garry_young1

<p>Long time no post for me - most likely won't even be remembered by most. :)</p>

<p>Just one shot for me for the new year. Shot deep in the bowels of an abandoned monastery here in Taiwan. The monastery was severely damaged in an earthquake. Now it is off-limits as it is leaning over precariously on the side of a mountain. But a great and spooky experience to fling fire in it's depths. Shot on a K20 with 16-45:</p>

<p><img src="http://farm3.staticflickr.com/2817/11796930015_92583ced91_c.jpg" alt="" width="800" height="531" /></p>

Lol - Nice one Mis!

Andrew - honestly not trying to be cruel - just saying what I heard! And yeah, Johnny would certainly have gone for black!! :)

Popped into a brick and mortar store here in Asia yesterday where Pentax goods are still sold a plenty. I happen to be in the process of buying an old Pentax medium format film kit from the old man. He was buzzing with excitement as I opened his shop door. With an irrepressible grin, he said (in heavily accented English), "Full-frame! I know!"

It turns out a Pentax rep from Japan was passing through the day before. The rep was showing my friend the new line up of products through the medium of pictures of the products on an iPad. Suddenly a camera body was shown that was nothing that has yet been released (this is after the K5ii and K5iis were formally presented - so it wasn't them). My friend asked what it was. The rep shut his iPad down in a flash.

The rep refused to talk about it, but when pointedly asked if it was a full-frame camera for Pentax, he winked in an exaggerated fashion at my friend.

I don't tread the rumor mill. I won't even buy a full-frame camera if one was released, well, not yet anyway. But I smell a new season for Pentax under Ricoh.

In the words of Johnny Cash:

"There ain't no grave, can hold my body down."

<p>Hi all. It's been a long time since I last posted here. I was inspired to visit here by the new lens rumors, and I miss the photo sharing! Here are two pics I shot in recent weeks, nothing special, but I just wanted to share. :)</p>

<p>First was taken with on a K20D, with my catadioptric 500mm f8 Tamron, hand held, high iso.<br>

<img src="http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7018/6800457475_b63f961372_z.jpg" alt="" width="640" height="431" /></p>

<p>Second was taken on a K20D, with my FA43 limited, my favorite walk around lens.<br>

<img src="http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7030/6800456943_b355d41832_z.jpg" alt="" width="640" height="431" /></p>

<p>Jeremiah - I agree!!</p>

<p>Bob - that is a great Idea! I think I'll try something like that this weekend!</p>

<p>Steve - thanks for chiming in! The problem I have with using the auto thyristor (or ttl for that matter) is that I like the environs and back ground to be entirely black. This means the auto thyristor and ttl system is going to be fooled by the dark, and will fire too long. If I were shooting into a very white close up environment (which I might have to do) then I would be able to use the auto systems to drop the flash duration lower.<br>

I know that many of the modern flash guns state in their specification sheets that the shortest flash duration possible is only achievable with the auto systems. I am just a junkie for well exposed subjects on a black background lol!</p>

<p>For those that are following this thread, or who might find this thread in the future, I have had prompt replies to my phone calls to Sigma taiwan, and to my emails that I wrote to Sigma USA. Unfortunately all the technicians I speak to seem incapable of understanding why on earth I would need a short flash duration, and they also have no idea what the technical data is concerning flash duration for the Sigma flashes beyond what is written in the manual. I am very frustrated with Sigma right now. :((</p>

<p>My own tests have shown (ROUGHLY) that the Sigma 530DG Super when dialed down to 1/64 power has a flash duration slightly shorter than 1/6,000 of a second. My guesstimations might be wrong though, and it could be as fast as down to 1/20,000 of a second or so. I wish I knew more so that I could choose between a cheap Chinese flash that would give me 1/20,000 of a second flash duration, or a Sunpak 622 Super that would give me a flash duration of 1/180,000 of a second. The Sunpak is not available here in Taiwan, so I would need to get it from out of the country, and even though it is not too expensive, I don't feel like getting hit for shipping AND import duty, lol.</p>

<p>Thanks Haig!</p>

<p>Michael - thanks for chipping in. Nice shot! The high speed photography I am doing and want to do is in an environment where there is no influence from ambient light at all. So that is not an issue. There is no way to stop the motion of high speed things with shutter. Even at shutter speeds of 1/4000 of a second (the fastest my K20D goes), I get blur. I guess a high speed impact with small pieces flying off ends up being faster than most sport lol! I think your shot is a great example of using fill flash to perfectly match what you wanted in a fraction of blur with frozen central subjects. Nice one.</p>

<p>Paul - also thanks for chipping in. I only shoot in full manual when doing the high speed stuff. Everything you say about trailing curtains and HSS etc is perfectly true! But not what I'm trying lol - sorry for not saying it more clearly in the beginning!</p>

<p>Your advice about killing the ambient light and relying on the flash is exactly what I'm trying to do! :)) But I can't freeze certain things even with that! I have since found that the full power flash duration of the Sigmas that I am using is 1/700 second, but I still do not know what the flash duration is for other power settings on these flashes. (I have found that it is not a simple proportion either - ie if 1/1 = 1/700, then one would think that 1/2 = 1/1400 - but it doesn't!!)</p>

<p>You say "In some flashes, this can be as brief as 1/50,000 second." Now that is what I am looking for lol!!! I am pretty sure the Sigma at 1/64 power is not getting me that sort of flash duration. So now my challenge is to (a) find out what duration I AM getting at 1/64 power on the sigma, and (b) find a flash gun that has something like a 1/128 power setting.</p>

<p>Does anyone know any math method of using guide numbers etc with the already known figure of 1/700 second flash duration at full power to find out what flash duration I'll be getting at 1/64 power?</p>

<p>Bob - thanks for another good link - I actually stumbled onto that site through Donnie's link! I may try to copy his optical trigger - if I can find the parts and a keen amateur electrician in my neighborhood lol!</p>

<p>Bob - thanks for that site! I learned a lot from it. Some things that were counter intuitive - the fact that halving the power of the flash doesn't halve the flash duration - it all varies. Very interesting. Another thing that was interesting, was that flashes with similar guide numbers have different flash durations. So there is a lot to look at, and I think getting my hands on one of those Sunpaks with the 1/128 power option seems to be the answer.</p>

<p>Steve - thanks for participating here. I think the thing that will help you get what my struggles are is that the power of the flash and the sensitivity of the sensor totally render the shutter speed irrelevant. The only reason cameras have a limit on the speed of their shutters when using a flash is that the shutter curtain will partially obscure the sensor at any speed over 1/250 of a second (I think it is 1/250). Basically, the shutter curtain will not be totally open over 100% of the sensor at those shutter speeds, but will only have a small gap traveling across the face of the sensor. This means that when the flash fires off at say 1/10000 of a second while your shutter is moving at 1/1000 of a second, the flash will only illuminate the small section of the sensor behind the shutter curtain gap at the time that the flash fires. Pulling apart an old camera might help you see what I mean. Anyway, it is all about the duration of the flash, not at all about the shutter speed, unless of course you are shooting at ISO sensitivity and aperture levels where the ambient light is well balanced with the power of the flash, but that is not what I'm trying at all. The motion blur that I am seeing is of very high speed small particles that spray off or splash out from a high speed impact. Most of the stuff is frozen, but the things that are still blurring are not going to be frozen by a camera shutter speed even at 1/8000 of a second. It is only a very very short duration flash that will freeze them.</p>

<p>Donnie - I can't seem to open that site. :( I'll try again later. Thanks for the heads up though. :)</p>

<p>Hi everyone. I have been experimenting with flash photography, with the express purpose of trying to catch the things that we experience in everyday life, but never get to see that clearly because they're gone in the flash of an eye - so to say. So I started with the proverbial drops in a saucer, and dropping a tomato in water, etc.</p>

<p>Let me clarify that by flash speed, I am talking about the time duration of one flash. Another thing that may help advice givers is that I am using Sigma EF 530 DG Super flashes fired wirelessly from my K20D.</p>

<p>I have found that I get a lot of motion blur when using a flash at full power, or even half power. Right now the best motion freeze I can get is when my flashes fire at 1/64 power - the lowest I can set them, but still I am getting motion blur in certain instances.</p>

<p>Am I just aiming too high in hoping for even shorter flash duration? I seem to remember that speeds of 1/16000 of a second are possible with flashes. Is this only certain types of flashes? Or did I read something about specialist studio equipment and mix things up? I am pretty sure that I read that using a flash skillfully can get better motion freeze than just high shutter speeds - even better than the 1/8000 sec that some cameras offer.</p>

<p>Does anyone know what time duration these flashes fire at when turned right down to 1/64 power? Any advice on getting time durations down to 1/16000 of a second or faster?</p>

<p>Here are some more successful shots, and I can't find the shots that demonstrate blur lol! I generally delete them. First, a tomato dropped into a fish tank.<br>

<img src="http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4074/4916552192_3bc8433836_z.jpg" alt="" width="445" height="640" /><br>

Second, water spouting up and falling back on itself:<br>

<img src="http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5172/5441367914_673ee61f17_z.jpg" alt="" width="438" height="640" /><br>

Third - my least successful, but not necessarily due to motion blur (just too shallow a depth of focus here), drops of milk with food coloring:<br>

<img src="http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5169/5338976350_23bba9cd5f_z.jpg" alt="" width="640" height="438" /></p>

<p>I have also posted a few shots of water falling onto the back of a spoon in this weeks POW thread. I'd appreciate any advice on getting shorter time duration flash exposure.</p>

<p>Excellent beginnings!</p>

<p>Fire:<br>

<img src="http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5214/5424828272_019b679ac2_z.jpg" alt="" width="438" height="640" /></p>

<p>Water onto the back of a spoon:<br>

<img src="http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4139/5441368406_ba96c00502_z.jpg" alt="" width="640" height="536" /></p>

<p>Detail of a water spout falling back onto itself:<br>

<img src="http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5217/5441367728_a18cdf871e_z.jpg" alt="" width="440" height="640" /></p>

<p>Firstly - Doug Stemke - my sympathies! Glad you are able to type lol!!<br>

Anirban - I love both shots. Very unique subjects.<br>

Matt Burt - Great self portrait and the guy's face is not too bad either (PS - you eat your meat raw? Lol!)<br>

Bob Marz - I'm shivering with the cold!<br>

ME - I love the willow shot - looks almost like one of those endless knots from Ireland.<br>

Doug Robinson - interesting shot. Pity the water was so overpoweringly bright. I think a fraction more detail in the secondary aspects of the shot would have made it stunning. Have you tried black and white?<br>

Osamu - enjoy your new lens! I'm jealous lol!<br>

Dave - brilliant! Did you crop that shot much? Hand held, especially if cropped, is amazing.<br>

Scott - I always love your wood shots. It's as much the wood as it is the instruments that they will become.<br>

Haig - great in flight shots - both of them lol!<br>

Michael - thanks for the kind words. :))</p>