Jump to content

- - - - -

Constant LEDs for still shots

  • Please log in to reply
7 replies to this topic

#1 jasonlandis



  • Member
  • Pip
  • 17 posts

Posted 06 July 2013 - 09:19 AM

Has anyone had any experience lighting with LEDs ? I know a lot of new led lights are balanced to daylight so it seems that would be a huge advantage. Especially for macro work with snoots.

I just purchased some ds161's is the video light bright enough to shoot stills with?

#2 davehicks


    Eagle Ray

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 317 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Seattle, WA USA

Posted 06 July 2013 - 10:10 AM

No, this will not be enough light is most situations.  If you have strobes you will be much better off using them.  The LED's will do ok for Video, but I think they are a little underpowered on the 161's for my taste.


#3 jasonlandis



  • Member
  • Pip
  • 17 posts

Posted 06 July 2013 - 05:08 PM

What about a more powerful light like the ikelite pro-2800 http://www.ikelite.c...s/vpro2800.html

#4 Interceptor121


    Giant Squid

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1730 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Weybridge, UK

Posted 06 July 2013 - 11:37 PM

Video lights work up to 1/100-1/125 shutter speed faster shutter speeds result in blurred images

If you put a pair of 4000 lumens light on a macro subject you are likely to scar it as fish tolerate more the rapid pulse of a strobe then continuous light

Check my video, pictures and blog

YouTube Channel

Flickr Sets


#5 kc_moses


    Great Hammerhead

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 860 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:South Florida
  • Interests:Cooking, baking, diving, videography, landscape and food photography.

Posted 07 July 2013 - 07:34 AM

From my experience, a 1400 lumen light is just right for macro video and photo. The 1400 lumen light can light up area up to 5 ft in front of you, yet for anything closer, you won't bind them as long as you don't point the light directly at them.


There is however a draw back to use video light for photo, that is you would burn through battery very fast. Battery for a strobe should last about 200+ photos, while if you have the video light on the whole time, it will last about 1 dive. Of course you can turn on the video light when you need to take photo to conserve battery, but then it could be a pain to turn the video light on and off so often, especially if you have a twist type video light.

#6 bvanant


    Sperm Whale

  • Team Wetpixel
  • 1879 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Los Angeles (more or less)
  • Interests:Science, photography, travel

Posted 09 July 2013 - 07:54 AM

In the non underwater world, a lot of photographers are leaving the old studio strobes behind and moving to LED panels. See Kirk Tuck (Visual Science Lab Blog) for details.  I think that for many macro subjects you can get buy with relatively high powered LED lights instead of strobes if you take care with local white balance, but I think shooting at f:16 at 1/250 will need strobes.


Canon 7d, Nauticam, Lots of glass, Olympus OMD-EM5, Nauticam, 60 macro, 45 macro, 8 mm fisheye, Inon, S&S, Athena Strobes plus lots of fiddly bits.

#7 ehanauer


    Eagle Ray

  • Industry
  • PipPipPip
  • 369 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:San Diego, California
  • Interests:Diving, Chicago Cubs baseball, Mac computers, swimming, Porsches

Posted 06 August 2013 - 06:35 AM

Video lights change critters' behaviors a lot more than the flash of a strobe.

#8 tdpriest


    Sperm Whale

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2181 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Solihull, UK
  • Interests:Diving medicine, warm water, scenery...

Posted 08 August 2013 - 02:58 AM

For what it's worth this was shot last year with a Sola 600 at full power and iso 800, balanced against ambient light in the English Channel:




Plymouth BSoUP Splash-in 2012 089 Fairyland.jpg