R-300 LED Ring Light Skin Tones

The new F&V R-300 LED Ring Light is a very capable light to be used both on or off camera. I've performed some basic comparisons of output and spread versus much more expensive and larger panels (seen here).

This time, it's a test on what it looks like with skin tones. In the beginning of this video, only the R-300 LED Ring Lights were used and the cameras were locked in at a manual 5600K. The image may be slightly warm, but it's an example of what it can look like when locked in with the 5600K setting.

The comparison to the popular 600 Led Video Light shows that it does not carry the same slightly green cast which is common for inexpensive LED lights. The single light test shows how broad it can diffuse lighting. Keep in mind that neither lights were set to 'full power' during these examples.

Without a trained eye, there may not be a significant difference in the video, but the true benefit of course is the cheaper price of the R-300, smaller and lighter form factor, and the ability to power with inexpensive Sony NPF batteries (instead of expensive V-mount). This is a highly recommended set of lights for lightweight travelers. You can find the R-300 LED Ring lights via F&V product page (Click Here).

hdr-300_set_up_1hdr-300_front_side_1_1_shadow
find-price-button R-300 LED Video Ring Light

 53 Comments





53 thoughts on “R-300 LED Ring Light Skin Tones

  1. BrandonT

    Hey Emm. I'd like to see this test, but it looks like the video was changed to private at some point. Could you check on that? Thanks!

  2. Thien

    Any thoughts to having this mounted on a 3axis gimbal? Curious to see if the size/weight will work well.

    Thanks for any thoughts anyone may have.

    Cheers!

    Thien

  3. Scott M

    Has anyone tried putting one of these behind a speed ring and soft box?
    I wonder if it would work and if it would be easier for talent to look into for the key light.?

  4. Can someone tell me the approx. run time for the R-300 on the available DV batteries?

    I'm considering a purchase, but would like to know how many batteries I'd need? My average gig recording time is about 4hrs.

    Can anyone offer some insight?

  5. What size is the opening? My preferred lens takes a 72mm filter. Also, is there adequate range in the L bracket to work with several lenses?

  6. Emm

    Post author

    @Davehowto - If you're creative you can add a modifier such as an egg crate (grid) to make the light more directional.

  7. Davehowto

    Hi very interesting video. Whilst the lights work ok for key and fill I dont see how such diffuse (non spot light) can work for the hair light, so the use of the 3rd light behind is kind of wasted. It would be interesting if you could try maybe an led fresnel for that the hair light.

  8. Emm

    Post author

    @sanveer - Feel free to share your results on any tests you perform with these lights.

  9. sanveer

    I agree, but, the lighting is too dull. Though the warmer skin tones are visible with the R-300, the lighting, in video, is very dull. It does not look like it is lit for an interview, or test. It, rather, looks like it is lit for a hoor or thriller film.
    Btw, the R-300 seems a great discovery, and I noticed it first here. So, thanks about that. I wanna pick up a few.

  10. Emm

    Post author

    @sanveer - At the time you've listed in the video, it's only one light (not three). Why would we want to go full power and overexpose the subject? The title of this article is 'skin tones' not about how bright can you light a room.

  11. sanveer

    (2:03 -2:07) Neither of our lights have been set to Full Power !!!
    Why would you conduct such a strange and incorrect lighting test. That is, perhaps, among other obvious reasons, that, the room is looking so dark.

  12. Nick

    I like this ring Light as I just recently got one, but I will say I am slightly disappointed with the 15mm rail mount for it. It is of ok quality. I wish it was metal and not plastic rings and the L shaped bracket that it attaches to is really small. this only allows you to place the bracket rings behind the light instead of under the light. This takes up extra space on the rails and makes it hard for me to mount my follow focus and Camera on a set of 12 inch rails. Wish the L bracket was an inch longer in both directions

  13. gordo

    no one mentions these rings can double up as a great portrait light for photography,,but you really would need 3 or 4 of these rings to light a whole set,,it barely lit that room,,but the color temp looked decent,,but at 200$,,hmmmmm

  14. Emm

    Post author

    @Rocco - I haven't tried lens flares with these lights. I'll try to shoot some samples of this.

  15. Hey @emm, I have the CN600 LEDs, and they give a square lens flare, which is just weird. I tend to use lens flare in my projects, so I'm thinking of getting something else.

    Do the R-300 lights give a donut type lens flare with a hole in the middle, or is it a solid round?

    Odd question probably, just curious if you've noticed.

    Thanks for everything,

    Rocco

  16. Greg Greenhaw

    I really like the r-300. I will order a second one soon. The accessories are really cheap though and not worth the money. I found that putting it on a magic arm with a cold shoe worked best for me.

  17. Mike

    I like the CRI and output of the R300's but the lack of barn doors kinda sucks - anyone know of some form of barn door that can be jury rigged to these? how else can the light be shaped ?

  18. Emm

    Post author

    @Greg Greenhaw - You are correct that the Diva is more diffused and a larger ring that will show more effectively as a catch light. The R300 has the advantage of battery power, and not as fragile with the bulbs.

  19. Greg Greenhaw

    How does it compare to the Diva Ring Light I know this one is battery powered which is a plus and the Diva is more defused.

  20. Rob S.

    Anybody get their lights yet? I ordered a set over three weeks ago and still haven't heard. They really got emptied out by the Cheesycam effect.

  21. Emm

    Post author

    @Sebastian - I have these, and I can show a video on how compact they are and how tall they expand. Very cool stands, but they are a bit pricey.

  22. Mike

    Thanks Rob! Do you have a site or a pic of your set up? Would love to check it out and also see the light if you've got examples. So you have 2 Cool Lights right? 1 4x2 and 1 2x2? Will check them out. Thanks again!

  23. Rob S.

    The Cool Lights have pretty good ballasts which is an important thing to consider. No flicker, no green spike, soft lighting, high CRI. Those ePhoto lights are cheaper but you get what you pay for. I went through this same decision and ended up paying a bit more to get the Cool Lights.

  24. Rob S.

    Cool Lights sells very well regarded and cheaper substitutes to Kino Divas and for a fraction of the cost. I have a 4x2 and 2x2 and use Kino bulbs, which I think work better. They also sell a pretty decent egg crate, LEDs and HMIs. But the flo's work best for the money. They even have lolipop style mounts.

  25. Mike

    Talking about lights, wondering as a side question, are there any affordable versions of a Kino light? And what about a Lowel Rifa?

  26. Rob S.

    @Alex I just meant that it seemed like it would be logistically cumbersome to juggle six batteries and replacements as well as stands, reflectors, etc. That DIY route looks pretty interesting.

  27. Interesting test. I suppose you could use the 300's in a pinch as normal lights, but they're not quite as bright or as shapable as the 600's. They are however MUCH less green which is really nice to see.

    Now, can someone please show a test with the ring light being used as an actual ring light around a lens?

  28. Alex

    @Rob S. That's my main concern! However i also think it will bring a lot of flexibily to the lighting. The batteries won't be a problem as they're small and cheap enough.

    Sometimes I want also try the DIY route as shown here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6HJX2uNSbJ4

    I thing the ring light is also possible to achieve using similar materials.

  29. Rob S.

    @Alex Do you really want to deal with setting up six lights, six stands and/or clamps, six batteries every time you set up a shot or move? Plus, I bet that the CRI of this ring light is better than many of the portable cheaper options.

  30. Matthijs Liethof

    @Emm thanks seeing I have nothing yet i'll go for the 312 and perhaps later on expand with the r300.

  31. Emm

    Post author

    @Alex - I know people who use the 160 LED and it works fine for them. Whatever works best for you, and what your situation is.

  32. I have to say, I'm intrigued by these as off-camera lights on stands, because of their size, portability and the cheap NPF batteries. Too bad their light does not match the 600 LEDs I have. How would you say these rate in terms of light output, compared to the daylight-only 312s?

  33. Emm

    Post author

    @Matthijs Liethof - I'm using the R-300 off camera as a larger light source. The light has less green color cast than the 312, more output, and better diffusion. The 312 has the advantage if you want to dial in color temp. Color temp on the 312 is not super accurate, but it's been good enough when we do event coverage. If you have nothing, a 312 is a good start and you can find them for just $119 dollars:: 312 Ultra High Powered LED Video Light With Variable Color (here)

  34. Thank you Emm,
    I missed the point then.
    I've not used either set of LED to make a proper judgment on their color or brightness, only what I could observe based on the footage.
    By the way, I do enjoy all your entries and I appreciate all your work!

    Best Regards

  35. Matthijs Liethof

    Was thinking of going for the 312's bi-color before you showed me these.

    @Emm I suppose you're recommending the R300 over the 312's atm? Worth the extra money?

  36. Nicholas

    I clearly see the green cast on the 600 LED, good to see that that the R-300 doesn't have the same green cast however with the minus green filter my 600 looks pretty good. Thanks for this review.

  37. What aperature/shutter speed/iso were you at? I'm interested to see what you had to dial-in in order to get the light to fill the scene. (though I guess the fact that they weren't at full power makes it less meaningful)

  38. Emm

    Post author

    @Rob S. - I would have to test, but the 'Milk' diffusion filter knocks down a few stops. Still the light is pretty bright already. Those diffusers that are directly in front of the LED bulbs are useless. If you want to better diffuse any light like your 312, add a modifier further away from the source. The further the diffusion panel is from the source, the softer the light will be.

  39. Rob S.

    I'm impressed with the output. I've been using 312 led lights for my ultra lightweight interview setup but these seem so much better. I bet I could get away with two of these and a z96 for the hair light. How much light do you think you lose with the milk diffusion filters and does it help that much? On the 312 the included diffusion filters are pretty negligible.

  40. Emm

    Post author

    @Diego W - Thanks for the input, but I think you may have missed the point. This was not meant to be a lighting tutorial. It was meant to show examples of the R-300 without any additional equipment or light modifiers vs. the 600 LED panel. Also as stated in the video and article, either lights were not set to full power. Mostly an example of color, color on skin, and how broad the diffusion is. If we started to flag or bounce these lights, it would most definitely defeat the purpose.

  41. mmm, maybe a fill light, but definetely not good by themselves... Very harsh shadows and weak performance to be so far away from subject.
    I think the lights were place too far away, and they should have been bounced to a white surface or something...It looks too flat from a contrast stand point..

    my 2 cents.

  42. 300 Looks way less green. Very nice! Thanks for putting this up! It'd be nice to see what the tungsten clip on gel looks like up against the 312 at the tungsten setting.

  43. Daniel Blanco

    Hehe, that smile at 1:35 πŸ˜€
    Really informative stuff as always! πŸ™‚

    I din't think those LED lights could light an scene by themselves. Impressed...

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *



RSS Feed Widget


Top Selling Drones