wlaidlaw Posted February 19, 2009 Share #21 Posted February 19, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) That seems to be camera controlled, a while back in one of the M8 firmware updates the interval was shortened. - Carl Carl, I assume the recharge time of the flash is a factor as well. In that 4 x AA NiMH batteries would have a higher current ability than the 2 x CR123A batteries in the SF24-D, the recycle time may be shorter. There would also be room for a bigger storage capacitor, so a recharge after a pre-flash may not be required. We shall see. I have just tried the SF24-D on my M8 and I would agree that the interval may be a bit shorter than it was 2 years ago, but I still seem to get shut eyes in photos. From some brief research, it would seem that the reaction time of the blink (corneal) reflex is about 40 to 50 milliseconds with the average blink lasting in the region of 100 milliseconds. So realistically, we need a pre-flash to main flash interval of 30 milliseconds or less. Wilson Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted February 19, 2009 Posted February 19, 2009 Hi wlaidlaw, Take a look here SF 58 Flash. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
dpattinson Posted February 19, 2009 Share #22 Posted February 19, 2009 Why on earth have they quoted the GN at a 105mm focal length 90mm on the M8? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
guywalder Posted February 19, 2009 Share #23 Posted February 19, 2009 90mm on the M8? David, it was intended as a rhetorical question I'm pretty sure the GN is quoted that way a) 'cos it sounds better, and that how Metz quote it and thats where the product name comes from. Just seems a bit superficial of Leica to carry all that over, especially as it is being promoted alongside the M8. After all if the coverage really is that of a 105mm lens then it wont be wide enough for a 90mm one. 105mm also falls in no mans land in the S2 range... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
marknorton Posted February 19, 2009 Share #24 Posted February 19, 2009 Why on earth have they quoted the GN at a 105mm focal length It's done to give the highest "headline" GN number. Since the flash has a zooming head, extending it to the maximum focal length will narrow the coverage and give an increased GN number. If you were to zoom back to a 24mm equivalent coverage (Super Elmar on the M8), you are not going to see a GN of 58 at ISO 100. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
marknorton Posted February 19, 2009 Share #25 Posted February 19, 2009 David,it was intended as a rhetorical question I'm pretty sure the GN is quoted that way a) 'cos it sounds better, and that how Metz quote it and thats where the product name comes from. Just seems a bit superficial of Leica to carry all that over, especially as it is being promoted alongside the M8. After all if the coverage really is that of a 105mm lens then it wont be wide enough for a 90mm one. 105mm also falls in no mans land in the S2 range... These nominal focal lengths are for FF coverage; a 90mm lens on the M8 has a effective field of view of 120mm, so the flash set to 105mm will be fine. So, with a 90mm Summicron wide-open, you can shoot at 29m at ISO 100. In theory at least. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
charlesphoto99 Posted February 19, 2009 Share #26 Posted February 19, 2009 That seems to be camera controlled, a while back in one of the M8 firmware updates the interval was shortened. - Carl Shorter or not, it's that "interval" that is troubling. Intervals are not the reason I shoot M cameras. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wattsy Posted February 19, 2009 Share #27 Posted February 19, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) Shorter or not, it's that "interval" that is troubling. Intervals are not the reason I shoot M cameras. Yes, the preflash thing (however short) is a complete non-starter for serious work that needs flash. Personally, I prefer to 'lock' the flash output down using manual mode (if I'm shooting at a fairly consistent distance) or simply switch to auto. I can't personally get very excited about a £520 flash if it doesn't offer any advantages over the £275 Metz 'equivalent' I already have. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
george_b Posted July 18, 2009 Share #28 Posted July 18, 2009 Has anyone got their hands on one yet and what is it like? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wlaidlaw Posted July 18, 2009 Share #29 Posted July 18, 2009 Has anyone got their hands on one yet and what is it like? Hi George, I got mine from Baker's in Lewes about 3 months ago. It is excellent if BIG - VERY BIG. The exposure is much more accurate than the SF24 and it is of course, very powerful. The pre-flash seems less intrusive than the SF24. I use mine a bit for daylight shots when there is no sun, with an MZ58 Sto-Fen softbox on it (about £12 from Warehouse express). If you want additional highlighting, you can use the secondary flash at full power in daylight or at half or a quarter power at night. I have not tried slave or strobe yet but they are there if you want them. Now all they need to do is to produce a small GNC bounce based on the MZ20-C2 to replace the SF24 for those that want a small bounce flash. Wilson Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DES Posted July 18, 2009 Share #30 Posted July 18, 2009 I have had one for about a month now and love it. I have posted some shots taken with it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
george_b Posted July 18, 2009 Share #31 Posted July 18, 2009 Hi George, I got mine from Baker's in Lewes about 3 months ago. .... Wilson Hi Wilson, thanks for that. I'll phone them next week and maybe pop down when to have a look it is convenient and they have stock. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.