Carmen Miranda
Offline
Upload & Sell: On
|
 p.2 #4 · Elinchrom Ranger RX AS Speed A-head & Bowens | |
rudiphoto wrote:
Well, you're the only one who's had a problem with the swivel mount on a pro-line Elinchrom strobe. I just looked at mine, and there are no plastic parts. I vote for a lemon!
Rudi,
Brent is correct. The stainless bolt is indeed imbedded in plastic.
Although I have not had a problem with mine, it's possible that it is designed to be a "shear" pin, so that overtightening will case the bolt to fail before the mount itself is damaged. Bolts are cheap and easy to replace.
rudiphoto wrote:
Your allegation that there is a design problem is what is ridiculous! If there was a design problem, we'd be hearing about it before now...
IMO, the tightening bolts on Elinchrom lights are clearly sufficient for most purposes and certainly handle professional use. How much overtightening and abuse beyond that is subject to risk like anything thing else.
Not everything I break is the manufacturers fault, especially when I want things to be so much smaller, lighter, faster and cheaper. 
No manufacturer, ProFoto included, condones overtightening, even though there is always that potential. I know I don't get much sympathy from my rental friends when it comes to overtighening their grip equipment, and my assistants don't get any from me either.
Products are made with specific design parameters in mind. This does not make products inherently inferior. It may make them less appropriate than others for the task at hand.
Case in point, the Octa was originally designed to be used with pack heads, which are quite a bit lighter than monolights. Using the RX series monolights work very well with the Octa but the mount just isn't sufficient for the additional weight IMO. So, do I throw the baby out with the bath water? No way. I simply beefed up the mount with a grip head, just as Brent went to the 3500 series on his Westcott boxes.
Standard mout:
D200 Grip Head replacement:
Problem solved. I get to keep and enjoy my Octa, with no frustration.
Fewer lights are using all metal brackets like they use to. Personally, I don't see the problem with this for most uses. But even Westcott recognizes, by virtue of their 3500 series, that a more robust mount system than their own conventional mount MAY be required for bigger, heavier boxes especially with the added use of grids. I've used Westcott for years, mainly their 3500 2K boxes, they are nice but they are they are NOT what you call light. The Elinchrom boxes, on the other hand, are very light and work well with their lights. Even still you can see I have beefed up certain boxes where it is appropriate for certain applications. Should every light incorporate the use of a grip head or be made of metal like the old tanks of yesteryear? Surely not.
rudiphoto wrote:
You could always use the Skyport Universal receiver if you wanted to use the Ranger plugged into mains power in the studio (that is what I do, I hate sync cords  ).
I'm not a fan of the double duty charging port either, but I also don't see any reason to keep a Ranger hooked up to AC while you're using it in the studio either.
First of all, the unit provides ample capacity for most use anyway.
The idea of dragging around cords defeats it's advantage over AC packs. If you didn't like tripping over PC cords why would it be any less of a nuisance to trip over an AC cord?
RX control is just TOO nice to forsake.
And last but not least, how tough is it to plug a back up battery to AC while using the Ranger untethered?
In addition to using packs and monolights, I find it very convienient to use the Ranger on a rolling stand in close to me so I won't have to deal with cords. I also made a platform so my gear could move with it.
Different strokes for different folks.
Good luck.
|
I'd like to say that I have no idea what you're talking about, but in all good conscience, I can't!