Pag PagLight review

[Paul Anderegg]

Just received my hyper expensive PagLight LED. This will be kept short, and updated when I receive ky 100 watt halogen module.

The PagLight is unique, in that it allows you to have one light head,a nd plug and unplug various rear end modules, which stick a halogen, LED, or HMI arc bulb into the focusable reflector dish. The halogen seems straight forward, 20 - 100 watt bulbs available, and the removable modules have a sheath that you cap the hot bulb so it can be stowed instantly when you swap it out for another version. The HMI seems nice, claims 80 watt halogen equivalent when CTO's to 3200k, with only a 20 watt power draw. The downside is that the bulb is something like close to $400, and i am not reading that they last forever. The module for the HMI is almost as much.

So now the LED review. Bare LED light pumps out an amazing 1 candlepower (estimated) of dim green 4900k light. When the GLASS, yes glass CTO is flipped into place, you get an even dimmer green 2900k glow. To correct this so that after you white balance off of it everything out of the dim glow doesn't shine bright pink/magenta, you have to add 3/4's of minus green (pink gel). Once you add that minus green to get the white in the center of a vectorscope, your left with almost another stop of light loss,and a color temperature of around 2600k. Engage the spot lever, and somehow, you get a little brighter spot which glows at 2500k. When CTO's and color corrected, you will have a difficult time shooting even at 6db with an f12@2000 camera at 3 meters.

Waiting for the 100 watt module, which has a dimmer, to test how well it compares against the gold standard Lowel ID light. The Paglight module has a voltage regulator, that claims to keep the voltage at exactly 12 volts, and lengthens the battery run time. pag literature says that a 100 watt light unregulated form a 15 watt on camera battery will draw 150 watts. Now, I read that as a Lowel ID Light unregulated will give you 150 watts of illumination..............based on my LED testing, I also assume that the 12v illumination may run under 3000k.

There is an HMI kit on eBay for like $300. I would play with that as well, but I cannot afford the replacement bulbs and don't need another 5600k paperweight. :)

Paul

[Paul Anderegg]

And for anyone who thinks my comments regarding the green hue, take a look at an independent review Pag put on their website. For some reason, they compared it against a black light........that joke will make sense when you see the light comparisons. :-)

https://www.paguk.com/sites/default/...ry2013_Pag.pdf

Paul

[Steven Digges]

Wow Paul,

I know you are an ENG guy so you need a flame thrower. But I have not seen anyone wearing a battery belt in years. Is that where your going with this. I have my battery belt in my AV bone yard, it wont take a charge anymore. I used it to power a Cool-Lux Tri Light. I just looked, I can't believe they are still on the market. 1500 lumens if you turn on all three lights. It has two 35 watt floods and one 20 watt spot. Good light in its day, at least for making people squint ;-) A lot simpler and cheaper than the paglight. Have you ever tried one? Mine is sitting around. Cigarette plug, not XLR.

Cool-Lux

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/174526-REG/Cool_Lux_U30010_U3_Tri_Lite_On.html
Steve

[Paul Anderegg]

Back in the days of f8@2000, I used the old belt 30v 250 watt MiniPro setup. When f11@2000 arrived, I made the transition to a 100watt camera powered dimmable Lowel ID light. With a modification, that sucker will put 3x the spot brightness on target.

Paul

[Paul Anderegg]

Finally got the halogen modules, one in 50watt, one in 100watt. I inserted the 100watt version and powered it up, then had to stare directly into the lamp to confirm it was on. It was extraordinarily dim for a 100 watt halogen bulb. I can stare directly into the beam on spot from 1 foot away without squinting. The 50 watt looks roughly the same. I compared it to my 100 watt halogen ID light, and the difference is literally night and day.

And before smashing the PagLight to bits with a hammer, I compared it to my Comer 1800 LED for kicks. In wide mode, the PagLight is 2-3x as bright. With the Comer condenser engaged for 45 degree spot, the Comer LED is 3x as bright as the 100watt PagLight ON SPOT. To make things even more fun, the PagLight has rings and shadows in wide angle, like an old flashlight from the 70's.

I really wanted this light to work, the advertising on their website and literature (devoid of illumination figures) sold me. What possible use could anyone really have for a 100 watt halogen draw from their camera battery that is equal to a 50 watt from any other competitor, or the exceedingly dim green LED model, when they charge $700USD for it?

For maximum light throw at a distance, nothing beats the Lowel ID Light 100watt on SPOT. For maximum LED brightness in wide angle, nothing beats the $60 Neewer CN304. For maximum LED spot throw, nothing beats the Comer 1800.

Paul

[John Nantz]

Thanks for al the good testing work and informative write-ups. Not that I need another one but in light of your results that inexpensive Neewer looks interesting. For something that is battery-powered, meaning more portable, it would be a good candidate for a kit addition. That’s a remarkable price.

As for the Lowel and the Comer for use in spot mode, I don’t understand what the difference is between the two. Different kind of spot? One has better spot throw than the other?

Psssst …. Paul, on another subject, here’s a thought for ya. We all enjoy your in-depth reviews, except for maybe some of us in the market for a new cam/light/whatever but procrastinate and then start finding out all kinds of things about why we shouldn’t.

What about, just thinking out loud here, considering doing some moonlighting, oops, can’t believe I said that (employer wouldn’t like it), okay, so in your case I mean daylighting. Start with a little business on the side doing video gear test reports. Kind of a mini consumers guide to video gear.

You’re always into something and do quite thorough test comparisons and not to mention the finding of “issues” so this would be a way to make some extra cash. Maybe even get some freebie gear for testing. Not sure how one could monetize the results but it would be right up your alley.

Actually, on second thought, an alternative and maybe a more profitable option would be to offer companies to NOT review their product! This route should yield larger lump sums from a corporation instead of measly pennies from a consumer. Just a thought. Sure, some might call this extortion but hey, … we all have to live somehow. One could put a better face on it and let’s just call it a business model.

[Paul Anderegg]

I do tend to push forward the negatives on products. Most people want to know the negatives, as the advertising and specs usually are all tat is out there to go by. I am very demanding of my gear, but that is because most of my new purchases are not out of necessity, but out of a desire to UPGRADE my quality or capability. My station issues me a full compliment of gear, but I have higher standards.

I must say i always appreciate reviews that point out the negatives in products, because without those, I may make a purchase I will regret. I do also always try to point out alternative products that are superior to the one I am reviewing. If these companies want to charge an arm and a leg and take a large sum of money for a product in a competitive market, they should offer more than the cheaper alternatives.

I have a huge heap of gear to sell off on eBay, mostly light kits powered on only to test. Too bad there are not convenient places to test drive stuff before you buy!

On the SPOT modes of the Lowel and Comer. In night ENG, you may have limited access to a scene, and be kept far away in the dark. Being able to spot enough illumination at a distance to be able to see a usable picture at the gain settings available in the camera is important. With a Lowel ID Light at 100 watts spot, you can shoot something a half a block away full zoom at 0db with an f13@2000 camera. :)

Paul

[Gary Nattrass]

If you want lots of light then you need to get the power arc for the PAG, it is a small HMI so kicks out a lot of light and is daylight balanced. I tried the LED but did not like it as it was too green and not very powerful. I agree that the bubbles are very expensive though.

The halogens are OK but as you already know they suck battery power and I would guess low cost LED lights are more cost effective these days!

[Paul Anderegg]

The $300 used eBay PowerArc kits had me tempted, but they would have disappointed me. Pag specifies they produce the equivalent of 80 watts of HALOGEN light when used with CTO in place, but draws 20 watts or so. The problem is that their reflector design is so POOR, that it doesn't even produce adequate illumination at an actual 100 watts, much less a converted 80 watts. And $400 for a new light bulb, to produce maybe what you get from a 50 watt Ultralight?

Nicely envisioned product, but poor technical execution. To me they are the JVC of lighting. They ticked all the boxes for a broadcaster, but the actual performance is way below the promise.

Paul

[Gary Nattrass]

To be honest I think the paglight had it's day ten years ago and I have a full kit that seldom gets used these days.

[Paul Anderegg]

Due to it being a mostly UK product, it hasn't been seen in my parts ever, so I thought I would test it out. If they could redesign a Paglight2 head unit, with a larger and better designed reflector dish that could at least compete with the 20+ year old IDlight design, it would be a killer system. My Comer 1800 LED spot can cope with most news situations, with it's ability to spot and newer f12/f13@2000 cameras, but there are long distance shots that simply NEED 100 watts of halogen spot put downrange just to see the news incident, be it a crashed helicopter, or dead body.

Again, the Paglight at 100 watts halogen SPOT cannot match the Comer 1800 LED light with it's reflector array engaged, even when the Comer has been CTO'd.

Paul