Marcus Watts wrote:
What about the $99 ring flash at Gary Fong's store? Cheap, is it any good. I would only expect it would be used a handful of times at any wedding.
I see a $199 ring flash, marked down to $149. Not that much cheaper than the Ray Flash.
I think I'd rather have the Ray Flash, so I don't have to worry about learning the ins and outs of another flash unit.
Also, the Fong ring flash attaches to the lens, so it might require adapters for different lens sizes (I don't know that; I'm just guessing). The Ray Flash floats around the lens, so all common lenses will fit as is.
My main concern would be the output power. Is the Fong unit powerful enough to be more than just a macro light?
BrianO wrote:
I see a $199 ring flash, marked down to $149. Not that much cheaper than the Ray Flash.
I think I'd rather have the Ray Flash, so I don't have to worry about learning the ins and outs of another flash unit.
Also, the Fong ring flash attaches to the lens, so it might require adapters for different lens sizes (I don't know that; I'm just guessing). The Ray Flash floats around the lens, so all common lenses will fit as is.
My main concern would be the output power. Is the Fong unit powerful enough to be more than just a macro light? ...Show more →
The output power is what i would be interested to know too. If it could put out enough light i think i would prefer an actual unit as long as it worked on more than one lens. Surely it would but who knows.
Marcus Watts wrote:
The output power is what i would be interested to know too. If it could put out enough light i think i would prefer an actual unit as long as it worked on more than one lens. Surely it would but who knows.
I just went onto the Gary Fong Web site, and this is what it says about their ring flash:
"You'll get even, shadow-free lighting for your close-up macro shots. The ringflash is ideal for all kinds of macro photography including nature, medical, scientific and forensic photography whether you are a professional or hobbyist."
"Guide Number 46 ft ISO 100 @ 50mm"
"Adaptor rings 55mm, 58mm, 62mm and 67mm included"
So the guide number of 46 compares to the Canon 580EX's guide number of 190 feet at 105mm. (I wish they'd just give them in Watt/Seconds.) I can't find a reference for Canon's Macro Ringflash, but if I recall it's around 70 or 80 feet.
There's a little video where Gary talks about using ring flash in fashion photography, but he never really comes out and says that the example shot shown is made with his ringflash. Since the text talks only of macro photography, I'd be sure to check it out further before ordering one.
There is a big difference with the ring flashes designed for macro use and those designed for portrait use. The Fong one is for macro. The Canon one is for macro. The Rayflash, Alienbees, and Orbis are for portraits. The primary difference is the size of the ring, which will be important both in catchlights and in the signature ring light shadow effect.
The ABR800 is the bee's knees, no doubt about it; but the OP is specifically about portable, flash-mounted, ringlight adapters.
The ABR800 is the lowest cost studio ringlight I've seen, and the only one that's designed like a mono-block strobe (no generator needed, just AC), but it's not self-powered. You need either direct AC power or a battery pack and DC-AC inverter. The ABR800 is also not e-TTL compatible; like standard studio strobes, it's a manually adjusted unit.
The Ray Flash, on the other hand, mounts on a Canon or Nikon flash to redirect the light output; so all the features of the host flash continue to work.
Most importantly, the ABR800 is double the price of the Ray Flash, so if one already owns a shoe-mount flash (Don't we all?) the ABR800 may not make sound financial sense unless the studio-specific features are important to one's work.
BTW, for those who do aleady have studio strobes with generators, look for the ABR800's fraternal twin, the Zeus ZRM1 RingMaster. Like the ABR800, the ZRM1 accepts light modifiers, has plenty of power, and is relatively inexpensive.
I recently picked up the Coco ring flash for less than $60.00 new and it looks just like the Ray flash. I figured it would be a nice toy and can't lose for the price.
I used it a few times to take pics of the kids and really liked the look I got out of it. It easily attaches to the speedlite 580 ex.
It isn't very heavy. I used one hand to hold it and the other to hold the camera. I didn't want to put any stress on my flash unit.
The one I received had a few scuff marks on it even though the box looked untampered and I contacted the shipper and they promptly issued a return label, but I decided to keep the one sent since I didn't want to be two weeks without it.
I am, although I didn't know it at the time of purchase!
It gives a very similar look except for the catch light in the eyes.
Only used it on a couple of occasions for the two years that I have owned it.
BrianO wrote:
I'll say! It looks even more like a Ray Flash than the similar Saturn Ring Flash.
I think somebody didn't get his or her patent(s) taken care of!
or the coco is made in a country and does not recognize or enforce patents. its a lot cheaper to produce something if you do not have development costs
Marcus Watts wrote:
Wow i think i'm predicting the death of the Ray Flash.
I'm predicting a court battle.
The Ray Flash has already been reduced in price from $299 to $199; I suspect it could go lower and still be profitable, but I think they should sue the distributors of the Coco.
The same thing happens in watchmaking tools. As soon as a new tool comes out from Bergeon in Switzerland, within weeks there's a (usually much inferior) copy being nocked off in India and being sold for a fraction of the price.
I bought a few of the nock-offs before I discovered that they were cheap imitations of the real deal; now I try to buy the original, in part to support the research and development efforts of the good people at Bergeon.
It'll be the same with a ring flash; when I'm ready to get one (if I get one at all) it'll be the Ray Flash.
The cost. That's been my issue with these. They seem cool, and look a lot more professional than the the DYI route (at least with my finishing skills). But, $200 for a Flash modifier?! whew! Hard to justify. My Flip-it was a lot for me to justify a pretty version of an index card, but I did it for durability and such.
Coco looks like the way to go for this. Any examples, Brandon?
The CoCo unit is great, and a price I was willing to pay. I just don't need a ringflash bad enough to pay $150+ for other versions. Yes, there may be some patent issues with this versus the Rayflash, but we have nothing close to the full story and that is for the courts to decide. For those defending Rayflash, keep in mind they seem to be infringing on Kodak's patent (#20060093344).
