New (and better?) Bare Bulb Alternative to Q Flash and Elinchrom Ranger. What do you think?

Started Apr 27, 2013 | Discussions
John Deerfield
Senior MemberPosts: 2,087
Like?
Re: New (and better?) Bare Bulb Alternative to Q Flash and Elinchrom Ranger. What do you think?
In reply to UKphotographers, Apr 29, 2013

The Godox has some interesting features, but to try and compare it to a Quantum with its capability of Manual, Auto, TTL, remote ratio and an integrated radio system controlling a range of 80Ws-400Ws is only a comparison of the skin and not the substance. In fact, many of the reviews of the Godox rely on Quantum accessories to 'do' stuff, or extend capabilities to suit requirements.

The Godox does have a remote control/triggering system? No, it isn't TTL but if you have to have TTL, then Quantum isn't your only choice. Personally, I would rather build a speedlight system for TTL, but that's me. I don't see any problem using flash modifiers developed for the QFLash? There is an entire industry of speedring adapters to accommodate various modifiers on various lights.

Ugly triggering units? Well thats a reason to not use them for sure. The CoPilot is quite pretty, controls 3 groups, incorporates a radio transmitter, TTL or Manual and is smaller, less ugly and more practical than a TT1 and AC3.... and has a focus assist as well. Then, what other radio system does this with the same mode variation and output range? Also, what other system provides a flash with built-in radio controller to control other remote (higher powered) flash as well?

This all hinges on TTL. Take TTL out of the equation and the possibilities are endless. Or, leave TTL in and choose to use dedicated flash systems from Nikon or Canon or whatever you shoot. For me TTL isn't worth the roughly $600 premium Quantum charges (Cheetahstand/Godox kit for $670 or B&H Flash kit for something in the range of $1300). Or maybe we take the battery pack out of the equation since it looks like the Godox will power the QFlash (!). The T5D is roughly the same power as the CL-180, for almost $300 more money (more yet to add TTL!). And then TTL isn't all of that to begin with. Sure, for run and gun event situations, I use TTL all the time. But for complicated light set ups I would never consider using TTL as I don't know what each light is going to fire at.

'Cheap' is the hook with the Godox. 'Better' is delusion. If - Manual only - rocks your boat and you can be certain that it will fulfil your every requirement in every situation, then you'll be fine. Lumedyne and Norman are Manual only and would be cheaper, but having had those systems and discovered their limitations I chose to use Quantum instead.

I am not sure any of us ever said "better". As a matter of fact, I said the Elinchrom system wins hands down in every category except price. And I think it's a good thing to have choices. If I were starting from scratch today, my TTL system would undoubtably be Nikon flash units. For starters, I love being able to use AA batteries to power my flashes. Yes, I use external power quite often, but in a pinch I don't need a $450 battery pack to power my light (not to mention that $450 SC pack from Quantum only uses 8 AA batteries). With everything self-contained, I can put my flash anywhere I want. And I do, often using a justin clamp. I didn't have that freedom with my QFlahes, the battery had to go somewhere! And before the Godox battery, powering a QFlash was nothing short of a joke (seriously... a $450 battery back that uses 8 AA batteries?). My 2nd flash system would be based on the power I need. At which point both shoe mount flashes and 400ws Rangers aren't enough!

Ian.
http://www.commercialphotographer.co.uk
Theres only one sun. Why do I need more than one light to get a natural result?

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
UKphotographers
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,933
Like?
Re: New (and better?) Bare Bulb Alternative to Q Flash and Elinchrom Ranger. What do you think?
In reply to John Deerfield, Apr 29, 2013

John Deerfield wrote:

The Godox does have a remote control/triggering system? No, it isn't TTL but if you have to have TTL, then Quantum isn't your only choice. Personally, I would rather build a speedlight system for TTL, but that's me. I don't see any problem using flash modifiers developed for the QFLash? There is an entire industry of speedring adapters to accommodate various modifiers on various lights.

'Cheap' is the hook with the Godox. 'Better' is delusion. If - Manual only - rocks your boat and you can be certain that it will fulfil your every requirement in every situation, then you'll be fine. Lumedyne and Norman are Manual only and would be cheaper, but having had those systems and discovered their limitations I chose to use Quantum instead.

I am not sure any of us ever said "better". As a matter of fact, I said the Elinchrom system wins hands down in every category except price. And I think it's a good thing to have choices. If I were starting from scratch today, my TTL system would undoubtably be Nikon flash units. For starters, I love being able to use AA batteries to power my flashes. Yes, I use external power quite often, but in a pinch I don't need a $450 battery pack to power my light (not to mention that $450 SC pack from Quantum only uses 8 AA batteries). With everything self-contained, I can put my flash anywhere I want. And I do, often using a justin clamp. I didn't have that freedom with my QFlahes, the battery had to go somewhere! And before the Godox battery, powering a QFlash was nothing short of a joke (seriously... a $450 battery back that uses 8 AA batteries?). My 2nd flash system would be based on the power I need. At which point both shoe mount flashes and 400ws Rangers aren't enough!

Thread Title:  New (and better?) Bare Bulb Alternative to Q Flash and Elinchrom Ranger. What do you think?

Having used and still use Manual only lighting as well as Speedlights, I find Speedlights underpowered in most situations and find that advocates of Speedlights tend to need to mount multiples together to get a useful output. I find this pointless when theres far better solutions available with appropriate output already provided without the overhead of costs and unnecessary, time consuming, mounting of equipment together. Up to 400Ws in whatever mode works flawlessly with Quantum - one flash head instead of five speedlights (and 20 AA's) - beyond that you are looking at a completely different ballgame and not one which the Godox or Speedlights would ever be part of.

You use Manual AND TTL. Everybody does. So why not just buy a lighting system capable of providing both? Quadras and Rangers don't, neither do Godox. I would advocate that Speedlights are underpowered, one or two are useful but beyond that when you need greater output rather than spend on more multiple underpowered units - just buy something more appropriate with the same function instead. Now that isn't advocating 'cheap' I know.. but having to buy AGAIN because your purchase was inappropriate is just costly. Elinchrom are fine, but faced with a choice of 'with TTL - Or without TTL for the same output' - I'd choose 'with'. I don't know what my next requirement will be for lighting, so having it is a far better insurance policy than not having it at all. My need is to provide images at the demand of whatever the client requires.. if that requires TTL, Auto or Manual (or whatever) then I'm equipped for it.

I use multiple Quantum's with Turbo's, SC's and QPAQ's - I've never had any issues with batteries or mounting them, or even hiding them on shoots and they're dirt cheap to use if you buy Turbo's with their $12 replacement batteries, or $100 Quantum replacements with 'free' swap out internal upgrades.

Upgrades - now theres an issue - what sort of upgrade policy is provided by Godox? Do they provide a free upgrade policy like the T5d-R R3 upgrade done recently by Quantum? Or radio upgrades? From what I see the recent Godox policy was - if the radio system doesn't work properly (Cells II) - 'Give it free to avert complaints.'

So no. The Godox is not better, it's just cheaper, it provides less function and still needs an external battery to power it. For a (not so cheap) light on the end of a stick it ticks the box.

-- hide signature --

Ian.
http://www.commercialphotographer.co.uk
Theres only one sun. Why do I need more than one light to get a natural result?

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
plevyadophy
Veteran MemberPosts: 4,250Gear list
Like?
Re: New (and better?) Bare Bulb Alternative to Q Flash and Elinchrom Ranger. What do you think?
In reply to UKphotographers, Apr 29, 2013

UKphotographers wrote:

plevyadophy wrote:

John Deerfield wrote:

Hi Pal,

Thanks for your contribution

Compared to a QFlash system, I think this system wins hands down (it doesn't hurt that I have thought that Quantum has been robbing us blind for years).

I too have always thought that the QFlash system was excessively priced (and I am drawing a distinction between "expensive" which can often be justified, and "excessive). And I, being a bit girlie and therefore like my kit to look good, have also thought that their flash triggering units are somewhat big clunky and ugly.

However, they do have that massive advantage of being able to link in with your TTL system (provided you are shooting Canon, Nikon or Olympus).

The Godox has some interesting features, but to try and compare it to a Quantum with its capability of Manual, Auto, TTL, remote ratio and an integrated radio system controlling a range of 80Ws-400Ws is only a comparison of the skin and not the substance. In fact, many of the reviews of the Godox rely on Quantum accessories to 'do' stuff, or extend capabilities to suit requirements.

Ugly triggering units? Well thats a reason to not use them for sure. The CoPilot is quite pretty, controls 3 groups, incorporates a radio transmitter, TTL or Manual and is smaller, less ugly and more practical than a TT1 and AC3.... and has a focus assist as well. Then, what other radio system does this with the same mode variation and output range? Also, what other system provides a flash with built-in radio controller to control other remote (higher powered) flash as well?

'Cheap' is the hook with the Godox. 'Better' is delusion. If - Manual only - rocks your boat and you can be certain that it will fulfil your every requirement in every situation, then you'll be fine. Lumedyne and Norman are Manual only and would be cheaper, but having had those systems and discovered their limitations I chose to use Quantum instead.

-- hide signature --

Ian.
http://www.commercialphotographer.co.uk
Theres only one sun. Why do I need more than one light to get a natural result?

Ha ha ha!!

Got ya!!!

I was hoping you would chime in here on this topic; you may recall, what perhaps, two or so years ago a rather long thread and a long exchange with me on the ins and outs of the Quantum gear in comparison to speedlites and the wonderful comparison images you did of the Quantum gear lighting up a Lastolite Ezybox compared to a speedlite. That was one of the best educations in lighting I ever received.

CoPilot. Can that thing control the standard Quantum T and and more powerful Q lights? Or does it just control that new on-camera Quantum "speedlite"?

As for pretty, I find the CoPilot, from the images of it I have seen (I can't actually recall if I have seen one in the flesh) pretty ugly. I am not a big fan of triggers that stick up in the air like some deformed mushroom; I much prefer the flat type of trigger like Canon's new radio ST-RT thingy because I am a right eye shooter (with left eye open) and hate anything that gets in the way of my left eye. But it's a darn site less big, clumsy (with a zillion cables and connectors required) and ugly compared to the previous triggers.

Does the CoPilot allow for Auto Flash mode (as distinct from TTL) as well ?

I think in that tutorial you gave me all that time ago,if my memory serves me correctly, you weren't too keen on the Quantum T heads as you didn't think they offered much more power (GN) than a speedlite and you recommended the Q heads instead, is that right?

The one thing,and I haven't looked at the Quantum system in ages (I found their site a pain to navigate to get all the info you want; poor layout), I found difficult to decide on is that I liked the flexibility of the lower power heads because the battery packs could be used for my speedlites as well; but I would rather the power of the more powerful Q heads,but they come with clunky battery packs that can't be used for anything else other than the Quantum lights. Has this situation changed?

I am still undecided (yep, after all this time ) as to what to go for; Quantum, Elinchrom Quadra or now this Godox thing. I tend to like to make a decision on something and stick with it for the long haul rather than chopping and changing.

Thanks in advance.

Regards,

plevyadophy

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
UKphotographers
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,933
Like?
Re: New (and better?) Bare Bulb Alternative to Q Flash and Elinchrom Ranger. What do you think?
In reply to plevyadophy, Apr 29, 2013

plevyadophy wrote:

Ha ha ha!!

Got ya!!!

I was hoping you would chime in here on this topic; you may recall, what perhaps, two or so years ago a rather long thread and a long exchange with me on the ins and outs of the Quantum gear in comparison to speedlites and the wonderful comparison images you did of the Quantum gear lighting up a Lastolite Ezybox compared to a speedlite. That was one of the best educations in lighting I ever received.

Regards,

plevyadophy

Thanks, the softbox thing was quite interesting from both our perspectives I think.

I still prefer the QPAQ's in the 400Ws configuration.. if you're going to have the inconvenience of a battery, you might as well have some benefit with it. A kit of 400Ws units will cope with most things inside or outside, the smaller 80Ws or 160Ws are better equipped for internal use. Outside, you don't trick bright sunlight too easily so you really do need the output.

The CoPilot isn't a 'deformed mushroom shape' - it's more of a 'Stealth bomber' and will control the Trio, T5d-R's or X5d-R's in Manual or TTL mode. It looks like this:

CoPilot Controller

If you need Auto control you do need a deformed mushroom shaped controller - a Pilot. (or a Trio flash, or a T5d-R/X5d-R set up as a controller with a transmitter and 'D' adapter). A pilot looks like this:

Neither of the Pilot/CoPilot controller options would interfere with a right-eyed shooter.. theres no cables required. The Pilot does have an external battery capability, but it runs quite happily on 4 AA's.

If you set your remotes to 'Auto' and set the ISO manually you can use the Pilot just to trigger these in the settings you made, (or any of the Quantum transmitters) but no changes from camera position. With the Pilot, the Auto facility will track your camera aperture and ISO changes and change remote outputs accordingly.

'Same Old' with the 400Ws power packs. The capacitors are in the packs rather than the heads, making the heads lighter. The QPAQ's only power the X heads because of this. Alternatively, Lumedyne packs can power Quantum X heads too with either the Quantum socket fitted or an adapter cable.

-- hide signature --

Ian.
http://www.commercialphotographer.co.uk
Theres only one sun. Why do I need more than one light to get a natural result?

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Nikonparrothead
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,950Gear list
Like?
Re: New (and better?) Bare Bulb Alternative to Q Flash and Elinchrom Ranger. What do you think?
In reply to CraigBennett, Apr 30, 2013

The VML should be able to handle the Flashpoint it's a wonderful little piece of gear.

As for the 1600s vs the Einsteins, go with the Einsteins. It's more versatile with better color consistency.

-- hide signature --

'Nice pen, bet you write good stories with it.'

 Nikonparrothead's gear list:Nikonparrothead's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-TZ1 Canon PowerShot S95 Fujifilm FinePix X100 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GF1 Nikon D3S +11 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
John Deerfield
Senior MemberPosts: 2,087
Like?
Re: New (and better?) Bare Bulb Alternative to Q Flash and Elinchrom Ranger. What do you think?
In reply to UKphotographers, Apr 30, 2013

UKphotographers wrote:

John Deerfield wrote:

The Godox does have a remote control/triggering system? No, it isn't TTL but if you have to have TTL, then Quantum isn't your only choice. Personally, I would rather build a speedlight system for TTL, but that's me. I don't see any problem using flash modifiers developed for the QFLash? There is an entire industry of speedring adapters to accommodate various modifiers on various lights.

'Cheap' is the hook with the Godox. 'Better' is delusion. If - Manual only - rocks your boat and you can be certain that it will fulfil your every requirement in every situation, then you'll be fine. Lumedyne and Norman are Manual only and would be cheaper, but having had those systems and discovered their limitations I chose to use Quantum instead.

I am not sure any of us ever said "better". As a matter of fact, I said the Elinchrom system wins hands down in every category except price. And I think it's a good thing to have choices. If I were starting from scratch today, my TTL system would undoubtably be Nikon flash units. For starters, I love being able to use AA batteries to power my flashes. Yes, I use external power quite often, but in a pinch I don't need a $450 battery pack to power my light (not to mention that $450 SC pack from Quantum only uses 8 AA batteries). With everything self-contained, I can put my flash anywhere I want. And I do, often using a justin clamp. I didn't have that freedom with my QFlahes, the battery had to go somewhere! And before the Godox battery, powering a QFlash was nothing short of a joke (seriously... a $450 battery back that uses 8 AA batteries?). My 2nd flash system would be based on the power I need. At which point both shoe mount flashes and 400ws Rangers aren't enough!

Thread Title:  New (and better?) Bare Bulb Alternative to Q Flash and Elinchrom Ranger. What do you think?

Having used and still use Manual only lighting as well as Speedlights, I find Speedlights underpowered in most situations and find that advocates of Speedlights tend to need to mount multiples together to get a useful output. I find this pointless when theres far better solutions available with appropriate output already provided without the overhead of costs and unnecessary, time consuming, mounting of equipment together. Up to 400Ws in whatever mode works flawlessly with Quantum - one flash head instead of five speedlights (and 20 AA's) - beyond that you are looking at a completely different ballgame and not one which the Godox or Speedlights would ever be part of.

I don't know where to start. First, a Quantum Trio doesn't have any more power than a shoe mount flash. The next step up in the QFlash will something like the T5 which has the same power as the Godox CL-180, both of which being about twice as powerful as a shoe mount flash. To get into the 400ws QFlash requires yet another flash unit AND the battery to power it; roughly $1500 for the flash and battery. And no, a Gordox battery won't power it. Or, one could wait a few months and get the 300ws version of the Godox which does work with the $200 battery, both for $750... fully HALF the cost of the QFlash and unless you add some more $$ to the QFlash, you still don't have TTL. So $750 for 1/2 a stop of light? Seriously? Or drop down to the same power as the Godox and you get TTL for only $250 (give or take) more! As far as fitting a Qflash anywhere a shoe mount flash goes, you can't. It is simply the laws of physics: I don't have a battery pack with a speedlight. The pack has to go somewhere. I can think of two locations that I frequently shoot at that I don't have anyplace to suspend the battery pack.

You use Manual AND TTL. Everybody does.

I certainly wouldn't say that. I never use TTL in controlled situations. And I don't know of any studio photographer that uses TTL. But that's me.

So why not just buy a lighting system capable of providing both?

Because they rob you on price/value. But there is no doubt that that is my opinion, not a fact. But the fact is that the system is enormously more expensive than other choices.

Quadras and Rangers don't, neither do Godox. I would advocate that Speedlights are underpowered, one or two are useful but beyond that when you need greater output rather than spend on more multiple underpowered units - just buy something more appropriate with the same function instead.

And therein lies the rub: how much power do you need via TTL? And I am sure this varies between users. For me, I am NOT spending $1500 on a 400ws flash and battery (no TTL at that price) when I can get a Einstein AND battery for under $750, have more power and more flash modifiers.

Now that isn't advocating 'cheap' I know.. but having to buy AGAIN because your purchase was inappropriate is just costly. Elinchrom are fine, but faced with a choice of 'with TTL - Or without TTL for the same output' - I'd choose 'with'. I don't know what my next requirement will be for lighting, so having it is a far better insurance policy than not having it at all. My need is to provide images at the demand of whatever the client requires.. if that requires TTL, Auto or Manual (or whatever) then I'm equipped for it.

And that argument can even be used as a reason to purchase the Elinchrom system: I might already have the modifiers for that system, why spend more money on new modifiers for a new system? What are you going to do when you need more than 400ws of power? Oops, lets double the price for the QFlash or skip TTL. The minute you drop TTL from the QFlash list of advantages, it has ZERO advantages.

I use multiple Quantum's with Turbo's, SC's and QPAQ's - I've never had any issues with batteries or mounting them, or even hiding them on shoots and they're dirt cheap to use if you buy Turbo's with their $12 replacement batteries, or $100 Quantum replacements with 'free' swap out internal upgrades.

The last Turbo I sent to Quantum they charged me $175 to "repack" the battery. The last time I bought a battery for the Turbo at Batteries Plus was $36. This why I cracked open the SC to see if I could replace the battery myself.That is when I found out that it was powered by 8 AAs.

Upgrades - now theres an issue - what sort of upgrade policy is provided by Godox? Do they provide a free upgrade policy like the T5d-R R3 upgrade done recently by Quantum? Or radio upgrades? From what I see the recent Godox policy was - if the radio system doesn't work properly (Cells II) - 'Give it free to avert complaints.'

And how do you think Quantum affords these "free" upgrades? As outlined, you are already paying quite the premium when you buy into the system. Gee, a Turbo 3 for $500 or a Godox with at least as much power if not more for $200. Extra battery for the Godox $100. Extra battery via Quantum repack, at least $100 and without the unit for two weeks. If I were Quantum, I would try to keep users locked into my system as well.

So no. The Godox is not better, it's just cheaper, it provides less function and still needs an external battery to power it. For a (not so cheap) light on the end of a stick it ticks the box.

I never said better? But it's a far better value than the QFlash system.

-- hide signature --

Ian.
http://www.commercialphotographer.co.uk
Theres only one sun. Why do I need more than one light to get a natural result?

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
plevyadophy
Veteran MemberPosts: 4,250Gear list
Like?
Re: New (and better?) Bare Bulb Alternative to Q Flash and Elinchrom Ranger. What do you think?
In reply to UKphotographers, Apr 30, 2013

UKphotographers wrote:

plevyadophy wrote:

Ha ha ha!!

Got ya!!!

I was hoping you would chime in here on this topic; you may recall, what perhaps, two or so years ago a rather long thread and a long exchange with me on the ins and outs of the Quantum gear in comparison to speedlites and the wonderful comparison images you did of the Quantum gear lighting up a Lastolite Ezybox compared to a speedlite. That was one of the best educations in lighting I ever received.

Regards,

plevyadophy

Thanks, the softbox thing was quite interesting from both our perspectives I think.

Yes indeed. I was, and still am, ever so grateful for the time and effort you put into your responses; it's things like that that make these forums worthwhile even if one does have to spend an inordinate amount of time wading through petty threads.

I still prefer the QPAQ's in the 400Ws configuration.. if you're going to have the inconvenience of a battery, you might as well have some benefit with it. A kit of 400Ws units will cope with most things inside or outside, the smaller 80Ws or 160Ws are better equipped for internal use. Outside, you don't trick bright sunlight too easily so you really do need the output.

Deja vu!

That's pretty much verbatim what you said in that original thread I mentioned. Sound advice but I am just a stubborn old "versatility" guy; I just love compactness and versatility in equipment hence why I keep looking at the Quantum T Series (and I here i am referring to the ability to use the batts for my speedlites as well).

The CoPilot isn't a 'deformed mushroom shape' - it's more of a 'Stealth bomber' and will control the Trio, T5d-R's or X5d-R's in Manual or TTL mode. It looks like this:

Thanks for that.

I wasn't aware of this device. Much much better looking than the other horrid Quantum stuff but it still has a bit of Quantum DNA to me; it's still kinda blocky and industrial looking, kinda old German in fact or Mercedes up to the early 90s (well engineered but pug ugly and tank like). I think Quantum really need to get Apple designers on secondment.

CoPilot Controller

If you need Auto control you do need a deformed mushroom shaped controller - a Pilot. (or a Trio flash, or a T5d-R/X5d-R set up as a controller with a transmitter and 'D' adapter). A pilot looks like this:

Yes this is the horrid mushroom I was thinking of.

Neither of the Pilot/CoPilot controller options would interfere with a right-eyed shooter.. theres no cables required. The Pilot does have an external battery capability, but it runs quite happily on 4 AA's.

The Pilot would definitely interfere with a right-eyed-left-eye-open shooter because the Pilot is blocking one's field of view.

And does this mushroom gives Auto Mode with the X series heads too? I had a quick look at Quantum's horrid site and couldn't get an answer to that.

If you set your remotes to 'Auto' and set the ISO manually you can use the Pilot just to trigger these in the settings you made, (or any of the Quantum transmitters) but no changes from camera position. With the Pilot, the Auto facility will track your camera aperture and ISO changes and change remote outputs accordingly.

OK, thanks.

'Same Old' with the 400Ws power packs. The capacitors are in the packs rather than the heads, making the heads lighter. The QPAQ's only power the X heads because of this. Alternatively, Lumedyne packs can power Quantum X heads too with either the Quantum socket fitted or an adapter cable.

Firstly, are Lumedyne packs availabe in U.K. and if so who from?

Second, how big are the packs?

Third,  will they give me the versatility I crave i.e. power speedlites as well as the X heads?

Finally, what are talking of in terms of cost?

Thanks in advance.

Warmest Regards,

plevyaodphy

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
UKphotographers
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,933
Like?
Re: New (and better?) Bare Bulb Alternative to Q Flash and Elinchrom Ranger. What do you think?
In reply to John Deerfield, Apr 30, 2013

John Deerfield wrote:

If I were starting from scratch today, my TTL system would undoubtably be Nikon flash units.

My 2nd flash system would be based on the power I need. At which point both shoe mount flashes and 400ws Rangers aren't enough!

For somebody who says they don't use TTL - you sure have specific requirements for the system you don't use.

And where will the Godox appear in your system? It is totally underpowered for your needs and doesn't have TTL at all... But, it's so cheap - you should obviously buy lots - or tell everybody else to buy lots - even if it doesn't fit any of your requirements !!?

As I said on my first line of this thread "The Godox has some interesting features, but to try and compare it to a Quantum with its capability of Manual, Auto, TTL, remote ratio and an integrated radio system controlling a range of 80Ws-400Ws is only a comparison of the skin and not the substance." So far, nobody is committed to this Godox system because it leaves a gapping hole in photographers requirements plugged only by Speedlights or Speedlites. As such it is restricted and is limited and its masquerade of being a Quantum is let down by its comparative lack of function. Of its interesting features, none have been mentioned - only price.

Could I manage using only a Manual system? Yes. Would I want to restrict myself in this way? No.

My location system today consists of kits of 80, 160 and 400Ws Quantum's. I have further Lumedynes which supplement this kit when required. They deliver everything I need for a location kit and can be configured to do anything I need to do. I don't need to plug any gaps, and if I was starting from scratch, I'd do exactly the same again because the configuration just works.

-- hide signature --

Ian.
http://www.commercialphotographer.co.uk
Theres only one sun. Why do I need more than one light to get a natural result?

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
UKphotographers
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,933
Like?
Re: New (and better?) Bare Bulb Alternative to Q Flash and Elinchrom Ranger. What do you think?
In reply to plevyadophy, Apr 30, 2013

plevyadophy wrote:

UKphotographers wrote:

'Same Old' with the 400Ws power packs. The capacitors are in the packs rather than the heads, making the heads lighter. The QPAQ's only power the X heads because of this. Alternatively, Lumedyne packs can power Quantum X heads too with either the Quantum socket fitted or an adapter cable.

Firstly, are Lumedyne packs availabe in U.K. and if so who from?

Second, how big are the packs?

Third,  will they give me the versatility I crave i.e. power speedlites as well as the X heads?

Finally, what are talking of in terms of cost?

Lumedyne packs are expensive when new, but S/H you can get a 400Ws pack for around £100. Add a battery - less than £100 (with a new case).. Size wise, the same as the QPAQ. Will they power speedlights - no. But you can use the battery with a Lumedyne Cycler (UHF/VHF) which will power Speedlights.

-- hide signature --

Ian.
http://www.commercialphotographer.co.uk
Theres only one sun. Why do I need more than one light to get a natural result?

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
plevyadophy
Veteran MemberPosts: 4,250Gear list
Like?
Interesting features Re: New (and better?) Bare Bulb Alternative to Q Flash and Elinchrom Ranger?
In reply to UKphotographers, Apr 30, 2013

UKphotographers wrote:

John Deerfield wrote:

If I were starting from scratch today, my TTL system would undoubtably be Nikon flash units.

My 2nd flash system would be based on the power I need. At which point both shoe mount flashes and 400ws Rangers aren't enough!

For somebody who says they don't use TTL - you sure have specific requirements for the system you don't use.

And where will the Godox appear in your system? It is totally underpowered for your needs and doesn't have TTL at all... But, it's so cheap - you should obviously buy lots - or tell everybody else to buy lots - even if it doesn't fit any of your requirements !!?

As I said on my first line of this thread "The Godox has some interesting features, but to try and compare it to a Quantum with its capability of Manual, Auto, TTL, remote ratio and an integrated radio system controlling a range of 80Ws-400Ws is only a comparison of the skin and not the substance." So far, nobody is committed to this Godox system because it leaves a gapping hole in photographers requirements plugged only by Speedlights or Speedlites. As such it is restricted and is limited and its masquerade of being a Quantum is let down by its comparative lack of function. Of its interesting features, none have been mentioned - only price.

If you read the very long and detailed review posted in the OP, along with a follow up that was published yesterday I think, then you will see quite a few good features of the Godox other than price.

I would definitely be interested in your take on those features.

Could I manage using only a Manual system? Yes. Would I want to restrict myself in this way? No.

My location system today consists of kits of 80, 160 and 400Ws Quantum's. I have further Lumedynes which supplement this kit when required. They deliver everything I need for a location kit and can be configured to do anything I need to do. I don't need to plug any gaps, and if I was starting from scratch, I'd do exactly the same again because the configuration just works.

-- hide signature --

Ian.
http://www.commercialphotographer.co.uk
Theres only one sun. Why do I need more than one light to get a natural result?

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
plevyadophy
Veteran MemberPosts: 4,250Gear list
Like?
Lumedyne Re: New (and better?) Bare Bulb Alternative to Q Flash and Elinchrom Ranger?
In reply to UKphotographers, Apr 30, 2013

UKphotographers wrote:

plevyadophy wrote:

UKphotographers wrote:

'Same Old' with the 400Ws power packs. The capacitors are in the packs rather than the heads, making the heads lighter. The QPAQ's only power the X heads because of this. Alternatively, Lumedyne packs can power Quantum X heads too with either the Quantum socket fitted or an adapter cable.

Firstly, are Lumedyne packs availabe in U.K. and if so who from?

Second, how big are the packs?

Third,  will they give me the versatility I crave i.e. power speedlites as well as the X heads?

Finally, what are talking of in terms of cost?

Lumedyne packs are expensive when new, but S/H you can get a 400Ws pack for around £100. Add a battery - less than £100 (with a new case).. Size wise, the same as the QPAQ. Will they power speedlights - no. But you can use the battery with a Lumedyne Cycler (UHF/VHF) which will power Speedlights.

-- hide signature --

Ian.
http://www.commercialphotographer.co.uk
Theres only one sun. Why do I need more than one light to get a natural result?

What are the service and support options for UK buyers?

Do you know of any UK site I can go to so as to have a look at the Lumedyne options? Or is it only an eBay jobbie?

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
UKphotographers
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,933
Like?
Re: Interesting features
In reply to plevyadophy, Apr 30, 2013

plevyadophy wrote:

If you read the very long and detailed review posted in the OP, along with a follow up that was published yesterday I think, then you will see quite a few good features of the Godox other than price.

I would definitely be interested in your take on those features.

The flashes are fundamentally missing the versatility you want - as you posted earlier. If you just want Manual flashes, thats fine, thats all they do. If you might want any more by way of Auto settings, they don't do any of that.

The HSS function might be useful on occasions, but the vagaries of what will work, which triggers might/not work and the requirement to use 2 sets of triggers to fire and control in HSS mode as well as needing to manually set HSS on the flash by a button combination seems illogical and rather cobbled together. The CL-TX only has a hotshoe connector and no sync-in, so you might need to sort out some hotshoe extension cable to use both together or if you wanted to use a TTL flash on your camera hotshoe.

The Manual remote control of up to 16 units you might find useful, if you can remember which unit is set to which channel when you want to change the output level, but anything requiring that amount of remotes tends to be easier to control by walking to the lights and just changing them in the same way that studio lighting is easier to change with this amount of units.

-- hide signature --

Ian.
http://www.commercialphotographer.co.uk
Theres only one sun. Why do I need more than one light to get a natural result?

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
UKphotographers
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,933
Like?
Re: Lumedyne
In reply to plevyadophy, Apr 30, 2013

plevyadophy wrote:

What are the service and support options for UK buyers?

Do you know of any UK site I can go to so as to have a look at the Lumedyne options? Or is it only an eBay jobbie?

Lumedyne used to have The Flash Centre in London as their service centre. Now Lumedyne needs to be sent back to the USA or they have a service centre in Holland (or Belgium?). Godox would need to be sent back to China. Quantum could be sent to Flaghead in Poole (UK).

www.Lumedyne.com will have all the options, but the units to look out for s/h are 067 units which are 400ws.

-- hide signature --

Ian.
http://www.commercialphotographer.co.uk
Theres only one sun. Why do I need more than one light to get a natural result?

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
CraigBennett
Contributing MemberPosts: 688Gear list
Like?
Re: New (and better?) Bare Bulb Alternative to Q Flash and Elinchrom Ranger. What do you think?
In reply to Nikonparrothead, Apr 30, 2013

Nikonparrothead wrote:

The VML should be able to handle the Flashpoint it's a wonderful little piece of gear.

As for the 1600s vs the Einsteins, go with the Einsteins. It's more versatile with better color consistency.

-- hide signature --

'Nice pen, bet you write good stories with it.'

Thanks.  Yes, the VML does indeed have the power, the recycle time drops to 3 seconds, but that's inline with the Flashpoint's at full power anyway.  My Flashpoints are the older ones and they are big and heavy.  That is one of the reasons I was going toward the 1600B.  I agree fully with Einsteins, they are much better than the AB IMO.

I think I will pass on the AB deal and go with one Einstein with PowerMC2 control and VML.  Should make a nice portable unit.  And as you point out, if needing more power, just use my Flashpoints.

Regards,

-- hide signature --
 CraigBennett's gear list:CraigBennett's gear list
Nikon D90 Nikon D800E Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 18-105mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24-85mm F3.5-4.5G ED VR +5 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
John Deerfield
Senior MemberPosts: 2,087
Like?
Re: New (and better?) Bare Bulb Alternative to Q Flash and Elinchrom Ranger. What do you think?
In reply to UKphotographers, Apr 30, 2013

UKphotographers wrote:

John Deerfield wrote:

If I were starting from scratch today, my TTL system would undoubtably be Nikon flash units.

My 2nd flash system would be based on the power I need. At which point both shoe mount flashes and 400ws Rangers aren't enough!

For somebody who says they don't use TTL - you sure have specific requirements for the system you don't use.

Why do you insist on putting words in my mouth? I never said I didn't use TTL. As a matter of fact, I outlined when I use it.

And where will the Godox appear in your system? It is totally underpowered for your needs and doesn't have TTL at all... But, it's so cheap - you should obviously buy lots - or tell everybody else to buy lots - even if it doesn't fit any of your requirements !!?

I don't know if the Godox will fit in my system. As far as my needs go, they are mine and yours are yours, I have never argued that. That said, I could see where a 300ws flash might make a good addition to my kit at the right price and especially since I already have the battery to power it.

As I said on my first line of this thread "The Godox has some interesting features, but to try and compare it to a Quantum with its capability of Manual, Auto, TTL, remote ratio and an integrated radio system controlling a range of 80Ws-400Ws is only a comparison of the skin and not the substance." So far, nobody is committed to this Godox system because it leaves a gapping hole in photographers requirements plugged only by Speedlights or Speedlites. As such it is restricted and is limited and its masquerade of being a Quantum is let down by its comparative lack of function. Of its interesting features, none have been mentioned - only price.

We have debated this the entire thread. Take TTL out of the equation and there is no advantage to the Quantum system. The 400ws flash is a red herring. A single 400ws unit runs $1500 and that does NOT include the TTL adapters. That leaves the 160ws version... on either a Godox battery or a ridiculously over priced Quantum battery. But no matter what batter you choose or how you slice it, the only advantage to the Quantum will be the TTL and that "feature" runs several hundreds of dollars more. Now if someone needs that feature, then the hundreds of dollars are worth it. For me, it isn't.

Could I manage using only a Manual system? Yes. Would I want to restrict myself in this way? No.

My location system today consists of kits of 80, 160 and 400Ws Quantum's. I have further Lumedynes which supplement this kit when required. They deliver everything I need for a location kit and can be configured to do anything I need to do. I don't need to plug any gaps, and if I was starting from scratch, I'd do exactly the same again because the configuration just works.

All of my lighting is location lighting   I use Nikon flashes when I need TTL (run and gun) and Einsteins everywhere else. If I had to do it all over again, I would do the same thing. I don't need to plug any gaps because my configuration just works. However, if I could change something, I would use Profoto's... even though they don't offer TTL.

-- hide signature --

Ian.
http://www.commercialphotographer.co.uk
Theres only one sun. Why do I need more than one light to get a natural result?

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
plevyadophy
Veteran MemberPosts: 4,250Gear list
Like?
Profoto,why? Re: New (and better?) Bare Bulb Alternative to Q Flash and Elinchrom Ranger?
In reply to John Deerfield, Apr 30, 2013

John Deerfield wrote:

UKphotographers wrote:

John Deerfield wrote:

If I were starting from scratch today, my TTL system would undoubtably be Nikon flash units.

My 2nd flash system would be based on the power I need. At which point both shoe mount flashes and 400ws Rangers aren't enough!

For somebody who says they don't use TTL - you sure have specific requirements for the system you don't use.

Why do you insist on putting words in my mouth? I never said I didn't use TTL. As a matter of fact, I outlined when I use it.

And where will the Godox appear in your system? It is totally underpowered for your needs and doesn't have TTL at all... But, it's so cheap - you should obviously buy lots - or tell everybody else to buy lots - even if it doesn't fit any of your requirements !!?

I don't know if the Godox will fit in my system. As far as my needs go, they are mine and yours are yours, I have never argued that. That said, I could see where a 300ws flash might make a good addition to my kit at the right price and especially since I already have the battery to power it.

As I said on my first line of this thread "The Godox has some interesting features, but to try and compare it to a Quantum with its capability of Manual, Auto, TTL, remote ratio and an integrated radio system controlling a range of 80Ws-400Ws is only a comparison of the skin and not the substance." So far, nobody is committed to this Godox system because it leaves a gapping hole in photographers requirements plugged only by Speedlights or Speedlites. As such it is restricted and is limited and its masquerade of being a Quantum is let down by its comparative lack of function. Of its interesting features, none have been mentioned - only price.

We have debated this the entire thread. Take TTL out of the equation and there is no advantage to the Quantum system. The 400ws flash is a red herring. A single 400ws unit runs $1500 and that does NOT include the TTL adapters. That leaves the 160ws version... on either a Godox battery or a ridiculously over priced Quantum battery. But no matter what batter you choose or how you slice it, the only advantage to the Quantum will be the TTL and that "feature" runs several hundreds of dollars more. Now if someone needs that feature, then the hundreds of dollars are worth it. For me, it isn't.

Could I manage using only a Manual system? Yes. Would I want to restrict myself in this way? No.

My location system today consists of kits of 80, 160 and 400Ws Quantum's. I have further Lumedynes which supplement this kit when required. They deliver everything I need for a location kit and can be configured to do anything I need to do. I don't need to plug any gaps, and if I was starting from scratch, I'd do exactly the same again because the configuration just works.

All of my lighting is location lighting   I use Nikon flashes when I need TTL (run and gun) and Einsteins everywhere else. If I had to do it all over again, I would do the same thing. I don't need to plug any gaps because my configuration just works. However, if I could change something, I would use Profoto's... even though they don't offer TTL.

-- hide signature --

Ian.
http://www.commercialphotographer.co.uk
Theres only one sun. Why do I need more than one light to get a natural result?

Hi,

just curious as to why you would go for Profoto gear?

Thanks.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
UKphotographers
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,933
Like?
Re: New (and better?) Bare Bulb Alternative to Q Flash and Elinchrom Ranger. What do you think?
In reply to John Deerfield, Apr 30, 2013

John Deerfield wrote:

UKphotographers wrote:

You use Manual AND TTL. Everybody does.

I certainly wouldn't say that. I never use TTL in controlled situations. And I don't know of any studio photographer that uses TTL. But that's me.

So why not just buy a lighting system capable of providing both?

Because they rob you on price/value. But there is no doubt that that is my opinion, not a fact.

Either you use TTL or you don't. You obviously do.

The thing with having it is that you can switch TTL off if you want to, making your lights Manual. If you don't have it - you can't switch it off and need another system to plug the gap.

I fail to see how a Godox might be suitable as a studio flash 'for controlled situations' without having a modelling light.

-- hide signature --

Ian.
http://www.commercialphotographer.co.uk
Theres only one sun. Why do I need more than one light to get a natural result?

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
UKphotographers
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,933
Like?
Re: Profoto,why? Re: New (and better?) Bare Bulb Alternative to Q Flash and Elinchrom Ranger?
In reply to plevyadophy, Apr 30, 2013

plevyadophy wrote:

John Deerfield wrote:

All of my lighting is location lighting   I use Nikon flashes when I need TTL (run and gun) and Einsteins everywhere else. If I had to do it all over again, I would do the same thing. I don't need to plug any gaps because my configuration just works. However, if I could change something, I would use Profoto's... even though they don't offer TTL.

Hi,

just curious as to why you would go for Profoto gear?

Thanks.

Thats what happens if you buy the wrong equipment in the first place.

-- hide signature --

Ian.
http://www.commercialphotographer.co.uk
Theres only one sun. Why do I need more than one light to get a natural result?

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
John Deerfield
Senior MemberPosts: 2,087
Like?
Re: Profoto,why? Re: New (and better?) Bare Bulb Alternative to Q Flash and Elinchrom Ranger?
In reply to plevyadophy, Apr 30, 2013

Hi,

just curious as to why you would go for Profoto gear?

Thanks.

To be honest, if I had unlimited funds, I would probably take a long hard look at both Broncolor and Profoto before making a decision. I have use an Elinchrom set up and wasn't impressed. There was nothing wrong with it by any means.... very nice stuff. But to my minds eye it's is either the really expensive low end or inexpensive high end. A great niche, but so long as I am dreaming I may as well dream. I haven't really used Profoto, but I have been in a studio where they were being used and I just liked them: build, quality of light, functionality, etc. I have never had the opportunity to work with Broncolor but they are one of the best as well so that is what i would be looking at: Broncolor or Profoto.

But let me be clear, the type of shooting I do now doesn't require that kind of lighting. I just admire that lighting. If I look at Marcus & Indrani, or Lindsay Adler, they are using Broncolor. Or Annie Leibovitz or Greg Heisler using Profoto. It seems that the greats are usually using one or the other. I see a lot of photographers endorsing Elinchrom (Kelby Training, Joe McNally) but when I see professional shoots I am usually seeing Broncolor or Profoto.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
John Deerfield
Senior MemberPosts: 2,087
Like?
Re: New (and better?) Bare Bulb Alternative to Q Flash and Elinchrom Ranger. What do you think?
In reply to UKphotographers, Apr 30, 2013

Either you use TTL or you don't. You obviously do.

So now you agree that I do use TTL? In another post you didn't? Getting hard to follow.

The thing with having it is that you can switch TTL off if you want to, making your lights Manual. If you don't have it - you can't switch it off and need another system to plug the gap.

Using your paradigm, I will always need something to "plug-the-gap". 400ws isn't enough for me, TTL or not.

I fail to see how a Godox might be suitable as a studio flash 'for controlled situations' without having a modelling light.

And now we add modeling lights? Since when does Quantum have a modeling light? Maybe something has changed, but mine never did. So by that paradigm, the Quantum wouldn't be a suitable studio flash and hence, you will need to fill that gap. Or, maybe Quantum has added a modeling light... from a battery back? I can't see where that would be useful. I don't find 100 watt modeling lights all that useful. Get a modeling light behind something even as simple as a brolly and 100-watts doesn't make a dent. Even the modeling light in something like an Alien Bee is of dubious benefit. At least the Einstein has a 250-watt modeling light and that is getting useful. But you typically don't run it on the battery unless you have plenty of batteries with you!

Look, we are obviously never going to agree. We have two very different approaches. Obviously, there isn't a one size fits all solution and that's a good thing. I am never going to convince you that Quantum isn't the best thing since sliced bread and you will never convince me that it is. So I wish you the best.

-- hide signature --

Ian.
http://www.commercialphotographer.co.uk
Theres only one sun. Why do I need more than one light to get a natural result?

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads