> 2400ws studio flash

Downhill Specialist

Downhill Specialist

Messages
333
Edit My Images
No
Having spent the last couple of days searching the used sites for the above, I can't find much in the U.K. that seems to exceed this for a reasonable price. Having never used powerful studio flash back in the day and being more familiar with current offerings such as IRO 400/600w, can anyone advise what I could be looking for with regards to makes/models and where to source at a decent price (I am really on a budget ATM).

I think 2400ws is the minimum I am looking for in a couple of heads but if we could get over 3000 that would be better from what I have read.
 
What are you lighting with 2400w/s? An entire aircraft hanger?


Seriously though - some idea of what you are trying to achieve would direct advice properly.
 
These things have gone out of fashion, killed by the high iso capability of digital. They are now only really needed in large pro studios when using 5"x4" or larger film cameras.

But, I'll try to answer your question as far as possible.

In about 2000 I bought into the Elinchrom flash generator range, which were excellent in every way. I started off with one of their Chic 2 flashes, which delivered a max of 2400j through 1 flash head or 2, when used with 2 it would be a max of 1200j through each, i.e. equal distribution. I ended up with 6 units. I THINK (but don't know) that this unit was replaced by the Elinchrom RX, I never actually used one but it seems to be about the same.

They also had a Chic 1 model, but that was only 1200j.

I also had an older 6000j unit from Elinchrom, I can't remember much about it but from memory it could power at least 2 heads, pushing that amount of power through 1 6000j head produced a loud crack:)

Edit: There were, from memory, also similar offerings from Bowens in both 2000j and 3000j, older and with a lesser reputation for quality, they still turn up on eBay.

As Mark says, why do you need that much power? But, if you do, the Chic 2 or the RX is probably your best choice.
 
Last edited:
DemiLion said:
What are you lighting with 2400w/s? An entire aircraft hanger?


Seriously though - some idea of what you are trying to achieve would direct advice properly.
Click to expand...
Garry Edwards said:
These things have gone out of fashion, killed by the high iso capability of digital. They are now only really needed in large pro studios when using 5"x4" or larger film cameras.

But, I'll try to answer your question as far as possible.

In about 2000 I bought into the Elinchrom flash generator range, which were excellent in every way. I started off with one of their Chic 2 flashes, which delivered a max of 2400j through 1 flash head or 2, when used with 2 it would be a max of 1200j through each, i.e. equal distribution. I ended up with 6 units. I THINK (but don't know) that this unit was replaced by the Elinchrom RX, I never actually used one but it seems to be about the same.

They also had a Chic 1 model, but that was only 1200j.

I also had an older 6000j unit from Elinchrom, I can't remember much about it but from memory it could power at least 2 heads, pushing that amount of power through 1 6000j head produced a loud crack:)

Edit: There were, from memory, also similar offerings from Bowens in both 2000j and 3000j, older and with a lesser reputation for quality, they still turn up on eBay.

As Mark says, why do you need that much power? But, if you do, the Chic 2 or the RX is probably your best choice.
Click to expand...

Thanks both.

Gary. I have been looking at the RX2400 packs and compatible heads. There are a couple with good deals at the moment but I am trying to figure out if I need more or not.

As you rightly say, I will be working in the studio using 5x4 and 8x10 with film (although I managed with 500ws recently for HP5), I am going to shoot wet plate collodion which has an ISO of 1-3.
 
Is it for a one off? You could hire.

Or if for static work you could fire multiple pops of a lesser flash.

Otherwise, 600Ws is enough for most people, for most things.

FWIW Godox do a 2400Ws pack & head system but I'd be wary of spending that much with them. They seem to be going through a cost-engineering phase and the quality of their stuff is definitely decreasing.
 
juggler said:
Is it for a one off? You could hire.

Or if for static work you could fire multiple pops of a lesser flash.

Otherwise, 600Ws is enough for most people, for most things.

FWIW Godox do a 2400Ws pack & head system but I'd be wary of spending that much with them. They seem to be going through a cost-engineering phase and the quality of their stuff is definitely decreasing.
Click to expand...

Thanks. As I posted above yours (may have crossed over), I definitely need more than 600Ws.
 
OK, in that case I would forget the Bowens offerings, I can't be sure but I think they used the old L mount accessory mount, so you won't be able to find any useful modifiers, and it's all about modifiers.

The Elinchrom is no longer popular, but adapters from Elinchrom to S-fit are available (not tried by me) which would open up the range of high-efficiency reflectors, which would, in effect, dramatically increase the delivered power.

And, as Simon says, there's always multiple pops, which work extremely well if ambient light can be totally excluded.

It's GarRy BTW, I was named after a Welshman not an American:)
 
Downhill Specialist said:
I will be working in the studio using 5x4 and 8x10 with film
Click to expand...


Aaaahhhhh. OK.

Despite what Simon says, I'd give Godox a lot of thought. Either the 2400 pack/head or a couple of Ad1200's.

Shooting a 5x4 means that you could run at 1/1 and not worry about recycling time - which for digital is usually the reason to bump up the native power.
 
Garry Edwards said:
OK, in that case I would forget the Bowens offerings, I can't be sure but I think they used the old L mount accessory mount, so you won't be able to find any useful modifiers, and it's all about modifiers.

The Elinchrom is no longer popular, but adapters from Elinchrom to S-fit are available (not tried by me) which would open up the range of high-efficiency reflectors, which would, in effect, dramatically increase the delivered power.

And, as Simon says, there's always multiple pops, which work extremely well if ambient light can be totally excluded.

It's GarRy BTW, I was named after a Welshman not an American:)
Click to expand...

Apologies, Garry. Thanks for the responses. I was expecting you to be honest in this department!

I am still figuring things out at the moment with which direction I want to go. Reading online a lot of folks say that 2400ws is the minimum you want for this type of stuff but people have got good results with that sort of power so I may pick up a couple cheap and see how I get on.
 
DemiLion said:
Aaaahhhhh. OK.

Despite what Simon says, I'd give Godox a lot of thought. Either the 2400 pack/head or a couple of Ad1200's.

Shooting a 5x4 means that you could run at 1/1 and not worry about recycling time - which for digital is usually the reason to bump up the native power.
Click to expand...

Yes, recycle time isn't an issue. It's literally one frame and done.
 
Downhill Specialist said:
Yes, recycle time isn't an issue. It's literally one frame and done.
Click to expand...
It becomes an issue with multiple pops, which are likely to be needed depending on the type of modifier used and the flash to subject distance.

I looked up the spec for the Godox 2400, there's a reference to max recycling time of 2 seconds, hidden away in their pdf, but it isn't clear to me whether that's at full power, they seem to provide much more detail about the other features.

And I agree with Simon re both pricing and quality, businesses that have a monopoly can do as they please:(
 
DemiLion said:
Aaaahhhhh. OK.

Despite what Simon says, I'd give Godox a lot of thought. Either the 2400 pack/head or a couple of Ad1200's.

Shooting a 5x4 means that you could run at 1/1 and not worry about recycling time - which for digital is usually the reason to bump up the native power.
Click to expand...
A couple of QT1200s should be much less spendy (ie risky!) than the 2400 system
 
Downhill Specialist said:
Apologies, Garry. Thanks for the responses. I was expecting you to be honest in this department!

I am still figuring things out at the moment with which direction I want to go. Reading online a lot of folks say that 2400ws is the minimum you want for this type of stuff but people have got good results with that sort of power so I may pick up a couple cheap and see how I get on.
Click to expand...
I assume you've already decided what modifiers you'll be using and what kind of distances you'll be working at?

If not then you may find that you can get a fair bit more light on the subject by careful selection.
 
juggler said:
I assume you've already decided what modifiers you'll be using and what kind of distances you'll be working at?

If not then you may find that you can get a fair bit more light on the subject by careful selection.
Click to expand...

Yes. From researching online a lot of people just use reflectors and work pretty close to the subject. Of course, more power gives more options for modifiers.
 
Downhill Specialist said:
Yes. From researching online a lot of people just use reflectors and work pretty close to the subject. Of course, more power gives more options for modifiers.
Click to expand...
Yes, it's all about the choice of modifier and making full use of the ISL. Many years ago, a local camera club borrowed my studio to take some shots using the wet collodion process, it was a real struggle, even in a fully blacked out studio, to get enough power even with multiple pops, with that process it was all about getting adequate exposure, not much room for creativity.
 
Garry Edwards said:
Yes, it's all about the choice of modifier and making full use of the ISL. Many years ago, a local camera club borrowed my studio to take some shots using the wet collodion process, it was a real struggle, even in a fully blacked out studio, to get enough power even with multiple pops, with that process it was all about getting adequate exposure, not much room for creativity.
Click to expand...

I have the book, 'Chemical Pictures' coming this week so hopefully that will give me some more information.

Also, it can of course be done with natural light outdoors with several seconds of exposure so perhaps a good place to start before looking at using studio flash.
 
Reminds me of doing my "O" and "A" level photography courses. We were alowed in to the studios but NOT allowed to touch anything...the packs for the studio flash units were the size and weight of a washing machine and the cables the sort usually found in electricity substations!
 
Graham W said:
Reminds me of doing my "O" and "A" level photography courses. We were alowed in to the studios but NOT allowed to touch anything...the packs for the studio flash units were the size and weight of a washing machine and the cables the sort usually found in electricity substations!
Click to expand...
I am so glad this is q thing of a past. I cant wrap my head round how the likes of karl taylor haven't got rid it of that! Must be emotional attachment
 
Have you considered movie lighting? If it's a static subjec you can get crazy bright movie lights, I saw some a while back they were I think 3000w each and you can get much brighter.
 
swanseamale47 said:
Have you considered movie lighting? If it's a static subjec you can get crazy bright movie lights, I saw some a while back they were I think 3000w each and you can get much brighter.
Click to expand...
Movie lighting at that power would surely be ridiculously hot and bright for the sitter?

I've gone ahead and purchased a Bowens 3K unit. I'll report back how it goes.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top