K-5 Sync limits.

Hound Tooth · 01-29-2011, 12:33 PM

Originally posted by amoringello

If you had the ability to turn up the flash to overcome ambient, shutter speed would not be an issue...

wth? That's absolutely ridiculous. Of course you can turn up the flash to overcome ambient (if your flash is powerful enough). When doing flash photography, the camera compensates for exposure through flash output power. If you put a ND filter on your camera, then your camera sees a dark scene, and therefore commands more flash power to compensate (up to the flash's limit). This is basic flash photography 101. And in the case of the Pentax 540 or Metz 58, there's often plenty of flash power to spare in most situations.

dlacouture really described it best.

dlacouture · 01-29-2011, 12:33 PM

And to close the debate of ND Vs HSS, in the same situation, HSS would not have really frozen the subject, as the shutter still takes 1/180 to travel across the sensor. So the subject would be slanted, as it's top was captured maybe 1/100 before its bottom. Or it would be compressed if shot vertically...

Remember this famous shot of a speeding car from early 1900, where the scenery is slanted one way and the car the other way due to relative speeds? Same applies here.

Further still, you'd have lost some power using HSS (the faster the shutter, the more power loss), more so than using a ND filter.

myeates · 01-29-2011, 04:19 PM

I own the Metz 58af1 flash does anyone know what the max shutter speed is for use off the camera using wireless transmitters. The tests I have done seem to be 180th but I can only get it to work as a slave. I tried to use the hss mode but the flash refused to fire when used with wireless, when I reverted back to slave mode on the flash it worked, any advice on this flash and usage with the K5 will be gratefully received

amoringello · 01-29-2011, 04:38 PM

Originally posted by Hound Tooth

wth? That's absolutely ridiculous. Of course you can turn up the flash to overcome ambient (if your flash is powerful enough). When doing flash photography, the camera compensates for exposure through flash output power. If you put a ND filter on your camera, then your camera sees a dark scene, and therefore commands more flash power to compensate (up to the flash's limit). This is basic flash photography 101. And in the case of the Pentax 540 or Metz 58, there's often plenty of flash power to spare in most situations.

dlacouture really described it best.

er, um, thats the whole point.
Dunno where you guys come up with this stuff, and I don't know what language I'm writing in, but I believe I have been quite specific with what I wrote.

Anyway, like you said, its all basic photography 101. No black magic. Just go out and try it. You'll see ND has no special affect on ambient v.s. flash.

ND affects overall exposure. PERIOD.
It cannot get more basic than that. Try it. If anyone can prove that ND grads affect the physics of ambient light more than that of light from flash, they get my K5.

areidjr · 01-29-2011, 06:15 PM

I've been following this thread with interest. I decided to try shooting with and without an ND filter. I set the camera up in manual with my AF540 in PTTL. Camera settings were f/5.6, 1/60s. ISO800. The shot on the left is without the ND and the right with.

It has definitely had an effect on the ambient light in the background while properly exposing the foreground subject. Not sure this proves anything, one way or another, but I thought I'd give it a try and see what happened. It worked as I expected it to.

dlacouture · 01-29-2011, 08:53 PM

Originally posted by amoringello

er, um, thats the whole point.
Dunno where you guys come up with this stuff, and I don't know what language I'm writing in, but I believe I have been quite specific with what I wrote.

Anyway, like you said, its all basic photography 101. No black magic. Just go out and try it. You'll see ND has no special affect on ambient v.s. flash.

ND affects overall exposure. PERIOD.
It cannot get more basic than that. Try it. If anyone can prove that ND grads affect the physics of ambient light more than that of light from flash, they get my K5.

You're of course right on a Physics level, both lights are impacted the same way, but one light (the ambient) cannot be modified by the photographer, while the other (the flash) can be adjusted.

So, in effect, using a ND filter does have a special affect on ambient v.s. flash, not by cheating those good old optics mechanisms, but just by letting you crank the knob up on the flash a little more.

EDIT : and thank you areidjr for illustrating my words, I was too lazy to do it... You used a ND2 filter, no? The ambient seems about one stop underexposed in the second one.
But to be precise, in your case, you could have used 400 iso with the same result. ND filters are a solution at base iso.

Granted, this is a quite strange way of thought : to freeze an action, sometimes, it's better to "slow" it down!

Hound Tooth · 01-29-2011, 09:37 PM

Originally posted by areidjr

I've been following this thread with interest. I decided to try shooting with and without an ND filter. I set the camera up in manual with my AF540 in PTTL. Camera settings were f/5.6, 1/60s. ISO800. The shot on the left is without the ND and the right with.

That is EXACTLY what I was referring to. The ND filter dampened ambient light and the flash kept the subject exposed exactly the same. All automatically by the light meter.

Looks to me like someone owes you a K-5.

dlacouture · 01-29-2011, 09:48 PM

Originally posted by myeates

I own the Metz 58af1 flash does anyone know what the max shutter speed is for use off the camera using wireless transmitters. The tests I have done seem to be 180th but I can only get it to work as a slave. I tried to use the hss mode but the flash refused to fire when used with wireless, when I reverted back to slave mode on the flash it worked, any advice on this flash and usage with the K5 will be gratefully received

Well, pentax inexplicably dropped the HSS wireless capabilities of their cameras when they went digital...
That's right : my 10 years old MZ-6 film body is able to do HSS in wireless mode, but my brand new K5 cannot...

dlacouture · 01-29-2011, 09:55 PM

To the defense of amoringello, he was thinking in terms of fixed flash power. Quite stubbornly, but he was right, as what he said is true. He just missed some important point in our posts, so don't go dispossess him of his brand new K5 (which is such a sweet cam!).

Hound Tooth · 01-29-2011, 10:02 PM

Originally posted by dlacouture

To the defense of amoringello, he was thinking in terms of fixed flash power. Quite stubbornly, but he was right, as what he said is true. He just missed some important point in our posts, so don't go dispossess him of his brand new K5 (which is such a sweet cam!).

But even a K-x has a built-in flash with variable output.

**Digitalis** · 01-29-2011, 10:39 PM

Originally posted by dlacouture

That's right : my 10 years old MZ-6 film body is able to do HSS in wireless mode, but my brand new K5 cannot...

actually you need another flash to do that,I use an AF360FGZ attached to my camera set to control mode. The built in flashes on current DSLR cameras cannot do this.

dlacouture · 01-29-2011, 10:53 PM

Originally posted by Digitalis

actually you need another flash to do that,I use an AF360FGZ attached to my camera set to control mode. The built in flashes on current DSLR cameras cannot do this.

Well, there was no need for an external master flash with the MZ-6 and the MZ-S... I really don't understand why they dropped this feature on DSLRs built-in flashes...

Hound Tooth · 01-29-2011, 11:21 PM

Originally posted by dlacouture

Well, there was no need for an external master flash with the MZ-6 and the MZ-S... I really don't understand why they dropped this feature on DSLRs built-in flashes...

Actually I'm pretty sure the *ist D could do it too. They dropped it starting with the K10D. I guess people didn't complain loud enough, because it never returned.

dlacouture · 01-30-2011, 02:07 AM

You're right, the *istD had it... But it was dropped even for the following *ist series.

amoringello · 01-30-2011, 05:49 AM

Originally posted by areidjr

I've been following this thread with interest. I decided to try shooting with and without an ND filter. I set the camera up in manual with my AF540 in PTTL. Camera settings were f/5.6, 1/60s. ISO800. The shot on the left is without the ND and the right with.

It has definitely had an effect on the ambient light in the background while properly ....

What is the power setting on the flash in each photo?
We can see the environment lighting changed.

But the ND did not affect ambient differently than the flash. It appears that the camera simply realized the flash had more power to give and upped it to compensate.

That is not an effect of the ND affecting ambient over flash... It is camera and flash compensating for the effect of the ND on the metered exposure.

You may think of it the other way around and be fine in most cases, but you will run into trouble if your flash does not have any headroom left and you have been falsely led to believe that an ND will help to reduce ambient but not affect your topped-out flash.

Yeah, maybe I missed some point... or perhaps I simply felt the points were not valid.

Use the terms correctly and think of the physics properly, and these issue will not become a problem.

01-29-2011, 12:33 PM	#62
dlacouture Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Var, South of France Photos: Albums Posts: 1,074	And to close the debate of ND Vs HSS, in the same situation, HSS would not have really frozen the subject, as the shutter still takes 1/180 to travel across the sensor. So the subject would be slanted, as it's top was captured maybe 1/100 before its bottom. Or it would be compressed if shot vertically... Remember this famous shot of a speeding car from early 1900, where the scenery is slanted one way and the car the other way due to relative speeds? Same applies here. Further still, you'd have lost some power using HSS (the faster the shutter, the more power loss), more so than using a ND filter. Last edited by dlacouture; 01-29-2011 at 12:41 PM.

01-29-2011, 08:53 PM	#66
dlacouture Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Var, South of France Photos: Albums Posts: 1,074	Originally posted by amoringello er, um, thats the whole point. Dunno where you guys come up with this stuff, and I don't know what language I'm writing in, but I believe I have been quite specific with what I wrote. Anyway, like you said, its all basic photography 101. No black magic. Just go out and try it. You'll see ND has no special affect on ambient v.s. flash. ND affects overall exposure. PERIOD. It cannot get more basic than that. Try it. If anyone can prove that ND grads affect the physics of ambient light more than that of light from flash, they get my K5. You're of course right on a Physics level, both lights are impacted the same way, but one light (the ambient) cannot be modified by the photographer, while the other (the flash) can be adjusted. So, in effect, using a ND filter does have a special affect on ambient v.s. flash, not by cheating those good old optics mechanisms, but just by letting you crank the knob up on the flash a little more. EDIT : and thank you areidjr for illustrating my words, I was too lazy to do it... You used a ND2 filter, no? The ambient seems about one stop underexposed in the second one. But to be precise, in your case, you could have used 400 iso with the same result. ND filters are a solution at base iso. Granted, this is a quite strange way of thought : to freeze an action, sometimes, it's better to "slow" it down! Last edited by dlacouture; 01-29-2011 at 08:59 PM.

01-30-2011, 05:49 AM	#75
amoringello Veteran Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: Virginia, USA Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,562	Originally posted by areidjr I've been following this thread with interest. I decided to try shooting with and without an ND filter. I set the camera up in manual with my AF540 in PTTL. Camera settings were f/5.6, 1/60s. ISO800. The shot on the left is without the ND and the right with. It has definitely had an effect on the ambient light in the background while properly .... What is the power setting on the flash in each photo? We can see the environment lighting changed. But the ND did not affect ambient differently than the flash. It appears that the camera simply realized the flash had more power to give and upped it to compensate. That is not an effect of the ND affecting ambient over flash... It is camera and flash compensating for the effect of the ND on the metered exposure. You may think of it the other way around and be fine in most cases, but you will run into trouble if your flash does not have any headroom left and you have been falsely led to believe that an ND will help to reduce ambient but not affect your topped-out flash. Yeah, maybe I missed some point... or perhaps I simply felt the points were not valid. Use the terms correctly and think of the physics properly, and these issue will not become a problem. Last edited by amoringello; 01-30-2011 at 05:58 AM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Term limits	jeffkrol	General Talk	7	11-17-2010 01:31 PM
Marketplace off limits?	TourDeForce	Site Suggestions and Help	10	07-31-2009 07:24 PM
Theoretical limits...	frith	Troubleshooting and Beginner Help	3	06-03-2009 06:33 AM
Post Attachment Limits	David	Site Suggestions and Help	2	12-05-2007 12:28 PM

01-29-2011, 12:33 PM	#61
Hound Tooth Banned Join Date: Nov 2010 Location: Williston, VT Posts: 268	Originally posted by amoringello If you had the ability to turn up the flash to overcome ambient, shutter speed would not be an issue... wth? That's absolutely ridiculous. Of course you can turn up the flash to overcome ambient (if your flash is powerful enough). When doing flash photography, the camera compensates for exposure through flash output power. If you put a ND filter on your camera, then your camera sees a dark scene, and therefore commands more flash power to compensate (up to the flash's limit). This is basic flash photography 101. And in the case of the Pentax 540 or Metz 58, there's often plenty of flash power to spare in most situations. dlacouture really described it best.

01-29-2011, 04:19 PM	#63
myeates Inactive Account Join Date: Nov 2010 Location: Lincolnshire Photos: Albums Posts: 23	I own the Metz 58af1 flash does anyone know what the max shutter speed is for use off the camera using wireless transmitters. The tests I have done seem to be 180th but I can only get it to work as a slave. I tried to use the hss mode but the flash refused to fire when used with wireless, when I reverted back to slave mode on the flash it worked, any advice on this flash and usage with the K5 will be gratefully received

01-29-2011, 04:38 PM	#64
amoringello Veteran Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: Virginia, USA Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,562	Originally posted by Hound Tooth wth? That's absolutely ridiculous. Of course you can turn up the flash to overcome ambient (if your flash is powerful enough). When doing flash photography, the camera compensates for exposure through flash output power. If you put a ND filter on your camera, then your camera sees a dark scene, and therefore commands more flash power to compensate (up to the flash's limit). This is basic flash photography 101. And in the case of the Pentax 540 or Metz 58, there's often plenty of flash power to spare in most situations. dlacouture really described it best. er, um, thats the whole point. Dunno where you guys come up with this stuff, and I don't know what language I'm writing in, but I believe I have been quite specific with what I wrote. Anyway, like you said, its all basic photography 101. No black magic. Just go out and try it. You'll see ND has no special affect on ambient v.s. flash. ND affects overall exposure. PERIOD. It cannot get more basic than that. Try it. If anyone can prove that ND grads affect the physics of ambient light more than that of light from flash, they get my K5.

01-29-2011, 06:15 PM	#65
areidjr Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Pittsburgh, Pa, USA Photos: Gallery Posts: 529	I've been following this thread with interest. I decided to try shooting with and without an ND filter. I set the camera up in manual with my AF540 in PTTL. Camera settings were f/5.6, 1/60s. ISO800. The shot on the left is without the ND and the right with. It has definitely had an effect on the ambient light in the background while properly exposing the foreground subject. Not sure this proves anything, one way or another, but I thought I'd give it a try and see what happened. It worked as I expected it to.

01-29-2011, 09:37 PM	#67
Hound Tooth Banned Join Date: Nov 2010 Location: Williston, VT Posts: 268	Originally posted by areidjr I've been following this thread with interest. I decided to try shooting with and without an ND filter. I set the camera up in manual with my AF540 in PTTL. Camera settings were f/5.6, 1/60s. ISO800. The shot on the left is without the ND and the right with. That is EXACTLY what I was referring to. The ND filter dampened ambient light and the flash kept the subject exposed exactly the same. All automatically by the light meter. Looks to me like someone owes you a K-5.

01-29-2011, 09:48 PM	#68
dlacouture Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Var, South of France Photos: Albums Posts: 1,074	Originally posted by myeates I own the Metz 58af1 flash does anyone know what the max shutter speed is for use off the camera using wireless transmitters. The tests I have done seem to be 180th but I can only get it to work as a slave. I tried to use the hss mode but the flash refused to fire when used with wireless, when I reverted back to slave mode on the flash it worked, any advice on this flash and usage with the K5 will be gratefully received Well, pentax inexplicably dropped the HSS wireless capabilities of their cameras when they went digital... That's right : my 10 years old MZ-6 film body is able to do HSS in wireless mode, but my brand new K5 cannot...

01-29-2011, 09:55 PM	#69
dlacouture Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Var, South of France Photos: Albums Posts: 1,074	To the defense of amoringello, he was thinking in terms of fixed flash power. Quite stubbornly, but he was right, as what he said is true. He just missed some important point in our posts, so don't go dispossess him of his brand new K5 (which is such a sweet cam!).

01-29-2011, 10:02 PM	#70
Hound Tooth Banned Join Date: Nov 2010 Location: Williston, VT Posts: 268	Originally posted by dlacouture To the defense of amoringello, he was thinking in terms of fixed flash power. Quite stubbornly, but he was right, as what he said is true. He just missed some important point in our posts, so don't go dispossess him of his brand new K5 (which is such a sweet cam!). But even a K-x has a built-in flash with variable output.

01-29-2011, 10:39 PM	#71
Digitalis Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Melbourne, Victoria Photos: Gallery Posts: 11,694	Originally posted by dlacouture That's right : my 10 years old MZ-6 film body is able to do HSS in wireless mode, but my brand new K5 cannot... actually you need another flash to do that,I use an AF360FGZ attached to my camera set to control mode. The built in flashes on current DSLR cameras cannot do this.

01-29-2011, 10:53 PM	#72
dlacouture Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Var, South of France Photos: Albums Posts: 1,074	Originally posted by Digitalis actually you need another flash to do that,I use an AF360FGZ attached to my camera set to control mode. The built in flashes on current DSLR cameras cannot do this. Well, there was no need for an external master flash with the MZ-6 and the MZ-S... I really don't understand why they dropped this feature on DSLRs built-in flashes...

01-29-2011, 11:21 PM	#73
Hound Tooth Banned Join Date: Nov 2010 Location: Williston, VT Posts: 268	Originally posted by dlacouture Well, there was no need for an external master flash with the MZ-6 and the MZ-S... I really don't understand why they dropped this feature on DSLRs built-in flashes... Actually I'm pretty sure the *ist D could do it too. They dropped it starting with the K10D. I guess people didn't complain loud enough, because it never returned.

01-30-2011, 02:07 AM	#74
dlacouture Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Var, South of France Photos: Albums Posts: 1,074	You're right, the istD had it... But it was dropped even for the following ist series.