The New LED LIGHT CUBE.

Anybody tried this strobe yet? I'm just curious, at $800 a unit I wonder how well it performs.

http://fstoppers.com …-your-idea-of-photo-light

http://www.ledlightcub​e.com/

I read about that today, looks interesting, but not unless there are modifier options.

Its only a matter of time before the flash tube becomes replaced by something else.

It would be super nifty if any "new" LED based heads were compatible with already existing power packs. I have this sneaking suspicion that Profoto or broncolor would make you get a new pack....

•300 watts (f22 @ 1 metre / 100 ISO)

So what is the guide number?

Most phones use LED so the concept is not new and my Galaxy Note takes great shots with just the LED flash. But 300w of power is insane output for an LED array. I wonder how much heat those suckers generate in contrast to a normal strobe.

LEDs don't generate much heat at all by their very nature, so heat is a non-issue.

Watching and waiting, seems like the new direction.

BrickR wrote in post #16214861
LEDs don't generate much heat at all by their very nature, so heat is a non-issue.

Not really true.

When you define a lamp in Watt (W) then that is input power. A "bad" filament-based lamp may have 95% heat and 5% light. A LED have much, much better performance but instead have the issue that it can't stand heat.

Already standard 3-5W LED lamps you can buy have very big heatsinks to keep down the temperature of the LED chips inside the lamp. You quickly need to add fans when going for higher power levels.

But the question with this link is that it doesn't actually give any trustworthy information.

Do they mean the equivalent light levels of a 300W incandecent bulb? That can be done with LEDs at way less heat.

But at the same time, they talk about flashes and discharge. And a a flash is normally specified in Ws - Watt-seconds. 300Ws means that the short flash pulse contains the same amount of energy as a 300W lamp that was on for 1 second. So if the flash has a one millisecond long pulse, then it needs 300kW of power for 0.001 seconds in the light pulse to accumulate 300Ws of energy. And one problem with a LED is that it doesn't scale directly with current. You can't send 10 times as much current into a LED and get 10 times more light - which is a reason why flash systems likes the avalance effect you get in a traditional flash tube.

So maybe they are talking about the equivalent of 300Ws from a flash tube system? But how will we know, until they present actual information...