Alien Bee vs. Sony 56 output power

After seeing a few excellent tutorials on using hotshoe flash with umbrellas and softboxes (something the camera store chowderheads will tell you is impossible), I became curious to know how the light output compared between an alien bee studio strobe and a hotshoe flash.

The Sony 56 (guide # 56 metres at full tele - or 183 feet) doesn't use the same rating system as my Alien Bee 800 (320 watt-seconds). The Alien Bees website said it was difficult to compare them because the hotshoe flash concentrates all its light in a tight beam --> almost the opposite of the studio strobe.

So I tested them in a real studio setup.

I set my light meter to cordless mode 10 feet away from a 48" umbrella that I bounced both lights into.

At half-power (to simulate an alien bee 400), the AB800 produced 5 stops more light than the Sony 56 at full power (wide angle setting without diffusor). That's 32 times as much light as the Sony.

In spite of this huge output difference, the Sony 56 can still produce beautiful results with umbrellas and softboxes (I have seen the examples on the web using other hotshoe flashes).

I still haven't ordered my portable, collapsible softbox to test this myself but I thought other portable studio type people might find this interesting.

Jay

Edited by jaje - 07 February 2007 at 02:43

Hey X-R-M,

The tutorial that instigated my testing:Julia Greer's Nikon SB-800 studio page

A popular one on the web: Strobist: taking the fear out of flash

...and my personal favourite for beautiful use of hotshoe flash that doesn't look like flash was used: planetneil.com

My own plan is to use the Apollo softbox that Julia reccomends, the portable light stand/umbrella/ball bungees/pocket wizards that David from Strobist uses and the techniques of Neil Van Niekirk at planetneil.

To save money, you might be OK using the Minolta/Sony wireless flash system this way. I think the control signals from the popup flash would still make it through the diffusion fabric of a softbox or softlighter umbrella. (this works fine for Julia Greer using the Nikon wireless flash system). You do need direct line of sight for this between your popup flash and the sensors on your Minolta/Sony flashes.

Jay

I can only add that I shoot a lot of children's portraits. From my experience, I tend to have my AB400s at 1/8-1/4 power (occasionally up to 1/2, and very rarely at full power). I have a 60" octobox and a 30" umbrella that I use most of the time. The octobox eats up a good stop to stop and a half of light, but the results are splendid. Oh yea, some other important settings...I typically shoot f5.6 to f8 and almost exclusively at ISO100, about 10% at ISO200.
So...With higher ISO, shorter distances, smaller reflectors, and wider apertures, using flashes are definitely doable. I used two Sigma EF-500 flashes before I had the strobes.

Yea, if the light from the big octobox wasn't so damn nice, I wouldn't even consider bringing it. I used to leave it at home, but then I started to get on with it and I am able to control the light really well with it. It has disadvantages (size and maneuverability) , but I do not own any other softbox (except the one I fabricated out of foam-core board for use with my EF-500s). Therefore, it is go big or go home. It only takes me about 5 minutes to get the whole light set up (stand, strobe, octobox, assembly). In the scheme of things, it is worth it for me.

One thing regarding aperture... I used to shoot a lot at f2.8 and f4 because I was trying to create non-distracting backgrounds. Eventually, I learned how to properly light a background, so now I don't have to have it be totally out of focus to look good. The problem I faced with f2.8 and f4 is the depth of field... If a small child is active, or my focus is off just a tad, the picture is ruined for me. I almost refuse to make prints of pictures that are not technically correct. I feel that a picture that is soft reflects poorly upon myself and my skills, so unless the image has something else really great to offer (expression or pose), I don't even show it to the customer. Before, this was maybe 20% of my shots (when I was just learning to use a DSLR and f2.8. Now, it is maybe 5%. However, if that is what you need to do to make your shots work, then it will be worth it.

I just blabbed on for way too long. My apologies...

I have the alien bees octobox (the biggest one). I break it completely down at the end of every photo shoot. My home studio area is the living room, so it doesn't get to stay put together for longer than a day regardless. The first time, it took me forever to put together. I have done it enough times now that I am pretty fast, under 5 minutes for sure. I have also slightly modified the front cover so it stays on easier (it was originally pretty loose and could fall off). I added small pieces of velcro on each of the 8 sides.
My supports are Impact Heavy Duty 3 section. I rarely raise the supports more than 24" from their lowest setting because I am working with short kids on the floor. I do have AB's boom, and use it occasionally when I am working at home and have time to set it up. I have the weight that goes with the boom, and it is a MUST for my set-up. It helps keep the set-up balanced and prevents it from tipping on the kids.

I don't use the internal baffle on mine...it uses up another stop of light, and I like a the light source to fall off a little bit towards the edges.

The 5-stop power difference in Sony56 vs B400 is interesting, it would give more versatility in nuking ambient light and using smaller apertures but almost sounds like too much given that they can only be dialed back 5-stops. One starts where the other leaves off. Is there any trouble using a pair of bees at f/4? They probably wouldnt mix well with ambient, ever. But for studio work, they sure sound nice!

I'm starting out the strobist way, he got me into lighting because of the way he presents the topic. Here's a guy making a living doing this stuff, and all he uses are the cheapest used flashes he can find on ebay, some cardboard cereal boxes, and duct tape. Ok, maybe some other bits too but he's very frugal about equipment and gets great results. Every other lighting website requires a minimum $1000-1500 buy-in just to keep reading and understand whats going on, and few (if any?) have any examples to go with the text. The strobist way is very aproachable.

You have to be careful though, while the kit is VERY compact and portable its not as cheap as it might first appear. Lets take a look and compare with Alien Bees. Assume you can use the same stand and umbrella (anyway, substitutes are similar in price)

-Light stand Manfrotto 3373 $57
-Westcott 43" compact umbrella $20

So now you need either:

A) Alien Bee B400 mono-light $225 (AC power only)
or
B) Vivitar 285HV shoe-mount strobe $90 (4-AA batteries)
+ Photoflex multiclamp $17
+ Rechargeable batteries $10
+ Slave or sync cord $20 (minimum!)
(total $137)

The bees come with sync cords and optical slaves, but also a wall tether. The difference is portability and less than $100 per light! Having a complete 3-4 light studio in a 24" duffel bag is way cool and the components can be useful even if you add bees later, but the whole idea falls apart if your looking at $300 TTL flashes (and all the expense required to adapt the non-standard Sony foot). Plus while I had the Sigma EF500DGSuperOBGYN I found the optical signal to be fairly unreliable unless you were in a dim room. Gels for the little lights are free, but can add up quick for the big lights. Snoots, gobos, etc are similarly pricey (relatively). Enough babbling, how 'bout a pic