Reading mode: Light Dark

Fools: they could have improved flash synch

Go to last post
R

Raul

Veteran Member
Messages
8,619
Solutions
1
Reaction score
953
Location
Stgo., CL
indeed.
--
"The tragedy of old age is not that one is old, but that one is young."
O.Wilde
 
Really? Without going to an electronic shutter how do you propose that they do that?

--
Mike Dawson
 
michaeladawson said:
Really? Without going to an electronic shutter how do you propose that they do that?
Click to expand...
the combined shutter of my D1x gave me 1/500. its their problem, not mine.

--
"The tragedy of old age is not that one is old, but that one is young."
O.Wilde
 
It is YOUR problem, not their and frankly not even mine - my flash can do 1/8000

In serious note to make 1/500 instead of 1/250 cost a lot, while result is subtle - mere 1 step. Hi-sync flash is answer by all manufactures. And no, I do not like electronic shutter - Nikon ditch it for good.
Raul said:
michaeladawson said:
Really? Without going to an electronic shutter how do you propose that they do that?
Click to expand...
the combined shutter of my D1x gave me 1/500. its their problem, not mine.

--
"The tragedy of old age is not that one is old, but that one is young."
O.Wilde
Click to expand...
 
I agree, the 1/250 flash sync limitation adds vexing complexity to flash photography, I wish they could rethink this somehow to make the process simpler for everyone. Reading Strobist's rejection of the D4 today, the one thing I agreed with him on was the sweet 1/800 or 1/1600 flash sync of his new non-Nikon system choice.
 
I'm not sure if the D4 market would accept the 1/1500 top shutter speed that would be caused by the move to a leaf shutter that allows the high sync speeds on the Mamiya.

Luckily Hyper sync works pretty well these days as does rear curtain sync and just putting ambient a few stops down in the hole and using your flash duration.

But yes...just as in the film days if you can justify the cost weight, low AF performance, low frame rates etc... of medium format, do it.
 
With my tests

At 1/8000 f/36.0 ISO 100 a direct image of a 17ws flash tube is perfectly exposed or 23 EV at my calcs.

I'm too tired and ready to get done with some post work so I can go out...you should be able to do the math on that
 
I should state that is with a Ranger RX using an A head
 
Now I get what you talking about - effective guide number getting smaller when in high sync mode

Of course it does! Of course true sync better. But when actually do you need to use flash with high shutter speed? As far as it going for me only in harsh lighting conditions (i.e. direct sun) where you like lit up faces. How far away you will be? Not a drama IMHO at all.
And if everything fail, put ND filter ;)
Iliah Borg said:
Setting 1/500 and normal flash mode I'm getting 3 stops more exposure compared to 1/500 at high speed mode.

--
http://www.libraw.org/
Click to expand...
 
Because you don't see the real usefulness of this nobody else should either? Is that your logic?

Anytime you are outside in sunlight you are going to be limited with what you can do with flash if the sync speed is limited to 1/250 max. What does it matter how often I shoot that way? How many times do I have to need it before you think it's a reasonable desire?

Using a ND filter helps, but only to a point. I've used a 4x ND filter outdoors with 2 SB-800 flashes mounted to a shoot-thru umbrella. I want my background underexposed by about 1 stop compared with my subject. This means I still have to shoot at f/8 or above with my D3. If I want to shoot at f/4 to blur the background I have to add another couple stops of ND. Getting kinda hard to see through the viewfinder now.

The D4 helps a bit due to the base ISO being lowered to 100.
KSV said:
Of course it does! Of course true sync better. But when actually do you need to use flash with high shutter speed? As far as it going for me only in harsh lighting conditions (i.e. direct sun) where you like lit up faces. How far away you will be? Not a drama IMHO at all.
And if everything fail, put ND filter ;)
Click to expand...
--
Mike Dawson
 
KSV said:
Now I get what you talking about - effective guide number getting smaller when in high sync mode

Of course it does! Of course true sync better. But when actually do you need to use flash with high shutter speed? As far as it going for me only in harsh lighting conditions (i.e. direct sun) where you like lit up faces. How far away you will be? Not a drama IMHO at all.
And if everything fail, put ND filter ;)
Click to expand...
An ND filter does nothing to change the ratio of flash output to ambient. It cuts down both equally, so it gives you no advantage with fill range on bright days.

I've covered events at mid day where you can't get close to the subject(s) with a flash or the group is large. Higher x-sync speeds reduce to need for large expensive flash units under these conditions.

The only advantage that an ND filter provides is it allows you to use a wider aperture for subject isolation or perhaps avoid diffraction softening on bright days when you're up against the 1/250s normal sync limit.

Steve
 
KSV said:
Now I get what you talking about - effective guide number getting smaller when in high sync mode

Of course it does! Of course true sync better. But when actually do you need to use flash with high shutter speed? As far as it going for me only in harsh lighting conditions (i.e. direct sun) where you like lit up faces. How far away you will be? Not a drama IMHO at all.
And if everything fail, put ND filter ;)
Iliah Borg said:
Setting 1/500 and normal flash mode I'm getting 3 stops more exposure compared to 1/500 at high speed mode.

--
http://www.libraw.org/
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
What would the camera makers prefer? Give you faster flash sync or have you buy a mess of SB900s using FP mode to get the same lighting power?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cP6a47BQA70
 
SteveL54 said:
KSV said:
Now I get what you talking about - effective guide number getting smaller when in high sync mode

Of course it does! Of course true sync better. But when actually do you need to use flash with high shutter speed? As far as it going for me only in harsh lighting conditions (i.e. direct sun) where you like lit up faces. How far away you will be? Not a drama IMHO at all.
And if everything fail, put ND filter ;)
Click to expand...
An ND filter does nothing to change the ratio of flash output to ambient. It cuts down both equally, so it gives you no advantage with fill range on bright days.

I've covered events at mid day where you can't get close to the subject(s) with a flash or the group is large. Higher x-sync speeds reduce to need for large expensive flash units under these conditions.

The only advantage that an ND filter provides is it allows you to use a wider aperture for subject isolation or perhaps avoid diffraction softening on bright days when you're up against the 1/250s normal sync limit.

Steve
Click to expand...
Yes, to blur ugly backgrounds, larger aperture than f16 is desired. Maybe at least f4. ND filter knocks down flash and ambient, but the flash can be brought back up with more power, while the ambient stays down as long as your image is not lit completely by the ambient (ie backlit in shadow). So ND filter does have advantage for certain scenes in sunlight, but also a hassle. Same affect as if they made iso 12.5 sensors. ISO 50 as the base iso actually would be nice.

= tommy
 
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