In article
>d_ruether@hotmail.com (Bob Neuman) wrote:
>>In article <54ie99$qfm@nnrp1.news.primenet.com>, evance@primenet.com says...
>>>A while back, I picked up a Sunpack Auto322 Thyristor flash dirt cheap
>>>(about $15 bucks). It works fine, as far as I can tell. I have a Nikon
>>>FE2 and an EM, and I was wondering if I could use this flash with it.
>>> [.....] Can I use it? Any idea about the airspeed of an unladen swallow?
>>Personally, I wouldn't risk using this flash with the electronic Nikons -
>>it may work, or it could be a very expensive $15 flash (most newer flashes
>>switch at low voltages, but most non-TTL flashes switch at high voltage,
>>and can be a risk to the camera electronics and sync. switch.
>Umm, Bob, I've used a Sunpak Auto 311 in the hot shoe of an FE-2
>hundreds of times with no problem (in conjunction with a second flash
>connected via the PC socket). The 322 is probably equally safe IMHO.
Um, I know people who have used high-voltage switching flashes successfully
for some time, before frying their cameras... I was trying to advise someone that their $15 flash may cause expensive problems (though, it also may
not....) - better to be warned about the possibility, and make a decision, than not to be warned, I would think.....
>> BTW, the TTL
>>feature is worth paying for, especially if you do any macro or tele flash
>>work.
>Non-matrix TTL flash is, IMHO, worthless unless one only shoots
>(flashed) compositions where the center of the image is 18%
>reflective. Of course, the recently-introduced 3-D matrix-balanced
>flash system is a whole other animal indeed.
I use TTL flash (non-matrix) in my business, and in extreme macro work
(slides) quite succesfully, and I generally choose to avoid the vagaries
of matrix "guess" exposure "aids" entirely. The "3-D" matrix system might actually be worthwhile, if it worked at macro distances, though I have
seen little real (as opposed to "ad-copy" or theoretical) need for it in
my work. With tele work, TTL is also quite useful (the flash does not get quenched prematurely by nearby out-of-field objects), as is the fact that
you can change your working distances and conditions rapidly without
having to fiddle with "A" ranges on the flash and apertures on the lens
before shooting.
>>And, roughly 46.337265 mph, in level flight at sea level at 80
>>degrees F and 70% humidity....;-)
>You forgot to ask if it was an African or a European swallow...
>Hope This Annoys
Average (not matrix) swallow (type not specified in the original post),
with distance from the observer irrelevant...;-).
>Richard Shiell, ASLA, Horticultural Photographer
>>Hope This Helps
Uh, Hope This Helps.....;-)