Aputure COB 120t First Look. Tungsten 1.5K watt equivalent one source LED fixture

The light has exactly the same output as a Lowel omni 500 watts, CRI is 89.
Difference is you can play football with the omni (not the bulb) and the Aputure is loaded with electronics
The omni is 100 CRI, much smaller and lighter weight
So not ready yet.
 
Last edited:
Felipe Henao said:
The light has exactly the same output as a Lowel omni 500 watts
Click to expand...

The Omni runs very hot, is not much use in daylight conditions ( you lose too much light with a conversion filter ), and more difficult to adjust brightness without a color shift.

When you need to move from location to location to keep your shooting schedule there is no time to wait for the Omni to cool down, so packing up a few hot lights to move to the next location can be a big problem.

I own 10 Lowel tungsten lights that are great for some situations, but not so much for "run and gun" shooting.
 
This one is Tungsten also so you need to gel it as well, What I see is wrong information with the output advertised color rendition, that is why I compare it to the omni which gets hot yes.
BUT is smaller, lighter, stronger, same output. and has great color, for me is not ready yet probably next model or daylight version THIS IS TUNGSTEN.
 
Erik Naso said:
I can't hear the fan at all. I have to put my ear an inch away to hear it. Should Not be an issue at all for interviews. My Chimera box fits very nice too with a Bowen-s mount speedring. I want the daylight version STAT! :-D
Click to expand...

Good to hear (or not hear) Erik. I agree, where is the daylight version? Most of my other kit are daylight balanced LED panels so this would be a game changer in 5500k for me.
 
I can give some input on this light. I actually really am enjoying it and I think it's output is getting a bit under-rated due to its wide 120º beam angle and the fact that nobody has the fresnel to use with it so the light falls off quickly in most measurements–especially if you're not using the reflector. I'm getting about 2900 Lux at a meter when measured conservatively (no reflector, no lens). I don't think that's too bad. I measured the Lowel Tota side by side and the output of the Aputure is greater not to mention that it's all-in-all just much easier to use since it doesn't get burning hot and you can use it open-faced in a modifier or with various Bowens accessories. The color reproduction of this light is phenomenal. I measured CRI and TLCI on it and the manufacturer's claims aren't at all mis-advertised as I thought they might be. I have the readings and a tungsten chart comparison up here if anyone is interested. Look how close it comes to the Lowel on the chart!

http://www.fennworld.com/aputure-cob-120t/
 
Pyriphlegethon said:
I can give some input on this light.
Click to expand...
Nice review, thanks for posting!
Im really excited about these lights, but as I can't afford it at the moment, I'm holding out for the daylight coloured ones.

regarding the remote, you were right in your suspicions. It's the same remote that comes with their Amaran series of lights, and the arrows are used to change colour temperature in the models that can do that. It's really great that they use the same remote (also with the LightStorms, I believe). Which means you can have a 120 COB, a LightStorm and a couple of Amarans and control them all with the same remote!
 
Pyriphlegethon said:
I can give some input on this light. I actually really am enjoying it and I think it's output is getting a bit under-rated due to its wide 120º beam angle and the fact that nobody has the fresnel to use with it so the light falls off quickly in most measurements–especially if you're not using the reflector. I'm getting about 2900 Lux at a meter when measured conservatively (no reflector, no lens). I don't think that's too bad. I measured the Lowel Tota side by side and the output of the Aputure is greater not to mention that it's all-in-all just much easier to use since it doesn't get burning hot and you can use it open-faced in a modifier or with various Bowens accessories. The color reproduction of this light is phenomenal. I measured CRI and TLCI on it and the manufacturer's claims aren't at all mis-advertised as I thought they might be. I have the readings and a tungsten chart comparison up here if anyone is interested. Look how close it comes to the Lowel on the chart!

http://www.fennworld.com/aputure-cob-120t/
Click to expand...
Nice review!

The output rating was done with the fresnel lens attached so yes it's misleading to say as is it's 1.5K. Looking forward to the daylight version.
 
Yeah I am looking forward to a daylight version for sure, that and adapter rings to change my paul c buff softboxes to bowen mount. Though I may not be able to wait longer and might pick up the pixapro for now as I have a job where this light would be nice to have and that plus a softbox would be lighter than the Lowel Caselite 4 bank (Can't wait to sell that and make room in my limited trunk space).
 
Bern Caughey said:
"A high CRI tungsten-balanced LED that won't break the bank"
by Phil Rhodes

http://www.redsharknews.com/product...ngsten-balanced-led-that-won-t-break-the-bank
Click to expand...

Thanks to the reviewer for the work this took and for putting it out there - so THANK YOU!

That said, the #1 concern question one has about a LED light is - you know, light. I mean, that's the whole purpose of the device: light output. Which can be broken down into two categories (1) brightness (2) color. The issue of color is addressed somewhat, but rarely is the issue of brightness done satisfactorily in most reviews, here including. Yet it's a fundamental question - to be addressed before any other. A single measurement "3640 lux @1m & 90°" is really completely inadequate. From the text:

"At one metre and with the supplied Bowens-mounting reflector (of which more below), the unit outputs a peak of around 3640 lux into a beam perhaps 90 degrees wide. Some sources have claimed that the COB-120t is equivalent to 1500W tungsten, which is dubious given the rule of thumb that an LED is perhaps four or, at best, five times more efficient than tungsten. Nonetheless, it's certainly reasonably bright for a tungsten-balanced LED, which is generally less powerful, due to the need to convert more of the LED's blue light to red to reduce the colour temperature."

That's it. Sum total. First, was this actually measured by the reviewer, or is this cribbed from the spec sheet? If it was measured, how was this done? We're given this info for the color, but not for the brightness output. It would be nice to know what the drop off is at various distances, which would allow us to judge how hard this light is, for one. Instead of calibrated measurements, we have eyeballing statements to the effect "reasonably bright" and speculation "some sources claim". I don't know about anybody else, but when I buy a light, I like to know about the light first and foremost, and then about all the other stuff. Most people don't have access to equipment for careful measurement, which is why these questions are the ones which are most important to address in a review - because all the other stuff anybody can find out on their own (build quality, battery etc.) with minimal effort - that's the value of a review: the info that's harder to come by, rather than the stuff anybody can get anyhow.

Btw. in case it isn't clear - this is not a criticism of the reviewer, whom I thank for doing all that work - it's more of a call for reviewers in general to please measure the light output of LED lights in particular, as that's a most pressing question in the minds of prospective buyers.
 
Last edited:
OldCorpse said:
...it's more of a call for reviewers in general to please measure the light output of LED lights in particular, as that's a most pressing question in the minds of prospective buyers.
Click to expand...

I agree, especially with things like LEDs that don't function like a familiar fresnel or Par.

If someone can't do a standard chart like Arri and so on, grab an incident meter, and tell us "ISO 400, 1/60th: F8 @ 24", F2.8 @ 5 feet". I can turn on one of my lights and grab my meter and get a pretty quick idea.
 
If it was measured, how was this done?
Click to expand...


With a Sekonic C-700R and a stick a metre long. Given common knowledge of the inverse square law, that actually is enough information to get a broad idea of what it does.

The reason I don't do more than that is that it becomes a task of almost unbounded complexity. The light in question, being essentially an open-faced type, has a fairly straightforward and highly symmetrical radiation pattern, but even that's quite significantly different to the output of a fresnel or a multi-emitter LED flat panel. The only way to characterise all of that is either narratively, or by producing a complete radiation pattern plot which would quite often have to be at least two-dimensional, which would require more facilities and time than can practically be dedicated to the task.
"ISO 400, 1/60th: F8 @ 24", F2.8 @ 5 feet"
Click to expand...


3640 lux is somewhere between EV 10 and 11 at ISO 100, let's assume 10 for the sake of argument. In your terms let's say ISO 400, 1/60: F8 @ 1m. The reason for stating it in lux is that it's then an absolute measurement independent of ISO.

(Conversion to inches and footcandles is left as an exercise for the reader)

P
 
I agree with Phil that such measurements are in part only necessary as an absolute. Some math is all that is required to extrapolate how the light performs.

That said, many people don't fully understand that math and even if they do, a simple chart with a few measurements of brightness v. coverage at fixed distances is useful and a nice shorthand reference. That is how manufacturers like Lowel, Mole-Richardson, ARRI and others have been doing it for years.

It's not a big criticism and I don't want to call out Phil on his efforts, but I would suggest that for the future it would be helpful to include a few measures.

I also completely agree that LUX or foot-candles are the way to go. These are absolutes, and the way light levels should be measured (include footlamberts if we're talking about reflectivity). I'm sorry if you don't know how to translate that into T-stops, ISO, etc. You really should learn.
 
A bit of a thread-revival here... but OldCorpse just encapsulated my thoughts after a couple frustrating days of google searching for any real info or validating YouTube videos.

What is up with the BS-Factor on lighting? Why are we still at the point where manufacturers make these performance claims? I'm looking at 6" LED fresnels, and all the one-sheets do all their comparing to 650w equivalent, but with a very basic search I can have both sets of photometrics right in front of me... and all these lights that are stated as 650w tungsten equivalent, are actually about a 400w equivalent... basically, you can use the Arri photometrics calculator, and pull up an Arri 300w... match up the distance or beam diameter (they need a slider for beam diameter also, but that is fixed as spot, middle, or flood)... and you can clearly see these lights aren't even close to their claims. Why push it on the fresnels, or THIS light? Why not just say this is a 650w equivalent instead of a 1.5K?

http://www.aputure.com/en/LS-C120t/specification.html Put this up in one window... then pull up this in the other one: http://calc.arri.de/calculator

Okay... an Arrilite 750 plus... with a 375w bulb... at 2m is making almost TWICE the light. I can't wait to see the performance numbers for the COB120t WITH the fresnel lens... (and then switch the Arri calculator over to match).

Basically... I'm back where I was with microphones 12 years ago... it's so frustrating how it seems that nobody is putting out valuable information and real-world comparisons. I'm with OC above... the first thing I want to see about a light... is horsepower... and not by itself, I want to see it next to the light the manufacturer claims it's going to replace... otherwise, manufacturers please... just make realistic claims about performance.

I've got some stuff on order... and when it finally ships... you bet I'll do a shoot-out, but I'm already sure my 650w equivalent LED fresnels will likely land just above my Arri 300w.
 
All good points Matt.

I'd appreciate more transparency as well. Companies shouldn't be rewarded with more sales through misleading advertising. Inversely, companies shouldn't be punished for displaying their product's information in an honest way.

I know you're speaking about how bright lights are, with the obvious other spec that needs refining being colour. An official standard (CRI, TLCI, or whatever) hasn't matured and therefore been globally accepted yet.

I'm fairly new to reading photometrics etc. but it seems like the best test for LEDs today is waiting for trusted users to do their own reviews.

I hate the blanket 50,000 hours claim nearly every LED light throws out there. Does this mean they just have to barely turn on 50,000 hours later? There should be a number in hours at full brightness.

Is it safe to say when a new light claims to be ___w HMI equivalent it's a Fresnel? Otherwise they'd be advertising it as a ____w equivalent HMI PAR right?
 
Rob... That's one of the things about life in general that discourages me. If one company tells the truth, and shows a lower spec... it would probably help the competition that's fudging the numbers. STILL... this has to start somewhere. I feel like we had a bit of a revolution with audio back in the day... and I'm annoyed at the universal BS on lighting right now. But the great thing about lighting is at least with power, it's not subjective.

I'm fairly happy with TLCI as an evolution of CRI... although I'm not that obsessed with the color, as I think there is room for opinions. A Kino 400 in tungsten has HORRIBLE TLCI, but I've seen so many great looking shots using a Diva... (it's pink, even to the naked eye)... and a lot of the "look how great the color is on this led" shots... still have a slightly fake (cheap) look to me. Whatever... I can live with that, as I only shoot as a hobby... and occasionally rent lights to out of town clients who hire me for audio.

The blanket 50K hour claim? Yeah... there's a spec that nobody talks about... and most people have likely never heard about... it's initial lumens. The output specs manufacturers give are based on initial lumens. Back when I first got obsessed with LEDs... about 9 years ago, I became friends with a brilliant guy who used to sell lights directly... remember Vidled? Well... we talked about this quite a bit. Everyone talks about LEDs running cool, but no... at the point of light, that diode is hot... really hot. That's why you see big heat-sinks and now, fans, on these lights. It's a battle against heat... because yes, as you just alluded to... 50K hours isn't that awesome of a number if the LED is HALF as bright at 8K hours. Back in 2007... the brightest LEDs then would lose around 20% of their brightness in the FIRST YEAR of use! See those old original Litepanels people are selling? Yeah... I'd never buy one. An Astra rated at 2x brighter is probably at least 3x brighter than the actual old panel.

To address your last question, any light claims comparing to HMI... are nuts IMO... I don't know why any company wants to go down that road. Your light better be freakin' amazing to make claims to HMI. I'm sure they will be, but so far the only LED lights I've worked with, that actually compare to HMI... are Aadyntech JAB lights. The Hurricane is supposed to compete with an 800w HMI... and it does very well, although it's slightly below in total output. BTW... the JAB is OVER FIVE GRAND... and if you see one in person, it makes the COB120t look like a complete toy by comparison. Jabs are freakin' SERIOUS lights.

That's not a dig on the COB120t... and any rational person would say, "why are you comparing a $5K light to a $600 light?!"... and my answer is, "Why are you?"

That's what drives me nuts with these 1.5K equivalent claims. Earlier in this thread the statement that LED is roughly 4-5x more efficient than tungsten... that's a good bit of commonsense to keep in mind. Any COB light you're interested in... take a look at the wattage, then figure you're getting 4-5x that in "tungsten equivalent". (at least for now... in October of 2016)

In my above post, linking the Arri calculator... I'm referencing the Arrilite... which is an open face light like the COB120t. The Arrilite has a good reflector enhancing it as a par... probably a better reflector than I've seen on the COB120t... but I don't think any cob-based light can make a lot of use of light reflected back, whereas a tungsten bulb is adding light into the bottom of the reflector as well (emitting light almost 360 vs. 180)... either way, the best horsepower comparison is with the Arrilite... and you can see for yourself, that even with a 375w bulb... the Arrilite is crushing the COB120t on that spec.

So why say it's a 1.5K equivalent? The 4-5x wattage is a good place to start.

I'm hoping that the fresnel attachment punches this up a lot. I'm 100% confident that at a spot setting, it absolutely will... but I'm really curious what it will do at the flood setting. Back when I was first trying to make an LED fresnel (again, around 2008-09)... the lens soaked up light as it shaped it. I was using genuine arri glass for this... and I finally lost interest as the output just wasn't there.

I bought some LED fresnels... and I can't wait to put one side-by-side with an arri 300w. All I can say is I HOPE... the new fresnels totally blow the 300w away, but I'm not kidding myself and expecting them to match an arri 650w... even though that's the claim... because it's not just Aputure doing this... it's almost everybody... and while so many people are clamoring about the "free lunch"... of replacing tungsten (or HMI) with low-priced "equivalents"... I just want to spread the word that no... they are not equivalents. The new lights are awesome yes... I'm buying them. I'll buy the daylight version of THIS one... the COB120d... but let's have a little more truth in advertising. That COB120d... at $700... ain't going to be a 1.5K HMI killer... why even say it's going to be an 800w HMI equivalent? Go look at a JAB Hurricane in person... it will freakin' blow your mind at the power... meanwhile the light head is the size of a watermelon... it's CHOCK FULL of the brightest LEDs... it's $5K... and even they are only comparing their light to an 800w HMI. (so there's one company not fudging numbers).

http://blog.movievision.co.za/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/Winter-Jab.jpg

If the COB120d is even remotely close to a Joker 400... That will be a slam-dunk to anyone who knows lights... and they'll sell a million of 'em. That's what I'm hoping for... a 400w HMI equivalent would be so impressive that I don't know why they have to be ridiculous with 1.5K claims.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top