Rotolight Neo 2 - Legit replacement for OCF?

Been seeing a lot going around Fedora Nation on the Rotolight Neo 2 LEDs that now have a built in HSS flash unit. These have really peaked my interest but was wondering if they have the power to replace (in most instances) my Godox V860II OCF setup. I know they won't be as versatile when it comes to bouncing, etc, but the larger light source should be softer, so I may not need as much of that.

I looked on the Rotolight website but I'm not very familiar with lighting terms, so I'm not sure how their power stacks up. https://www.rotolight.​com/product/neo-2/ Here is the link if you want to take a look.

I mainly shoot weddings and high end corporate events, but also dabble in model work. These interest me for not only their OCF capabilities, but also their versatility for bridals, headshots, models, etc.

It is undoubtedly a small fraction of the light put out by a strobe. So, wider apertures, higher ISO, not enough power to be significant compared to daylight, not enough power to overcome bad interior lights (e.g. flourescents). To be bright enough for any of those functions mean it's bright enough to be uncomfortable and would have huge power demands.

Not to say it doesn't have a place, but it isn't going to compete with flash head-on.

F2Bthere wrote in post #18446242
It is undoubtedly a small fraction of the light put out by a strobe. So, wider apertures, higher ISO, not enough power to be significant compared to daylight, not enough power to overcome bad interior lights (e.g. flourescents). To be bright enough for any of those functions mean it's bright enough to be uncomfortable and would have huge power demands.

Not to say it doesn't have a place, but it isn't going to compete with flash head-on.

Yea. I was thinking the same thing. I was wondering how it compares power-wise to the Godox AD200, which is about 3 times as powerful as a Canon 600EX-RT type speedlight. Doubt the Neo 2 even comes close.

Jarvis Creative Studios wrote in post #18446392
Yea. I was thinking the same thing. I was wondering how it compares power-wise to the Godox AD200, which is about 3 times as powerful as a Canon 600EX-RT type speedlight. Doubt the Neo 2 even comes close.

Short answer: it doesn't. It doesn't compare to a flash which runs off 2 AAA batteries. Small strobes put out way more light.

A light strong enough to compare seriously with a flash unit would generate a lot of heat, even if it runs on LEDs and would not be powered by batteries. The day will probably come when that isn't true, but today's technology isn't close.

And when that technology comes, you will have a hard time finding a person who is willing to be under such a light, let alone someone who can do it without squinting.

It's not a waste of time for some applications; it just isn't comparable.

I have seen some videos from Jason Lanier

https://www.youtube.co​m/watch?v=APaStY83gpA

during day
https://www.youtube.co​m/watch?v=Ryrwne0Dx40

I will stick with something like AD200.

F2Bthere wrote in post #18446411
Short answer: it doesn't. It doesn't compare to a flash which runs off 2 AAA batteries. Small strobes put out way more light.

A light strong enough to compare seriously with a flash unit would generate a lot of heat, even if it runs on LEDs and would not be powered by batteries. The day will probably come when that isn't true, but today's technology isn't close.

And when that technology comes, you will have a hard time finding a person who is willing to be under such a light, let alone someone who can do it without squinting.

It's not a waste of time for some applications; it just isn't comparable.

Thanks. Just based on your response, I'm making sure that you know when I'm comparing the NEO 2 to strobes, I'm comparing it's strobe feature right? Unlike the Neo 1, it's not just a constant LED light. It is that but it also has a studio strobe feature. I still don't think it's strobe feature is going to match flashes and definitely not something like the AD200 Pocketflash. The NEO 2 strobe feature is the most unknown feature about the light though.

bobbyz wrote in post #18446621
I have seen some videos from Jason Lanier

https://www.youtube.co​m/watch?v=APaStY83gpA

during day
https://www.youtube.co​m/watch?v=Ryrwne0Dx40

I will stick with something like AD200.

That's where I first saw them to. And yes I agree with you. While the NEO 2 looks cool, I think for the same price you could get a new AD200 and a used NEO 1 for the same price as a NEO 2. Sure, it would be more cumbersome, but you would get more power on the strobe side.

I agree with a lot this guys says:
https://www.youtube.co​m/watch?v=8iUIKUXm3Po

shaolin95 wrote in post #18447036
I agree with a lot this guys says:
https://www.youtube.co​m/watch?v=8iUIKUXm3Po

He's totally right, too.

This is not a big deal.

That's a good, informative video. That's also all I need to hear about these lights lol.

I just saw that Jason Lanier is attacking that video on his Facebook page and of course his minions are following the master blindly believing all he says.
I used to follow him until he went into this I am God mode and also his Used Sales car salesman mode. What an industry!


Well the good thing is the guy that posted the video is getting the light from Rotolight to test it. What if it turn out to be good I may get one too!

These types of LED lights ARE good. They just are nowhere near the power of a speedlight, let alone a strobe. It all depends on your needs.

If your subjects are not living and not moving and you can put your camera on a tripod, LED light is awesome. If you are shooting video, it's pretty good, too.

The real issue is that we have come to expect the quality and capability we can get with strobes. By quality I mean depth of field, crisp stopping of motion, enough light to fill modifiers, ability to shoot handheld without blur and using low ISO, etc.

We have also come to expect our living subjects to feel comfortable before our cameras. Flash tends to be better for this.

In the "good old days" we used head braces to hold our subjects still:

http://thephotopalace.​blogspot.com/p/head-brace.html

Plus we had no problem subjecting our stars to bright, hot light.

https://i.pinimg.com …g-setups-photo-tricks.jpg

F2Bthere wrote in post #18449778
These types of LED lights ARE good. They just are nowhere near the power of a speedlight, let alone a strobe. It all depends on your needs.

If your subjects are not living and not moving and you can put your camera on a tripod, LED light is awesome. If you are shooting video, it's pretty good, too.

The real issue is that we have come to expect the quality and capability we can get with strobes. By quality I mean depth of field, crisp stopping of motion, enough light to fill modifiers, ability to shoot handheld without blur and using low ISO, etc.

We have also come to expect our living subjects to feel comfortable before our cameras. Flash tends to be better for this.

In the "good old days" we used head braces to hold our subjects still:

http://thephotopalace.​blogspot.com/p/head-brace.html

Plus we had no problem subjecting our stars to bright, hot light.

https://i.pinimg.com …g-setups-photo-tricks.jpg

Speaking of the comfort of subjects, I get the idea that a lot of LED proponents haven't sat on the lens-end of the camera.

LED lights have a peculiar characteristic of impinging the eye as though a heck of a lot brighter than their actual level of illumination. That is to say, let's say we have (as I have) the total 20 watt high intensity LED pair in the AD-B2 as well as a Buff White Lightning with a 250 watt halogen modeling light. Although the 20 watt AD-B2 pair casts much less illuminating light than the 250 watt halogen modeling light, directly looking into the LED source causes much more discomfort than looking into the 250 watt halogen.

I'm guessing phrases such as "highly actininc content" have something to do with it. I just know LEDs are distinctly more unpleasant to glance at directly than incandescent lights.

https://youtu.be/RW5AH​h8W94w
Haven't watch it yet but here is the new video him Jason

shaolin95 wrote in post #18449836
https://youtu.be/RW5AH​h8W94w
Haven't watch it yet but here is the new video him Jason

Thanks for posting the link. This does make a number of things quite clear.

Mr Jason says "this is not a marketing video." That is a load of BS. He just got done doing a press conference for the light. He is sponsored by the company. He states he is the only person out there with the light. His enthusiasm is over the top.

I am not familiar with him or his history, but he is clearly marketing a product.

This is a paid and produced marketing video done with a "casual" shooting style and very sophisticated editing.

It is sad when people compromise their integrity for a few bucks.