flash frustration - SF24D

[menos I M6]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The SF24d chapter has a good ending.

 

Today, I swapped the SF24D against a AF58 and I am quite happy with it's performance compared to the former flash ;-) (how could one seriously compare them ?).

 

Getting to know this flash now during the next weeks.

The good thing about a swivel flash is, that you can turn the head away, if you blast your subject due to to high minimum flash power.

This might be my reason no. 1, why I did not get along with the SF24D.

 

The operation is a lot better, despite every important setting goes over one button instead of dedicated buttons (not exactly ergonomic, this approach - the reason, I actually choose the SF24D over the 58 yesterday ;-) ).

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[pico]

Today, I swapped the SF24D against a AF58

 

Does that unit have high-speed sync?

[menos I M6]

Does that unit have high-speed sync?

 

It does (called HSS function in Leica language), but the manual states, it is only compatible with the Leica R9.

 

I suppose though, that it might work as well with the S2.

A pity, it doesn't work with the M.

 

A side question: the flash cites firmware v1.1 on start up.

I could not find any info on firmware downloads and upgrades. Is this considered a dead technology or is it a "Leica service only" feature?

 

The SF58 is soo much better an option for flash, than the SF24D. From the value for the money perspective, size and weight aside, it is really a no brainer, to go for the SF58.

It does everything so much better, than the SF24D.

 

Of course, it is a price difference of ~200,- EUR, but the better output really makes this the better solution.

[menos I M6]

Further shooting with the 58 gives me a new feeling:

 

Is the TTL pre flash sequence quicker than with the SF24D (It would make sence, as the 58 has quite a bit bigger capacitors + battery power, thus quicker recharge time)?

 

I notice this, as my test subject managed to blink with the 34D, but not really with the 58

 

I am really happy with this flash now!

[Luke_Miller]

I went the same route - SF-24D to SF-58. I agree with your assessment. The SF-58 is a big step up in all areas.

[wlaidlaw]

Further shooting with the 58 gives me a new feeling:

 

Is the TTL pre flash sequence quicker than with the SF24D (It would make sence, as the 58 has quite a bit bigger capacitors + battery power, thus quicker recharge time)?

 

I notice this, as my test subject managed to blink with the 34D, but not really with the 58

 

I am really happy with this flash now!

 

What you may find is that younger folks (presumably with faster blink reflex) still occasionally have shut eyes with the 58 but I agree it is nothing like as bad as the 24 without a softbox. I found using the secondary flash on anything over 1/2 power with bounce on main, made shut eyes worse. This is a bit disappointing as it negates the purpose of the fill in secondary head to some extent. When I want to use the secondary fill in flash, I now therefore, limit myself to using the 58 on A mode rather than TTL.

 

Wilson

[menos I M6]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Thanks for the info Wilson, I played around with the secondary flash only a bit with dead (partly reflective) subjects and didn't go so far as using NDs on the secondary reflector.

 

With a minimum output to be set as only 1/4, I found it to give already a too flashy look.

 

It might be just about right though, to use with less reflective subjects (as for portraits) with a bit ND gel.

 

It might also be useful, when using the flash bounced in a bigger room or outside, where the bounce might "get lost".

 

It will definitely take me some weeks, to get to know the flash (and memorize some basic practics, to start from).

 

Nice thing is now, that I can use my Nikon SB900 as remote in SU-4 mode, which can be diffused and shot with great recycling @ full blast, while the weaker SF58 works as lower key ;-)

 

I have no idea, what rode me, to choose the SF24D in the beginning ;-) - maybe, it looked cute or something ;-)

[bocaburger]

The SF24d chapter has a good ending.

 

Today, I swapped the SF24D against a AF58 and I am quite happy with it's performance compared to the former flash ;-) (how could one seriously compare them ?).

 

Er, with a scale and a measuring tape The 24D has feature and power limitations to be sure, but it's pocketable. I've got a Metz 54MZ3 which with the correct module does approximately what the SF58 will do (and, used, the Metz + module cost me about a third of the SF58) but it's the 24D that fits easily in my Domke J5XB along with the M9 and 4 lenses, and so it's the flash I travel with. I've never found it overpowering for fill-in, although my use of fill is typically in daylight. It's pretty easy to slip a layer or two of Kleenex under the clip-on diffuser if you really need less power than the minimum setting can provide.

[menos I M6]

Er, with a scale and a measuring tape The 24D has feature and power limitations to be sure, but it's pocketable. I've got a Metz 54MZ3 which with the correct module does approximately what the SF58 will do (and, used, the Metz + module cost me about a third of the SF58) but it's the 24D that fits easily in my Domke J5XB along with the M9 and 4 lenses, and so it's the flash I travel with. I've never found it overpowering for fill-in, although my use of fill is typically in daylight. It's pretty easy to slip a layer or two of Kleenex under the clip-on diffuser if you really need less power than the minimum setting can provide.

 

It's no big deal for me. I basically have one bag most of the time with me, which is limited in minimum size, to fit at least a 15" notebook.

This bag comfortably fits two M bodies with attached lenses + 3 extra lenses, if needed (I mostly just have the two bodies with lenses, but slip occasionally a third body inside, if I want a third focal length).

 

The SF58 takes about the size of a M body without lens + 2 rolls of film.

I can still slide a 135mm or 90 2.8 together with it in the same compartment and can work with everything without squeezing.

 

There is no size, SF24D or 58 restriction for me. I travelled with two DSLRs + 3 − 4 lenses before. This M outfit is more complete for me + I have a full capable flash with full freedom - all the hassle, the 24D had announced to me ;-)

 

I am perfectly happy now ;-)

 

It really is a riddle to me though, that some people spend thousands of EUR on a lens or a camera body and are to short, to spend 200 EUR more or less on a flash, that has a better compatibility.

 

With this thinking, going for a full fledged Nikon D3 + 3 fast zooms instead of a Leica outfit, to safe a few hundred bucks in the process would be a no brainer.

Isn't the no compromise thinking, many RF user with Leica the actual drive of choosing a technically better item for a lot more money over a slightly less competent item for a lot less money?

 

I didn't mind, to pay the money for the 58 over a similar (but not as fully compatible) Metz unit - I wanted maximum features and compatibility. When I do something, I do it better full hog or not at all.

 

Feature and performance wise, the SF58 doesn't hold a candle to a top Nikon or Canon strobe, I would bite my a… every time, I think about this or that compromise, using a Metz, but still have paid a few hundred EUR for it. Makes no sense to me ;-)

[ho_co]

Dirk, thanks for this thread!

 

It covers the frustration of trying to get the SF24D to work right, the learning curve associated with it, and the reasoning associated with upgrading to the SF58. It reads like a Bildungsroman as we gradually see the logic behind each choice, with glances at various competitors' efforts along the way.

 

Very enlightening and educational IMHO. Thanks for letting us accompany you on the journey.

[menos I M6]

Dirk, thanks for this thread!

 

It covers the frustration of trying to get the SF24D to work right, the learning curve associated with it, and the reasoning associated with upgrading to the SF58. It reads like a Bildungsroman as we gradually see the logic behind each choice, with glances at various competitors' efforts along the way.

 

Very enlightening and educational IMHO. Thanks for letting us accompany you on the journey.

 

Haha - let me tell you a little here: if patience would have been with me + a little less need of sharing exactly that frustration, this thread (and my tone during the first posts) would have been never created ;-)

 

Here goes that evening:

 

Me, sitting in the apartment, flash guides, manuals, test targets all over me.

My better half comes home.

 

Me: Hey honey, how was your day? I cleaned the floor, dusted the frames, cleaned the balcony, the windows, washed two loads of laundry … and cooked dinner.

 

She: Are you ok? What happened?

 

Me: Look, what I did (Me showing SF24D + a few horrible, flashy test shots with half the frames fried) …

 

silence …

 

Me: … I got the wrong flash. I saved money on the better one … now nothing works.

 

She: Come on, let's have dinner and tomorrow, I'll come with you and we get this thing changed.

 

Me:

 

… reading SF58 manual until late night …

 

That was an evening after buying a SF24D and spending the better half of an afternoon with it (it indeed is true - nothing better, than house cleaning against buyers remorse ).

[bocaburger]

 

It really is a riddle to me though, that some people spend thousands of EUR on a lens or a camera body and are to short, to spend 200 EUR more or less on a flash, that has a better compatibility.

 

Like many M users I use a flash infrequently. Perhaps one shot out of 500 in typical shooting with my M9. I used to have a CF flash which was even smaller and used AA cells, but the 24D came up used at a great price and it has a wider range of aperture choices in AUTO mode. It was never designed or advertised to be a do-all flash, and I never expected it to be. As for the 54MZ3 instead of buying an SF58, I already had the Metz 54MZ3 since my M7 and R8 days. I shoot all flashes in AUTO mode, so I don't find it any less compatible than I need. It reads the ISO from the camera, it reads the focal length from coded lenses...and that's even before updating the module to the latest version (which Bogen does free of charge). And the Metz also works on my Canon 5D with a quick change of the module (I have a 420EX and a 220EX, both of which have only eTTL and no AUTO. The Metz in AUTO gives me more consistent results...go figure!)

[menos I M6]

@ bocaburger - don't feel offended, your former post surely sounded like a pattern to me ;-)

 

I didn't expect the 24D to be an "all for everything flash" at all. I was aware of the lower output, the limitations of being a non swivel flash and the slower recycling.

 

I did not expect for this kind of money the abysmal user interface and severe limitations of output selection (and the locks thereof) and a too high of a minimum output for a direct flash (the reports of users, hacking their SF24D with tape, NDs, paper, underwear, … should have been a strong indicator to be aware of that).

 

The form factor and weight was just too nice, to not try it out.

 

The 58 (as the Metz version of it) is just a proper flash (by far not playing in the same league as Nikon/ Canon flashes of this class do, but it is a proper and very usable flash).

Just a short time of using the 58 is enough to see, that it indeed kills all the issues, one could possibly have with the SF24D - everything, the smaller 24 lacks, the 58 seriously improves upon.

 

When I picked up the 58, there was a Gentleman in the store, who negotiated for a M9 + Noctilux f1.

He in fact bargained for a bag, to move the goods in and cheaped out for a Chinese knockoff of a small LowePro hip back instead of a very nice Alcantara version of similar style - the cost differential was about 10 USD between the two.

 

Now I know, you never get rich, if not being a clutch about cents, but this really annoys me. Along that line do pop people up, who claim, "yah but my 123 was only 80% of your 123 and I don't need the 50% more function, your 123 provides, so you're an a…" ;-)

[jaapv]

Just the reason I keep an SF24D in my bag for fill etc. Much nicer than all these el-cheapo small flashes. I don't use M-Ttl that much. After all, when using fill it is much easier to set the camera to 180 and use the aperture with the high level of ambient light. And when needing more oomph and swivel/tilt I have an old MZ 40 SCA 3502M5 which delivers stunning results on the M9 on A setting. Communicates with the camera too...

[pico]

When I first got the SF24D, I poured through the instructions, and the instructions for the M7. After all that I was so confused, so I just put the flash on the M7, set it to TTL, and made pictures. They were all just fine! Duh. That's what automation is supposed to be about.

[Nicoleica]

When I first got the SF24D, I poured through the instructions, and the instructions for the M7. After all that I was so confused, so I just put the flash on the M7, set it to TTL, and made pictures. They were all just fine! Duh. That's what automation is supposed to be about.

 

I agree, the TTL flash on the M6TTL,M7,R8 and R9 cameras is just fine. It just works as it's supposed to. For these cameras the SF20 and SF24D are great little flashguns. In my opinion, the problem here is not with the SF24D, but in the TTL flash circuitry/logic in the digital M cameras. I consider it to be a work-in-progress, and hope that Leica will be able to improve it in the future. Other camera manufacturers have been able to make TTL flash work well with digital cameras, so I'm sure that in time Leica will eventually be able to do the same.

[bocaburger]

@ bocaburger - don't feel offended, your former post surely sounded like a pattern to me ;-)

 

 

When I picked up the 58, there was a Gentleman in the store, who negotiated for a M9 + Noctilux f1.

He in fact bargained for a bag, to move the goods in and cheaped out for a Chinese knockoff of a small LowePro hip back instead of a very nice Alcantara version of similar style - the cost differential was about 10 USD between the two.

 

Now I know, you never get rich, if not being a clutch about cents, but this really annoys me. Along that line do pop people up, who claim, "yah but my 123 was only 80% of your 123 and I don't need the 50% more function, your 123 provides, so you're an a…" ;-)

 

I wasn't really offended, but frankly I don't see an upside to making assumptions about or editorializing on other peoples' motivations. Just MHO.

[bocaburger]

Other camera manufacturers have been able to make TTL flash work well with digital cameras

 

I can only speak from experience with Canon, but other than with long telephoto and macro, I haven't found eTTL any more accurate or consistent than AUTO (with 3rd-party flashes, as my Canon flashes don't offer it). What is a nice feature is the flash exposure lock, wherein the press of a button fires the pre-flash and locks in the exposure, so you can recompose and shoot.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[masjah]

I agree, the TTL flash on the M6TTL,M7,R8 and R9 cameras is just fine. It just works as it's supposed to. For these cameras the SF20 and SF24D are great little flashguns. In my opinion, the problem here is not with the SF24D, but in the TTL flash circuitry/logic in the digital M cameras. I consider it to be a work-in-progress, and hope that Leica will be able to improve it in the future. Other camera manufacturers have been able to make TTL flash work well with digital cameras, so I'm sure that in time Leica will eventually be able to do the same.

 

I agree - my experience of the TTL flash on the R8 and R9 (actually with an SF20, but no real difference in these cases from the SF24D) is that it works very well.

 

I also have a CM, which, although a film camera, has, being a compact camera, got to rely on GNC for any form of TTL type metering. Having an SF20 this is not possible for me, since GNC is not supported. So I use "A" mode. Relevant data about aperture and film speed is still sent to the flash, and I seem to get perfectly reasonable results.

 

Clearly all my experience is related to film cameras, and I haven't tried GNC. But my point is that "A" mode works well as an alternative on a GNC camera. If I had a digital M, I think I'd give "A" mode a try, as an alternative to GNC.

[menos I M6]

Nicole, I fully agree with Leica having a slow development with flash in comparison with the big Japanese manufacturers.

Putting a TTL flash (any TTL flash from Nikon's range for that matter) on a Nikon DSLR just works.

 

It is the same level of sophisticated automation though, that goes with exposure and autofocus of these modern SLRs vs. the way, a Leica rangefinder used to work.

 

I enjoy the simple, manual way of using the M, but when it comes to flash, I am simply not interested enough, to fiddle and learn the secrets of flash photography from ground up.

 

I just want flash to work like a Mac or a Nikon camera - stick it there and it just works.

The difference between the SF24D and SF58 for this matter on the M8.2 is immense.

 

Due to the limitation (or call it differences, if you want), the Leica M sets (center weighted metering on the curtain, limited communication of exposure values between flash and camera, less stream lined user interface for using flash), flash with the M is a lot less easy and convenient, than with the Nikon system (also more limiting, think about, what CLS can do with a lot more freedom right from the camera with remote flash output, groups, etc without walking around and retouching the strobes locally ).