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 15, 2006, 1:33 AM   #71
Senior Member
 
nooner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 1,452
Default

No sarcasm. I hope it works out.:arrow:
nooner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 15, 2006, 2:47 AM   #72
E.T
Senior Member
 
E.T's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 921
Default

Uhh... now I'm even happier that I bought Metz 54MZ4 despite it cost same as Minolta's own flash... (mostly bought it for having "future proof" flash)


Hopefully you don't have to suffer from those "nightmare exposures" after this adjusting... flash and camera talking to each other automatically is really nice feature.



JimC wrote:
Quote:
So, perhaps there's more to calibrating one than a simple firmware upgrade, and they can "fine tune" it to a given camera body.
Now that sounds little weird, if there's different operating delays in different cameras shouldn't it be camera's job to signal flash at correct time? Otherwise exposures could be expected to differ between every camera to which flash fits.

BTW, SCA 3302M5 was update for A200 and DSLRs so I don't know what difference there's to M6.
E.T is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 15, 2006, 3:27 AM   #73
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

By different camera bodies, I meant different camera models. I wouldn't expect there to be differences between bodies within the same model.

But, since Sigma has a 5D body they're testing the flash with according to their correspondance with rduve, that's a good thing (it's more likely they'll get it working right with this camera model).

JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 17, 2006, 10:45 PM   #74
Senior Member
 
rduve's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 1,504
Default

Ok, I have had it. Ihave received the flash back after the "adjustment", the flash is now underexposing worse than the first one I had. Here is a shot with direct flash at full auto settings only about 6 ft. away.


Attached Images
 
rduve is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 17, 2006, 10:45 PM   #75
Senior Member
 
rduve's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 1,504
Default

...and this one with bounce flash:


Attached Images
 
rduve is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 17, 2006, 10:46 PM   #76
Senior Member
 
rduve's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 1,504
Default

and here is the letter I wrote to Sigma:

Ok, I received the flash. And now I have really had it. Now the flash grossly UNDEREXPOSES again. Just like the first one I had received and returned to the vendor.

I am attaching one shot with direct flash and one with bounce flash. My old Sunpak 433 flash does a MUCH better job than that. How did this pass quality control????

And not at any point has there been a communication like: "We are sorry for the trouble you have been having" as one would have expected from a Customer Service Dept.

I have had enough patience now. A month, two flashes and an "adjustment" later, I have come to the conclusion that this flash does not work with the Minolta TTL system, that it is a piece of crap, and that your service department is either incompetent or careless. I will return the unit for a refund. Look forward to my postings on all photo and product review sites.

Sincerely,

Rainer Duve

rduve is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 17, 2006, 10:48 PM   #77
Senior Member
 
rduve's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 1,504
Default

I received the hotshoe adapter and I will just use my Sunpak 433D instead. This experiment with the Sigma was a complete and utter failure.
rduve is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 18, 2006, 5:44 AM   #78
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

Sorry to hear it.

How about FP (HSS) mode? That's what some people say they need to do in order to get one to work.
JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 18, 2006, 12:54 PM   #79
Senior Member
 
nooner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 1,452
Default

That's a drag. I think if you want TTL, wireless etc. the Metz 54 is the only way to go. Too pricey for me so I'll stick with the Metz 32Z and Sunpak 433D.:|
nooner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 18, 2006, 6:39 PM   #80
Senior Member
 
rduve's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 1,504
Default

FP mode is even darker.
rduve 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 5:04 AM.