ian_maclennan

<p>I am posting this to help other Sony A7RII users who have been seeking a solution for professional location flash units that will work well with Sony cameras. The absence of compatible Sony flash triggers has been one of the major ommissions for me in migrating fully from Canon professional DSLRs to Sony mirrorless.<br /> I have photographed downhill mountain bike racers for many years using High Speed Sync (HSS) flash provided by 6 Canon 580EXII mounted on a custom bracket and powered by 3 Quantum Turbo 3 battery packs. As a solution it was heavy, cumbersome, and very expensive, but it enabled me to get some fabulous images. This year, however, migrating from Canon to Sony meant that I needed to find an alternative to my trusty Canon Speedlights. The 500 Joule Prophoto B1 looked suitable but no Sony trigger was available or even forecast. The Elinchrom ELB400 with HS head also looked a possible replacement but its promised Sony trigger had not arrived by the time I really had to make a decision. (It was finally announced at the beginning of June). As I desperately trawled for a solution I stumbled across the Godox AD600. The spec looked good with an energy rating equal to about 9 or 10 Speedlights, HSS up to 1/8000s, and 500 full power flashes from the battery. But … it was an unfamiliar Chinese brand and the price was so low compared to Prophoto and Elinchrom that I thought “there must be a catch!” I placed my order anyway with Amazon/LeaTure UK and then did some extensive tests. There is no catch!<br /> My tests showed that the flash output from shot to shot was identical, nor could I detect any shift in colour temperature. The X1T-S trigger integrates nicely with my Sony A7RII, turning off the Live View Display effect to enable focus and composition, and there is no discernible trigger delay when used with the new Voigtlander 15mm Super Heliar III lens. The manual specifies the switch-on order for trigger, camera, and flash and if you turn on in the wrong order then the modeling lamp may switch on - easily noticed in the studio but not so easy on location in bright sun. The flash unit has built in radio receivers for Canon, Nikon and Sony so you only need to change the hot shoe mounted trigger if you change camera systems, and the Godox trigger costs £32 versus £200-£300 for Elinchrom and Prophoto. Wow!<br /> The X1T-S flash trigger has a very simple and intuitive LCD interface that allows the mode and power of up to 5 flash groups to be set. I particularly like that a button has to be pressed before adjusting power with the control wheel as that prevents accidental changes in the heat of the moment. The flash head has a similar interface with dedicated buttons and its backlight LCD is readable in bright or dim light.<br /> I was so confident after my tests that I used the AD600 in anger on a major shoot where I was covering the UCI Mountain Bike World Cup in Fort William. The flash performed flawlessly over three days on the side of a mountain under direct exposure to sun and an air temp of 24 degrees Celsius. The battery life was very impressive too : I was shooting full power at 1/4000s in HSS and even after a day’s shots I still had full bars on the battery status! Had I been using X-sync at 1/250s then I would obviously expect to use more battery power but the performance in HSS is still mighty impressive. Fitted with a Bowens 120 degree reflector gave me 2.3 stops advantage over my 6 Canon Speedlights which meant I afford to lose 1.3 stops on a “shower cap” style diffuser and still have one whole stop in hand.<br /> The unit is not weather proofed but I would have no concerns using it in wet weather, and I went to this shoot prepared with a large “Stormjacket” lens protector. This completely covers the body of the flash and works well with the “shower cap” diffuser to provide pretty complete weather protection. However the ADH600B extension head and cable could also be used which means that the main flash monobloc could be left inside a camera bag in really bad conditions. Incidentally the AD600HB is a superb accessory that enables boom mounting of the flash tube for flexible and safe high angled lighting using the AD-S13 pole. You lose half a stop because of the cable but that is a small price to pay for the flexibility.<br /> In conclusion the AD600 offers superb functionality and performance at a price that is simply unbeatable. If you are a Sony user needing high power HSS on location then I think it is currently the only game in town. Highly recommended!<br>

<br /> I tried to attach some images from the World Cup shot with Sony A7RII, Voigtlander 15mm Super Heliar III, and Godox AD600BM fitted with Bowens 120 degree reflector and shower cap diffuser but they did not load successfully. You can see the original article on Pinkbike.com here : http://www.pinkbike.com/u/cloverleaf/blog/fort-william-2016-maclennan-photo-reel.html. Almost all the ultra wide angle shots used the Godox AD600BM flash.</p>

Chris

 

Check out this older thread : http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=006WrY

Jeffrey

 

I use a 72mm Super Angulon XL, which has a 95mm filter thread, with a Lee 100mm push on wide angle filter holder. It works fine with Lee 100mm square filters. Lee also make large holders and filters. The largest is 115mm diameter but they also have "wings" which can be fitted to smaller holders to take the new 130mm square filters. Speak to Robert White - www.robertwhite.co.uk.

I used the GA645Zi for about two years and was astounded at how good the zoom lens was. I used it exclusively for landscape use so it was never used wide open - the aperture was probably never wider than f11-f16, and I always used a tripod. I bought the camera originally for some backpacking work where I wasn't prepared to lug my 6x7 kit and I was expecting some compromises in quality because of the zoom lens. However I discovered that the GA645Zi produced trannies that were as sharp and contrasty as any of my other kit.

I've just changed from my Pentax 67II to a Fuji 680 so don't have a camera in front of me to check out but I used the Pentax for years and the exposure compensation steps were definitely 1/3rd stop. I'm sure that the shutter speed readout was also in 1/3 stop increments. Howeever I seem to recall that one of the options available at a Pentax service centre was to change the compensation steps from 1/3 to 1/2 stops so maybe this has been done to your camera.

Ryan

 

I've experienced something like this before - see the thread on http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=006WrY.

Kent I use the very same lens and find it almost impossible to get the glass filters I want. I have been using Lee resin filters for a couple of years now - the quality is excellent plus the range is huge. Check out www.lee.co.uk for the range. I usually buy mine from Robert White : www.robertwhite.co.uk or +44 1202 723046.

I outrank you both in the Methusela scale but I'm not telling you by how much!

 

I checked the manual and its pretty easy to alter the latitude range. Here's how : turn on the meter while holding down the Latitude button. Set the Highlight end of the scale with jog dial, press Latitude again, then repeat for the Shadow end. Once that's done you can also go on to change the latitude for the Polaroid setting or just press the power-off button to store the changes. I'm not sure I'd want to do it if I were alternating B&W and colour on every roll but it only takes about 10-15 seconds.

 

BTW I didn't answer your question about the backlighting. The simple answer is that in any situation where you would take an incident light reading in the field you can easily see the display. The spot display which you see through the viewfinder is automatically illuminated when you take a reading so it's fine after dusk.

The default latitude setting is for transparency film i.e. +2.3 and -2.7 stops. I've never had to change it because I only use Velvia, but it is modifiable by the user. I'll check the manual and let you know how easy it is.

 

I fully endorse your comments on the Minolta Spotmeter F. I only realised how incredibly useful the calculator dial was on my Pentax Spotmeter V when I started using the Minolta Spotmeter F. I had taken the Pentax dial for granted but I soon realised how essential it really was when I had to start doing mental calculations everytime to translate the digital reading from the Minolta on to a mental exposure scale. The latitude function on the Flashmeter VI gives you similar functionality to the exposure dial and there is the additional benefit of a direct reading of the exposure difference between the stored incident reading and spot readings. So you can take an incident reading and then just scan the subject with the spot button held down for instantaneous readout of all the main tonal areas. It's extremely fast in use and avoids lots of mental arithmetic. Of course if you have more time to meter you can take lots of key tone readings and these will be superimposed on the latitude display.

 

I'll get back to you on changing the latitude range, but it'll be about 48 hours before I can do that.

I've been using the Flashmeter VI for about a year now, having previously carried both the Flashmeter IV and Minolta spotmeter. My overall assessment of the meter that it is superb for speed of use. The ability to take an incident light reading and then superimpose spot readings (in latitude mode) is excellent and does away with the need for bits of paper or memory, neither of which I find particularly conducive to acuracy when I need to get a reading in changing light conditions.

 

However you asked specifically about the spotmeter accuracy and I have noticed underexposure of up to 1 stop when measuring into the sun - typically when photographing sunsets when the sun is still very bright. So I do not believe it is as good in this respect as the individual Pentax or Minolta spotmeters I have previously used. I wasn't acually too disappointed when I discovered this because I really didn't expect it to be able to compete with bigger/heavier standalone spotmeters. I don't often photograph directly against the sun so this is not a major problem for me, but when I do it's easy to make an allowance for the flare. For the other 99% of the time this meter is simply superb and I would have no hesitation in recommending it highly.

Dan, the Ebony RSW45 might meet your requirements. This is a lightweight (1.5kg) but non-folding field camera which is intended mainly for landscape use with wide angle lenses (45-180mm with standard board). It is the fastest 5x4 I've ever used because the lens can remain on the camera when it's packed away so there is minimal setting up before taking a shot. It's also pretty compact - the front to back dimension when the standards are retracted is only about 90mm with a 72mm Super Angulon XL lens. A consequence of the low weight however is that it has restricted movements which might be a limitation in architectural work : rise/fall and tilt on the front but no swing or rear movements. Price is about £1000. I use mine for landscapes, mainly with a 72mm lens and 6x12 panoramic back. Its low weight and speed of use are a great advantage in the field and the simplicity makes it a joy to use.

Subject: Response to How well does an 80mm fit in with 43/65/150 for Mamiya 7ii

 

Will

The 135, 6x6 and 6x7 formats all have different aspect ratios so there are three possible equivalents for any given lens depending on whether you consider the horizontal, vertical, or diagonal angle of view.

 

It's quite easy to calculate the equivalent angles of view. The image sizes,in mm, for 135, 6x6 and 6x7 (for the M7II) are : 24x36, 56x56, and 56x69.5. The equivalent 135 lens for the same horizontal angle of view is found by multiplying a 6x6 lens focal length by 36/56, and by multiplying a 6x7 lens focal length by 36/69.5. For the vertical angle of view the corresponding 6x6 and 6x7 factors are 24/56 and 24/69.5 respectively. Similarly for the diagonal field of view the corresponding 6x6 and 6x7 factors are 43.3/79.2 and 43.3/89.3 respectively.

 

So the precise 135 equivalents of an M7 50mm lens could be either 25.9mm (horizontal), 21.2mm (vertical) or 24.2 diagonal. For an M6 50mm lens the corresponding equivalents are : 32.1mm (horizontal), 21.4mm (vertical) or 27.3mm (diagonal). You can now calculate the M7 210mm equivalents for yourself!

 

I don't consider the diagonal angle of view to be of much practical use since I only compose in either portrait or landscape format. So whenever I do a mental mapping from one format to another I either think in terms of the vertical or horizontal angle of view.

Peder

I also looked very seriously at buying one of these cameras about 18 months ago. Although I ended up buying something else it might help if recount some of the factors which swayed my decision. My prime use was for panoramic landscapes, to be used alongside my Pentax 67 workhorse. Because it was a big investment I spent a day at Robert White and Co in Dorset who were exceptionally helpful in offering advice and allowing me to try out the kit in action.

My conclusions were :

 

The movements of the SW612 Pro did not justify the extra cost (~£650) or weight (~350g) for me since I would rarely use rise/fall or shift in the field. The really useful movement would be tilt and that is absent, so the SW612 Pro offered no real advantage to me over the SW612.

You really need to compose on the ground glass screen to use the movements effectively. However the screen is pretty dim and although useable, certainly does not make for fast working. It does not compare well to a typical 5x4 screen. We tried overlaying a piece of Fresnel lens on the ground glass which helped somewhat but it is still a very dim setup. I concluded that I could certainly use the screen to confirm the overall composition but I would almost always focus using the hyperfocal distance on the helical mount.

A centre filter is recommended on all lenses wider than 75mm. This is normal because of the aspect ratio of the format but it does mean losing 1.5-2 stops in speed for 65mm and below for panoramic cameras. While this was not an issue for me because 75mm would have been my preferred choice, it does mean that a tripod is probably going to be needed for most landscape shots.

The lenses are all Rodenstock so the quality should be excellent. However the cost of the helical mounts means that the lenses are significantly more expensive than the same lenses for large format . The build quality and finish looked excellent and I would have no concerns about lugging the camera about in the field (suitably packed of course).

 

In the end I decided to buy an Ebony RSW45 with a Horseman 612 roll film back which, with a Schneider 75mm Super Angulon XL cost me about 15% less than an SW612. My standard print from a Velvia 6x12 original is 16�x32�. The quality from my Ebony setup is just superb but I am sure that the 612 Pro would be just as good.

 

The deciding factors in favour of the Ebony were :

 

The Ebony is the fastest field camera I have seen because the lens stays mounted when packed away in the camera bag. I wish I had seen this camera years ago!

I have sufficient tilts/rise/fall for any landscape applications.

I can use 5x4 if the need arises.

I can use a bigger range of lenses on the Ebony.

The weight of the Ebony including lens is only about 200g more than the SW612 Pro. From memory the basic camera is about 1.5kg thanks to the use of titanium for all the metal parts.

 

The downside of the Ebony is that is bulkier than an SW612 - but not that much. When the standards are retracted the front to back dimension is only about 90mm, including the 72mm lens. The Ebony is clearly not a point and shoot camera since it has to be tripod mounted. However I don't believe that the SW612 would be that much faster for serious landscape photography because of the limitations on composition and focus set by the ground glass. However if precise composition was not an issue and the viewfinder masks alone were used to do the framing then it would be faster.

I don't know which part of the world you are in Peder but I would recommend that you contact Robert White in Dorset, UK, if you have specific questions (+44 1202 723046; www.robertwhite.co.uk). I should say that my only connection with Robert White is as a long-standing customer who has received superb service and excellent advice over many years!

Hope this helps.

I also suffered from occasional flare with the 645Zi but eventually discovered that the flare disappeared when I removed the skylight filter I had fitted. I had an identical issue with the Mamiya 7 camera and 65mm lens. Without a front filter the camera can be pointed into almost any light source but add a filter and all sorts of flare reflections start to appear.

 

As regards the on-camera meter I have to say that it is perfectly useable but you have to remember that it is not through-the-lens. It is also not a matrix meter and I don't think it is coupled to the field of view so its field of view will change with the zoom position. For average situations it will give a reasonable exposure but if you point it towards a bright source then it will underexpose. I used to carry a separate meter for tricky situations but probably shot more than 80% on auto.

Hi Gary

 

I've made quite a few long haul flights in the last year carrying substantial amounts (about 400 rolls in total)of Fuji Velvia 50 rollfilm and have had no problems. However I still don't know if I have just been lucky or whether the problem is over-exaggerated. I recently returned to the UK from a trip to Australia with about 20 ISO 50 films that I had not been able to get processed before I left. They all processed OK but my lab told me of another customer who had also returned from Australia about the same time who had x-ray shadows on all his films. This is what I can say for sure :

 

I mainly use Velvia 50 rollfilm and have had no visible x-ray damage with film that has had 8 scans prior to exposure and processing.

 

I have had no visible damage with film that has had 5 scans prior to exposure and 3 scans after exposure. The exposed film was wrapped in heavy duty aluminium foil when it went through the aiport scanners.

 

I always hand carry film and never place film in the hold.

 

I always ensure that film is aligned vertically in the bag before going through the scanner on the assumption that the x-ray path is vertical and hence the surface area presented is minimised, but I don't know if this has any real benefit.

 

I have given up asking for hand searches because they are usually refused!

Dave

 

My browser just crashed so there may already be a partial posting of this response.

 

If you set the meter on the P67II to ISO 50 then the camera will consistently overexpose by 1/3 to 2/3 stop. If you set the meter to ISO 80, or dial in -2/3 stop exposure compensation, then it will usually provide a spot on exposure. It doesn't really matter what the "true" film speed is as long as you can get consistent results with our individual setup.

 

Matrix metering uses the multiple segments to assess the light distribution of the scene and while it can obviously be fooled by particular circumstances, it is a major improvement over simple centre-weighted metering and much faster than spot metering. When I first acquired my P67II I continued to use separate handheld incident and spot meters until I eventually did a rigorous comparison between the two approaches. What I found was that the matrix metering in the P67II could beat my manual approach under almost all lighting conditions. In terms of speed and accuracy of metering there is just no contest (provided the in-built bias discussed above is accounted for). This year I have put >500 rolls of Velvia through my P67II and the results are consistently excellent. I use matrix metering exclusively and there are virtually no occasions when I need to switch to using a spot meter. For example, on a recent trip to Australia I was photographing at Natural Arch in Springbrook National Park. This is a complex shot to meter since the camera is inside a dark cave which has a hole in the roof through which pours a waterfall, while the sunlight is falling on the rain forest outside which is also visible. I spot metered this very carefully and bracketed widely for safety and I also shot with the matrix metering on auto. My first spot metered shot was about optimum but so too was the matrix metered shot, and it took me several minutes with the spot meter. The moral of this tale is that you won't go far wrong if you use the matrix metering with some bracketing where necessary.

Dave

 

If you set the meter on the P67II to ISO 50 then the camera will consistently overexpose by 1/3 to 2/3 stop. If you set the meter to ISO 80, or dial in -2/3 stop exposure compensation, then it will usually provide a spot on exposure. It doesn't really matter what the "true" film speed is as long as you can get consistent results with our individual setup.

 

Matrix metering uses the multiple segments to assess the light distribution of the scene and while it can obviously be fooled by particular circumstances, it is a major improvement over simple centre-weighted metering and much faster than spot metering. When I first acquired my P67II I continued to use separate handheld incident and spot meters until I eventually did a rigorous comparison between the two approaches. What I found was that the matrix metering in the P67II could beat my manual approach under almost all lighting conditions. In terms of speed and accuracy of metering there is just no contest (provided the in-built bias discussed above is accounted for). This year I have put >500 rolls of Velvia through my P67II and the results are consistently excellent. I use matrix metering exclusively and there are virtually no occasions when I need to switch to using a spot meter. For example, on a recent trip to Australia I was photographing at Natural Arch in Springbrook National Park. This is a complex shot to meter since the camera is inside a dark cave which has a hole in the roof through which pours a waterfall, while the sunlight is falling on the rain forest outside which is also visible. I spot metered this very carefully and bracketed widely for safety and I also shot with the matrix metering on auto. My first spot metered shot was about optimum but so too was the matrix metered shot, and it took me several minutes with the spot meter. The moral of this tale is that you won't go far wrong if you use the matrix metering with some bracketing where necessary.

Dave

 

I've just posted a response on a similar P67II metering question raised by Chuk Tang which is relevant to your query.

Chuk

 

The real exposure is the one that gives you the desired result! I have used Velvia 50 with my P67II for about 4 or 5 years now and have found that the camera consistently overexposes (to my taste!) by about 1/3 to 2/3 stop when I use matrix metering with either my 55,75 or 105mm lenses. When I use my 165mm lens I find that the exposure is usually within about 1/3 of a stop (of my personal preference). However I find that the matrix metering is very consistent so there are usually no surprises and it allows me to get shots in rapidly changing light that would otherwise be impossible. I usually bracket all important shots whenever possible and I will ususally shoot the following sequence of exposures : "correct", -1/3, -2/3, -1, and the two middle ones will almost always clsoe to the optimum. If I was going to take only 1 shot then I would set the compensation at -2/3 and I would be completely confident that the exposure would be damn near perfect.

 

I also use Velvia 50 in my 5x4 camera, sometimes as sheet film, and sometimes in a panoramic roll film back. When I do this I use a separate hand held meter (currently a Minolta Flash Meter VI but there have been several over the years) and find I consistently get the best exposures when I rate Velvia 50 at ISO 32. Now part of this may be down to personal metering technique and preferences but I don't know many people who would claim that Velvia is truly an ISO 50 film. So if the "true" rating of Velvia 50 is ISO 32 then that would imply that the Pentax is overexposing by about 2/3 to 4/3 stops. This is not really an issue though as long as its behaviour is consistent, which it is.

 

I can't comment on the accuracy of the Canon50e metering but what you describe with the Pentax is definitely consistent with my experience. I would suggest you just bracket your shots for a while and then check which of the compensation values consistently gives the desired results. Then either change the ISO rating to suit or bias the compensation dial in one direction. Hope this helps.

Tom, your comment "...but eventually it behaved as though it had film" is exactly what happened to me and I am sure that my frantic winding on etc just convinced the camera that it had got to the end of the "virtual film".

 

Dave, I'd sure appreciate hearing whatever Pentax have to say about this problem (or maybe that should read "undocumented feature"!) once it's repaired. Maybe someone from Pentax is reading this thread and would like to respond?

David

 

I should have stated that my camera is a P67II which has a modified wind-on mechanism relative to the original P67. Having said that, your problem sounds identical to what I experienced.

David

 

I don't think your winding problem can be directly related to a wrong pressure plate setting but it does sound very similar to something I experienced during a recent photographic trip to Iceland. I ended up with the camera refusing to wind on the film even though cogs were turning. In my case I had previously opened the back inadvertently while a film was loaded and I can't remember if I did this because the lack of resistance on the wind on lever made me think the camera was empty, i.e. I don't know if opening the back was the cause or a consequential effect of the problem. Anyway I ended up with no wind on, about two hundred unused films, and in a panic! I eventually got it winding again after fiddling ad nauseam and I can't say for sure what I did to make it work. I think that I operated the wind on lever many times, I opened and closed the back multiple times, I turned the power on and off, and I prayed for inspiration! I concluded that opening the back mid-roll had reset some internal take-up ratchets and confused the system but I just don't know for sure. Since then I have exposed hundreds more films and the camera has operated perfectly so I don't think what I experienced could have been a real mechanical failure in the sense of a broken part, but it could have been a grain of dirt or something sticking. I suppose I should have tested my theory about opening mid-roll with a blank film. I am currently taking pictures in Australia and would not like to induce the same fault again since I am not sure how to fix it, but if I can pluck up the courage I might just try a small experiment.

Hi Jonathan

 

You've obviously got several answers already about the suitability of the movements but I thought I would add a few comments as I have been using this particular model now for several months.

 

The RSW45 is intended as a wide angle camera and as such the movements are more than you will ever be likely to need in landscape photography. I thought that the lack of front swing would be a bit of a limitation but I've only had one occasion out of hundreds of shots where I wanted some swing. The big plus point for me is the very low weight and the fact that the camera can dropped in my Lowepro backpack with the lens still attached and be ready for use instantly. And, although it's non-folding, the design means that front to back dimension is still only about 90mm with a 72mm Schneider Super Angulon attached. I use the RSW45 along with the new Minolta Flashmeter VI which provides extremely fast analysis of a scene through its spot/latitude function. The combination of camera and meter means that I frequently use my Ebony in situations where I would have previously grabbed my MF Pentax 67. It's a great camera for landscape photography and I don't think you will be disappointed.

 

After using it for a while I changed the standard Ebony focussing screen for a Beattie Intenscreen which provided more even illumination and more "snap" to the focus, at least with my preferred 72mm Super Angulon. Tre(Trelawney Burt) at Robert White has told me that the Beattie is not always successful and it depends on the particular lens so I'd speak to them if you want more background.

 

I've just come back from two weeks photography in Iceland and the results from the Ebony were simply superb. Plus, its low weight for a 5x4 meant that I was able to take my Pentax 67 system along too.

 

Let me know if you want any other info on the camera.

Hi Trevor

 

The silver lever is a lock release for the wind on mechanism which you push to the left only until the the film wind on lever is released. At that point you let go the silver lever and stroke the wind on lever until the film stops advancing (on my Horseman 612 back this takes about two strokes), and at this point the new number will be fully visible in the window. If you keep the silver lever continually pressed then the film spacing will be unpredictable. I use a Horseman 612 roll film back and the spacing is absolutely even if operated as described.

 

To get to the first frame when loading the film you wind on the leader until an arrow appears through a circular cutout in the pressure plate, close the back and continue winding until the film stops positively. At this point the number 1 will be visible in the frame counter window.

 

Once all the frames have been exposed you press the silver lever and stroke the wind on lever until the film is fully wound on to the take up spool. There is no positive indication when this is achieved but it only takes about 6 or 7 strokes.

 

Hope this helps.

Brian I use a Horseman 612 back on my RSW45 field camera and it works just fine. I obtained my Horseman back from Robert White Photographic(www.robertwhite.co.uk).