Jump to content




Photo

Kino-Flo Tegra 4-Bank DMX


  • Please log in to reply
20 replies to this topic

#1 Bill DiPietra

Bill DiPietra
  • Sustaining Members
  • 2264 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • New York City

Posted 20 December 2015 - 01:05 PM

Hi everyone.  I am considering purchasing one these units in the near future.  I've never used Kino-Flos at all I just wanted some feedback on those of you who have had experience with them in the past.  I know the Diva Lite is the more popular (and cheaper unit,) but the 4-bank DMX seems a lot more versatile and worth the extra money.

 

Thanks in advance for any comments.


  • 0




#2 JD Hartman

JD Hartman
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1490 posts
  • Gaffer
  • Edison, N.J. U.S.A.

Posted 20 December 2015 - 03:24 PM

How often are you going to use the DMX control?  What will be providing the DMX control signal?  How do you see the extra versatility working to make you job easier or faster?  For my money a regular 4' 4bank will do.  


  • 0

#3 Bill DiPietra

Bill DiPietra
  • Sustaining Members
  • 2264 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • New York City

Posted 20 December 2015 - 03:53 PM

The DMX feature is a nice one, but not my primary motivation for leaning towards that unit.  Why would I need the DMX control tapped into a control signal?  According to the product description I can dim it remotely.  More importantly, the unit appears to put out a decent amount of light and I like the ability that you have to switch selected lamps on and off. 

 

Also, a regular 4-bank is fine but it doesn't include the $500+ ballast.  So taking all that into account, it seems worth the extra money.


  • 0

#4 Phil Rhodes

Phil Rhodes
  • Sustaining Members
  • 11232 posts
  • Other

Posted 20 December 2015 - 04:08 PM

Unless you're into renting it out, I'm not sure I'd consider the Kino-Flo branding particularly essential.

 

P


  • 0

#5 Bill DiPietra

Bill DiPietra
  • Sustaining Members
  • 2264 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • New York City

Posted 20 December 2015 - 04:10 PM

Unless you're into renting it out, I'm not sure I'd consider the Kino-Flo branding particularly essential.

 

P

 

I'm open to recommendations...


  • 0

#6 Bill DiPietra

Bill DiPietra
  • Sustaining Members
  • 2264 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • New York City

Posted 20 December 2015 - 04:22 PM

For my money a regular 4' 4bank will do.  

 

Actually, I forgot about the Diva Lite 415.  So that's a possibility, too.


  • 0

#7 JD Hartman

JD Hartman
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1490 posts
  • Gaffer
  • Edison, N.J. U.S.A.

Posted 20 December 2015 - 05:14 PM

Newer Kino ballasts all have the capability to individually switch lamps on and off.  To control a DMX ballast remotely you need a source for the DMX control signal and a DMX control cable.  You will get a color temp shift dimming the lamps.  You may want to look at the Kino Diva(s) which dim as well.

 

No experience with them, but the FloLights are supposed to be  cheaper.  http://www.flolight.com/


  • 0

#8 Oron Cohen

Oron Cohen
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 208 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Tel-Aviv/London

Posted 20 December 2015 - 06:15 PM

Hi Bill, 

 

You said you never used a Kino but you want to buy one, why? 

 

I think maybe it's better to rent a Kino and use it first, then see if it's useful for you. If you work as DOP it's rarely that you'll use 1 Kino on set, more like a truck of lights or at least a small van :-) 

 

I agree with the others though, you should just get the regular 4f 4 bank option+a soft case, you can get one including the ballast from various places, also, I'll check with all the local rental houses, they sometimes have used ones for sell in reduced price and they will include the tubes, so you pay about half, and those lights lasts for a very long time. 

 

here is a link for the full kit from B&H: http://www.bhphotovi...escent_One.html

soft case: http://www.bhphotovi...ageID/accessory

 

p.s - If you do get a "Kino" light, get the Kino and don't go close to the other makes, it's not worth it as they're not on par, it's not like with HMI's and some other lights which you have GOOD alternatives. 


  • 0

#9 Bill DiPietra

Bill DiPietra
  • Sustaining Members
  • 2264 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • New York City

Posted 20 December 2015 - 06:27 PM

You said you never used a Kino but you want to buy one, why? 

 

Well, as Phil mentioned, there is a possibility I would be renting it out.  Not really sure, yet.  And I have seen them in use when I was at the ASC and I like the quality of the light very much. 

 

Thanks for your comments.  And yes, among fluorescent lighting units, so far Kinos appear to be what would give me the best bang for my buck.


  • 0

#10 JD Hartman

JD Hartman
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1490 posts
  • Gaffer
  • Edison, N.J. U.S.A.

Posted 20 December 2015 - 06:40 PM

Hi Bill, 

 

You said you never used a Kino but you want to buy one, why? 

 

I think maybe it's better to rent a Kino and use it first, then see if it's useful for you. If you work as DOP it's rarely that you'll use 1 Kino on set, more like a truck of lights or at least a small van :-)

 

p.s - If you do get a "Kino" light, get the Kino and don't go close to the other makes, it's not worth it as they're not on par, it's not like with HMI's and some other lights which you have GOOD alternatives. 

 

Try before you buy, especially if you think this will be a rental items.  Especially true of the Diva light.    I have two and some DP's love them, some don't.  The Diva's are also heavier than a comparable Flo since the ballast is onboard, so you can't always stick a Diva where you would be able to use a regular Kino.


  • 0

#11 Bill DiPietra

Bill DiPietra
  • Sustaining Members
  • 2264 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • New York City

Posted 20 December 2015 - 06:44 PM

 

Try before you buy, especially if you think this will be a rental items.  Especially true of the Diva light.    I have two and some DP's love them, some don't.  The Diva's are also heavier than a comparable Flo since the ballast is onboard, so you can't always stick a Diva where you would be able to use a regular Kino.

 

Good to know.  Thanks.


  • 0

#12 Oron Cohen

Oron Cohen
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 208 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Tel-Aviv/London

Posted 20 December 2015 - 06:48 PM

I think for film work you want regular kino not a DIVA as they are more flexible, you can take the tubes out and use them even without the housing which could be very useful sometimes, also they colour temperature on the DIVA usually look off when you try to change it...at least the ones I used, I think DIVA are great for documentary interviews not film work an I used them a lot for that. 


  • 0

#13 Bill DiPietra

Bill DiPietra
  • Sustaining Members
  • 2264 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • New York City

Posted 20 December 2015 - 06:55 PM

I think for film work you want regular kino not a DIVA as they are more flexible...

 

What do you mean by "regular Kino?"...


  • 0

#14 Oron Cohen

Oron Cohen
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 208 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Tel-Aviv/London

Posted 20 December 2015 - 07:03 PM

 

What do you mean by "regular Kino?"...

They one that I linked to and DMX as well (I think) not the DIVA, as you can not use the bulbs on the DIVA without the housing, there are few more difference, google it and you find a lot more info I'm sure. 


  • 0

#15 Bill DiPietra

Bill DiPietra
  • Sustaining Members
  • 2264 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • New York City

Posted 20 December 2015 - 07:20 PM

They one that I linked to and DMX as well (I think) not the DIVA, as you can not use the bulbs on the DIVA without the housing, there are few more difference, google it and you find a lot more info I'm sure. 

 

I already looked them up on the B&H website before posting this topic and both the DMX and the Diva seem like they would suit my needs.  I'll take at look at them in the store.

 

Thanks.


  • 0

#16 Phil Rhodes

Phil Rhodes
  • Sustaining Members
  • 11232 posts
  • Other

Posted 21 December 2015 - 04:06 AM

To answer the earlier question, the technology in a fluorescent light is in two places - the ballasts and the tubes, both of which are reasonably easy to make these days. Kino tubes, particularly the tungsten ones in my opinion, are very good, but I don't think there's anything absolutely showstopping about them. The ballasts, either.

 

It's worth bearing in mind that no fluorescent tube can be dimmed without discolouration. They go purple when under-run and yellow when over-run. DMX is not that useful in my view, even if only for that reason.

 

P


  • 0

#17 Bill DiPietra

Bill DiPietra
  • Sustaining Members
  • 2264 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • New York City

Posted 21 December 2015 - 12:25 PM

It's worth bearing in mind that no fluorescent tube can be dimmed without discolouration. They go purple when under-run and yellow when over-run. DMX is not that useful in my view, even if only for that reason.

 

P

 

I've always enjoyed working with dimmers, if for no other reason, to experiment with different film stocks.  I never would have guessed that the variances go from purple to yellow.  But as I look at the visible light spectrum, it kind of makes sense.  So let me see if I have this right (hold on...lol.)

 

Is it the ultraviolet-to-visible-light conversion that occurs within a regular household fluorescent tube that causes the lamp to appear green when photographed?  Because I see that green is pretty much in the middle of purple and yellow on the visible spectrum.  Or is it the combination of the argon, xenon, neon & krypton gases in the tube?

 

Or is it something totally different?...


  • 0

#18 Phil Rhodes

Phil Rhodes
  • Sustaining Members
  • 11232 posts
  • Other

Posted 21 December 2015 - 01:19 PM

Oh, absolutely - yay dimmers.

 

Theoretically, fluorescent tubes are a vacuum device. There's nothing in there but the mercury. However, practically they are made with some very trace amount of argon and krypton gas. Among other reasons, argon in particular breaks down very easily under electrical stress, and this makes the lamp much easier to start, especially when it's cold and the mercury has not boiled off. The problem is that argon glows a dim purple (much as neon glows red, etc) and the final output of the tube is balanced to take that into account, so that the output of the phosphors is biased slightly yellow. Under-drive it, and the fill gas, which is easy to ionise, keeps glowing, but the yellow output falls off, and you start to see the purple. If you've ever seen an old fluorescent tube with largely-finished electrodes, outdoors in the cold, on an old iron ballast, and it looks pink while it's trying to start up - that's what's going on.

 

The excessive-green issue is as far as I'm aware unconnected to this. It was just an issue of what phosphors were available. Since the early 40s the cheap, easy approach to fluorescent tubes has been halophosphate tubes containing phosphor that emits blue and a sort of of dusky orange. The combination is white...ish. It isn't so much that these tubes emit too much green per se, or they'd just look green, and they don't. The problem is that the spikes of green they do emit happen to line up more or less with where the sensitivity of the green layer in film is, and the red and blue don't line up nearly so well with the red and blue. It looks green to film (and indeed to some video cameras), but it's not really that either the tube or the film is wrong. The camera was built to approximate the human eye. The tube was built to satisfy the human eye. Both do what they were designed to do, but the two approximations just don't line up right.

 

Triphosphor tubes, which contain separate phosphors intended to emit blue, green and r... well, dirty orange, work better. The biggest problem there is just underexposure of reds.

 

P


  • 0

#19 Bill DiPietra

Bill DiPietra
  • Sustaining Members
  • 2264 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • New York City

Posted 21 December 2015 - 01:39 PM

Oh, absolutely - yay dimmers.

 

Theoretically, fluorescent tubes are a vacuum device. There's nothing in there but the mercury. However, practically they are made with some very trace amount of argon and krypton gas. Among other reasons, argon in particular breaks down very easily under electrical stress, and this makes the lamp much easier to start, especially when it's cold and the mercury has not boiled off. The problem is that argon glows a dim purple (much as neon glows red, etc) and the final output of the tube is balanced to take that into account, so that the output of the phosphors is biased slightly yellow. Under-drive it, and the fill gas, which is easy to ionise, keeps glowing, but the yellow output falls off, and you start to see the purple. If you've ever seen an old fluorescent tube with largely-finished electrodes, outdoors in the cold, on an old iron ballast, and it looks pink while it's trying to start up - that's what's going on.

 

The excessive-green issue is as far as I'm aware unconnected to this. It was just an issue of what phosphors were available. Since the early 40s the cheap, easy approach to fluorescent tubes has been halophosphate tubes containing phosphor that emits blue and a sort of of dusky orange. The combination is white...ish. It isn't so much that these tubes emit too much green per se, or they'd just look green, and they don't. The problem is that the spikes of green they do emit happen to line up more or less with where the sensitivity of the green layer in film is, and the red and blue don't line up nearly so well with the red and blue. It looks green to film (and indeed to some video cameras), but it's not really that either the tube or the film is wrong. The camera was built to approximate the human eye. The tube was built to satisfy the human eye. Both do what they were designed to do, but the two approximations just don't line up right.

 

Triphosphor tubes, which contain separate phosphors intended to emit blue, green and r... well, dirty orange, work better. The biggest problem there is just underexposure of reds.

 

P

 

Great explanation, Phil.  Thanks a lot.


  • 0

#20 Edward Lawrence Conley III

Edward Lawrence Conley III
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 128 posts
  • Other
  • Los Angeles CA

Posted 21 December 2015 - 04:25 PM

 

What do you mean by "regular Kino?"...

Regular Kino: 4ft 4bank Fixture with standard ballast-4Bank Ballast - Model BAL-427

 

You can run these remotely just by using 25' Feeder cables up to 75'. No need for DMX.

 

http://www.kinoflo.c.../4Bank_DMX.html


  • 0


Paralinx LLC

Aerial Filmworks

Tai Audio

Willys Widgets

Zylight

Ritter Battery

CineLab

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Pro 8mm

Abel Cine

CineTape

Technodolly

Visual Products

The Slider

Rig Wheels Passport

rebotnix Technologies

Glidecam

Glidecam

Technodolly

rebotnix Technologies

CineLab

The Slider

Ritter Battery

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Paralinx LLC

Aerial Filmworks

Abel Cine

Visual Products

Tai Audio

Willys Widgets

Zylight

CineTape

Pro 8mm

Rig Wheels Passport