[Class A]

I suspect there is more lag in many radio triggers. I note pros in studio workshops telling everyone to operate their controllers at 1/125s even though I'm sure using optical or cable 1/200 or 1/250s wouldn't be a problem. They gave no theoretical reason, seemed to be more their bitter pill of experience.

That must have been experience from people using super cheap triggers or mismatched triggers. IIRC, the Yongnuo RF-602 for Canon only supported 1/125s maximum on a Pentax without manually waking it up or DIY modifications.

A good radio trigger introduces very little delay and could support a sync-speed of 1/1000s.

---

Last edited by Class A; 12-13-2016 at 06:31 PM.

[clackers]

That must have been experience from people using super cheap triggers or mismatched triggers. IIRC, the Yongnuo RF-602 for Canon only supported 1/125s maximum on a Pentax without manually waking it up or DIY modifications.

A good radio trigger introduces very little delay and could support a sync-speed of 1/1000s.

These were various PocketWizards and Cowboys over the last few years.

I saw Neil van Niekerk in a video say the same thing - delays in the circuitry.

Several times in those workshops I just secretly chose 1/200s to get clear of the shutter shake of the K-1, and because there was no ambient, it worked fine.

My own Yongnuo, Cactus v5 and Acon triggers have been fine at the max sync speed.

[Digitalis]

A good radio trigger introduces very little delay and could support a sync-speed of 1/1000s.

unfortunately most of them do not, Pocketwizards, Elinchrom speed are triggers I have found to be consistent at 1/1000, but at sync speeds above that misfiring becomes problematic.

[Class A]

These were various PocketWizards and Cowboys over the last few years.

unfortunately most of them do not...

OK, I stand corrected.

I assumed that triggers like the RF-602 were the exception rather than the rule.

Too bad the overall standard isn't better, but clearly as a number of fast triggers demonstrate, with the right equipment, there is no need to stay below the sync-speed.

[Digitalis]

OK, I stand corrected.

Flash triggering and sync speeds at which triggers are reliable can, annoyingly, be dependent on camera model.

My experience goes outside just pentax cameras, for example the Canon 5D and 6D cameras typically need to stay under sync speed: around 1/125~1/160th with most triggers, for reasons unknown the same triggers work perfectly fine on Canon 1 series cameras at 1/250th. Which indicates there might be something different in the flash signaling pathways in the two cameras.

[macman24054]

Are you sure? I think what Andy888 is simply saying is that you use the Acon R930 to fire a Pentax Pttl flash in HSS mode and that that flash optically triggers the clustered manual flashes. Why wouldn't the Pttl flash contribute light output? I don't think it is merely a controller. As to controlling the power output of manual flashes, that could be preset or with triggers depending on the flash

I am all for contributing. I just know what I know from wondering is this doable and then setting up and experimenting. A Pentax dedicated flash in manual mode discharges once at the set power setting. To achieve HSS the unit must be set to HSS and either "on" or "wireless mode". While you can trigger a flash set to manual with a flash set to HSS and it appear to our eyes to fire in the same manner, the two flashes are not functioning the same. The pulses from the HSS flash may seem as one continuous flash they are actually pulses. To our eyes they appear as one flash the sensor and shutter above the sync speed will prove our eyes wrong.
90% of what I shoot is weddings. Since I don't have the choice of shooting outside at 1 or 2 in the afternoon, I set out to find the best HSS option for me with the gear I already have. I had a set of Acon triggers and four AF360's. I shoot wedding portraits very often with my 50-135 2.8 or 135 2.5. The distance I have to be away would kill the flash output in HSS mode. Triggering optically from 25 feet in 2pm sun with the flashes in a modifier would be impossible. My solution was to use the Acon transmitter on my camera, the receiver with a 360 on it set to HSS and "on" (set like this it acts just like an on camera unit acting as optical controller) and the other three 360's set to HSS and wireless. Since all four 360's are on a mounting bracket in my 32" octabox I eliminate the chance of an optical misfire and I get three 360's worth of HSS output. Since my 135 2.5 wide open at 25 feet from the subject only gives me 1 foot DOF and shooting wide open runs the shutter speed up so high my lights have to be close or I loss to much light. Lucy (my manikin model) and I have tested this and it works. Why shoot wide open? That is the look my clients want.

---------- Post added 12-14-16 at 03:25 AM ----------

I think to often we make to much of light output. I shot some children Christmas portraits this past weekend. I shot up to a group of 5 children using a 300watt strobe in a 47" octabox with a grid about 5 feet from the subjects. My camera settings were ISO 100, shutter speed of 1/15 (to have the lights from the tree to show up in the photo), f8 with the light set to 1/128 power. I had to shoot at f8 because I could go no lower on my light. Last year I shoot cheerleader group photos with groups of up to 30. I used a 300watt strobe as the key light in a 60" white reflective umbrella set to 1/32 power with a 250 watt strobe as a fill light set to 1/32 power in a 33" silver umbrella. The light output is often less important than the size of the modifier ( size of light) and distance from the subject. With the same size modifier, a 300 watt strobe at 4 feet from the subject puts out as much light as a 1200 watt strobe at 12 feet.

[andy888]

Pardon?

From "...some of these have shown to be wrong..." you gather that I

said optical triggering has problems, and specifically, that
I used "...the long distance problem to against my finding."

?

What is your problem?

Note what I really said regarding optical triggering in the form you use it was:

"We (or at least I) am not challenging your 100% claim for optical triggering.".

That's the opposite of what you claim I had said.

It eludes me as to why you would stray away from facts in this manner.

What I did was.

Made a radio and optical mixed flash TEST for 100% success. and reported. said it was reliable, useful.

This is what Class A accused:

[ As usual, you found some way to praise your triggers (this time by explaining a technique that is old as dirt(what tech, How, is that same as What I did)) and made some incorrect statements (what statement)and wild claims along the way. Some of these statements have been shown to be false already [ what statement ] and we now know that you are now not willing to back up your claims . [who,You or me]]

I don't expect a reasonable answer. like before. You would get some more others little branch trying to escape from direct fact. and bare accuse by mouth. accuse what you have set up. that is your nature.

And I don't think you have english as first language too.

---

Last edited by andy888; 12-14-2016 at 10:36 PM.

[Class A]

What I did was.
...
This is what Class A accused:

This is a complete misrepresenation of what happened.

I never responded to your thread initially and at first only corrected some statements in posts made by other members. Only with my third post in this thread, I corrected an incorrect statement from you. Then you accused me of providing "misinformation" and I have been defending myself ever since.

How can you spin all of this as an attack on you on my behalf?

what tech

The technique you described -- using multiple speedlights to increase power output.
This is hardly worth a new thread as the technique is very old, very obvious, and you did not add any value, like presenting trade-offs, or similar. The main motivation for it seemed to have been to talk about your triggers again.

How, is that same as What I did

Sorry, I don't know what you are asking.

what statement

One of the incorrect statements you made was that Pentax flashes have "very good light quality".

[who,You or me]

You are the one who is not willing to back up your claims. You talked about an "other brand" and alleged its reliability is not as good as that of Acon. When I enquired, you did not come forward with anything supporting your claim.

I don't expect a reasonable answer.

So why are you asking all these questions?

that is your nature.

For the last time, can you please stop making any of this personal?
You have called me all sorts of things before with zero foundation.
This forum is not a platform for expressing one's animosities towards someone else.

This forum is meant to allow Pentaxians to help each other. So please just keep your personal views about me to yourself.

And I don't think you have english as first language too.

What's that got to do with anything?

FYI, in English it is "... I don't think English is your first language either".
I hope that helps and that my English is good enough for you.

[andy888]

Originally posted by andy888 How, is that same as What I did
Sorry, I don't know what you are asking.

-----------
To help you make it clear. You said " a technique that is old as dirt ", I asked you what is this tech and how it is old as dirt. Is the mix optical and radio I made the same as it is?

Is that clear for you now?


And your answer :
[The technique you described -- using multiple speedlights to increase power output.
This is hardly worth a new thread as the technique is very old, very obvious, and you did not add any value}

obviously you change the target. from 'Mainly Optical" to " muti flash".

Fine. You are not to accuse the " reliability " like before but suddently come up the "muti flash"

But I did add new thing. triggering method. Can you point out what else manufacturer make things like this to prove mine as " very old, very obvious,".

Still, You don't have things matched.

[Dan Rentea]

Well, I use to consider buying a powerful studio flash. Now I only need to buy a multi flash stand.

https://detail.tmall.com/item.htm?spm=a230r.1.14.13.dyTqzc&id=528084292401&c...27b&abbucket=8

My suggestion (if you didn't already invested in speedlights) is to buy a powerful flash, like Godox AD360, rather than using 4 speedlights. Why? Because:
- you can use the Godox flash with any modifier from Bowens or Elinchrom (beauty dish, reflectors, etc.)
- it's more portable than 4 flashes
- the battery from AD360 is going to last a lot more than AA batteries
- the recycle time is faster with AD360
- the quantity of light stays the same each time you press the shutter; with sppedlights there is always the posibility that one flash will not fire or one of them will not recycle as fast as the others.

The main advantage of 4 speedligths vs. 1 Godox AD360 is related to lighting options. If you don't need the power of AD360, with 4 flashes you can have more options and flexibility to create a lot of setups.

[andy888]

My suggestion (if you didn't already invested in speedlights) is to buy a powerful flash, like Godox AD360, rather than using 4 speedlights. Why? Because:
- you can use the Godox flash with any modifier from Bowens or Elinchrom (beauty dish, reflectors, etc.)
- it's more portable than 4 flashes
- the battery from AD360 is going to last a lot more than AA batteries
- the recycle time is faster with AD360
- the quantity of light stays the same each time you press the shutter; with sppedlights there is always the posibility that one flash will not fire or one of them will not recycle as fast as the others.

The main advantage of 4 speedligths vs. 1 Godox AD360 is related to lighting options. If you don't need the power of AD360, with 4 flashes you can have more options and flexibility to create a lot of setups.

I quite agree with your last statement. flexiability. Yes.

Modifier. I have little experience about that. what I am to do is use unbrella， which showed in the flash stand picture.

Weight. I would use 3 flashes. a strobe with battery pack . I don't make compare yet.

I didn't miss fire for the optical close. and system clean. what you worry about should be applied for some readio trigger for each flash's feet.

Further, P-TTL, that is my faverate. free me to use camera. Or i should stick to M mode.

[Dan Rentea]

Modifier. I have little experience about that. what I am to do is use unbrella， which showed in the flash stand picture.

Modifiers makes strobist work so beautiful.

I didn't miss fire for the optical close. and system clean. what you worry about should be applied for some readio trigger for each flash's feet.

What happens when the batteries from one flash discharges faster than on the other 2 or 3 flashes? You're going to have different amount of light...

Further, P-TTL, that is my faverate. free me to use camera. Or i should stick to M mode.

I never use TTL with off camera flash. Manual is the way to go for me.

Plus. I agree with Mac， the lihgt amount is not so important than the direction, angle of light. as long as it is correct.

Then you will love the light from AD360. It's different than the light from speedlight. The bulb from AD360 spreads the light in a different way than a normal speedlight.

[Class A]

obviously you change the target. from 'Mainly Optical" to " muti flash".

?

Your triggering method mainly uses optical triggering (more optical triggering than radio triggering occurs). Period.
You proposed to use multiple flashes together. Period.
I never changed any "target".

BTW, if you want people to understand that the main contribution of your described setup is a mixed triggering approach then just say that.
Go back to your first post and read it again. The main message is "I put together two flashes to get something more powerful than one flash".
Nothing about combining radio triggering and optical triggering.

You are not to accuse the " reliability " like before but suddently come up the "muti flash"

1. What do you mean "like before"? I never challenged reliability. On the contrary. It is there in writing! And you still are claiming I "accused the reliability"!
2. I did not suddenly "come up with the 'muti flash'". Your thread is about a multi-flash technique.

Can you get off my back already?!

But I did add new thing. triggering method.

Combining radio triggering and optical triggering is not new. People do that all the time to save the number of radio receivers required.

BTW, not because using multiple radio receivers is unreliable -- as you keep relentlessly claiming with respect to some "other brand" without providing any support whatsoever -- but because to save cost. If a flash already supports optical triggering, why spend money on more triggers?

It is a very common technique when using studio strobes: Use one radio transmitter on the camera and one radio receiver connected to one strobe. Trigger the rest of the strobes optically. This avoids using a sync-cable or an on-camera flash that may contribute to the illumination. In the past, people sometimes used optical infrared triggers on the camera but since simple radio triggers are so cheap and small nowadays, using a radio trigger is much more straightforward and flexible.

Can you point out what else manufacturer make things like this to prove mine as " very old, very obvious,".

?

All sorts of manufacturers produce very standard equipment with which one can combine radio triggering and optical triggering and thus fire multiple flashes/strobes at once.

[Digitalis]

But I did add new thing. triggering method. Can you point out what else manufacturer make things like this to prove mine as " very old, very obvious,".

Remember these?

[andy888]

Remember these?

Well. see the title. PTTL and HSS. which I use the radio and optical mixture to acheive.