Reading mode: Light Dark

Idiots decided no TTL for K10D & No MacroFlash!!

Go to last post
C

corlissnc

Leading Member
Messages
581
Reaction score
3
Location
Mansfield USA, MA, US
Not my first time looking for one -- just did it again and I come up with NOTHING. My kids are all grown up, no grandkids, landscape around here is not impressive (I live in flatlands of Massachusetts where there are no panoramas, canyons or mountains). I like to take macro photos and have to do it with available light. Darned lucky I didn't buy a ringflash for my istD before I got my K10D because there never has been and may never be a ringflash in the whole world that will work with PTTL which is all the K10D is compatable with. Because some idiot decided to not include support for TTL on the K10D.

Furthermore, Pentax also decided to stop production of their own AF-140C ringlash --- a really nice unit but no longer available because it only supports TTL and not PTTL. Everybody shows it as on backorder and you know it'll never be available ---- even if it was available ---- wouldn't work on a K10D.

And NOBODY else makes one that has PTTL --- so if you want ring/macro flash and you have a K10D, yer screwed! You'd have thought that Pentax would have planned to do a simple revamp of the AF-140C and quickly added PTTL support to it and shipped them out. They bend over backwards to make the new SLRS compatible with all the old lenses but when it comes to flash they make an impossible situaton. I doubly ticked off because I spent $400 for my Metz 54MZ-4 with the 3702 adaptor for Pentax which supports TTL on my istD but will not work on the K10D except in automatic mode and Metz seems not to care about revamping the adaptor to support PTTL.

So, to my knowledge, there are only two standard flashes in the world that work with the K10D's PTTL and Pentax makes them both the 360 and the 540. And absolutely NO ring/macro flash from anybody that will work on a K10D --- not even from Pentax --- because they do not care about giving the enthusiast the ability to use the camera with a ring/macro flash ---- so yer screwed! Least they could do is make an announcement that they are nearing the release of a PTTL compatible unit.

There, my rant is over --- sorry, but after all my time searching on the internet --- more than once, I just felt like ranting.
 
HERE, HERE but that's whats giving my DS the after market value right now. If not, it would be a $100 camera.

Dave
 
Hi there:

Pentax for some inexplicable reason has always been behind C* and N* when it comes to flash of any kind. Why this has been this way since the '70's is anyones guess.

Perhaps to avoid a price war Pentax agreed to stay an enthusiast camera company rather than one that caters to professionals needs.

Regards,
GregT
--
F8 and be there.
 
Duct Tape - what would the world be without it!!! :-) A shame that w/a name like Pentax that is the (or a) solution.
Bob
--
BobNIK
 
It's all part of the great Japanese corporate conspiracy. Pentax is actually owned by the Asahi Duct Tape Company. The lack of a ring flash is part of their plans to increase duct tape sales :-)
bobmax said:
Duct Tape - what would the world be without it!!! :-) A shame
that w/a name like Pentax that is the (or a) solution.
Click to expand...
I did hear a rumor that Promaster is working on a P-TTL module for their flashes. One would hope it would also be compatible with their ring flash.

-Eric
 
Promaster advertised an "Award Winning" macro flash for PTTL, it was said to be great, I read all about it over at Lum Landscape last year. I tried to buy it, mailed Promaster, called numbers, wrote letters....never heard a word. Would have been nice.
--
'This is more serious than I thought.....but it is still fun!
http://www.pbase.com/rupertdog Take a look- It's Free!
 
I still like shooting w/my K10D. Nice size (great for business travel) - light - well made - comfortable - good interface - etc. But this just ultimately points to the fact that whether an "enthusiast" or "Pro" body, Pentax is just embarrassingly behind the pack from a "System offerings and versitility standpoint".

I'd include in that Pentax "readily available" lens offerings, flash "system", and related accessories. Not only is it not up to Canon or Nikon but it is even behind Sony and Olympus.... and probably behind Sigma if you take into account the "Sigma" brand in it's entirity. Yet Pentax is one of the original primo SLR's from the film days....

As noted, I enjoy my K10D but am simply amazed at how slow Pentax is at coming up to speed in the System Arena... we are not talking reinvention of the wheel... the technology exists and has for ages...

Bob
--
BobNIK
 
These makeshift arrangements are all fine to a point -- but the units I've lusted after have 4 flashtubes which can be fired together, in pairs or just one, so you can get evenly lit shots or modelled light shots --- and I do not agree with one poster's comment that macro flash photography is more along the lines of professional photography as opposed to enthusiast photography --- I think the pros are all out there doing photojournalist, studio work, etc. --- it's the enthusiast who wants to get the pics of bugs and flowers in his/her backyard --- Pentax is making enthusiast cameras so where is the TTL support so we can buy a 3rd party macro/ring flash or where (at least) is the Pentax ringflash that supports the PTTL which allow us K10D owners to have some fun with bugs and flowers. And they already have that nice AF-140C which could be out there right now, revamped with PTTL support and on the shelves --- instead they got nothing! And I'd have shelled out $385 for it ---- they lost out!
 
Wish the K10D had ttl flash for macro. It doesn't. Wish Pentax had a P-ttl ring flash. They don't - yet. One reason The DS still hangs around in my bag. A good macro flash bracket, ala John Shaw, will do about anything a ring light will unless we are talking an inch or two away from subject. John Shaws CLOSEUPS IN NATURE was done without a ring flash. Not correct to say macro can't be done without ring light. K10D wireless flash even makes it easier. Add a small sofbox/flash diffuser and viola. Just look at the shots mousehill posts here. Don't remember seeing any ring flash. The real crime Pentax commited was discontinuing the 200 macro! I would trade the ring flash for it any day.
thanks
--
barondla
 
corlissnc said:
Not my first time looking for one -- just did it again and I come
up with NOTHING. My kids are all grown up, no grandkids, landscape
around here is not impressive (I live in flatlands of Massachusetts
where there are no panoramas, canyons or mountains). I like to take
macro photos and have to do it with available light. Darned lucky
I didn't buy a ringflash for my istD before I got my K10D because
there never has been and may never be a ringflash in the whole
world that will work with PTTL which is all the K10D is compatable
with. Because some idiot decided to not include support for TTL on
the K10D.
Click to expand...
It is not an idiot who decided not to support TTL flash. It is probably a bean counter who did that. Removing TTL flash support saves cost! A plus! Removing TTL flash support also forces people to buy P-TTL flashes. Another plus! These decisions help increase profits. They are definitely not idiotic decisions.
corlissnc said:
Furthermore, Pentax also decided to stop production of their own
AF-140C ringlash --- a really nice unit but no longer available
because it only supports TTL and not PTTL. Everybody shows it as
on backorder and you know it'll never be available ---- even if it
was available ---- wouldn't work on a K10D.
Click to expand...
Hardly anybody will buy an AF-140C ringflash because there are alternative, and often better, TTL flashes available. Pentax will probably manufacture a P-TTL macro flash sooner or later, and it will likely be the only P-TTL macro flash around for a little while, until Sigma or Promaster markets one supporting P-TTL.
corlissnc said:
And NOBODY else makes one that has PTTL --- so if you want
ring/macro flash and you have a K10D, yer screwed! You'd have
thought that Pentax would have planned to do a simple revamp of the
AF-140C and quickly added PTTL support to it and shipped them out.
Click to expand...
Not really. It took Nikon a whole year before it marketed an i-TTL macro flash. Pentax is a smaller company, so I am not surprised there is no P-TTL macro flash yet.
corlissnc said:
They bend over backwards to make the new SLRS compatible with all
the old lenses but when it comes to flash they make an impossible
situaton. I doubly ticked off because I spent $400 for my Metz
54MZ-4 with the 3702 adaptor for Pentax which supports TTL on my
istD but will not work on the K10D except in automatic mode and
Metz seems not to care about revamping the adaptor to support PTTL.
Click to expand...
Just keep using your *ist D.
corlissnc said:
So, to my knowledge, there are only two standard flashes in the
world that work with the K10D's PTTL and Pentax makes them both the
360 and the 540.
Click to expand...
Not really. Sigma makes a P-TTL flash too.
corlissnc said:
And absolutely NO ring/macro flash from anybody
that will work on a K10D --- not even from Pentax --- because they
do not care about giving the enthusiast the ability to use the
camera with a ring/macro flash ---- so yer screwed! Least they
could do is make an announcement that they are nearing the release
of a PTTL compatible unit.

There, my rant is over --- sorry, but after all my time searching
on the internet --- more than once, I just felt like ranting.
Click to expand...
Why waste your breath? Just use the *ist D you have. If you don't have one, then you can still buy a new one for $400 plus shipping from Cameta Auctions. This is a terrific deal because the *ist D never sold for this little before the K10D was released. I have the K10D to thank for the price drop on the *ist D. :)
 
It wasn't an idiot who decided not to fit the K10D with old style TTL flash. It was a group of engineers who found that it was both difficult to implement in conjunction with the issues of a shiny sensor, a moving sensor for image stabilization, and found it didn't work particularly well anyway.

But you don't need a TTL flash ringlight to have the same type of light source and do macro work. Take a look at the Digi-slave L-Ring Ultra II LED Ring light:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details&Q=&sku=365518&is=REG

Continuous light so you can see what you're doing as you arrange your subject, variable power, full or partial ring illumination, full ambient TTL metering with the entire shutter speed range. More versatile and flexible than a ring flash.

Get over it and move on to new, better ideas in macro illumination.

Godfrey
 
Heinrich Lohmann said:
I like to keep things simple and just use the onboard flash and
diffuse it. On the two samples here I just used a double layer of
tissue paper loosely taped to the front of the flash.
Click to expand...
Remarkable examples, Heinrich! Love the second one most. Shows what can be done even with on board flash if used expertly! :-)

--
Phil

GMT +1
 
Godfrey said:
It wasn't an idiot who decided not to fit the K10D with old style
TTL flash.
Click to expand...
That's right - A pennycounter, I have to agree with Anastigmat there (a first for me?)
Godfrey said:
It was a group of engineers who found that it was both
difficult to implement
Click to expand...
Read: Too expensive. And undesirable because having TTL would not make people buy new overpriced flash gear.
Godfrey said:
in conjunction with the issues of a shiny sensor,
Click to expand...
From my own TTL experiences on the DS of several thousand TTL flash shots, this is pretty close to an urban myth, especially when compared to all these complains about P-TTL not working perfectly, either.
Godfrey said:
a moving sensor for image stabilization,
Click to expand...
I really don't see how this will be a problem. As long as the TTL sensor "sees" only the reflective part of the IR/AA filter, things should be ok.

Besides, preflash was introduced for film cameras, where we don't have any of these issues, but cost reduction was always important. (I'm not saying P-TTL has no advantages, of course it has them, but so does TTL.)
Godfrey said:
and found it didn't work particularly well anyway.
Click to expand...
And many TTL users found it works well. It is especially useful for pre-A attachments, which are not uncommon for macro.
Godfrey said:
But you don't need a TTL flash ringlight to have the same type of
light source and do macro work.
Click to expand...
It surely isn't "the same type of light source". I haven't yet seen any convincing shots with these things. Also, their range is limited, they might be good for setups with short working distance (a reversed 28mm for example), but put them on a 100mm or 180mm macro lens and it won't be fun anymore. And the price is pretty steep, too, considering what you get for it...

--
'I only trust those photos I have faked myself.' (Me, 2007)
http://www.jensroesner.de/
--=! Condemning proprietary batteries since 1976 !=--
 
Well, there are the Promaster P-TTL ringflash and the "normal" Sigma P-TTL flashes and the "normal" Promaster P-TTL flashes and the "normal" Soligor P-TTL flashes. The Sigma P-TTL ringflash is rumoured for years, so I bet it won't be available for still some time...

Have you had a look at using a normal flash with a diffusor/bouncer and a side-mount flash bracket? This will give you nice (P-TTL) flash with (IMO) nicer lighting for most subjects than a normal ringflash would do. Now, having a ringflash with multiple, individually adjustable flash bulbs, this is kinda nice, but these cost a small fortune and are less versatile for normal shooting than a normal flash on a bracket with bouncer.

You could experiment with your Metz: If you use it on Auto or Metz's SmartAutio and you use it on a flash bracket so that the sensor eye sees the subject, this could work okay.

Some info on flash, it isn't all bad...
http://www.jr-worldwi.de/photo/flash_technique.html

Cheers
Jens

--
'I only trust those photos I have faked myself.' (Me, 2007)
http://www.jensroesner.de/
--=! Condemning proprietary batteries since 1976 !=--
 
Godfrey said:
It wasn't an idiot who decided not to fit the K10D with old style
TTL flash. It was a group of engineers who found that it was both
difficult to implement in conjunction with the issues of a shiny
sensor, a moving sensor for image stabilization, and found it
didn't work particularly well anyway.
Click to expand...
Thank you for explaining that. I knew there had to be a logical reason...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top