File :-(, x, )
studioeeg
dose /p/ suggest a strobe like the Vivitar 285 HV?
>> Anonyfag of Borneo !bHymOqU5YY
ac, your call!
>> Anonymous
Consider the Sunpak 444D or 383
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
I have no strong feelings on it one way or the other.
>> Anonymous
Sunpak 383 supers. I have a pair and they fucking own. Plus, one took a good 7 foot fall onto concrete then rolled down a hill and survived without a hitch. The batteries didn't even come out.
>> Anonymous
>>112055
sauce plz

If it's true, it's awesome
>> Blackadder !!bSWRwu/NqzQ
I don't know about the latest ones, but this old article is quite good: http://www.botzilla.com/photo/strobeVolts.html
>> Blackadder !!bSWRwu/NqzQ
I found this on the trigger voltage subject too: http://photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00Bq8u&unified_p=1
>> Anonymous
>>112053and it doesn't matter if you're using radio slaves.

Will there be a problem if you use an extension cord?
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>112053
Yeah, that's why he specifically said *non-HV* will fry cameras. The 285HV is the updated version of the 285 designed not to kill modern cameras.

Also: Flash with a too-high trigger voltage can kill wireless flash triggers, too. I've killed a couple of Cactus flash triggers that way. PocketWizards are probably more resilient, although I wouldn't want to try it with a $200 flash trigger.