[bobmaxja]

Were you using a K-5? I ask because your sig says K-x. As far as I can tell, this is a K-5 specific problem.

Yes I use the K-5 , signature is not updated. This K-5 is also a very early one

[Lage]

Did you upgrade the firmware for the Metz 58AF-1?

Yes i did.

[Lage]

I don't have any problem with my K5 and AF 540FGZ with a few precautions.

Most important :

- don't use ISO AUTO with large range : K5 will have the trend to preserve ambiance and set High ISO.
- be careful with minimum distance and high ISOs. Remember that all objects before the minimum distance are burnt. This is not an error. Indoors, with high ISO the guide number is too high and the minimum distance is generally too far, then all objects wil be burnt. So, set ISO manually within a range as 100-800, not above.

- Min.distance = 1/10 Max. distance.
- Max distance = NG / Aperture at ISO 100 ( x 2 at ISO 400)

It's good to verify minimum and maximum distances wich are are displayed on the LCD at the rear of the cobra flash (before bouncing).

If this was the cause, the pics with direct flash would also be overexposed, which they aren´t.

[pscl57]

If this was the cause, the pics with direct flash would also be overexposed, which they aren´t.

Exact. It's strange. No such problem with my K5 and AF 540 FGZ...
Did you have made a test with same flashes, lenses and another K5 body ?

[glanglois]

Using the Metz 58, I've seen this rarely if ever, direct or bounce. But then I use auto mode on the Metz rather than P-TTL. The Metz control is much more consistent than the camera with P-TTL.

Prior to the 58, I used the 54 with almost the same results. The difference was that the 54 seemed to come just a bit loose from my K-X and K-7. If the flash unit was not fastened down precisely and firmly, all I got was full power. Simply taking it off and putting it back on fixed the problem, rare as the problem was.

[Van Zan]

K-5 with Metz AF-50 here, both on last version of firmware. No probs at all, 3 months of usage so far. Faulty HW perhaps? Or connectors?

[pscl57]

... If the flash unit was not fastened down precisely and firmly, all I got was full power. Simply taking it off and putting it back on fixed the problem, rare as the problem was.

I confirm. It's important to fix firmly the flash in its slot.

[Qwntm]

I'm using fixed ISO (400) and fixed aperture (f/4.5) on my flash test shots, in Av mode, with the subject about 4 feet away. If it were a problem with minimum distance, then DIRECT flash would be burnt out. But it's not. It's only bounce flash.

If I take two shots in sequence, one with direct flash and one with bounce flash, generally BOTH shots will be ISO400 f/4.5 1/125. The direct flash shot will adjust the flash power to achieve correct exposure. The bounce flash shot is at MUCH higher power -- I can tell just by listening to the "pop" sound the flash makes. All other exposure parameters are identical.

I feel confident in saying it's a flash power control problem.

Man, ISO 400 and F4.5 at 4 feet sounds like a recipe for HOT PHOTOS to me. I think you are exceeding the parameters of what's physically possible.

Dial the ISO down to 100, crank your aperture to f8 or 11 and then see what you get at 4 feet. If that solves your problem then it's not gear related...

I'm betting on the bounce shot the sensor in the camera is trying to fill the room on the sides of the subject as well. Try it with spot metering, check the camera manual and see if the flash metering can be set to spot. And then see if that gets the exposure right.

So there's two possibilities and some things to try.

(I was shooting a model when I first got the K-5 and my dang flash started not firing. It was intermittent and really had me thinking everything was broken. What was happening was the shutter speed was climbing over x-sync speed in av mode and Pentax turns the flash off when that happens.
I was feeling kinda stupid for a while... )

[Lage]

Man, ISO 400 and F4.5 at 4 feet sounds like a recipe for HOT PHOTOS to me. I think you are exceeding the parameters of what's physically possible.

Dial the ISO down to 100, crank your aperture to f8 or 11 and then see what you get at 4 feet. If that solves your problem then it's not gear related...

I'm betting on the bounce shot the sensor in the camera is trying to fill the room on the sides of the subject as well. Try it with spot metering, check the camera manual and see if the flash metering can be set to spot. And then see if that gets the exposure right.

So there's two possibilities and some things to try.

(I was shooting a model when I first got the K-5 and my dang flash started not firing. It was intermittent and really had me thinking everything was broken. What was happening was the shutter speed was climbing over x-sync speed in av mode and Pentax turns the flash off when that happens.
I was feeling kinda stupid for a while... )

If this was the issue, why is the direct flash pic correctly exposed then?

[Lage]

Man, ISO 400 and F4.5 at 4 feet sounds like a recipe for HOT PHOTOS to me. I think you are exceeding the parameters of what's physically possible.

Dial the ISO down to 100, crank your aperture to f8 or 11 and then see what you get at 4 feet. If that solves your problem then it's not gear related...

I'm betting on the bounce shot the sensor in the camera is trying to fill the room on the sides of the subject as well. Try it with spot metering, check the camera manual and see if the flash metering can be set to spot. And then see if that gets the exposure right.

So there's two possibilities and some things to try.

(I was shooting a model when I first got the K-5 and my dang flash started not firing. It was intermittent and really had me thinking everything was broken. What was happening was the shutter speed was climbing over x-sync speed in av mode and Pentax turns the flash off when that happens.
I was feeling kinda stupid for a while... )

If this was the issue, why is the direct flash pic correctly exposed then? Seems to me that some of you guys are trying to dig up any strange explanation rather than admit that this is a fault that pentax seems incompetent to fix.

[rawr]

rather than admit that this is a fault that pentax seems incompetent to fix

You have to admit though that Pentax have to deal with a range of variables when examining these sort of issues - like the settings on camera (Av/Tv/M/, spot AF, multi AF, spot AE etc), the brand of 'PTTL' flash used (Metz, Pentax, Sigma etc), the version(s) of firmware involved in camera and flash, the lenses used (A/M/F/DA Pentax, Sigma, Tamron etc), the distances involved, scene type involved, ambient EV involved, batteries used etc etc etc.

Hence you get these reports of the Pentax service department testing out everything and saying the flash works OK and to spec, but then the user still reporting problems because there was no way for the service department to replicate the user's usage scenario.

If Pentax tightly controlled (like Apple does) how all the hardware relationships worked together (ie support only extends to Apple certified hardware), things might be different.

[Clavius]

If Pentax tightly controlled (like Apple does) how all the hardware relationships worked together (ie support only extends to Apple certified hardware), things might be different.

And that's the no1 reason why I don't like Apple products. You've got no freedom. "Not certified? Sorry, you're not even allowed to even try."

[rawr]

And that's the no1 reason why I don't like Apple products. You've got no freedom. "Not certified? Sorry, you're not even allowed to even try."

Exactly. So folks should try and understand the dilemma Pentax (and other companies) are in when users report issues with their hardware.

[RobA_Oz]

And that's the no1 reason why I don't like Apple products. You've got no freedom. "Not certified? Sorry, you're not even allowed to even try."

Well, you'll never be short of friends with that reasoning, which I find to be more popular among tinkerers than among serious programmers and hardware developers, but which I don't accept as absolutely true. One example is the relative ease with which iPhones can be "jailbroken" but still able to run all the other "certified" software. So, "no freedom"? I don't think so.

However, if we come back somewhat closer to the topic, it seems to me that it's not so much a matter of the hardware itself, but the software controlling it, that's the problem. If Pentax is not currently adopting that Apple-like model of tight product control, why don't we have more people modifying their camera's firmware to get around the problems spoken about here and elsewhere (like the flash issues, the inability to switch between SDM and screw-drive etc)? One very slowly-developed tethering program for Windows PCs is about all I see, and the occasional hacking attempt, but nothing organised and sustained. From the looks of it, nobody's much interested in doing anything much with Pentax's "open" software policy, even for products that are now out of warranty. "Freedom" may not be just another word for "nothing left to lose", but in this case it looks like nobody knows what to do with it, either, except complain, of course.

[Quicksand]

If this was the issue, why is the direct flash pic correctly exposed then? Seems to me that some of you guys are trying to dig up any strange explanation rather than admit that this is a fault that pentax seems incompetent to fix.

Lage, you're absolutely 100% correct, of course.

I agree with Qwntm to some extent -- yes, ISO400 and f/4.5 at 4 feet does have the potential to blow out when flash is used, UNLESS the flash power is controlled appropriately. That's why it's a good test.

And when direct flash is used, it works fine. When wireless flash is used, it works fine.

I don't buy the argument about the indirect bounce flash trying to light up the rest of the room. That doesn't make any sense. The way P-TTL is SUPPOSED to work, a preflash gets sent out, and the camera meters the scene twice to figure out how much the preflash affected the actual in-frame scene by calculating the difference between the ambient light exposure and the preflash-lit exposure.

The flash power is then adjusted to bring the predicted exposure up to a well-exposed scene, when factoring in ambient plus flash. P-TTL doesn't care about the rest of the room, only what the lens sees.

And it's failing in this use scenario.