A question about 580EX II vs D-Lite 4

[fi20100]

I'm wondering what's the difference in power between the 580EX II and the D-Lite 4... how many f-stop difference at full power??

[fi20100]

And perhaps I should say that I'm talking about shooting into umbrellas or soft boxes, so the 580EX II would be zoomed out to 14mm (the little plastic thing over it) :)

[Mark]

And perhaps I should say that I'm talking about shooting into umbrellas or soft boxes, so the 580EX II would be zoomed out to 14mm (the little plastic thing over it) :)
Do you really need that if the umbrella is all the way out? I never use it.

[hommedars]

The guide number for the D-Lite 4 is 64. The guide number for the 580EX II is 58. Both measured in meters.

[fi20100]

Well, I've got a rather large shoot through, where I need to use it to fill it completely :)

[fi20100]

The guide number for the D-Lite 4 is 64. The guide number for the 580EX II is 58. Both measured in meters.


But those numbers are not exactly comparable, since the 580EX would be at 14mm? Or at least that's what I would think.

[fi20100]

I was rather thinking if someone had tried both and metered them at full power :)

[hommedars]

I thought you wanted to compare power vs power. Of course anything you do to modify the light will influence the amount of light.

Personally, shooting into a softbox or umbrella, I wouldn't see the need to use 14mm.

[fi20100]

I thought you wanted to compare power vs power. Of course anything you do to modify the light will influence the amount of light.

Personally, shooting into a softbox or umbrella, I wouldn't see the need to use 14mm.


Well, the 580EX does already modify the light with a fresnel lens inside the flash... I think the guide number comes from being zoomed to 105mm... If you are going to compare what kind of f-stops you're getting with the difference strobes, you need to measure them with the modifiers you'll be using (since they are so different) :) When I'm using my 110cm shoot through or a rather large DIY soft box, I definitely need to put my 430EX to 14mm to get the best coverage. A shoot through umbrella doesn't give you as even light if it zoomed too much, but you want it to cover the whole umbrella.

[TMR Design]

Hi Stefan,

Here are some numbers that may help you out.

An Elinchrom D-Lite 4 at full power, 6 feet from the subject, measuring at ISO 200 and 1/125s, will give you f/22 + .1 without a reflector and with any standard reflector will increase that by about 1 stop, giving you f/32 + .1

A Canon 580EX II Speedlite, measured using the same values and in the 105mm zoom setting, will give you f/22 + .6

Keep in mind that it's not all about the numbers. Pattern and coverage are important to consider and if you're looking for quantity and quality of light, the D-Lite will be a better, more flexible choice.

[fi20100]

Thanks Robert :) So I would guess if you put the 580EX at 14mm the difference will be quite significant. Thanks for the numbers :)

[TMR Design]

Thanks Robert :) So I would guess if you put the 580EX at 14mm the difference will be quite significant. Thanks for the numbers :)

Hi Stefan,

Yes, the numbers would be very different. Speedlite's are great for many things but if you need firepower and great coverage then you can't beat studio strobes, which will also accommodate larger numbers of modifiers and light shaping tools.

[fi20100]

Hi Stefan,

Yes, the numbers would be very different. Speedlite's are great for many things but if you need firepower and great coverage then you can't beat studio strobes, which will also accommodate larger numbers of modifiers and light shaping tools.


That's true... I just metered my 430EX from 3 meters at full power. At 1/200 and ISO 100 it gave me f/13 at 105mm and f/5 at 14mm :) So very big difference!

[Rudi]

To compare apples to (almost) apples, you'd have to have the 580EX zoomed out to about 35mm or wider, so the comparable guide numbers are VERY different! As Robert said, you cannot beat studio strobes like the D-Lite 4 for raw power and rapid recycling capability, no matter what brand or size hot shoe flash you care to bring. :)

[Rudi]

When I'm using my 110cm shoot through or a rather large DIY soft box, I definitely need to put my 430EX to 14mm to get the best coverage. A shoot through umbrella doesn't give you as even light if it zoomed too much, but you want it to cover the whole umbrella.

I find that I have to zoom out my 580EX to 24mm to almost cover a 43" shoot-through umbrella. A Sunpak 383, which supposedly covers 35mm, actually covers the umbrella more completely than the 580EX set at 24mm (this is with the umbrella as far away from the flash head as possible). So, I suspect you lose a bit more power with the 580EX because of the zoom setting...

[Curtis N]

For what it's worth, I compared readings from a 580EX II and an Alienbees B1600 fired into the same umbrella. My calculations indicate the 580EX II has about 40 wattseconds. So it would take about ten of them to equal the power of a D-Lite 4.

40 wattseconds is enough for some things, and frankly, 400 wattseconds is overkill for individual portraits. But when you're lighting groups and need some distance from light to subject, you're gonna want the power.

[fi20100]

I find that I have to zoom out my 580EX to 24mm to almost cover a 43" shoot-through umbrella. A Sunpak 383, which supposedly covers 35mm, actually covers the umbrella more completely than the 580EX set at 24mm (this is with the umbrella as far away from the flash head as possible). So, I suspect you lose a bit more power with the 580EX because of the zoom setting...

Yes, but you're able to tilt the 580EX a little bit down... which the 430EX can't do... I think that might be why I need to go to 14mm :)

[fi20100]

Thanks Curtis!

[Rudi]

Yes, but you're able to tilt the 580EX a little bit down... which the 430EX can't do... I think that might be why I need to go to 14mm :)

Depends on what umbrella bracket you use, too. :) I use the Manfrotto Lite-Tite, and it has an opening which positions the umbrella shaft slightly tilted up, so a flash is firing into the the centre of the umbrella, much better than if you had a bracket that just held the umbrella perpendicular (at a right angle) to the flash bracket. But yes, I was surprised that I had to zoom out my 580EX that wide just to get reasonable coverage (while my Sunpak 383's cover the umbrella almost perfectly).

[fi20100]

Depends on what umbrella bracket you use, too. :) I use the Manfrotto Lite-Tite, and it has an opening which positions the umbrella shaft slightly tilted up, so a flash is firing into the the centre of the umbrella, much better than if you had a bracket that just held the umbrella perpendicular (at a right angle) to the flash bracket. But yes, I was surprised that I had to zoom out my 580EX that wide just to get reasonable coverage (while my Sunpak 383's cover the umbrella almost perfectly).

Yes, I've got the exact same umbrella brackets :) Work like a charm :) Perhaps I should do some quite careful experimenting with 24mm and 14mm and see how big the difference is.

[Rudi]

I don't think that the 580EX at 24mm is as good at covering the umbrella with light as the Sunpak is at (supposedly) 35mm! I have some photos that I might dig up, if you're interested (might take a while though :) ).

So... it is possible that the 14mm diffuser is necessary to cover an umbrella completely! I don't know, since I never went as far as all that (I'm happy with the Sunpak coverage, so I don't use the 580EX if I don't have to :) ).

[Rudi]

OK, not the best way to show you this, but these were just for my testing, so I didn't bother making them terribly consistent. Also, two convertible 43" umbrellas were used, one without the black cover in a corner where the black and white backgrounds meet, so on the right it looks like there is some spill - there isn't! That is the white background on the wall on the right (umbrella in the corner). The photo with the Sunpak flash had the umbrella with the black cover on, up against the black background, so shows no apparent spill. The two umbrellas were also at slightly different angles <shrug> :)

Anyway here we go:

580EX at 35mm
http://rudiphoto.zenfolio.com/img/v2/p4438583.jpg

580EX at 24mm
http://rudiphoto.zenfolio.com/img/v2/p262905407.jpg

Sunpak 383 at 35mm (it's a fixed head)
http://rudiphoto.zenfolio.com/img/v2/p229368218.jpg

So, it looks like the 580EX had the head tilted down, but even though it's hitting the umbrella in the centre, I prefer the coverage of the Sunpak. Using shoot-through umbrellas is not a precise science anyway... :D

[fi20100]

Nice :) It does look like the Sunpak is covering the umbrella better... would have been cool with a last of the 580 at 14mm :) But at least a big difference when they both are @ 35mm.

[Rudi]

I can shoot the 14mm with the 580EX in the next day or so, if you want to see... funnily enough *I* was interested in how well the Sunpak covers the umbrella, not the other way around. :)

[fi20100]

;) It's ok. Btw... just found a pretty "good" (yeah right) prize on a used 540EZ... seems quite interesting.

[TMR Design]

I decided to check this for myself with a 43" umbrella and a Nikon SB-800 Speedlight.
The removable black backing was left on so you can see the pattern and coverage without the diffusion and scattering of the light passing through. I kept the power level low so nothing was being blown out and close enough so the pattern was not exceeding the perimeter of the umbrella.

In my little animation you can plainly see the reduced coverage as you use the longer zoom settings on the flash. I should also add that it's pretty obvious the coverage is far from even and that is certainly a good reason to fire into a softbox with s silver interior or use a strobe with a good reflector.

[hawk911]

great demonstration Robert.

[Rudi]

Trust Robert to do it the way I should have done it in the first place! Thanks Robert! :)

[TMR Design]

great demonstration Robert.

Thanks Hawk. I hope that others realize that this is the effect of using the zoom control on the flash. I know that many people forget to change it if it's not being controlled by the camera, and some think that setting on 105mm gives the most even coverage, for no other reason than because it's the highest setting.

Trust Robert to do it the way I should have done it in the first place! Thanks Robert! :)

Hi Rudi,

I had them side by side but realized that the eye didn't really see the change as easily as when they cycled in the same place.