Yup, I agree with that. The double-flash of 'anti-red eye'
modes, the preflash of P-TTL, etc, all have their downsides. TTL
flash metering itself is not always the best solution ... I
think I've gotten more good exposures with the Sunpak 383's
external auto-flash sensor than I have gotten with the Canon 10D
and 420EX speedlight's ETTL flash sophistication.
Sometimes, the "If it ain't broke, don't fix it" rule should be
adhered to. ;-)
Godfrey
--- Frantisek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> There is also a theoretical (and sometimes sadly real)
> disadvantage to
> any pre-flash system, be it P-TTL, i-TTL E-TTL2, Minolta's
> one,
> whatever... that is that it is slower than plain old TTL
> off-the-film
> metering with film SLRs. And some SLRs used several (five)
> sensors to
> measure the flash during the exposure, if I remember
> correctly. I have
> myself seen the slowdown mostly with wireless flash, where it
> is
> really slower (the subjects can even blink during the wireless
> synchornisation phase), but others in the wedding biz spoke of
> it too.
> It's not such a big issue, but _sometimes_, it can be a
> nuisance. Be
> glad that Pentax and Fuji (?) still support plain "old"
> off_the_sensor
> TTL, even with the other problems it brings with digital
> (sensor's
> much higher specularity?). Of course the "problem" depends on
> how fast
> the DSLR can swing the mirror (as the flash metering is done
> before
> the mirror rises), so a superfast mirror-swinging machine
> would be
> almost fine probably. But even on this list, I heard issues
> about
> using preexposure flash metering for "candid" portraits.
>
> Good light!
> fra
>
>
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The all-new My Yahoo! - Get yours free!
http://my.yahoo.com
