To me, it looks more like one slightly longer flash, rather than a pre burst and main flash as two separate bursts. However, some people are prone to blinking and it is quite easy for them to get the eyelids starting to close while the exposure is being made. I get way more partially closed eyes with P-TTL than I do with TTL when shooting weddings and portraits. It seems to be only those who are prone to blinking in flash photos anyway.
-- Best regards, Bruce Tuesday, April 4, 2006, 7:03:47 AM, you wrote: JB> I would have thought that it's something like the red eye reduction pre JB> flash, which I find very annoying and time consuming (the shot is taken JB> quite a bit after I have pressed the button). I never use it for the same JB> reason - and it gives unnatural looking (small) pupils. JB> Regards JB> Jens Bladt JB> http://www.jensbladt.dk JB> -----Oprindelig meddelelse----- JB> Fra: Adam Maas [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] JB> Sendt: 3. april 2006 22:38 JB> Til: [email protected] JB> Emne: Re: DL TTL flash madness JB> It does take time, but maybe 10-15ms. It's imperceptible. JB> -Adam JB> Jens Bladt wrote: >> So the pre-flash doesn't take time? >> Regards >> Jens >> >> >> Jens Bladt >> http://www.jensbladt.dk >> >> -----Oprindelig meddelelse----- >> Fra: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >> Sendt: 3. april 2006 20:02 >> Til: [email protected] >> Emne: RE: DL TTL flash madness >> >> >> And P-TTL does not cause shutter lag. >> >> -------------- Original message ---------------------- >> From: "Jens Bladt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> >>>What is E-TTL? >>>I don't know. >>>All I know is, that I'm not interested in using ANY preflash - at all. >>>It's bad enough, that the people I photograph must put up with one flash >>>light. I would never use a flash system that requires more than one flash >>>burst. >>> >>>First of all, it will give me a "shutter lag" - I can't capture the right >>>moment. Secondly I believe that more than one flash is an unnecessary >>>annoyance for the people being photographed. >>> >>>I almost exclusively use bounced flash (ceiling or other surfaces (except >>>for studio photography and outdoor photography). >>>A direct flash is not very polite. is it?. It leaves people "blind" for >>>several minutes. This is often quite unacceptable. >>>A direct flash provides a very unnatural looking light (horizontal in >> >> stead >> >>>of vertical). >>>Direct flash will result in over exposure of the foreground and under >>>exposure of the background. Thus very unpleasant pictures. >>>A direct flash will result in long horizontal shadows, which are not very >>>pleasing IMO. >>> >>>No pre flash system for me, thank you very much! >>> >>>One flash light is actually one flash too many, as far as I'm concerned. >>>I just want noiseless 12800 ASA . >>>I guess my grand children will have this feature in - let's say - 20 years >>>time ;-) >>>Regards >>>Jens >>> >>> >>>Jens Bladt >>>http://www.jensbladt.dk >>> >>>-----Oprindelig meddelelse----- >>>Fra: Jens Bladt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >>>Sendt: 3. april 2006 19:00 >>>Til: [email protected] >>>Emne: RE: DL TTL flash madness >>> >>> >>>BTW, I didn't know that my PENTAX *ist D was their very cheapest DSLR? >>>I knew it was their first one, though. >>>Regards >>>Jens >>> >>>Jens Bladt >>>http://www.jensbladt.dk >>> >>>-----Oprindelig meddelelse----- >>>Fra: Jens Bladt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >>>Sendt: 3. april 2006 17:29 >>>Til: [email protected] >>>Emne: RE: DL TTL flash madness >>> >>> >>>Who said only? >>>Jens >>>Jens Bladt >>>http://www.jensbladt.dk >>> >>>-----Oprindelig meddelelse----- >>>Fra: Aaron Reynolds [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >>>Sendt: 3. april 2006 15:49 >>>Til: [email protected] >>>Emne: Re: DL TTL flash madness >>> >>> >>> >>>On Apr 3, 2006, at 2:22 AM, Jens Bladt wrote: >>> >>> >>>>Crippled or not. >>>>If the new 10 MP Pentax body doesn't support ordenary TTL flash, I >>>>won't be >>>>buying it. >>>>I have too many flashes - I guess 7 or 8 TTL flahses, one of which is >>>>a Metz >>>>60-CT2. >>> >>>Why on earth would you expect that the new top-end body would have only >>>the feature set of the very cheapest DSLR that Pentax makes? >>> >>>-Aaron >>> >>>-- >>>No virus found in this incoming message. >>>Checked by AVG Free Edition. >>>Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.3.4/299 - Release Date: 03/31/2006 >>> >>>-- >>>No virus found in this outgoing message. >>>Checked by AVG Free Edition. >>>Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.3.4/299 - Release Date: 03/31/2006 >>> >>>-- >>>No virus found in this incoming message. >>>Checked by AVG Free Edition. >>>Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.3.4/299 - Release Date: 03/31/2006 >>> >>>-- >>>No virus found in this outgoing message. >>>Checked by AVG Free Edition. >>>Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.3.4/299 - Release Date: 03/31/2006 >>> >>> >>>-- >>>No virus found in this incoming message. >>>Checked by AVG Free Edition. >>>Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.3.4/299 - Release Date: 03/31/2006 >>> >>>-- >>>No virus found in this outgoing message. >>>Checked by AVG Free Edition. >>>Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.3.4/299 - Release Date: 03/31/2006 >>> >> >> >> -- >> No virus found in this incoming message. >> Checked by AVG Free Edition. >> Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.3.4/299 - Release Date: 03/31/2006 >> >> -- >> No virus found in this outgoing message. >> Checked by AVG Free Edition. >> Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.3.4/299 - Release Date: 03/31/2006 JB> -- JB> No virus found in this incoming message. JB> Checked by AVG Free Edition. JB> Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.3.5/300 - Release Date: 04/03/2006 JB> -- JB> No virus found in this outgoing message. JB> Checked by AVG Free Edition. JB> Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.3.5/300 - Release Date: 04/03/2006
