Drilled Ringlight Flash

SloYerRoll · August 31, 2006

What is the drilled on a drilled ringlight flash mean?:dunno
I found a what seems to be a killer deal on a ringlight since I am interested in getting into macro.
The only problem bugging me is the old addage: "If it sounds to good to be true...."
Here is the link to the to the website for the ringlight flash in question.

If there are any other downsides to this product (or things to look out for), please let me know.

Thanks in advance for your knowledge.:):

andymillson · August 31, 2006

SloYerRoll wrote:

What is the drilled on a drilled ringlight flash mean?
I found a what seems to be a killer deal on a ringlight since I am interested in getting into macro.
The only problem bugging me is the old addage: "If it sounds to good to be true...."
Here is the link to the to the website for the ringlight flash in question.

If there are any other downsides to this product (or things to look out for), please let me know.

Thanks in advance for your knowledge.:):

I THINK that this indicates that this is a LED light rather than flash tubes.

It is a self contained unit with constantly on LED's. Power is built in. Rechargeable. Runs for about 45 minutes

Check this post

http://fourthirdsphoto.com/vbb/showthread.php?t=2690

Andy

pathfinder · August 31, 2006

I bought a similar device made by Nikon for my CoolPix 950 for use with macro. The Macro Cool Light SL-1 by Nikon. Seven LEDs in a ring.

When I meter the SL-1 ringlight's output, with a Sekonic L-358 for ISO 100, at f16 the shutter speed needs to be 1/2 second about 1 inch in front of the ringlight. If you were two inches, it would be 1 full second.... At 6 inches, well..., you get my drift.

F16 is not an unusual aperture to use for macro. At f8, the shutter speed drops to a rapid 1/8th of a second at 1 inch. Do you want to try to shoot macro handheld with 1/2 second exposures?? Well, do ya punk?? ( MY 'Dirty Harry' imitation:D

) The light is not very diffuse, but gives multiple specular reflections also.

My take is that these lights are very dim and not useful for macro at reasonable small apertures. I'll bet the Drilled ringlight is not a great deal brighter. I could be wrong, it would be interesting to hear from a user's perspective. I see no mention of light output, nor any mention of what apertures and shutter speeds should be available with this device.

When it sounds to good to be true....

As an aside, I think ring flashes are very useful for shooting intra oral pictures for dentists, for shooting stamps for stamp collectors, and coins for coin collectors. Otherwise the light is fairly flat and uniform.

I say this an an owner of a Canon MT-14ex. I know I will be told that the light output is adjustable from each side to allow some variation in lighting. I think this might be true for short focal length macros like the 50mms at 1:1. Not for 100mm macros and up.

Here is a shot with the MT-14ex set at 8:1 lighting ratio ( the MT-14ex's maximum variation ) with a 100mm macro - is this the contrasty, shaded lighting you are expecting for an 8:1 ratio??

Compare that lighting to this image shot with a single flash off to the side with a diffuser over the flash head with a longer Sigma 150mm macro. This flash was actually a 430ex, but it could be almost any standard ETTL (or not) flash head.

As I have posted before, I really like SunPak's FP-38 flat panel flash for off camera macro also - It must be used in strict Manual Mode( it is not ETTL but manual only ) in the camera, but with the flash about 6 inches from the subject at ISO 100, the aperture is about f16-f22. Very easy to do, and NICE, soft diffuse light. The FP-38 has a guide number of 12. Not very bright at all, but works very nice for macro work. Cheap too at ~$75.00:):

SloYerRoll · August 31, 2006

Thanks for the link Andy.
That definitely shed some light on my situation. (Unintentional pun)

Pathfinder,

Hang w/ me here; I'm still learning.

In reference to the SL-1 ring-light statement...
Why wouldn't you just increase the f-stop (past f-16) so you can reduce your shutter speed exposure? I would figure this would be optimal since most flora has a tendency to sway in the wind anyway. This would also decrease the DOF so you would only see the object in focus as well.

I'm afraid I'm not up to speed in lighting ratios. Any links to good references? I'm definitely not scared to study.... I will comment on your comments after I upgrade my grey matter..

Speaking of the Sunpak Flash Fp 38.
Since this is an "off center" flash.. Are you saying hook this up directly to the hot shoe the start shooting to find optimal results? Or do you use some form of extension so the flash can be further removed from the focal point?

So much to learn. So little time.

Thanks for your help.

-Jon

pathfinder · August 31, 2006

SloYerRoll wrote:

Thanks for the link Andy.
That definitely shed some light on my situation. (Unintentional pun)

Pathfinder,

Hang w/ me here; I'm still learning.

In reference to the SL-1 ring-light statement...
Why wouldn't you just increase the f-stop (past f-16) so you can reduce your shutter speed exposure? I would figure this would be optimal since most flora has a tendency to sway in the wind anyway. This would also decrease the DOF so you would only see the object in focus as well.

I'm afraid I'm not up to speed in lighting ratios. Any links to good references? I'm definitely not scared to study.... I will comment on your comments after I upgrade my grey matter..

Speaking of the Sunpak Flash Fp 38.
Since this is an "off center" flash.. Are you saying hook this up directly to the hot shoe the start shooting to find optimal results? Or do you use some form of extension so the flash can be further removed from the focal point?

So much to learn. So little time.

Thanks for your help.

-Jon

Certainly, you could open the aperture from f16 down to f8 or even f5.6. But you will lose a lot of depth of field as you open the aperture, and you frequently need all the DOF you can get with macro shooting with DSLRs. You need shutter speeds at least 1/100th or less. Preferably a lot shorter shutter speeds. 1/2 second won't cut it, unless you are using a copying stand and shooting stamps. And that was at a distance from the SL-1 of about only 1 inch. Image if it was 8 inches.....

Lighting ratios with the MT-14ex, or other ringlight flashes, refer to how bright one half of the ringlight is compared to the other half. An 8:1 ratio is a very high ratio for lighting, and should have deep, dark shadows.

In my second image the 430ex was hand held about 2 feet in front of my camera, off to the right as you can see from the shadows on the plant stalk. 90 degrees to the axis of the lens.

I tripped it with Canon's ST-E2 IR remote trigger, but could have used a Pocket Wizard or an off camera ETTL extension cord.

The point of the second image is to display ow much better macros can look when the light is not axial, but side lighting. Just as when shooting portraits, or architectural studies, get the flash off the camera for a more interesting image.

Just like natural light shots look better when shot late in the afternoon as side light than in the middle of the day shining straight into your subjects eyes.

If you have anymore questions, I will be happy to try to explain them.

I am not against ringlights; I own and use one.

But they have siginificant limitations for macro lighitng if you are trying to create more dramatic illumination. A 430ex is cheaper and more versatile.

SloYerRoll · September 1, 2006

pathfinder wrote:

Certainly, you could open the aperture from f16 down to f8 or even f5.6. But you will lose a lot of depth of field as you open the aperture, and you frequently need all the DOF you can get with macro shooting with DSLRs. You need shutter speeds at least 1/100th or less. Preferably a lot shorter shutter speeds. 1/2 second won't cut it, unless you are using a copying stand and shooting stamps. And that was at a distance from the SL-1 of about only 1 inch. Image if it was 8 inches.....

Lighting ratios with the MT-14ex, or other ringlight flashes, refer to how bright one half of the ringlight is compared to the other half. An 8:1 ratio is a very high ratio for lighting, and should have deep, dark shadows.

In my second image the 430ex was hand held about 2 feet in front of my camera, off to the right as you can see from the shadows on the plant stalk. 90 degrees to the axis of the lens.

I tripped it with Canon's ST-E2 IR remote trigger, but could have used a Pocket Wizard or an off camera ETTL extension cord.

The point of the second image is to display ow much better macros can look when the light is not axial, but side lighting. Just as when shooting portraits, or architectural studies, get the flash off the camera for a more interesting image.

Just like natural light shots look better when shot late in the afternoon as side light than in the middle of the day shining straight into your subjects eyes.

If you have anymore questions, I will be happy to try to explain them.

I am not against ringlights; I own and use one.

But they have siginificant limitations for macro lighitng if you are trying to create more dramatic illumination. A 430ex is cheaper and more versatile.

Ahhh that's the piece I was missing.
I wasn't aware the you needed all the DOF you can get when shooting macro. This makes sense though w/ the such tight tolerances.
I will definitely be shooting w/ off center light sources for shots to start. I'm not big on conventional shots. I just like to have the knowledge so I know how to break the rules.
Do you have recommendations for Nikkor macro lenses? (or web resources that can point me in the right direction?) Just looking for an unbiased opinion.
I have heard that how a lens focuses makes a difference on how you set up your shot.
i.e. w/a certain type of macro lens, you need to move the actual camera closer or further to the subject to "zoom" in since the lens actually changes the distance from the focal point.
i.e.2 w/ a certain type of macro lens, you can zoom in and out since the distance from the lens's focal point does not change.

Capiche?

pathfinder · September 1, 2006

DO the search here on dgrin for macro lenses and you will trun up a dozen threads about macro lenses and their uses. I know the Nikon 60mm macro and the Nikon 200macro are both thought to be stellar.

The plane of focus can be extremely shallow when focusing near 1:1 ratios where the image on the film plane is life sized. Autofocus does not always work well in this situation and many shooters prefer to focus manually and rock the camera/lens fore and aft to achieve focus lock.

Some of us use a macro rail, which is a tripod mounted geared device to move the camera fore and aft to achieve focus.

SloYerRoll · September 1, 2006

pathfinder wrote:

DO the search here on dgrin for macro lenses and you will trun up a dozen threads about macro lenses and their uses. I know the Nikon 60mm macro and the Nikon 200macro are both thought to be stellar.

The plane of focus can be extremely shallow when focusing near 1:1 ratios where the image on the film plane is life sized. Autofocus does not always work well in this situation and many shooters prefer to focus manually and rock the camera/lens fore and aft to achieve focus lock.

Some of us use a macro rail, which is a tripod mounted geared device to move the camera fore and aft to achieve focus.

Good start though Pathfinder.
Thanks for the knowledge.

Stan · September 1, 2006

I made one about a year ago. with loads more LEDs and it is still not bright enough for anything.

It is somewhere in this post. It was alot of fun doing it though and I have used it on occasion but as PF says the light is limited...

Stan

Drilled Ringlight Flash

Comments