Ugly Hedgehog® - Photography Forum
Continuous Lighting
Feb 14, 2012 19:39:57   #
Old Timer Loc: Greenfield, In.
 
Do these cheap macro continuous ring lights do a reasonable job? Are they worth the low price or are they worthless. Nearing 80 I do even want my coffee steaming hot. Might not cool in time. I have looked at them on different sites and You Tube, but do no trust ever thing I read or see.

| Reply
Feb 14, 2012 19:56:01   #
Nikonian72 Loc: Long Beach CA
 
Old Timer wrote:
Do these cheap macro continuous ring lights do a reasonable job? Are they worth the low price or are they worthless. Nearing 80 I do even want my coffee steaming hot. Might not cool in time. I have looked at them on different sites and You Tube, but do no trust ever thing I read or see.

The biggest problem with LED ringlights is the lack of illumination to allow decent DOF. Shooting true macro at f/4 or f.5.6, or even f/8 means shallow DOF. The smaller apertures (f/11 through f/22) are really needed to keep as much of subject in focus as possible.

A ringlight of LEDs will not provide nearly the illumination of a Speedlight for the same subject.

The second problem with ringlights is the all-around, even illumination, which tends to counter the spherical and cylindrical shapes of many insects and other macro subjects. This phenomenon is referenced as "flat lighting". Blocking a quart or a third of the light ring will restore "roundness" to a subject, but require a longer exposure or wider aperture.

In contrast, the O-Flash 3/4-circle Fresnel prism attachment on a standard Speedlight provides enough illumination to use f/22, and preserve the roundness of subject.

| Reply
Feb 14, 2012 20:33:45   #
Old Timer Loc: Greenfield, In.
 
Thanks for the reply. You confirmed my suspicion that they were not what they were blowed up to be. Respect your opinion as you have proof in your captures of micro subject.

| Reply
Feb 17, 2012 23:26:48   #
NatureFan Loc: Winder, GA
 
I have several of the inexpensive LED lights (36 LEDs). They work well as fill-in lights. They prove enough light to focus stack at F/8. True, the LED light is not as brilliant as good Flash. The LED lamps have their place, particularly at $50 compared to a quality flash at $400-$500.

| Reply
Feb 18, 2012 01:57:08   #
Nikonian72 Loc: Long Beach CA
 
NatureFan wrote:
The LED lamps have their place, particularly at $50 compared to a quality flash at $400-$500.
I will match my results with a $40 O-Flash attachment on a standard Nikon SB-600 Speedlight, against any LED or $500 macro-lighting set-up.

| Reply
Feb 19, 2012 01:27:26   #
LoneRangeFinder Loc: Left field
 
Nikonian72 wrote:
NatureFan wrote:
The LED lamps have their place, particularly at $50 compared to a quality flash at $400-$500.
I will match my results with a $40 O-Flash attachment on a standard Nikon SB-600 Speedlight, against any LED or $500 macro-lighting set-up.


I haven't used the O-Flash. I do have the macro flash kit which attaches to the front of the lens. My issue is this: it is easy to dislodge. The O-flash looks a lot more "field worthy". I think the R1C1 is probably ok for studio and indoor work, but not so much for outdoor shooting. I'll probably trade it in at some point. It would mean having to pop for a better strobe as well.

| Reply
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2020 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.