LED Flash for Macro Photography

[khukri]

Anyone used the continuous light LED flashes/light sources for macro and close up work? (4 to 24 inches). Can anyone advise pluses and minuses of LED source lighting compared to conventional flashes - other than light output and wireless control? Thank you!

[Pi_314]

I'm using the small AAA preon light by foursevens, although it's just for focusing. It puts out 70 lumens with a regular AAA, but I put a lithium ion in it for about 200 lumens, with the caveat that you don't run it for much over a minute on full power, lest you fry it. You can however run it on medium and get about 100 lumens continuous.

If you want to used LED as a main light source be prepared to haul around some weight, such as batteries, cuz you really should have much more than a couple hundred lumens. Much of the weight will come by the name of heat sinks.

I've often wondered why not, or if anyone has tried using high powered led for flash, as you could most definitely pop off 4000 lumens on a quick burst. Close up as in macro, 4000 lumens would very intense.

[gmillerf]

Less light output means more noise in your image. Also the short burst of a flash helps freeze any motion.

One advantage, though, would be you see what you get.

[gmillerf]

I don't see where it says that, but the math doesn't work out right. If it illuminates 1sq meter at 900 lumens, it would illuminate 2sq meters at exactly 450 lumens.

The math works a little better if it's distance, e.g. 900 lumens at 1 meter, 225 lumens at 2 meters, regardless of the actual area covered.

[orionmystery]

That is light, not flash. It won't have the motion freezing capability of flash!

http://orionmystery.blogspot.com/200...-3-things.html

[Kronie]

What about this cheapy:
http://www.amazon.com/NEEWER-Macro-M...7092263&sr=8-1

For $25 I am tempted. This one even flashes and you can + and - the EV but the problem with LED's is that they emit bluish light that would be a nightmare to process out in post.

[AntonLargiader]

Still sounds like a continuous light, just one that turns on and off and has some adjustment.

[Kronie]

Originally Posted by AntonLargiader

Still sounds like a continuous light, just one that turns on and off and has some adjustment.

I don't know, this sounds like it flash's to me:

It could flash or provide the continuous light. The flash range is adjustable, the flash exposure compensation could be set to be +3EV or -3EV, and thus it is especially suitable for macro photography"

[AntonLargiader]

I guess it depends on what you call flash. A GN of 15 but the range is only 150cm? A sync speed of 1/100, no matter what camera its on? Do the technical specs sound legitimate to you?

What's the difference between the 'flash' and just turning it on all the time, since it is [also] a continuous light? LEDs are not, AFAIK, suitable for capacitive discharge. I can't see the thing getting any brighter than 'on'. Maybe the continuous light mode isn't full intensity.

It's cheap. Buy it and give us a real review! I can't find a review of it on any mainstream site.

[khukri]

Hello everybody!
I see a lot of posts but back to the question: Has anybody actually used LED light source in macro work? If yes, can she/he kindly post some pictures comparng the LED results with normal flash work at macro or close up distances? Plus some practical comments on ease of use, effects, problems in the field/outdoors if any.
Thanks so much!

[Dmitriy]

Originally Posted by khukri

Hello everybody!
I see a lot of posts but back to the question: Has anybody actually used LED light source in macro work? If yes, can she/he kindly post some pictures comparng the LED results with normal flash work at macro or close up distances? Plus some practical comments on ease of use, effects, problems in the field/outdoors if any.
Thanks so much!

I have one, called Meike FC100. I think it is similar, if not identical, to NEEWER ring light. Long story short - a "normal" flash is so much better (can provide enough light for any situation with ability to control it).

Outdoors, when there is plenty of light (but often you need even more), the effect is barely noticeable. There are not many functions or effects - you can change the intensity of light and turn off/on one side of the ring lights. Think that's it.

I have a review on it, no photos though:
Meike LED ring flash FC100 review

I'll try to take photos over next couple of days and publish them.

[khukri]

Thank you, Dimitriy, I'll wait...!
One reason I wanted to look at continous LED light is it can be useful as fill light when shooting short video clips, especially contra jour where flash will not do. But as you say for field photography LED lighting is likely inadequate.

[Dmitriy]

Added a photo to the article:
Photo taken with Meike LED Ring Flash FC100.

Now, photo taken with Canon 430EX II:



Not sure what you can get from these small images, but the difference is f/13, 1/10, ISO 400 against f/16 1/640 ISO 100. And I had to use a tripod.

I have to warn you about your videos - you probably shouldn't get farther then half of a meter away from you subjects, because FC-100 can't throw light far.

[khukri]

Cpocibo, Dimitry! The trouble you have taken is much appreciated! I was looking for something I can use with a 300mm+extn tube at 1m or a 150mm macro at 0.5m. Mainly as fill lighting, not primary source. Subjects are primarily butterflies and flowers in windy conditons. Once again, thanks and the best!

By the way, for those interested - I found the Canon 300mm IS at 1m gives sharper/better quality image than the Sigma 150mm OS at 0.5. Are there others who share this view?