[mbukal]

I use Pentax AF 360FGZ on K1, I take photos of family-children, socializing-traveling, celebrations in the family circle, after 10 years I would treat myself to a new flash for the new year, I have the opportunity to buy a new 360FGZ ll in the store or used (approx.2 and 1/2 year) but in good condition 540FGZ ll from a friend, for the same price new smaller or cca.2 and1/2 year old and bigger, the old AF360FGZ met all my needs (95%), reading on the net I did not find anywhere a specific recommendation why 360 or 540, supposedly 360 is much faster in recycling flashes and by functions / possibilities do not differ at all, only 540 is stronger with flash, ie it has a longer range, please help in choosing, I have a little time, between 28.12. and 31.12, thanks!

---

Last edited by mbukal; 12-24-2020 at 11:44 AM.

[stevebrot]

The difference between the two is 1.5x greater reach, 20% lower battery life, and 60g greater weight with the AF560FGZ II. Moving up to either will get you swivel, WR, metal foot, improved battery door, and LED modeling light. Both should work with your current flash for optical wireless P-TTL.


Steve

[mbukal]

The difference between the two is 1.5x greater reach, 20% lower battery life, and 60g greater weight with the AF560FGZ II. Moving up to either will get you swivel, WR, metal foot, improved battery door, and LED modeling light. Both should work with your current flash for optical wireless P-TTL.


Steve

The difference between the two is 1.5x greater reach - it's a nice increase (the range was enough for me on the AF360, but shouting range is not bad to have)
20% lower battery life - eneloop batteries work wonders (I use them, both white and black)
and 60g greater - not crucial, reportedly the size is the same as af360fgz

but

which is with the flash recycling rate in pttl (supposedly 540 is recycled 2 approx. 3 seconds longer, that would be a big problem for me,
which is with light help when focusing (flash reflection when focusing would mean a lot to me)
specifically the essential differences between them in possibilities
here on the forum 540fgz ll has a lower estimate of value than 360fgz ll

[stevebrot]

20% lower battery life - eneloop batteries work wonders (I use them, both white and black)

For NiMH, the difference is 17% lower.

Pentax AF360FGZ II Flash Review - Specifications | PentaxForums.com Reviews

which is with the flash recycling rate in pttl (supposedly 540 is recycled 2 approx. 3 seconds longer, that would be a big problem for me,

Recycle times depend heavily on flash duration (intensity) and battery current capacity. The numbers given are usually at maximum intensity. The Pentax specification for your current flash is 6 seconds* as compared to 3 seconds with the AF540FGZ II and 1.5 seconds for the less powerful AF360FGZ. In practice, either should be an improvement over your current flash.

As for the forum review ratings...consider the number of reviews for each (very few, actually), the actual scores given by each reviewer. The AF540FGZ had two very low ratings from users that I suspect did not read the manual or had a beef with the Pentax flash system in general. I think there are plenty of happy campers for both units.


Steve

* From the AF360FGZ manual, p 86.

---

Last edited by stevebrot; 12-24-2020 at 01:31 PM.

[mbukal]

stevebrot big thanks for the effort invested in describing the differences and qualities, you don't mention anything about light assistance when focusing (reflection of the flash when focusing would mean a lot to me - is it finally possible on 360ll and 540ll combined with K1, I'm close to deciding what to spend cca 300 euros, I need another small "push" for the decision 360ll new vs 540ll used, help a little more, thank you!

[C_Jones]

I know you are referring to Pentax flashes in your original post, and I have had several AF360FGZ flashes myself, them all serving me well with my Pentax cameras. I just want to mention another option in case you are interested, which is the Godox V1P for Pentax flashes. It is a very well performing and reliable light, and the power storage of the battery cartridge it uses is excellent.

I do not want to sway you unnecessarily from your original interest, but would otherwise recommend the V1P as an option. It is listed on Amazon (US) for approx. 259 USD presently.



Happy Holidays!

[DWS1]

I too couldn't tell much difference.

[stevebrot]

you don't mention anything about light assistance when focusing (reflection of the flash when focusing would mean a lot to me

I forgot that the K-1 only supports AF assist on the AF360FGZ II and AF540FGZII and not on the mk I versions. That is a nice feature to have.


Steve

[Denver]

As a footnote on batteries. I have used the enloop and been very pleased except for the price. IKEA batteries are much better priced, have tested as good or better than enloop. There are only two factories in japan turning out Nimh batteries. The specs for enloop and IKEA are identical and both are from japan. IKEA's charger charges individually and also are better priced, has more slots to charge with, and supports AA and AAA. Just food for thought and something easier on the wallet. I personally use the 540GZII on all my PTTL cameras. I have a Vivitar for TTL Pentax I use on my TTL cameras.

[West Penn]

You'll get a full stop more light from the 540II which is beneficial in greater range, when bounding light, when using high speed sync, or with modifiers. As far as recycle time goes, they're likely about equal if you consider that you'd get the same output of light from the 360II at full power as you would when using the 540II at it's 1/2 power setting (it's actually GN36 for the 360II at full power versus GN38 for the 540II at 1/2 power).

[mbukal]

You'll get a full stop more light from the 540II which is beneficial in greater range, when bounding light, when using high speed sync, or with modifiers. As far as recycle time goes, they're likely about equal if you consider that you'd get the same output of light from the 360II at full power as you would when using the 540II at it's 1/2 power setting (it's actually GN36 for the 360II at full power versus GN38 for the 540II at 1/2 power).

you mean that 540 ll will be recycled in pttl mode in the power range covering 360 ll in the same time interval, only when you need a flash over 5.5 meters 540 ll will be recycled slower

[stevebrot]

You'll get a full stop more light from the 540II

1/2 stop...the GN multiplier is 1.5 according to the spec.

My mistake...

54/10m = f/5.4
36/10m = f/3.6

A little over one stop difference.


Steve

[West Penn]

No, it's a full stop (actually a bit more than that). I'm not sure where that multiplier of 1.5 comes from, but using the respective guide number of the two flashes and calculating the corresponding f stop at a given distance clearly shows a bit over one full stop advantage to the 540II. So, at full power on the 360II the guide number is 36 and on the 540II is 54. At a distance of 9 meters with the 360II, the appropriate f stop is 4 (36 / 9 = 4). At a distance of 9 meters with the 540II, the appropriate f stop is 6 (54 / 9 = 6). From f4 to f6 is more than one stop. At half power on the 540II at 9 meters, the f stop is 4,22 (38 / 9 = 4.22).

---------- Post added 12-25-20 at 03:10 PM ----------

you mean that 540 ll will be recycled in pttl mode in the power range covering 360 ll in the same time interval, only when you need a flash over 5.5 meters 540 ll will be recycled slower

I would expect that to be the case. I have a 540II and the original 360, so when my batteries are fully charged I'll try a non-scientific comparison with these two flashes.

[West Penn]

With a fully charged set of batteries, the 540II at 1/2 power took about 2 1/2 to 3 seconds to fully charge after firing. Using the same set of batteries in the 360 (version I), it took about 4 seconds to recover after firing at full power. Nothing scientific, just counting 1001, 1002, . . . , so your results may vary.

[mbukal]

in parallel with the data provided by West Penn, 360 ll would be recycled in the same conditions within 1 second, ie currently 360 ll would be ready for a new flash - so 360 ll could follow the filling of the K1 tank with a single quick trigger without any problems, it can't AF360 as it could not even 540 ll although it is a little faster in recycling, the lack / impossibility of 360 ll would be felt after the required flash only over 5.5 meters, or I get lost somewhere in understanding,

would ask West Penn to share his experience with the LED pre-flash at 540 ll versus red light on the AF360 to help with problematic focus depending on the light/aperture or anyone else who has had the opportunity to do parallel-parallel use of both flashes or one who has experience in using Led pre-flash at 360ll ~ 540ll to help with focusing