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 Apr 30, 2006, 5:59 AM   #1
Member
 
Cavemandude's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 62
Default

Finally got to compare my 3600HS and Sunpak 433D flashes using a 5D with the 18-70mm kit lens.

Here are a couple pics from the 3600HS flash showing the overexposure I get with no flash compensation in TTL mode but it does the same thingin ADI mode. To fix it I would have to use -1 flash compensation. Thisis a problemsince some shots don't need the -1 compensation and turn out too dark so it becomes a constant battle on each shot I take.







Here are a couple pics using the Sunpak 433D flash using the proper manual settingson the 5D to match the flash settings with no compensation. After taking a couple hundred shots between the two flashes I found the 433D flash ismuch betterat not overexposing shots when compared to the 3600HS.







I'll be doingan in-depth"lazy eye" test next with my dog that always had her eyes closed when using the 3600HS flash. The couple pics I have taken of her with the 433D she has had her eyes open.

Randy Wheeler




Cavemandude is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Apr 30, 2006, 1:59 PM   #2
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

You do know you're using spot metering, right?

If you meter on a brighter portion of an image, you may get underexposed images. If you meter on a darker portion of an image, you may get overexposed images.

I'd switch to matrix or center weighted unless you're very careful about what you're metering on, and you're reasonably confident in the results you'll get based on experience using spot metering with different subject types.

The flash algorithms are most likely taking your metering mode into consideration when using the 3600HS (D).

I have not tested the camera using manual exposure with any flash other than my Sunpaks. So, I don't know if the 3600HS(D) will change flash exposure as a result of metering changes or not when using manual exposure. But,I think it's likely thatyour selection of spot metering is influencing it.


JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 1, 2006, 4:40 AM   #3
Member
 
Cavemandude's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 62
Default

Ok, I took some pics using matrix metering and ADI mode. Same results as before. You'll notice that the 3600HS pic has a shutter speed of 1/125 and the Sunpak 433D is at 1/160 this time though thismade no difference in the results.

Both flash pics had image stabilization on and surprisingly the 433D pics had no sync problems using a shutter speed of1/160 even though the 3600HS has to automatically go down to 1/125 with image stabilization on. I tried shutter speeds above1/160 and had sync problems with the 433D.

5D camera was inmanualmode with an aperture of 8,ISO 100, lens at 50mm.

The one thing I miss with the Sunpak 433D so far is the lack of an auto focus sensor on the 3600HS flashthat works great in the dark withmy 18-70mm kit lens.

Here is the 3600HS pic:



Here's the Sunpak 433D pic:



Here's a close up at 70mm using the Sunpak 433D. This flash just won't overexpose!





Randy Wheeler


Cavemandude is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 2, 2006, 1:46 AM   #4
Senior Member
 
nooner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 1,452
Default

I use a Sinpak 433D also. Good flash. High GN and the head swivels in both directions.:|
nooner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 2, 2006, 2:03 AM   #5
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

As noonerknows from my previous posts, I've bought two Sunpaks for use with my 5D (they weredirt cheap on the used market).

But, I just wanted to suggest that give the 3600HS(D) a chance, since it does offer some features you don't have with a Sunpak (like HSS and wireless)

It's probably got it's own set of "metering quirks". No one system is just right for all conditions, and they all take some getting used to. ;-) I wouldn't mind having one for some conditions (for example, fill flash outdoors when wider apertures are desired, sinceHSS would allow you to exceed the sync speed).

If budget allowed, I'd probably go with a Metz 54MZ3 or MZ4 instead of a KM Flash, if I needed a more versatile flash with HSS, though.
JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 2, 2006, 10:19 AM   #6
Senior Member
 
BillDrew's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Hay River Township, WI
Posts: 2,512
Default

JimC wrote:
Quote:
You do know you're using spot metering, right?...
Does that have any effect on flash metering? To do so, I'd think it would have to use the sensor, and thus have to lift the mirror before the preflash. Since I see the preflash through the viewfinder (using the built-in flash), that doesn't seem to be the case.
BillDrew is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 2, 2006, 11:37 AM   #7
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

Bill:

I haven't tested it. But, I've read that the camera is using a series of preflashes, designed so that each of the 14 segments is evaluated separately. The main sensor is not used for measuring preflash return (the preflashes occur before the mirror goes up and the metering sensors measure the light returned).

It's my understanding that it should be taking both metering and focus points into consideration when deciding how long the main flash burst needs to be. Perhaps that understanding is incorrect. But, I've seen forum posts with that opinion in the past from those explaining it's behavior.


JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 2, 2006, 4:27 PM   #8
Member
 
Cavemandude's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 62
Default

Hereis the "lazy eye" test for the Sunpak 433D and Minolta 3600HS flashes and there is a clear winner. Also notice the auto white balance difference between the two flashes.

Sunpak 433Dflash results:


















Minolta 3600HS flash results:














That settles the "lazy eye" debate for me. It was so obvious, while shooting the pics,that the 3600HS preflash was makingmy dogclose her eyes whenswitching back and forth between flashes. The Minolta 3600HS does have a muchmore accurate auto white balance with the pics I've taken indoors. Wonder whyit is so differentbetween flashes when using auto white balance?

I guess I will use manual white balance when using the Sunpak 433D to take out the slight blue cast it produces. What manual whitebalance settting do you think, 4500 degrees?

Randy Wheeler


Cavemandude is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 2, 2006, 7:23 PM   #9
Senior Member
 
nooner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 1,452
Default

You may have to experiment to arrive at a WB value. I shoot RAW and adjust in PP.
nooner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 2, 2006, 8:18 PM   #10
Senior Member
 
rduve's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 1,504
Default

Interesting thread. I just stumbled upon it. I happen to have the same two flashes. My own Sunpak 433D and the 3600HS which a friend lent me. I also love the auto exposure results of the Sunpak, but that white balance issue certainly is a damper. Will test it out and post my own comparisons.
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 3:31 PM.