[Dale H. Cook]

Staff note: This post may contain affiliate links, which means Pentax Forums may earn a small commission if a visitor clicks through and makes a purchase. If you would like to support the forum directly, you may also make a donation here.

---

I understand there were two types of sensor for the 283, the standard one which gives 4 Auto modes and a single full-blast Manual mode, and an optional sensor that has no Auto modes but does give a choice of manual power levels. Is that correct?

The only one I have seen is the 4-mode sensor.

[Lord Lucan]

The only one I have seen is the 4-mode sensor.

Looks like this is the variable manual power controller. Fits in the sensor socket instead of the Auto sensor I believe.
Vivitar VP-1 varipower adapter for Vivitar 283 flash. | eBay

[stevebrot]

I understand there were two types of sensor for the 283, the standard one which gives 4 Auto modes and a single full-blast Manual mode, and an optional sensor that has no Auto modes but does give a choice of manual power levels. Is that correct?

Yes, I have both. The other is not a sensor, but plugs into the same 4-pin receptacle. It is called Vari-power VP-1 and allows up to 1:32 attenuation by marked increment or continuous in a range from 1:1 through to an unmarked 1:64.

As for weight...a comparison with batteries:

• Pentax AF280T : 414g
• Sigma EF-610 DG Super : 436g
• Yongnuo YN560III : 472g
• Vivitar 283 : 494g

Yes, the Viv is the heaviest, but the Yongnou is in the same league. On the list above, each has its strengths with none able to do a full spread of how I use flash, at least not without optional accessories.

As for the foot on the 283, its construction is similar to the other three. Yes, the Yn560III has a metal foot, but has a plastic attachment the same as the rest. I think the reason why there is a market for replacements may be traced to the rough life assigned to pro tools in general and the loyalty of fans. FWIW, the replacement foot industry is still alive and well.

Considering guide numbers...I hope you don't mind my taking a somewhat deeper dive here. My experience shooting with the Viv 283 has been that is has coverage and power similar to the YN560III, with the AF280T being respectably powerful, but not in the same league. Based on published marketing specs, the Sigma in the list above is the most powerful at max followed by the Yongnuo. However, when normalized for comparable coverage, the four run like this:

• AF280T : 28(m), ~40mm FF (33° vertical 48° horizontal) *
• Viv 283 : 36(m), 43° vertical 60° horizontal (~31mm FF)
• YN560III : 30(m), 28mm FF (46° vertical 65° horizontal)
• EF-610 DG Super : 35(m), 28mm FF (46° vertical 65° horizontal)

Note the coverage for the AF280T. This is far short of an apples-to-apples comparison, but at the very least shows that published GNs are often not an appropriate basis for comparison without a few qualifiers. To be honest, I was surprised. I did not expect the Viv to equal the Sigma at similar coverage. Of course, there is always the accuracy of the guide numbers themselves. For that I would need a flash meter.


Steve

* Determined against blank wall to point of visible vignette (24mm APS-C) with zero vignette at 28mm on APS-C. Coverage for the AF280T has been variously stated from a wide of 28mm to as long as 50mm. The manual indicates improved performance with the wide angle adapter at 35mm, so maximum coverage without of about 40mm is appropriate and consistent with my quick test. With the WA adapter, coverage increases to 24mm with a published drop in GN to 14(m).

[Lord Lucan]

Of course, there is always the accuracy of the guide numbers themselves. For that I would need a flash meter.

You could take pictures of a blank wall, preferably 18% grey or otherwise have a grey card in the picture. Stand say 20ft (if you are in the USA, otherwise 6m ) from the wall, put the unit on maximum manual power, camera at ISO 400, and aperture according to the nominal GN, which for example would be F11 (near enough) for the Viv 283. Then take pictures at F11 and a stop or two up and down on the lens in half stop intervals. Repeat with any other flash units you own.

You can then compare the resulting shots and conclude if the maker's GN is true or not, and if not by how much - eg by how much more the aperture needed to be opened to get the grey correct. At least you can compare the different units this way, even if the method is not as accurate as a flash meter.

[stevebrot]

You could take pictures of a blank wall, preferably 18% grey or otherwise have a grey card in the picture.

Good idea. The RGB value for an 18% gray card is 124,124,124 (#7C7C7C).


Steve

[Lord Lucan]

Looking at the Vivitar 283 (I have sight of the manual) there a feature that the auto sensor can be removed and put on the camera hotshoe, with a connecting lead between to carry the trigger and quench signals (presumably). The given purpose is that the flash can be located at a distance from the camera for better lighting effects.

However, I don't understand why the sensor needs to be on the camera for this. In simple cases, the camera needs a certain illumination of the subject. In Auto mode, as long as the flash sensor is aimed at the subject and the settings (ie aperture selection) of the camera and flash unit correspond, then the flash unit will give that illumination. Within reason, it makes no difference where the sensor is, as long as it is aimed at the subject.

Moreover, I can envisage edge cases where it is certainly better for the sensor to remain on the flash, even if the flash is separate from the camera. One is if you were taking a head portrait with deliberate strong side lighting from the flash, as below. If the sensor were on the camera it would try to normalise the average lighting over the face, and therefore over-expose the side that is lit. But if the sensor remained on the flash itself, that side of the head would be correctly lit. An extreme case would be rim lighting from behind the subject, when the flash would be giving full output in a futile effort to try to illuminate the front of the face as seen by the sensor on the camera. And everything in between.

I don't know if the lead that you get with the remote sensor holder is long enough for those set-ups anyway.

Of course the same issues occur in these situations with TTL flash control of a flash unit off the camera, but nothing can be done about that unless your flash unit is old enough to be capable of being switched from TTL to self-sensing Auto.

The only use I can see for shifting the sensor from the flash unit to the camera is if you are holding the flash unit up like a torch, like the Statue of Liberty, (as some photogs do I'm told) because then the sensor cannot be guaranteed to remain accurately aimed at the subject. Pentax used to sell a "Hot Shoe Grip" for the purpose. Never done it myself, I'd be worried about dropping the camera with only one hand to hold it and press the shutter .

Am I missing something here?

[stevebrot]

However, I don't understand why the sensor needs to be on the camera for this.

Illuminance to the camera is what counts. One of the shortcomings of "auto" flash for off-camera use is that the flash to subject distance must be the same as the camera distance. Moving the detector back to the camera solves that problem.

Interestingly, Pentax could have implemented an off-camera wired '"auto" solution for its TTL flash using an on-camera detector, but with no need to have anything plugged into the flash. The foot contacts already provide the means to signal "quench".

Added: The Remote Sensor Cord accessory does not have to be positioned on the camera. It can receive sync from a wireless trigger or cabled connection.


Steve

---

Last edited by stevebrot; 12-18-2020 at 06:38 PM.

[stevebrot]

Of course the same issues occur in these situations with TTL flash control of a flash unit off the camera, but nothing can be done about that unless your flash unit is old enough to be capable of being switched from TTL to self-sensing Auto.

Which is why TTL flash requires flash EC to be practical for many lighting setups and why TTL is such a bother. Similar is true for flash automation in general. That is why I am puzzled by the efforts of many members on this site to configure multi-flash radio wireless configurations for P-TTL. More advanced lighting such as the chiaroscuro in your example is as much or more difficult to tune using TTL as with radio controlled manual flash.


Steve

[hjoseph7]

I have 2 Vivvitar 283's and 2 Vivitar 285's . One of my 285's is the newer version that some company under the name of Vivitar tried to reintroduce to the market. The newer version pales in comparison to the older version when it comes to quality. The plastic is more flimsy and the lights in the back make the flash look like a Christmas Tree. Those lights are so annoyingly bright that I had to put some masking tape over them. The older models are classics ! Really well made and rugged. They still sell color filter kits and other accessories for them on eBay if you are lucky enough to find them.

Why you say ? I mean there are much better flash units on the market these days. That is true but I got these dirt cheap and they are very reliable . The only thing you have to remember is to remove the batteries from the flash before storing them, otherwise the contacts in the battery case get corroded (turn green) and you won't be able to use the flash anymore. Amazingly you can still get brand new battery cases on Amazon and elsewhere if that were to happen.

[Lord Lucan]

The older models are classics ! Really well made and rugged. They still sell color filter kits and other accessories for them on eBay if you are lucky enough to find them.

Your point about accessories goes for most of the old system flash units (or indeed cameras). Very often you can get an entire outfit "For spares or repair" very cheap because the flash itself does not work, but it comes with leads, adaptors, filters etc and the whole lot is cheaper than buying the accessories individually.

Why you say ? I mean there are much better flash units on the market these days. That is true but I got these dirt cheap and they are very reliable .

The prices of new camera branded units (or even used recent models) is a long way up the "not worth it" curve IMHO. I am not a fan of auto-everything anyway. Moreover, some of the independent brands seem to be going out of business (Metz, Cactus). Meanwhile Ebay etc has loads of quality older stuff if you know what to look for, being sold for peanuts or simply failing to find a buyer.

The only thing you have to remember is to remove the batteries from the flash before storing them .... Amazingly you can still get brand new battery cases on Amazon and elsewhere if that were to happen.

The battery advice goes for anything that takes batteries. Don't buy from Ebay unless they show a photo of a clean battery compartment, and don't be afraid to message the seller to send you a photo if they don't show one. I recently bought a non-working flash unit really cheap just for the battery holder, just because I wanted a spare one; as a bonus it came with the users manual (which I did not previously have) and a couple of sync leads. The sync leads are special to that flash unit and I could probably sell each of them for more than I paid for the lot, if I could be bothered.

[builttospill]

Several here have commented they are afraid to use the 283 on their DSLRs. The 283 was my first flash used with my K1000 long ago. When I bought my K10D new, I tested the output volts in the 283. It was high, but upon discharge of the flash the output was approaching 600 volts through the foot. It's a great flash and still works perfectly today.

I bought a Wein safe sync, and would recommend them to anyone with a 283. I bought mine from Adorama about the time I bought the K10D but couldn't find it on their site today. Here's the link for it at B&H: Wein Safe-Sync Hot Shoe to Hot Shoe with PC 990-560 B&H Photo