RDKirk
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
|
Here you go:
From what the people at Paul C Buff, Inc told me, the basic circuitry of the current WL and the AB is the same, the differences being primarily in physical and thermal robustness.
The AB circuitry is on two boards relatively close together in the shell; the WL circuitry (same basic design) is spread across four boards in a larger shell. I speculate that makes it easier to cool.
The WL 1600 and 3200 units have a 1/4 power step down control. This enables them to be more consistent at very low power than the single-stage adjustment of the AB, according to my tests. However, both of them are well equal to the consistency you'll find in any other flash unit anywhere close to their price ranges. You have to double the price to get any better consistency...and you have to check the specs carefully even then--don't expect more money to automatically buy better consistency. The WL 1600 and 3200 lights also go to a much lower power than the AB lights because of the 1/4 power button.
The AB has a 1/8-inch mono sync jack; the WL has a 1/4-inch stereo sync jack (it's really only two poles, but you need a stereo plug with both the barrel and the ring grounded to make the connection correctly). The WL shell is solid aluminum while the AB shell is Lexan. That makes the WL physically tougher, but in practice, it actually takes quite a serious whack to break the Lexan--and I doubt the circuits of either can stand that many gees. It would probably make a difference under a PRESSURE situation, like boxes (or luggage) stacked on the lights. I'd expect the Lexan would eventually deflect enough to bend something inside, where the WL would resist the pressure.
The stand mount of the WL is cast and machined aluminum; the mount of the AB is polycarbonate. I note that Paul Buff sells replacement mounts for the AB, which suggests they can be broken--although I've never broken one.
The WL has a 250 watt modeling light; the AB comes with a 100 watt lamp that most people immediately replace with 150 watt Phillips Halogenas from Lowes or Home Depot (perfectly safe, according to AlienBees). The company also states that a 250 volt bulb can be used on AlienBees IF it's used in an open-air situation, like an umbrella or very large softbox...but I'd be very wary of a small softbox. Paul Buff says that the eventual damage of using a 250 watt bulb is to the bulb socket itself.
Obviously, the fact that the WL has a better thermally protective design is the difference there. In practice, 150-watts is more than adequate for the kind of living room portraits the ABs are best suited for. If you're doing commercial work and lighting larger sets, you want the WL modeling light power.
The WL has separate manual controls for the flash and modeling power while the AB has a single control for them both. That's pretty much a matter of individual taste, but the WL levers are directly parallel to each other, so it's just as easy to flick them both simultaneously with the same finger as it is to manipulate the single AB lever.
The "modern" style of low-to-mid-priced studio flash units is flat membrane buttons and LED power level displays, but I find these levers to have much better useability in the real world. Membrane buttons and LED displays require the user to have a direct view of the rear panel. In practice, the rear panel is often above eye level and pointing upwards, which would make it difficult to operate membrane buttons or see an LED display. The AB and WL controls are operable by feel even when 'way over your head.
The WL has a thermal-controlled fan--it comes on when necessary (which always tends to be "eventually" on a long job); the AB has a constant-on fan. The AB fan is a bit quieter and lower in pitch than the WL fan, but neither is objectionable--I have a laptop that has a louder fan.
The fingers of the WL reflector mount are cast and machined; the AB fingers are slightly less substantial stamped metal. The method of actuating the fingers is also mechanically more efficient on the WL than the AB (that is, has a greater mechanical advantage to stay clamped). Also, the WL reflector mount is screwed into the aluminum housing; the AB reflector mount is screwed into the Lexan. Those two differences mean the WL can theoretically hold a far heavier light modifier than the AB. However, the AB mount is no wimp, and, again, it can hold just about anything you'd use for the living-room portraiture it's designed for.
The WL lights are heavier and longer than the AB lights--substantially so in the higher wattages.
Finally, the AB's Lexan shell and polycarbonate stand mount means it can't drain off static electricity as readily as the WL's aluminum shell and aluminum mount. Some people have reported that under very dry and stacticky conditions, they've gotten spurious flashes when they touched an AB after walking across a carpeted floor; this should not be a problem for the WL--the aluminum shell is directly grounded through the power cable.
All in all, I'd categorize the differences as being compact/lightweight versus tough/high endurance. If you work constantly on location (as I did for a good while), the compactness and light weight of the AB units is very important. If you carry, say, four or five lights on location, it's as little as half the weight with AB units. The low cost helps, too, because while ABs take a licking and still keep ticking, I would shed fewer tears if a truck backed over my ABs than my WLs.
In small-set situations like most portraits, the AB modeling lights are adequate. But if you're doing larger-set commercial work, if you need lights that can flash all day long, day in and day out week after week, and weight isn't such a factor for you, then the White Lightning has advantages.
Either unit becomes positively glorious when combined with the Radio Remote 1 for digital, wireless control of the modeling lights and flash power. I can't trumpet loudly enough about the utility of the RR-1--you can't get remote control this effective at ANY price.
Edited on Apr 24, 2008 at 07:29 PM
|
