# Seriously Guys? C'mon!



## PhotoWrangler (Dec 12, 2011)

$256 Lastolite Joe McNally 24'' White Ezybox Hotshoe - Ezybox Hotshoe

$38 CowboyStudio Photography Lighting | Studio Equipment | Studio Accessories

Seriously?


----------



## ghache (Dec 12, 2011)

lol, I got 2 of these softbox from ebay. 1 24X24 and one 32X32 that i just got. i compared the 24X24 with the lastolite and quality wise, its the same freaking softbox and i am usre the light quality is the same.

Some people will say you get what you pay for, not really, These 40$ softbox are a WIN. i wouldn't NEVER pay 250 bucks for the lastolite one.

The round 42 inch reflector?. I have one photoflex and one lastolite that my friend left at my studio and i have a cheap one from ebay, guess what? they are the same.


----------



## 480sparky (Dec 12, 2011)

Porsche.

Kia.


----------



## Derrel (Dec 12, 2011)

Left: $19 Cheap Chinese imitation        Right $75 genuine Lastolite Umbrella Box.

Both fitted with identical speedotron MW3U (aka 'umbrella heads") flash heads firing at 200 watt-seconds.

They look "similar" in appearance, but the cheap Chinese knock-off has a severe hot-spot,
and edges with very rapid fall-off. Cheap Chinese made modifiers often use cheap fabrics
with UV enhancers, to make the fabric appear "white" to the human eye.

So...yeah...the imitation and the original give identical results? Right? I mean, who you gonna believe?


----------



## PhotoWrangler (Dec 12, 2011)

ok, ok, ok. Derrell threw me under the bus. Thanks Derrell. My checkbook hates you.


----------



## MLeeK (Dec 12, 2011)

Very interesting, Derrel. Thanks!


----------



## Robin Usagani (Dec 12, 2011)

Hyundais and Kias are getting nicer and nicer though.



480sparky said:


> Porsche.
> 
> Kia.


----------



## tirediron (Dec 12, 2011)

ghache said:


> ...Some people will say you get what you pay for, not really...


Yes.  Really!  

As Derrel just demonstrated in his post, appearances can be (and often are) deceiving.  If you don't pay for it, your work will.


----------



## Derrel (Dec 12, 2011)

Well, somebody above said he is "sure the light quality is the same", and impugned the name and reputation of both Photoflex and Lastolite. MY EXPERIENCE is that the Chinese-made stuff has a different color temperature and different materials construction than the "name brand" stuff. Like the Lastolite Umbrella box, which I have personally been recommending since 2007; it has a "special" white diffusion material on the front of it...it is "thick-ish", and "semi-transparent"; the closest thing I could liken it to is frosted Plexiglas or "opal glass", which is/was used in slide duplicators and some enlagers, to create a very SMOOTH and EVEN diffusion of the light.

The cheap Chinese umbrella box, which I payed $19 for, used regular old shoot-through umbrella type material in the front, and it does NOT create an even diffusion of the light. As you can see, it has terrible edge fall-off, and a VERY "hot" center...also, the black fabric on the back--the Lastolite is a sort of rubberized-feeling, THICK cloth that allows ZERO light to come through, even when firing 800 to 1200 watt-seconds of flash through one light head....the Chinese umbrellas use "regular", black-dyed, woven fabric that is nowhere near opaque, and light comes out the back side...meaning that when two umbrellas are aimed toward the subjects, and the photographer is behind the umbrellas, on the black side, there is a LOT of spill light blasting toward the lens with the Chinese-made cheapies, and the Lastolites are light-proof,and are NOT flaring the lens... I myself recommend and use the Lastolite Umbrella Box 40 inch umbrellas with the 7mm diameter shafts. I stand behind the product's results. Its sewing sometimes needs a bit of assistance with the rib end-caps and an extra stitch or two, but the "quality" of the light is beautiful.

Chinese e-bay item   versus     Name-brand.... UFC 141...


----------



## pgriz (Dec 12, 2011)

@Derrel:  looking at your example, I&#8217;m wondering if the&#8220;focal length&#8221; of the umbrella has something to do with the pattern you are showing.  The Lastolite umbrella shows an even pattern that one would expect if the flash was at the focal point of the umbrella&#8217;s curvature.   The &#8220;Other&#8221; one either has a stronger curve than the Lastolite umbrella, or the flash head is further away from the umbrella&#8217;s focal point (actually, closer to the umbrella on the axis), or both.  If my guess is correct, then the positioning of the flash or light at the correct location/position relative to the umbrella axis and curvature becomes very important. 

You mayalso have solved a WB problem for me in that I never really considered the quality of &#8220;white&#8221; that I get from the bounced light from the umbrella.  I was getting a slightly magenta cast in some shots but not others, using the same equipment. Now that you mention it, I am thinking that the magenta cast may have been happening when I used a specific umbrella. I&#8217;m going to test this theory, maybe even as early as tonight.


----------



## Buckster (Dec 12, 2011)

Derrel said:


> Left: $19 Cheap Chinese imitation        Right $75 genuine Lastolite Umbrella Box.
> 
> Both fitted with identical speedotron MW3U (aka 'umbrella heads") flash heads firing at 200 watt-seconds.
> 
> ...


Seeing is definitely believing!

I'd love to see a similar comparison of the softbox in question.


----------



## Derrel (Dec 12, 2011)

pgriz said:


> @Derrel:  looking at your example, I&#8217;m wondering if the&#8220;focal length&#8221; of the umbrella has something to do with the pattern you areshowing.  The Lastolite umbrella shows aneven pattern that one would expect if the flash was at the focal point of the umbrella&#8217;scurvature.   The &#8220;Other&#8221; one either has a stronger curvethan the Lastolite umbrella, or the flash head is further away from theumbrella&#8217;s focal point (actually, closer to the umbrella on the axis), orboth.  If my guess is correct, then the positioningof the flash or light at the correct location/position relative to the umbrellaaxis and curvature becomes very important.
> 
> You mayalso have solved a WB problem for me in that I never really considered thequality of &#8220;white&#8221; that I get from the bounced light from the umbrella.  I was getting a slightly magenta cast in someshots but not others, using the same equipment. Now that you mention it, I am thinking that the magenta cast may havebeen happening when I used a specific umbrella. I&#8217;m going to test this theory, maybe even as early as tonight.



The thing I've picked up from other people off the web is that the COLOR TEMPERATURE of a LOT of the Chinese, low-cost, no-name products is inconsistent with 1) different lots of the same product and 2) sometimes inconsistent/incompatible with other "name-brand" reflectors and modifiers. Meaning that mix-and-match between say, Photoflex and Brand XX may yield weird and impossible-to-correct WB problems.

As far as the "focal legnth" of the umbrella, or the curvature: the cheapie is set up with the flash head set along the umbrella shaft at the same distance as the Lastolite. On both, the front panel fabrics are "tight", and the flash head could not be pulled farther away, because the fabric was drum-tight...also, the curve of the two umbrellas is different...the Lastolite is a bit deeper, but it also has a VERY different backing...as I think is obvious, the cheapie umbrella on the left is not containing "all" of the light...a good deal of the light is going right through the back of the umbrella's semi-transparent fabric, and is being lost at the edges of the front diffusion panel. This is not an exhaustive test, but it does show some differences with the same watt-seconds and the same flash head models.

The  Lastolite, on the other hand, has a 100 percent, light-containing black, coated fabric...light is NOT lost, but is  scrambled/diffused well, and then it goes through a "thicker", "coated" type of diffusing material that is very different from the cheap, rip-stop nylon used in the $19 umbrella box face...the degree of specularity is also different. I'm not suggesting that the low-cost softbox ChristopeherCoy is a terrible modifier, compared against the $250 Lastolite JoeMcNally softbox, but I was just using a test shot I happen to have on hand that shows how _there **can be** differences in the way apparently very similar products perform_.

For me, the "name-brand" umbrellas and softboxes have been very good investments. But I will also admit that the lure of $25 and $38 and $59 e-Bay items is very strong, and I have bought three low-cost items, 2 softboxes and 1 beauty dish, and they have been good...when used ALONE. But the color temp of the soft boxes does not match my Photoflexes or my Lastolite stuff, so, they do not play well together. For me, at least. The way I see it, there is no way to pair a "warm" main light with "cool" fill light or hair light, and have it look right.


----------



## unpopular (Dec 12, 2011)

My $30 brolly does render a bit bluish, though only slight.

I think these things are good for newbies who really don't want to invest a lot, like myself. I would feel very silly if I put $1200 into my kit only to discover I really don't enjoy studio photography that much.


----------



## KmH (Dec 12, 2011)

But, if you decide studio work is not for you, you can sell the gear and recoup most of your money.


----------



## PhotoWrangler (Dec 12, 2011)

KmH said:


> But, if you decide studio work is not for you, you can sell the gear and recoup most of your money.




Not likely on lighting gear. For some reason softboxes and things DO NOT keep their value very well.


----------



## unpopular (Dec 12, 2011)

KmH said:


> But, if you decide studio work is not for you, you can sell the gear and recoup most of your money.



So you're out $300-500? And you can always use those Chinese wonders if you need an extra light. You could always resell them to a college student. I'm not saying get the cheapest stuff you can find, but I really don't think there is much need to buy the most expensive, either.

I never had any problem with my lights, they dump a ton of light for given the wattage. As I said my brolly is a little bit bluish and the stands are kind of cheap. But they work ok, and I never felt they were terribly unstable. I wouldn't suggest it to a pro or anything, but they're good to learn with.

But stay FAR away from Britek.


----------



## KmH (Dec 12, 2011)

Maybe I'm a better salesman than you are, because I've never taken that big a hit when selling $1200 worth of like new but used, quality studio gear.


----------



## delusions (Dec 12, 2011)

do you still possibly have a link of the 19$ one XD


----------



## Dominantly (Dec 12, 2011)

Schwettylens said:


> Hyundais and Kias are getting nicer and nicer though.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Yeah no ****, I've been finding myself really drawn to both companies. I wish I would have picked up a new Sonata Vs the Camry SE I got for the Wiff.


----------



## unpopular (Dec 12, 2011)

KmH said:


> Maybe I'm a better salesman than you are, because I've never taken that big a hit when selling $1200 worth of like new but used, quality studio gear.



You must be a really good salesman. I wouldn't touch a used $1200 kit for more than $900.


----------



## Derrel (Dec 12, 2011)

delusions said:


> do you still possibly have a link of the 19$ one XD



Steve Kaeser Enterprises. A small company that has been selling lower-cost studio equipment since way back in the late 1980's. Here is the link. Steve Kaeser Photographic Lighting

They have 2-umbrella kits of a 42-inch size for $36.95, plus a lot of other stuff at lower prices.


----------



## nickzou (Dec 12, 2011)

More pictures! I am interested in this topic. It didn't even occur to me that this stuff could even have variations in quality other than cheaper build quality. Anyone have any horror stories of light stands?


----------



## unpopular (Dec 12, 2011)

^^ I'm planning on setting my lights up tonight. I'll post a similar image with my brolly.

Derrel - what was the exposure settings for your example?


----------



## pgriz (Dec 12, 2011)

Thank you Derrel, for showing those examples.  I replicated your test with my own flashes and umbrellas and noticed several things:  The positioning of the flash relative to the axis and distance from the umbrella plays a role, as does whether the flash head is set to "wide angle" or "zoom".  I have a silvered umbrella and a white one (both cheapies), and found I could get pretty even light with the white umbrella (after doing some tinkering with the axis/distance), but was getting rather spotty coverage with the silvered one.  In fact, playing with the various distances and positions, I cannot get the silvered one to project a "filled" umbrella image.  That probably explains some of the difficulty I have had using the umbrellas to broaden the light - I didn't have them adjusted correctly, and in the case of the silvered one, it is pretty much useless.  But at least, I now know what to look for and verify the light pattern in the umbrella.  A very useful bit of knowledge.  Also looks like I will be shopping for better quality umbrellas!


----------



## 2WheelPhoto (Dec 12, 2011)

What Derrel said about color temp is same thing one of my professors said.  And professor added "don't set your WB to your studio setting and expect it to be right on Chinese umbrellas"....I asked "use AUTO?"...he said yes you'll be closer.  

Watch those Chinese


----------



## unpopular (Dec 12, 2011)

Derrel said:


> delusions said:
> 
> 
> > do you still possibly have a link of the 19$ one XD
> ...




I wouldn't trust anyone who sells Britek. That stuff is absolute garbage.



2WheelPhoto said:


> What Derrel said about color temp is same  thing one of my professors said.  And professor added "don't set your WB  to your studio setting and expect it to be right on Chinese  umbrellas"....I asked "use AUTO?"...he said yes you'll be closer.
> 
> Watch those Chinese



No matter what you'll be better off shooting RAW and fine tuning. All lamps drift over time, flash, incandescent alike. I've heard that cheaper stuff has poor voltage regulation that may result in unexpected variation. IDK if there is any truth to this or how significant the effects.



nickzou said:


> Anyone have any horror stories of light stands?



I've been taught to always sandbag your light stands. IMO this is just common sense. Studios are darkish, have lots of stuff going on, many things to trip over. Last thing you want is a hot modelling lamp falling on your model.


----------



## 2WheelPhoto (Dec 12, 2011)

unpopular, sure we shoot RAW and tweak WB when required, but we start off with the right kelvin # (rather than "auto WB" as suggested with  Chinese LoL)


----------



## unpopular (Dec 13, 2011)

^^ I really don't see that much drift from 5500°. But OTOH I specifically chose units that were not the absolute cheapest models.

I think that this might be a situation where a small difference in price makes a huge difference in quality. I suspect that 25USD means a lot more to Chinese manufacturers than it does to European manufacturers. In the west, we might look at two different Chinese products and say there isn't a lot of price difference, but in reality that marginal difference might go a lot further in China.

I once bought an adapter for $21.99USD instead of $35.00USD. The cheaper one had bits of metal and rough edges, while other adapters I've bought in the $30 price range were machined with good quality. Both had sh*t for optics, though 

In any case, if you buy a 4 light kit with every modifier known to man for under $200 you're going to get a pile of garbage. But if you buy a light with nothing else included for more than $150, it's much more likely to be something you'd want to use.

If you buy a $600 bowens or elinchrom, you're not going to regret it (i'd imagine), but if you don't have $600 to spend on a single light, you won't have it anyway.


----------



## PhotoWrangler (Dec 13, 2011)

unpopular said:


> You must be a really good salesman. I wouldn't touch a used $1200 kit for more than $900.




And even then I'd be hard pressed to not shuck out the extra $300 and buy a brand new kit. He'd have to make it really worth my while.


----------



## ghache (Dec 13, 2011)

I agree with Derrel that these umbrella box are deff cheaper compared to the other makers, However, How much was the brand named umbrella box 79? 60$ more?  THe lastolite 24X24 is 210 $ more than the ebay one and for a small softbox, its a lot more money to put towards something you will be shooting portrait and small product with a SPEEDLIGHT!?!?!. 



I think nobody should cheap out on modifiers if your shooting professionally, However, I wouldn't hesitate to buy the 24X24 softbox from eBay again because i have used them intensively and know what they are capable of. 

I bought one of these Visico softbox from ebay a few months ago. It was 80$ for a 80X100cm softbox with the bowens ring and the GRID. I was curious to see how well it performed and i was suprised to find out that it was actually well built. I have 2 of the same sized bowens softbox that was 240$ with the speed ring only (no grid) and end up using the visico softbox as much as the more expensive bowens. 

The visico softbox is a bit deeper and i noticed a slight warmer temp to it but nothing crazy.


Now you be the judge! 
Does different color temp means wrong? not really. Every modifier that i used had a different color temp, create a different light, softer or harsher but IMO
, you shooting should be adjusted to every modifier you use and do not expect to get the same color temp, same exposure from every modifiers, that would make no sense.

here is one shot i did with the visico softbox that i paid 80$. the price of a meal at a restaurant lol






I don't think i would have done better using one of my more expensive brand named soft box. It all comes down on how you use it.


----------



## kundalini (Dec 13, 2011)

Anybody remember these commercials?  The premise is the same for many things in life.


----------



## 2WheelPhoto (Dec 13, 2011)

ghache said:


> I agree with Derrel that these umbrella box are  deff cheaper compared to the other makers, However, How much was the  brand named umbrella box 79? 60$ more?  THe lastolite 24X24 is 210 $  more than the ebay one and for a small softbox, its a lot more money to  put towards something you will be shooting portrait and small product  with a SPEEDLIGHT!?!?!.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



nice!


----------



## nickzou (Dec 13, 2011)

kundalini said:


> Anybody remember these commercials?  The premise is the same for many things in life.



Nah, not interested in vague platitudes. Interested in test shots, numbers, stats, and comprehensive reviews.


----------



## c.cloudwalker (Dec 13, 2011)

Derrel said:


> Left: $19 Cheap Chinese imitation        Right $75 genuine Lastolite Umbrella Box.



Fook you Derrel! Now that you've shown this, how am I going to keep on suggesting sheers as diffusers? :lmao:

Not that it really matters. Most members are on a budget and just want to get an idea of what it's like to work with lights and light modifiers, So, sheers are still pretty good, lol.


----------



## 2WheelPhoto (Dec 13, 2011)

I bought a lastolite brolly on Derrel's advice, can't wait to use it!


----------



## c.cloudwalker (Dec 13, 2011)

KmH said:


> But, if you decide studio work is not for you, you can sell the gear and recoup most of your money.



I totally agree with that. If you have good lights and include the modifiers in the sale, you will recoup most of your money if you know how to write the ad 

When I closed down my first studio, I had 3 photogs fighting over my gear. My strobes were Broncolors and I ended up selling them for more than I had paid for them. That, of course, is because I had gotten them at wholesale prices    but they were still a very good deal, although including all the modifiers... I was *not* going to get stuck selling the modifiers on their own.


----------



## e.rose (Dec 13, 2011)

Schwettylens said:


> Hyundais and Kias are getting nicer and nicer though.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Our brand new Kia soul caught on fire due to faulty wiring a month after we bought it... if that means anything.


----------



## unpopular (Dec 13, 2011)

Ferrari recalls 'cursed' supercar after FIVE 458 Italias burst into flames | Mail Online

yeah... welll....


----------



## Derrel (Dec 13, 2011)

ghache said:


> I agree with Derrel that these umbrella box are deff cheaper compared to the other makers, However, How much was the brand named umbrella box 79? 60$ more?  THe lastolite 24X24 is 210 $ more than the ebay one and for a small softbox, its a lot more money to put towards something you will be shooting portrait and small product with a SPEEDLIGHT!?!?!



My nemesis has an excellent point...the McNally-series softbox is REALLY EXPENSIVE for such a small softbox!!! I know, it has some accessory louvre type flaps, which is kind of new and different....but jeeze...it's REALLY EXPENSIVE. I think softboxes are easier to design than umbrellas, due to some typical design differences. I think that the Lastolite branding means the McNally-series small softbox will be made of top-quality materials that are sourced from a consistent, reliable source. But part of the price is also, I think, "status symbol" factor, or "cachet"... it's like a Rolex watch, not a Timex. The really hard-core Strobist crowd that can afford the $130, four-SB-900 flash bracket for the McNally softbox can probably afford the $240 price tag for the box, as well as the $130 for the multi-flash bracket--because they are spending $2,100 on four freaking SB-900 speedlights to fill the bracket!   lol

I really like the McNally blog articles and the videos and the DVDs and stuff...but, uh...this whole "Nikon, multi-speedlight flash", Strobist-ethic, TTL remote flash thing....uh...for that kind of lighting, I think Speedotron, not "Nikon"...


----------



## Derrel (Dec 13, 2011)

unpopular said:


> Ferrari recalls 'cursed' supercar after FIVE 458 Italias burst into flames | Mail Online
> 
> yeah... welll....



zOMG! Dude! Look--it's a Ferrari I'll bet I can buy for like, $50!!! AND, I'll bet they can ship it overseas to me in two, 55-gallon drums!!! article-1305396-0AE301DB000005DC-77_634x286.jpg


----------



## unpopular (Dec 13, 2011)

I bet KMH could sell it!


----------

