 2006, Tom C wrote: >> >> >>>Yeah I understand that technology changes... It doesn't help though that >> >>I >> >>>bought their most expensive flash unit and that now it's basically >> >>useless. >> >>>:-) Long before the life of the product itself has been exhausted. >> >>That's an aperture-simulator kind of argument. Stick it on an AF film >>body and enjoy. >> >>The real complaint is that we had to wait 14 years for the successor >>of the AF500FTZ (more if you live in the UK). The MZ-S would have made >>use of it as early as 2001. >> >>Kostas >> >>-- >>PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >>PDML@pdml.net >>http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > > > > -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K10D and Ring flash
On Dec 14, 2006, at 9:50 AM, Tom C wrote: > It's not an argument at all. I'm simply stating that since I paid, > at the > time, a pretty penny, and haven't used it that much, I'm disappointed. The value in any of this equipment is in its use, not in its longevity, future usability or residual value. If you bought it and didn't use it much, well, that's your fault not Pentax'. It's why I have not yet purchased a dedicated flash unit of any kind: I don't get enough use out of high-falutin' flash features to be worth the money. Godfrey -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K10D and Ring flash
I didn't actually say it was anyone's fault... I bought its specifically to photograph a wedding and it served me well. Tom C. >From: Godfrey DiGiorgi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List >To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List >Subject: Re: K10D and Ring flash >Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2006 11:12:56 -0800 > > >On Dec 14, 2006, at 9:50 AM, Tom C wrote: > > > It's not an argument at all. I'm simply stating that since I paid, > > at the > > time, a pretty penny, and haven't used it that much, I'm disappointed. > >The value in any of this equipment is in its use, not in its >longevity, future usability or residual value. > >If you bought it and didn't use it much, well, that's your fault not >Pentax'. It's why I have not yet purchased a dedicated flash unit of >any kind: I don't get enough use out of high-falutin' flash features >to be worth the money. > >Godfrey > >-- >PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >PDML@pdml.net >http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
RE: K10D and Ring flash
full manual meaning full power manual flash only, or is there reduced power manual settings available? jco -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of John Francis Sent: Thursday, December 14, 2006 2:28 PM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: K10D and Ring flash On Thu, Dec 14, 2006 at 01:29:36PM -0500, Adam Maas wrote: > Does the AF500FTZ not have an Auto-Thyristor mode? No - just camera-controlled or full manual. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K10D and Ring flash
On Thu, Dec 14, 2006 at 01:29:36PM -0500, Adam Maas wrote: > Does the AF500FTZ not have an Auto-Thyristor mode? No - just camera-controlled or full manual. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K10D and Ring flash
Full manual control, not just full-power. -Adam J. C. O'Connell wrote: > full manual meaning full power manual flash only, > or is there reduced power manual settings available? > jco > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of > John Francis > Sent: Thursday, December 14, 2006 2:28 PM > To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List > Subject: Re: K10D and Ring flash > > > On Thu, Dec 14, 2006 at 01:29:36PM -0500, Adam Maas wrote: > >>Does the AF500FTZ not have an Auto-Thyristor mode? > > > No - just camera-controlled or full manual. > > -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K10D and Ring flash
So then why the disappointment? You bought it for a specific purpose, for which you are delighted that it served satisfactorily. Why not leave it at that? Have such a purpose in mind when you invest in a new flash unit for your newer cameras and I bet you'll get your money's worth out of them very quickly. G On Dec 14, 2006, at 11:18 AM, Tom C wrote: > I didn't actually say it was anyone's fault... I bought its > specifically to > photograph a wedding and it served me well. > >> The value in any of this equipment is in its use, not in its >> longevity, future usability or residual value. >> >> If you bought it and didn't use it much, well, that's your fault not >> Pentax'. It's why I have not yet purchased a dedicated flash unit of >> any kind: I don't get enough use out of high-falutin' flash features >> to be worth the money. >> >>> It's not an argument at all. I'm simply stating that since I >>> paid, at the >>> time, a pretty penny, and haven't used it that much, I'm >>> disappointed. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K10D and Ring flash
> > It's also rather annoying that the AF500 doesn't have an "auto" mode, > so I'd be better off with my 30-year-old Sunpak 3000 on a new body. > (Although, of course, there's an aperture-simulator parallel; a screw- > mount lens gives me slightly more automation that a later K/M mount). I think it's nicely ironic that my AF280T flash units have better functionality with the new generation of DSLRs than newer generation AF500s. John Francis wrote: > On Thu, Dec 14, 2006 at 04:49:25PM +, Kostas Kavoussanakis wrote: > >> On Thu, 14 Dec 2006, Tom C wrote: >> >> >>> Yeah I understand that technology changes... It doesn't help though that I >>> bought their most expensive flash unit and that now it's basically useless. >>> :-) Long before the life of the product itself has been exhausted. >>> >> That's an aperture-simulator kind of argument. Stick it on an AF film >> body and enjoy. >> >> The real complaint is that we had to wait 14 years for the successor >> of the AF500FTZ (more if you live in the UK). The MZ-S would have made >> use of it as early as 2001. >> >> Kostas >> > > It's also rather annoying that the AF500 doesn't have an "auto" mode, > so I'd be better off with my 30-year-old Sunpak 3000 on a new body. > (Although, of course, there's an aperture-simulator parallel; a screw- > mount lens gives me slightly more automation that a later K/M mount). > > > -- Things should be made as simple as possible -- but no simpler. --Albert Einstein -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K10D and Ring flash
William Robb wrote: > - Original Message - > From: "Mike Hamilton" > Subject: Re: RE: K10D and Ring flash > > > >>P-TTL was already the standard in new Pentax bodies (MZ-S & MZ-6) in >>2001, 2 years prior to the *ist D, which *also* supports TTL. As do >>the *ist DS and *ist DS2. I think that 14 years (1992 to 2006) of use >>of a top of the line flash on modern bodies is reasonable. There was >>even 5 years of overlap where your TTL flash was still supported in >>new camera bodies. And nothing stops you from using that flash on a >>*ist D/DS/DS2 body now! >> >>Enjoy your equipment as it was intended. > > > It's more stuff being left off that limits support for older equipment, > in this case, an analogue flash control. > I'm sure it was done to cut costs. > > William Robb > And engineering complexity. TTL requires a flash sensor in the mirror box, P-TTL uses the ambient exposure meter. -Adam -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K10D and Ring flash
On Thu, 14 Dec 2006, P. J. Alling wrote: > I think it's nicely ironic that my AF280T flash units have better > functionality with the new generation of DSLRs than newer generation AF500s. It's exactly as ironic as the fact that M42 have better functionality than the pre-A bayonets: it's coincidental. Kostas -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K10D and Ring flash
On 15/12/06, Godfrey DiGiorgi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > So then why the disappointment? You bought it for a specific purpose, > for which you are delighted that it served satisfactorily. Why not > leave it at that? > > Have such a purpose in mind when you invest in a new flash unit for > your newer cameras and I bet you'll get your money's worth out of > them very quickly. Some of that post war mentality of my grandparents must have rubbed off on me. I see this regular and forced redundancy of what are essentially physically long lived objects as a ridiculous waste of resources and my cash. And I really despise being told to effectively get over it and more on. Maybe I'm just a greenie at heart '-) -- Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://home.swiftdsl.com.au/~distudio//publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K10D and Ring flash
Kostas Kavoussanakis wrote: > On Thu, 14 Dec 2006, P. J. Alling wrote: > > >>I think it's nicely ironic that my AF280T flash units have better >>functionality with the new generation of DSLRs than newer generation AF500s. > > > It's exactly as ironic as the fact that M42 have better functionality > than the pre-A bayonets: it's coincidental. > > Kostas > > Ironically, it appears that they don't on the K100D/K110D, I'm seeing exposure errors in Av with M42 lenses, pre-A lenses at least work wide open. This seems to be related to shorting out the A contacts based on my testing. The D gives correct exposures in Av with the A contacts uncovered, IIRC the DS and DL do as well. I can't comment on the K10D. -Adam -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K10D and Ring flash
On Dec 14, 2006, at 3:59 PM, Digital Image Studio wrote: >> So then why the disappointment? You bought it for a specific purpose, >> for which you are delighted that it served satisfactorily. Why not >> leave it at that? >> >> Have such a purpose in mind when you invest in a new flash unit for >> your newer cameras and I bet you'll get your money's worth out of >> them very quickly. > > Some of that post war mentality of my grandparents must have rubbed > off on me. I see this regular and forced redundancy of what are > essentially physically long lived objects as a ridiculous waste of > resources and my cash. And I really despise being told to effectively > get over it and more on. Maybe I'm just a greenie at heart '-) That's why I don't buy them unless they will return sufficient value in use. It's even greener when they don't have to make so many of them. ... ;-) G -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K10D and Ring flash
On Thu, 14 Dec 2006, Adam Maas wrote: > Kostas Kavoussanakis wrote: >> On Thu, 14 Dec 2006, P. J. Alling wrote: >> >> >>> I think it's nicely ironic that my AF280T flash units have better >>> functionality with the new generation of DSLRs than newer generation AF500s. >> >> >> It's exactly as ironic as the fact that M42 have better functionality >> than the pre-A bayonets: it's coincidental. > > Ironically, it appears that they don't on the K100D/K110D, I'm seeing > exposure errors in Av with M42 lenses, pre-A lenses at least work wide open. > This seems to be related to shorting out the A contacts based on my testing. Again I would have started the sentence above: "Coincidentally...". These lenses just aren't on the map as far as these cameras are concerned. Kostas -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K10D and Ring flash
On Fri, 15 Dec 2006, Digital Image Studio wrote: > Some of that post war mentality of my grandparents must have rubbed > off on me. I see this regular and forced redundancy of what are > essentially physically long lived objects as a ridiculous waste of > resources and my cash. And I really despise being told to effectively > get over it and more on. Maybe I'm just a greenie at heart '-) I share your sentiments. This is why I still run a CRT and just bought 10-yo speakers to match my existing ones for a 3.0 sound system. It's also one of the reasons why I use film. However, TTL was reportedly not easy to implement well on digital, so it had to go. Shoot film, be happy! Kostas :-) -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K10D and Ring flash
> > From: "Digital Image Studio" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: 2006/12/14 Thu PM 11:59:29 GMT > To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List" > Subject: Re: K10D and Ring flash > > On 15/12/06, Godfrey DiGiorgi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > So then why the disappointment? You bought it for a specific purpose, > > for which you are delighted that it served satisfactorily. Why not > > leave it at that? > > > > Have such a purpose in mind when you invest in a new flash unit for > > your newer cameras and I bet you'll get your money's worth out of > > them very quickly. > > Some of that post war mentality of my grandparents must have rubbed > off on me. I see this regular and forced redundancy of what are > essentially physically long lived objects as a ridiculous waste of > resources and my cash. And I really despise being told to effectively > get over it and more on. Maybe I'm just a greenie at heart '-) You're certainly not the "more on". ;-) - Email sent from www.ntlworld.com Virus-checked using McAfee(R) Software Visit www.ntlworld.com/security for more information -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K10D and Ring flash
Kostas Kavoussanakis wrote: > On Thu, 14 Dec 2006, Adam Maas wrote: > >> Kostas Kavoussanakis wrote: >>> On Thu, 14 Dec 2006, P. J. Alling wrote: >>> >>> I think it's nicely ironic that my AF280T flash units have better functionality with the new generation of DSLRs than newer generation AF500s. >>> >>> It's exactly as ironic as the fact that M42 have better functionality >>> than the pre-A bayonets: it's coincidental. >> Ironically, it appears that they don't on the K100D/K110D, I'm seeing >> exposure errors in Av with M42 lenses, pre-A lenses at least work wide open. >> This seems to be related to shorting out the A contacts based on my testing. > > Again I would have started the sentence above: "Coincidentally...". > These lenses just aren't on the map as far as these cameras are > concerned. > > Kostas > Which is unfortunate, the 35/3.5 Super Takumar is probably the best lens I own. -Adam -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K10D and Ring flash
Some of that post war mentality of my grandparents must have rubbed off on me. I see this regular and forced redundancy of what are essentially physically long lived objects as a ridiculous waste of resources and my cash. And I really despise being told to effectively get over it and more on. Maybe I'm just a greenie at heart '-) Rob Studdert - I'm with you, Rob, but torn both ways. I'm glad to have the K10D with it's improvements in so many areas, but not pleased that I now feel pressure to buy a new camera every three years, and consign the old one to backup status. Lenses, at least, seem to have longer use-lives. I prefer to use something until it is used up. I drive cars until the wheels fall off. My 1989 Volvo 740 has 220,000 miles/354,000 km. My wife's 1989 Isuzu Trooper has about the same. But there are always two sides: Use-and-toss keeps people employed and companies profitable. It may be that Pentax has been saved by the advent of the DSLR, which involved retiring a lot of film-era gear. If the K10D and new P-TTL flash units (including hopefully a new ring flash) help Pentax to prosper, in the long run that is probably good for me too. Fortunately, since the *ist D came out, I have been able to afford the new gear. So I'll grumble about the new models, then buy them as I can. Joe -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K10D and Ring flash
On 16/12/06, Joseph Tainter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I prefer to use something until it is used up. I drive cars until the > wheels fall off. My 1989 Volvo 740 has 220,000 miles/354,000 km. My > wife's 1989 Isuzu Trooper has about the same. LOL, I retired my '89 Volvo 740 Estate a couple of years back at about 270,000km, the steering rack power assist was leaking and it was going to cost more than the car was worth to repair otherwise it drove quite well and blew no smoke. > But there are always two sides: Use-and-toss keeps people employed and > companies profitable. It may be that Pentax has been saved by the advent > of the DSLR, which involved retiring a lot of film-era gear. If the K10D > and new P-TTL flash units (including hopefully a new ring flash) help > Pentax to prosper, in the long run that is probably good for me too. > Fortunately, since the *ist D came out, I have been able to afford the > new gear. > > So I'll grumble about the new models, then buy them as I can. I'm right there with you Joe (as you and everyone else knows ;-) -- Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://home.swiftdsl.com.au/~distudio//publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K10D and Ring flash
TTL flash seemed to work alright on the Ds if you remembered it's limitations. Kostas Kavoussanakis wrote: > On Fri, 15 Dec 2006, Digital Image Studio wrote: > > >> Some of that post war mentality of my grandparents must have rubbed >> off on me. I see this regular and forced redundancy of what are >> essentially physically long lived objects as a ridiculous waste of >> resources and my cash. And I really despise being told to effectively >> get over it and more on. Maybe I'm just a greenie at heart '-) >> > > I share your sentiments. This is why I still run a CRT and just bought > 10-yo speakers to match my existing ones for a 3.0 sound system. It's > also one of the reasons why I use film. > > However, TTL was reportedly not easy to implement well on digital, so > it had to go. > > Shoot film, be happy! > > Kostas :-) > > -- Things should be made as simple as possible -- but no simpler. --Albert Einstein -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K10D and Ring flash
Mike Hamilton wrote: > The AF500FTZ was released in 1992. Pentax updated the flash protocol > to P-TTL in 2001 to bring Pentax flashes into modern day with wireless > flash, high speed sync, etc... I like P-TTL a lot because exposures with it are much more accurate. But - the pre-flash is a problem for some specialized work. I've never gotten a decent shot of a long legged fly using P-TTL - the insect's reaction time to the flash is so fast that they fly out of the frame between the pre-flash and the flash. I had a similar problem with some butterflies this last summer, who were so fast that they could fly out of the frame after the pre flash and back to their perch before I took my eye off the camera. I kept getting blanks on the LCD but the bug apparently did not move. I felt like Benny Hill behind the camera until I figured out what was going on So - in some cases, maybe just a few specialized ones I care about, TTL has advantages over P-TTL, and I miss it. - MCC -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Mark Cassino Photography Kalamazoo www.markcassino.com - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K10D and Ring flash
My Saturn SC2 blew it's engine at 297000 miles or so just three weeks ago. I seriously thought about getting a new engine... Digital Image Studio wrote: > On 16/12/06, Joseph Tainter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >> I prefer to use something until it is used up. I drive cars until the >> wheels fall off. My 1989 Volvo 740 has 220,000 miles/354,000 km. My >> wife's 1989 Isuzu Trooper has about the same. >> > > LOL, I retired my '89 Volvo 740 Estate a couple of years back at about > 270,000km, the steering rack power assist was leaking and it was going > to cost more than the car was worth to repair otherwise it drove quite > well and blew no smoke. > > >> But there are always two sides: Use-and-toss keeps people employed and >> companies profitable. It may be that Pentax has been saved by the advent >> of the DSLR, which involved retiring a lot of film-era gear. If the K10D >> and new P-TTL flash units (including hopefully a new ring flash) help >> Pentax to prosper, in the long run that is probably good for me too. >> Fortunately, since the *ist D came out, I have been able to afford the >> new gear. >> >> So I'll grumble about the new models, then buy them as I can. >> > > I'm right there with you Joe (as you and everyone else knows ;-) > > -- Things should be made as simple as possible -- but no simpler. --Albert Einstein -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: RE: K10D and Ring flash
The AF500FTZ was released in 1992. Pentax updated the flash protocol to P-TTL in 2001 to bring Pentax flashes into modern day with wireless flash, high speed sync, etc... The difference between the Sigma flashes, and the Pentax AF500FTZ is that when you bought it, the unit was already 7 years old. Sigmas flashes are fairly current, and are "supposed" to work with P-TTL. Your FTZ was never intended to work with P-TTL. It acts as it was intended. P-TTL was already the standard in new Pentax bodies (MZ-S & MZ-6) in 2001, 2 years prior to the *ist D, which *also* supports TTL. As do the *ist DS and *ist DS2. I think that 14 years (1992 to 2006) of use of a top of the line flash on modern bodies is reasonable. There was even 5 years of overlap where your TTL flash was still supported in new camera bodies. And nothing stops you from using that flash on a *ist D/DS/DS2 body now! Enjoy your equipment as it was intended. Mike On 12/13/06, Tom C <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Of course Pentax brought out it's top of the line AF500 FTZ flash which I > purchased in '99... which is now rather useless on it's DSLR's. > > At least Sigma updates their flash. With Pentax you need a whole new unit. > > > Tom C. > > > >From: Joseph Tainter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List > >To: pdml@pdml.net > >Subject: K10D and Ring flash > >Date: Mon, 11 Dec 2006 10:15:27 -0700 > > > >Sigma's ringflash is supposed to be forthcoming in P-TTL form. Now that > >Sigma has a copy of the K10D, it may appear soon. > > > >I hesitate to buy one, though. Every time you buy a new body, you have > >to send the flash back to Sigma for a new chip. > > > >I, too, wish Pentax would bring one out. After all, the macros were two > >of Pentax's first digital lenses. > > > >Joe > > > >-- > >PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > >PDML@pdml.net > >http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > -- -- Remember to Breathe -- MichaelHamilton.ca -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: RE: K10D and Ring flash
- Original Message - From: "Mike Hamilton" Subject: Re: RE: K10D and Ring flash > > P-TTL was already the standard in new Pentax bodies (MZ-S & MZ-6) in > 2001, 2 years prior to the *ist D, which *also* supports TTL. As do > the *ist DS and *ist DS2. I think that 14 years (1992 to 2006) of use > of a top of the line flash on modern bodies is reasonable. There was > even 5 years of overlap where your TTL flash was still supported in > new camera bodies. And nothing stops you from using that flash on a > *ist D/DS/DS2 body now! > > Enjoy your equipment as it was intended. It's more stuff being left off that limits support for older equipment, in this case, an analogue flash control. I'm sure it was done to cut costs. William Robb -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: RE: K10D and Ring flash
On Wed, 13 Dec 2006, William Robb wrote: > It's more stuff being left off that limits support for older equipment, > in this case, an analogue flash control. Not sure what you are saying here, William. The AF-500FTZ is digitally controlled, isn't it? It's the rear-facing sensor for TTL that is omitted, because it did not work well with the CCDs. Am I wrong? Kostas -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: RE: K10D and Ring flash
- Original Message - From: "Kostas Kavoussanakis" Subject: Re: RE: K10D and Ring flash > Not sure what you are saying here, William. The AF-500FTZ is digitally > controlled, isn't it? It's the rear-facing sensor for TTL that is > omitted, because it did not work well with the CCDs. Am I wrong? Sorry, I didn't realize the 500 was a digital flash. My experience with TTL flash control on the istD was very dissapointing. William Robb -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: RE: K10D and Ring flash
Yeah I understand that technology changes... It doesn't help though that I bought their most expensive flash unit and that now it's basically useless. :-) Long before the life of the product itself has been exhausted. Tom C. >From: "William Robb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List >To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List" >Subject: Re: RE: K10D and Ring flash >Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2006 19:34:25 -0600 > > >- Original Message - >From: "Mike Hamilton" >Subject: Re: RE: K10D and Ring flash > > > > > > P-TTL was already the standard in new Pentax bodies (MZ-S & MZ-6) in > > 2001, 2 years prior to the *ist D, which *also* supports TTL. As do > > the *ist DS and *ist DS2. I think that 14 years (1992 to 2006) of use > > of a top of the line flash on modern bodies is reasonable. There was > > even 5 years of overlap where your TTL flash was still supported in > > new camera bodies. And nothing stops you from using that flash on a > > *ist D/DS/DS2 body now! > > > > Enjoy your equipment as it was intended. > >It's more stuff being left off that limits support for older equipment, >in this case, an analogue flash control. >I'm sure it was done to cut costs. > >William Robb > > > >-- >PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >PDML@pdml.net >http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: RE: K10D and Ring flash
On Thu, 14 Dec 2006, Tom C wrote: > Yeah I understand that technology changes... It doesn't help though that I > bought their most expensive flash unit and that now it's basically useless. > :-) Long before the life of the product itself has been exhausted. That's an aperture-simulator kind of argument. Stick it on an AF film body and enjoy. The real complaint is that we had to wait 14 years for the successor of the AF500FTZ (more if you live in the UK). The MZ-S would have made use of it as early as 2001. Kostas -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: RE: K10D and Ring flash
On Thu, Dec 14, 2006 at 04:49:25PM +, Kostas Kavoussanakis wrote: > On Thu, 14 Dec 2006, Tom C wrote: > > > Yeah I understand that technology changes... It doesn't help though that I > > bought their most expensive flash unit and that now it's basically useless. > > :-) Long before the life of the product itself has been exhausted. > > That's an aperture-simulator kind of argument. Stick it on an AF film > body and enjoy. > > The real complaint is that we had to wait 14 years for the successor > of the AF500FTZ (more if you live in the UK). The MZ-S would have made > use of it as early as 2001. > > Kostas It's also rather annoying that the AF500 doesn't have an "auto" mode, so I'd be better off with my 30-year-old Sunpak 3000 on a new body. (Although, of course, there's an aperture-simulator parallel; a screw- mount lens gives me slightly more automation that a later K/M mount). -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: RE: K10D and Ring flash
It's not an argument at all. I'm simply stating that since I paid, at the time, a pretty penny, and haven't used it that much, I'm disappointed. Why would I shoot film just to use my flash unit? Tom C. >From: Kostas Kavoussanakis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List >To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List >Subject: Re: RE: K10D and Ring flash >Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2006 16:49:25 + (GMT) > >On Thu, 14 Dec 2006, Tom C wrote: > > > Yeah I understand that technology changes... It doesn't help though that >I > > bought their most expensive flash unit and that now it's basically >useless. > > :-) Long before the life of the product itself has been exhausted. > >That's an aperture-simulator kind of argument. Stick it on an AF film >body and enjoy. > >The real complaint is that we had to wait 14 years for the successor >of the AF500FTZ (more if you live in the UK). The MZ-S would have made >use of it as early as 2001. > >Kostas > >-- >PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >PDML@pdml.net >http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: RE: K10D and Ring flash
On Thu, 14 Dec 2006, Tom C wrote: > Why would I shoot film just to use my flash unit? I have many reasons to shoot film, as you know, but you should use film because you bought a flash that is designed for a film camera. Kostas -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
