ian_casement

Quantum FreeXwire. They handle TTL with my Quantum stuff, enable control from an on camera Trio, on camera Pilot, On camera Radio Trigger and I fit one to every light across the range of Quantum, Lumedyne, Sunpak as well as having a set for studio lighting use.

On the Sunpak's they get velcro'd to the front of the handles where they don't swing around or get in the way and all my lighting where appropriate share the same Velcro Hook/Eye configuration so that they can be interchanged if needed. The Receivers have soft 'Eye' velcro and the Handles / Pack sides have 'Hook' velcro.

I was repeating my "neighbour's rooftop" test that I'd done a couple of days previously using a Nikon SB-800. I got the same exposure at 400 ISO from the 60CT as I got at 800 ISO from the Nikon speedlight.

Try the same test in daylight. Compare and provide the images produced.

Speedlights are JUST underpowered compared to daylight. When your subject needs matching light levels to those provided by daylight and your "Hammerhead" is just about managing at full power and at full zoom, then you'll see how woefully inadequate the Speedlight is in comparison. Ressurecting underexposed subjects through lack of output is just unnecessary if you use the correct equipment.

That is not to say that a Hammerhead has any better quality of light than a Speedlight has - not in the slightest - both are crap. Hammerheads are probably worse as their fresnels are less developed and are do not provide even coverage, but both compared to a parabolic are in a much lower class.

Hammerhead Parabolic? I'll take that, but I detest the extra weight and inconvenience of the power pack and umbilical, also without a zoom reflector they will provide less light on subject than a Fresnel zoom Hammerhead could provide (of less Ws) and if it's only for Hammerhead type photos and outside, then the matched frame coverage benefit and minimal loss of output would go a long way to swing the use to the Fresnel Hammerhead instead.

Off camera flash: Speedlight - Hammerhead - Parabolic? Parabolic every time, apart from where some low level fill or maybe some soft box use might be required.

Sunpak users might like this setup where I've fixed a Quick Release clamp to the battery holder rather than needing to use the supplied L bracket. The supplied L bracket, whilst sturdy leaves a vicious pin sticking out if the flash is removed from the bracket:

http://www.accolade-photography.com/DPR/spbracket2.jpg

Interesting thread... Moreso as I've just been using my 622's today... and they're a dream.

Battery options I've arrived at are: The simplest - Use 5500mAh NiMH C cells. Great duration, great recycle times, great single combined flash unit and power supply. Next easiest - Quantum Turbo batteries, Great duration, great recycle times, but umbilical cord cable connection to contend with.

The Sunpak 622 Super with its zoom head and integral battery really are a tough combination to beat. Their efficient reflector makes them a worthy competitor to a 400Ws parabolic and with better ergonomics. In syncro sunlight situations, overpowering the sun and matching ambient they're pretty much unbeatable. Where you have any requirement to combine external lighting along with lighting a subject the power provided y the 622's is what is needed and no adjustment of ISO will ever save you.

Gear Porn: Opening the Sunpak case today.

http://www.accolade-photography.com/DPR/622kit1800.jpg

The flat fronted battery packs provide a great location for fixing a radio receiver and when given to an assistant the handle/flash/battery/radio are a fantastic combination. Without an assistant theres a 1/4" screw fitting at the bottom of the handle.

But, once you buy it, It will work and pay for itself in due time. I know this sounds like a commercial, but Quantum is an American company that got it right the first time. You can buy a Qflash T2 off Ebay.com and it will still work like it did brand new! Quantum was also the first flash company to really get TTL flash right. Also its wireless radio control of remote flashes is hard to beat. There are knock off flashes that look like Quantum's and I won't put them down, cause I haven't used them. One bad thing though, the Quantum T2 series is out of production and with the new owners, Quantum is not servicing or upgrading these units. The T4's and T5's are being repaired and updated when shipped back to the factory. Quantum also will refurbish and recycle its batteries and other equipment. Most of the time we hear of an American company being sold and soon after that being shut down. Quantum's continued existence is a boon for all serious and professional photographers. Check out their website, www.qtm.com.

Agree.

Entirely.

Lets leave the T2 out of the equation as thats like saying the Ford motor company make a great 'Model T'. The Quantum T5dR is probably the most well known and aspired-to lighting addition of the the Quantum range , but I would wholeheartedly , 100% advocate the X5d-R range. 400Ws, Pack configuration, full camera and remote integration, battery options, expandable output to 2x 400Ws per pack. Beautiful. I have been a long time user of Quantum equipment after evaluating my needs and identifying the (Quantum) solution. This extends to control Speedlights and trigger studio packs too.

Note this: Models purchased in the year 2000 can STILL be up to date with modern day cameras via firmware updates and are still being use in professional applications. I have 10 Quantum units and they all work great today. Some ARE prior to 2000 units. ROI has never been equated.

There are things which could be changed for the better for working professionals but these changes would be down to 'attention to details' rather than pure function.

If, as you state there is a T6 coming out, then I hope it already has professional requirements priotised and it will retain the ROI offered by no other system.

<p>Forget squirming, you'd scare the life out of an animal with flash at 12 fps!</p>

<p>Set to 100Ws I was able to get 11fps with a Quantum 400Ws set up. If you added more 200Ws boosters to the basic 200Ws pack you'd probably get up to 12fps for 24-30 shot sequence but you'd need quite a few boosters.. maybe a dozen (?!).</p>

<p>Some lighting which has a TTL capability would be your requirement. These cycle to full storage capacity each time and use what they need for each shot but recycle again to full power each time. This won't happen in the time you're thinking about so you'll need a big energy reserve in the first place.</p>

<p>LED's, Tungsten, HMI's would all be better options I'd say.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Short exposure (or more correctly, high intensity) Reciprocity Failure doesn't kick in suddenly above 1/1000th s. It's a gradual process and works such that contrast is reduced. In other words the highlights are affected more than the shadows, resulting in a flat-looking exposure, but not a completely blank frame.</p>

</blockquote>

<p> <br>

That ^</p>

<p>Your shutter or whole shutter box may be faulty.</p>

<p>Check by looking through the shutter blades without film in the camera, back open and no lens on the body. You should see light coming through the shutter by way of a travelling slit.</p>

<p>By the sounds of your initial post you should only need to check speeds faster than 1/1000s.</p>

<p>You could just buy a Wein IR transmitter. They're the smallest and last the longest. You can DIY your own but they end up being more expensive unless you already have IR gel filter. There are other IR transmitters but they do tend to be quite large. Prolinca make such a transmitter.</p>

<p>A barebulb set to Wide at the full extent of the umbrella shaft will give you even coverage of the umbrella.</p>

<p>The geometry of umbrellas is pretty much the same unless you have a removable shaft. The position of the flash on the shaft is pretty much the same for any umbrella too.</p>

<p>Your subjects need to be lit to the same level as the bridge in the background. Not 'fill' at a lower level. The subject is primary. Not only does it need to be lit, it needs to be "realistically" lit... not just fill flash from camera position, which provide the required lighting brightness equivalent but also provide favourable modelling. That may require a hard light equalling the light level at the bridge, but also a fill light to balance the the (then) black shadows.</p>

<p>If your background is too bright with the lighting you're using, then you're not adding enough flash. OR.. you are tripping into HSS/FP mode beyond 1/250s where your lighting is compromised and cannot provide enough output.</p>

<p>I would admit to not understanding what the 'Amp' unit would be but CEE PLUG SOCKETS are industrial versions of the square pin sockets found in consumer situations. They're often waterproof which can be useful in many industrial type situations. (Camp sites use these for caravans).</p>

<p>Often an adapter can be used to convert oblong pin 13Amp plugs to the round pin CEE sockets, although it would be feasible to fit a round pin plug to the cable instead.</p>

<p>The CEE sockets are often 15Amp and many continuous lighting setups use these as standard. These provide a higher energy provision before blowing a fuse on the main board.</p>

<p>I tend to use adapters in these situations through a RCCD cut-out socket as my own safety provision but there should be no reason to plug directly into them if the lighting plug matches.</p>

<p>Hi Marva,</p>

<p>Sorry to hear about your personal battles, but once working Lumedyne are pretty easy to use with limited output parameters which should be easy enough to handle and will provide a low cost immediate solution to your needs.</p>

<p>I use a lot of Lumedyne gear and its rare that a pack dies, but batteries do tend to.. especially if you expect them to work for ever - or for over 36 years like yours :-)</p>

<p>Your batteries are not like Turbo batteries or like Minimegacyclers.. They're just batteries. Turbo's and Minimegacyclers are battery and capacitor charge storage which discharge the battery energy fast into a suitable flash. Your 244's won't work with these.</p>

<p>You will need to try a new battery first. If I were you, I would put one of the Mini batteries into an independent battery receller.. Batteries Plus might be a good start point for you. I say this because the mini batteries are quite small to use and now with newer battery technology you can increase their capacitance from 1800mAh to 3600mAh quite easily giving a useful duration.</p>

<p>If you can borrow or hire a Lumedyne battery before you do get the battery recelled, it would be prudent to do so.</p>

<p>I tend to but the "Large" batteries and fit 3.6Ah Lead Acid batteries to them.. About $15 a unit, but I have mini's as well at 3600mAh.</p>

<p>Good luck.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>I have requested another meeting with the client tomorrow, in the hopes of convincing them that a bit more tonal variation is actually more flattering to the products.<br>

</p>

</blockquote>

<p>That will be really confusing for them - you already convinced them you would be retouching the dark areas out - and thats what they agreed they wanted (!?)</p>

<blockquote>

<p> I have shot and retouched a couple of the units already, and the client has approved the look. They have stressed the importance of matching this look for the entire product line.<br>

</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Do that ^^. You need to organise your lighting to fit your product ranges the best possible then retouch the images to suit what you have already supplied.<br>

<br>

Theres no magic bullet.</p>

<p>The Bronica SQ has a leaf shutter. Whilst it is opening and whilst it is closing it is exposing. You will get no banding, just a reduced from optimal flash output. This is not unusual even with Speedlights and Full and Half power, at full power there is a 'a reduced from optimal flash output' too.</p>

<p>With Speedlights you will be at 1/250s or less. With the Bronica you will be killing ambient a little more. Flash may not be providing more benefit.</p>

<p>The optimal setup would be a faster flash duration.</p>

<p>I use the Qpaq-X, although I do have a bunch of Lumedynes too and those work just as well.</p>

<p>I like the Qpaq's purely to keep the system integrated. However, if I'm shooting all day with numerous lights (8-15), and the next day, and the next.. then the Lumedyne multi-battery chargers work best to charge multiple batteries. The Quantum system generally needs to charge through the pack rather than just charge the battery and for that reason I've added a charging terminal to the Qpaq PB1 batteries so they can be charged by the Lumedyne chargers without being fitted to the Qpaq power packs. </p>

<p>Hey Nathan - Great to hear you're getting excellent results with Canon. Everybody seems to have different battles with different equipment and different manufacturers but perseverance does seem to pay off eventually.</p>

<p>I'm fortunate in that I pushed for the three group X5d-R update and it came through. My Nikon's work great with them, and I'm reassured by your positive comments on the Canon side.</p>

<p>It does seem to be a firmware issue when problems arise. Getting the latest firmware is usually the key to the best results.</p>

<p>Was the firmware on the X5d-R the latest version and did you update the CoPilot firmware to the current version? (Often, even new versions don't have the up to date firmware).</p>

<p>Was the CoPilot connected to the X5d-R by cable or by radio? If radio, was the FW7Q receiver working OK?</p>

<p>There was an X5d-R firmware update last year (or the year before), for which the unit needed to be sent into Quantum. I had all mine done but can't recall the version number. I'll check out my X5d-R's and repost.</p>