Cheap Studio vs Speedlights

H

haggerma

Suspended / Banned
Messages
178
Name
Mark
Edit My Images
Yes
I currently use 3 speed lights in my setup but noticed the batteries were running out on the last session. I have started to do portraits at people homes so do not need that much power and the current setup is just fine.

I was looking at the cheaper (ebay) studio flashes of 180W. They have a slightly higher Guide Number from the 360afd and 430exII but have the advantage of the mains power.

My question is has anyone used these and can compare them to the speedlights?
 
I've been a hot shoe flash chap for some time (still am too) but this year made the jump to studio heads.

Both systems have the disadvantages and advantages, the trick is knowing when to select one over the other. Neither is a replacement for each other.

As far as your needs are concerned, shooting indoors in family's homes etc, a few AC powered heads with a variety of diffusers/modifiers would most likely be more beneficial.

Personally though, If there were limited space in folk's homes I'd still choose a hotshoe flash over a head, it's much more possible to fix a hotshoe flash in a small area than a studio head, even with diffusion and the various modifiers.

The choice of batteries is fairly important too, rechargeable over non rechargeable is far more effective and also ensuring that your strictly keep a set of four together and do not mix them up with other sets when charging.
This prolongs the performance and also the life span of the set.

Also, with hot shoe flashes being biased toward lower powers wherever possible is good practise, your batteries will indeed run out if your shooting the flash at full power all the time.
I recommend only shooting at full power only if you absolutely have to.
Indoors should not be presenting any huge issues with power output, you'll find that a more balanced aperture can do the trick as opposed to increasing flash output.

If none of the above is applicable to you then it looks like your first set of heads will be in the horizon.

The cheap stuff from ebay needs to approached with sever caution though IMO.
Lookout for brands such as: Lencarta.
Elinchrom (although the mods and accesoreies are obsecenely expensive).
Bowens and
Interfit.
 
Good advice from Thomas. I use both studio heads and hot-shoe guns, often together, and wouldn't be without either! That's not very helpful is it :lol:

If I had to choose one system, it would be the hot-shoe route simply because they can be pressed into doing just about anything, so handy, whereas studio lights are generally tied to the mains. I just don't need all that power most of the time for portraits. I'd miss the modelling lights though, and the fast recycle.

The biggest problem I have with hot-shoes is recyling time with portraits. When it starts to look right, I bang off more than one frame a second quite often. Fortunately I have four 580EX guns so I double them up and turn them down to 1/8th power for quick recycle and better battery life. That's quite a popular option for strobists I think, and certainly there are plenty of brackets about to mount two/three/four guns together. Adding a couple of cheap Yongnuo flashes to your outfit might do the trick for £35 each (and you can always fit a fresh set of batteries half way through ;) ).
 
HoppyUK said:
The biggest problem I have with hot-shoes is recyling time with portraits. When it starts to look right, I bang off more than one frame a second quite often. Fortunately I have four 580EX guns so I double them up and turn them down to 1/8th power for quick recycle and better battery life.
Click to expand...

More or less the same here mate, Most of the time I'm at 1/4 power with a 2-4 speedlight set up. For portraits I rarely need any more power than that indoors.

My studio heads aren't much better on recycle times than say a hotshoe at 1/4 power, the VC-600's and Elinchrom D-lites are at a 2-3 seconds recycle when at full power, it's the same with my Profoto AcuteB pack too, 2-3 seconds on a full power pop. The Profoto kicks bum at 1/4 and 1/2 power though, almost immediate recycle, pop pop pop pop ;)
 
Thanks for your comments. I have a set of Eneloop's in each flash and never mix the sets up.

I tend to shoot around f2.8 on my 50mm with the flashes normally around 1/2 power for main and 1/4 for secondary.

A few spare sets of Eneloops will be cheaper than a head, so may go down that route if it works out the cheap ebay heads are worse than the speedlights (jessops 360afd).
 
haggerma said:
I tend to shoot around f2.8 on my 50mm with the flashes normally around 1/2 power for main and 1/4 for secondary.
Click to expand...

Blimey! How far are the flashes away from the subject and what kind of modifiers are you using to avoid anything of the nuclear persuasion at 2.8 and at 1/2 power? :thinking:

Can you post any sample images?
 
Tomas Whitehouse said:
Blimey! How far are the flashes away from the subject and what kind of modifiers are you using to avoid anything of the nuclear persuasion at 2.8 and at 1/2 power? :thinking:

Can you post any sample images?
Click to expand...

Was just going to say similar. At 2.8 a 40w bulb'l do the trick!

On the original subject I went from mains powered stuff (which I still own) to a hotshoe setup. I just love the flexibility of the strobist gear. So much so I find myself grabbing more shoots and inpromptu sessions knowing I can setup in less than a couple of minutes.

The irony is that my bundle of SB900s add up to a much greater cost than all the studio heads combined but for less power.
 
kalibre said:
Was just going to say similar. At 2.8 a 40w bulb'l do the trick!
Click to expand...

Or a candle :D

kalibre said:
On the original subject I went from mains powered stuff (which I still own) to a hotshoe setup. I just love the flexibility of the strobist gear. So much so I find myself grabbing more shoots and inpromptu sessions knowing I can setup in less than a couple of minutes.

The irony is that my bundle of SB900s add up to a much greater cost than all the studio heads combined but for less power.
Click to expand...

Well it is that way if you want the latest and greatest, SB-900's are an awesome flash (200mm zoom and CLS compatible) but the same results are easily achieved with cheaper units.

Don't get me wrong, I'd love a bag full of 900's but they're not vital to lighting your shot effectively.
 
Tomas Whitehouse said:
Blimey! How far are the flashes away from the subject and what kind of modifiers are you using to avoid anything of the nuclear persuasion at 2.8 and at 1/2 power? :thinking:

Can you post any sample images?
Click to expand...


I would say about 3 meters away using a reflective umbrella off to one side.

Just checked the JPEG details and one was 3.5, must have been 2.8 for one of the outside ones without a flash!
 
As a rule of thumb the distribution of light follows the inverse square rule, meaning that if you double the distance to the subject you will need four times the power, 4 times the distance you'll need 16 and so on.

To save your flash heads, batteries and the subjects eyeballs get your lights as close to the subject as possible without being in the final (post crop) frame. I don't know your composition, but 3m away from a subject in a portrait would be quite a long way. The situation would be made worse by the use of modifiers which will also 'eat' more light or if using reflectors (which you are) will add to the overall distance between light and subject and therefore the amount of power required.

Having the lights close also provides the additional benefit of making the apparent size of the light source larger and therefore softer, but that's a different subject.

Hope some of that makes sense.
 
Actually, looking through some more and most seem to be at f4.
 
haggerma said:
I would say about 3 meters away using a reflective umbrella off to one side.

Just checked the JPEG details and one was 3.5, must have been 2.8 for one of the outside ones without a flash!
Click to expand...

Cheers for the info haggerma! :thumbs:

It would be great if you could post some example images, I'm just making assumptions based on indoor usage y'see, you could be doing something very interesting and fresh for all we know, so advice and opinion is merely hypothetical.

Without seeing anything I'd say the distances (3 metres) is much too generous, with hotshoe flashes the general preference is light as close as possible to make the best, not only of the quality of the light, but also the battery life.
 
haggerma said:
Actually, looking through some more and most seem to be at f4.
Click to expand...

Depending on what you're shooting and what your 'artistic intentions' are even f/4 will have a limiting depth of field (unless the camera is also a long way away). This will only allow for a small margin of error or may even cause problems if it's a group shot. Common apertures for studio/flash work is around f/8 - f/11, but once again it's dependant on the effect you're trying to achieve. Hope that helps.
 
Tomas Whitehouse said:
Cheers for the info haggerma! :thumbs:

It would be great if you could post some example images, I'm just making assumptions based on indoor usage y'see, you could be doing something very interesting and fresh for all we know, so advice and opinion is merely hypothetical.

Without seeing anything I'd say the distances (3 metres) is much too generous, with hotshoe flashes the general preference is light as close as possible to make the best, not only of the quality of the light, but also the battery life.
Click to expand...

I have only done a couple of sessions and both I was moving the lights around adjusting the power and re-metering and firing away to have a play at differant things, so that may have been my starting point.

have a look at my Flickr

http://www.flickr.com/photos/markhagger/sets/72157622877986601/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/markhagger/sets/72157622955818028/?page=2
 
haggerma said:
I have only done a couple of sessions and both I was moving the lights around adjusting the power and re-metering and firing away to have a play at differant things, so that may have been my starting point.

have a look at my Flickr

http://www.flickr.com/photos/markhagger/sets/72157622877986601/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/markhagger/sets/72157622955818028/?page=2
Click to expand...

Not bad at all there, the light is a little harsh in this shot:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/markhagger/4167326632/in/set-72157622955818028/

But the rest have quite a nice balance IMO, not tre bad at all :clap:

It's definitely a little out of the box to see such balanced flash and also with such wide aperture, the outdoors image certainly has a very natural feel.
Reminded me a little of a friend of mine:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/maiasuvi/sets/72157622527364772/

I would still stick with having a go at moving the lights in closer and cutting back on the output.

As Kalibre has also mentioned, lighting close is much more power efficient and also the quality of the light is much better too.
 
haggerma said:
I have only done a couple of sessions and both I was moving the lights around adjusting the power and re-metering and firing away to have a play at differant things, so that may have been my starting point.

have a look at my Flickr

http://www.flickr.com/photos/markhagger/sets/72157622877986601/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/markhagger/sets/72157622955818028/?page=2
Click to expand...

Some really nice stuff in there, nice one. You've got some young models with good skin in there, once you get some subjects with more 'lines of experience' then you'll really notice the difference between close quality light and far flung small stuff.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top