Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
07-26-2017, 07:46 AM   #16
Pentaxian
mcgregni's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Surrey, England
Posts: 2,557
Original Poster
"Exposure Compensation" ? No, you have to get the terms right first of all .... It's Flash Compensation !

It will be very interesting to see how the Cactus TTL system performs in exposure accuracy. Obviously there's still an interdependence on the camera and it's reading of the light levels. I agree that the exposure lock functions will be a good asset, combining good aspects of both Manual and TTL approaches.

Regarding the 'multi-functional' and utility qualities that I value with my Pentax flashes, I am not only referring to flash features,but also to the practical photography scenarios that the single Pentax P-TTL flash can function in.... That is its "utility".

So with my AF-540FGZs, I can use it for .....

1) Indoors on-camera P-TTL bounced
2) Outdoors on-camera direct flash (P-TTL plus HSS)
3) Outdoors on-camera direct flash Manual mode, with distance indications for high accuracy and consistent exposures
4) Wireless (Optical) P-TTL /HSS, in a 1, 2 or 3 flash configuration
5) Wireless (Optical) Manual mode
6) Radio Manual Slave with remote control (V6 system)
7) Optical Slave manual mode
8) The P-TTL functions above with 2nd curtain sync
9) Extension Cord P-TTL off-camera(1, 2 or 3 flash setup).
10) AF assist

So each of these functions apply and help with a great number of different and specific flash situations and shooting conditions, and they are all available on a single Pentax AF-540FGZ .... That is a really multi-functional flash that provides real wide ranging utility. For the money I find it is very good value.

What I said earlier was that with their TTL and HSS updates, Cactus are bringing their flash system forwards and making it much more multi-functional and with wider utility, closer to a competing dedicated system flash, although with the advantage (for off camera work) of remote radio control. What will still be lacking is the on-camera options listed above, although the workaround with blocking the hotshoe connection and using short range radio might work out well for some of course.

07-26-2017, 10:58 PM   #17
Pentaxian
Class A's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Posts: 9,949
QuoteOriginally posted by mcgregni Quote
"Exposure Compensation" ? No, you have to get the terms right first of all .... It's Flash Compensation !
"Flash Compensation": Is that some kind of extra sunlight or a giant filter to reduce the effect of the flash on the subject?

Seriously, I think it should be "flash exposure compensation" and when I wrote "exposure compensation" I assumed the flash context was obvious.
Of course you are right that "exposure compensation" normally refers to camera-related settings and that one should avoid confusion with flash-related power level adjustments.

QuoteOriginally posted by mcgregni Quote
It will be very interesting to see how the Cactus TTL system performs in exposure accuracy.
Should be exactly as good or as bad as P-TTL. I don't think they'll implement their own scheme, given that it would be easiest to just implement a relay functionality, i.e., not modify any of the codes that are exchanged between a camera and a flash. But then, I have no insider information; possibly the automatic metering results will be different to what P-TTL provides, I'm just not expecting that to be the case.

QuoteOriginally posted by mcgregni Quote
So with my AF-540FGZs, I can use it for .....
I wouldn't call your list a list of "functions".
I see four real functional aspects in your list:
  1. HSS
  2. SCS (second-curtain sync)
  3. automatic metering
  4. AF-assist
The V6II already ticks off boxes 1. & 4. and will add 2. & 3. once the X-TTL version for Pentax will be available.
What I'm trying to say is that there isn't much of a "functionality" difference at the moment and anything I'll regard as "functionality" will soon be covered.

The other items on your list are not relating to "functionality" but mounting and triggering options, AFAIC.

With respect to mounting a flash on the camera directly, I'm not a fan because it makes the camera/lens/flash combination very heavy and awkward to handle, plus one is limited with respect to lighting options. Bouncing with an on-camera only works satisfactorily if there are suitable (preferably colour-neutral) surfaces nearby in positions where one wants them. I guess using a flash bracket would make the handling a bit better but it wouldn't improve the lighting options.

With respect to all the triggering options, none of the optical ones are needed when one has a more versatile and reliable solution in the form of radio triggering. When a pop-up flash is used, HSS won't be available with optical triggering, implying that for full functionality one would have to use a full-blown on-camera flash just for triggering. With triggers that support a "short range" option (Godox started to offer that as well as Cactus) then the extension cord option is not needed either.

So while your list has 10 points, most of them become irrelevant, AFAIC, when one has a general and versatile radio triggering solution. More of them become irrelevant if one dismisses on-camera flash for good reasons. In any event, one can use non-Pentax flashes on-camera as well. If certain functionality (any of the four 1.-4. above) is desired then a flash bracket + TTL trigger would do the trick, or one would have to use the flash on top of a transceiver like the V6II with the centre pin isolated (I guess, see below).

BTW, I don't see any relevance in having a distance indication because
  • this only works with the flash head in a certain position which implies very limited use (fill flash only, or the results won't be good).
  • the displayed distance is for some idea of "correct exposure" which is very unlikely to be artistically desirable.

QuoteOriginally posted by mcgregni Quote
What will still be lacking is the on-camera options listed above, although the workaround with blocking the hotshoe connection and using short range radio might work out well for some of course.
Would it really be necessary to block the hot-shoe connection? I guess it would, but I've never tried with or without blocking.
Blocking or using a flash bracket with a cold-shoe or a hot-shoe that one simply not connects up, should definitely work.

I guess Cactus could offer a mode (on the V6II or RF60x) in which the centre-pin activity is disabled/ignored but I don't think I'll be the one making that suggestion because I have no intentions of putting an RF60x on top of an on-camera V6II (which is even worse than just having a flash mounted on-camera directly).
07-27-2017, 02:51 PM   #18
Pentaxian
mcgregni's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Surrey, England
Posts: 2,557
Original Poster
I can agree for sure on the last point! A V6II on the camera plus a flash on top makes quite a handful, although I do use this configuration, such as for optical triggering of an RF60 with 'HSS Sympathy' while using radio power control from the V6 .....(although I guess those days are behind me now ) , and also with a P-TTL flash used as bounced fill in 'TTL Passthrough' mode, in combination with an RF60 slave controlled by a V6 . But it is a bit delicate and heavy, and the hot shoe connections can be patchy and the locking levers need tightening regularly I find.

I was surprised to see Cactus advertising 'On Camera Flash With TTL ' with the XTTL firmware, with a V6II on the hot shoe and RF60 on top .....see this link to their XTTL website .... Cactus V6 II / IIs Wireless TTL HSS Flash Transceiver ....

This appears to contradict discussion I've seen on the Cactus forum where it was said that in order to use an RF60 on-camera with TTL metering it would be necessary to tape over the hotshoe connection in order to only use radio triggering from the V6II ( Short Range mode needed) ....(hence my earlier comments about this approach) .

It is not spelled out in the promotional webpage the means by which TTL metering can be obtained with the V6II and RF60 in this on-camera configuration ......there is no sign of any tape or other obstruction at the hotshot contacts. Could there in fact be a hot shoe isolation function on either the flash or transceiver included with the firmware ....?

Going back through your last post ClassA, I accept that 'functions' was not the best term to use for some of the listed items about the utility of the Pentax system flash. What I am really referring to are of course specific flash photography approaches and techniques, and the ability of the dedicated system flash to adapt and perform in those situations.

I don't think it is fair to dismiss techniques such as bounced and direct on-camera flash as automatically inferior and undesirable .....this has to be considered in the context of what options are actually possible for any particular photographer in a wide range of situations. Certainly for me, on most occasions when employing these on-camera techniques (you've seen some of my HSS examples recently), they were the only approaches possible to take control of the lighting balance and create a quality image under the circumstances ....i.e. Off-camera flash was not an option because the gear wasn't there or was impractical to set up. So these on-camera techniques can be very important ..... a compromise to some, but a revelation to others .

The Distance Indication on the Dedicated System Flash in Manual mode is a fantastic aid to instant accurate subject placement and exposures right the first time. It can also inform a judgement on power adjustment factors to make in bounced and off camera scenarios . It's a highly accurate additional source of information to the flash photographer that can be utilised in different ways.

Finally 'FEC' is used by Canon. Pentax use 'FC', and I am trying to promote the standardisation of our terms for clarity ....so that's 'Exposure Compensation' for the ambient, and 'Flash Compensation' for the flash. This has an added distinction and logic I think.

Last edited by mcgregni; 07-27-2017 at 03:27 PM.
07-27-2017, 07:45 PM   #19
Pentaxian
Class A's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Posts: 9,949
QuoteOriginally posted by mcgregni Quote
I was surprised to see Cactus advertising 'On Camera Flash With TTL ' with the XTTL firmware, with a V6II on the hot shoe and RF60 on top .....see this link to their XTTL website
The flash on top of the V6II on that page does not look like an RF60 at all.
It has some control knob at the front and if it is one of the supported TTL-capable flashes then the picture would indeed make sense.

QuoteOriginally posted by mcgregni Quote
This appears to contradict discussion I've seen on the Cactus forum where it was said that in order to use an RF60 on-camera with TTL metering it would be necessary to tape over the hotshoe connection in order to only use radio triggering from the V6II ( Short Range mode needed)
My assumption is that such trickery will be necessary until someone convinces Cactus that they need to support an on-camera V6II+RF60x combination with a software update. However, that's just speculation on my part, only informed by the discussion on the community forum you referred to.

QuoteOriginally posted by mcgregni Quote
I don't think it is fair to dismiss techniques such as bounced and direct on-camera flash as automatically inferior and undesirable
Well, I did not dismiss it for everyone, I just expressed my personal view which is why I lead with "I'm not a fan ...".
I accept that there are many shooters using on-camera flash and there are certainly scenarios where this is a reasonable approach. It is just something that I'd try to avoid if possible and I certainly wouldn't pay a premium to get HSS/SCS for this particular flash usage scenario.

QuoteOriginally posted by mcgregni Quote
The Distance Indication on the Dedicated System Flash in Manual mode is a fantastic aid to instant accurate subject placement and exposures right the first time.
It's great that you find it so useful. I personally take issue with the notion of "accurate" as I know from my cameras' meter systems how "accurate" they are. I use exposure compensation quite a bit and it is definitely necessary in situations that are difficult to get right even for smart metering modes. What compounds the notion of "accuracy" for on-camera flash with the head tilted forward (the only way in which the distance indication is supported) is that for me the only acceptable application of such a flash usage is adding almost not noticeable fill light. However, that is not what P-TTL is metering for. So "accurate" does not apply for my purposes at all. Maybe there are modes (say "Av") where a fill light support is exactly what the metering system goes for; I'd have to stand corrected in that case. But I highly doubt that the amount of light the P-TTL system will choose for me, will be to my taste. I shall definitely see as soon as I get to play with P-TTL in the future. As an option for off-camera flash in combination with a V6II + Pentax X-TTL firmware, P-TTL is something I'm more interested in exploring. As a pure on-camera solution (or involving a second P-TTL flash as a master), I was not interested at all.

QuoteOriginally posted by mcgregni Quote
Finally 'FEC' is used by Canon. Pentax use 'FC', and I am trying to promote the standardisation of our terms for clarity
I'm all for clarity and using standardised terms is certainly a good idea. I don't think FC is an improvement over FEC, but using either of those two should be fine, AFAIC.

07-28-2017, 04:49 AM   #20
Pentaxian
mcgregni's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Surrey, England
Posts: 2,557
Original Poster
Ok, so 'FC' it is from now then ....

There is another terminology distinction with the 'Distance / Range' indications ....'Distance' refers to a single measured distance from flash to subject, and operates in Manual Mode ...it's the equivalent of calculating things with guide number tables, but instant and easy because the flash makes the calculation instantly based on the aperture and ISO settings communicated from the camera, plus the users manual power inputs. So for this reason it is accurate and totally reliable, so long as you place the subject at the indicated distance from to flash. (Many members here are probably familiar with the descriptions of using this in practice as detailed by Bryan Peterson in his book 'Understanding Flash Exposure').

Earlier you were referring to P-TTL , rather than Manual as I did, and this uses a 'Range' indication (the nearest and farthest distance that correct exposure can occur within) ....this too is not subject to metering variations, it is also 'accurate' as it is a pure calculation based on Guide number and known ISO/ aperture values. The range indication is independent of the P-TTL exposure measurement, and indeed is displayed before any pre-flash or metering has occurred.

I'm not really understanding the point where Cactus show a dedicated system flash (perhaps from another camera system) on top of the V6II. Why is the V6II needed at all? I can understand if it's being used to control other off-camera slaves by reading, and the flash on top is working in TTL PassThrough mode ......but I'm not understanding how X-TTL is involved in this case .....?

The cross-brand aspect of the system will indeed be useful to many, but my understanding is that it works through the radio protocols with V6II transmitter and receiver ....

I think Cactus have seen, on their forum, a desire from users to see the RF60 / x transform as far as possible into the full multi-functional device with wider utility as I listed earlier ....i.e. they are looking for the On-Camera TTL features that I said were so useful in many situations, and of course hoping for the extra value that would bring and the competitive pricing advantage it would give over the camera brand own models.

Last edited by mcgregni; 07-28-2017 at 05:03 AM.
07-28-2017, 06:36 AM   #21
Pentaxian
Class A's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Posts: 9,949
QuoteOriginally posted by mcgregni Quote
Ok, so 'FC' it is from now then ....
FC Barcelona, I take it?!

QuoteOriginally posted by mcgregni Quote
this too is not subject to metering variations, it is also 'accurate' as it is a pure calculation based on Guide number and known ISO/ aperture values.
Yeah, well, when I discussed "accurate", I wasn't talking about metering variations. My main point is the utility (or lack thereof) of a notion of "technically correct exposure", on which either metering or the GN-related calculations are based on. The value that is calculated based on GN and camera settings may always be 100% deterministic, but it still assumes some idea of middle grey (18% reflectance) exposure, right? This is typically not what is needed for subtle fill flash, the ideal exposure may depend on the skin type, etc. Yes, theoretically, the exposure will be "correct" but in practice, one will want to season to taste and that puts the notion of an "accurate exposure" into perspective.

QuoteOriginally posted by mcgregni Quote
I'm not really understanding the point where Cactus show a dedicated system flash (perhaps from another camera system) on top of the V6II. Why is the V6II needed at all?
I can think of two reasons:
  1. There should be a translation between camera and on-camera flash. This means, one should be able to use any compatible TTL flash from any system on any supported camera. In other words, there should be an X-TTL pass-through functionality.
  2. With a flash mounted, the V6II still controls four off-camera groups, meaning that one can use one on-camera flash (with full TTL functionality) and up to four groups of off-camera flashes (with full TTL functionality).
07-28-2017, 09:32 AM   #22
Pentaxian
mcgregni's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Surrey, England
Posts: 2,557
Original Poster
OK ... so you're saying that you think the X-TTL cross brand protocol is in fact being 'passed-through' the hotshoe connections between the V6II and the flash on top? That's the first I've seen reference to that functionality ..... so far I've been led to believe that it was only via the radio protocol between a transmitting V6II and a receiving V6II. Its obviously great if it is true, it does add that extra 'utility' without having to mess around with tape etc.... but I don't feel its been spelled out well by Cactus so far.


I think that the concept of 'correct' flash exposure in terms of pure guide numbers, apertures, ISOs and distance figures is not related to 18% reflectance, and is in fact not subject to that at all . A flash exposure calculated by GN either mathematically by the user or automatically by the Flash (and indicated with Distance figures) is going to 'correctly' expose any object, any surface of any colour and reflectance , so long as the distance between the flash and that object is set right. So dark skin will be exposed correctly, light skin correctly, white snow correctly, a black cat correctly .... and all with exactly the same flash power setting !


This is because there is absolutely no metering taking place at all, no way for the objects reflective properties to affect the calculation in any way. So there is no reason to make any allowance for the objects colour or 'reflectiveness'. The flash exposure remains exactly the same and is successful no matter what object is placed in its way at the right distance. The variations and need for adjustments that you refer to only apply to flash exposures that are calculated by using reflective metering systems. The Range and Distance indicator on a dedicated system flash does not use any reflective metering to calculate flash exposure.


So on a histogram the recorded brightness tones will be accurately placed depending on the lightness and darkness of each object . Say for example we were using ISO 200, F8, and we had our subject placed at a distance of 3 metres from the flash. You would turn the flash power setting dial until 3 meters was displayed on the distance indication ..... once 3 meters is displayed you accept the power setting as shown ....that might be something like 1/8th power. You can now place a person with black skin there, take the shot and get correct exposure ...... next place a person with fair light skin there, take the shot and get correct exposure ...... the white snow you had spread around there is correctly exposed .... and the black cat you put there is correctly exposed as well ! All without changing one setting for any of those subjects!


On the histogram each subjects brightness tones will be distributed accordingly .... so the black cats tones will be down near the bottom, the white snow near the top, and the dark skin and white skin tones will be in between to the left and right of centre. Each subject was recorded with exactly the same flash exposure, in the same light level as each other, but their tones are different and therefore correctly recorded and distributed over the histogram ..... therefore 'correctly' exposed.


Of course there may be some extra creative interpretation that the photographer wants to assert .... they may prefer to deepen the dark tones of the skin more for drama, or lighten the white snow for a 'high key' look. That's the creative element, and I think that's what you are thinking of really when you are uncomfortable with the concept of 'correct' flash exposure. If you can see this rather in the terms as I've described, as in correct distribution over a scale on the histogram, then it is a perfectly comfortable concept.
07-28-2017, 11:26 AM - 1 Like   #23
Senior Member




Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 156
QuoteOriginally posted by mcgregni Quote
OK ... so you're saying that you think the X-TTL cross brand protocol is in fact being 'passed-through' the hotshoe connections between the V6II and the flash on top? That's the first I've seen reference to that functionality ..... so far I've been led to believe that it was only via the radio protocol between a transmitting V6II and a receiving V6II. Its obviously great if it is true, it does add that extra 'utility' without having to mess around with tape etc.... but I don't feel its been spelled out well by Cactus so far.
I've confirmed with Cactus that X-TTL works (or will work in the case of Pentax) in pass-through mode, so you can effectively use the V6 II as a TTL format translator on camera, whilst also getting radio control for off-camera units. In theory this would mean you could stack something like a Profoto Air transmitter for Canon atop it and get TTL from your B1/B2 lights, but their intended use is for speedlights from other flash systems rather than trigger stacking.

07-28-2017, 11:42 AM   #24
Pentaxian
mcgregni's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Surrey, England
Posts: 2,557
Original Poster
Thanks, that good to know . Its interesting isn't it .... 'TTL PassThrough' has up to now been associated with isolating the flash on top from the transmitter. The TTL signals 'pass through' as if the trigger was not there. Now the trigger is applying its control and sending X-TTL instructions through the hotshoe as well as via radio to other slaves. An interesting change in the concept .... Of course up to now it only applies to flashes and cameras from the same system.


Am I right to assume that for this to work we will be setting the 'TTL PassThrough' mode as before, a long press on the menu button ?


Bye the way, there was a post from Cactus on their forum recently that stated the Pentax version of X-TTL was '2-3 months' away.
07-28-2017, 08:43 PM - 1 Like   #25
Pentaxian
Class A's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Posts: 9,949
QuoteOriginally posted by mcgregni Quote
OK ... so you're saying that you think the X-TTL cross brand protocol is in fact being 'passed-through' the hotshoe connections between the V6II and the flash on top?
That's what I assumed, and I'm glad to read that paulster got explicit confirmation from Cactus that indeed there is a protocol translation even for the TTL pass-through mode. They could have done that for the current V6II already, but it would only have made a difference with respect to HSS; for anything else, no translation is required. So I guess there wasn't much incentive to implement protocol translation for the pass-through mode. But now that the V6II is meant to support full TTL cross-brand usage, it would seem a bit limiting to limit on-camera flashes to those that would have fully worked on the camera directly.

QuoteOriginally posted by mcgregni Quote
I think that the concept of 'correct' flash exposure in terms of pure guide numbers, apertures, ISOs and distance figures is not related to 18% reflectance, and is in fact not subject to that at all .
So how do you think the distance is calculated?
Why does it show 4m, instead of 8m, given a set of settings?

Associating a distance with a flash power and camera settings only makes sense, if one assumes some desired level of exposure. That (fixed!) level is rarely what one actually wants.

QuoteOriginally posted by mcgregni Quote
So dark skin will be exposed correctly, light skin correctly, white snow correctly, a black cat correctly .... and all with exactly the same flash power setting !
That does not make sense to me at all, because I would light all those subjects differently. If you are talking about "technically correct" exposure then, yes, of course that can be achieved in this manner, but I bet you there will be very few instances, where that technically correct exposure is what I'd want (in particular, given from where the light is coming from (virtually from the lens axis)).

QuoteOriginally posted by mcgregni Quote
This is because there is absolutely no metering taking place at all, no way for the objects reflective properties to affect the calculation in any way. So there is no reason to make any allowance for the objects colour or 'reflectiveness'.
I understand that.

There is still the notion of some flash power level assumed to be the "correct" one and that notion is based on an idea of "correct exposure" which is in turn defined by obtaining a certain amount of light from a surface with standard reflectance. If that's not the case, please explain to me how else the "correct" distance indication is calculated.

QuoteOriginally posted by mcgregni Quote
Of course there may be some extra creative interpretation that the photographer wants to assert .... they may prefer to deepen the dark tones of the skin more for drama, or lighten the white snow for a 'high key' look.
Now we are talking!

However, the adjustments you are talking about are not confined to exotic choices for weird artistic aims. In my view, almost all scenarios call for some level of adaptation. The camera (whether it is for regular exposure, flash exposure, or suggesting a "correct" distance for a manual flash level) just gives you a starting point. That starting point is rarely what one really wants and calls for adjustments.

It can be argued that it is better to have that starting point and then work with standard compensation choices for various applications, and I can see that point, but this does not mean that there is a mechanical way to achieve the "right" exposure for an image. The (technically) "correct" exposure can be provided automatically (not always when metering is involved, though), but my view is that it will almost never be the "right" exposure for an image.
07-28-2017, 08:50 PM   #26
Pentaxian
Class A's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Posts: 9,949
QuoteOriginally posted by mcgregni Quote
Am I right to assume that for this to work we will be setting the 'TTL PassThrough' mode as before, a long press on the menu button ?
The Quick Start Guide for the Sigma X-TTL version does not explicitly mention TTL pass-through activation, which is probably an indication that the long-press on the menu button will still work.

QuoteOriginally posted by mcgregni Quote
Bye the way, there was a post from Cactus on their forum recently that stated the Pentax version of X-TTL was '2-3 months' away.
That's not long enough to read and take in everything that is in your guides!
07-29-2017, 02:05 AM   #27
Pentaxian
mcgregni's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Surrey, England
Posts: 2,557
Original Poster
Well that will teach you for leaving it so late ....you should have got stuck in with all that important study a long time ago

I like the distinction between "technically" and "artistically" correct flash exposure ....and I believe that in the majority of cases a technically correct flash exposure would satisfy most people artistically also.

The technical one obviously does need a definition and scientific means to determine and programme it. Nowadays this is fairly simple and logical, with reference to the histogram. When programming a flash Distance Indication system then a mid-toned object needs to be recorded and displayed on the histogram in the appropriate position, generally a little right of centre. Once tested and set at a particular power level and distance then all the other indications follow by mathematics. Likewise, so long as this middle range is set properly then the darker and lighter tones will fall into place naturally.

The biggest practical difficulty with using range and distance indications is of course getting the distances correct without using a tape measure! And also mental factoring to allow for diffusion can be a little inaccurate. However, it is another tool that adds to the utility of a Dedicated System flash ....that's how this all started!

I'm glad that the developments with Cactus have caused you to re-consider the choice of TTL. I admit that I am very excited to try it, in particular for off camera stuff with the family when I have to move things around a lot. I'm thinking of getting a multi-flash bracket for my umbrella in order to fit the RF60s next to each other and double my power / half recycling, especially for HSS. I think the TTL metering will be very helpful in the sort of dynamic situations I often have to cope with, plus of course the V6II on the camera is preferable to a flash as controller.

Last edited by mcgregni; 07-29-2017 at 01:23 PM.
07-29-2017, 02:45 AM   #28
Veteran Member




Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Sydney
Posts: 428
Nigel, I just had a thorough read of the supplement. Very helpful. Thank you! Pentax should be paying you for that.

What do you think of the recently released Yongnuo YN585EX? Seems great value for the features it offers.

585ex Pentax | Yongnuo USA
Attached Images
   
07-29-2017, 03:34 AM - 1 Like   #29
Pentaxian
mcgregni's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Surrey, England
Posts: 2,557
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Theov39 Quote
Nigel, I just had a thorough read of the supplement. Very helpful. Thank you! Pentax should be paying you for that.
Yes, great idea! How about you guys petition them for me .... I'll settle for a K1, Grip and a couple of new flashes!

I do think the Yongnuo P-TTL model is a very good addition to the third party choices we have. I've noticed a number of members here expressing interest, in particular because of the wireless support . There's no doubt that the specs suggest very good value. I don't think we've seen enough good clear reports from owners yet, in particular concerning the P-TTL exposure accuracy or the user interface, two things that will be important to people thinking about getting one. I am hoping that we will get more user reports and reviews about both this Yongnuo model and the competing offering from Shanny as well.

The key difference between them seems to be HSS (the Shanny, on-camera only) and wireless (Yongnuo). Unfortunately neither offers both.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
af, canon, download, flash, flashes, godox, guide, hope, hss, information, lighting, nikon, pentax, pentax flash, photo studio, post, product, resource, section, strobist, support, system, thanks, triggers, users
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Pentax Flash Guide - 1st Development Thread mcgregni Flashes, Lighting, and Studio 43 09-21-2015 05:38 PM
A video I made on the k 01 to supplement photos in an art show last Friday.. dflorez Video and Pentax HDSLRs 1 06-13-2013 02:25 PM
The Film Shooters Guide to Digital - A Dummies Guide to the K5 SCADjacket Troubleshooting and Beginner Help 10 11-18-2012 04:49 PM
Yellow K-r in UK Observer's lifestyle supplement jeztastic Pentax News and Rumors 7 08-02-2011 01:27 PM
flash guide updated for k-7 built-in flash mattdm Pentax News and Rumors 4 05-26-2009 06:02 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:46 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top