Flash for weddings

*Jun Park* · 02-15-2007, 06:02 PM

Well, I've been turning down requests to photograph weddings for the past couple of years but I've finally broken down and agreed to work 2 weddings this year. I currently have 2 AF360FGZs and they work just fine for most applications but I would like to upgrade to flash units with faster recycle times and higher output. Wireless operation is not a requirement and my budget is $1,000 for 1 or 2 flash heads and an external battery pack. I haven't been able to tryout the 540FGZ with the external battery so I'd really like to hear from anyone with hands on experience with the 540FGZ and the TR Power Pack III.

My preference would be to stay with Pentax, mainly for compatibility but I would like to hear from anyone who has experience with Metz (especially the 45 series) or Quantum flash units with the K10D.

Thanks in advance for your help!

*Alvin* · 02-15-2007, 07:05 PM

Other than the swivel head and the stronger flash power, I think I read the flash recycle time for the 540FGZ is 6 seconds.

**-=JoN=-** · 02-15-2007, 09:41 PM

with a fresh set of AA's, i've gone about 4-5 shots before it needs to charge up again on a 540FGz

pentaxshooter · 02-15-2007, 09:49 PM

Jun,

You already have the makings of a great kit...and you certainly will have enough to do everything you want with the pair of 360's.

I have previously shot weddings with Canon prior to moving over to Pentax last year...I have a couple of weddings coming up... In any case the Canon 580EX's worked fine for nearly all applications, and I have been playing with my K10D/540 flash for many months now and I am confident I will be able to handle the weddings with no problem.

The quantum flashes are TOP OF THE LINE....PROFESSIONAL units. BUT, I would hold off for a bit and consider this....

If you purchase a 540FGZ for about $350 and add it to your collection of 360's you will have a fantastic basis for a nice setup.

Get a couple of stands, flash adapters and umbrellas and you will take some great wedding photos.

While heavy the Al Jacobs "Black Box" is a great unit for powering the flash if you must get away from AA batteries. Check out : MODEL ONE* STANDARD HIGH CAPACITY PACK

Al also has a smaller battery pack called the Tuxedo.

Call him or email him and I am sure he will work with you to make the adapter necessary to use in the 360/540's. He's old school, but an honest man and will work with you.

Once you have a few off camera flashes, your photos are going to take on a whole new dimension.

So, for about $600 you can get the 560 and use it to trigger your 360's or you can use the K10D's on-board wireless.

Finally, I may be wrong, but I believe you would spend well over $1000 to get a complete new Quantum flash.

*Alvin* · 02-15-2007, 10:10 PM

Originally Posted by pentaxshooter

If you purchase a 540FGZ for about $350 and add it to your collection of 360's you will have a fantastic basis for a nice setup.

Get a couple of stands, flash adapters and umbrellas and you will take some great wedding photos.

Wow, I didn't think about that. This would definitely rival a Nikon wireless iTTL setup. I'd really like to see this in action.

BrendanPK · 02-15-2007, 10:19 PM

Ok I have the combo your asking, 540 w/ TRIII
The TR3 takes 6 C batteries and its a little picky. I am going to try rechargables soon but dont have the money to spend on them and a charger at the moment so only Alc. for now.
I have found that it works well with fresh batteries. the claim of 700 full power flashes is probably true when you spend big $$$ on the best Alc "C" batteries, I do not. I have found that with peridoc use throughout the week I can get about 1month out of a set, with probably about 4-500 flashes. SO probaly all at once in 1wk, 700 may do it.
The thing that is with this pack is that it uses its own capacitor, you can here it charging (wine) and from what I can tell it by-passes the flashes own capacitor. Recycle times are not as spectacular as I was hoping, it still takes up to 3.5-6sec even longer as the batteries die. However it stays at the 4sec or so for full recharge for probably at least 2-300 flashes (compaired to 50 or so with AA NiMh)
I am hoping that with high capacity NiMh C batteries I will get better performance.

I do think that is worth the money they are asking, but I really wish they offered a rechargable battery pack for it with higher cap.

I would buy it again, and am looking into a second one with my second flash as I ocasionaly remote the flashes at games/events.

I would also recommend getting the 540 flash in general as it is much better IMO than the 360.

My 2 cents

*Jun Park* · 02-16-2007, 04:28 PM

and Pentaxshooter, you may be right in that a complete Quantum setup would most likely end up north of $1,000. I currently use lithium AAs and bump up the ISO to compensate for the slow recycle time and limited power of the 360s.

I guess I'll get the 540 right now and use it for a while to see how it fits my shooting style. I can always add an external power pack later on (I really appreciate the link, Pentaxshooter.)

Thanks again to everyone for your help!

*Jun Park* · 02-16-2007, 04:31 PM

As I wrote in the previous post, I'll go ahead and get the 540 but hold off on an external power pack for a little while.

pentaxshooter · 02-18-2007, 02:39 PM

Just another thought. keep in mind that your Pentax (and most other flashes) have a consistent power (flash) output.

When you change "power" you're actually changing the duration of the flash, NOT the output.

Try change duration to 1/2 or lower and move the flash a liiiiitle closer to the subject. That way you might be able to maintain higher shutter speeds.

pentaxshooter

nosnoop · 02-18-2007, 03:56 PM

Originally Posted by pentaxshooter

Try change duration to 1/2 or lower and move the flash a liiiiitle closer to the subject. That way you might be able to maintain higher shutter speeds.

If he is using the 540FGZ, I suppose he would be using P-TTL mode most of the time. In that case, he cannot change the flash power directly. Rather he could use larger aperture (at the expense of Depth of field) or higher ISO (at the expense of noise) to reduce flash recycling time if needed.