Same with any computer product... buy now and be happy. There will always be "something better, faster, stronger" around the corner.

[-edit] Argh! beaten to it... I gotta stop eating lunch while typing. [/-edit]

There are rumors of some new lenses (DA* or something) coming this winter, spring, summer, er, um fall?? Actually the lenses themselves are fact. The arrival date is pure fiction.
A new K10D flavor is fiction at the moment. Any hopes that a reliable date could be attached to vaporware is a case of setting one's self up for failure.



FYI, I have used the bright mode with sharpening to full on the K10D... it was way too much. Had to dial back down. maybe it would have been useful for printing directly from SD card at a kiosk, but for any post production work it was just too much. Pentax made the right decision in thier decision in this area... (as stated many, many times).

he, he, I only notice it on my 50mm f1.4. My other lenses are too deep and I cannot see if that is happening.

Use the 50mm f/1.4. Set shutter speed to half a second. Set Aperture to 1.4.
Take a picture. You'll see the mirror flip up then down but then just afterwards, the iris flashes closed and open again.

FYI, The behavior is the same on my istD.

I love my 50mm 1.4, with that large glass opening you can see clearly all the way to the sensor as you take a photo (of your face ).

Generally, the iris is fully open to allow for metering and focus. When the picture is being taken the iris closes. Of course at f/1.4 the iris really doesn't move that much...

One thing I noticed is that when the image is just about to be exposed the iris closes down all the way then back open, even when I am using an aperture of f/1.4.

I'm sure there is some technical reason, Any ideas why this happens?
Perhaps to help eliminate light coming in?? Or is this just a type of system reset/calibration between photos?


I was just thinking recently, there is a lot happening between each image being taken. If all these hardware movements were eliminated I bet the camera could take some wickedly fast sequences of photos. Assuming the sensor, processor and memory could keep up, of course.

Nope, empty space for battery, extra SD card and remote, but just the empty space.

You have to buy the extra battery. Seems to be a cruel joke, but still I found I am very glad I got the grip for my camera.

SD card slot is simply a holder.
The battery lays down facing upwards with contacts towards the center of the camera body.

The 540 can do a Modeling test which causes quick flashes for a second. But it can not strobe. This is a very dim and non-settable sequence.

The 500 can, I believe, set a number of flashes at a specific frequency for an effect like multiple exposure but using a single long exposure on the camera. (Don't know what other uses one might have for such a feature.)

Could be. But the signal should be in binary. Whether the signal is weak or diffused, on is on, and off is off. Sending analog pulses would of course be too prone to errors caused by distance and all sorts of other factors.
As least logically it makes sense to me that way. So I'm not sure how the brolly would make a difference.

I do not actually know the exact encoding scheme -- but it would be cool to have a way to record whats happening and decipher what is being sent/received.

Of course, as in your case, bright light can mask/overpower the signal altogether and cause the signal to not be seen in one direction or the other, or both.

Good idea on the lens issue. Just read another thread on something about that yesterday. Anyway, I was using my old SMC Pentax-FA 1:14 50mm lens. switched to the new kit 18-55mm and have the same results.

OK some further observations...

When the 360 on camera is in master mode it fully takes part in the exposure of the subject.

When the 360 on camera is in control mode, it tries not to take part in exposure but if you're close to the subject the flash is still bright enough to have some effect and cause reflections.


I generally have been shooting the remote flash through a brolly. I thought I had mentioned that in my initial post but I see after all the copy/paste and re-writes that I left that out. (stupid!)
Although honestly didn't think the flash needed to "see" the subject for PTTL.

Anyway everything seems to work much better with bare remote flash. (both with pop-up controller and 360 on camera as controller.)
Still some odd behavior with regards to master v.s. controller, but maybe the bigger flash just takes too long to loose power before the main flash fires. That makes total sense and I can accept that one.

Still, it is odd that my initial tests with the 360 on camera seemed to work flawlessly even through the brolly. I think I may have had the remote flash closer to the subject and the ambient lighting may have been more subdued. Perhaps the remote flash's sensor picked up the lighting better on that one test?


Do any of this make sense, or does it sound like my whole system just totally wacked?


I hate the look of bare flash, but I guess that is OK, in variable conditions I'm not likely to have a big umbrella connected to the flash anyway. And for constant environment shooting, I can just go to full manual mode.

At least I now seem to have some methods of getting consistent exposure. It is just a bummer that I have to worry about that.
Of course, I have a nagging feeling that when I come back and try again tomorrow, everything will be different.

Rats!

So you're saying the following works:
1. 360 on camera wireless/control mode, 360 off camera wireless mode - exposes fine (no reflection from on camera flash)

2. 360 on camera wireless/control mode, 360 off camera wireless mode, aperture closed down (lets say three stops) - exposes the same as 1. above?

3. 360 on camera wireless/master mode, 360 off camera wireless mode -- results on flash on camera used in exposure (you my see reflection from on camera flash), otherwise exposure is close to 1. above?

I've tried swapping the 360 and 540 as well, so it isn't a problem that one flash is mildly screwed up either.

ARGH!!!


I will try re-installing the firmware, but I'm hard pressed to see how a partial failure would be possible. (unless the upgrade logic is truly flawed)

I usually set the camera so that the pop-up flash is used only as the controller so it has no direct bearing on the final image exposure.


Now what truly confuses me is I have been working more with the 360 on the hotshoe to fire the 540 remotely. Initially (as stated above) it worked great!
Now I am seeing behavior similar to the pop-up flash!!
Even more disturbing is that the 360 (or the 540) when placed in the hotshoe ALWAYS affects exposure. Controller mode is supposed to fire control signal only and not affect exposure. Master mode is supposed to do both. The setting does not seem to make any bit of difference any more. (It did, as stated above since I had aimed the flash away from the subject and the scene was still properly exposed. Now the scene is too bright when the control flash is aimed at the subject and the scene is too dark when aimed away from the subject.)
The remote flash is firing in all instances.

Man, this stuff is so very frustrating!! It makes no sense what-so-ever! Arrrrggggh!!!

Yep.... unfortunately the wireless is working. (i.e. all my settings are correct).
It just isn't working correctly.

I am probably going to go back to my other issues and see if they get resolved with the 360 on the hotshoe.
It is sad, as I really need two light sources sometimes and didn't look forward to getting another flash. (I really wanted a DA* lens instead!)
ARRGGGH!!!

What a waste of time. Oh well, at least now I know it isn't my fault and that the equipment is a turd. I may not be happy, but I do have a solution.

Just really hope it is a firmware issue and not hardware. Maybe Pentax will eventually fix that issue. (I'm sure they'll just jump right on that! Argh!)