I would put it in the category of falling into the statement "Not all versions of the 283 have high trigger voltages." ;-) http://www.botzilla.com/photo/strobeVolts.html As reported by users, 283's made after '87 measure between 5-10 volts at the hotshoe... I think the IB for for 2.8C states that the Rollei isolates up to 200 volts... this from memory so it may not be correct... Eric Goldstein -- On Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 5:54 PM, Don Williams <dwilli10@xxxxxxx> wrote: > At 03:05 PM 12/9/2009, you wrote: > > Not all versions of the 283 have high trigger voltages. > > What category would you put 256 volts, just measured right now? As I said, > this unit is at least 30 years old and I remember waiting anxiously for it > to arrive from New York. I think I paid $80 something for it and thought it > was pretty hot at the time. > > I think it's in the high voltage category and the current drawn when you > connect the contacts externally makes a pretty significant spark. > > The 283 replaced a high-voltage DC battery unit I bought in Panama in 1953. > I think that unit used a 67.5 volt, (perhaps even higher) battery and it was > the first strobe I had ever seen. > > In reflection I think the battery was higher than 67.5 volts but only > Richard K will remember the voltages that were available in batteries in > that era. I should know but my mind is dropping old things like that to > make room for new things. I do remember that the flash head was separate > from the battery pack and that it worked quite well once I ground the cam > and added a set of contacts synchronized for X delay, X being zero in my > nomenclature.) When you think about it F and M flash settings were > advances, not delays, no? That would really mean that "delay" relates to > the time for the flash bulb to be at or near it's peak light output. > > One more comment- I always used M5 and other small bulbs with my > Rolleimarin, even though strobes were becoming available. The bulbs always > had more light output than small strobes of those days. > > DAW > > Eric Goldstein > > On Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 4:01 PM, Don Williams <dwilli10@xxxxxxx> wrote: >> At 10:34 AM 12/9/2009, Eric wrote: >> >> I agree with this. The 285 was bulky and overblown with an emphasis on >> useless features rather than sleek performance. A low voltage trigger >> 283 is still very much a great ally in the camera bag... >> >> >> Eric Goldstein >> >> I've had a 283 for 30 years or more and like it's features. In addition >> to >> the wide and narrow beam lenses, it has a remote sensor for off-camera >> sensing, the ability to use AC power, and some other features I don't >> remember because the accessories are out of sight. >> >> The only downside is that it has a high voltage trigger which I assume is >> not good for my cameras. I understand the later models had a low voltage >> sync signal and there is also available, somewhere, an adapter that deals >> with this high voltage, high current trigger problem, protecting the sync >> contacts. I used it for many years on several cameras before learning >> that >> there was a lower sync current version. >> >> DAW > --- Rollei List - Post to rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx - Subscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'subscribe' in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org - Unsubscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'unsubscribe' in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org - Online, searchable archives are available at //www.freelists.org/archives/rollei_list