Comparison shots while using my Minolta auto 132x remote flash

[Mr. Yellow]

Around the end of Febuary, I picked up a remote flash for my D40 at a cost of $7 as seen here. After finding out that ASA is the same as ISO, I took two comparison shots. I'm trying to find out which settings is the optimal settings. If you could help, that would be awesome. The flash is set in the std./Tele position, the flash setting at 200 ASA and f5.6, the camera lens set at 50 mm, the aperture at f5.6 and the white balance is set at 5400K. The shutter speed is at 1/60.
Here's the first shot with the camera set at 200 ISO:



Here's the second shot with the camera set at 400 ISO:



Both photos look fuzzy due to Photobucket.

[sonicGLI]

Guess I don't understand the question (fyi, I can't get over how old that receiver is lol )

[Mr. Yellow]

What I'm asking is which shot looks like the correct exsposure, i.e. Overexposure, underexposed, etc. Basically I'm trying to find out which ISO setting looks the best; 200 ISO (the darker one) or 400 (the brighter one).

[sonicGLI]

There's no doubt that the brighter versions looks better exposed, the darker one being underexposed and all.

[EricTheRad]

Personally, I think the first shot looks more realistic.

[DowNnOuTDubin]

Personally, I think the first shot looks more realistic.

x2

[Mr. Yellow]

Personally, I think the first shot looks more realistic.

Is that a pun? (note stereo receiver name)

thanks for the help guys.

[sonicGLI]

I don't know what the heck you guys are seeing that I'm not, but this says it all, for me:



The top one is simply underexposed. In the second, you can see the numbers/dials through the screen clearly, you can see under the desk (which can be brought back down if you don't want to see it). Etc. The underexposure makes it look more like a POS than a well-taken-care-of older stereo like the shinier version below.

[EricTheRad]

Is that a pun? (note stereo receiver name)

Yes, strictly for my own amusement!