on 22/01/2005 16:03, Julian Davies wrote:
> You wouldn't need the TTL connector if you put a T32 on the shoe. You plug
> the Cord into the socket on the T32 instead! This goes against your off -
> axis requirement, however.
Would the PBG2 T-32 mounted profit of the 4 'C' cells too?
That's good news, but could a daisy chain be continued? For instance,
pluging a cord into the bottom socket of the PBG2 ->T20 adapter and so on ?
>
> I carry mini tripods in my flash bag specifically to put T20 connectors and
> T32s on. Works well if there is something to put them on, and is probably
> less problematic than trying to get so many pieces onto the camera.
Well, I do the same.
But it all depends of which suject do you intend to shoot, having chosen ASA
100 film. Perhaps a bird of you know will land just there...
You're right, I'm getting into the trouble of assembling a complicated
puzzle. But how do I catch that small bird? Not a hummingbird, whose
behavior is highly predictable...
>
> For the guide number calculation, if the separation of the flashes is
> significant at the subject distance, the calculation becomes impossible for
> my limited abilities, so it's TTL or meter for me!
Alright, I agree with you; that's why I said it wouldn't quite reach a GN
45.
> If you go TTL the
> question of accuracy / consistency of the aperture markings becomes
> irrelevant.
But I see this just the other way round !!
Accuracy / consistency of the aperture markings have a mathematical reason
of their own. They should be as they must. TTL-OTF may override inaccuracy,
but it was not intended to do so (both flash or Auto TTL-OTF)
And we still didn't clear up the reason for this peculiar apparent lack of
consistency.
When I subscribed, there was a fellow listee whom I don't recall too well,
but always signed:
"Inquiring minds want to know"
Fernando.
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|