Original AD600 Extension Head

Messages
958
Name
Alan
Edit My Images
Yes
Hoping someone can help? In the original versions of the Godox AD600, I believe the bulb is set too far back in order to accomodate the Bowens mount, resulting in loss of light. When using the extension, does that suffer similarly, or is that ok?
 
Hoping someone can help? In the original versions of the Godox AD600, I believe the bulb is set too far back in order to accomodate the Bowens mount, resulting in loss of light. When using the extension, does that suffer similarly, or is that ok?

Both the same. The easiest fix is to use a low-profile Bowens adapter - assuming you have a softbox with interchangeable mounts. Eg this https://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B01EYJOPPS/ref=oh_aui_search_detailpage?ie=UTF8&psc=1
 
Thanks @HoppyUK was using my AD360 today and was a bit short of power. Not so bothered about TTL, so the original version of the AD600 seems a better option ;)

If it's just power you want, the original AD600 plus a low-profile mount to maximise output is as good as it gets with a battery powered monolight, The non-TTL version is the pick of the bunch for value, and you can double-up to 1200Ws with the twin-unit adapter for very modest extra cost.

It's easy to run out of puff when working outdoors in bright light, especially when greater working distances are often involved. If that's the case, moving the light as close as possible can make a big difference, boosted further by a smaller softbox that can be just as effective at close range and a lot easier to use if it's a bit breezy.
 
Thanks again @HoppyUK. It was a horse outside, with a single light. So didn't want to be too close. Increasing the ISO a little worked. But I would have liked to have used a bigger softbox. Think I'll get one ;)
 
Big softboxes tend to be relatively shallower, resulting in a wider spread of light, and that's where they lose brightness compared to smaller softboxes. A deeper design will maximise effective output.
 
Back
Top