Old external flash OK for digital cam?

Eric Stevens wrote:
On Fri, 01 Feb 2013 01:14:59 -0900, (Floyd L.
Davidson) wrote:

Eric Stevens wrote:
On Thu, 31 Jan 2013 22:29:50 -0500, Scott Schuckert
wrote:

In article , Ron
wrote:

I have an old external flash, a Sunpak 333D. Used it with my old Nikon
FA but haven't used it on any camera since I went digital. Have heard
that some older flashes have high voltages present at the hot shoe that
could damage a digital camera. How can I tell if this flash is OK to use
with something like my Nikon D40?

According to DPAnswers.com, the trigger voltage for that flash is 4.3
volts. Nikon DSLRs can generally withstand up to 250V, so you should be
fine. I'd recommend, of course, that you confirm those figures with the
respective manufacturers, if possible.

If in doubt, sync regulators like the Wein Safe-Sync. can be used.

That data is all very well but you also need to be concerned about
voltage spikes at the moment of switching. A simple diode protector or
similar device should make sure that the camera is protected from a
back-lash fromthe flash.

Not true.

Various sources all report measured voltages of less than 6 VDC for the
Sunpak 333D. There is no reason to think that is not a reliable enough
value. Given that it is very low, and Nikon can tolerate a very high
voltage, there is virtually no reason to be concerned.

I was cautious because I don't know what is being switched in
Sunpak333D and I have had bad experiences switching inductive loads. I
think it was a 400V spike I measured when switching relays on the 12V
system on my boat. An ordinary meter will never detect that.
Switching spike voltages don't have to be very high to take out
assorted solid state circuitry.

Yes that is very true for inductive loads, and you
should see a reverse diode across every relay winding.
There are no relays in a flash.

There of course is the inductance of the leads
themselves, so there can be inductive kicks that are
significantly higher than what might be read as the
static voltage. But a 6 VDC circuit isn't a problem for
a camera that can deal with 250 volts.

Nobody reads the trigger voltage of a flash with "an
orginary voltmeter" either. GigaHertz bandwidth scope is
more like it...


A single diode "protection" device is 1) not enough, but 2) redundant in
this case. Rest assured that the camera has both a forward and reverse
diodes in series and parallel.

It is also true that given the low voltage on the trigger line there is
no question but that the flash unit itself incorporates what essentially
is the same type of circuitry as the mentioned Wein Safe-Sync unit.

All of which means that adding another diode will do very little other
than possibly causing less that reliable triggering.

--
Floyd L. Davidson http://www.apaflo.com/floyd_davidson
Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska)

On 2/02/2013 3:38 AM, ray carter wrote:
On Thu, 31 Jan 2013 18:59:52 -0800, Ron wrote:

I have an old external flash, a Sunpak 333D. Used it with my old Nikon
FA but haven't used it on any camera since I went digital. Have heard
that some older flashes have high voltages present at the hot shoe that
could damage a digital camera. How can I tell if this flash is OK to use
with something like my Nikon D40?

Another option might be a hot shoe slave to fire the flash.



Yep slave the flash and use the pop up flash as a light source.

lid (Ron) writes:

I have an old external flash, a Sunpak 333D. Used it with my old Nikon
FA but haven't used it on any camera since I went digital. Have heard
that some older flashes have high voltages present at the hot shoe that
could damage a digital camera. How can I tell if this flash is OK to use
with something like my Nikon D40?

It won't work with iTTL, though; just A or manual, I believe. They had
to design a completely new TTL mode for digital because the sensor
reflectivity wasn't anything like film reflectivity (and the new mode
doesn't work nearly as well, drat it).
--
Googleproofaddress(account:dd-b provider:dd-b domain:net)
Snapshots: http://dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/data/
Photos: http://dd-b.net/photography/gallery/
Dragaera: http://dragaera.info

In article , PeterN
wrote:

I have an old external flash, a Sunpak 333D. Used it with my old Nikon
FA but haven't used it on any camera since I went digital. Have heard
that some older flashes have high voltages present at the hot shoe that
could damage a digital camera. How can I tell if this flash is OK to use
with something like my Nikon D40?

No need to find out. For about $10 you can buy a device that will sit
between your flash and the camera, that will protect your camera from
high voltagge. I just forgot what it is called.

wein safe sync and it's *much* more than $10. it's also not needed.

In article , David Dyer-Bennet
wrote:

I have an old external flash, a Sunpak 333D. Used it with my old Nikon
FA but haven't used it on any camera since I went digital. Have heard
that some older flashes have high voltages present at the hot shoe that
could damage a digital camera. How can I tell if this flash is OK to use
with something like my Nikon D40?

It won't work with iTTL, though; just A or manual, I believe. They had
to design a completely new TTL mode for digital because the sensor
reflectivity wasn't anything like film reflectivity (and the new mode
doesn't work nearly as well, drat it).

the new ittl is *much* better and far more capable than the old ttl
ever was.

nospam writes:

In article , David Dyer-Bennet
wrote:

I have an old external flash, a Sunpak 333D. Used it with my old Nikon
FA but haven't used it on any camera since I went digital. Have heard
that some older flashes have high voltages present at the hot shoe that
could damage a digital camera. How can I tell if this flash is OK to use
with something like my Nikon D40?

It won't work with iTTL, though; just A or manual, I believe. They had
to design a completely new TTL mode for digital because the sensor
reflectivity wasn't anything like film reflectivity (and the new mode
doesn't work nearly as well, drat it).

the new ittl is *much* better and far more capable than the old ttl
ever was.

Not for producing accurately exposed pictures it isn't. The whole CLS
thing for controlling a group of flashes is pretty neat -- except that
it introduces enough delays that animals I've tried to use it with ALL
manage to blink during the actual exposure (it does test flashes in each
group, and then uses communication flashes to tell each group what power
to select, so that's a lot of pre-flash).
--
Googleproofaddress(account:dd-b provider:dd-b domain:net)
Snapshots: http://dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/data/
Photos: http://dd-b.net/photography/gallery/
Dragaera: http://dragaera.info

In article , David Dyer-Bennet
wrote:

I have an old external flash, a Sunpak 333D. Used it with my old Nikon
FA but haven't used it on any camera since I went digital. Have heard
that some older flashes have high voltages present at the hot shoe that
could damage a digital camera. How can I tell if this flash is OK to use
with something like my Nikon D40?

It won't work with iTTL, though; just A or manual, I believe. They had
to design a completely new TTL mode for digital because the sensor
reflectivity wasn't anything like film reflectivity (and the new mode
doesn't work nearly as well, drat it).

the new ittl is *much* better and far more capable than the old ttl
ever was.

Not for producing accurately exposed pictures it isn't.

yes it is.

The whole CLS
thing for controlling a group of flashes is pretty neat

very neat, and very powerful.

-- except that
it introduces enough delays that animals I've tried to use it with ALL
manage to blink during the actual exposure (it does test flashes in each
group, and then uses communication flashes to tell each group what power
to select, so that's a lot of pre-flash).

yes, it fires a series of preflashes, which is an effective way for the
flashes to communicate with each other.

you can mitigate the blinking with infrared filters, and a blinking
animal does not affect the exposure *at* *all*.

On 2/5/2013 11:57 PM, nospam wrote:
In article , David Dyer-Bennet
wrote:

I have an old external flash, a Sunpak 333D. Used it with my old Nikon
FA but haven't used it on any camera since I went digital. Have heard
that some older flashes have high voltages present at the hot shoe that
could damage a digital camera. How can I tell if this flash is OK to use
with something like my Nikon D40?

It won't work with iTTL, though; just A or manual, I believe. They had
to design a completely new TTL mode for digital because the sensor
reflectivity wasn't anything like film reflectivity (and the new mode
doesn't work nearly as well, drat it).

the new ittl is *much* better and far more capable than the old ttl
ever was.

Not for producing accurately exposed pictures it isn't.

yes it is.

The whole CLS
thing for controlling a group of flashes is pretty neat

very neat, and very powerful.

-- except that
it introduces enough delays that animals I've tried to use it with ALL
manage to blink during the actual exposure (it does test flashes in each
group, and then uses communication flashes to tell each group what power
to select, so that's a lot of pre-flash).

yes, it fires a series of preflashes, which is an effective way for the
flashes to communicate with each other.

you can mitigate the blinking with infrared filters, and a blinking
animal does not affect the exposure *at* *all*.


Right. You just get a well exposed, technically correct, lousy image.
Sheesh!

BTW don't some flash systems have infrared?
What does it take to convert a system to infrared?

--
PeterN

In article , PeterN
wrote:

the new ittl is *much* better and far more capable than the old ttl
ever was.

Not for producing accurately exposed pictures it isn't.

yes it is.

The whole CLS
thing for controlling a group of flashes is pretty neat

very neat, and very powerful.

-- except that
it introduces enough delays that animals I've tried to use it with ALL
manage to blink during the actual exposure (it does test flashes in each
group, and then uses communication flashes to tell each group what power
to select, so that's a lot of pre-flash).

yes, it fires a series of preflashes, which is an effective way for the
flashes to communicate with each other.

you can mitigate the blinking with infrared filters, and a blinking
animal does not affect the exposure *at* *all*.

Right. You just get a well exposed, technically correct, lousy image.
Sheesh!

his concern was about exposure, not whether or not the image was a
prize winner.

BTW don't some flash systems have infrared?
What does it take to convert a system to infrared?

an infrared filter over the master flash or the nikon su-800.

On 2/6/2013 9:35 AM, nospam wrote:

snip

Right. You just get a well exposed, technically correct, lousy image.
Sheesh!

his concern was about exposure, not whether or not the image was a
prize winner.


Who said anything about a prize winning image? You are saying that
content doesn't matter, as long as the image is properly exposed?


BTW don't some flash systems have infrared?
What does it take to convert a system to infrared?

an infrared filter over the master flash or the nikon su-800.

Oh!

--
PeterN