Ring lights/ring flashes.

[Rhys]

Playing with my LEDs, I was toying with the idea of ring lights and ring flashes. Has anybody used them?

I won't build a ring flash/light immediately. I still have to build the rest of the light I am working on now. One project at a time!

I can see a ring light would be wonderful for portraits - don't care so much about the macro stuff though. In fact I found B&H has a ring flash for $70 and one for $110 that I've seen going on ebay for $130.

After I complete my LED lighting unit(s) then I might invest in some more LEDs and etch a PCB for a circular light just to try out ring lighting.

Question for Jamison and CDI etc... Do you use ringlights for your portraits?

[cdifoto]

I have yet to use a ringlight. I'm not really a fan of its characteristic look.

[Rhys]

Hmm... Reading around about that Bower ring flash unit, it seems to have mixed reviews. I don't know much about whether there're negative reviewers or negative experiences. It could be either.

Given that the ring flashes have such a puny GN, it seems to me that using a more powerful unit such as my 580EX with an adaptor is more in order. Having said that I don't want to blow the money on pre-made plastic add-ons when I can make my own. Later, if I decide ring flashes are for me, I can buy the real Canon article.

[Mark_48]

I'm thinking the ring flashes you looked at on B&H were primarily targeted for macro-photography, not for portraits. I had asked a question about ring flash over on POTN regarding possibility of red-eye, got refered to an already ongoing thread (got spanked for not doing a search first :D), and found out it can happen, but the modeling lights used tend to shut down the pupils which reduces the effect. It seems like a kind of specialized lighting that has it's place, but doesn't allow much versatility and could tire of the look quickly if overdone.

If your going to do it, this is as probably as cheap as your going to be able do it and have it look right.......
http://www.alienbees.com/abr800.html

[Rhys]

I see that. It's interesting though not greatly portable. Most ringlights have microscopic guide numbers (which baffles me) that could probably be beaten quite nicely by an LED ring light. On the other hand, ringlights being used for portraits mean the distance is short enough - between 1.5 - 2 meters that the guide number of 14 simply means an f5.6-f8 aperture at full whack. Thus the tiny guide number given the close proximity of the subject sounds adequate.

I have seen phenomenally high prices on ebay for ring-light modifiers for ordinary flashes. Essentially, they are not complicated gizmos to make. Making them durable enough to last for enough portrait sessions that will pay for a real ringlight might be problematic for DIY attempts though.

The Alien Bees unit looks great. I'm not going to spend that much on it though. I need to try out ring flash first to see if I like it.

[ghost]

I believe you guys are talking about the Rayflash? (http://www.ray-flash.com/rayflash.html)

Never used it, or read reviews, but for about $200 (on fleabay) It's not too badly priced at 1/2 price compared to the real sigma ring flash.

And there is a flickr group (http://flickr.com/groups/718898@N23/pool/) with some examples as well.

[Rhys]

Well, there's something very similar that I saw for a ton less...

I notice that at 16oz, the Rayflash is horribly heavy. I also notice it claims minimal light loss yet drops the light by 3.5 stops which I hardly consider minimal.

http://cgi.ebay.com/Ring-Flash-Adapter-for-580EX-II-Canon-EOS-50D-40D-5D_W0QQitemZ360130663278QQcmdZViewItemQQptZCamera_ Flash_Accessories?hash=item360130663278&_trksid=p3286.c0.m14&_trkparms=72%3A1234|66%3A2|65%3A12|39%3A1|240%3A13 18|301%3A1|293%3A1|294%3A50

Personally, I think at that rate I'd rather buy something secondhand or build something myself. Anyway, I'm waiting to complete my 1st LED light unit. That has first priority.

[ghost]

Well, there's something very similar that I saw for a ton less...

I notice that at 16oz, the Rayflash is horribly heavy. I also notice it claims minimal light loss yet drops the light by 3.5 stops which I hardly consider minimal.

http://cgi.ebay.com/Ring-Flash-Adapter-for-580EX-II-Canon-EOS-50D-40D-5D_W0QQitemZ360130663278QQcmdZViewItemQQptZCamera_ Flash_Accessories?hash=item360130663278&_trksid=p3286.c0.m14&_trkparms=72%3A1234|66%3A2|65%3A12|39%3A1|240%3A13 18|301%3A1|293%3A1|294%3A50

Personally, I think at that rate I'd rather buy something secondhand or build something myself. Anyway, I'm waiting to complete my 1st LED light unit. That has first priority.

I'm not sure if the ebay knock offs are the same build quality, but strobist.com (http://strobist.blogspot.com/2008/03/full-review-ray-flash-ring-flash.html) said that they only lost one stop of light, which isn't too bad. The LED idea sounds really interesting though

[Rhys]

Hmm... I see it was $300 when it first came out and is now $200. That's still more than a $100 ring flash from B&H or the $70 ebay knock-off.

I see a wide variety of doughnut-shaped lights now:

1. The $300/$200/$70 lump of plastic.
2. The $70-$130 no-name ring flash.
3. The $400 Canon ring-flash.
4. The $30 circular florescent tube unit.
5. The ring of LEDs.

I have also seen people making their own equivalents to the lump of plastic from a variety of materials. There was even one guy that cut a great big circle from plywood and screwed ordinary bulb holders, mounting florescent bulbs onto it for a truly gigantic unit.

The only problem with the vast majority of the DIY approaches is that they can end up being somewhat more expensive than the ready-made versions with the added problem of variable quality. The flat panel LED units (I'm building one now) already exist but cost ten times more than my DIY build (which also has features not included on the ready-made units).

[jekostas]

http://www.dansdata.com/ringlight.htm

Ring light made from a $10 eBay camping light. I like the idea and I could see it being useful for bug and flower shots, though I'm not sure I'd use it in a studio (and probably not strong enough for a portrait light).