Photogenic vs. White Lightning

[John Sack]

I am looking for a 3-light set, most likely monoblock, approx 500 watt seconds.

I'd like something I can grow into (I'm a beginner, but serious about learning). Mostly I expect to do family and small-group portraits and such. Expect to work on location almost always (except when I'm experimenting at home).

White Lightning seems to have a large following. But I would generally prefer to patronize my local photo store whenever I can get similar quality and cost. They provide good advice for somebody learning, and I don't mind paying a bit for that. I've been looking to see what lights are at a similar price point to White Lightning. The one I spotted is Photogenic (the 1200 Powerlight); it is higher priced that WL, but I'm hoping I can get my dealer to provide a discount that gets into the right ballpark.

But I can't seem to find many comments on Photogenic online. There seem to be many comments on the WL.

Anybody with some pointers or experience to help me?

I want to be sure there are accessories to fit. I'd expect to use non-Photogenic accessories; same with WL.

One thing this newbie wonders:

The modeling light setting on the WL lights seems to be set separately from the flash. There is no "track" function, just a slider switch that you slide to the same place as the flash power. Is that awkward in practice, or is it handy when you want to see the modeling light full on?

John

 

[RDKirk]

One thing this newbie wonders:

The modeling light setting on the WL lights seems to be set
separately from the flash. There is no "track" function, just a
slider switch that you slide to the same place as the flash power.
Is that awkward in practice, or is it handy when you want to see
the modeling light full on?

You sweep it with the same finger-sweep you use to set the flash power--no problem. The remote control units can do a real "track" function, lowering or raising the power of the lights as you raise or lower the power of the flash.

Given that the White Lightning uses a 250 watt modeling light, the separate control is a good thing because it allows you to lower the modeling light independently of the flash for subjects that are sensitive to bright lights. I find that very frequently when I'm using paramount (butterfly) lighting, which is directly in the subject's face.

--
RDKirk
'TANSTAAFL: The only unbreakable rule in photography.'

 

[TMacaw]

I am looking for a 3-light set, most likely monoblock, approx 500
watt seconds.

I'd like something I can grow into (I'm a beginner, but serious
about learning). Mostly I expect to do family and small-group
portraits and such. Expect to work on location almost always
(except when I'm experimenting at home).

White Lightning seems to have a large following. But I would
generally prefer to patronize my local photo store whenever I can
get similar quality and cost. They provide good advice for
somebody learning, and I don't mind paying a bit for that. I've
been looking to see what lights are at a similar price point to
White Lightning. The one I spotted is Photogenic (the 1200
Powerlight); it is higher priced that WL, but I'm hoping I can get
my dealer to provide a discount that gets into the right ballpark.

But I can't seem to find many comments on Photogenic online. There
seem to be many comments on the WL.

Anybody with some pointers or experience to help me?

I want to be sure there are accessories to fit. I'd expect to use
non-Photogenic accessories; same with WL.

One thing this newbie wonders:

The modeling light setting on the WL lights seems to be set
separately from the flash. There is no "track" function, just a
slider switch that you slide to the same place as the flash power.
Is that awkward in practice, or is it handy when you want to see
the modeling light full on?

John

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

You need to take time to call Photogenic (Bob Otis) 1-800-682-7668 and talk about their Powerlight series, their pro users, and even comparisons with some much more highly touted monos. One key issue is constant color temperature across power range.
TMc

 

[Mike Goebel]

Our studio shoots approx 55,000 underclassmen for yearbooks every year.

We use Photogenic and love them. Very little problems. We use a 3 light setup- Main, Fill and hair light.

We only use the power light for proms and dances, we use a Power PACK with 3 plug in lights for our portrait work.

One thing this newbie wonders:

The modeling light setting on the WL lights seems to be set
separately from the flash. There is no "track" function, just a
slider switch that you slide to the same place as the flash power.
Is that awkward in practice, or is it handy when you want to see
the modeling light full on?

You sweep it with the same finger-sweep you use to set the flash
power--no problem. The remote control units can do a real "track"
function, lowering or raising the power of the lights as you raise
or lower the power of the flash.

Given that the White Lightning uses a 250 watt modeling light, the
separate control is a good thing because it allows you to lower the
modeling light independently of the flash for subjects that are
sensitive to bright lights. I find that very frequently when I'm
using paramount (butterfly) lighting, which is directly in the
subject's face.

--
RDKirk
'TANSTAAFL: The only unbreakable rule in photography.'

--
http://www.mikegoebel.com
http://www.belmontstudio.com
'Evil prevails when good men do nothing'

 

[Nabal]

I am looking for a 3-light set, most likely monoblock, approx 500
watt seconds.

I own a full-time portrait studio, small with only 3 employees, and I have only 1 camera room. When I was shooting medium format film, I equipped my camera room with Photogenic PL-1250 monolights (500 watt seconds).

Shooting medium format film (ISO 160), I most often shot at f/11 - and found this provided sufficient depth of field for all the people and other things I could fit into my camera room - whether I was using an 80mm lens for group portraits or a 150mm telephoto for headshots. Shooting at f/11 and ISO 160, my main light was never set above 1/2 power - so my 500 ws main light had available about 1 f/stop more brightness capability than I ever used. In other words, I could have been using a 250 ws monolight at full power for my main light and gotten by just as well - albeit with slower recycling times.

The 35mm film format, because of its smaller size, has inherently more depth-of-field than medium format - about 1 f/stop more depth of field, all other things being equal. If I had been shooting 35mm film in my studio instead of medium format, I could have got the same depth-of-field at f/8 that my medium format cameras were giving me at f/11. 250 watt seconds of power would have been sufficient for my medium format equipment at f/11, so 125 watt seconds of power would have been adequate for me to shoot 35mm film at f/8.

When I switched to digital capture with the Canon 10D, I realized that the "smaller-than-full-frame" sensor was giving me more depth-of-field than full-frame 35mm film - about 1 1/2 f/stops more depth of field. So pictures which I would have shot at f/11 on medium format, or at f/8 on 35mm film, I could now shoot at f/5 with the Canon 10D - and still have the same depth of field. And where 250 watt seconds were necessary to give me f/11 with medium format, and 125 watt seconds were required to give me f/8 on 35mm film, with the Canon 10D I now needed less than 100 watts seconds - to get the same kinds of pictures I was shooting on medium format film at f/11.

For reasons which should not need to be explained, I ditched my Canon dSLRs and switched to the Olympus E-1 system. The 4/3rds format sensor provides about 2 f/stops more depth of field than full-frame 35mm film, and about 1/2 f/stop more depth of field than the 1.6X crop factor sensor in the Canon 10D. With the E-1, I get the same depth-of-field shooting at f/4 as I was getting with medium format film at f/11. So once again, the power requirements for the main light in my studio was reduced to below 100 watt seconds.

I would like to be able to shoot at f/4, but my 500 watt second PL-1250s will not power down that low. With them, f/4.5 is as low as I can go at the minimum power setting.

What I'm saying is this:

500 watt seconds may not be enough power for you, if you're shooting 8X10 sheet film and need to shoot at f/64 to get adequate depth-of-field. 500 watt seconds was approximately twice as much brightness as I needed to shoot medium format film at f/11. It was 4 times as much power as I would have needed to shoot full-frame 35mm film, and 16 times as much power as I currently require. My plan is to replace my Photogenic PL-1250s, simply because they won't power down low enough to shoot at the f/stops I want to use. I plan to buy Alien Bees 400s, which at 160 watt seconds also have way more power than I actually need.

I'd like something I can grow into (I'm a beginner, but serious
about learning).

Do you plan on "growing into" shooting 8X10 sheet film?

Keep in mind that doubling the brightness capability of a monolight essentially doubles the price. How much extra headroom are you willing to pay for, and what will you do if you can't power down your lights low enough to shoot at the wide lens apertures you want to use?

White Lightning seems to have a large following.

With White Lightning, you're buying directly from the manufacturer - with no profit markup by the wholesale distributor or retail store. Consequently, the price you pay is lower than for comparable products sold through normal retail channels.

But I would
generally prefer to patronize my local photo store whenever I can
get similar quality and cost. They provide good advice for
somebody learning, and I don't mind paying a bit for that.

Have they advised you that 500 watt seconds is way, way more power than you need - and may be "too much" power for you to use? How much are you willing to pay for "bad" advice?

I've been looking to see what lights are at a similar price point to
White Lightning. The one I spotted is Photogenic (the 1200
Powerlight); it is higher priced that WL, but I'm hoping I can get
my dealer to provide a discount that gets into the right ballpark.

The cost of the basic monolight is not the only consideration. Also check the price of the light modifiers. Check the price of the 22" Photogenic beauty dish. What is the difference in cost for barn doors, honeycomb grids, etc. Photogenic accessories are way more expensive than equivalent White Lightning or Alien Bees products. Does Photogenic offer a battery pack to power their monolights outdoors or on location, comparable to the Vagabond battery pak which is available for the Paul Buff products?

But I can't seem to find many comments on Photogenic online. There
seem to be many comments on the WL.

I own Photogenic products, and plan to replace them soon with Alien Bees. If I haven't convinced you yet, perhaps you'd like to buy my Photogenic PL-1250s which have become too powerful for my needs?

In summary, the amount of flash power you need depends on the size of your imager and the ISO you work at. For example, a camera such as the Nikon D70 which can't go below ISO 200 requires only half as much flash power as a Canon 20D shooting at ISO 100.

 

[Tom Boucher]

You have some very interesting comments which now make me wonder if I bought too much for my 20D setup.

You qualified some of your statements with the 'size of my room' type things regarding the strobes being too much for a 20D, or Nikon D70. I shoot with a 20D and have just ordered a few Alien Bee 800s. My goal is person to small group portraits, in a decent sized room and maybe even outdoors one day.

Based on a lot of things I read I thought the 800s would give me the best range should I change the way I do things. Based on what I read it was shoot at f/8 and go from there type thing and you had some pretty interesting comments on comparing multiple camera types to how much light they needed for the same exposure.

So I guess my question is in what situation would the AB800 be too much light for a 20D with a 24-70 f/2.8L or 50mm f/1.8 being used as the primary lens?

 

[John Sack]

Nabal,

Thanks for this lengthy reply about watt-seconds.

One of the things you made me look into for the White Lightnings is that the x1600 (which is what I am looking at) has a "quarter power" mode that takes it from 660ws to 165ws (around where your ABs will be). The "smaller" x800 does not have that function and is 330ws.

One of my concerns for the quarter power mode was that it took the modeling light down by 1/4 as well from 250w to (presumably) 60w.

It sounds like this quarter power mode might be more useful than I had thought.

I'm such a beginner that I do not yet know what I will be using these for. I'm taking a course in commercial lighting to get a broad view of lighting from interiors to architecture to food to environmental portraits to studio portraits. So I thought the extra power would be helpful if I am outdoors with a group for example.

You've given me a good illustration of where you CAN be too rich or too thin of have too much money or light!

I need to study this some more.

John

I am looking for a 3-light set, most likely monoblock, approx 500
watt seconds.

I own a full-time portrait studio, small with only 3 employees, and
I have only 1 camera room. When I was shooting medium format film,
I equipped my camera room with Photogenic PL-1250 monolights (500
watt seconds).

...

What I'm saying is this:

500 watt seconds may not be enough power for you, if you're
shooting 8X10 sheet film and need to shoot at f/64 to get adequate
depth-of-field. 500 watt seconds was approximately twice as much
brightness as I needed to shoot medium format film at f/11. It was
4 times as much power as I would have needed to shoot full-frame
35mm film, and 16 times as much power as I currently require. My
plan is to replace my Photogenic PL-1250s, simply because they
won't power down low enough to shoot at the f/stops I want to use.
I plan to buy Alien Bees 400s, which at 160 watt seconds also have
way more power than I actually need.

I'd like something I can grow into (I'm a beginner, but serious
about learning).

Do you plan on "growing into" shooting 8X10 sheet film?

Keep in mind that doubling the brightness capability of a monolight
essentially doubles the price. How much extra headroom are you
willing to pay for, and what will you do if you can't power down
your lights low enough to shoot at the wide lens apertures you want
to use?

White Lightning seems to have a large following.

With White Lightning, you're buying directly from the manufacturer

• with no profit markup by the wholesale distributor or retail

store. Consequently, the price you pay is lower than for
comparable products sold through normal retail channels.

But I would
generally prefer to patronize my local photo store whenever I can
get similar quality and cost. They provide good advice for
somebody learning, and I don't mind paying a bit for that.

Have they advised you that 500 watt seconds is way, way more power
than you need - and may be "too much" power for you to use? How
much are you willing to pay for "bad" advice?

I've been looking to see what lights are at a similar price point to
White Lightning. The one I spotted is Photogenic (the 1200
Powerlight); it is higher priced that WL, but I'm hoping I can get
my dealer to provide a discount that gets into the right ballpark.

The cost of the basic monolight is not the only consideration.
Also check the price of the light modifiers. Check the price of
the 22" Photogenic beauty dish. What is the difference in cost for
barn doors, honeycomb grids, etc. Photogenic accessories are way
more expensive than equivalent White Lightning or Alien Bees
products. Does Photogenic offer a battery pack to power their
monolights outdoors or on location, comparable to the Vagabond
battery pak which is available for the Paul Buff products?

But I can't seem to find many comments on Photogenic online. There
seem to be many comments on the WL.

I own Photogenic products, and plan to replace them soon with Alien
Bees. If I haven't convinced you yet, perhaps you'd like to buy my
Photogenic PL-1250s which have become too powerful for my needs?

In summary, the amount of flash power you need depends on the size
of your imager and the ISO you work at. For example, a camera such
as the Nikon D70 which can't go below ISO 200 requires only half as
much flash power as a Canon 20D shooting at ISO 100.

 

[Nabal]

So I guess my question is in what situation would the AB800 be too
much light for a 20D with a 24-70 f/2.8L or 50mm f/1.8 being used
as the primary lens?

The only way you can have "too much" monolight is if you can't power it down low enough to use the large lens apertures you want to shoot at.

Of course, you can reduce the brightness of a flash unit by moving it farther away from your subject. But if you're using a large diffuser like a softbox or an umbrella, moving it farther away from the subject will change the lighting effect in a way you don't want. If your working space is about the size of a one-car garage, you are very limited in how much you can back up the light away from the subject.

You can also reduce the brightness of the flash by mounting sheets of neutral density gel material in front of the flash tube. But when you have to resort to that, you realize that you bought and paid for way more flash power than you are able to use - and which is actually causing you problems.

How much flash power you need will be influenced by how close to or far away your light is positioned in relation to the subject. For example, with a softbox on the flash unit, for head and shoulders portraits of a single person the softbox is usually positioned only 2 to 4 feet away from the subject's face. On the other hand, if you are trying to light up a ski boat or a team of mules in your studio - you would need to back up the light about 20 feet away from the subject to get even coverage. Most "home studios" are not big enough to fit in a ski boat or a team of mules, nor are they big enough to back up the lights 20 feet away from the subject. Consequently, you don't need nearly as much flash power as a large commercial studio that routinely shoots "big stuff."

What I'm saying is that for most amateur photographers who want to play around with multiple lighting techniques in a "home studio," about 100 watt seconds of power is all they would ever need - which is equivalent to a Canon 550EX or Nikon SB 800. The Alien Bees 400 (160 watt seconds) is a good choice, and better than a shoe-mount flash because:

1. It costs less than a Canon 550EX or Nikon SB 800.
2. The monolight already has a lightstand mounting bracket built-in.
3. The monolight has a modeling light built-in.
4. The monolight has an optical slave built-in

5. The monolight will recycle faster, and doesn't require charging up a bunch of batteries before you use it.

Why should you buy an Alien Bees 800 instead of the 400? You might want to shoot a group photo of 50 or more people (high school class reunion?) in a large open space, or something like that.

 

[Daniel Payne]

Hi,

I'm shooting portraits of individuals and families using the XL-800 and it has plenty of watt-seconds and control to handle the task. For comparison purposes with a Novatron power-pack system, you should consider the White Lightning XL-800 to really be just 400 watt-seconds, not 800 as advertized.

Thanks for this lengthy reply about watt-seconds.

One of the things you made me look into for the White Lightnings is
that the x1600 (which is what I am looking at) has a "quarter
power" mode that takes it from 660ws to 165ws (around where your
ABs will be). The "smaller" x800 does not have that function and
is 330ws.

One of my concerns for the quarter power mode was that it took the
modeling light down by 1/4 as well from 250w to (presumably) 60w.

It sounds like this quarter power mode might be more useful than I
had thought.

I'm such a beginner that I do not yet know what I will be using
these for. I'm taking a course in commercial lighting to get a
broad view of lighting from interiors to architecture to food to
environmental portraits to studio portraits. So I thought the
extra power would be helpful if I am outdoors with a group for
example.

You've given me a good illustration of where you CAN be too rich or
too thin of have too much money or light!

I need to study this some more.

John

I am looking for a 3-light set, most likely monoblock, approx 500
watt seconds.

I own a full-time portrait studio, small with only 3 employees, and
I have only 1 camera room. When I was shooting medium format film,
I equipped my camera room with Photogenic PL-1250 monolights (500
watt seconds).

...

What I'm saying is this:

500 watt seconds may not be enough power for you, if you're
shooting 8X10 sheet film and need to shoot at f/64 to get adequate
depth-of-field. 500 watt seconds was approximately twice as much
brightness as I needed to shoot medium format film at f/11. It was
4 times as much power as I would have needed to shoot full-frame
35mm film, and 16 times as much power as I currently require. My
plan is to replace my Photogenic PL-1250s, simply because they
won't power down low enough to shoot at the f/stops I want to use.
I plan to buy Alien Bees 400s, which at 160 watt seconds also have
way more power than I actually need.

I'd like something I can grow into (I'm a beginner, but serious
about learning).

Do you plan on "growing into" shooting 8X10 sheet film?

Keep in mind that doubling the brightness capability of a monolight
essentially doubles the price. How much extra headroom are you
willing to pay for, and what will you do if you can't power down
your lights low enough to shoot at the wide lens apertures you want
to use?

White Lightning seems to have a large following.

With White Lightning, you're buying directly from the manufacturer

• with no profit markup by the wholesale distributor or retail

store. Consequently, the price you pay is lower than for
comparable products sold through normal retail channels.

But I would
generally prefer to patronize my local photo store whenever I can
get similar quality and cost. They provide good advice for
somebody learning, and I don't mind paying a bit for that.

Have they advised you that 500 watt seconds is way, way more power
than you need - and may be "too much" power for you to use? How
much are you willing to pay for "bad" advice?

I've been looking to see what lights are at a similar price point to
White Lightning. The one I spotted is Photogenic (the 1200
Powerlight); it is higher priced that WL, but I'm hoping I can get
my dealer to provide a discount that gets into the right ballpark.

The cost of the basic monolight is not the only consideration.
Also check the price of the light modifiers. Check the price of
the 22" Photogenic beauty dish. What is the difference in cost for
barn doors, honeycomb grids, etc. Photogenic accessories are way
more expensive than equivalent White Lightning or Alien Bees
products. Does Photogenic offer a battery pack to power their
monolights outdoors or on location, comparable to the Vagabond
battery pak which is available for the Paul Buff products?

But I can't seem to find many comments on Photogenic online. There
seem to be many comments on the WL.

I own Photogenic products, and plan to replace them soon with Alien
Bees. If I haven't convinced you yet, perhaps you'd like to buy my
Photogenic PL-1250s which have become too powerful for my needs?

In summary, the amount of flash power you need depends on the size
of your imager and the ISO you work at. For example, a camera such
as the Nikon D70 which can't go below ISO 200 requires only half as
much flash power as a Canon 20D shooting at ISO 100.

--
Daniel Payne
http://danieljpayne.com/

 

[RDKirk]

Hi,

I'm shooting portraits of individuals and families using the XL-800
and it has plenty of watt-seconds and control to handle the task.
For comparison purposes with a Novatron power-pack system, you
should consider the White Lightning XL-800 to really be just 400
watt-seconds, not 800 as advertized.

It's actually advertised as 330 "true" watt seconds.

--
RDKirk
'TANSTAAFL: The only unbreakable rule in photography.'

 

[RDKirk]

Nabal wrote:
you use it.

Why should you buy an Alien Bees 800 instead of the 400? You might
want to shoot a group photo of 50 or more people (high school class
reunion?) in a large open space, or something like that.

I'd quibble on that. I do a lot of location portraiture (usually the living rooms of my clients), with a 50-inch softbox normally as my main light and 36-inch square translucent reflectasols (spread flat) as fill.

I find even the B800 at full power to be at the bottom edge of the envelop for family portraits or full length portraits, shooting at ISO 100 and f5.6 to f8. It's fine in a 28-inch softbox for a head-and-shoulders portrait of one or two persons.

Otherwise, I fully agree with all you've said about choice of type of lighting.

--
RDKirk
'TANSTAAFL: The only unbreakable rule in photography.'

 

[v_]

Hey John,

I can recommend Hensel strobes to you. I just got a set and I am very pleased with the built quality and the Light quality as well.

--
Viktor
'Happy shooting!'

 

[shooter2]

The tubes cost 1/2 of photogenics-you are carrying a spare(s)?? I use them up at events and they are on for hours on end. I never worry about these guys. I wish all my equipment was as reliable as these. YMMV
Shooter2

 

[TMacaw]

The tubes cost 1/2 of photogenics-you are carrying a spare(s)?? I
use them up at events and they are on for hours on end. I never
worry about these guys. I wish all my equipment was as reliable as
these. YMMV
Shooter2

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
....check B&HPhoto .... 22% less ... long way from 50%.

Hensel's are good lights. Photogenic PL-1250's are terrific, also workhorses, and great U.S. based support ..... toll free! Then check out the availability of a very long list of relevant accessories. Both good choices, but no need to knock Photogenic.

TMc

 

[Ted Harris]

I use Hensel and Norman (3 Hensel monlites and 2 Normans). Both are built solid, the Normans like tanks. I prefer the Hensels but if you are in the US support is sparse at the moment. Going bacj to the original question, nothing wrong with Photogenic but I would stay away from White Litghtning.

--
Ted Harris
Resource Strategies
[email protected]

 

[shooter2]

TMc

Wasn't "knocking" photogenics. When I made my purchase I guess about 3 years ago and bought my spares, the Hensel tubes were actually much less than 1/2 of Photogenic's. They were around $30-$35.00 each if I remember right and Photogenics were over $100.00. Don't know what they are now as I have not needed to replace the spares. I broke one of the glass covers by idiocy and Performing Light actually sent me one for free when I ordered a spare. I do like the fact that you can use remotes on the Photogenics and WL or ABs. Even if it is wired, it is a pain to lower, raise the light when you have it up on a high stand.
Regards,
Shooter2

The tubes cost 1/2 of photogenics-you are carrying a spare(s)?? I
use them up at events and they are on for hours on end. I never
worry about these guys. I wish all my equipment was as reliable as
these. YMMV
Shooter2

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
....check B&HPhoto .... 22% less ... long way from 50%.
Hensel's are good lights. Photogenic PL-1250's are terrific, also
workhorses, and great U.S. based support ..... toll free! Then
check out the availability of a very long list of relevant
accessories. Both good choices, but no need to knock Photogenic.

TMc