Hi,
Anybody on here use flash rings for their macro workflow? As I get more into macro photography, I've been thinking about purchasing a reasonably priced flash ring setup like the affordable sunpak 16R unit. Any thoughts?
Use of Flash Rings For Macro Work
(48 posts) (19 voices)-
Posted 2 years ago #
-
Kellenfreeman made one, kanuck.
http://nikonrumors.com/forum/topic.php?id=1220#post-20888
I don't have one, but I'd like to. Maybe I'll make one someday to try it out.Posted 2 years ago # -
I haven't used mine for macro, but I still love the ABR-800. It's a little awkward, but you can put up with that and I love the additional beauty dish and other accessories. There are better ones and ones you can make, but I can speak for this one.
Posted 2 years ago # -
Thanks guys it looks like you need one for really serious highly detailed macro shots of bugs for example.
Posted 2 years ago # -
I dont have a ring flash but I was using an adapter the other day and its great.. It looks weird and attaches to the front of the SB-800/etc and has fiber optics directing the light to the ring. Works great with the nikon CLS and thats a huge plus.
Posted 2 years ago # -
A friend and I were shooting some flowers, he was using ring flash and I was using the Nikon R1C1 rig. His main complaint was that the pictures seemed flat. I have a similar problem when I use the macro defuser attachment on the R200 flashs. What I like about the R1C1 rig is that it lets me get the flash above and to the side, very similar to how you would setup portraits. This gives you better control over shadows.
Down side is the R1C1 rig is a lot more expensive than most of the ring flashes, but you can do it in bits in pieces if you need.
Posted 2 years ago # -
Interesting comment about the images seeming flat. Could it be that ring-flashes are designed really for 'record photography' (which they do very well) but you all are looking at using one for creative photography where the lighting needs are different?
Just a thought.
Posted 2 years ago # -
I was told that for real intimate details of insects for example, you have to use a ring flash unit. Where the images flat maybe because of a wrong setting for power output from the flash? Maybe needed say 1/8 instead of 1/16 power? I have heard the R1C1 is very expensive compared to other brands..
Posted 2 years ago # -
Thought I'd add my question to this thread as although not to do with macro work, is regarding ring flashes. Has anyone used either the Orbis or Rayflash for portrait work (possibly at weddings also) and care to share their experiences? Which one would you recommend, and does their weight and size mean they have no place outside of the studio?
Posted 1 year ago # -
I don't own a ring flash for bug macro work, but the ability to get extra light makes a big difference- to get good handheld results, you might have to shoot at f/11 at ISO 1600 in daylight, whereas with a flash you can shoot as base iso at f/22 or lower if you want (and with very low flash power- usually 1/8 or below).
The secret to avoid getting flat looks is that a ring flash lights everything evenly, so there is no texture and no shadow. You can get much better results is the lights are uneven- unbalanced, non symmetrical and close to the subject. For me, what I've done is use a single off-camera flash (either with or without a small softbox) and hold it close to the subject. I use optical slaves to sync (with the on-camera flash to trigger)
Posted 1 year ago # -
I have always been interested in the Nikon macro flash setup, but never cared enough to buy it. The SB400 actually works OK for the little I use a flash with my macro stuff.
Posted 1 year ago # -
SkintBrit said:
Thought I'd add my question to this thread as although not to do with macro work, is regarding ring flashes. Has anyone used either the Orbis or Rayflash for portrait work (possibly at weddings also) and care to share their experiences? Which one would you recommend, and does their weight and size mean they have no place outside of the studio?I own the Coco ring flash, which is a knock off of the Rayflash and is available on Amazon. I find the build quality to be acceptable, but I only use it once in a while, so I can't comment on heavy use.
Having a D700 + grip (+ typically an L plate) + SB-900 + Coco/Rayflash is a heavy and cumbersome unit. When shot with the 24-70 the lens can block part of the light from the ring flash unless your focal plane is parallel to your subject, as the lens extends far past the ring. I've found the best lens to use (out of my bag) is the 50mm f1.4 with the hood on... although I imagine the 85mm f/1.4g would work well but unsure about whether the hood would be required (I don't own one, yet). The hood can act as a stabilizer for the ring flash unit, and I think it needs the second contact point other than the flash head connection.
When all this is on and you try to 'work a room', the entire rig is pretty top heavy and unwieldy. So, practically, I would caution against the set up unless you can manage the rig. That said, in the right conditions, it does 'behave' like a far more expensive studio ring light in the right conditions. It provides the same type of fill, and the same type of catch light. But boy, those conditions have to be close to perfect. The quality of light can help produce good fashion-esque results. That means your model had better be well made up because every imperfection will show through.
Ignore the dof problem and everything else wrong with this photo, it's the first example I could find of a coco ring flash shot:
As you can see, in terms of light it's workable. I haven't used it enough to really nail it. With a 50mm and close enough to get decent catch lights, you get facial distortion. So 85mm would probably be better. Anyway, hope that helps. Let me know if you have any more specific questions about the Coco/Rayflash.
As for the R1C1, I have that to but I don't like it for macro. The reason is it gives a very strange double catch light even when using one light. I prefer using a handheld SB-900 and some kind of diffuser. To each their own, though. I should point out it looks absolutely badass on the front of a lens. ;)
Posted 1 year ago # -
Thank you to all those that have replied thus far, @elvishefer, the catchlights in your models eyes are amazing! The point you raise about different lens lengths is something I was wondering too. I guessed that a short lens would be necessary, but had imagined some expandable extention on the flash head attachment to give more versatility, from what you say this is not the case. Fortunately I own both the 50 & 85 1.4 G's so I guess I'd use them. I also have a 700 with grip so laughed when I read that the Rayflash was "only" 500g! From your comments I get the feeling that I may be better off continuing to use my Garry Fong LightSphere for hand held work? If I have understood correctly, the Rayflash's weight is supported by the flash, and the Orbis's by the lens? Also it would appear that if I wanted to use the Rayflash system with my SB900's on both my cameras, I would need to buy two? They are listing different part numbers for SB900 use on the 700 & 3s. Can the mount be so rigid that it fits each camera exactly?
Posted 1 year ago # -
SkintBrit said:
Thank you to all those that have replied thus far, @elvishefer, the catchlights in your models eyes are amazing!>> Thank you!
The point you raise about different lens lengths is something I was wondering too. I guessed that a short lens would be necessary, but had imagined some expandable extension on the flash head attachment to give more versatility, from what you say this is not the case.
>> Think of it as a hard plastic glove with a screw-type compression tightening mechanism. If you don't slide the glove all the way on, it falls off. If you have it all the way on, and don't screw it down, it will fall off, eventually. Nothing attaches to the lens, but the lens goes through the plastic ring, and the top of the ring can rest on the top of the lens, depending on lens size, but it doesn't fasten.
Fortunately I own both the 50 & 85 1.4 G's so I guess I'd use them.
>> My gut says the 85 would likely be the better way to go. Or a similarly sized (length and diameter) prime of any kind, I guess.
I also have a 700 with grip so laughed when I read that the Rayflash was "only" 500g!
>> We all live at the gym, right? ;)
From your comments I get the feeling that I may be better off continuing to use my Garry Fong LightSphere for hand held work?
>> I think for working an event, yes. But if you were at some nouveau fashion party style event, and wanted to give your subjects 'the look' I suppose you could do ok with the Rayflash/Coco.
If I have understood correctly, the Rayflash's weight is supported by the flash, and the Orbis's by the lens?
>> While I don't own an Orbis, I have watched videos and their mount appears to attach to the tripod screw on the bottom of the camera. An l-shaped bracket is attached (hanging under the camera, and protruding under the lens), to which a flash is mounted and pointed 'up'. The Orbis ring flash sits on top of the flash and the L bracket is adjusted so the lens fits through the hole. So, completely different systems.
Also it would appear that if I wanted to use the Rayflash system with my SB900's on both my cameras, I would need to buy two? They are listing different part numbers for SB900 use on the 700 & 3s. Can the mount be so rigid that it fits each camera exactly?
>> Rigid might not be the best word; perhaps 'built to fit' is better. The Rayflash/Coco is one piece of plastic, with no moving parts. You can't, for example, use a Flex5 Pocketwizard under your flash; it adds too much height and the hole in the ring flash wouldn't align with your lens (Orbis might score points here, unconfirmed). I have a 700 and 300s so the bodies are close enough to be covered by the same model of ring flash, however, the 700 is slightly taller in the body (viewfinder) and fits much more snugly.
To me, the Rayflash/Coco is a nice gimmick. It's fun to use, but not something you'd want to rely on for a ring flash. The inability to use Flex pocketwizards with it annoys me. I bought it thinking it would give me another strobist-style trick to use on location, but it doesn't really pan out that way. I would say, that when conditions are right, it's fun to use, but there is no reason to buy the Rayflash over the Coco as far as I can see. It really is just a piece of plastic. So if you wind up wanting one for fun, look into the knock-offs - they're cheaper (I think $100+ CAD here).
What I find exciting about ring flashes are the studio flashes I've seen that are ~2 feet in diameter - a huge ring that puts the highlights in the model's iris (not pupil) when properly positioned. That's a really cool effect, and I hope to one day get to use one.
Posted 1 year ago # -
Thinking about getting a ring flash for macro. Has anybody look at or have one of the NISSIN MF18 ring flash. It seems you can adjust each side independently. What do you think or do i really need one. I have 2 SB900's.
Posted 9 months ago # -
I have recently purchased the R1C1 and I love it. To me, it does not produce flat photos.
Before that I used a SB 910 on an extension cord. So I could hold the flash in one hand and the camery in the other. Worked fine and gave me a lot of flexibilty. But especially for bug shot, where you can't work with a tripod, it is a very tiring job. Plus, focussing is a real challenge.
All this got solved with using a ring flash. The set-up looks odd, but I have to say, with a D4 and a 105 it is nicely balanced.Rifqi is using a small softbox with his flash attached to the camera. His results are speaking for themselfes (check them out on PAD). This is maybe a good and inexpensive alternative to a ring flash.
Posted 9 months ago # -
As one who grew up shooting available light or with a small fill, I think Rifqi has the nicest macro lighting. I had a bracket rigged to hold an SB-800 with a soft box and hand held it next to what ever I was shooting, but as you say, Juergen, very tiring. I think I am going to rig a small tube with reflective material in it, so as to provide a soft light at the left side of the lens about 10 cm across. The job of holding the camera for me requires two hands or a tripod/monopod.
And, although this is the macro ring light thread, I am recognizing the advantage of the VR on a macro lens...I shoot at 1/800th now, but I think about 1/250 or 1/400 would suffice with the VR to avoid any camera shake. Thus the ISO could be lowered. Of course, using the ring light or its derivative, the problem is solved.
Then, when I find this is not what I want...a ring light.
Posted 9 months ago # -
I will give the SB900 a try on the very very slow bugs and i also have a few small soft boxes to try. Most bugs don't stay put long. I would still like it if anyone has tried the NISSIN MF18. It's about $450 and the Nikon is about $775 which comes with the SU-800 and that can be useful. Gee i love how i talk myself into stuff. Thanks for the info. Pics on the PAD (it took me about a week to find out what that was) are really great. Hope to post one or two soon. Need to go kiss up some want to go shopping.
Posted 9 months ago # -
parke1953 said:
I will give the SB900 a try on the very very slow bugs and i also have a few small soft boxes to try. Most bugs don't stay put long. I would still like it if anyone has tried the NISSIN MF18. It's about $450 and the Nikon is about $775 which comes with the SU-800 and that can be useful. Gee i love how i talk myself into stuff. Thanks for the info. Pics on the PAD (it took me about a week to find out what that was) are really great. Hope to post one or two soon. Need to go kiss up some want to go shopping.Parke, the SU 800 made me decide on the Nikon kit. Because i thought it is useful for any remote flash application. I thought i could kill two birds with one stone. But since it is infrared based and needs the special angle, the versatility for other remote applications is somewhat limited.
Rifqi (i wish he would share his opinion on this thread) has his own unique style. He uses extension tubes and works with a shallow depth as a creative composition to his macros. This is very nice and requires a lot of skills. He is showing us, how the eye of a fly looks like.
I most of the time, try to show the whole critter in focus, revealing as much overall details as possible. Which means, the bigger the subject is, the more I have to close my lense and the better lighting I need. I tend to fix all my settings and then fall into the shot, like a sniper homes into the target.
So to me, there are many styles and everyone is developing his/her own technique, which require different lighting equipment and set-ups.
Go shopping and share :-)
JürgenPosted 9 months ago # -
@ parke1953... Google NISSIN MF18 Review and I think you will find some info. One review I read suggested the build quality was good but the modeling light was not so good, flickered at low power. At B & H, one review from a dentist said his office was happy..
Posted 9 months ago # -
useful thred on the Nikon SBR1 system
http://nikonrumors.com/forum/topic.php?id=295
I bought a SB R1 kit plus an additional SB R200
They work fine with an SB900 as the master
I sometimes use a second SB 900 as a back light
105 macro on a D800Posted 9 months ago # -
@ sevencrossing In the US the SB R1 is refereed to as R1C1 Wireless Close-Up Speedlight System. On Nikon's website, the reviews are excellent...even the one with the photos horribly out of focus, LOL If I keep reading these threads I may have to get the 105 VR lens...really sounds like it does the job well and is also, surprisingly, not a very expensive (>$1000) lens.
Posted 9 months ago # -
msmoto said:
In the US the SB R1 is refereed to as R1C1 Wireless Close-Up Speedlight System.The R1C1 kit includes the SU-800 Wireless Speedlight Commander which you don't really need, if you have a "commander" flash eg the SB900
The SB R1 Kit, does not come with an SU-800 Remote Commander
the individual flash units that make up the system, are designated SB R200
if you getting one, shop around. Sometimes its cheaper to buy individual components
sometimes there are big discount on KitsPosted 9 months ago # -
I play around with a macro lens from time to time. Shot this spider in my garage. DOF is a bit of an issue at a distance of about 14". Next time I may increase my working distance then crop. I don't have a ring flash but I did use a Nissin Di866, handheld (in commander mode), with a Gary Fong diffuser. From what I remember of this little experiment, I got more keepers when holding the flash off to the side than I did when it was pointed straight on the spider. Not a work of art by any means, but something I would certainly attempt again and a technique I'm assuming I could improve upon with a little trial and error.
Posted 9 months ago # -
OK, I think I will add 2 cents again. One method I use to look at different focus points, is to shoot at about 9 FPS while moving the camera in and out slightly. I can then see which plane of focus I prefer in post. Obviously, a flash would not be useful. So, I am thinking a small portable LED unit, providing a cool but constant high intensity light source, may work. Has anyone tried this for macro work?
Posted 9 months ago #
Reply »
You must log in to post.
