FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

A99 wl flash delay

Page  <1 34567 21>
Author
matthiaspaul View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 08 September 2006
Country: Germany
Status: Offline
Posts: 940
Post Options Post Options   Quote matthiaspaul Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03 January 2013 at 21:16
Originally posted by matthiaspaul matthiaspaul wrote:

Originally posted by analytical analytical wrote:

Originally posted by IanL IanL wrote:

...the adapter, which is just plastic and metal conductors - nothing which could cause delay.
Do we know that for sure? I haven't read anything either way. Sony might have changed the communication protocol for the multifunction interface shoe, since it handles more functions than just flash. If so there would be a "chip" in the adapter to translate.

At most there could be some passive parts inside the ADP-AMA and ADP-MAA adapters (series resistors or coils, ESD protection, etc.), but it is unlikely given the costs. Also, the adapters do not depend on a power supply. F1 is somewhat special as the MIS shoe has two kinds of F1 signals (named F1# and ISO_SHOE_X below). The F2, F3 and GND signals seem to be just passed through and with the protocol not changed (or at least compatible), as even an old Minolta Program Flash 4000 AF mounted via ADP-MAA + FS-1100 on a SLT-A99 will work (flash distance display, zoom reflector, flash ready signal and X-sync speed enforcement) except for TTL-OTF.

http://www.mi-fo.de/forum/index.php?showtopic=32344&view=findpost&p=292021 ff.
http://www.mi-fo.de/forum/index.php?showtopic=32700&view=findpost&p=292451 ff.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multi_Interface_Shoe
[...]


and

Originally posted by matthiaspaul matthiaspaul wrote:

Originally posted by IanL IanL wrote:

Originally posted by matthiaspaul matthiaspaul wrote:

... Example:

HVL-F60M mounted on SLT-A99 will allow ADI, whereas a HVL-F60M connected via ADP-MAA + OC-1100 / FA-CC1AM must not and should not allow for ADI (I cannot test this as I don't own a SLT-A99 or HVL-F60M).


This could be recognised by open circuits on ID1-3.

Yep, this would be a straight-forward logical choice - and probably the cheapest to implement.

But there are other possible kinds of "sense loops" which could be used for this purpose as well (f.e. there are multiple GND pins). At this stage, we just don't know for sure how Sony chosed to implement it.


For ADP-MAA and ADP-AMA internals, see here:

http://www.dyxum.com/dforum/a99s-sync-speed_topic93240_post1123141.html#1123141

These adapters are fully passive.

Greetings,

Matthias
--

Minolta-Forum (MiFo) - German forum for the Minolta, Konica, Konica Minolta and Sony world of photography: http://www.mi-fo.de
 



Back to Top
IanL View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 30 December 2010
Country: Great Britain
Location: Jersey,C.I.
Status: Offline
Posts: 2113
Post Options Post Options   Quote IanL Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03 January 2013 at 22:59
Originally posted by matthiaspaul matthiaspaul wrote:



....These adapters are fully passive


Thanks, Matthias, I knew I had seen it somewhere
Ian
Back to Top
Peekayoh View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 19 January 2009
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Posts: 3167
Post Options Post Options   Quote Peekayoh Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03 January 2013 at 23:29
Originally posted by analytical analytical wrote:

When posts on this thread have said "FEL" did they mean "FEL Lock?" The A99 Handbook p122 defines FEL as "Flash Exposure Level" and only discusses FEL as "FEL Lock" or "lock the FEL," not as a separate setting.   

So maybe FELL?
In my manual,Page 122 has a heading "Flashes compatible with the FEL Lock function" and then names the four flashes I mentioned previously.
Back to Top
FarmerDave View Drop Down
Groupie
Groupie

Joined: 18 December 2008
Country: Canada
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Posts: 40
Post Options Post Options   Quote FarmerDave Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04 January 2013 at 05:19
Originally posted by analytical analytical wrote:

When posts on this thread have said "FEL" did they mean "FEL Lock?" The A99 Handbook p122 defines FEL as "Flash Exposure Level" and only discusses FEL as "FEL Lock" or "lock the FEL," not as a separate setting.   

So maybe FELL?   
              


LOL, it never occur to me FEL is flash exposure level because AEL has always been Auto Exposure LOCK.
Back to Top
tjack View Drop Down
Groupie
Groupie

Joined: 19 November 2010
Location: Rochester, NY
Status: Offline
Posts: 61
Post Options Post Options   Quote tjack Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05 January 2013 at 18:32
First tried the a77 with the HVL-F20 as the on-camera wireless controller (to a HVL-F58 off-camera flash)--and got the very noticeable delay Friedman and others report.

I then tried using my Pixel Kings to communicate with the HVL-F58 off-camera, and--surprise--I do not notice a delay (and I'm in auto, not manual, flash mode). I'm not certain I understand why....
Back to Top
IanL View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 30 December 2010
Country: Great Britain
Location: Jersey,C.I.
Status: Offline
Posts: 2113
Post Options Post Options   Quote IanL Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05 January 2013 at 23:10
Originally posted by tjack tjack wrote:


...I then tried using my Pixel Kings to communicate with the HVL-F58 off-camera, and--surprise--I do not notice a delay (and I'm in auto, not manual, flash mode). I'm not certain I understand why....


Assuming the Pixel Kings are implementing the Sony protocols correctly, the camera would believe it had a flash mounted on it, so it would not be implementing the wireless (IR) protocols, under which the delays arise.
Ian
 



Back to Top
tjack View Drop Down
Groupie
Groupie

Joined: 19 November 2010
Location: Rochester, NY
Status: Offline
Posts: 61
Post Options Post Options   Quote tjack Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06 January 2013 at 02:14
Your comment is interesting, because it seemed (to me) counter-intuitive before thinking about it some more. We know what happens when the camera "believe[s] it had a flash mounted on it," but needs to communicate (wirelessly) to an off-camera flash: that's the F20 to the F58, with the delay Friedman noted. The Pixel King still has to communicate with--not just trigger--the remote F58, as the flash exposure is auto, not manual, and the F58 "knows" the correct amount of light to provide. I presume you are saying that it does so in a way so that the F58 "believes" it is mounted on the camera, and not triggered remotely--as it would with a flash cable. That is, the camera "tells" the flash when it has had enough light, and the flash stops--just as when it is mounted on the camera, but this time, relayed through the Pixel King, just as it would through a cable. Interesting.

Anyway, however it works, it is another reason (beyond the reality that the radio signal won't be blocked as Sony's wireless signals sometimes are--by umbrellas, etc.) to use this rather than Sony's wireless implementation (assuming, of course, that the Pixel Kings work with the camera--they do for my a77, but I haven't yet heard much definitively as to how they might work with the a99 [where they will need an adapter to fit on the new shoe]).
Back to Top
Photosopher View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Knowledgebase Contributor

Joined: 13 June 2010
Country: United States
Location: St. Louis Mo
Status: Offline
Posts: 4178
Post Options Post Options   Quote Photosopher Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06 January 2013 at 03:24
i thought Pixel King confirmed they don't work on a77 yet. Have they released a firmware update to accommodate their function?
Back to Top
IanL View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 30 December 2010
Country: Great Britain
Location: Jersey,C.I.
Status: Offline
Posts: 2113
Post Options Post Options   Quote IanL Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06 January 2013 at 10:43
Originally posted by tjack tjack wrote:

I presume you are saying that it does so in a way so that the F58 "believes" it is mounted on the camera, and not triggered remotely--as it would with a flash cable.


Yes, exactly so. The radio units convey the signals as would the cable, and neither camera nor flash can tell the difference.

That is, the camera "tells" the flash when it has had enough light, and the flash stops--just as when it is mounted on the camera, but this time, relayed through the Pixel King, just as it would through a cable. Interesting.


That is it, in principle, but the mechanism you detail " the camera "tells" the flash when it has had enough light, and the flash stops-" is not the case with digital sensors, as they cannot be read fast enough (it is, however, the system used with the Minolta film cameras). With digital sensors, the flash is commanded to emit a pre-flash of standard power, and from the result of that, the camera computes how much power is required from the flash and commands that amount for the exposure. That, of course, takes a finite time, but it is normally so short that the user is not aware of it. That is what happens when the pop-up or shoe-mounted flash is used for direct illumination, as well as a wireless (IR)-commanded flash. The delay, which is the subject of this thread, only seems to arise when the wireless (IR) method is used with a shoe-mounted flash as commander. It is not inherent in that method, as the pre-SLT DSLRs (e.g. a900) did not suffer from it. That suggests it is a programming issue.

Edited by IanL - 06 January 2013 at 10:50
Ian
Back to Top
mikey2000 View Drop Down
Moderator Group
Moderator Group
OoU co÷rdinator

Joined: 10 January 2008
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Posts: 11082
Post Options Post Options   Quote mikey2000 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06 January 2013 at 11:05
I mentioned this issue to the moderators at Sony.co.uk support forums
Perhaps they can get it fixed in firmware....
Linky

(Edit to correct link)

Edited by mikey2000 - 06 January 2013 at 11:08
Want to know more about
  • Atom Ant? Just click!
  • Back to Top
    tjack View Drop Down
    Groupie
    Groupie

    Joined: 19 November 2010
    Location: Rochester, NY
    Status: Offline
    Posts: 61
    Post Options Post Options   Quote tjack Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06 January 2013 at 14:24
    The Pixel Kings work fine on my a77, including multiple-flash HSS (tested up to 1/2000). I've only used the F58 and F43 flashes with the Pixel Kings, and the F58 worked fine from the start; the F43 worked in HSS only after I went into Fn and turned HSS off (which I can't figure out). I can't speak as to whether the Kings would work with other flashes on the a77. I'm using firmware version 10.10.
    Back to Top
    tjack View Drop Down
    Groupie
    Groupie

    Joined: 19 November 2010
    Location: Rochester, NY
    Status: Offline
    Posts: 61
    Post Options Post Options   Quote tjack Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06 January 2013 at 14:27
    Thanks, IanL; that makes sense! There, indeed, is a pre-flash when using the Pixel Kings on the a77; it is just like on my a850--so close in time to the main flash that it is hard to distinguish the two.
    Back to Top
    Peekayoh View Drop Down
    Senior Member
    Senior Member

    Joined: 19 January 2009
    Location: United Kingdom
    Status: Offline
    Posts: 3167
    Post Options Post Options   Quote Peekayoh Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06 January 2013 at 17:45
    Originally posted by tjack tjack wrote:

    The Pixel Kings work fine on my a77, including multiple-flash HSS (tested up to 1/2000). I've only used the F58 and F43 flashes with the Pixel Kings, and the F58 worked fine from the start; the F43 worked in HSS only after I went into Fn and turned HSS off (which I can't figure out). I can't speak as to whether the Kings would work with other flashes on the a77. I'm using firmware version 10.10.
    You should be using v1020.
    Back to Top
    tjack View Drop Down
    Groupie
    Groupie

    Joined: 19 November 2010
    Location: Rochester, NY
    Status: Offline
    Posts: 61
    Post Options Post Options   Quote tjack Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06 January 2013 at 20:20
    Regarding using v1020, normally I'd agree. But when I received the units (one trigger and two receivers) two were with v1020 and one was with v1010, and it was, basically, a mess--little worked. At that time, I could only find v1010 on Pixel's web site (probably a lousy search....), so I decided to change the two v1020 to v1010 (ignoring the warning that I was downgrading), so all three units were running the same version.

    Since then, the set-up has worked perfectly (apart from the quirk of needing to set the F43 to HSS-off in order for it to work wirelessly at HSS shutter speeds). Given that I have everything working, as I reported, I'm not inclined to change to v1020 and risk upsetting this applecart. Is there something I'm missing?
    Back to Top
    Dyxum main page >  Forum Home > Equipment forums > Camera Talk > A-mount full frame Page  <1 34567 21>

    Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down



    This page was generated in 0.059 seconds.

    Monitor calibration strip

    Dyxum.com - Home of the alpha system photographer

    In memory of Cameron Hill - brettania

    Feel free to contact us if needed.