Gary Fong Diffuser
Dec 8, 2019 17:48:54 #
The results from this device is visually amazing. (It sure looks funny! I frequently have people come us asking what it is.)
Shooting a Nikon D850 with Nikon D5000 strobe and Nikkor 28-300 lens for walkabout parties.
Before the Fong, faces would have hot reflective spots and ofter over-exposed.
Fong recommends shooting Full Auto at ISO 800 with flash white balance, letting the camera do the work. It worked pretty well, but the auto-focus got fussy. I went back to Aperture Priority and it helped.
Using NEW Lithium batteries, the strobe went through 3 sets or 4 during the 3 hour party, shooting a total of 250+ shots.
Question: Did the diffuser cause the strobe to have to work harder to produce light and did it capture the heat of the strobe, hence eating up the batteries?
Any thoughts on this?
Shooting a Nikon D850 with Nikon D5000 strobe and Nikkor 28-300 lens for walkabout parties.
Before the Fong, faces would have hot reflective spots and ofter over-exposed.
Fong recommends shooting Full Auto at ISO 800 with flash white balance, letting the camera do the work. It worked pretty well, but the auto-focus got fussy. I went back to Aperture Priority and it helped.
Using NEW Lithium batteries, the strobe went through 3 sets or 4 during the 3 hour party, shooting a total of 250+ shots.
Question: Did the diffuser cause the strobe to have to work harder to produce light and did it capture the heat of the strobe, hence eating up the batteries?
Any thoughts on this?
Dec 8, 2019 17:51:04 #
grtday wrote:
The results from this device is visually amazing. ... (show quote)
Yes, it does reduce the output, thus using more battery power
In large rooms, it wastes more than 3/4 of the power it puts out because the light going behind the flash, the sides and the top doesn’t do a thing for the subject.
In smaller rooms, it may be more effective.
I always get better, more natural effects by bouncing.
(And, yes, I’ve had a Fong)
Dec 8, 2019 18:37:26 #
TBerwick
Loc: Houston, Texas
When you think about it, the diffuser requires more flash power since it gets spread out (diffused) & is no longer a point source. That requires a stronger flash pulse which uses more battery power.
Dec 8, 2019 19:02:31 #
Yes to both. It “wastes” a large percentage of the light, and since it encloses the lens of the flash, it does prevent some heat dissipation, but my gut feel is that is not significant. I have one, but I prefer a plain bounce flash with a small white reflecting card attached to the back of the flash.
Dec 8, 2019 19:04:09 #
TBerwick wrote:
When you think about it, the diffuser requires more flash power since it gets spread out (diffused) & is no longer a point source. That requires a stronger flash pulse which uses more battery power.
This thing eats up power because it is not focused in addition to diffusing. It is so small at distances greater than 10 ft that it truly is a point source. A good bounce off a ceiling or a wall (or a large person wearing a white garment) will be a large, soft light. The Fong is not all that. . .
Dec 8, 2019 19:22:02 #
I responded to another Fong thread which I saw later was started in 2012. My opinion has not changed since well before that time.
https://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-22889-1.html#10749340
PS, GAS got me to purchase an attachment for my flash called a Spinlite 360. It's sort of like a black foamie thing (look it up) but the thing can be either black or white and can be reoriented to block direct light or give it some diffusion. It is probably equally funny looking, but not as unprofessional looking as my card-stock-and-rubber-band diffuser. I used it for a couple years at events but it's now residing in my photo equipment storage chest.
https://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-22889-1.html#10749340
PS, GAS got me to purchase an attachment for my flash called a Spinlite 360. It's sort of like a black foamie thing (look it up) but the thing can be either black or white and can be reoriented to block direct light or give it some diffusion. It is probably equally funny looking, but not as unprofessional looking as my card-stock-and-rubber-band diffuser. I used it for a couple years at events but it's now residing in my photo equipment storage chest.
Dec 9, 2019 04:29:55 #
Pistnbroke
Loc: UK
just rubbish ..its a power absorber ..if you just fit a SB400 and a flash flipper you will have no problem. Base iso at 200 will give you 800 when the flash if on . Hundreds of weddings photographed like this ..you just pouring money into Garry Fongs pocket.
Dec 9, 2019 05:28:06 #
Dec 9, 2019 06:09:06 #
billnikon
Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont
grtday wrote:
The results from this device is visually amazing. ... (show quote)
In my film days when shooting for UPI (united press international) we always had index cards with us to take notes and names for our story, we very often used a rubber band to hold these cards to our Vivitar 283 flash units, we aimed the head of the flash up and used the index cards to bounce the flash off for a diffused light. Cost, you could get 100 cards for 10 cents. Worked great, many of today's flash manufactures have a plastic white card that extends from inside the flash for the same effect.
No need for Gary Fong, today I just point my flash head up and behind me for wonderful effects. I drag my shutter and off I go. So sorry, Gary, I do not need you and never have.
Dec 9, 2019 06:16:56 #
tcthome
Loc: NJ
billnikon wrote:
In my film days when shooting for UPI (united pres... (show quote)
My Nikon sb 700 has the bounce card built in. Also came with a diffuser & a couple of color filters.
Dec 9, 2019 07:47:55 #
Dec 9, 2019 07:48:10 #
Archboo3
Loc: Central Florida
I was a Gary Fong user for a while, then I met MAGMOD and after using one for a few jobs I threw all my Gary Fongs in the trash. I now have just about everything MagMod. Much, Much easier to use, much faster do do a quick change, take less room to store, and the quality of the flash much better. I use them for my league photography and my real estate photography. I just photographed a hotel using only my MagMods, and my Nikon SB910s. That shoot included: breakfast area, lobby, about 10 different quest rooms, plus a guesthouse on the side of the property. By using my flashes instead of my studio lights. My flashes had a much small footprint, so I could get them in tighter and better locations to light my rooms and with the MagMods my light was much more pleasing. A satisfied MagMod customer here.
Dec 9, 2019 07:59:17 #
grtday wrote:
The results from this device is visually amazing. ... (show quote)
Like others have said, it is a power hog. BTW, how often did it fall off of the speedlight? They are known for doing that too...
Dec 9, 2019 08:17:39 #
Archboo3
Loc: Central Florida
they didn't fall off, but I have knocked them off, not paying attention
Dec 9, 2019 08:19:20 #
Since it's introduction, there's been no middle ground on this product - you either love it or hate it.
I used a Fong diffuser for ~ 10 years shooting weddings. It does eat batteries because it uses more power to diffuse the light and a lot of it is wasted. Over time, I found slightly inclining the Fong forward I got the best balance between power usage and softer lighting. But I always used a Quantum battery pack for my flashes. Checking B&H, battery packs are relatively inexpensive nowadays.
My experience was good, with lots of happy brides and grooms - YMMV.
I used a Fong diffuser for ~ 10 years shooting weddings. It does eat batteries because it uses more power to diffuse the light and a lot of it is wasted. Over time, I found slightly inclining the Fong forward I got the best balance between power usage and softer lighting. But I always used a Quantum battery pack for my flashes. Checking B&H, battery packs are relatively inexpensive nowadays.
My experience was good, with lots of happy brides and grooms - YMMV.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.