Studio flash vs. dedicated flash vs. ...
Brian Segal
The Minolta Flashmeter IV reads flash in cordless mode...you hit the measuring
button and then it waits for you to fire the flash and gives you the reading.
For portraits, you can't go wrong with Photogenic Powerlight 600's.
In the states you can get 2 for about $1100.00 and will have a 5 stop infinitly
adjustable range, power to spare, and UV coated tubes with modelling lights
and built in slaves.
Great combo...
b
Eugene Lau
>I'm interested in doing a small amount of home portrait work as well
>as some "studio" still-life. I have a Canon EOS10S and a 430EZ flash.
>I don't want to spend more than $700-$800 on flash equipment. It
>seems my main options are:
>
>* Get several more 430EZs and connect them all together ...
> ... No modeling lights.
this alone will make you give up on portraits.
>
>* Get a simple pack studio system, such as the Speedotron Brown Line.
>600 or 800WS pack and 3 lights (400WS each) costs around $700.
>[stuff deleted]
>
>* Get a few self-contained strobes, such as the SP studio system from
>47st Photo. These cost about $100 a piece, have built-in slaves, and
>are rated around 100WS. These have snoots, umbrellas, etc. available.
>They are also variable power (3-5 stops depending on model).
>[stuff deleted]
>
>Also, a question about flash meters. The Minolta IV and IV-F have ...
> .... Any advice on choosing a flashmeter?
>
just a word of caution. studio strobes may be good, but the Minolta flash
meters costs hundreds of dollars, which may put you over your budget.
have you considered quartz-halogen photofloods? with these, the major
drawback is the low light output (compared to flash), so you may need to
put your camera on a tripod. otherwise they are quite good.
eugene
james feldman
>just a word of caution. studio strobes may be good, but the Minolta flash
>meters costs hundreds of dollars, which may put you over your budget.
There are other less expensive meters, and there is always used.
>have you considered quartz-halogen photofloods? with these, the major
>drawback is the low light output (compared to flash), so you may need to
>put your camera on a tripod. otherwise they are quite good.
Plus you're limited to Tungsten films or filters that may eat another 2/3-1
stop of light. And then there is the current draw (750-1000w main, 500w key,
500w halo), plus the heat. The heat will limit what light modifiers you can
use, and how close you can put them.
If you're doing static portraits, the tripod is not a drawback, even with
flash.
--
Jim Feldman || This space for lease, contact your
Digital Equipment Corp || Digital Sales Rep.
CSC/Colorado Springs ||
Eugene Lau
>In article <1993Mar30....@berlioz.nsc.com> el...@berlioz.nsc.com (Eugene Lau) writes:
>
>>just a word of caution. studio strobes may be good, but the Minolta flash
>>meters costs hundreds of dollars, which may put you over your budget.
>
>There are other less expensive meters, and there is always used.
the cheapest flash meter I can find costs $90, and it has no read out,
just an LED lighting up on an aperture/ISO chart. If I'm going with flash,
I think that's what I'll buy.
I happen to also be in the market for a simple studio light set up. Having
an AF SLR means I can't use conventional PC cords and will have to shell
out money for a dedicated hot shoe sync. thing. Since I plan to do non-
static people pictures, I'll probably end up buying an infra-red trigger to
avoid tripping over the sync. cords, major $$$. also, I don't want to see
multiple flash pops if I happen to shoot in continuous mode. besides, studio
flashes are more expensive to begin with.
>
>>have you considered quartz-halogen photofloods? with these, the major
>>drawback is the low light output (compared to flash), so you may need to
>>put your camera on a tripod. otherwise they are quite good.
>
>Plus you're limited to Tungsten films or filters that may eat another 2/3-1
>stop of light. And then there is the current draw (750-1000w main, 500w key,
>500w halo), plus the heat. The heat will limit what light modifiers you can
>use, and how close you can put them.
>
>If you're doing static portraits, the tripod is not a drawback, even with
>flash.
>--
>Jim Feldman || This space for lease, contact your
the current draw is not a problem. dedicated accessories for quartz lights
are designed to handle the heat when used properly and don't costs more
than regular accessories. my main concern is still the light output. you're
right, with a blue filter on the light, I might barely get 1/125 sec and
f5.6 using ASA400. Fortunately, today's ASA400 films, such as Ektachrome
400X (EPL), have fine grain.
eugene
Mark Goldberg
>In article <1993Mar30....@nntpd2.cxo.dec.com> fel...@hal9k.cxo.dec.com
>the cheapest flash meter I can find costs $90, and it has no read out,
I bought the Luna Pro F several years back. It does well with both
ambient and flash, incident and reflected. It is nowhere near as fancy
as the Minoltas, but it has worked well for my pro work.
>
>I happen to also be in the market for a simple studio light set up.
Consider the Portamaster 400 from Photogenic. It comes with one head,
built-in stand, and umbrella. It can accomodate three more heads. Price
is reasonable. There is also an accesory optical slave trigger that
plugs right into its socket (phone plug). It comes with a pc cord,
too. I use it by putting a small flash on my camera and aiming it at
the ceiling - lowest power. Sometimes I aim that one forward, using
a Lumiquest card, as a fill or eyelight. That triggers the slave.
This bounce-fill trick has worked well at weddings for years and doesn't
require a slew of extra gear. Portamaster is compact when packed.
>>
>>>have you considered quartz-halogen photofloods? with these, the major
>>>drawback is the low light output (compared to flash), so you may need to
>>>put your camera on a tripod..........
>>...... And then there is the current draw (750-1000w main, 500w key,
>>500w halo), plus the heat. The heat will limit what light modifiers you can
>>use, and how close you can put them.
I have tungsten lights, too. I use them for video. They will fry your
subjects. The light maker, Lowell, warns that the UV from the lights
can cause harm if the lights are not properly filtered.
I used them when I first started in serious photography. Forget it.
I'll never go back to using them for portraits. My subjects are thankful
for that.
/|/| /||)|/ /~ /\| |\|)[~|)/~ | Everyone's entitled to MY opinion.
/ | |/ ||\|\ \_|\/|_|/|)[_|\\_| | gold...@oasys.dt.navy.mil
========Imagination is more important than knowledge. - Albert Einstein=======
Robert S. French
>the cheapest flash meter I can find costs $90, and it has no read out,
>just an LED lighting up on an aperture/ISO chart. If I'm going with flash,
>I think that's what I'll buy.
Some nice features of the more expensive flashmeters are that they let
you fire the flashes from the meter (thus you can walk up to your
subject and fire the flashes from there while metering). Also they
allow you to balance ambient and flash light to any degree desired.
It's much harder to do this with a cheap meter.
>I happen to also be in the market for a simple studio light set up. Having
>an AF SLR means I can't use conventional PC cords and will have to shell
>out money for a dedicated hot shoe sync. thing. Since I plan to do non-
>static people pictures, I'll probably end up buying an infra-red trigger to
>avoid tripping over the sync. cords, major $$$. also, I don't want to see
>multiple flash pops if I happen to shoot in continuous mode. besides, studio
>flashes are more expensive to begin with.
A hotshoe->PC adapter costs $17 at my local store (it's the Nikon
AF-17 or something like that); not very expensive. It is supposed to
work on my Canon EOS 10S.
Some people have recommended the White Lightning series of studio
strobes (these were also mentioned in Pop Photog a few months ago).
They are self-contained, plug into a wall outlet, have a 3 stop
variable range, take many standard accessories, and are very cheap
(like $200 for 500WS). They also have built-in slaves so you don't
have to buy a separate IR trigger. Hard to beat.
Rob
Jake Livni
>>just a word of caution. studio strobes may be good, but the Minolta flash
>>meters costs hundreds of dollars, which may put you over your budget.
>There are other less expensive meters, and there is always used.
How does one check out a used Minolta flash meter?
I once found one used. It rattled when shook. I tried it with a
flash, measuring the readings at different distances, but I couldn't
get it to make readings that made consistent sense to me.
The main reason for a flash meter (for me) is consistency and
precision. If the meter will give me readings that vary +/- half a
stop, it's not helping me.
So how does one check out a USED and expensive Minolta flash meter?
--
Jake Livni ja...@bony1.bony.com Ten years from now, George Bush will
American-Occupied New York have replaced Jimmy Carter as the
My opinions only - employer has no opinions. standard of a failed President.
Al Goldis
>I'm interested in doing a small amount of home portrait work as well
>as some "studio" still-life. I have a Canon EOS10S and a 430EZ flash.
>I don't want to spend more than $700-$800 on flash equipment. It
>seems my main options are:
For any kind of studio photography there are three things you really
want to have: 1) modeling lights, 2) modeling lights, and 3) modeling
lights. They're not absolutely necessary, but life is *so* much
easier with them. It's also a good idea to get something with
proportional modeling lights (the modeling lights change brightness in
relation to the strobe's power output).
>* Get several more 430EZs and connect them all together. 2 more
>flashes plus connecting hardware costs around $500 (plus tripods,
>etc.).
>Advantages: TTL flash exposure still works as long as all flashes are
When you start changing the location of your lights, TTL can get a
little seedy.
The Canon 430 EZ is a very nice flash, but I don't think it's well
suited to the studio, and in that environment is very overpriced for
what it does. If you must get battery powered flashes, I'd recommend
some Vivitar 283s or 285s and a flash meter. You can also get Quantum
batteries for them if you like.
>* Get a simple pack studio system, such as the Speedotron Brown Line.
>600 or 800WS pack and 3 lights (400WS each) costs around $700.
>Disadvantages: No TTL metering (ever). Lights do not have variable
>power output.
They don't? Are you sure? Also, as I said, I don't see the lack of
TTL as a problem. Get a flashmeter.
Novatron also makes a series of relatively inexpensive kits that
include pack, heads, stands, umbrellas and case. However, I'm quite
unimpressed by them. The stands are hideously fiddly. Not that the
stands are the most important part of the kit. But for some reason,
the heads and packs don't inspire confidence either.
If I wanted an inexpensive pack system I'd probably go with
Speed-o-tron Brownline. Although the new Photogenic Photomaster
series looks interesting and seems to be very reasonably priced. I've
never seen one in person.
>* Get a few self-contained strobes, such as the SP studio system from
>47st Photo. These cost about $100 a piece, have built-in slaves, and
>are rated around 100WS. These have snoots, umbrellas, etc. available.
>They are also variable power (3-5 stops depending on model).
However, I don't think they have proportional modeling lights--at
least most models don't. In terms of price and functionality these
units look pretty attractive, but with a couple gottchas. I wouldn't
expect their durability to be very good. And 100WS will probably be
pretty limiting if you want to stick them into a big light-sucking
softbox.
>I'm leaning toward the cheap self-contained strobes. Has anyone had
>experience with these particular strobes? When all of the strobes
>have slaves, and none have PC terminals, how do you fire the strobes?
With an on-camera flash.
>Any recommendations?
Yes. Read on.
In <1p8ju9$e...@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu> bu...@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Brian Segal) writes:
>For portraits, you can't go wrong with Photogenic Powerlight 600's.
>In the states you can get 2 for about $1100.00 and will have a 5 stop infinitly
>adjustable range, power to spare, and UV coated tubes with modelling lights
>and built in slaves.
The White Lightning Ultra 600 units have the same features with a few
other advantages. They're slightly less expensive than the Photogenic
units ($395 each). I believe both replacement modeling lights and
flash tubes are less expensive. They are very light (4.3 pounds). I
think they draw less current (max 6 amps). For $100 you can get a
remote control that uses standard phone cord and can completely
control four units.
If price is the most important thing, you might also consider the White
Lightning 5000 (200 WS) and 10000 (400 WS) units. They are much less
sophisticated than the Ultras but also less expensive.
--
Al Goldis alan-...@uiowa.edu
"Pictures are moments truth, touched by light, that show character."
--Annie Griffiths-Belt
Dave Quinn
|> In article <1993Mar29....@CSD-NewsHost.Stanford.EDU> rfr...@Xenon.Stanford.EDU (Robert S. French) writes:
|> >I'm interested in doing a small amount of home portrait work as well
|> >as some "studio" still-life. I have a Canon EOS10S and a 430EZ flash.
|> >I don't want to spend more than $700-$800 on flash equipment. It
|> >seems my main options are:
|> >
|> >* Get several more 430EZs and connect them all together ...
|> > ... No modeling lights.
|>
|> this alone will make you give up on portraits.
|>
I am afraid that I have to agree with Eugene.
The benefits that you listed about using multiple 430EZs (TTL etc) sound
really good but the crucial thing about any sort of studio photography is
controling the contrast range in the shot. And you will be hard pressed to
do so without modelling lights.
In my experience (I use an EOS10 + 2 Multiblitz studio heads + a 430EZ which
I never use for studio work) calculating exposure is not as daunting as you
might at first think. All you need is a relatively inexpensive flash meter
- mine cost about 40pounds.
Dave
Peter PrestonThomas 1629969
>In <1993Mar29....@CSD-NewsHost.Stanford.EDU> rfr...@Xenon.Stanford.EDU (Robert S. French) writes:
>
>>I'm interested in doing a small amount of home portrait work as well
>>as some "studio" still-life. I have a Canon EOS10S and a 430EZ flash.
>>I don't want to spend more than $700-$800 on flash equipment. It
>>seems my main options are:
>
>other advantages. They're slightly less expensive than the Photogenic
>units ($395 each). I believe both replacement modeling lights and
>flash tubes are less expensive. They are very light (4.3 pounds). I
>think they draw less current (max 6 amps). For $100 you can get a
>remote control that uses standard phone cord and can completely
>control four units.
>
>If price is the most important thing, you might also consider the White
>Lightning 5000 (200 WS) and 10000 (400 WS) units. They are much less
>sophisticated than the Ultras but also less expensive.
>--
>Al Goldis alan-...@uiowa.edu
>"Pictures are moments truth, touched by light, that show character."
> --Annie Griffiths-Belt
After much thought, research, price comparison, etc., I've ordered a
White Lighning Ultra 1200 with a heavy duty stand, barn doors and
umbrella. Once I receive it and try it out I'll report back on it.
Up until now I've been using regular on camera flash units (but not
on the camera), a couple of Morris slaves - no modeling on anything -
along with a Minolta Meter.
Following are some of the features and some general comments about why
I chose the White Lightning Ultra:
Price
Good price for the power - additional features add to value
Power
GN 220 with 7" 75 degree reflector supplied. 600Ws stored energy on
par with other similarly priced mid-range units (though they call it
a U1200 because they claim it gives as much light output as many
1200 Ws units).
Recycle
2 seconds full power. Faster is always nicer but you always pay for it.
From what I've read this is good value for money. Faster gets rapidly
more expensive.
Modeling
Proportional modeling - a must!!!
Power range
Continuously variable over a 6 stop range. Most other units seem to
give only 1 or 2 stop reductions. I don't have the experience to know
if you need 6 stops but I sure can't see it hurting.
Modifiers
They have what looks like a good system/selection of modifier - barn
doors, honeycombs, snoot, gel holders, reflectors.
Remote
Adjusting lighting ratios with a single remote when you have 2 to 4
units seems like a great idea.
Factory Direct
There are salespeople in this world who know what they are talking about
and then there are most of the salespeople. Dealing factory direct may
take longer for service but you get more knowledgable people by being
close to the source.
I'll provide a follow-up when I've had some experience with it.
...PPT
Brian Segal
The question asked is "what use is variable power output?" Well with
my Photogenic PL 06 lights I can tweak my contrast ratios to within 1/10
stop (as fine as my Flashmeter IV will read) to obtain perfect control
over the subject lighting. You can set each light to deliver exactly
the correct amount of power (in my case over 5 stops) in infinitely adjustable
increments in order to realize your main light as the strong source, use the
other lights for fill and background and hair or whatever. Once you learn
how to control lighting like that you will wonder why you ever tried it with
on camera flash!
In orderto do all of this you DO need a decent flashmeter, and preferably the
ability to shot polaroids to confirm the final look of the lighting set-up.
brian
Robert S. French
>In orderto do all of this you DO need a decent flashmeter, and preferably the
>ability to shot polaroids to confirm the final look of the lighting set-up.
I've seen this mentioned in various books on studio photography. Is
this literal, you buy a Polaroid insta-develope camera and use it to
check lighting? Aren't there any problems with the tungsten/halogen
modeling lights showing up yellow on the film, or doesn't this matter
because you're only looking at the lighting ratios?
Rob
Alexandria North
No, this means getting a Polaroid film back for your camera (or using
Polaroid sheet film in a view camera). If you're using a medium format
camera Polaroid film backs are readily available, and you can switch
back and forth between film magazines as you want. With 35mm, it's more
complicated. Not many places make them.
I have an NPC Polaroid film back for my Nikon 8008s. At a discount source,
this ran me about $620. NPC makes film backs for Nikons, and they say
they'll custom make them for other 35mm SLRs, too. The disadvantage with
35mm is that, because these cameras aren't made to exchange film backs,
you need to do all your Polaroid proofing *between* rolls of film.
Unlike a medium format camera, you can't just change the film in the
middle of a roll, because you have to remove the back completely. Also,
the image is always the size of your negative, so you need to look
closely. I'm used to examining contact sheets, so that's no big deal.
That said, I really enjoy my NPC Proback II. It saves me a lot of time
and expense to know that my lighting is exactly what I want before I
take the pictures, have the lab pick them up, get the contact sheets
back, and pay for them.
Using a standard instamatic won't work because you're not using your
lighting (unless you have a clever way of doing this that I don't know
about) and you aren't shooting through the lens on your camera. You
don't see what you get.
Hope this helps!
Alix
Alexandria North
>In article <1993Apr1.0...@news.weeg.uiowa.edu> gol...@news.weeg.uiowa.edu (Al Goldis) writes:
>>In <1993Mar29....@CSD-NewsHost.Stanford.EDU> rfr...@Xenon.Stanford.EDU (Robert S. French) writes:
>>
>>>I'm interested in doing a small amount of home portrait work as well
>>>as some "studio" still-life. I have a Canon EOS10S and a 430EZ flash.
>>>I don't want to spend more than $700-$800 on flash equipment. It
>>>seems my main options are:
>>
>>The White Lightning Ultra 600 units have the same features with a few
>>other advantages. They're slightly less expensive than the Photogenic
>>units ($395 each). I believe both replacement modeling lights and
>>flash tubes are less expensive. They are very light (4.3 pounds). I
>>think they draw less current (max 6 amps). For $100 you can get a
>>remote control that uses standard phone cord and can completely
>>control four units.
>>
>>If price is the most important thing, you might also consider the White
>>Lightning 5000 (200 WS) and 10000 (400 WS) units. They are much less
>>sophisticated than the Ultras but also less expensive.
>>--
>White Lighning Ultra 1200 with a heavy duty stand, barn doors and
>umbrella. Once I receive it and try it out I'll report back on it.
>Up until now I've been using regular on camera flash units (but not
>on the camera), a couple of Morris slaves - no modeling on anything -
>along with a Minolta Meter.
>
I think you'll love the Ultra 1200. I have an Ultra 600 and two WL10,000s.
In retrospect, I wish I had waited until I could get an Ultra 1200 and two
Ultra 600s, because the Ultra units are miles ahead of the 5,000 and
10,000 (much more versatile due to their size, too). Right now, I can't
wait until I can afford an Ultra 1800 and perhaps another Ultra 600.
By the way, in all my varied uses of the Ultra 600, I haven't yet had a
situation where I haven't had enough lighting power. I'm just looking
ahead to some full figure work in the future, and so I want some of the
more powerful models.
Alexandria
Dave Quinn
|> >
|> >I've seen this mentioned in various books on studio photography. Is
|> >this literal, you buy a Polaroid insta-develope camera and use it to
|> >check lighting? Aren't there any problems with the tungsten/halogen
|> >modeling lights showing up yellow on the film, or doesn't this matter
|> >because you're only looking at the lighting ratios?
|>
|> No, this means getting a Polaroid film back for your camera (or using
|> Polaroid sheet film in a view camera). If you're using a medium format
|> camera Polaroid film backs are readily available, and you can switch
|> back and forth between film magazines as you want. With 35mm, it's more
|> complicated. Not many places make them.
|>
Actually, you can use an ordinary instamatic camera but it requires a bit
of trial and error to get it to give you the results you want (they all
seem to have some sort of manual exposure/contrast control which can provide
a bit of tailoring.
You *can* make the Polaroid camera trigger your flash heads by means of a
photo cell strapped in front of the polaroid flash or using mirrors to bounce
the polaroid flash to a place where it will trigger the slave cell on one
of your flash heads (I don't think any of the Polaroid cameras have flash
sync sockets).
--- like I said, it requires trial and error, but at 20-40GBP its still
a cost effective solution.
Dave
Marc Thompson-Sun-Vienna VA-Systems Engineer
Actually, the price for White Lightning 1200 (~600WS) is $495.
WL 600 (~300WS) sells for $395 in US. White Lightning does come highly
recommended.
Marc &&
Jeff Settle
exposure because they are overwhelmed by the daylight strobe. A 200 watt
modelling lamp contributes very little (read: virtually none) to the
total light in the scene.
As far as Polaroids go, I got a NPC back for my F3. It is more expensive
than a P. camera but is less to carry around and makes all my Nikon lenses
available for exposure testing. I like doing a Polaroid through the same
lense the final shot will be made. If you get one of these, you will learn
very quickly that the little optical block eats 1/2 to 2/3s of a stop that
you must adjust for.
Jeff Settle - just my opinions.
Alexandria North
>As far as Polaroids go, I got a NPC back for my F3. It is more expensive
>than a P. camera but is less to carry around and makes all my Nikon lenses
>available for exposure testing. I like doing a Polaroid through the same
>lense the final shot will be made. If you get one of these, you will learn
>very quickly that the little optical block eats 1/2 to 2/3s of a stop that
>you must adjust for.
>
>Jeff Settle - just my opinions.
Thank you, Jeff! I thought I was going crazy. I'd been supposedly
"overexposing" my Polaroids to get a decent shot, and was wondering
why I needed to do that. Now I know it's not just me...
Alexandria
Barry Gunn
>as some "studio" still-life. I have a Canon EOS10S and a 430EZ flash.
>I don't want to spend more than $700-$800 on flash equipment. It
>seems my main options are:
>
flashmeter.
White lightnings = $250 each
flshmeter = $250ish
total $750.
Then you can make your own light modifiers out of 1/2 inch plastic
pipe (hardware store, $2 for 10ft), T connectors, and different
types of fabric.
_
[o] Barry Gunn x2281
/|\ bar...@lsid.hp.com
If money could talk
it would say goodbye.