[DAZ]

I like many of the ideas discussed here (especially the flash lock for P-TTL and manual control of the on board flash) but even though I like the idea of a built in RF trigger there is some problems with it for an international company. The little guy can kind of snub there nose at a country’s laws for RF devises but a big international company has to follow the rules in each county if it is built into the camera. It probably would make more sentience to have a trigger unit on the hot shoe that can send all the new data to the new flash (and/or a new receiver to trigger older flashes) that can comply with the rules per county.


With a company like Pentax Ricoh it can spend the money for a RF system using advanced RF modulation and send a lot of data to/from the camera/flash. Not only would this let the camera know what flash unit it has out there to control but also get info from the flash like battery or the internal temperature of the flash. Once you have a system that can send all this kind of data back and forth on the hot shoe you could even update the flash BIOs from the camera.


DAZ

[mattdm]

I think you may be on to something there. Metz is the one company that could make a flash to rival the Nikon SBs, and give Pentax a bit of an edge, or at least a level playing field in the flash department. You may also be interested to know that the Metz 58 goes down to an almost undetectable 1/256th power at 1/33000th of a second, it's great for close-up work.

For what it's worth, I get about three people a month buying a flash through the Amazon referral links on my flash guide. Pentax and Sigma sales are about even (with the Super model far outpacing the ST), but more people pick Metz than either of the other brands put together.

[rvannatta]

Pentax needs to resolve the conflict between the 0-GPS1 unit and the flash units. I assume they had something in mind when they made the conflict.

Having had a heavy flash unit break the top out of my Pentax ME many years ago, I have never loved large heavy flash units poised to destroy my camera.
A wireless design that could freely be used as a handlebar flash which would not conflct with the GPS add on would be just ducky.

An urgent priority is to rationalize the exposure controls. My head spins when I try to figure out where/when to turn/push/swear to adjust the flash exposure. There is exposure compensation controls on the flash unit, in the menus, and with the PLUS/Minus + wheel on the camera. I'd prefer not to have to carry a crib card with me
explaining which to actually use. And if there was some way to make the exposure more accurate the first time, I wouldn't need to adjust the flash manually so often.

[sjwaldron]

Pentax's flash lineup is getting rather long in the tooth, and it's a bit short in capabilities compared to the bigger companies — particularly, when compared to Nikon's CLS. The top-of-the-line AF540FGZ was introduced six years ago in 2005, and the midrange AF360FGZ is a decade old — it was announced in 2001. So, clearly, the time is soon.

Here's some of the things I'd like to see:

• Radio wireless control built in. No one else has this, and while optical wireless P-TTL works pretty well (better than some loud voices might have you think), radio would be better in a number of ways. And, this is particularly important to Pentax, because while some third-party triggers now support the big two brands, they're unlikely to do the same for Pentax.
  
• An Entry-Level / Low-Cost Wireless Slave. Nikon offers this in the SB-R200, which can be used as macro flash but also in creative lighting setups. It'd be ideal to go below the $160 price point of the Nikon offering, if possible — Pentax offers wireless control from its entry-level cameras, while Nikon does not. With this feature, the entry-level flash is interesting to intermediate photographers (and up) as a secondary or tertiary light source, rather than just something to pass on by.
  
• Weather-Sealing. This is playing to Pentax's strength — might as well keep it up.
  
• Multiple control groups. The current flash system can control several slaves, but they all need to have their exposure control set manually on the flash. It'd be nice if they could be set into two or more groups, with an easy on-camera system for changing the ratios between the groups. (The competition can do this!)
  
• Flash Exposure Lock. This measures once and then suppresses the preflash later.
  
• More intuitive options for balancing with ambient light. Basically, Nikon has this right.

Excellent list. I have especially been pushing for the built-in RF wireless idea that has full P-TTL communication. I wrote an article on my site a while back with ideas for Pentax flash improvements. I think your list pretty much summed everything up that I wanted or would want. Only extras would be making high-speed sync more seamless in the interface and a thyristor auto mode in new flash units.

[DAZ]

Pentax needs to resolve the conflict between the 0-GPS1 unit and the flash units. I assume they had something in mind when they made the conflict.

The only conflict between the O-GPS and flash is a mechanical space limit between the popup flash and the O-GPS when mounted on the camera and that can be overcome. See https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-camera-field-accessories/162897-using-0-gps1-flash.html

To me the O-GPS leads me to believe that a new flash could be in the works and the changes that make the O-GPS work is what could make many of the new things talked about here possible.

DAZ

[philbaum]

I think you may be on to something there. Metz is the one company that could make a flash to rival the Nikon SBs, and give Pentax a bit of an edge, or at least a level playing field in the flash department. You may also be interested to know that the Metz 58 goes down to an almost undetectable 1/256th power at 1/33000th of a second, it's great for close-up work.

Thank you. I knew about the Metz 58 and its 1/256th power. Even at 1/128th power, (both Metz 48 and Yongnuo 560 do this) it may not be detectable. I once put my Metz at 1/128th power at the foot of this statue with my Cactus trigger, and it wouldn't fire. Fooled around and finally by looking straight at the flash when i triggered, found out it was actually firing, but at such a low level it was hard to detect on my LCD screen or on the viewfinder. Duh...

Here's an example of 1/128th power, Metz 48, where such low power enabled me to take a picture in close quarters:
(the point is that for strobist work, or Macro work, flash makers shouldn't circumvent creative ideas by limiting their flashes - end of quiet rant)

[jake14mw]

Great suggestions here. My wants in order would be:

1) Increasing the Max Synch speed
2) Allowing firing of a flash from the hotshoe at a faster shutter speed than the max synch through a menu override. This one makes me mad, wouldn't this be easy/cheap to implement?
3) Allowing control of flash exposure/group levels from the camera body.
4) Revamp the menu/control system to be more user friendly.
5) Allowing a user configurable fill flash mode
6) Building the next flashes to be Iphone/Android app cabable, allowing two way communications of controls/settings. Third parties can build apps.

[Jodokast96]

One thing that I wonder about is the usefulness of a pivot feature in addition to the normal bounce and swivel. It's not often, but there are times where I think it may have been a handy feature to have.

[maxfield_photo]

One thing that I wonder about is the usefulness of a pivot feature in addition to the normal bounce and swivel. It's not often, but there are times where I think it may have been a handy feature to have.

You mean being able to turn the flash head in a "portrait" orientation rather than "landscape"?

[Jodokast96]

Yeah. Take a look at Sony, they offer it.

[Deiberson]

faster recycling times with and a battery pack option for flashes at all levels.
fill tilt/rotation at all flash levels. my 60 dollar yongnugo can do it for crying out loud.
wireless group control from the main unit/or body
the ability to go lower than 1/32 on the af360. i didn't know about the metz until i just read it above.

and of course the wireless pttl option......pocket wizard compatibility.

[alohadave]

Radio wireless control built in. No one else has this, and while optical wireless P-TTL works pretty well (better than some loud voices might have you think), radio would be better in a number of ways. And, this is particularly important to Pentax, because while some third-party triggers now support the big two brands, they're unlikely to do the same for Pentax.

You aren't likely to see it from anyone. They would need to certify the RF frequencies in every country/region that has an FCC-like entity controlling the RF spectrum. This is why even Canon and Nikon use light instead of RF in their flashes.

[mattdm]

You aren't likely to see it from anyone. They would need to certify the RF frequencies in every country/region that has an FCC-like entity controlling the RF spectrum. This is why even Canon and Nikon use light instead of RF in their flashes.

It's doable, though, or else radio triggers wouldn't exist at all. And, these days, with software-defined radios, making an adaptable product isn't as hard as it once might have been.

[alohadave]

It's doable, though, or else radio triggers wouldn't exist at all. And, these days, with software-defined radios, making an adaptable product isn't as hard as it once might have been.

Yeah, but that drives up costs because you have to design a flash that has a variable frequency output and is certified in all the regions that you want to sell in. Much easier to simply take that headache out of the picture and use a method that works everywhere and isn't regulated.

Radio triggers aren't compatible in different markets. You can't use an EU PocketWizard in the North America and vice versa, and that's all they make. If the trigger makers don't do it, why would a camera maker go to the trouble.

[DAZ]

Software defined radios are still way to expensive (although they will some day be the norm) software controlled radios are the norm but the problem with putting one into a camera is it will slow down the process as you will have to wait for each country’s bureaucracy to approve the camera and if one has a problem you now have a very big problem. The flash triggers that are out there are either flying under the radar as it were or are technically limited to a given county. It would be easier to either make an add on unit per county or publish the controlling specs and let someone do it for you.


DAZ