Affordable LED lights briefly compared.

[heart0less]

Hiya!

Some time ago I decided to complete a rather simple, but most importantly, affordable lighting setup that would be easy to carry around and to set up.

LED panels ticked all these boxes, so I started to hunt for them on a sales and local Craigslist / eBay.

This is what I managed to acquire:

I decided to gather them all up and put together a short test comparing their light output, since it was the parameter that I cared about most.

 

PART 1 - HOW MUCH LIGHT DO THEY ACTUALLY GIVE?

I put all the lights on a lighting stand, my camera on a tripod and took photos of a cabinet that was exactly 3.5 meters  (~11.5 feet) away from them.
Just what you could call 'a flood mode'. No light modifiers in front, no objects in front.

I measured both the lowest and the highest brightness settings and also took notice of white balance.

No other lights were turned on, my room was pitch black.

 

The first light I turned on was Neewer Foldable 256 that consists of 256 LED beads. Dozens of positive reviews on amazon praising its mobility and high output.

I only got it yesterday, but truth be told, I'm not really convinced by it. Doesn't feel much sturdy and I'm quite confident that if you used it on a daily basis, it wouldn't last more than a year, especially the velcro stripes.
What's more, it can only be controlled by a remote included in the package - there are no dials / knobs on the light itself, which is a pity.
This one is powered via AC adapter and can't run on any batteries.

It's rated at 40 W, which in my case translated to an exposure of:
- at the lowest setting (10%) → f/1.4 , 1/80 s, ISO 800 which, according to a smart exposure calculators, equals EV100 = 4.3; white balance - 5550K,
- at the highest setting (100%) → f/1.4 , 1/100 s, ISO 160 → EV100 = 6.9; white balance - 5600K.

 

The second light - a cheap cabinet LED bar that I consider as a poor-man's Quasar / Astera Tube.

Bought it for 4$ and features 36 LED beads. I plan to combine 3 of them together in some nicer 3D printed housing and use it as a practical light / hair light that could be put anywhere in the frame.

Runs on a USB 5V - every power bank is capable of powering it. Doesn't feature any brightness control, it's either at 0 or 100%.

With it I managed to get a following exposure:

f/1.4 , 1/80 s, ISO 2500 → EV100 = 2.6; WB - 6000K and astonishing +60 tint (don't even ask about CRI).

 

The third competitor - Neewer CN 176.

Just like the name says - it has 176 LEDs, rated at 11W. Got it for 15$ and that included a NP-F550 battery.
It's quite nice and very handy. Can be powered with a battery or an AC plug.

Results:
- at the lowest setting (10%) → f/1.4 , 1/80 s, ISO 3200 → EV100 = 2.3; WB - 5800K,
- at the highest setting (100%) → f/1.4 , 1/80 s, ISO 250 → EV100 ~ 6.0; WB - 5700K.

 

The fourth light - Yongnuo YN-300 III 5500K

The first light I ever bought. Most feature-packed, since it can be controlled with my phone via some app. The original package included an orange card, a diffusion card, a remote and a bunch of adapters, etc. Can be powered with a battery or an AC plug.
300 daylight balanced LEDs, 18W

Results:
- at the lowest setting (10%) → f/1.4 , 1/80 s, ISO 1000 → EV100 ~ 4.0; WB - 5950K
- at the highest setting (100%) → f/1.4 , 1/125 s, ISO 160 → EV100 ~ 7.33; WB - 5650K.
Quite funny - it overpowered the foldable Neewer.

 

And the last, but definitely not least - Neewer 660 Bi-color

660 LEDs; 330 are supposed to be 5600K and 330 - 3200 K; rated at 40W
The most robust build - all metal. Feels very solid and looks expensive. Bought for 60$. Can be powered with a single battery (even though it features a dual NP-F slot) or an AC plug.

Results:
- at the lowest setting, daylight LEDs only → f/1.4 , 1/80 s, ISO 1600 → EV100 - 3.6; WB - 5900K
- at the highest setting, daylight LEDs only → f/1.4 , 1/120 s, ISO 160 → EV100 ~ 7.3; WB - 5900K - funny thing, the photo looks EXACTLY the same as the previous one, no WB shift, no color shift, at all.

- at the lowest setting, tungsten LEDs only → f/1.4 , 1/80 s, ISO 1250 → EV100 - 3.6; WB - 3600K
- at the highest setting, daylight LEDs only → f/1.4 , 1/105 s, ISO 160 → EV100 - 6.9; WB - 3600K - slight tint shift

- at the highest setting, both LED types → f/1.4 , 1/220 s, ISO 160 → EV100 ~ 8.15; WB - 4600K

 

To get you an idea, how does an exposure of f/1.4 , 1/220 s, ISO 160 looks like, here is a photo taken at 8:10AM (the sun rises at 5:50 AM) with those exact parameters:

A bigger picture of this scene, taken with my phone (HDR enabled):

 

To sum up:

Neewer 660 is the brightest of the bunch followed by Yongnuo YN-300, which almost matches its bigger competitor at daylight temperature (that's quite a surprise).

I'm a bit dissapointed with the foldable Neewer - it didn't really amaze me and I find it LESS practical than any other light.
Fortunately, I bought it on Amazon and I think I'll be returning it in the next few days.

Neewer CN 176 did quite good; might serve as a nice hair light / fill light.

The LED bar didn't win any awards, but it's a different kind of a beast - I promise you, I'll make it shine some day, lol.

 

Hopefully more parts of this comparison will come.
I'll put them against some diffusion and test their color renderition.

Ideally, I'd like to get a Godox SL-60 or a Weeylite Ninja 400 150W (what a whacky name) to have some more power at disposal.
Maybe in the future..

Hope you got something out of this post.

[scotchtape]

Actual quality of light is important and you need a meter to test. The cheap flexible panels probably are the same, I had the fl3030b type, very poor rendering in the red channel.

[heart0less]

47 minutes ago, scotchtape said:

Actual quality of light is important and you need a meter to test.

Noted, thanks! 

I won't be getting any meter, that's for sure, though I'll try my best to compare their performance in a real life situation. 

[newfoundmass]

11 hours ago, heart0less said:

The fourth light - Yongnuo YN-300 III 5500K

These lights are great. I still use them quite a bit even though I have my Godox SL-60W. I'd definitely recommend it for those starting out or who need some affordable, good LED lights! It was really the first budget LED I worked with that I felt was worth it. The ones I'd worked with before gave a nasty green tint. 

[heart0less]

How do you like the Godox, @newfoundmass?

[sanveer]

Try the Lupo Smartpanel Dual Colour which outputs a staggering 5060 lx, at a metre.

https://www.newsshooter.com/2020/04/10/lupo-smartpanel-dual-color-review/

I am guessing a few of these should be sufficient to light a small room well.

If it were available here, I would have picked up a few of these. I also wish they had accessories (barn doors?). 

 

 

[heart0less]

3 hours ago, sanveer said:

Try the Lupo Smartpanel Dual Colour which outputs a staggering 5060 lx, at a metre.

https://www.newsshooter.com/2020/04/10/lupo-smartpanel-dual-color-review/

I am guessing a few of these should be sufficient to light a small room well.

If it were available here, I would have picked up a few of these. I also wish they had accessories (barn doors?). 

Hmm, it sounds almost too good to be true.. 🤔

It'd cost me slightly more than Godox 60W, but, allegedly, the final output would be higher. Not to mention the ease of use (weighs almost nothing and can be battery powered), transportation, etc.

It really got me thinking.

Thanks for sharing it, @sanveer!

[gt3rs]

1 hour ago, heart0less said:

Hmm, it sounds almost too good to be true.. 🤔

It'd cost me slightly more than Godox 60W, but, allegedly, the final output would be higher. Not to mention the ease of use (weighs almost nothing and can be battery powered), transportation, etc.

It really got me thinking.

Thanks for sharing it, @sanveer!

The Lupo looks interesting but not sure you can compare with the Godox 60W in output as the Lupo has a beam angle of 40°, not sure with what Godox lux is measured but probably the standard reflector that has a much wider  beam angle. A SL-60W with Fresnel 12°-55° probably at 12° gives 25'000 lux at 1m so at 40° my guess it will be more than 10'000 lux.....  
But the portability and easy to use of the Lupo is hard to beat.

[sanveer]

3 hours ago, gt3rs said:

The Lupo looks interesting but not sure you can compare with the Godox 60W in output as the Lupo has a beam angle of 40°, not sure with what Godox lux is measured but probably the standard reflector that has a much wider  beam angle. A SL-60W with Fresnel 12°-55° probably at 12° gives 25'000 lux at 1m so at 40° my guess it will be more than 10'000 lux.....  
But the portability and easy to use of the Lupo is hard to beat.

The Lupo, is, surprisingly brighter. It also has higher CRI, arguably lasts longer (the Godox has 3 times the power draw, the Lupo uses NP-F-series batteries meaning that there are mmultiple capacity battery options (meaning you could go for hours on large capacity batteries), and is cheaper too $159 vs $349 (for the battery version of the Godox, the SLB60W). If the Godox is used with its fresnel attachment, it would be brighter.

The Lupo is much smaller and lighter. 

 

https://www.adorama.com/goslb60w.html

[gt3rs]

1 hour ago, sanveer said:

The Lupo, is, surprisingly brighter. It also has higher CRI, arguably lasts longer (the Godox has 3 times the power draw, the Lupo uses NP-F-series batteries meaning that there are mmultiple capacity battery options (meaning you could go for hours on large capacity batteries), and is cheaper too $159 vs $349 (for the battery version of the Godox, the SLB60W). If the Godox is used with its fresnel attachment, it would be brighter.

The Lupo is much smaller and lighter. 

 

https://www.adorama.com/goslb60w.html

Lupo does not include battery, chargers or power adapter so it will be more than 159 but for sure less than 349. I find panel less flexible than COB lights but especially if you are doing interviews, corporates etc.. the new Lupo panel seems a better fit than the SL or SLB from godox.

Just that there is no magic in output, the lupo use fresnel lens inside this is why the beam is narrow you do the same with the godox and the power will be much more. 

[sanveer]

1 hour ago, gt3rs said:

Just that there is no magic in output, the lupo use fresnel lens inside this is why the beam is narrow you do the same with the godox and the power will be much more. 

I am guessing they are a newer generation  (atleast 2 generations, I am guessing), of LED technology. That's why the power draw is substantially different. The Lupo outputs as much output, as lights which are much larger in size.

The Aputure F7 is a comparable light (its RGB though). It's similar in size and beam angle (45° vs 40°). But the Aputure F7 outputs 1500 lx at a metre. And that has a power draw of 15 watts (as opposed to 20watts on the Lupo).

It's not just the beam angle, the efficiency is actually highlighting a newer generation of LEDs.

And this is the price of 2 large capacity batteries, along with a dual charging hub. 

https://www.amazon.com/Neewer-6600mAh-Replacement-Handycams-Feelworld/dp/B076M5LQC7/ref=sxin_9_ac_m_rm?ac_md=1-1-bnAgYmF0dGVyeQ%3D%3D-ac_d_rm&cv_ct_cx=Sony+NPF+battery&dchild=1&keywords=Sony+NPF+battery&pd_rd_i=B076M5LQC7&pd_rd_r=fba5927c-c582-43f1-8879-898943bbb3e1&pd_rd_w=c2qIb&pd_rd_wg=x7kxp&pf_rd_p=e3a499cf-9678-4595-82a4-3d742ce12b40&pf_rd_r=FEDYDDC7XX7R1ME7B5NG&psc=1&qid=1587328156&sr=1-2-87203c69-9404-44ba-aa52-290406ffe53a

[newfoundmass]

On 4/19/2020 at 3:34 AM, heart0less said:

How do you like the Godox, @newfoundmass?

It's great. I've got 3. Paired with a Glow EZ Lock softboxes from Adorama they're incredible value!

[IronFilm]

On 4/17/2020 at 2:45 AM, scotchtape said:

Actual quality of light is important and you need a meter to test.

The second best option to using an expensive meter is stick a few subjects with varying skin tones in front of the light and see how it looks 

[heart0less]

On 4/19/2020 at 10:32 PM, sanveer said:

I am guessing they are a newer generation  (atleast 2 generations, I am guessing), of LED technology. That's why the power draw is substantially different. The Lupo outputs as much output, as lights which are much larger in size.

Yeah, something is definitely going on. I've seen some new lights that boast about 90W output from 384 LED beads.
Right now I get 40W of power from 660 LEDs, which is still plenty.

 

On 4/19/2020 at 8:45 PM, gt3rs said:

Just that there is no magic in output, the lupo use fresnel lens inside this is why the beam is narrow you do the same with the godox and the power will be much more. 

That's right, no magic inside.
Though I have to admit that those LEDs that Lupo used seem to be pretty efficient and bright, nonetheless.

Manfrotto used fresnels in their small LED lights back in the day and they could only achieve 550 Lx @ 1m
(Manfrotto Spectra 500F)

[gt3rs]

51 minutes ago, heart0less said:

Yeah, something is definitely going on. I've seen some new lights that boast about 90W output from 384 LED beads.
Right now I get 40W of power from 660 LEDs, which is still plenty.

 

That's right, no magic inside.
Though I have to admit that those LEDs that Lupo used seem to be pretty efficient and bright, nonetheless.

Manfrotto used fresnels in their small LED lights back in the day and they could only achieve 550 Lx @ 1m
(Manfrotto Spectra 500F)

Yep on the newsshooter review is stated that the Lupo uses fresnel nothing wrong with this approach but is not due to led evolution.

[heart0less]

I took another approach. 

4x 17W LED bulbs. 95+ CRI. 

[zerocool22]

11 hours ago, heart0less said:

I took another approach. 

4x 17W LED bulbs. 95+ CRI. 

This looks interesting, where did you find it. Might be a good use for putting some thungsten bulbs in there. If you light a face with it please share the results, very interested in this!

[heart0less]

1 hour ago, zerocool22 said:

This looks interesting, where did you find it.

I was looking for some light stands and saw this four-socket lamp holder, which lead to me to think - why not put some quite efficient lightbulbs in there and call it a day? 

Sure, I could use some 80W CFL lights, that are even cheaper than those LEDs I bought, but even though can be bought in professionals photo equipment stores, their color renderition is really poor - couldn't find anything better than 85 CRI. 

 

2 hours ago, zerocool22 said:

Might be a good use for putting some thungsten bulbs in there.

I wish! 

Tungsten bulbs for domestic use have been banned in Europe for more than 10 years now. Getting some could prove to be difficult..

 

2 hours ago, zerocool22 said:

If you light a face with it please share the results, very interested in this!

Sure, if you don't have anything against my face, I'll do it. 

( :

[zerocool22]

27 minutes ago, heart0less said:

I was looking for some light stands and saw this four-socket lamp holder, which lead to me to think - why not put some quite efficient lightbulbs in there and call it a day? 

Sure, I could use some 80W CFL lights, that are even cheaper than those LEDs I bought, but even though can be bought in professionals photo equipment stores, their color renderition is really poor - couldn't find anything better than 85 CRI. 

 

I wish! 

Tungsten bulbs for domestic use have been banned in Europe for more than 10 years now. Getting some could prove to be difficult..

 

Sure, if you don't have anything against my face, I'll do it. 

( :

You can still find them in europe, but not sure which one gives the best results. Wonder which ones Roger Deakins uses. 

[heart0less]

4 hours ago, zerocool22 said:

Wonder which ones Roger Deakins uses. 

That's what he said some time ago. Source.