>
> "The OM-4Ti is probably better capable of Super FP flash because it can
> measure
> the influence of both the flash and available light during exposure."
>
> This is not correct. It is a major point of confusion. It's been discussed
> before, but maybe it needs to be rehashed.
>
> Super FP is a _manual_ mode of flash operation. Instead of firing one big
> burst
> of light, the flash puts out several hundred smaller bursts over a period
> slightly longer than 1/60 of a second. Other than changing your distance from
> the subject or sticking a handkerchief over the flash tube, neither you nor
> the
> camera have any control over the flash's output.
>
> Super FP is strictly for fill-in. The camera's normal controls (aperture and
> shutter) set the base exposure, with the flash providing fill-in at
> "reasonable"
> subject distances.
>
> In order for Super FP to be fully automatic, it would have to know the
> distance
> to the subject, the f/stop selected and the scene brightness, _before_ the
> exposure. The OM cameras do not supply the first two pieces of information, so
> Super FP cannot provide _automatic_ fill-in flash.
>
OK - since I started this particular thread, and since I'm still
confused, let me see if I have this straight. You are saying that the
output of the F280 in Super FP mode is IDENTICAL on each and every
exposure, completely INDEPENDENT of any camera setting and any available
light? In other words...it's a heap of flash powder - best used for
shots of tourists wearing floppy hats posing in front of the Grand
Canyon?
--
Kenneth Sloan sloan@xxxxxxx
Computer and Information Sciences (205) 934-2213
University of Alabama at Birmingham FAX (205) 934-5473
Birmingham, AL 35294-1170 http://www.cis.uab.edu/info/faculty/sloan/
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|