Aputure Lights

Joshua Milligan

Joshua Milligan

Well-known member
I've been using Westcott Flex 1'x1' Bi-Color LED Panels for several years now, plus a couple of Westcott Ice Light 2's for lighting interviews and small rooms for corporate content. I've put the LED panels in soft boxes with different levels of diffusion and have been able to get pretty decent lighting that way.

Over the past year and a half, I've been going through and upgrading all of my equipment. I purchased all new cameras (FX6, A1, A7SIII), some newer lenses, a new drone, a new gimbal, a new slider, grabbed an Easyrig Minimax and a Basecamp Matte Box with filters, etc. My goal has been to completely overhaul the areas of my gear that I felt were kind of lacking.

Now I want to upgrade my lights. This is the last area I want to upgrade from (I already had great audio gear and support gear), so I want to really do it right. I've always felt that my Westcott lights were great to travel with and that they were "good enough", but I don't want good enough anymore. I want to have exceptional lighting for my clients.

The type of work I do is corporate, commercial, small doc, branding content, and some remote projects for Discovery. The types of clients I work for include eBay, several colleges, a large engineering and mapping firm, plastic surgeons, dentists, insurance agencies, commercial and land real estate companies (on the marketing side), nonprofits, etc. I tell you all of this so that you can get an idea of the type of work I do so that the discussion I want to have has a basis to work off of.

For my new lights, I've been drawn to Aputure. I feel that point source lights make sense for me because they allow for a wide range of flexibility and usually pack a punch in terms of brightness. Aputure makes some great point source lights that are well built, bright, well priced, and that have a lot of options in terms of modifiers.

So far over the past couple of weeks I went ahead and ordered two Aputure LS 300X's and two LS 60X's. My thought was that the 300X's would make for great interview lights being that they are bi-color and that the two LS 60X's would make for great bi-color rim lights/hair lights. I got two of each for times when I'm interviewing two people 60 Minutes style which I do on occasion. I also thought the 300X's with Light Dome II's and/or Lantern modifiers would make for great lights for shooting corporate work in offices, small buildings, etc. In addition, I'm about to order a Spotlight Mini Zoom for one of my 60X's that comes with 15 gobos that I can use for interesting lighting for commercial work or for projects where you're showcasing a product.

In addition to those lights, I also picked up a couple B7c's (the app controlled light bulbs) and a couple of MC's for practicals. I also was tossing around the idea of getting some SGC Prism 60 RGBW 2' tube lights to have on hand for accent or practical lights when shooting corporate projects or the occasional music video I get. The SGC lights, like the practicals and point source lights from Aputure, can be controlled through the Sidus Link app which is super useful.

Now I want to pick out a big light and that's what I wanted to ask opinions on. With the 300X's, 60X's, practical lights and tube lights, I have a lot of areas covered. From interviews to lighting for b-roll in corporate offices, I will have several bi-color or RGBW lights to allow me to match my surrounding if needed and to light and get interesting shots. Where I'm lacking though is a light big enough to fill a large room or to fight the sun, whether that's fighting it indoors with windows or outside directly.

Aputure has three large point source lights: the 600X, 600D, and the upcoming 1200D. All three are pretty bright. For me, I plan to only get one, so I wanted to get input from other users here on DVXuser as to which would pair the best with my kit. This light needs to be bright enough to help me combat the sun as much as is reasonably possible, manageable to use by myself when working alone, and it has to be a good fit for shooting into my 6'x6' scrim with super silks using a book light method, or to bounce off of my 6'x6' unbleached muslin reflector fabric.

The 600X to me makes a lot of sense because it's bi-color which all the rest of my lights now are (some even being RGBW). This would give me full control of every light I own. The 600D on the other hand would give me about 30-40% more output and since I'm needing a bigger light to either light a large space or to fight the sun, the additional output from the 600D also makes sense. The only issue with the 600D is that gelling it seems to be quite the task and appears almost impossible when using a Lantern 90 or Light Dome II / Light Dome 150 modifier. The 1200D is not available yet and looks pretty large, so I'm not sure that's something I would enjoy working with alone.

In a perfect world I would just get a 600X and a 1200D and have a grip or assistant with me at all times to help set them both up when needed, but that seems like overkill for me right now. As such, if you were me, which route would you go to round out this kit?

Thanks for your input!
 
Owning a bunch of Aputure COB fixtures myself, including all of your recent purchases, I would go with the 600d. You will want more firepower than what the X models offer in some situations. None of the bicolor options, including the 600x are truly able to compete with windows, and situations where you don't have windows will generally do fine with the lower output x models (300x, etc). However, when you need the juice, you needs the juice. I'd forego bicolor for at least one fixture.

So, for now, I'd do the 600d. It's available, and will complement what you already have nicely.
 
600d definitely sounds like what you are after given your preference for point source lights. 1200W LED will be even harder to gel.

Personally I would consider a Nova P600c at this level. Brightness is about the same as a 600d with no reflector, so if you are looking to fill a very large frame or bounce off a very large surface / room you won’t lose much output (if any). But gain all of the advantage of being able to colour match ambient light perfectly without gel.

Of course if you need a concentrated beam of light with a narrower beam angle, a panel light will never work for you.
 
Thanks guys. I appreciate the comments. I do think the 600D is probably the right fit for me to round out my kit. At the end of the day the point of the big light is to be able to pump light when I need it and most of those times are going to be either in daylight situations, or in situations where daylight color makes sense. As such, getting a daylight only light shouldn't be a problem and will give me the most power. And for those few times where I would want a different color (simulating morning light for example, or maybe even moonlight), I can gel the barn doors over the fresnel to achieve those looks.
 
I'll toss my hat in the ring with the Orion 300 FS. I know it's more expensive, but it is powerful enough to do much of the work you're considering and at the same time is fully color tunable with an RGBACL color engine that will allow you to get excellent color rendition from 2000-20,000 Kelvin and also let you dial in any specialty color you need. And should you ever need to match an oddly colored sky or some imperfect practical light in a space you can't control, the free app allows you to use your phone's camera as a Color Picker to instantly match whatever color you're faced with.

Moving forward, mono-color lights will be seen as limited as old tungsten photofloods. Consider a tool that will grow with you over time.
 
^Agreed Mitch, The Prolycht option is definitely very versatile. I would have bought 1 or 2 of them if they had a wider native beam angle (and with the same brightness level).

I think it is important to note that while the 600d and Prolycht (both with no reflector) are basically the same brightness - Prolycht is only a 50-60 degree beam (according to gaffer and gear). The aputure light is over 100 degree beam spread by comparison. If you need to bounce into a large frame or create a book light and have the light as even as possible, the aputure is a much better option in my opinion. It is also much more suitable for filling a soft box.

I feel the Prolycht makes the most sense when the primary use is for it to be used as a hardlight… or if you have the space to back it up a little to fill out a large frame (and additionally don’t need maximum output for the dollar in that use case).

A relevant comparison in my own work…. I frequently need to fill an 8x8 or 8x12 muslin bounce for a soft fill. My RGBWW panel lights with 100 degree beam spread let me do it quite easily in a reasonable amount of space. And light level is surprisingly good. My 650w Dedolights measure the same brightness at 3m (measuring both direct) but only have a 56degree beam angle. When you back them up to fill up a large frame evenly.. things get a whole lot dimmer compared to the panel light.
 
Mitch Gross said:
Moving forward, mono-color lights will be seen as limited as old tungsten photofloods. Consider a tool that will grow with you over time.
Click to expand...

As I just lit a few highish-profile jobs with my decades-old Lowel kit and some DeSisti Cosmobeams, I won't take offense :D

Agreed to a point, though... daylight-only lamps are very limiting, and gels on them always look pretty f'n terrible.

UNLESS of course the only thing you're attempting to match when deploying that light is the sun, where some 5600K oomph is really all that's called for.

Prolychts are absolutely dandy, especially for things like live presentations where there's no post-color option... but lights have entered the realm of Moore's Law now, and IMHO unless someone knows they NEED what a good, expensive light has to offer within the next 18 months, it's not worth the expense for inevitable obsolescence. Nothing lasts any more to grow with you over time. Use what you can while you can and toss it on the heaping pile of 'progress' when it no longer meets your needs...

...or keep trudging along with antediluvian tungsten like some of us punters :D
 
If you really just need it for tangling with the sun, I feel like there's a case to be made for the 1200D. Depending on when it's available, of course. I think the fixture is just under 20lbs. Not totally unmanageable
 
mcbob said:
... but lights have entered the realm of Moore's Law now, and IMHO unless someone knows they NEED what a good, expensive light has to offer within the next 18 months, it's not worth the expense for inevitable obsolescence. Nothing lasts any more to grow with you over time. Use what you can while you can and toss it on the heaping pile of 'progress' when it no longer meets your needs...

...or keep trudging along with antediluvian tungsten like some of us punters :D
Click to expand...

I can't say that I quite agree with that statement just for the simple fact that while light fixtures may change, light itself does not. So if you bought a nice light today that's pretty color accurate, whether that's an RGB light, bi-color light or daylight balanced light, it's still going to look nice 15 years from now. Well, unless of course the color or quality deteriorates by then, but that's more of a build quality discussion than a light becoming obsolete discussion.
 
ahalpert said:
If you really just need it for tangling with the sun, I feel like there's a case to be made for the 1200D. Depending on when it's available, of course. I think the fixture is just under 20lbs. Not totally unmanageable
Click to expand...

What's up ahalpert? I did consider the 1200D, especially since I was looking for a single bright light to round out my kit, but the 20 pound fixture is kind of where I became hesitant. You're right that 20 pounds isn't totally unmanageable when you're talking about the light. But to me it's everything that comes with a 20 pound light that makes me not want to go there. A 20 pound fixture plus the pretty hefty ballast it comes with means a bigger and heavier stand, bigger or at least additional sandbags, a bigger and heavier boom if you're wanting to do anything like that, etc. It's not the extra 10 pounds of the 1200D over the 600D that's the problem. It's all that comes with it that is.

If I was working with a crew all the time I wouldn't worry about it. But since I work by myself a lot, or just me plus an assistant, then that becomes something I have to consider.
 
Joshua Milligan said:
I can't say that I quite agree with that statement just for the simple fact that while light fixtures may change, light itself does not. So if you bought a nice light today that's pretty color accurate, whether that's an RGB light, bi-color light or daylight balanced light, it's still going to look nice 15 years from now. Well, unless of course the color or quality deteriorates by then, but that's more of a build quality discussion than a light becoming obsolete discussion.
Click to expand...

Agreed in part. The light doesn't change, but the client expectations certainly do. My tungsten still gives off better quality light than any of my LED fixtures, but some clients turn up their nose at the wattage and heat... or want to run on batteries... or want color variability... or want to be able to control intensity and color on them all from a single location... as computational capabilities increase, older fixtures of most any kind will inevitably seem "limited" with increasing frequency. A camera op on a recent shoot commented on my "old school" Astra 6x's. They don't even have bluetooth control. Thought he was going to have a GenY vac-stroke when I pulled out the Ushio-relamped Diva400 as a room fill. All my fixtures make good quality light with excellent modifiers to shape them, but all it takes is one key producer who's watched one too many YouTube reviews....

Whatever. It's yet another permutation of "keeping up with the Joneses" to mire us in eternal consumerism.
 
Joshua Milligan said:
What's up ahalpert? I did consider the 1200D, especially since I was looking for a single bright light to round out my kit, but the 20 pound fixture is kind of where I became hesitant. You're right that 20 pounds isn't totally unmanageable when you're talking about the light. But to me it's everything that comes with a 20 pound light that makes me not want to go there. A 20 pound fixture plus the pretty hefty ballast it comes with means a bigger and heavier stand, bigger or at least additional sandbags, a bigger and heavier boom if you're wanting to do anything like that, etc. It's not the extra 10 pounds of the 1200D over the 600D that's the problem. It's all that comes with it that is.

If I was working with a crew all the time I wouldn't worry about it. But since I work by myself a lot, or just me plus an assistant, then that becomes something I have to consider.
Click to expand...

Right, you're trading one type of flexibility for another. You lose the flexibility of lighter weight and easier to deploy. But you gain some flexibility of maximum output for additional diffusion or covering a wider area or throwing a greater distance.

I guess my feeling is that an extra stop or 2 of output isn't an earth-shattering difference when you want to do any of the aforementioned. (Nothing stings more than pulling diffusion just to increase output.) So I'd take the extra power

but you really need to think through the challenges of supporting the beefier unit and make sure it won't end up staying on the truck or at home because it's a PITA.

I think Eric Coughlin (before he was banned for a year) mentioned that he often gangs 2 600D's together through a silk. If you end up doing that, I'm not sure you're super worse off dealing with 1 heavier stand for 1200D vs 2 stands and same or more sandbags, etc

of course, the 1200D is pricier. There's an argument for getting the 600D now and reconsidering a 1200D purchase later down the road once you know for sure if you often need more power. And maybe you'll have a gaffer on hand more often by then! (Wouldn't we all like that)

Ps my name is Abe Halpert. Sure wish I had just made that my username instead of ahalpert
 
mcbob said:
Thought he was going to have a GenY vac-stroke when I pulled out the Ushio-relamped Diva400 as a room fill.
Click to expand...

I spit out my coffee when I read that haha. That’s one of my favorite DVXuser quotes yet.

I think the difference is our clientele. Virtually none of my clients know anything about video. None of them would know an RGB light from a lamp haha. So for them as long as it looks good, it looks good.
 
Chaps Im really just throwing in a concept.

I have the 24in and it works with a 4.4 bit of diffusion or bounced off something.

A cstand is strong enough to hold the splitter and two lights im sure .. ive used it since the days of four redheads

Overall if the lights were free to take.. Id have a 1200 no doubt.

It seemed that the 600 worked as a ratio of price size and mass for my setup.

Im not too confident putting too much cash into apture as they are still a new brand, dont have easy service, and might die.. being stuck with a non servicable 600 is as deep as Id like to go right now.

My previous $1500 200w lupos have basically been superceded making a loss of maybe $1200 in three years.. when we have a $250 2000w led the damage will be done to the value of this generation of fixtures.
 
ahalpert said:
But if you put 2 600D's on one stand,, then won't you need the same stand and sandbags you'd need for a 1200D? And have possibly a trickier time booming it?
Click to expand...

To continue.. there really isnt a right answer.. ive been shooting in a cooking school 10m by 5m room and bouncing two lights off the ceiing allowed more spread.

Emulating the sun popping through a window a single source is clearly better (or booming of course!)

So on wednesday two 600s are better and then on thursday you want a single 1200.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top