[Ray Pulley]

Sorry, but hot-shoe flash communication issue is still there, Pentax didn't fix it in fw 1.02. The original flash issue is that sometimes the camera doesn't send proper info to the hot-shoe flash and therefore the flash may fire at full power. It's a sporadic issue, sometimes you can take X shots without any problems and later take Y shots with the issue.

I can confirm that this is in fact the way my K5 works with the latest firmware. It is not fixed.

I can make my camera over-expose consistently with flash by simply including a white or light-colored object in a significant part of the scene (a light skinned face works), although it does seem to be far worse sometimes than others, it is still a problem that Pentax needs to fix.

Ray

[inferno10]

I can also confirm that the hotshoe communication problem still exists. I've tested my K-5 (running 1.02) with a Metz 48 AF-1 and a Pentax AF-160FC ringflash. It's easy to immediately identify the issue w/ the Metz flash, as its rear LCD shows when the camera and flash are communicating via P-TTL. When I power on the camera and flash, the flash's display sometimes will show P-TTL; other times it will show just TTL. When the flash does show P-TTL, I can usually output a few shots before the flash reverts to just TTL. If a zoom lens is mounted, I can usually cause the flash to switch from P-TTL to TTL by changing the zoom on the lens. If I take shots when the flash is in TTL mode, the image will be totally overexposed to the point of no recovery, as the flash fires at full power. In P-TTL mode, I have the camera set to -1 EV in order to not overexpose the image.

If I have the time, I'll go ahead and make a video showing these observations. Maybe showing it to Ned or some other employee through a video on YouTube might bring this issue to their attention.

- Jason

[blende8]

Problem is still there.

Direct flash:


Indirect flash:

[inferno10]

Ok, I made a quick video illustrating the issue I'm having. P-TTL communication is sporadic on my K-5. When powering on the camera and flash sometimes, P-TTL will not be enabled. When P-TTL is recognized, however, the flash will usually revert back to TTL after a few shots, messing with the zoom, or just letting the camera idle. It's easy to see it on my Metz flash, as it tells you when P-TTL is enabled or not. On a Pentax flash, there's no such indicator, so the only way to know is when the flash ends up firing a single full-power blast instead of the pre-flash+controlled blast.

This happens in both Auto ISO and when an ISO is selected.

Can anyone else with a K-5 and a Metz flash confirm this result?

You Tube

You Tube

- Jason

EDIT: I updated to the latest stealth firmware revision and can confirm the problem still exists.

[Dave_E]

I had a Metz 58 AF-1 which failed recently, but it was always flaky when in PTTL, but OK when set to Automatic. Finally it would always fire at full power when in PTTL mode. The same happened on my K10 and K-5.

Just replaced it with a Metz 58 AF-2 and it works perfectly in PTTL mode, hotshoe mounted bounced and direct and also wireless PTTL in slave mode bounced and direct. The metal base on the AF-2 makes mounting and removing the flash much easier – I wonder if the struggle to mount/remove the AF-1 damaged the contacts or connections in the base?

[blockamon]

From the last images, I'd say that the direct flash is underexposed for digital, while the indirect flash is much closer to the proper exposure. The histograms don't show any clipped highlights, as far as I can tell, so I'd say it nailed it.

[blende8]

From the last images, I'd say that the direct flash is underexposed for digital, while the indirect flash is much closer to the proper exposure. The histograms don't show any clipped highlights, as far as I can tell, so I'd say it nailed it.

No, the direct image is correct.
"Correct" in that way how a camera meter should meter such a scene, namely assuming neutral grey.
The indirect one appears closer to reality, but it is nevertheless overexposed.
Whatever, the main point is that direct and indirect should be the same!

[dylansalt]

Amazing that this latest Pentax cannot get this right when its by far less costly competitor namely the Nikon D7000 or even the ancient D40 can do flash in their sleep.

Not flaming just a fact

The Pentax K5 should be on an equal footing with the D300S and 7D but yet it fails in some crucial areas (besides size)

I really really wanted th K5 as I love its size and tactile feel, but refuse to buy a product thats more expensive and less efficient than its competitors in key departments.

[Bobe416]

Amazing that this latest Pentax cannot get this right when its by far less costly competitor namely the Nikon D7000 or even the ancient D40 can do flash in their sleep.

Not flaming just a fact

The Pentax K5 should be on an equal footing with the D300S and 7D but yet it fails in some crucial areas (besides size)

I really really wanted th K5 as I love its size and tactile feel, but refuse to buy a product thats more expensive and less efficient than its competitors in key departments.

This is not a major problem, I am sure there will be a firmware fix for this soon (P-TTL bounce flash works with my K10D - so I assume they can fix it on the K-5)

The work around I am using with the AF-50FGZ when bouncing is to set the ev on the flash to -1 or -1.5. Works for me!

[vespats]

Hi,
I am just back from a 4 week asia trip and confirm the k-5 works great without flash, but....

I still have the overexposed problems with bounced flash (1.02).

My question:
Does anyone have this issue with a replaced K-5 as well?
So is it a general problem or only visible with some K-5?

What I have to say: With an aperture of >8 it tends to be OKish, but at least with small aperture numbers I need to adjust the EV-compensation by approximately -1.3.

Have someone tested bounced flash with exchanged cameras and apertures <2.4?

Thanks for your answers
Chris

PS
for me it is a serious problem. The stain problem is solveable AFTERWARDS at the computer in my case (as I only have two minor perls), but when I do shoot pictures it is not acceptable that I have to adjust the camera switch aperture settings or bounced/unbounced DURING shooting

[areidjr]

Does anyone have this issue with a replaced K-5 as well?
So is it a general problem or only visible with some K-5?

I've had 2 K-5's and a third on the way. I have not been able to reproduce the issue on either body. the flash seemed to work correctly whether bounced or direct. Maybe there's some specific scenario where the flash happens that I didn't try.

[efkelly]

I will let you know when 2 of my K-5's come back from fixing. I sent two off for the sensor stain issue as well as the over-exposure with bounce flash problem (both had it). I shoot weddings, so I agree that it is a real big issue. One work around I have found is to put the expanded dynamic range highlight protection on (works in raw too). Then make that setting a custom mode and you are all set. You don't have to fuss around with any settings. At indoor events, I like to shoot f4-5.6, 1/50 sec. and ISO 800 (depending upon light I may lower the ISO). That way the flash doesn't work so hard and drain the battery. I am excited to see if the problem is fixed. The cameras just arrived today in Arizona for fixing, so I will keep you posted...

[Cannikin]

I've confirmed that my second K-5 body received back directly from Pentax (serial number: 398xxxx) behaves the same as the first: normal exposure in direct flash, ~2 stops overexposure from bounce.

Flash (AF360FGZ) still works fine on my K-x, so it has to be the K-5s.

[areidjr]

I've confirmed that my second K-5 body received back directly from Pentax (serial number: 398xxxx) behaves the same as the first: normal exposure in direct flash, ~2 stops overexposure from bounce.

Flash (AF360FGZ) still works fine on my K-x, so it has to be the K-5s.

What mode do you shoot in? Does this require the combination of a specific mode and auto ISO or what? I just haven't been able to reproduce this problem on two K-5s. I will have a third K-5 (replacement) in my hands on Wednesday and I'd like to see if I can reproduce this issue with it.

[Cannikin]

What mode do you shoot in? Does this require the combination of a specific mode and auto ISO or what? I just haven't been able to reproduce this problem on two K-5s. I will have a third K-5 (replacement) in my hands on Wednesday and I'd like to see if I can reproduce this issue with it.

P mode/P-TTL, just to make things simple; the camera exposes whatever it thinks is the correct exposure. To isolate the flash, I made sure that the room was relatively dark such that the flash is the primary source of light (but not the only source so as to avoid it being so dark as to make metering unreliable). I confirmed that the in camera exposure settings it chose were identical between shots, the only variable being the angle of the flash. Make sure the flash is not firing at either maximum or minimum power in either test, because that can skew the comparison.

Using P mode on the K-x, both direct and bounce flash are in roughly the same neighborhood in exposure (with inevitable differences coming from the direction of the light of course). It actually looks a little underexposed, but that's beside the point. The point is that in P-TTL, both the direct and bounce should look roughly the same exposure. With the K-5, it's obvious that the flash is firing at a much greater power in bounce, while direct looks ok. Dialing down -2 EV flash compensation for bounce usually puts it back in line.