Fools: they could have improved flash synch

[KSV]

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?

Indeed - such a drama! I have not said that I do not like to have higher sync from shutter. Of course I like to have it, as least for versatility. What I have said that it getting very expensive to produce shutter with very high sync. And I said that for my application high-sync flash is good enough compromise.

Also I love to have lower base ISO, but unfortunately it means that high ISO will be compromised. Again for my application I am happy to use ND. Ideal solution would be replaceable sensor, but IMHO we have to wait quite a few more years for this to happen.

 

[TOF guy]

Really? Without going to an electronic shutter how do you propose that they do that?

the combined shutter of my D1x gave me 1/500. its their problem, not mine.

1/500 was this with or without an electronic shutter?
--
Thierry

 

[KSV]

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.

Of course it cuts down both equally and if you within shutter sync it make no sense. But indeed it does make sense to avoid putting flash in high-sync mode where it dramatically loosing guide number.

 

[KSV]

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?

It could be marketing decision.

 

[KSV]

Broad daylight and moderate to long lenses, groups and moderate wide angle lenses, shooting at archeological sites, diving, etc.

But why do you need superfast shutter sync while diving?

 

[Iliah Borg]

But why do you need superfast shutter sync while diving?

Shallow waters, shooting up from the bottom; or movie crew bringing a lot of light with them and creating super contrast scene for somebody who is to shoot around the setting.

--
http://www.libraw.org/

 

[SteveL54]

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.

Of course it cuts down both equally and if you within shutter sync it make no sense. But indeed it does make sense to avoid putting flash in high-sync mode where it dramatically loosing guide number.

Yes, I did make that related point about an ND filter in the part of my response you cut out:

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.

If subject isolation and diffraction are not an issue there's no need to resort to an ND filter. Assuming you're already at base ISO, just close down the aperture until you're back to the max x-sync speed.

But it seems I didn't make my point clear enough that an ND filter is no substitute for the fill range advantage that a global shutter camera has over a focal plane shutter under bright light. If you can sync at 1/500s then the fill range will be 41% greater than it is at the same equivalent exposure setting using 1/250s. That's because the 1/500s shutter cuts the bright ambient light in half but does not cut the flash. (At least not very much if at all) So one can then open up the aperture or increase ISO one stop which brings the ambient back up, but increases effective flash range by one additional stop. An ND filter just can't do this.

Steve

 

[Iliah Borg]

If subject isolation and diffraction are not an issue there's no need to resort to an ND filter.

I'm afraid an ND filter will cause more softness than mild diffraction.

--
http://www.libraw.org/

 

[SteveL54]

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

Thanks for the video link. Very interesting, but 8 SB-910s would cost $4400 MSRP! And that doesn't include the other stuff used to cluster and control the group. I wonder how much I'd have to charge those surfer dudes per photo to get a decent ROI. ;-) But the results are great!

At a three stop loss in effective output that cluster of 8 speedlites operating in FP mode is the equivalent of one speedlite operating in normal x-sync mode.

However, once shutter speeds get much over 1/500s, most speedlites start suffering from reduced GN at maximum output simply because the flash duration becomes longer than the exposure duration.

Steve

 

[SteveL54]

If subject isolation and diffraction are not an issue there's no need to resort to an ND filter.

I'm afraid an ND filter will cause more softness than mild diffraction.

Yeah, I wouldn't argue that point.

Not only that but when filling full shadows you're typically shooting into the general direction of the sun and those extra two glass surfaces become a problem -- especially since they aren't shaded as effectivelly by the hood.

Steve

 

[SteveL54]

Really? Without going to an electronic shutter how do you propose that they do that?

the combined shutter of my D1x gave me 1/500. its their problem, not mine.

1/500 was this with or without an electronic shutter?
--
Thierry

The D1x had a CCD, and AFAIK it got its 1/500s x-sync capability with an electronic global shutter like the D70 et al.

Steve

 

[TOF guy]

The D1x had a CCD, and AFAIK it got its 1/500s x-sync capability with an electronic global shutter like the D70 et al.

Exactly!

The max shutter speed mechanically is something like 1/100 sec (forgot the exact number).

--
Thierry