Thanks to you all for your thoughtful input.

I agree that I have to practice with whatever metering system I decide upon, and will start with center-weighted, in-camera first. I guess it's a compromise/average starting point.

I've been playing around with in-camera spot metering and boy, is it hairy!

I'm thinking back to my Spotmatic days and really can't remember that little needle ever letting me down in any big way. We learned to add or subtract a stop by instinct after a while.
Anybody remember if those old meters were general or center-weighted?

Havin' fun now!

I've just watched a video by a cinematographer who discusses the differences between incidental and spot meters. At the end of the day, he leans towards spot meters.

He cautions to always take polarizers and filters into account while determining exposures.

OK, says I, where does the in camera's meter fall into the mix?

I can set it to spot reading, and it is already reading through the lens and filters I'm using. I can aim the camera at the "zone" I think would represent a grey card, and lock the exposure.

What do you all think? Am I going to get the best exposure 9 times out of 10?

I'm too cheap to spend hundreds of dollars on an extra step if it won't buy me much outdoors.

Now, that said, I certainly see the value of incident meters in the studio.

Love to hear your opinions.

Cheers!

Just found out the news, Tim, and am delighted!

Heartiest congratulations and well deserved!

It certainly is! and it certainly is!

Hi All.

I'm fooling around with my old M42 screw mount lenses on a istDS and decided to spend the day using the above lens as a general purpose 50mm.

I guess the thing that impressed me most was how tack sharp it is - even wide open (well, if you can consider f4 wide open).

I love sharp images so I can crop them with less loss of detail.

One thing I did learn though, never use this as a portrait lens on anyone older than 5 years!

Especially your loving wife (of ANY age).
Unless I guess, she's a dermatologist and gets a kick out of seeing every microscopic imperfection.

I should be out of intensive care by next weekend - that's when we go to couples' therapy.

Oy!

Gee, I hope not. One of the reasons I got the DS was for the glass prism - but I may be wrong (wouldn't be the first or last time).

From the write-ups I've seen, pentaprism is always mentioned with istDS, but not with the 100D etc.

Time to get the screwdrivers out?

Nah - too chicken.

Thanks Don,

Will look for a 2800D model.

Just measured my Pentax 200S at 5.78 volts for fun. Can use this non-TTL and non thyristor for now - pretty much as I have to use the pop-up flash with the M42 set-up. The 200S only gives me about one more stop but less red-eye.

Also seems to be dialogue about voltage vs current in the write-ups. Makin' my old head hurt!


Oy! There's a istDS TWO?

HUGE differences between istD and istDS.

Between DS and DS2?

So much to learn - so little brain!

Not to worry, Al.

You're not responsible for my impulsive actions.

There are 4 days to go on the auction - and who knows, I could be outbid.

The way I see it, completing a trigger circuit in Thyristor mode shouldn't be very polarity sensitive? Just shorting out a DC contact?

Anyway, please let us know what Pentax says? And if you could ask as well, about mating with a istDS specifically?

Appreciate it!

Feelin' better and better about this flash!

Thanks for the update Al!

The latest:

Found a Photo Strobe table which measured trigger voltages on a zillion flashes.

The Vivitar 2800 had some 170+volt readings and was not recommended for direct connect to a DSLR.

The seller understood my worry completely and refunded my money prior to shipping.

Don, I believe you use these old war horses as slaves, and they're probably brilliant for that. As would all the old film era thyristors I'd wager.

Al, I have a bid in on an Achiever TZ250 with a 17.5volt trigger, so we'll see how that works out.

Thank you both for your thoughtful input!