Hi Guys,
I'm getting confused with the bewildering display/availability of different aftermarket diffusers for use with OEM Speedlites.
Can you all step in and offer some opinions as to the quality and usefulness of all these different makes, shapes and models? I would really like to know what is wrong with the diffuser that Nikon supplied me with my SB-800 when I bought it?
Is it good enough for the job, or do I just ditch it and run out and get the Sto-fen or Gary Fong equivalent?
Are these just aftermarket replacements for 'lost' diffusers, or are they superior quality and have better diffusion qualities?
Thanks for all your advice fellas.
Bruce

Just get Lumiquest Softbox II, works great as you can see in Kenny's sample.

Agree with n0b0 - a lumiquest softbox is probably one of the best commercial ones for macro. Stofen and Gary Fong are often mixed bounce flash/diffusers really meant for doing people shots etc.
Brian V.

Hi Guys,
Thanks for the input. . . . I have the original lumiquest 'softbox', the one that it's angled up from the bottom, and I'm pretty chuffed with its results.
Just seems to be a lot of experimenting with diffusers going on around this place?
Bruce...

TheBat wrote:
Just seems to be a lot of experimenting with diffusers going on around this place?
Bruce...

I think it's mostly for the MT-24EX twinflash since there doesn't seem to be any proper diffuser designed for it. As it is, the Stofen for the twinflash doesn't diffuse the light as much as it disperses it, ie. wasting the flash unless you have something to bounce it back to the subject.

TheBat wrote:

Hi Guys,
Thanks for the input. . . . I have the original lumiquest 'softbox', the one that it's angled up from the bottom, and I'm pretty chuffed with its results.
Just seems to be a lot of experimenting with diffusers going on around this place?
Bruce...

Again as n0b0 suggests there are major problems trying to get good diffusion and large apparent light source size with macro flashes including the MT-24.It's much easier with a normal flashgun not attached to the front of the lens.
Brian v.

Second what's already been proffered about the Lumiquest: good bang for the buck. I also shoot with a twin flash, the Nikon R1C1 and it's the same story as with the MT-24EX. Besides, it's kinda fun to be building stuff with grinders and glue guns and such.

Kenny

I think one of the best articles that I've read on diffusion is Apparent Light Size over at Strobist -pretty much required reading IMHO.

As for the MT-24EX: It's a small, brutally harsh light source out of the box. But in the process of diffusing it I've leaned a great deal about the light and how to manipulate it to get the quality that I want. I'll also second what Kenny said -sometimes you just gotta channel Martha Stewart and break out a Dremel Tool

Thanks guys.
Your help is always appreciated. . . . and,
I LOVE the sense of achievement from 'home made'...
Bruce

I've got a lumiquest mini softbox and it works great. Personally I like the relatively small size, which is large enough for most applications.

M Vers wrote:
I've got a lumiquest mini softbox and it works great. Personally I like the relatively small size, which is large enough for most applications.

And I got the gigantic Softbox III. I just love the soft shadow I get from it and I can place the flash further away from the subject to keep it from freaking out. My twinflash is gathering dust in the cabinet.

n0b0 wrote:
And I got the gigantic Softbox III. I just love the soft shadow I get from it and I can place the flash further away from the subject to keep it from freaking out. My twinflash is gathering dust in the cabinet.


Hi n0b0,
Size is always impressive. . . .
But how do you mount your beast, or is it 'hand-held'
Bruce...

M Vers wrote:
I've got a lumiquest mini softbox and it works great. Personally I like the relatively small size, which is large enough for most applications.


M Vers,
I have seen images of the mini softbox and I liked what I saw, although it has been reported on Strobist that the OEM speedlites work better from a bigger diffuser?
I'm very tempted at this stage to try two SB800's fitted with mini softboxes mounted on either side of the lens?. . . . kinda like the Nikon and Canon macro flash set-ups. Opinions guys??
Bruce...

TheBat wrote:
Hi n0b0,
Size is always impressive. . . .
But how do you mount your beast, or is it 'hand-held'
Bruce...

I always shoot handheld mate. For the type of subjects I shoot, they'd all leave, have a family, develop a beer gut, gone bald and wrinkly by the time I finish setting up my tripod.

TheBat wrote:
...I'm very tempted at this stage to try two SB800's fitted with mini softboxes mounted on either side of the lens?. . . . kinda like the Nikon and Canon macro flash set-ups. Opinions guys??
Bruce...

Check out Blepharopsis -specifically his Stag and Beetles photo. It's not the rig I'd use, cause it would be impossible to hand hold it, but he has some of the best two flash lighting that I've ever seen. From looking at his photos I think he sets the camera to expose for the ambient light behind the subject (under exposing it a little), and then uses the flash to illuminate the subject. The technique is very limiting due to the tripod, and I really think he'd have a tough time freezing motion with the flash. But it's tough to argue with the quality of the light that he's getting...

TheBat wrote:
M Vers wrote:
I've got a lumiquest mini softbox and it works great. Personally I like the relatively small size, which is large enough for most applications.


M Vers,
I have seen images of the mini softbox and I liked what I saw, although it has been reported on Strobist that the OEM speedlites work better from a bigger diffuser?
I'm very tempted at this stage to try two SB800's fitted with mini softboxes mounted on either side of the lens?. . . . kinda like the Nikon and Canon macro flash set-ups. Opinions guys??
Bruce...

I agree with what John said above--definitely not the rig for me either. That's not to say it wont be for you, but the sheer weight of such a rig is impractical for any mortal looking to handhold. The size of the diffuser is relative to the distance from the lens to the subject...the further away the larger the diffuser. From what I've seen through my own trial and error is that the mini is large enough to shoot all subjects at 1:1 and beyond as well as subjects within 1-2ft of working distance. I don't see any reason to go much larger though I'm open to the idea.

n0b0 wrote:
TheBat wrote:
Hi n0b0,
Size is always impressive. . . .
But how do you mount your beast, or is it 'hand-held'
Bruce...

I always shoot handheld mate. For the type of subjects I shoot, they'd all leave, have a family, develop a beer gut, gone bald and wrinkly by the time I finish setting up my tripod.


BTW, I was asking if you hand held the flash unit or had it mounted to the camera via the hotshoe or some bracket assembly?
Nice vision though. . . .
Bruce

M Vers wrote:
I agree with what John said above--definitely not the rig for me either. That's not to say it wont be for you, but the sheer weight of such a rig is impractical for any mortal looking to handhold. The size of the diffuser is relative to the distance from the lens to the subject...the further away the larger the diffuser. From what I've seen through my own trial and error is that the mini is large enough to shoot all subjects at 1:1 and beyond as well as subjects within 1-2ft of working distance. I don't see any reason to go much larger though I'm open to the idea.

Which brings me back to my original question, , , , what's wrong with the OEM diffuser unit from Nikon? Maybe tape the outside edges so that all the light is directed forwards towards the subject?
Bruce

TheBat wrote:
Which brings me back to my original question, , , , what's wrong with the OEM diffuser unit from Nikon? Maybe tape the outside edges so that all the light is directed forwards towards the subject?
Bruce

I'm not sure what Nikon OEM diffuser you are referring to, but I'm assuming you're speaking of a sto-fen like diffuser (?). If so you will find that the light is still relatively harsh. The softbox, OTOH, creates a softer more diffuse light.

Just gotta make the size of the light emitter bigger. See my hopper sample above, if I had used the stofen, the shadow would've been much darker with distinct edges.

I'll add another "wrench to the gears": Get the diffuser really close to what you're shooting and the size of it won't matter -relative to the subject it will look huge and give you some really good diffusion...

The advantage to using a larger diffuser is that you can put some distance between it and the subject and still get diffused light. The disadvantage is that the flash duration will increase to compensate for the increase in distance to the subject, possibly impacting your ability to freeze motion...

Dalantech wrote:
I'll add another "wrench to the gears": Get the diffuser really close to what you're shooting and the size of it won't matter -relative to the subject it will look huge and give you some really good diffusion...
..

I thought that this was the idea behind the OEM twin macro lights being so close to the subject? Small powerful light either side of the lens to supply enough light and positioned to cancel out the other's strong shadows?
Thanks for your help guys, I'm just trying to shorten the experimentation/cost learning curve. . . .
Bruce

TheBat wrote:
I thought that this was the idea behind the OEM twin macro lights being so close to the subject? Small powerful light either side of the lens to supply enough light and positioned to cancel out the other's strong shadows?
Bruce

Yes to the first question (although you still need to diffuse them) and the answer to your second question: The shadows will depend on how you position the lights...

Dalantech wrote:
The disadvantage is that the flash duration will increase to compensate for the increase in distance to the subject, possibly impacting your ability to freeze motion...

Never affected any of my shots. I don't think zero point something something extra second of flash duration is gonna make much difference. Besides, I use a much more powerful flash than the 24EX.

n0b0 wrote:
Dalantech wrote:
The disadvantage is that the flash duration will increase to compensate for the increase in distance to the subject, possibly impacting your ability to freeze motion...

Never affected any of my shots. I don't think zero point something something extra second of flash duration is gonna make much difference. Besides, I use a much more powerful flash than the 24EX.

I did use the word "possibly" because it really depends on a lot of different factors, flash power being one of them.

I wouldn't discount how much flash duration can impact the detail in a photo though -every full stop change in flash power means that your virtual shutter speed is getting cut in half or doubling depending on how the power level shifts. I'm convinced that what a lot of people blame diffraction for is nothing but "macro motion blur" -movement by as little as half a pixel during the firing of the flash...