Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Digital Photography > Old external flash OK for digital cam?

Reply
Thread Tools

Old external flash OK for digital cam?

 
 
nospam
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-06-2013
In article <(E-Mail Removed)>, David Dyer-Bennet
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> >> > I have an old external flash, a Sunpak 333D. Used it with my old Nikon
> >> > FA but haven't used it on any camera since I went digital. Have heard
> >> > that some older flashes have high voltages present at the hot shoe that
> >> > could damage a digital camera. How can I tell if this flash is OK to use
> >> > with something like my Nikon D40?
> >>
> >> It won't work with iTTL, though; just A or manual, I believe. They had
> >> to design a completely new TTL mode for digital because the sensor
> >> reflectivity wasn't anything like film reflectivity (and the new mode
> >> doesn't work nearly as well, drat it).

> >
> > the new ittl is *much* better and far more capable than the old ttl
> > ever was.

>
> Not for producing accurately exposed pictures it isn't.


yes it is.

> The whole CLS
> thing for controlling a group of flashes is pretty neat


very neat, and very powerful.

> -- except that
> it introduces enough delays that animals I've tried to use it with ALL
> manage to blink during the actual exposure (it does test flashes in each
> group, and then uses communication flashes to tell each group what power
> to select, so that's a lot of pre-flash).


yes, it fires a series of preflashes, which is an effective way for the
flashes to communicate with each other.

you can mitigate the blinking with infrared filters, and a blinking
animal does not affect the exposure *at* *all*.
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
PeterN
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-06-2013
On 2/5/2013 11:57 PM, nospam wrote:
> In article <(E-Mail Removed)>, David Dyer-Bennet
> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>>>>> I have an old external flash, a Sunpak 333D. Used it with my old Nikon
>>>>> FA but haven't used it on any camera since I went digital. Have heard
>>>>> that some older flashes have high voltages present at the hot shoe that
>>>>> could damage a digital camera. How can I tell if this flash is OK to use
>>>>> with something like my Nikon D40?
>>>>
>>>> It won't work with iTTL, though; just A or manual, I believe. They had
>>>> to design a completely new TTL mode for digital because the sensor
>>>> reflectivity wasn't anything like film reflectivity (and the new mode
>>>> doesn't work nearly as well, drat it).
>>>
>>> the new ittl is *much* better and far more capable than the old ttl
>>> ever was.

>>
>> Not for producing accurately exposed pictures it isn't.

>
> yes it is.
>
>> The whole CLS
>> thing for controlling a group of flashes is pretty neat

>
> very neat, and very powerful.
>
>> -- except that
>> it introduces enough delays that animals I've tried to use it with ALL
>> manage to blink during the actual exposure (it does test flashes in each
>> group, and then uses communication flashes to tell each group what power
>> to select, so that's a lot of pre-flash).

>
> yes, it fires a series of preflashes, which is an effective way for the
> flashes to communicate with each other.
>
> you can mitigate the blinking with infrared filters, and a blinking
> animal does not affect the exposure *at* *all*.
>


Right. You just get a well exposed, technically correct, lousy image.
Sheesh!

BTW don't some flash systems have infrared?
What does it take to convert a system to infrared?

--
PeterN
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
nospam
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-06-2013
In article <51125a83$0$10816$(E-Mail Removed)-secrets.com>, PeterN
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> >>> the new ittl is *much* better and far more capable than the old ttl
> >>> ever was.
> >>
> >> Not for producing accurately exposed pictures it isn't.

> >
> > yes it is.
> >
> >> The whole CLS
> >> thing for controlling a group of flashes is pretty neat

> >
> > very neat, and very powerful.
> >
> >> -- except that
> >> it introduces enough delays that animals I've tried to use it with ALL
> >> manage to blink during the actual exposure (it does test flashes in each
> >> group, and then uses communication flashes to tell each group what power
> >> to select, so that's a lot of pre-flash).

> >
> > yes, it fires a series of preflashes, which is an effective way for the
> > flashes to communicate with each other.
> >
> > you can mitigate the blinking with infrared filters, and a blinking
> > animal does not affect the exposure *at* *all*.

>
> Right. You just get a well exposed, technically correct, lousy image.
> Sheesh!


his concern was about exposure, not whether or not the image was a
prize winner.

> BTW don't some flash systems have infrared?
> What does it take to convert a system to infrared?


an infrared filter over the master flash or the nikon su-800.
 
Reply With Quote
 
PeterN
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-06-2013
On 2/6/2013 9:35 AM, nospam wrote:

<snip>

>> Right. You just get a well exposed, technically correct, lousy image.
>> Sheesh!

>
> his concern was about exposure, not whether or not the image was a
> prize winner.
>


Who said anything about a prize winning image? You are saying that
content doesn't matter, as long as the image is properly exposed?


>> BTW don't some flash systems have infrared?
>> What does it take to convert a system to infrared?

>
> an infrared filter over the master flash or the nikon su-800.
>

Oh!

--
PeterN
 
Reply With Quote
 
nospam
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-06-2013
In article <51128032$0$10751$(E-Mail Removed)-secrets.com>, PeterN
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> >> Right. You just get a well exposed, technically correct, lousy image.
> >> Sheesh!

> >
> > his concern was about exposure, not whether or not the image was a
> > prize winner.

>
> Who said anything about a prize winning image? You are saying that
> content doesn't matter, as long as the image is properly exposed?


basically, yes.

once again, his issue was that ittl did not expose as well as the older
ttl. he is wrong. ittl exposure is more accurate.

the problem he mentioned is that the preflashes, which ittl uses to
communicate, can cause blinking. that's a *different* problem, and one
which is easily solved by using an infrared trigger for ittl.
 
Reply With Quote
 
PeterN
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-06-2013
On 2/6/2013 11:59 AM, nospam wrote:
> In article <51128032$0$10751$(E-Mail Removed)-secrets.com>, PeterN
> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>>>> Right. You just get a well exposed, technically correct, lousy image.
>>>> Sheesh!
>>>
>>> his concern was about exposure, not whether or not the image was a
>>> prize winner.

>>
>> Who said anything about a prize winning image? You are saying that
>> content doesn't matter, as long as the image is properly exposed?

>
> basically, yes.
>


Point made.

Go take your pictures of test charts.

--
PeterN
 
Reply With Quote
 
nospam
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-06-2013
In article <51128c8a$0$10805$(E-Mail Removed)-secrets.com>, PeterN
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> >>>> Right. You just get a well exposed, technically correct, lousy image.
> >>>> Sheesh!
> >>>
> >>> his concern was about exposure, not whether or not the image was a
> >>> prize winner.
> >>
> >> Who said anything about a prize winning image? You are saying that
> >> content doesn't matter, as long as the image is properly exposed?

> >
> > basically, yes.

>
> Point made.


the only point is that you snipped where i pointed out his concern was
exposure, not content.

> Go take your pictures of test charts.


i don't take pictures of test charts.
 
Reply With Quote
 
David Dyer-Bennet
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-08-2013
nospam <(E-Mail Removed)> writes:

> In article <(E-Mail Removed)>, David Dyer-Bennet
> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>> >> > I have an old external flash, a Sunpak 333D. Used it with my old Nikon
>> >> > FA but haven't used it on any camera since I went digital. Have heard
>> >> > that some older flashes have high voltages present at the hot shoe that
>> >> > could damage a digital camera. How can I tell if this flash is OK to use
>> >> > with something like my Nikon D40?
>> >>
>> >> It won't work with iTTL, though; just A or manual, I believe. They had
>> >> to design a completely new TTL mode for digital because the sensor
>> >> reflectivity wasn't anything like film reflectivity (and the new mode
>> >> doesn't work nearly as well, drat it).
>> >
>> > the new ittl is *much* better and far more capable than the old ttl
>> > ever was.

>>
>> Not for producing accurately exposed pictures it isn't.

>
> yes it is.


I've shot many thousands of pictures both ways, it's clearly not.

>> The whole CLS
>> thing for controlling a group of flashes is pretty neat

>
> very neat, and very powerful.
>
>> -- except that
>> it introduces enough delays that animals I've tried to use it with ALL
>> manage to blink during the actual exposure (it does test flashes in each
>> group, and then uses communication flashes to tell each group what power
>> to select, so that's a lot of pre-flash).

>
> yes, it fires a series of preflashes, which is an effective way for the
> flashes to communicate with each other.


In particular, it avoids the complex government regulations around RF
emissions, which differ a lot around the world.

> you can mitigate the blinking with infrared filters, and a blinking
> animal does not affect the exposure *at* *all*.


An infrared filter would also make it not much of an exposure, though.

Yes, I got adequately exposed portraits of various animals with their
eyes closed. These were totally useless.
--
Googleproofaddress(account:dd-b provider:dd-b domain:net)
Snapshots: http://dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/data/
Photos: http://dd-b.net/photography/gallery/
Dragaera: http://dragaera.info
 
Reply With Quote
 
David Dyer-Bennet
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-08-2013
nospam <(E-Mail Removed)> writes:

> In article <51125a83$0$10816$(E-Mail Removed)-secrets.com>, PeterN
> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>> >>> the new ittl is *much* better and far more capable than the old ttl
>> >>> ever was.
>> >>
>> >> Not for producing accurately exposed pictures it isn't.
>> >
>> > yes it is.
>> >
>> >> The whole CLS
>> >> thing for controlling a group of flashes is pretty neat
>> >
>> > very neat, and very powerful.
>> >
>> >> -- except that
>> >> it introduces enough delays that animals I've tried to use it with ALL
>> >> manage to blink during the actual exposure (it does test flashes in each
>> >> group, and then uses communication flashes to tell each group what power
>> >> to select, so that's a lot of pre-flash).
>> >
>> > yes, it fires a series of preflashes, which is an effective way for the
>> > flashes to communicate with each other.
>> >
>> > you can mitigate the blinking with infrared filters, and a blinking
>> > animal does not affect the exposure *at* *all*.

>>
>> Right. You just get a well exposed, technically correct, lousy image.
>> Sheesh!

>
> his concern was about exposure, not whether or not the image was a
> prize winner.


A system which guarantees lousy images in a major category is not an
acceptable general-purpose scheme, regardless of how well it works
within its limited technical goals.
--
Googleproofaddress(account:dd-b provider:dd-b domain:net)
Snapshots: http://dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/data/
Photos: http://dd-b.net/photography/gallery/
Dragaera: http://dragaera.info
 
Reply With Quote
 
nospam
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-08-2013
In article <(E-Mail Removed)>, David Dyer-Bennet
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> > his concern was about exposure, not whether or not the image was a
> > prize winner.

>
> A system which guarantees lousy images in a major category is not an
> acceptable general-purpose scheme, regardless of how well it works
> within its limited technical goals.


it's just one category out of many, and again, the problem is not
exposure (which it does well).

some cameras in the film days had preflashes. it's not just nikon.

meanwhile, ittl/cls works amazingly well for everyone else.
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

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 On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Can I use an old fashion flash unit with a digital camera? magne.braaten@gmail.com Digital Photography 7 05-21-2007 01:27 AM
How to use an old external flash paul Digital Photography 4 01-10-2005 06:57 PM
flash question, external flash power Destin_FL Digital Photography 3 07-19-2004 01:14 PM
Coaxial flash socket for external flash Chris Digital Photography 9 01-23-2004 09:09 AM
Re: With More Flash More Lumix: using an external flash unit with the FZ1 and other digicams Hans-Georg Michna Digital Photography 4 08-24-2003 06:05 PM



Advertisments