NAB Day Two Highlights

ozmorphasis said:
The picture of the Photometrics that you took at the Aputure booth: Are those specs for the large fresnel (120t) or for the smaller one? Those numbers are significantly lower than the LS1, so I'm hoping they are the specs for the LS-C20, and not for the 120t.
Click to expand...

Those numbers are for the 120t. I just verified it by looking at the spec sheet I picked up on the show floor.
 
Bowens mount on the aputure leds? Price point of under 600? Yep time to make the jump for me. Almost bought a light storm but glad I held out
 
Stephen Mick said:
Those numbers are for the 120t. I just verified it by looking at the spec sheet I picked up on the show floor.
Click to expand...

Thanks!

I would've assumed that a bright fresnel LED that is being advertised as the equivalent of a 1.5k tungsten would be brighter than their panels, or at least in that zone.


Aputure 672s: 559 fc (1 meter)
Aputure LS1: 975 fc (1 meter)

...but...

The new 120t Fresnel: 232 fc (1 meter)

What am I missing here? Don't get me wrong, I LOVE the idea of being able to better shape the light, the size, and the Bowens mount. However, those numbers don't seem like a lot of punch considering my 672s is often not punchy enough for a key once it's diffused.



 
Different beam angles I would assume. LS1 is 25deg and I'm not sure what the beam angle of a bare 120t fixture but I assume it's much wider than 25deg.
 
For a fresnel (focal) vs panel (broad), me thinks you need a longer distance comparison. I'm guessing old rules still apply to some..err..degree. (aka physics)
 
Well, if it isn't a clerical error then it is a pretty disappointing figure, more in line with a 300 watt tungsten ( http://calc.arri.de/calculator ) than a 1.5k.

Maybe the 800$ mole-richardson 800 watt equiv cheap led will be the way to go, that seems to have a bit more punch.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top