Difference Between Sunpak 3600 and 544 Flashes

[braxus]

I used to own the 3600 some years ago and shouldn't have gotten rid of it. I sold it for almost nothing back when. I also checked into the 544 flash and they look almost identical. What is the real difference between these 2 flashes from Sunpak? I plan to use it with my Pentax 67 again, as it worked well with that camera.

 

[wiltw]

A basic difference, is the power output. The 3600 has a lower guide number, ISO 100 GN120, while the 544 has GN140.

 

[braxus]

So for most purposes, the 3600 is the better flash if total output is not needed? What is the time period for these two flashes, if you know?

 

[Helge]

AFAIR there is also some differences in the manual controls between two. And not necessarily in favor of the most powerful unit.
Read the manuals.

 

[AgX]

A basic difference, is the power output. The 3600 has a lower guide number, ISO 100 GN120, while the 544 has GN140.

Which makes 1/2 stop...

 

[wiltw]

Which makes 1/2 stop...

Yes, not much difference. But one could say the same about difference between Metz 45 vs. Metz 60 !
Yet there are those who preferred the Metz 60.
And then there is the Canon 580EX vs 430EX...GN150 vs GN130 at 50mm FL, and folks preferred the 580EX at f/6.8 (vs f/5.9) at 22' shooting ISO 100.

I am hoping a knowledgable person in Sunpak models can articulate other differences in the flash units in questions. I know that differentiating models is sometimes quite subtle...like 45CT3 vs. 45CT4 vs 45CT5.

 

[AgX]

That would at least be 1 stop. Seemingly enough for some to pefer the model 60, though at press work, the model 45 became standard.

At the Canon flashes the various features seem to have been more important than insignificant differences in output.

 

[braxus]

Well I ended up purchasing another 3600. I don't think I'll need the extra power in my uses. Im familiar with the 3600, so I went with it again. Prices for the 544 are higher in some cases anyway.

Where are people finding the manual for this flash anyway? I dont really need one, as the flash is simple to use. But it would be nice to go over for any reason.

 

[wiltw]

Well I ended up purchasing another 3600. I don't think I'll need the extra power in my uses. Im familiar with the 3600, so I went with it again. Prices for the 544 are higher in some cases anyway.

Where are people finding the manual for this flash anyway? I dont really need one, as the flash is simple to use. But it would be nice to go over for any reason.

butkus

Sunpak Auto zoom 933, Sunpak 444D, Sunpak auto 383 super, sunpak auto 36dx, Sunpak Auto 3075G, sunpak auto 511, Sunpak 611, 422D, Sunpak 433D, Sunpak 622, Sunpak DC3, Sunpak Interface Module, Sunpak Super, 544, Sunpak 411, Sunpak zoom 3600, Sunpak

Sunpak electronic flash unit instruction manuals

www.butkus.org

 

[Jude the Obscure]

Assuming the "Auto Zoom 3600" is meant (Sunpak made more than one flash with 3600 in the name), while it looks a similar design to the larger 544 (which was also called the 4205G) there is an important difference in that the 3600 had a high trigger voltage (200v reported) and the 544 a low one (7v reported). I would not want a 3600 around in case someone (not me) connects it to a modern camera and blows the electronics.
http://www.lucan.org.uk/Vintage/Hotshoes/volt_table.html

 

[braxus]

... the 3600 had a high trigger voltage (200v reported) and the 544 a low one (7v reported). I would not want a 3600 around in case someone (not me) connects it to a modern camera and blows the electronics.

I found that out when I used my previous 3600 on a Canon T90, and a hotshoe to PC adapter. It fried the flash port. That said is using the PC port on cameras with that safe? I have a Pentax 67 from the 90s using a PC port, and wonder if the 3600 would be safe for that? Id assume so, since that camera design goes back to the late 60s. I wonder if there is a hotshoe to PC adapter with a voltage regulator built in, to protect the camera?

Also what is the advantage of using a 200 volt trigger vs a low voltage one? Should I upgrade my 3600 to a 544 to be safe? I believe the 544 is functionally the same as the 3600 in every way, other than the 544 has more output?

 

[braxus]

To be safe I went on Ebay, found a 544 selling in Canada in working order, and BIN'd it. I'll just sell my 3600, and swap a few parts over to the 544. Looking at it, it seems basically identical between the two of them, in terms of how its used and functions.

 

[Jude the Obscure]

I found that out when I used my previous 3600 on a Canon T90, and a hotshoe to PC adapter. It fried the flash port. That said is using the PC port on cameras with that safe? I have a Pentax 67 from the 90s using a PC port, and wonder if the 3600 would be safe for that? Id assume so, since that camera design goes back to the late 60s. I wonder if there is a hotshoe to PC adapter with a voltage regulator built in, to protect the camera?

Some people say that PC ports can stand higher voltages than hotshoes, and it may be true for certain cameras, but it is not reliable advice. I would guess that Pentax 67 could tolerate a higher voltage, being as you say a basically 1960's design with a makeover. Seems to have the same shutter with the 1/30 sec sync speed as the earlier 6x7 (which I have : horizontal cloth shutter) so it would probably have the same sync mechanical microswitch.

Also what is the advantage of using a 200 volt trigger vs a low voltage one? Should I upgrade my 3600 to a 544 to be safe? I believe the 544 is functionally the same as the 3600 in every way, other than the 544 has more output?

There is no advantage to a higher trigger voltage except that it is the voltage of the "raw" trigger circuit in the flash unit. Earlier flashgun designers saw no need to moderate it because the non-electronic cameras of the time could handle it. It is possible to get a bit of a shock off it, and some flashguns went up to over 250 volts. Later, the flashgun makers added a few more electronic components (quite cheaply after all) to moderate the trigger voltage down to below 24 volts and in some cases only 4-5 volts. There is a standard now that cameras should tolerate up to 24 volts, although it is not a compulsory standard - Canon have been known to advise a user of one of their recent cameras that it should not be subjected to more than 6 volts.

I have a 544 (which I like) but not a 3600. Looking at pictures of the 3600 they do look very similar, probably use the same battery pods and bracket, but the 544 does not have what looks like a remote sensor socket on the back of the 3600.

 

[braxus]

but the 544 does not have what looks like a remote sensor socket on the back of the 3600.

Which to me is useless anyway, as I'd never acquire that part. When I get the 544 here, I'll sell the 3600. I tested the 3600, so I know its working.