Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Sony Alpha dSLR / Konica Minolta dSLR, Sony SLT

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Mar 10, 2006, 8:41 AM   #31
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

Mercury694 wrote:
Quote:
I hope I didn't offend you, I'm not dogging your solution as much as I am frustrated that this flash didn't seem to work automatically right out of the box. (Im' sure the synch cable was worth the $2 premium you paid though...)
Not at all. I chuckled over it. My wife hates it when I tell people about the cheap solutions I find (and not just camera gear).

I thought she was going to die of embarassment once when I told someone that I bought a suit I was wearing at a thrift shop for practically nothing. It got it for $12.00, and you couldn't tell it from a brand new suit. It had even been freshly dry cleaned, fit me perfectly, and wasn't even out of style. I stopped by the thrift shop just to see what they had, saw the suit, tried it on and bought it. It was a well made 100% wool suit, too.

Ditto for how much I pay for automobiles. She hates it when I "brag" about how much I got a couple of my "clunkers" for. :-)

Some call it "cheap", some call it "frugal".

But, if I can find a solution that meets my needs for a fraction of the cost of the 'popular" solution, I'll usually go with the cheaper solution. I'm not out to "impress the neighbors" by trying to outspend them. ;-)



JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 10, 2006, 9:11 AM   #32
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

Mercury694 wrote:
Quote:
I have an old X-series Minolta and to use the flash on that all you needed was ISO and distance, you would then adjust the aperture and shutteraccordingly. That seems more simple than messing with menus and such. Didn't even have to take your eye out of the lens to make it right.
You don't even need to do that much with a cheap Auto Thyristor Solution.

You don't need to worry about distance to subject unless you use the manual power settings versus Auto modes, as long as you don't need to change apertures or ISO speed (and I usually wouldn't in the typical conditions I'll use a flash in).

I've got an old Vivitar 273 I used that way on a Nikon 35mm SLR, too (and I've still got it). But, it's trigger voltage is too high for use on a 5D (the FS1100 doesn't have voltage protection built in). So, I had to buy new "used" flashes with lower trigger voltages for my 5D. :-)

Quote:
Though all were direct light from the flash, not bounce- it is better than the results I was getting with the 35-70 f4 mounted. I think I'm going to have to get a chart going on what seems to work and not.
Speaking of the 35-70mm f/4.... Here's a quick snapshot at close range with a Maxxum 5D with a Sunpak 333 Auto. I was playing with this lens at a dinner at my brother-in-law's neighbor's house last month. It won't win any composition awards for sure. LOL

I had the Aperture set to f/5.6 (one stop down from wide open), using ISO 200, to match the settings the flash needed for the selected Auto Range. It was at full wide angle (35mm zoom setting). It's a straight from the camera JPEG except for downsizing for posting here using Irfanview. No tweaks of any kind were made, and I wasn't using any kind of diffuser.

BTW, this was the first chance I've had to use the lens, and it's a sharp one. I spent a whopping $52 to get it from KEH.com, and that included a working Maxxum 7000 35mm SLR in great condition (I found it in their camera package deals). Again, I'm "frugal". LOL

Attached Images
 
JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 10, 2006, 9:13 AM   #33
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

Here's one taken from across the room at the full zoom setting (70mm) with the same lens and flash.

No settings were changed on the camera or the flash from the last snapshot.

I didn't need to change anything, since the flash is smart enough to control it's own output based on the amount of reflected light it sees. So, it's at the same f/5.6 and ISO 200, with the flash on the same Auto Aperture Range. Again, it's just a quick snapshot, and it was straight on (so you've got some shadows).

Just like the last one, it's a straight from the camera JPEG except for downsizing for posting here. No tweaks of any kind were made.


Attached Images
 
JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 10, 2006, 9:46 AM   #34
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

That was the more expensive flash unit, though. I spent $25 for that one (like new in the box in 10 condition from B&H). But, you sometimes see them on Ebay for around $10 if you're a careful shopper. :-)

JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 10, 2006, 9:55 AM   #35
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 338
Default

Ok, I gotta ask.... Is granny's use of the fan related to the empty Absolute bottle behind her? (your family has better parties than mine!)

The first shot looks like it's exposed well, the second is just a tad overexposed though I'd say correctable in software. This may be mostly my preference in skin tone versus yours, but her skin seems a bit too white.

I'm going to try to post some shots tonight, after I d/l them from the camera, to give you examples of what I've been seeing. None are as washed as rduve's though some are as dark. The subject in the center has obvious flash exposure, with the perimeter too dark and the whole shot is underexposed. I don't have any of the new D lenses, so ADI isn't a factor. (at least that's how I understand it) The 50mm prime seemed to do better than the zoom with the flash though only in one test last night of about 70 shots.
Mercury694 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 10, 2006, 10:26 AM   #36
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

Mercury694 wrote:
Quote:
Ok, I gotta ask.... Is granny's use of the fan related to the empty Absolute bottle behind her? (your family has better parties than mine!)
My brother-in-law. his neigbor, and I all have a "pot luck" (everyone brings something) type dinner once per month, and we rotate where we have it. My brother-in-law's neighbor was hosting this one.

Darn, I didn't notice the Absolute.... perhaps it had enough left in the bottle for a drink. I'll make sure to check it next time around. :-)

As for the fan being related, she doesn't drink alcohol (and still scolds me when I do). LOL

Quote:
The first shot looks like it's exposed well, the second is just a tad overexposed though I'd say correctable in software. This may be mostly my preference in skin tone versus yours, but her skin seems a bit too white.
Nope, it's pretty close to spot on. If anything, her complexion is lighter than you see, not darker.

"Granny" happens to be my mother. My younger brother drove her here from South Carolina that weekend to visit, so she came along for our monthly dinner. She'll be 80 in June.

JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 10, 2006, 11:23 AM   #37
Senior Member
 
rduve's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 1,504
Default

Looks like this forum got some traction after all. Good to see. I certainly learned a lot about what I can do with my old Sunpak 433D. And I am going to get the adapter.

But since I have the Sigma flash and I'd like to have the TTL feature, I am curious if Sigma can fix it up.

Mercury, what set up do you have and what has your experience been with the Sigma flash? On which camera?
rduve is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 10, 2006, 11:29 AM   #38
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

One more, and again these are just snapshots (and not very good ones at that). LOL

I was just playing around with this 35-70mm f/4 lens for the first time, as well as testing my newest flash solution to see how much tweaking I may need with it ($25 for the Sunpak 333 Auto flash in like new condition, still in the box with the manual) :-)

Like the last two, I didn't need to change anything on the camera or the flash as my distance to subject changed, since the flash is controlling it's own ouput via reflected light it sees with it's sensor.

I had the 5D set to f/5.6 and ISO 200, which is exactly what the Auto Range indicator on the flash said I should use for this Aperture Range and ISO speed (so I didn't tweak anything from the defaults).

Straight from the camera JPEG except for downsizing for posting here. This is my niece, along with her youngest child. I guess I need to get around to buying a diffuser for the flash, too.

Attached Images
 
JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 10, 2006, 11:42 AM   #39
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

rduve wrote:
Quote:
Looks like this forum got some traction after all. Good to see. I certainly learned a lot about what I can do with my old Sunpak 433D. And I am going to get the adapter.
It's not a perfect solution. Since it's looking at total reflected light in the frame, it's possible that your subject is further away and it may measure reflected light from something closer in the frame.

But, with a solution using a short preflash to try and guess how long of flash burst is needed, you also have similar problems from reflected light (although the preflash solution does have the advantage of knowing your focus point, and can look at a speciific sensor to see how much reflected light it received during the preflash).

But, if I had to guess, based on user reports I've seen, I'd say that the cheaper solution is probably going to be more predictable for flash exposure accuracy.


JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 10, 2006, 11:55 AM   #40
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

rduve wrote:
Quote:
Looks like this forum got some traction after all. Good to see. I certainly learned a lot about what I can do with my old Sunpak 433D. And I am going to get the adapter.

But since I have the Sigma flash and I'd like to have the TTL feature, I am curious if Sigma can fix it up.

Mercury, what set up do you have and what has your experience been with the Sigma flash? On which camera?
Yes, do let us know how it works out.

Again, I did see someone post that Sigma got theirs working OK with a 7D, the second time they sent it in (they fumbled the first time around). LOL

I'd make sure to let them know you're using it on a KM DSLR model, in case they have different parameters they program into one for a given camera model for best results.

I kept your question to Mercury when I quoted you in this post, to make sure he didn't miss it.

JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 3:44 AM.