Another cheap lighting question: total waste of money?

[zulu42]

Regarding some of my other hobbies, I've already learned the value in not buying cheap junk, only to have to replace it later. However, I somehow feel the need to re-learn this simple lesson over and over again.

I want to learn and improve lighting for my basic indoor family/pet portraits and general photos of "stuff"

I've got a basic 42" reflector set.

Found this lighting kit on the local craigs':
Photographic Studio Lighting System - Smith Victor KT900 3 Light 1250

Would it improve my indoor shots, and have any value in learning and experimenting with lighting technique? Or is it such poor quality that I should just avoid it.

Thanks!

 

[Designer]

For people and pets I recommend flash, not continuous lighting.

 

[zulu42]

Thank you.

Unfortunately I'm limited to the built in flash on my camera.

 

[jaomul]

Have a look at yongnuo yn 560 flashes on Amazon, 2 of these, 2 stands and softboxes wouldn't be to expensive. Your on camera flash can trigger these off camera flashes. Get 1 of each to start and use reflectors also.

 

[Derrel]

S-V used to be a good light producer of hot lights...they still do market a line of hot lights. The stands and the mini boom arm and the travel/storage case make this almost worth the $115, for use with other lights, like speedlights. But, OTOH, today one can buy inexpensive, made in China light stands for very low prices,so....I dunno...hot lights aka "continuous" incandescent or quartz-halogen or quartz-iodine or whatever are actually pretty GOOD for still-life and tabletop work, since you can easily see the lighting effects in real time, and this set has a parabolic reflector (the biggest one), a small, boom-arm fitted hair or accent light, and one umbrella light. Honestly, for $115 I might be tempted to buy this as well, esp. if the guy will take $75 for it. (wink)

I do not think it would be a total waste of money for small-product shots and things like that, or for using the stands, mini-boom arm, and the case for the basis of a flash system.

 

[zulu42]

Great info. Thanks very much.

 

[zulu42]

Your on camera flash can trigger these off camera flashes. Get 1 of each to start and use reflectors also.

I tried to research, couldn't find how these would be triggered by my built in flash with no hot shoe.

 

[jaomul]

They have a slave mode. You set them to slave and manually select their power yourself, trial and error. You pop up the flash on your camera and set it to low power. Once the flashes are in line of sight your flash will trigger them, like magic

 

[Derrel]

These are not flash units...I did some research; the stock kit has six-foot steel light stands...kind of low....I like 7-foot minimum stand height for regular lighting scenarios, and prefer a 10-fot high max height. These use 250 Watt ECA lamps, continuous light. Again, for tabletop stuff, still-life photos, six foot high stands are fine, really. But I think there are better ways to get into lighting. Here is the URL I saw this kit at http://www.markertek.com/product/sv...bcJBRc1aJA-maSYGp5CM6bTDttbsad00E0BoC8pXw_wcB

Thee **is** a kit variant that offers eight foot tall stands, which would be preferable.

 

[WayneF]

Found this lighting kit on the local craigs':
Photographic Studio Lighting System - Smith Victor KT900 3 Light 1250

Would it improve my indoor shots, and have any value in learning and experimenting with lighting technique? Or is it such poor quality that I should just avoid it.

It's not about "quality" exactly, it is about being continuous lights. Hot light bulbs instead of flash. Hot is a real pain, but the problem is such lights (250 watts or even 500 watts) are dim for photography. In the brightest part of your well lighted kitchen, count the watts of all the bulbs, and then try a normal sunshine daylight exposure (EV 15, f/16 1/125 second ISO 100), and see what you get.

Continuous lights will be OK for table top or still life, when you can use a long shutter speed like one second, but simply insufficient light for portraits of humans. You will struggle with 250 watts, tying to make all your maximums work (1/30 second f/2.8 ISO 800). It never really does.

A flash like the $50 to $60 YN-560 mentioned is rated by Guide Number, GN 92 at ISO 100, 24mm zoom. That means direct flash at f/9.2 at 10 feet, ISO 100 (or f/18 at 5 feet), at any shutter speed up to camera sync speed, probably 1/200 second. This is greatly more light than 1/30 second f/2.8 ISO 800. It will be a stop or two less in an umbrella, but still very usable. Plus you can turn it down when desired. Plus it does Not heat up your room. Plus its speed stops motion better than shutter speed can (is called speedlight).

Bigger flashes are rated as watt-seconds of electrical energy. This little YN-560 will compare at about 75 watt seconds.

Meaning of watt seconds:

Continuous lights are only effective for photography while the shutter is open.
A 250 watt incandescent light will consume 250 watts x 1 second = 250 watt seconds at 1 second shutter. That is quite bright.
It will consume 250 watts x 1/100 = 2.5 watt seconds at 1/100 second shutter. That is NOT bright.

The little flash can do 75 watt seconds at any shutter speed (up to the cameras 1/200 sync maximum).

And the flash (like fluorescent) will ALSO be around four times more efficient producing light from its watt-seconds than incandescent bulbs can be (they produce heat instead). This is tremendously more light on the subject. And no heat to make your subject sweat.

This is why flashes are routinely used for portraits. Sure, everyone is attracted to price of the incandescent continuous lights at first, but they always turn to flash (except maybe the still life mentioned). Continuous lights are simply not sufficient light for any major use. Unless you are Hollywood and can provide big generators and really HUGE lights. Movies require continuous lights.

Using flash has differences.

You can't see its effect except in a test picture (rear LCD of camera). Bigger studio lights have 250 watt incandescent modeling lights, which help to see, but a test picture is the final word. Incidentally, these 250 watt modeling lights can be left on during the picture, without even affecting the flash picture at say f/8 1/200 ISO 100. Too dim. The flash covers them up.

The camera cannot meter flash (TTL systems excepted). You can buy a handheld incident meter, which are fabulous, and precise, or you can trial and error tweak it in. The advantage of the meter is in setting the power of multiple lights to their exact known relationships... lighting ratio.

 

[zulu42]

^
Absolutely fantastic post, and, with your link, can't be overstated how helpful it was.

Thank you so much!

 

[WayneF]

Thanks, I guess it really didn't turn out so bad, like quick stuff usually does. I may even steal that, and add it to my other pages. I don't think I say those words there, but should.

The $100 for the continuous lights probably won't affect if you can eat next week or not, and it would be a good "bad" experience. Which certainly would make you appreciate your flashes. It seems an exceptional price, the same SV KT900 is $300 at Amazon. Which says 1250 is two 500 watt and one 250 watt. 500 watts is still minimal light (change my ISO 800 to ISO 400), and it is still continuous, and hot. You quickly learn to leave them turned off at every opportunity. Two of these are like a 1000 watt room heater. In the old days (before affordable flash), we used a foot switch on them, just on for the exposure. Just saying, it will be an memorable experience. SV is a major US brand, still imported stuff now, but with reputation and warranty behind them. They've been around a long time, and you can contact them.

If used, you may need new light bulbs? These are special photo bulbs compared to regular bulbs, with a short life. In the old days, they lasted maybe 6 hours. I think it's closer to 60 hours now. They dim and change color as they age.
Smith-Victor ECT 500W 120V Lamp Pack of 6 406986 B H Photo

But really, I say all this mostly assuming at any later time, you can simply discard the bulbs and reflectors, and use the same stands and umbrellas for flash too. See Mounting Speedights in Umbrellas about mounting speedlights in umbrellas.

The Smith Victor page for this is Photography lighting products for photo video and digital imaging Smith-Victor Corporation Logan Electric

Most importantly, it says the stands are 8 feet, with standard 5/8 inch mounts, standard like any studio light uses, so it should all be very compatible with anything. 8 feet is about all a ten foot ceiling will allow with an umbrella. And it's normally enough. It does not say which stands, don't know if Raven stands or not? It says 32 inch SV white umbrellas, which should be OK for a long time.

My only point is all you would need then to convert is two speedlights and two standard umbrella mounts (less than $20 each). And probably cold shoes for the flash, about $8 (see that umbrella page above). And a way to trigger the flashes. Your camera internal flash, manual flash mode at lowest power level, could do it, slave mode in both flashes. Or one radio trigger (about $30) to one light, and slave mode in the second. And you'll want a white balance card, mine is Porta Brace for $5.

I tried continuous lights years ago. Never again. Least fun I ever had in photography.
This time, ten years ago with digital, I started with this SV kit - for two speedlights, probably the most fun I ever had... I mean, like it works.

Amazon.com Smith Victor 401484 UK2 Umbrella Kit Photographic Lighting Umbrellas Camera Photo

I have more other stuff today, heavier stands for a large softbox, but I still use these too. Nothing wrong with them. Umbrellas don't need a heavy stand, but we do learn to keep one foot directly under the extended umbrella (or any offset weight on any stand). Otherwise, stands can tip over, between two legs.

So I use two SV 40 inch umbrellas myself. I have a few others, and other stuff too, including a large softbox, and it depends on the use, but I keep coming back to these. They are ten years old and still going well.

Some people seem not to ever take to flash, but if we can just realize it's just a light that we add, and we can add it any way we want it, it seems pretty easy. If you don't like the first try, try another way.

Just talking, we have to start somewhere, but the capability to take great pictures can last your lifetime, certainly as the kids grow up. Then ideally (some day), you would would like bigger flash, like 160 to 300 watt second units. Bigger than that indoors is to me a disadvantage, cannot turn them down enough for regular stuff. Bigger than that for whatever, you need two sizes, regular and big. But a little more gives you more flexibility, can stop down more for the picture (f/11 is nothing), they have modeling lights, and in particular, are fan cooled with faster recycle (nearly immediate instead of waiting 2 or 3 seconds between each picture). Also able to handle different modifiers (softboxes, grids, etc). Umbrellas are very good, nothing wrong with them, and they're about all that works for speedlights. But real studio lights can offer a few more things.

But just starting with two speedlights and umbrellas is a very big deal.