[switters]

I received my AF540 yesterday and had a chance to take several test shots in P-TTL mode. I noticed the same underexposure / inconsistency problems reported by Entropy.

I have 13 days to try to figure this out. In the mean time, I'm wondering whether the Sigma 500 Super or the upcoming Sigma 530 Super would be a better choice for P-TTL usage? Has anyone here had the chance to compare the results between the 500 Super and AF540 in P-TTL mode?

Thanks,
Chris

[jfdavis58]

A closed mind is a waste of time.

Start with the manual; test shots; a notebook...

I received my AF540 yesterday and had a chance to take several test shots in P-TTL mode. I noticed the same underexposure / inconsistency problems reported by Entropy.

I have 13 days to try to figure this out. In the mean time, I'm wondering whether the Sigma 500 Super or the upcoming Sigma 530 Super would be a better choice for P-TTL usage? Has anyone here had the chance to compare the results between the 500 Super and AF540 in P-TTL mode?

Thanks,
Chris

[switters]

A closed mind is a waste of time.

Thanks for the cryptic and not very helpful reply. I already did exactly what you suggest for two hours last night. Read the manual, took 50+ test shots, compared the exposures in-camera to RAW converter, tried several metering modes, different FEC and EC values, etc.

And what I'm saying is that the AF540 is 1) inconsistent, and 2) often underexposes. What I'd like to know is how the Sigma 500 Super performs for people in P-TTL.

No closed mind here. Just a simple question.

And one more to add: I'm assuming it's not possible to use the Sigma's in wireless mode. Is that correct?

[Dieni]

And one more to add: I'm assuming it's not possible to use the Sigma's in wireless mode. Is that correct?

No its not correct, with the latest firmware for the DG Super, Sigma have now managed to get wireless flash too working.

[fwbigd]

I noticed the same underexposure / inconsistency problems reported by Entropy.



Thanks,
Chris

I know nothing about the Sigma flash. However, I have two 540s, and shoot in the P-TTL using the K10D set to the spot metering mode all the time with excellent results. After hearing about the underexposure/inconsistency problem I tried shooting in the matrix and average modes. Bingo the underexposure/inconsistency problem was there. Switched back to the spot metering mode and the problem went away.

[switters]

I know nothing about the Sigma flash. However, I have two 540s, and shoot in the P-TTL using the K10D set to the spot metering mode all the time with excellent results. After hearing about the underexposure/inconsistency problem I tried shooting in the matrix and average modes. Bingo the underexposure/inconsistency problem was there. Switched back to the spot metering mode and the problem went away.

Thanks for the tip. I'll try this and see how it goes.

How has this technique affected your ambient exposures of the background? It seems to me that if you spot meter against a subject that is much darker than the background, the subject may be properly exposed but the background would blow out. Likewise, if you're spot metering a subject that is somewhat more brightly lit than the background, it seems the background would go dark. That could be okay, I guess, as I could just decrease the shutter speed in manual to get more ambient light in without affecting flash/subject exposure.

[jfdavis58]

Really, I'm surprised; a whole two hours?!?!

Man, I'm impressed!

That must be, what??? Ninety minutes more than the source you cited?

Some time back, just to persuade myself that such problems did or did not exist, I burned through four complete discharges of my camera batteries and countless sets of flash batteries testing my pair of K10s, a pair of 540s and a triplet of 360's. For grins I watch my daughter burn through about half that much energy with her K10/360. Then I repeated the mess with a K100 and an *ist-DL.

I dog-eared and heavily annotated a copy of both flash manuals and the associated camera manuals that I downloaded and printed--singled sided. I'm still not satisfied that that was exhaustive.

I found no problems that couldn't be fixed with a simple adjustment of the nut behind the viewfinder.

I figure it took a bit more than two hours; I'd be really impressed if you managed to 'catch-up', then you could say you did exactly what I suggested and I'd gladly refrain from uttering my big "GUFFAW!" or perhaps one of my equally obnoxious, "HHRUMMPHS!"

Thanks for the cryptic and not very helpful reply. I already did exactly what you suggest for two hours last night. Read the manual, took 50+ test shots, compared the exposures in-camera to RAW converter, tried several metering modes, different FEC and EC values, etc.

And what I'm saying is that the AF540 is 1) inconsistent, and 2) often underexposes. What I'd like to know is how the Sigma 500 Super performs for people in P-TTL.

No closed mind here. Just a simple question.

And one more to add: I'm assuming it's not possible to use the Sigma's in wireless mode. Is that correct?

[switters]

I don't want to get into an argument here. There are many other people on the forums that have reported flash exposure problems with the 540 & K10D, so clearly I'm not alone.

What's more, I used my Canon 20D and 430EX nearly every day in e-TTL and manual mode without a single complaint. The exposures were as I expected them to be almost every time.

Why should I have to go through what you went through to get proper exposures in P-TTL? Frankly I have neither the time nor the inclination. Isn't the whole point of P-TTL to make exposing with flash a whole lot faster and easier than it was in manual, automatic or even TTL modes? And since I was able to get the Canon system figured out in about half a day, why is it unreasonable for me to expect Pentax to work in a similar fashion?

No, it isn't unreasonable. Pentax simply isn't up to par with Nikon and Canon in their TTL capability. I've seen many complaints both here and on DPReviews. So you can keep your GUFFAW to yourself!

[fwbigd]

Thanks for the tip. I'll try this and see how it goes.

How has this technique affected your ambient exposures of the background? It seems to me that if you spot meter against a subject that is much darker than the background, the subject may be properly exposed but the background would blow out. Likewise, if you're spot metering a subject that is somewhat more brightly lit than the background, it seems the background would go dark. That could be okay, I guess, as I could just decrease the shutter speed in manual to get more ambient light in without affecting flash/subject exposure.

You are correct about the background. I shoot mostly portraits so my real concern is in getting the subject exposed correctly. I try to meter off white or neutral colors (gray or light blue). If I shoot off white I set the flash one stop plus. If I meter off gray or light blue I set the flash up by 1/3 stop. If I meter off black I turn the flash down by one. This is something that I learned at a John Shaw workshop. He calls it the color zone method

[Chuck Lee]

I just got a DG Super from Sigma4less. Works flawlessly. Only one issue. After an important shoot coming up in the next two weeks it'll have to go to Sigma for a firmware upgrade to support wireless. Advice: Check with Sigma for the firmware initiation date and ask the reseller to confirm the date of flash in question. Sigma does not pay for shipping. I no longer got a bargain buying at Sigma4less.

Waaaa

[SupremeMoFo]

Really, I'm surprised; a whole two hours?!?!

Man, I'm impressed!

That must be, what??? Ninety minutes more than the source you cited?

*rant snip*

Uh... settle down? The OP wasn't rude in asking his question, and I agree with them that it's perfectly reasonable for a product that is meant to be able to work without any assistance for various settings to get it right every time! I mean, sure work with manual settings if you like - I've spent the last few days shooting in full manual mode on the K10D (nothing to do with a flash) because it underexposing so badly (resolved now), got some good photos but it's a right pain in the arse.

Switters, did the spot metering help?

[jfdavis58]

I don't want to get into an argument here. There are many other people on the forums that have reported flash exposure problems with the 540 & K10D, so clearly I'm not alone.

Actually what you don't want is to stand alone, to be unique, at the very least to run at the head of the pack. As to the argument, whose arguing? Forums are about discussion,; this is a discussion.

There are a handful of loud forum citizens who have a problem with virtually every piece of new equipment; and an equal number of groupies who think that whining and band bashing actually improve their own lack of talent and technique. Statistically, these number less than statistical error!

What's more, I used my Canon 20D and 430EX nearly every day in e-TTL and manual mode without a single complaint. The exposures were as I expected them to be almost every time.

Stick with things you can understand.

Why should I have to go through what you went through to get proper exposures in P-TTL? Frankly I have neither the time nor the inclination. Isn't the whole point of P-TTL to make exposing with flash a whole lot faster and easier than it was in manual, automatic or even TTL modes? And since I was able to get the Canon system figured out in about half a day, why is it unreasonable for me to expect Pentax to work in a similar fashion?

The Pentax is not philosophically similar to either Canon or Nikon; neither in form or in function. It doesn't lead, it follows the photographer direction. It's very similar to having someone hold your hand while you cross the street VS crossing by yourself.

What I 'went through' has been considered by some to be a normal learning and growing process. As to Canon or Nikon being 'simpler', I repeat "Stick with things you can understand."

No, it isn't unreasonable. Pentax simply isn't up to par with Nikon and Canon in their TTL capability. I've seen many complaints both here and on DPReviews. So you can keep your GUFFAW to yourself!

As to unreasonable-that fault is entirely on the side of the whiners and bashers. Like you, they have provided little or no credible evidence, nothing approaching a definitive study and not so much as a testable postulate let alone a full blown hypothesis. No it shouldn't be rocket surgery or brain science, the flash is, after all, a simple device.

Still, I assert, the average person will need to spend more than a couple of hours and a pop more than a few frames to learn it's intricacies. And a whole lot more to qualify such sweeping and banal assertions as yours. Can you provide evidence that you are something extra-ordinary and exempt from my assertion?

Until such a time I will withdraw as there is little to discuss in this thread---moving along, not much here.

See, not a single "Guffaw".

[switters]

John,

I am so deeply grateful that someone with such a superior understanding of the intricacies of the Pentax system, and life in general, deigned to reply to the errant and ignorant wonderings of an obvious neophyte like myself. Alas, this glorious bath in the light of knowledge was never destined to last long for me, as your time and effort are much too precious to be wasted so indiscriminately.

I can only hope that some trifle of wisdom percolates down to me from the many layers of knowledge, life experience and wisdom which separate us. Someday, perhaps, I may glimpse even a shred of your enlightenment.

Chris

P.S. I have rarely, if ever, seen arrogance elevated to such an art form. Bravo!

[switters]

Uh... settle down? The OP wasn't rude in asking his question, and I agree with them that it's perfectly reasonable for a product that is meant to be able to work without any assistance for various settings to get it right every time! I mean, sure work with manual settings if you like - I've spent the last few days shooting in full manual mode on the K10D (nothing to do with a flash) because it underexposing so badly (resolved now), got some good photos but it's a right pain in the arse.

Switters, did the spot metering help?

I have found spot metering to be helpful in many situations. Especially when photographing people where there are ANY light or dark areas in the background. With my Canon, center-weighted metering would take care of that situation nicely, but interestingly enough I haven't noticed much difference between center-weighted and evaluative metering on the K10D.

I'm going to give the 540 another week, as I am still getting used to the metering and exposure of the K10D as well. But I think I'll return it before the deadline and wait for the Sigma 530 Super in September to give that a try. I've heard mostly good reports of the Sigma 500 series regarding exposure.

[switters]

I just got a DG Super from Sigma4less. Works flawlessly. Only one issue. After an important shoot coming up in the next two weeks it'll have to go to Sigma for a firmware upgrade to support wireless. Advice: Check with Sigma for the firmware initiation date and ask the reseller to confirm the date of flash in question. Sigma does not pay for shipping. I no longer got a bargain buying at Sigma4less.

Waaaa

Glad to hear it. I think I'll wait for the Sigma 530 Super in September. I'm not certain, but I'd assume all of those will come "Pentax wireless ready" since they're new units.