Introducing the Prolycht Orion 300 FS

[Mitch Gross]

I prefer to have a hard light with a more directional beam angle vs a hard light without any directionality. I am looking forward to my focal spot and fresnel shipping when they become available.

What I feel is currently missing from RGB LED systems is something similar to a Joker/Bug. A system that can act as both a hard source by adding a reflector while also having the option to have a broad beam spread for a softbox. The flat, disk shape of the COB and heat transfer requirements may make this entirely impossible. Also, a panel light is just far more efficient as a soft source even with a softbox attached. I just appreciate how small these COB fixtures are and wish I could replace my mixture of heavy panels and HMI's with a bunch of COB lights, reflectors, and softboxes.

Both the focal spot and the fresnel should be bak in stock very soon (days). We had a huge demand and sold out a little faster than expected, but our supply chain is solid and we'll have full inventory on everything very quickly.

So are you asking for a basic single element lens that would go in front of the COB to spread the beam more? Would you want to use it on its own or in conjunction with our soft dome or lantern? I ask because we mount accessories using the common Bowens mount, and currently everything we make (dome, lantern, reflector, fresnel, focal spot) uses this. So if you wanted two items such as a "beam-spreading lens" as well as a diffuser then we'd need to come up with a proper way to rig this. If it was just used on its own then it makes designing something a lot simpler for the lens. For instance I could see it clipping to the front of the reflector we include with the Orion 300 FS. Since the 4-way barndoors we include with the fresnel kit also fit on the Orion 300 FS reflector we would try to make the lens not interfere with this. But that just means putting diffusion on the barndoors or punching into a frame, not using a softbox.

So how would you realistically want to use such a lens?

 

[cpreston]

Both the focal spot and the fresnel should be bak in stock very soon (days). We had a huge demand and sold out a little faster than expected, but our supply chain is solid and we'll have full inventory on everything very quickly.

So are you asking for a basic single element lens that would go in front of the COB to spread the beam more? Would you want to use it on its own or in conjunction with our soft dome or lantern? I ask because we mount accessories using the common Bowens mount, and currently everything we make (dome, lantern, reflector, fresnel, focal spot) uses this. So if you wanted two items such as a "beam-spreading lens" as well as a diffuser then we'd need to come up with a proper way to rig this. If it was just used on its own then it makes designing something a lot simpler for the lens. For instance I could see it clipping to the front of the reflector we include with the Orion 300 FS. Since the 4-way barndoors we include with the fresnel kit also fit on the Orion 300 FS reflector we would try to make the lens not interfere with this. But that just means putting diffusion on the barndoors or punching into a frame, not using a softbox.

So how would you realistically want to use such a lens?

Thank you for all of the response. I doubt my style of shooting is the most common, so I'm not sure how relevant my wishes are. Also, I am still trying to figure out the limitations of the COB technology in order to temper my expectations.

I have accumulated a full range of Chimera softoboxes in both the Quartz size and the video size. I like using speed rings and softboxes and grids vs book lights, flags, and multiple layers of diffusion. This is mostly because I'm often shooting in offices with limited space and difficult load in. An RGB light that could replace a Joker/Bug that would allow a bug light for softboxes, reflectors for bounces, and lekos for spots would be wonderful. I know that is impossible just due to the physical limitations of having a disk emitter with multiple colors that need to be diffused. I would also like powerful fresnel replacement with clean barn door cuts, but that also appears to be impossible due to the size of the emitter.

All that being said, the add on I would like is a bowens mount wide angle lens attached to a speed ring that would allow the 300fs to operate like an open face light and fill a standard video chimera. I could also see the lens being a different product from the speed ring so that 300fs works better as a compact book light.

I just watched a video of DOP Choices options for the Orbitter. In order to get softboxes to work, they had to make their own wide angle lens and half dome diffuser very close to the lens in order get an even soft box. Their octabox setup costs $2000 and I doubt it is very efficient compared to the S60 softbox. I think I need to just be happy that I now have an affordable RBG spot light rather than wishing it could do something that is better accomplished with a panel.

 

[Mitch Gross]

Sometimes it's just not practical to try to make one light do everything. I seriously wonder what the photometrics are for that octabox setup on an Orbiter. For reference, here's how the photometrics of an Orion 300 FS compare to an Arri Orbiter, which is about 3.5 times the price:

(Both lights at 5600K and measured at 3-meters. Measurements from manufacturer's websites.)

Orion 300 FS with 55-degree reflector: 3,276 lux
Oribiter with 60-degree reflector lens: 2,333 lux

 

[Eric Coughlin]

If I read that correctly, are you saying the 300w Orion is brighter (in general) than the 400w (plus 100w for the computer) Orbiter?

I ordered the Orion FS on B&H a few days ago. Appears to be on back order. I ordered the Fresnel attachment as well.

Got the Hive 575 replacement and still not thrilled with it. Fan is still on the noisy side and some of the previously mentioned issues are still present. Planning to return it.

I am happy with the Hive 200-C with mini source four projection. Much smaller and lighter than the Orion with the versatility of RGB and projection use. Less bright than the Orion so the Orion definitely has its place as a brighter RGB light. I may get a second Hive 200-C. The Hive 100-C I'm also returning because it's practically the same size and weight as the 200-C but is half as bright, so the only real advantage it has is it's half the cost, so I don't want to waste $1k on a half as bright light when I can get a $2k light that's twice as bright and negligibly larger and heavier.

Changing from projection attachment to Fresnel or reflector attachment on the Hive is a bit finicky and requires some screwing around with the projection attachment, while the Bowens mount is much easier to switch on the Orion. The Orion projection attachment is also around five or so times the size of the Hive projection. The Hive Projection gets quite hot and then requires gloves to adjust while the Orion seems to have good heat dispersion and ergonomics such that you don't need gloves to operate it. Hive also has different lens options for the projection so you can change the beam angle of the projection, while I believe the Orion only offers one option for lensing which can be more limiting. I'd like to see more lensing options for the Orion that ideally do not require additional full size Bowens projector attachments as having three of those would get bulky. The projection attachments on the Hives also have lots of fringing (somewhat noticeable in the image below, the yellow line on top and bottom) while the Orion projection has zero fringing.

Also considering getting a Dedo DLED7 or 9 Turbo bi-color. Anyone have experience with those? Would be nice to have an LED light with a good barn door cut that doesn’t require fiddling with a projection attachment to do so. The barn door cut on the Hive Frensnels are practically useless. The DLED9 Turbo can get costly quickly; $2200 head, $800 ballast, add some accessories and a projection, and you can easily be at $5k...for a 90w light. What?! I guess if you skip the accessories $3k isn't too terrible and I believe the ellipsoidal lens is more efficient than a regular Fresnel but I'm not sure about that, plus you get the ability to have a 5 degree beam angle which can be useful.

Been quite happy with the original version of the Orion.


Projection slash with the Hive 200-C. I had the Orion setup to put a blurred and dimmed Venetian pattern on the blank wall background behind her right side but the remote series DP didn't like that so we turned it off.

 

[Mitch Gross]

If I read that correctly, are you saying the 300w Orion is brighter (in general) than the 400w (plus 100w for the computer) Orbiter?

I ordered the Orion FS on B&H a few days ago. Appears to be on back order. I ordered the Fresnel attachment as well.

Got the Hive 575 replacement and still not thrilled with it. Fan is still on the noisy side and some of the previously mentioned issues are still present. Planning to return it.

I am happy with the Hive 200-C with mini source four projection. Much smaller and lighter than the Orion with the versatility of RGB and projection use. Less bright than the Orion so the Orion definitely has its place as a brighter RGB light. I may get a second Hive 200-C. The Hive 100-C I'm also returning because it's practically the same size and weight as the 200-C but is half as bright, so the only real advantage it has is it's half the cost, so I don't want to waste $1k on a half as bright light when I can get a $2k light that's twice as bright and negligibly larger and heavier.

Changing from projection attachment to Fresnel or reflector attachment on the Hive is a bit finicky and requires some screwing around with the projection attachment, while the Bowens mount is much easier to switch on the Orion. The Orion projection attachment is also around five or so times the size of the Hive projection. The Hive Projection gets quite hot and then requires gloves to adjust while the Orion seems to have good heat dispersion and ergonomics such that you don't need gloves to operate it. Hive also has different lens options for the projection so you can change the beam angle of the projection, while I believe the Orion only offers one option for lensing which can be more limiting. I'd like to see more lensing options for the Orion that ideally do not require additional full size Bowens projector attachments as having three of those would get bulky. The projection attachments on the Hives also have lots of fringing (somewhat noticeable in the image below, the yellow line on top and bottom) while the Orion projection has zero fringing.

Also considering getting a Dedo DLED7 or 9 Turbo bi-color. Anyone have experience with those? Would be nice to have an LED light with a good barn door cut that doesn’t require fiddling with a projection attachment to do so. The barn door cut on the Hive Frensnels are practically useless. The DLED9 Turbo can get costly quickly; $2200 head, $800 ballast, add some accessories and a projection, and you can easily be at $5k...for a 90w light. What?! I guess if you skip the accessories $3k isn't too terrible and I believe the ellipsoidal lens is more efficient than a regular Fresnel but I'm not sure about that, plus you get the ability to have a 5 degree beam angle which can be useful.

Been quite happy with the original version of the Orion.


Projection slash with the Hive 200-C. I had the Orion setup to put a blurred and dimmed Venetian pattern on the blank wall background behind her right side but the remote series DP didn't like that so we turned it off.

Yes, at 3-meters and with similar beam angle reflectors in place (55-degree v 60-degree) the Orion 300 FS is considerably brighter than the Orbiter, nearly 50% brighter.
The Hive 575-C is nearly twice the wattage (and three times the price) of the Orion 300 FS, yet the two lights have similar output. The Orion 300 FS at 3-meters, 55-degree reflector, 5600K is again 3276 lux. The Hive 575-C has available a par reflector that's a bit tighter beam at 40-degrees which should mean more brightness as the light is more concentrated, but it's only a bit brighter at 3767 lux. The Hive 200-C under the same parameters is 1507 lux, less than half the output of the Orion 300 FS at a similar price.

Our focal spot projection lens is definitely well-engineered, with excellent passive cooling, quite mounting & adjustment, and as noted non-existent color fringing plus very even edge-to-center brightness. It's currently only available in a 23-degree angle beam but we are actively looking for options to widen & tighten that beam angle and to do so without having to purchase complete new projection heads.

We're restocking B&H as well as other resellers in the next couple of days so your order should ship very soon. In your 2x fresnel kit you will find that it not only includes a handy protective softbag (because I know you like all the extra bags so much) but also a 4-way barndoor. As a nice added-value feature the barndoors will also fit on your reflector that comes with the Orion 300 FS.

 

[rob norton]

Also considering getting a Dedo DLED7 or 9 Turbo bi-color. Anyone have experience with those? Would be nice to have an LED light with a good barn door cut that doesn’t require fiddling with a projection attachment to do so. The barn door cut on the Hive Frensnels are practically useless. The DLED9 Turbo can get costly quickly; $2200 head, $800 ballast, add some accessories and a projection, and you can easily be at $5k...for a 90w light. What?! I guess if you skip the accessories $3k isn't too terrible and I believe the ellipsoidal lens is more efficient than a regular Fresnel but I'm not sure about that, plus you get the ability to have a 5 degree beam angle which can be useful.

I've used the DLED9 once, it was really nice but I can't remember if there were any quirks. You might have to eat the rental fees to test drive one to see if it's worth it. The light was released in 2015 which seems ancient these days, but if there aren't any better options then who knows?

I wouldn't put as much weight in power consumption when evaluating this light, you'd be paying for light quality.

Or you could buy the elusive Dedolight DLED10 and report back..

 

[Eric Coughlin]

Looking at the Lux values for the Dedos they don't seem that great compared to the Orion. Their 320w LED light which is $4800 lists a lux of 1300 at 10' at full flood (65 degrees). The Orion is 3276 lux at 55 degrees with the standard reflector (not a fair comparison because it has no glass in front of it to reduce the light output). With the Orion Fresnel at 30 degrees, it's 9,600 lux. Does double the beam angle mean half the lux? So 9,600 lux and 30 degrees would be 4,800 lux at 60 degrees? In any case it seems to be outperforming the Dedo in terms of lux. I'd definitely imagine the Dedo has a better barndoor cut and has the ability to go to a really tight 5 degree beam angle.

I haven't looked at how evenly the Orion beam spread is lately (I recalled it being even) and am feeling too lazy to setup the light to find out. I know the Aputure 600D can get spotty with the reflector which can tarnish accurate lux reading results. Mitch, would you say the Orion has an even beam with the reflector and Frensel that accurately indicates the lux values across the beam spread?

How good of a barn door cut does the Orion Fresnel give?

Another nice thing about the Dedo light ellipsoid lenses is they don't take up a lot of space unlike these large Fresnel attachments from Hive, Aputure, and Orion, though the 320w Dedo is not a small or light light. The Orion one actually looks a good amount smaller than the Aputure and Hive Fresnel. I know with the Hive they sell two Fresnels, 5" and 10" (which I have both of at the moment), and the 10" is said to be twice as light efficient, so I wonder if the Orion having a smaller size Fresnel (if I'm seeing these photos accurately) would mean it's less light efficient than the Hive and Aputure Fresnel. Or maybe the extra size is moreso needed for additional heat dispersion since the HIve 575 and Aputure 600D are around twice the wattage of the Orion?

 

[Mitch Gross]

Looking at the Lux values for the Dedos they don't seem that great compared to the Orion. Their 320w LED light which is $4800 lists a lux of 1300 at 10' at full flood (65 degrees). The Orion is 3276 lux at 55 degrees with the standard reflector (not a fair comparison because it has no glass in front of it to reduce the light output). With the Orion Fresnel at 30 degrees, it's 9,600 lux. Does double the beam angle mean half the lux? So 9,600 lux and 30 degrees would be 4,800 lux at 60 degrees? In any case it seems to be outperforming the Dedo in terms of lux. I'd definitely imagine the Dedo has a better barndoor cut and has the ability to go to a really tight 5 degree beam angle.

I haven't looked at how evenly the Orion beam spread is lately (I recalled it being even) and am feeling too lazy to setup the light to find out. I know the Aputure 600D can get spotty with the reflector which can tarnish accurate lux reading results. Mitch, would you say the Orion has an even beam with the reflector and Frensel that accurately indicates the lux values across the beam spread?

How good of a barn door cut does the Orion Fresnel give?

Another nice thing about the Dedo light ellipsoid lenses is they don't take up a lot of space unlike these large Fresnel attachments from Hive, Aputure, and Orion, though the 320w Dedo is not a small or light light. The Orion one actually looks a good amount smaller than the Aputure and Hive Fresnel. I know with the Hive they sell two Fresnels, 5" and 10" (which I have both of at the moment), and the 10" is said to be twice as light efficient, so I wonder if the Orion having a smaller size Fresnel (if I'm seeing these photos accurately) would mean it's less light efficient than the Hive and Aputure Fresnel. Or maybe the extra size is moreso needed for additional heat dispersion since the HIve 575 and Aputure 600D are around twice the wattage of the Orion?

I can't speak to the design and specs of other manufacturers if only because I don't really know the details of the hows & whys. I will say that the Orion is a much newer light than the Dedo so the technology may have advanced.

You can't definitively state double the beam angle = half the brightness because there can be different efficiencies in lens or reflector designs in combination with the native beam spread of the "bare emitter" design of each light. The Orion is a fair bit more directional even without the reflector compared to some other lights, which is why we call it a spotlight.

I will say that with the reflector in place we have a fairly even beam (maybe 20% drop-off as a guess). I can't speak for the fresnel performance as I have seen a prototype but am still waiting for my sample unit, which is in the same batch as your accessory. I will say that the prototype performed well and the barndoors cut about as one would expect with barndoors on a traditional tungsten fresnel light.

Our fresnel is an 8" diameter. Part of the question of light efficiency applies to the design of the fixture's emitter. How big is the diameter of the COB? How far forward does the COB protrude from the Bowens mount? What is the beam spread coming off the "bare emitter" COB? These differ between manufacturers which goes into how these lens attachments then perform. I can say that I've seen a number of people put an Aputure F10 in front of an Orion 300 FS and be amazed at how well they performed together. As for heat our light puts out very little from the front of the COB so we don't worry about it so much. The back 3/4ths or so of the lamp head is all heat sink and small fans for that.

Hope that answers the questions. Interested to hear your thoughts once you receive your fresnel kit.

 

[Eric Coughlin]

Another note, the Newsshooter review mentioned that the Orion FS is quieter than the original Orion and made it sound like the fan noise of the original one was loud enough to be an issue. I've got the original one and it has the quietest fan of the various COB lights I've used (though the others I used from Hive, Aputure, CLAR, and Nanlight were all 500w or more). I heard that there was an earlier firmware of the original Orion whereby the fan was noisier, so I wonder if Newsshooter had the latest firmware when they mentioned the loud fan noise on the original unit.

 

[Mitch Gross]

We did in fact update the firmware to better track the temperature of the COB. It's quite likely that your original Orion 300 is quieter than the unit tested by Newsshooter. And yes, the Orion 300 FS is even quieter still.

 

[Eric Coughlin]

We did in fact update the firmware to better track the temperature of the COB. It's quite likely that your original Orion 300 is quieter than the unit tested by Newsshooter. And yes, the Orion 300 FS is even quieter still.

 

[Mitch Gross]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ujzWwLEfTBw

 

[morgan_moore]

LIght spreads with the inverse square law. Double the angle = 1/4 of the lux
triple the beam angle and get 1/9 of the lux

 

[paulears]

I wish manufacturers would pull back on equating their equipment to power consumption, and being a Brit, 'draw' is a horrible word for us and we don't use it at all - and you've never seen it used in lighting equipment since I started in the 70s. We would always talk about Amps, because, certainly in the UK - electricity supplies come in a number of maximums - so 10A (dimmers), 13A home electricity outlets, 15A traditional theatrical style lighting, 16A, more modern hard power (i.e. not through a dimmer), then 32A, 63A and 125A. 16 through 125 are in lock in style with 3, 4 or 5 pins, splash proof too. Blue for Single Phase, Red for 3 phase. Everyone here works with Amps. We might well still have incandescent lamps labelled in Watts, of course. It gets horrible once discharge lighting pops up because that really mean little, and for LEDs Watts is crazily unrelated to light output. We're happy with Foot Candles, and Lux but we hate the "equivalent to" statements. So I have some LEDs claiming equivalence with 600W discharge, others claiming to be equivalent to 1200W halogen and then we now have 300W from LEDs claiming to be equivalent to a 1.2K HMI - which itself usually gets compared to a 5K Tungsten. I don't think they're actually wrong, but you get an LED that really is not remotely wide being compared to Arri Fresnels which are - so the Arri on full flood gets compared to another fixture on full spot - what a mess.

The only way to 'equivalise' )I made that word up) is with a meter and accurate beam angles. That in itself is tricky. The fall off at the edge of a Fresnel lens (a real one, not those micro Fresnels you used to find on overhead projectors, not in TV/stage lights) works so differently to the results with the other lenses - so we're not even measuring like with like. I'm not even sure the manufacturers don't do it craftily. One brand gives you a figure for 5m, another 3m - others measure at different degrees to an alternate manufacture. I suspect they want to make comparison less easy than it could be.

A single fixture that can do real bendable soft lights and through to hard with gobos could be a brilliant all rounder - if -it really does all these things well. Some do all of them pretty well, but none extremely well.

I can do Watts and Amps and of course Volts - but in my pedantic head, fixtures consume electricity, I can just stretch to current draw - but Watts draw?? Watts is not the right unit to use to describe this.

 

[morgan_moore]

Watts is Joules per Second. It is the perfect unit to describe how much energy in Joules a fixture uses every second. A Joule is the energey to heat one Cm cubed of water by 1 degree Kelvin if I remember correctly.

Using Watts skips confusion around Volts and Amps which must be used hand in hand as different countries and battereis have different voltages and therefore need different amperage to deliver a constant wattage.

But that wattage is energy burned of which a % comes out as heat and only says minimal about a fixture performance. Eg one can guess a fixutre performance by the watts consumed and 'knowing' that tungsten is 20% efficient, HMI 45% and LED 60% or something such fixture blind extimates.

Ive espoused on many occasions testing the ability of a light to fill an 8.8 space (board) by metering across 8 feet and in the middle and then averaging the three results. Im not sure the unit to measure. Candela? Lumens?

The resulting spec would be n Candela at 32sqFf or suchlike.

To perform the test the light could be orgainisaed in any manner which would equalise types of source.

S

 

[Mitch Gross]

LIght spreads with the inverse square law. Double the angle = 1/4 of the lux
triple the beam angle and get 1/9 of the lux

All else being equal this is true, but you can't state that when comparing emitter designs & shapes, reflector designs & shapes, and the interaction of them all.

 

[Mitch Gross]

The value of watts is that it is an absolute constant: This is how much power is pulled. Maybe not so inportant in a studio, but very important on location and extremely important when running off battery power. Amps and Amo hours work on assumption of voltage. I dealt with a big British battery manufacturer who was stunned that I wanted power info published in watts not amps. Because with watts I can understand how much juice is actually available. I deal all the time with devices used in 120v and 240v countries and often with 12v, 14.4v, 24v, 48v and so on, but the wattage remains consistent.

There are several standards for measuring a lamp's illumination values. If only all manufacturers would follow them.

 

[morgan_moore]

There are several standards for measuring a lamp's illumination values. If only all manufacturers would follow them.

Im not aware of any. It seems that one can only get a concept when checking area and luminance. which would generally mean 3 minimum readings

 

[Mitch Gross]

The simplest standard is the one I believe Lowel Lighting introduced decades ago. Lowel defined the edge of a beam angle as the point at which intensity dropped to 50% of the brightness of maximum, which was usually located at the center. While some lights have a more even spread than others, this simple standard make for an easily testable measure that is readily understood.

 

[chris_f]

The simplest standard is the one I believe Lowel Lighting introduced decades ago. Lowel defined the edge of a beam angle as the point at which intensity dropped to 50% of the brightness of maximum, which was usually located at the center. While some lights have a more even spread than others, this simple standard make for an easily testable measure that is readily understood.

Unfortunately manufacturers take advantage of this definition of beam angle. The Aputure 600d for example. With it’s reflector on it has a small bright spot that measures nearly 9000lux at 3m, the rest of the beam sits at just under 5000lux at 3m… (figures quoted from Gaffer & Gear on YouTube) so they can still claim the beam angle is 55 degrees, but you might only be getting 10degrees spread of light (or less) at the 9000lux measurement that some people will quote for that light. Perhaps the 50% beam angle definition is more appropriate for a fresnel type fitting? But I’m sure even those could be fudged to get better looking numbers.

Personally, I would always sacrifice peak brightness for an even beam… really important if your using the hard light source, undiffused directly on your subject