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 pdml@pdml.net To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net 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 pdml@pdml.net To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net 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
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 pdml@pdml.net 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
