[tromboads]

I'm not talking about Art here, for there is nothing artistic in technique :P

I merely defending the usages of a high flash sync :P

[ChrisA]

Did you guys read any of the links I put in?

I've read them, and I totally get the principle.

What I don't get is how 1/250 rather than 1/180 can make all that much of a difference in practice - it's less than half a stop.

What am I missing?

[jake14mw]

I've read them, and I totally get the principle.

What I don't get is how 1/250 rather than 1/180 can make all that much of a difference in practice - it's less than half a stop.

What am I missing?

.
How does being able to shoot clean at ISO 3200 rather than 2000 make a difference?
How does having 6fps vs. 5fps make a difference?
How does 16 mp vs. 12 mp make a difference?
How does having a 3 inch LCD instead of a 2.75 inch LCD make a difference?

Every incremental change makes a difference.

To answer your question specifically, if I'm taking a portrait outside of someone and have to go to 1/180 instead 1/250, that means I may need to use f6.3 instead of the 5.6 sweetspot of my portrait lens. If I'm taking pictures of a night football game, and want to use flash as fill to the ambient available to brighten things up a little, 1/180th is just too slow. Too much motion blur ghosting. 1/250 is not super in this regard, but the motion blur ghosting is tolerable. Similar but different issues with using flashes for strobing a basketball game.

Also, another limiting factor with Pentax is that they don't even allow a flash to be triggered at speeds faster than 1/180. If they don't want to upgrade their flash system, if they would AT LEAST allow us to trigger a flash at faster shutter speeds and deal with cropping out any black bars later, at least it would help. I don't understand why this should be hard.

I think Pentax has three areas where people can say that it's inferior to Canikon systems

AF performance, especially AF-C
Flash system
Lens availability and availabilty of third party accessories. Not much they can do about this, just not enough market share.

All of these are important to the photography I do. I want them to close the gaps.

[maxfield_photo]

What I don't get is how 1/250 rather than 1/180 can make all that much of a difference in practice - it's less than half a stop.

Actually it is half a stop.

There are four things you can do to reduce the amount of ambient light in an outdoor photo (ignoring for a moment 'coming back later in the day' as that's not always a viable option)

A) Reduce the ISO
B) Close down the aperture
C) Add an ND filter
D) Increase the shutter speed

When balancing flash and ambient light, choice 'D' is the only one that does not also reduce the flash's contribution, and therefore the only useful option, especially if you are already at full power on your flash.

To increase flash contribution you can:
1) Increase the output
2) Move the flash closer
3) Focus the light by zooming or add a Fresnel-type attachment.

Let's look at these. 1) is a possibility as long as you are not already at full power, but there are drawbacks. At full power the flash takes longer to recycle, even good flashes take as much as 4 seconds, an eternity when action is going on right now! It also increases the flash duration exponentially, so if your objective is to freeze motion, choice 1 is unacceptable. 2) - Moving the light closer is sometimes possible, but not always. If you're photographing, let's say, dancers outdoors, placing a lighstand close enough to get a good flash/ambient balance may result in injuries to the dancers and/or damage to your equipment. Choice 3) a Fresnel attachment can cause very harsh and unnatural light, and it may not fill your field of view, particularly if the light is already close.

So why not use HSS? Well HSS causes a huge reduction in flash power as soon as you cross the threshold, and it only gets worse from there. It basically reduces the flash's effectiveness by a factor of 4, so if you were at quarter power below 1/180, you're now a full power at 1/250th, not to mention the added problem of long recycle time, and if you were at half power at 1/180th you're now S.O.L. HSS is only useful with a good flash up to about 1/1000th, and then only if you can get the light very close. Add a softbox and you lose a stop of that light so now it's only useful at 1/250th and 1/500th.

You're right though, 1/250th is not all that different from 1/180th, but every little bit helps. Really I think if Pentax would put a 1/500th syncing DSLR out there, even an APS-C, strobists would flock to the brand, even with the antiquated flash system. It's that important to them. But the very best, and surprisingly one of the easiest solutions is what I call a "hybrid shutter", but most folks refer to as an electronic shutter. Such a camera could would really be a feather in Pentax's cap... at least for a year at which point Canon and Nikon would follow suit, unoriginal bastards.

[maxfield_photo]

So why not just sell off the inadequate stuff and buy gear without these limitations and eliminate your frustrations and go forth and make the photographs you desire? I had a similar situation with my first wife. It wasn't ever going to get better so I made a change.

You sold off your wife?!

[Ponosby Britt]

You sold off your wife?!

Illegal in the US. Got divorced, which cost me, so in a way, yes. Found an older model which has proved to be quite capable.

[ChrisA]

Actually it is half a stop.

Very true

Although... 1/180 is (very!!!) slightly less than sqrt(2) times 1/250, so technically it's less than half a stop different

But only just, I grant you

You're right though, 1/250th is not all that different from 1/180th, but every little bit helps. Really I think if Pentax would put a 1/500th syncing DSLR out there, even an APS-C, strobists would flock to the brand

Yes, agree.

But most (all?) of the similarly priced competition, and quite a bit of the much more expensive competition has a sync speed of only 1/250.

So I tend to think that the way Pentax is slated for having a slow sync speed is a touch harsh.

[Lowell Goudge]

Very true

Although... 1/180 is (very!!!) slightly less than sqrt(2) times 1/250, so technically it's less than half a stop different

But only just, I grant you


Yes, agree.

But most (all?) of the similarly priced competition, and quite a bit of the much more expensive competition has a sync speed of only 1/250.

So I tend to think that the way Pentax is slated for having a slow sync speed is a touch harsh.

if you want the ultimate in sync speed, get a 6x7 with a leaf shutter lens.

[hoanpham]

I have been waiting for this thread, long time...

[Xsalfior]

I'm a huge strobist and I ended up at one point buying a Nikon D40 for the faster sync speed but I hated how small the rear screen was. I love Pentax but I agree the low sync speed drives me bananas. I'm always planning my shoots in the evening because I cannot underexpose the sky enough and get enough power out of my flash. I play around with ND filters as much as I can to help but I would much rather play around with the shutter speed.

[DayleT]

if you want the ultimate in sync speed, get a 6x7 with a leaf shutter lens.

If your using a 6x7, then you wouldn't be using amateur (ish) speedlite type flash. It would be studio type flash, Bowens, Elinchrome, Broncolor and the like.. If so then you would not be using more than a 60th of a second as you would know that these flash types take time to get to their optimum output,(as they are best used at full power, indeed the 6x7 cameras and above are best used at f16 to f45) and can, and do incur inconsistent colour temperatures if not used at 125th and slower.. So that negates the leaf shutter (of which I haven't come across one a larger format camera that exceeded a 500th of a second)..I was a pro for 25 years and have never had any problem with flash sync speed, I think all this hullabaloo with the top flash sync speed is rooted down to, in what we call in Britain.. Operator Error..

[Lowell Goudge]

If your using a 6x7, then you wouldn't be using amateur (ish) speedlite type flash. It would be studio type flash, Bowens, Elinchrome, Broncolor and the like.. If so then you would not be using more than a 60th of a second as you would know that these flash types take time to get to their optimum output,(as they are best used at full power, indeed the 6x7 cameras and above are best used at f16 to f45) and can, and do incur inconsistent colour temperatures if not used at 125th and slower.. So that negates the leaf shutter (of which I haven't come across one a larger format camera that exceeded a 500th of a second)..I was a pro for 25 years and have never had any problem with flash sync speed, I think all this hullabaloo with the top flash sync speed is rooted down to, in what we call in Britain.. Operator Error..

I won't profess to being up on studio lighting etc. but that is not what I was looking at. I was simply looking at suggesting that the issue of maximum sync speed is best addressed by a leaf shutter in lens, not a focal plane shutter,

[dlacouture]

I never really understood this 1/250 fad... The only practical case I see is when you really have to balance a high ambient at base ISO, without closing your aperture further, and without using HSS.

And in this case, it means you work in plenty of light, so using a ND filter is possible... A simple ND2 will lead you into 1/360 territory (but, granted, it will cost you some flash power).

So, faced with this choice, well, I think I would rather spend some more dollars on a 2nd light source to compensate for the light loss, rather than wait for a higher sync speed...

EDIT: one thing that would sell like hot cakes : LCD filters!
Imagine a ND-like filter with a programmable "shutter" duration...
Wired to the flash hot-shoe, you enter the desired duration, it darkens at the end of the P-TTL communication and lighten on the flash signal, for the desired amount of time only...
Ta-daaaa, instant 1/1000 (or whatever!) shutter speed, compatible with any lens/body combo, and cheap!!!
Anyone for a kickstarter campaign?

[amoringello]

I truly don't even care if they increase shutter speed. Just don't lock the damned camera from firing a flash at higher shutter speeds. If I want to decrease exposure on part of the frame when firing at 1/500 so be it. I may very well have a specific intent for wanting that effect and will compensate for it.

1/250 is barely anything above 1/80 as far as exposure, but it does help freezing action when the flash cannot or is not desired to totally blast away ambient light. But probably not enough to warrant it as a requirement for me.

It would be nice to have 1/500 or 1/1000 but with enough flash power, not locking out flash on the camera body would be a big help. Its just senseless and stupid to do so, except maybe in full Program mode. I would like Pentax to make a 'big boy' camera and stop coddling to the lowest common denominator.

[mtb]

One more thing, which is sometimes forgotten when talking about max flash sync is the power (or maybe better to say efficency) of the flashgun. At maximum sync speed we have the most effective power from flashgun - more power, quicker recycle, etc. It is really good to have more than 1/180
I recommend you to visit THIS great article about the max flash sync.