CLAR 500 vs Nanlight 500 - Initial Impressions

[Eric Coughlin]

So I just had these two lights arrive and my initial impressions...

To my eye, since I haven't put it into camera yet or put any light meters to it...Nanlight feels about 40% brighter. Colors look whiter in a good way, while CLAR has a bit of green to the light.

Downside of the Nanlight, the fan is on the noisy side. I feel like it could be problematic in a quiet interview space, not a problem in a noisier space. If you turn the fan off, it goes down to 50% (or less?) brightness, which then makes it less bright than the CLAR 500 which at 100%, the fan is perhaps one third as noisy, so not really noisy enough to be concerned about.

Nanlight, the head is shorter, while the ballast is longer, and the CLAR the opposite, longer head, shorter ballast.

I also got a CLAR 350. It comes in the same exact case as the CLAR 500, so in terms of case size, you aren't saving any room, just money. The head and ballast are a bit smaller than the 500, so assuming you're using the CLAR case, you could theoretically fit more stuff in the CLAR 350 case due to the smaller head and ballast.

The CLAR cases are about three inches smaller in width than the Nanlight, so a bit smaller. Height and depth are about the same.

I don't see a way to mount the CLAR ballast to a stand while you can do that with the Nanlight as it comes with a bracket for that which is a nice feature.

The Nanlight has been on sale and with my B&H corporate discount, I got it for about $1,000, while the two CLAR 500s I got for $700 each, and the CLAR 350 for $450.

Maybe I'll compare them in brightness to the Gemini 2 x 1 later. I'm hoping to not have to lug around the two to three times as large Gemini as often if these lights can replace it. Will see.

That's all for now.

 

[Eric Coughlin]

 

[Guest]

you may have an older model ballast for the nanlite. maybe talk to Nanlite and perhaps they can swap it out for you if that is the case. they are east coast, so should be quick turn around.

i can still hear the ballast, but not enough to be picked up by a boom mic, unless the ballast is right next to talent (which wouldn’t happen, but is the best reference i can thinknof to describe the volume)

 

[Run&Gun]

you may have an older model ballast for the nanlite. maybe talk to Nanlite and perhaps they can swap it out for you if that is the case. they are east coast, so should be quick turn around.

i can still hear the ballast, but not enough to be picked up by a boom mic, unless the ballast is right next to talent (which wouldn’t happen, but is the best reference i can thinknof to describe the volume)

Yeah, lights as powerful as the CLAR and Forza generally aren't going to be in close proximity to talent/mics, BUT the Forza fans are pretty loud in that video and could be a problem indoors.

 

[Eric Coughlin]

Yeah, the Forzra fans are unusably loud for interviews. I'm going to see about a replacement or return for the Fozra. It seems nice aside from the fan noise, and since others have said the fan noise on theirs isn't so bad, perhaps a replacement will solve the issue. It'd also be nice to keep the Nanlight as I can see adding a Nanlux 1200 when it becomes available, and $1k is a pretty good price for a light of this power.

I think I'll see if I can return the CLARs as well. The colors seem a bit off, less than 5600k, and not as bright as the Nanlight. The producer on a recent shoot barely tapped the CLAR 500 with his foot and it immediately turned off and stopped working for a minute or two. I tried turning it on and off and nothing was working. Was thinking to go to the car to get my 2 x 1 Gemini but then the CLAR started working again. It is kind of plasticy. Overall it worked decently on the shoot and was a nice change from using the Gemini particularly since this shoot was in a high rise and we just barely got all the gear in in one trip, while a Gemini would have meant a second trip, but I felt the CLAR has some limitations.

Though the CLAR was $700, so $300 cheaper than the Nanlight, since it's about 30% less bright, despite the same wattage, the price per lumen is about the same between the two, so I'd take the brighter light with the better colors if the fan noise can be fixed.

My Aputure 600Ds are still on backorder.

I just bought a Prolycht Orion 300 today. Will see how it is when it arrives. RGB. Yum.

Might bite the bullet and get a Hive 575. I wants.

Hive at 550w, Prolycht at 300w, and got the two Geminis (2 x 1 & 1 x 1) and Luxli Timpani, Viola, and Cello - a healthy assortment of RGB lights. Then get the Nanlux 1200w as an M18 style light, and I'll be feeling pretty good about my lighting kit.

I'm always skeptical about these daylight only lights as it's not that uncommon I want to shoot at 3200k or 4300k.

 

[Guest]

Yeah, the Forzra fans are unusably loud for interviews. I'm going to see about a replacement or return for the Fozra. It seems nice aside from the fan noise, and since others have said the fan noise on theirs isn't so bad, perhaps a replacement will solve the issue. It'd also be nice to keep the Nanlight as I can see adding a Nanlux 1200 when it becomes available, and $1k is a pretty good price for a light of this power.

I think I'll see if I can return the CLARs as well. The colors seem a bit off, less than 5600k, and not as bright as the Nanlight. The producer on a recent shoot barely tapped the CLAR 500 with his foot and it immediately turned off and stopped working for a minute or two. I tried turning it on and off and nothing was working. Was thinking to go to the car to get my 2 x 1 Gemini but then the CLAR started working again. It is kind of plasticy. Overall it worked decently on the shoot and was a nice change from using the Gemini particularly since this shoot was in a high rise and we just barely got all the gear in in one trip, while a Gemini would have meant a second trip, but I felt the CLAR has some limitations.

Though the CLAR was $700, so $300 cheaper than the Nanlight, since it's about 30% less bright, despite the same wattage, the price per lumen is about the same between the two, so I'd take the brighter light with the better colors if the fan noise can be fixed.

My Aputure 600Ds are still on backorder.

I just bought a Prolycht Orion 300 today. Will see how it is when it arrives. RGB. Yum.

Might bite the bullet and get a Hive 575. I wants.

Hive at 550w, Prolycht at 300w, and got the two Geminis (2 x 1 & 1 x 1) and Luxli Timpani, Viola, and Cello - a healthy assortment of RGB lights. Then get the Nanlux 1200w as an M18 style light, and I'll be feeling pretty good about my lighting kit.

I'm always skeptical about these daylight only lights as it's not that uncommon I want to shoot at 3200k or 4300k.

the Forza 500 runs cool enough to put smaller 12”x12” gel cuts just a foot in front of the COB behind any diffusion. sonitnis pretty easy and affordable to change colours. sadly everyone is beginning to expect everything to be clean and on an ipad app. so, i understand the desire for bi-colour and rgb only. but i feel colours can get real subtle, and i have 1/8 and 1/4 strength gel variants with the lights anyway, so i just quickly attach a gel before going full up with a softbox or anything.

definitely get nanlite to replace your ballast. i got one that was insanely loud, and then the replacement has been good. i can just barely hear it in a quiet room, and it is a mechanical hum, so very easy to remove if for whatever reason it is needed. but i’d assum the mic proximity to the speaker would be enough to drown it out.

 

[Eric Coughlin]

I know RGB lights often lose a considerable amount of brightness when using different RGB colors, but I feel like gels cut down on brightness even more. But I don't know. Never done tests, so makes me wonder.

Gels are a pain, especially demoing a large number of colors, which you can do with an RGB light in seconds.

I was reading on Newsshooter that the Aputure 600D came in at twice the lux of the Nanlight at the same 45 degree beam angle. It's 720w vs 500w, so about 1.5 times the wattage, but perhaps it's more efficient as well.

Hive has a Zoom Focusing Reflector reflector which has a 35 to 100 degree beam angle. Can also attach barn downs and grids to it which is cool. Most of these monolights come with a reflector that has a 45 degree angle. I believe Profoto also has a Zoom focusing reflector, and imagine these could be put on any of these Bowens mount monolights. Is there a downside to a zoom reflector vs the 45 degree reflector?

A lot of people seem to really like the idea of using a Fresnel with these lights. For me it's mostly to use them as a key light filling up an 8 x 8 or perhaps a 12 x 12 if I get one, and for that, a beam angle wider than 45 degrees such as the approx 110 degrees of my Gemini makes filling up a surface area easier since the light doesn't need to be a far away from the diffusion. So, the 35 to 100 degree zoom reflector would seem like a good way to go.

 

[Grug]

I was reading on Newsshooter that the Aputure 600D came in at twice the lux of the Nanlight at the same 45 degree beam angle. It's 720w vs 500w, so about 1.5 times the wattage, but perhaps it's more efficient as well.

The reflector on the Aputure 600D has an intense central hot spot, so the beam is much less even than the Nanlite's with the reflector on. The actual raw output from both COBs is very close.

A lot of people seem to really like the idea of using a Fresnel with these lights. For me it's mostly to use them as a key light filling up an 8 x 8 or perhaps a 12 x 12 if I get one, and for that, a beam angle wider than 45 degrees such as the approx 110 degrees of my Gemini makes filling up a surface area easier since the light doesn't need to be a far away from the diffusion. So, the 35 to 100 degree zoom reflector would seem like a good way to go.

No need for a reflector when using COBs to fill a frame, just use the raw COB and you get a nice, wide 120 degree (or something like that) beam.

That's one of the features that makes them so versatile to my mind. You have so much more control of the beam spread.

 

[Guest]

The reflector on the Aputure 600D has an intense central hot spot, so the beam is much less even than the Nanlite's with the reflector on. The actual raw output from both COBs is very close.



No need for a reflector when using COBs to fill a frame, just use the raw COB and you get a nice, wide 120 degree (or something like that) beam.

That's one of the features that makes them so versatile to my mind. You have so much more control of the beam spread.

I believe Nanlite rates their COB's by what the light pulls, so the Forza 500 pulls 500w on battery power, but closer to 600w with the ballast plugged in to AC.


Does the Aputure rate their power draw similarly? Or do they go including the ballast?

 

[Grug]

I believe Nanlite rates their COB's by what the light pulls, so the Forza 500 pulls 500w on battery power, but closer to 600w with the ballast plugged in to AC.


Does the Aputure rate their power draw similarly? Or do they go including the ballast?

No idea, though we have got away with running two Forza 500s and a 1200w HMI on a single 10amp 240v circuit.

 

[Guest]

No idea, though we have got away with running two Forza 500s and a 1200w HMI on a single 10amp 240v circuit.

That is wild. haha. glad to hear it though

 

[Run&Gun]

The reflector on the Aputure 600D has an intense central hot spot, so the beam is much less even than the Nanlite's with the reflector on. The actual raw output from both COBs is very close.



No need for a reflector when using COBs to fill a frame, just use the raw COB and you get a nice, wide 120 degree (or something like that) beam.

That's one of the features that makes them so versatile to my mind. You have so much more control of the beam spread.

Read that in Matt’s review, as well. And that kind of worries me. The manufacturers are getting into a “spec war” and sacrificing the actual “performance”. Yeah, the lights technically produce a bajillion fc, but it’s in a 1/4” central spot in the middle of the beam and then falls off to nothing within an inch. Instead of giving us a beam that is even from middle to edge that may be slightly “less powerful”.

 

[Guest]

Read that in Matt’s review, as well. And that kind of worries me. The manufacturers are getting into a “spec war” and sacrificing the actual “performance”. Yeah, the lights technically produce a bajillion fc, but it’s in a 1/4” central spot in the middle of the beam and then falls off to nothing within an inch. Instead of giving us a beam that is even from middle to edge that may be slightly “less powerful”.

that is the standard reflector, but the Fresnel attachment does some wonders.

i do quite like the Arri Orbiter reflectors, as they are more about quality of light, than just output. And the Forza default reflector is a noce blend of even spread and high output.

 

[Grug]

Read that in Matt’s review, as well. And that kind of worries me. The manufacturers are getting into a “spec war” and sacrificing the actual “performance”. Yeah, the lights technically produce a bajillion fc, but it’s in a 1/4” central spot in the middle of the beam and then falls off to nothing within an inch. Instead of giving us a beam that is even from middle to edge that may be slightly “less powerful”.

I think it means the same thing it's always meant - always take manufacturers' claims with a grain of salt. And if something sounds too good to be true, it almost certainly is.

In practical terms, you can simply swap out Aputure's hot spotty reflector for a more even one like the Nanlite for a whopping total cost of about $20.

This kind of behaviour is really frustrating, especially when manufacturers seem to be listening and responding thoughtfully to customer requests otherwise. But it happens - everyone's trying to sell you stuff. Just be aware of their motivations and always try to consider the things you hear objectively.

 

[morgan_moore]

Read that in Matt’s review, as well. And that kind of worries me. The manufacturers are getting into a “spec war” and sacrificing the actual “performance”. Yeah, the lights technically produce a bajillion fc, but it’s in a 1/4” central spot in the middle of the beam and then falls off to nothing within an inch. Instead of giving us a beam that is even from middle to edge that may be slightly “less powerful”.

I have mailed 'Meet The Gaffer' Luke Servelt 100 times sugesting that he (having more influence than me) tries to implement a 'double reading' methodology. Simples. Put the light meter at three points.

1m right of the centre, the centre 1m left of the centre of the tested area .. taking the outside measurements would create a poor reading for the lights that have a sill spot that make the sucker blogger/testers so happy.

Taking a 2m wide target works for all light sources be that a 5 degree spot moved back to cover the target or a 'kino' a foot or two from the target

It is the great leveller in terms of finding the 'true' luminance of a light.

If a light is too spotty it is problematic as you have to have it further back from any diff or bouce wall. All it does is increase lighting footprint on your stage/location