Why spend money on Profoto vs Alien Bees?

One doesn't need to be shooting 4-6 hours/day for 4-5 days a week to benefit from better quality strobes. There is also a lot of middle ground between ABs and Profoto/Brons. Elinchrom, Dyna-Lite, and Hensels are all good candidates.

I was in the same situation. I got about $3K of equipment on AB. I didn't want to buy profoto or the other pro equipment because they were soooo expensive. AB was OK but lighting wasn't very consisent. I end up getting the profoto. It was very expensive and if you take care of it, you should get about 10,000 pops before you have to replace the light bulb. Thank god for that because they cost about $300 or so to replace but they are very consisent on power level and light. Good luck

You pay for quality. The more money you spend you end up generally with better the equipment but more importantly the ease of use. For exampe the difference between the Elinchrom FX/BX series of lighst and the RX series is not just power or power range, it's also the remote control features of the RX series that really help sell the lights.

Why does this matter? Consider a light on a boom, with conventional lights you would have to raise/lower the boom each time and make a speculative guess as to the original height to adjust the power. The RX controls the power remotely saving you time and guess work.

Little things like that make a big difference in perceived quality and time saved. It's the same for dSLRs. The interface of the 1 series is more refined than the xxD series of cameras add into the equation the dual controls which helps steady the camera you see the benefits.

The real advantage of high cost studio lighting gear is even coverage of light.

People often think it's a matter of durability, color consistency, output consistency etc. Those things are definitely important, but the real advantage of high end gear is determined by quality of light. Even coverage of light and smooth transitions between light and dark simply cannot be obtained with lower cost brands. It's also something that must be experienced to be understood.

IF a photographer has never experienced working with high end gear on a long term basis then he/she will probably not be able to see what even coverage of light looks like. That's not a put-down or anything...it's just a matter of experience. Personally, I didn't know the difference until I assisted for a photographer that had a studio filled with Broncolor. Once I worked with excellent gear on a daily basis for many years, I was able to see the differences between quality of light. But before that, I was perfectly happy using my low end gear and couldn't tell the difference.

If a photographer is shooting in a style that doesn't require even coverage of light or smooth gradations between light and dark, then it really doesn't matter if he/she has lower end gear. Alien bees or speedlites etc would work just fine. If there are any color issues or output issues then that can usually be fixed pretty easily in PP.

But, even coverage of light and smooth gradations cannot really be fixed in PP. High end retouchers will use D&B to try and emulate the effects of high end lighting...but this is time consuming and often results in a look that starts to appear unnatural. It would be better if the photographer had just used high end gear in the first place.

Final thought: just because a photographer has equipment capable of producing even coverage and smooth transitions doesn't mean his/her photography will show it...It takes skill to know how to manipulate the gear. I've found that many people shooting Elinchrom etc don't even know what their gear is really capable of doing and they often use it in a way that doesn't portray the true potential. So in the end, it's still a matter of "seeing" the light. High end gear can provide the quality of light, but it still takes an experienced photographer to be able to use the gear correctly. There are a lot of people using expensive gear that aren't taking better photographs than somebody using low cost gear.

Faolan wrote in post #5624355
You pay for quality. The more money you spend you end up generally with better the equipment but more importantly the ease of use. For exampe the difference between the Elinchrom FX/BX series of lighst and the RX series is not just power or power range, it's also the remote control features of the RX series that really help sell the lights.

Why does this matter? Consider a light on a boom, with conventional lights you would have to raise/lower the boom each time and make a speculative guess as to the original height to adjust the power. The RX controls the power remotely saving you time and guess work.

Little things like that make a big difference in perceived quality and time saved. It's the same for dSLRs. The interface of the 1 series is more refined than the xxD series of cameras add into the equation the dual controls which helps steady the camera you see the benefits.

AB also has a wired remote control to do all that and their new cyber commander thing will let you control ights over the RF link.

Gentleman Villain wrote in post #5624635
The real advantage of high cost studio lighting gear is even coverage of light.

People often think it's a matter of durability, color consistency, output consistency etc. Those things are definitely important, but the real advantage of high end gear is determined by quality of light. Even coverage of light and smooth transitions between light and dark simply cannot be obtained with lower cost brands. It's also something that must be experienced to be understood.

IF a photographer has never experienced working with high end gear on a long term basis then he/she will probably not be able to see what even coverage of light looks like. That's not a put-down or anything...it's just a matter of experience. Personally, I didn't know the difference until I assisted for a photographer that had a studio filled with Broncolor. Once I worked with excellent gear on a daily basis for many years, I was able to see the differences between quality of light. But before that, I was perfectly happy using my low end gear and couldn't tell the difference.

If a photographer is shooting in a style that doesn't require even coverage of light or smooth gradations between light and dark, then it really doesn't matter if he/she has lower end gear. Alien bees or speedlites etc would work just fine. If there are any color issues or output issues then that can usually be fixed pretty easily in PP.

But, even coverage of light and smooth gradations cannot really be fixed in PP. High end retouchers will use D&B to try and emulate the effects of high end lighting...but this is time consuming and often results in a look that starts to appear unnatural. It would be better if the photographer had just used high end gear in the first place.

Final thought: just because a photographer has equipment capable of producing even coverage and smooth transitions doesn't mean his/her photography will show it...It takes skill to know how to manipulate the gear. I've found that many people shooting Elinchrom etc don't even know what their gear is really capable of doing and they often use it in a way that doesn't portray the true potential. So in the end, it's still a matter of "seeing" the light. High end gear can provide the quality of light, but it still takes an experienced photographer to be able to use the gear correctly. There are a lot of people using expensive gear that aren't taking better photographs than somebody using low cost gear.

Strange, I can't seem to find any picture comparisons. Some thing like profoto vs AB

M Powered wrote in post #5625286
Strange, I can't seem to find any picture comparisons. Some thing like profoto vs AB

Yes, that's the 1000% truth - It's almost impossible to find side-by-side comparisons since studio gear is so expensive and there's only a small market that really buys it. Heck, even "low cost" studio gear is pretty darn expensive and only the most serious photographers buy off-camera lighting in the first place. That's the main reason it usually takes first hand experience working with the different types of gear and working in everyday situations to really see the differences in light quality between brands. There's very little information available.

People buy more expensive lights because they're making too much money and need a big tax deduction. It's usually after they've run out of expensive lenses and bodies to buy.

As others have already discussed, you're dealing with build, durability, materials and construction, consistency of output and color temperature, branded accessories and third party accessory compatibility. The modifiers you have available and the quality of light produced is a very strong consideration as well.

It's not just about a black box that fires a burst of light. Sure, they all do that and some at 10 times the cost of others. Whether someone can justify the cost is another issue.

Professionals tend to buy the tools that will not only do the job but will do it well for years and withstand the wear and tear of daily extended use. They are willing to pay a premium for that. Not everyone needs those tools though.

When you pick up a Profoto head or work with the pack you definitely know you're working with a well built component. Nothing feels flimsy, there is more metal than plastic and it's built like a tank. The packs almost look like rugged military or industrial equipment.

The rocker and rotary switches are of very high quality. The amphenol multi-pin locking connectors on the packs are amazing. The mono lights have this same feel to them. Metal cases, high quality switches, metal swivel mounts that don't slip, and to top it off they have a great method of mounting reflectors, speedrings and modifiers unlike other manufacturers. No light leaks, solid construction, and solid.

The reflectors themselves provide more even light without the classic hot spot that most inexpensive reflectors produce.

Anyway, that's a taste of why someone might choose Profoto or any other high end strobes over an Alien Bee. That's not to say that you should be anything but happy with your Bees if they do what you want and need.

High-end commercial work pays well enough to allow you to buy the pricier gear, so it's a whole other economy compared to your average wedding shooter, for instance. I can't justify the expense for what I do, but if I were shooting for larger publications on a routine basis, going with prophoto would be a no brainer. If, for instance, you're shooting very color sensitive catalog work, the most consistent head will make a difference. I love my bees, and for what I do they're great, but I can see why having a commercial grade kit would be advantageous...not to mention a whole production crew to lug it all around for you.

Philco wrote in post #5625961
High-end commercial work pays well enough to allow you to buy the pricier gear, so it's a whole other economy compared to your average wedding shooter, for instance. I can't justify the expense for what I do, but if I were shooting for larger publications on a routine basis, going with prophoto would be a no brainer. If, for instance, you're shooting very color sensitive catalog work, the most consistent head will make a difference. I love my bees, and for what I do they're great, but I can see why having a commercial grade kit would be advantageous...not to mention a whole production crew to lug it all around for you.

Personally I don't buy into your cost justification argument. If you can cost justify a pair of 5Ds, a 70-200 f/2.8, an 85 f/1.2, and a 35 L for your work you certainly can cost justify another $1k more for professional lights. I'm not attacking your kit or suggesting that they don't meet your needs, but if you need that type of camera and gear for your work I don't think the cost justification argument holds up. If don't consider your work high end commercial then you might as well be shooting it with Rebel or 20D and consumer glass.

RichNY wrote in post #5626594
Personally I don't buy into your cost justification argument. If you can cost justify a pair of 5Ds, a 70-200 f/2.8, an 85 f/1.2, and a 35 L for your work you certainly can cost justify another $1k more for professional lights. I'm not attacking your kit or suggesting that they don't meet your needs, but if you need that type of camera and gear for your work I don't think the cost justification argument holds up. If don't consider your work high end commercial then you might as well be shooting it with Rebel or 20D and consumer glass.

For the equipment we are talking about here, the difference is a lot more than $1K.

For the OP question, if the users have the money, they can choose any brand, or spend THEIR money anyway they like, it's none of my business.

But while we are debating lighting brands, I always have this question: if I grab a stunnng studio shot off the net, can anyone tell me if it's shot with a Prophoto or AB?

RichNY wrote in post #5626594
Personally I don't buy into your cost justification argument. If you can cost justify a pair of 5Ds, a 70-200 f/2.8, an 85 f/1.2, and a 35 L for your work you certainly can cost justify another $1k more for professional lights. I'm not attacking your kit or suggesting that they don't meet your needs, but if you need that type of camera and gear for your work I don't think the cost justification argument holds up. If don't consider your work high end commercial then you might as well be shooting it with Rebel or 20D and consumer glass.

From AB > Profoto cost a LITTLE more than just a mere 1k

Lotto wrote in post #5626992
For the OP question, if the users have the money, they can choose any brand, or spend THEIR money anyway they like, it's none of my business.

But while we are debating lighting brands, I always have this question: if I grab a stunnng studio shot off the net, can anyone tell me if it's shot with a Prophoto or AB?

You'll be god if you can

Lets play....

Tell me what light was used to light this.

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO