Looking at the spec of the Elinchrom Quadra and compare them to Alienbees it looks like the Quadra is equivalent to an AB400 (160ws):

AB400 at 10ft with 80deg standard reflector: F11
http://www.alienbees.com/specs.html

Quadra at 2m with 70deg standard reflector: f16.5, at 3m (ca. 10feet) would be a stop less so F11
from Quadra manuals: http://www.elinchrom.com/data/download/ranger_quadra_manual.pdf)

I'm I missing something here?

ronnie

You are entering the true watt seconds and effective watt seconds arguement.

AB400 weight 1.136kg and Quadra head weight 0.25kg.

Additonal function on Quadra (integrate skyport, LED modelling lamp, 2:1 output, 3.6Ah SLA dropout battery)

AB400 will cost me £370 (include import duty + VAT + Delivery), additonal weight and cost if I want to run this on location I need a battery.

Quadra cost £1121 (inclusive of VAT). Elinchrom Quadra is cover by manufacture warranty.

Can't compare apple and orange, I am in europe, I know which one to buy.
Good luck.

It is not true vs. effective ws argument, it is that I get f11 at 3m, not what I expect from a 400ws unit.

I know that is apple vs. orange but I was hoping for the same power as an AB800 (320ws).

It probably will be the same (similar) power as the AB800 if you remove AB's reflector or use a more tele reflector on the quadra. Reflector plays a major role in power efficiency.

s2000hku wrote: Reflector plays a major role in power efficiency.

+1

You can't really compare GN without using the same modifier.

The Elinchrom 70º is more of a "spill kill" reflector. Their 50º is probably more comparable to the AB 80º.

At 2m the 50º is rated at 22.4, while the 70º is rated at 16.5. Like you say, at 10' you're probably looking somewhere around 1 stop difference, which puts the 70º around 11.5 (big difference from 11 BTW) and the 50º just under 16.5. Thus making the Quadra more powerful than the AB800, as expected.

However, you really have to be careful when comparing light output when using different modifiers. Reflector angle can be especially deceiving, where design can affect light distribution as much as coverage. As an example the Elinchrom 48º standard reflector is rated on Quadra using EL adaptor at f32.4 / 2m, a full stop over the Quadra 50º reflector. Quality modifiers are typically designed more for their light shaping quality than output efficiency.

Until all manufacturer's get together on a standard modifier design for comparison (not going to happen), GN's should be used more as a reference for modifier comparison within a line than a means to compare the output one brand of light to another. This of course is not a issue with speed lights as they have similar head designs and are tested without modifiers.

Even though we all know that WS is actually a rating of stored power, not light output, I think you will find that most light generators generally perform as rated and that the Quadra is actually more powerful than an AB800 when using the same modifier.

Good luck.

The best way to compare directly between units is to put the same SB on them (medium Photoflex makes it real easy for lots of people to contribute) and take a reading at the given distance. If someone with a Quadra has a medium SB and wants to clear this up, speak up.

Thanks, this makes sense now.

Actually looking at the reflectors pictures I would also say that the EL 50º is similar to the standard 7' AB reflector and the EL 48º is similar to the AB 11'' reflector confirming that the Quarda is a tad more powerfull than an AB800.

The standard Quadra reflector looks more like a very small beauty dish.

It is not that I want to compare it to AB800, but having an AB800 it give me an idea how powerfull the Quadra outside would be.

thanks

ronnie

Carmen Miranda wrote:
s2000hku wrote: Reflector plays a major role in power efficiency.

+1

You can't really compare GN without using the same modifier.

+1 To everything Carmen said.

Some reflectors are polished (more gain), some are dimpled (less gain), etc.


bacilonur wrote:
The best way to compare directly between units is to put the same SB on them (medium Photoflex makes it real easy for lots of people to contribute)

That is an excelllent proposal! That really should become our standard, as the medium or large Photoflex Q39 is probably the most readily available soft box.

Then you need to take readings across the range of the resulting light pattern to find any "hot spots" or fall off.

I have a digital laser distance meter, it is easy to measure down to .05 feet or so. The Sekonic digital meters give results to .1 stop.

Not that I care enough to do any tests myself right now. Maybe in the fall once I get a studio and have everything set up and at hand.

Best,
Michael

I don't have a Quadra in hand to test yet but I wanted to say, whatever you can do with an AB800 can be done with the Quadra. Just think of it as less weight and more $$$. Also, look into a set of used Profoto AcuteB 600. They have drop a lot in price and gets you a little more power.

Like with cars, horsepower under the hood is certainly a factor, but it is never a true indicator of speed or performance.

Considering the fact that ProFoto and Elinchrom have a wide assortment of HP reflectors in their stable and that a high quality HP sports reflector can give you upwards of 2 stops efficiency, it doesn't take much to realize that the Quadra and 600B are actually much more powerful solutions in terms of output than some other generators of higher WS. I think it was Frankie D. who recently published some stuff on his blog (or maybe it was YouTube) using a HP sports reflector with a Quadra where he was totally nuking the midday sun in some funky junkyard.

Right now the combination of power, weight, size, RX handling, price and a full range of mods, including HP reflectors, makes the Quadra a very powerful location lighting tool indeed.
My sports reflector is already scratching at the door and not-so-patiently waiting for my Quadra to show up.

There are always more ways to skin a cat, but when it comes to location gear more power generally means more weight, which is another reason to consider your modifier options all the more carefully as part of the overall equation.

Good luck.

The weight is no one counting the battery pack of the Quadra.

If you compare it to the new ABMax 640 watt that can use a much smaller battery on location then the AMMax has much more power and is less weight on location and cost less then 1/3 of the price.
From what i have seen posted so far the Quadra has less power then placing two SB800s side by side and two SB800 are very lite and take small batterys or a very small battery pack.

I was shooting at F16 with my two SB800s the other day at 4 pm on the beach and they worked like a champ shooting a family of 4 a very bright hot day.
I do not think the Quadra could of done this at F16 iso 200 with small defusser on.

Just attache same reflective umbrella to Guadra and AB400, look like it will be same power. My two AB800 and umbrellas within same power range with my Broncolor Mobil, two mobil heads and umbrellas both at full power.

According to this test a quadra is like 4 speedlight: http://www.krolop-gerst.com/blog/technical-tutorial/technical_how_strong_is_sb90/lang/en/

ABMax 640 ca. 2 kg, SLA battery 1.6 kg, 400w inverter 1.2 kg = 4.8 kg and it takes more space.

digitaled wrote:
The weight is no one counting the battery pack of the Quadra.

If you compare it to the new ABMax 640 watt that can use a much smaller battery on location then the AMMax has much more power and is less weight on location and cost less then 1/3 of the price.
From what i have seen posted so far the Quadra has less power then placing two SB800s side by side and two SB800 are very lite and take small batterys or a very small battery pack.

I was shooting at F16 with my two SB800s the other day at 4 pm on the beach and they worked like a champ shooting a family of 4 a very bright hot day.
I do not think the Quadra could of done this at F16 iso 200 with small defusser on.

How does it work for ABMax 640? Does it require a DC convert and a SLA battery? or can you plug an SLA battery straight into the unit?

Just out of interest what is the zoom setting on your SB800 and how far did you position it from your subject?

For those living in Europe check with your local tax authority on importing unit outside EU.

From what I recall, if your purchase ever needed a repair or replacement. On the return trip to the EU, "let say AB declare the repair/replacement unit at the full purchase price."

You will be asked to pay import duty and VAT again. It is definitely not cheap to buy overseas product outside EU.

You chose what ever tools you feel comfortable and suitable for what you needed. Quadra reviews are available from many sources on the internet. i.e. check out www.dg28.com

I carried the quadra head & cables in a plastic lunch box, and including the quadra pack all fitted in a domke f3-x.
The side pocket can carried additional battery and other junks.

digitaled wrote:
I was shooting at F16 with my two SB800s the other day at 4 pm on the beach and they worked like a champ shooting a family of 4 a very bright hot day.
I do not think the Quadra could of done this at F16 iso 200 with small defusser on.

Were you overpowering daylight at f/16 or were you just shooting at f/16? That's a pretty meaningless statement. I can shoot at f/32 on the beach with a flashlight...you just won't see the effects of the flashlight. What did the ambient light meter at before you added strobes, then after?

f/16 isn't that much on a Nikon, since you're shooting at ISO 200 instead of 100. Two SB-800's could easily do that at 5 feet with diffusers, or without diffusers and dropping the power for faster recycle.

Actually, there is a vast difference between the way that Elinchrom and Alien Bee make their reflectors. Elinchrom reflectors all have been optically optimized for Elinchrom lights and have a pebbled surface and a particular curvature to help bounce the light around inside the reflector before emitting. Alien Bee reflectors appear to be stamped out of straight sheet metal (no curves) and do not have the same interior surface.

Also, with the adapter ring the Quadra heads can accept any of Elinchrom modifiers except the 53" Rotalux midi Octa and the 69" Rotalux Octa. Elinchrom offers a vast variety of modifiers, many very large (Octa bank is 74") compared to the handful of relatively small modifiers that can work with the Alien Bee gear.

Mark Astmann
Product Lighting Manager
Bogen Imaging, Inc.

s2000hku wrote:
I don't have a Quadra in hand to test yet but I wanted to say, whatever you can do with an AB800 can be done with the Quadra. Just think of it as less weight and more $$$. Also, look into a set of used Profoto AcuteB 600. They have drop a lot in price and gets you a little more power.

At 600ws the AcuteB 600 is only 1/2 stop above the Quadra. It weights 10.8 lbs, supports a single head, adjusts power in 2/10's of a stop and the R model (with built-in PocketWizard) costs $2695 in the US without heads and you'll need to get another PocketWizard at $189 for your camera in order to pop the lights.

Quadra new weights 6.6lbs (heads weight .55lbs), supports two heads asymmetrically, adjusts power in 1/10's of a stop. The To Go set with an "S" head costs only $1475,with an "A" head it sells for $1560. A kit with two heads, two batteries, hard shell case and Skyport Trigger goes for $2,200 or $2,300 depending upon whether you get the "S" or "A" heads. A Skyport Trigger goes for about $105. Further with Quadra you not only can pop your lights, you can control the power and turn on and off the modeling lamp right from the top of the camera.

With Elinchrom's vast assortment of lighting modifiers available for the Quadra I think it's a far better choice then the Profoto AcuteB 600.

Mark Astmann
Lighting Product Manger
Bogen Imaging, Inc.

Mark Astmann wrote:

... I think it's a far better choice then the xxxxxx.

If I'd sell BMW I'd state the same about BMW...

I have taken some reading from Quadra head at full power attached to the following light shape tool at 3m/10ft.
1) 44cm Square reflector + translucent deflector (f11.9)
2) 53" Octa box + internal diffuser (f16.3)

I am not a fan boy, I don't work for Elinchrom and I use what is available to me.

I hear what people are saying, Quadra is not powerful ....etc.
Speedlight is so amazing so very very very powerful so powerful. Did you compare the spread and the size of light source speedlight vs quadra? (The two light shape tools I used above for the quadra test is amazing, speedlight what do you think??).

Mark Astmann wrote:
Quadra new weights 6.6lbs (heads weight .55lbs), supports two heads asymmetrically, adjusts power in 1/10's of a stop.

Hi Mark!

Good to see you here. May help when we get too deep into speculation.

Cheers,
Michael

With Elinchrom's vast assortment of lighting modifiers available for the Quadra I think it's a far better choice then the Profoto AcuteB 600.

+1

tonghc wrote:
Did you compare the spread and the size of light source speedlight vs quadra? (The two light shape tools I used above for the quadra test is amazing

Yes, quality of light is the first question. Otherwise, why bother?

Although there are a few "brute force" jobs out there - lots of pops fast - for straight speedlights.