[WPRESTO]

I can confirm that my AF160FC works well on my K5 with my 50mm SMCA 1.4 at its closest focus.

Strange. The 160 I purchased and returned would only fire at maximum output mounted on either my K5 or K3 with an A-series macro lens attached, although with the same lens on a K20, it worked fine.

[Digitalis]

I can confirm that my AF160FC works well on my K5 with my 50mm SMCA 1.4 at its closest focus

I got exactly the same results on my Pentax K5IIs with the SMCP-A 50mm f/1.7 - even when I added a full KAF3 25mm extension tube. The AF160FC exposed correctly with P-TTL.

[manntax]

I got exactly the same results on my Pentax K5IIs with the SMCP-A 50mm f/1.7 - even when I added a full KAF3 25mm extension tube. The AF160FC exposed correctly with P-TTL.

I wish I could say the same about my unit - sadly it works correctly only with K10D - in any configuration lens/tubes/etc. as long as P-ttl is possible. K-01 overexposes the more the closer I get.

---------- Post added 01-12-15 at 04:23 PM ----------

For those who are interested - I still wait for Ricoh to get back to me with their results of tests flashes made in China and Japan. hopefully they didn't forget...

[Digitalis]

wish I could say the same about my unit - sadly it works correctly only with K10D - in any configuration lens/tubes/etc. as long as P-ttl is possible. K-01 overexposes the more the closer I get

Are you working at the same subject/camera distance when you switch from the K10 to K-01?

[manntax]

Are you working at the same subject/camera distance when you switch from the K10 to K-01?

precisely... just removing the camera from tripod and changing for another - nothing changed but camera - even settings are the same. Ricoh already acknowledged the problem and partially confirmed in their tests K-01 blown out the shots where K10D produced more or less correct image.

[BETLOG]

Ok, third flash from japan, all 3 have been made in china, i have finally managed to get one that will cycle more than once.
Faulty: 0005191
Faulty: forgot to record the serial number.
Functional: 0005641

So some quick tests:
AF160FC on K3 and K5 Comparisons

Processed in RawTherapee with 'neutral' settings and *everything* set to zero or off.
Both cameras set to matrix metering and X mode, exposure and shadow compensation off. Raw mode.
Same lens, SMC Pentax-F 50mm/2.8 Macro, manually set to minimum focus at 0.195m
Semi-supported-hand-held because I'm lazy
Flash modelling light set to on prior to all shots
Ambient light a lot lower than ISO100 and f/16 would be significantly influenced by.
The AF160FC range guide (images in previous post) specifies: ISO100 and f/16 is good for 0.1-1.0m
On-flash EV adjustment are AUTO, then AUTO-0.5, and then AUTO-1.0 EV

First image is K5 - seems to over expose on AUTO, fine on -0.5 and -1.0
Second image is K3 - seems accurate

[Digitalis]

First image is K5 - seems to over expose on AUTO, fine on -0.5 and -1.0 Second image is K3 - seems accurate

Just a question- are you using matrix metering?

[manntax]

Ok, third flash from japan, all 3 have been made in china, i have finally managed to get one that will cycle more than once. Faulty: 0005191 Faulty: forgot to record the serial number. Functional: 0005641 So some quick tests: AF160FC on K3 and K5 Comparisons Processed in RawTherapee with 'neutral' settings and *everything* set to zero or off. Both cameras set to matrix metering and X mode, exposure and shadow compensation off. Raw mode. Same lens, SMC Pentax-F 50mm/2.8 Macro, manually set to minimum focus at 0.195m Semi-supported-hand-held because I'm lazy Flash modelling light set to on prior to all shots Ambient light a lot lower than ISO100 and f/16 would be significantly influenced by. The AF160FC range guide (images in previous post) specifies: ISO100 and f/16 is good for 0.1-1.0m On-flash EV adjustment are AUTO, then AUTO-0.5, and then AUTO-1.0 EV First image is K5 - seems to over expose on AUTO, fine on -0.5 and -1.0 Second image is K3 - seems accurate

Thanks for reporting back - it appears that you finally have a good, fairly accurate unit. Minor overexposure in the range of 0.5 EV I would say is fairly common in macro.

For those interested how the problem of my flash is unfolding, I am sorry to report that after over 2 months of waiting for the results of Ricoh's testing ( testing of units made in China and Japan with all cameras, promised over the phone ) - I have never heard a word back from them. I dropped them a line two days ago - let's see if that will make them to pick the issue up again.

[manntax]

Month later - no reply from Ricoh. So far these are the promises they've made :

1) to investigate the problem of compatibility of AF160FC flash with all Pentax cameras
2) to investigate the differences in operating of flashes made in Japan and made in China
3) to reply to my email

so far it's been 3 months since their original promises (no. 1 and 2 ) , and a month since their promise to get back to me soon , after I complained about the delay so far.
Sadly, none of those were honoured and Ricoh's representative were simple ignoring the issue with their high end macro flash, that is affecting some users and flash <> camera configurations.

Let's see how much of a bad press they can afford... but I have to say that this is something I would never expect from a reputable company

[manntax]

Well I've got kind of excited seeing their reply so quickly ... hmm looks like I shouldn't have... ... I wonder what is wrong with people employed at their Technical Support if they reply an utter rubbish proving their total lack of care and even understanding ?

> Dear Mr. ....
> Thank you for contacting Ricoh Imaging.In answer to your e-mail we would
> like to provide you with the following information.
> Most likely the reason for exposure difference, when AF160FC flash is
> uesd, is that P-TTL-auto and TTL-auto modes switch automatically depending
> on camera and lens settings.
> If you are in need of further assistance, please respond to this email or
> call our technical support center.
>
>
> Sincerely,

[manntax]

Hmm.. I think I should update this , after having something like 15 min. chat with a nice guy from technical support from Ricoh.

Initially we had a small clash about whether the issue with P-TTL in K-01 is real or not. Their main reasoning was that the flash adjusts the power output according to how camera meters, and in this case the K-01 metered this way, causing severe overexposure. I was suggested to switch to the manual mode and adjust exposure from there. It was not really consistent since manual control ends at 1/16th of the full power, where in P-TTL flash goes as low as 1/64th.

Also he tried to convince me that this macro flash on a K-01 couldn't cope with distances below 50cm this one also had fallen after I pointed that the same flash works fine with K10D in distances well below 50cm, and - what's more important - the K-01 have no issues with P-TTL on AF360 Pentax flash, when used on a P-TTL off-camera cord - even in macro distances! (I tried it in macro even as close as 10-15cm to the subject !) .

So, at last I think there is somebody at Ricoh beginning to understand that there *IS* an overlooked issue with the way at least K-01 communicates with AF160 FC ring flash ( or certain production-batch of it. I was promised that issue will be investigated - so I keep my hopes up

Finally, I suggested to do the through tests of the K-01 in macro distances with both Chinese made AF160FC rings flashes , as well as AF360 Pentax flash on a P-TTL cord. The difference in how these flashes are use(ful/less) with K-01 at macro distances is striking

[BETLOG]

Excellent.
I have also had a chance to test the flash some more, and I found it rather good for general shooting of people at out to very roughly 5m, but as soon as I tried to shoot individual portraits off a school yearbook page the flash would overexpose in the extreme, making it impossible to do. I'm sure there are various factors involved that make my observations far less than a valid test, but it's apparent that exposure is an issue at distances the flash is supposed to operate at. (ie: 0.1m).
Also rare, but I noticed once or twice the flash would grossly overexpose on a generic people-at-a-couple-of-metres-posing type photo. For no apparent reason.

I am also wondering if the physical length of various lenses is a factor.
The flash's range guide no doubt quotes distance from the flash strobe itself, which classically is on top of the camera at the same subject/flash distance regardless of lens, but with the ring flash being attached to the end of the lens then this is very likely to be a highly variable factor. Particualrly as we get closer to the subject and the actual distance from strobe to subject and back to sensor plane will be proportionally very different on different lenses.

All observations in *this* post based on several days of recent use: K-3, AF160FC, SMC Pentax-FA 50mm/2.8 macro at a reunion party.

[manntax]

I have also had a chance to test the flash some more, and I found it rather good for general shooting of people at out to very roughly 5m, but as soon as I tried to shoot individual portraits off a school yearbook page the flash would overexpose in the extreme, making it impossible to do. I'm sure there are various factors involved that make my observations far less than a valid test, but it's apparent that exposure is an issue at distances the flash is supposed to operate at. (ie: 0.1m). Also rare, but I noticed once or twice the flash would grossly overexpose on a generic people-at-a-couple-of-metres-posing type photo. For no apparent reason. I am also wondering if the physical length of various lenses is a factor. The flash's range guide no doubt quotes distance from the flash strobe itself, which classically is on top of the camera at the same subject/flash distance regardless of lens, but with the ring flash being attached to the end of the lens then this is very likely to be a highly variable factor. Particualrly as we get closer to the subject and the actual distance from strobe to subject and back to sensor plane will be proportionally very different on different lenses. All observations in *this* post based on several days of recent use: K-3, AF160FC, SMC Pentax-FA 50mm/2.8 macro at a reunion party.

Sorry for late reply , somehow I missed your post.. Looks like your experience is pretty similar to all of those who found this flash to be rather problematic in macro distances. Similar your findings I also found it to be excellent for general shooting at 1-2m or further away. But as soon as I would go down to 50cm or closer it would badly overexpose , basically shooting at full power, instead of reducing the light to proper exposure (which is the main purpose of it in AUTO mode via PPTL ).

Your doubts about possible influence from lens' length can simple be answered : NO influence what so ever. As long as you stay within the focusing range of a particular macro lens, it should expose properly with P-TTL flash mode enabled. This is how my flash works on my Pentax K-10D , which is not suffering ANY ISSUES. My problems started with it when I paired this flash with Pentax K-01. Mind you I use only Pentax branded, genuine P/KA or Autofocus lenses.

Sadly RICOH representatives never got around to solve or even INVESTIGATE this issue - despite numerous calls and emails I've made. Probably lack of popularity of this rather pricey flash plays a major part in them ignoring my problems. Well let's see how long they can keep their heads buried in the sand...

[Weevil]

HI All, I know this post has been sitting here for long time (wow 6 years !), but this is the only one I could find in PF about the issue I had with my K-1 + the IRIX 150mm macro (manual focus lens) + that AF160 FG Macro Ring Flash...

every photo I tried with that lens and the flash were heavily overexposed (could probably be +5EV like some have stated here, as I had to put the lens in f367 and 1/4000s to get acceptable image in close-ups).

Does anyone can tell me what is the exact issue in a nut shell ? (sorry, when I read many technical explanations, I am getting confused)

What is the problem exactly?
the Flash (build/version)?
the Camera compability? (can it be fixed by a firmware update of some sort or not?)

has the issue been recognized by Ricoh/Pentax finally?

I am also surprised that this issue is not reported in the many revews here in the PF accessories sections...

Is there any updates about fixing this issue with the Ring Flash?

Any updated info would be great!
thanks

[termy]

maybe try 1/16 of the flash output?