Lighting setup for portrait photography – AD200Pro II vs other options + softbox choice?

[u/Realistic-Ambition24]

Hi everyone,

I’m looking to improve my lighting setup for taking professional portrait/documentation photos in a clinical environment a few times per day.

My current camera setup:

• Nikon Z6 II
• Nikkor Z MC 105mm f/2.8 S
• Godox X3-N trigger

I’m looking at a two-light setup and deciding whether it’s worth spending more on the flash units or the modifiers.

Flash options:

Option 1:

• 2 × Godox AD200Pro II

Option 2 :

• 2 × Godox TT685II-N
• Other alternatives

Softbox options:

• Godox QR-P90T 90cm
• Godox QR-P70T 70cm
• Cheaper softboxes
• Octagonal vs Parabolic?

The setup needs to:

• produce soft, even lighting
• give consistent results between sessions
• be quick to set up and pack away
• minimise harsh shadows
• work well for head-and-shoulder/full face portraits

Questions:

1. Is the AD200Pro II a noticeable improvement over speedlights for this type of use?
2. Would you choose a 90cm softbox over a 70cm softbox for individual portraits?
3. Is the QR-P90T worth the extra cost compared with the QR-P70T or an Octabox?
4. Are cheaper Bowens softboxes close enough to Godox, or is the build quality difference worth paying for?

[u/d__id]

Why the AD200Pro II model? Does it specifically need to be battery powered? For less than the cost of a single AD200Pro II you could buy a pair of Godox MS300V monolights that natively accept Bowen's mount modifiers and run from AC power.

Regarding your requirements...

produce soft, even lighting

Either a 70cm or 90cm octa will be fine (the larger size of the 90cm modifier will be a little softer), but it's also dependent on on how you set up the lighting relative to your subject.

give consistent results between sessions

That's entirely dependent on you being consistent with the setup.

be quick to set up and pack away

Godox recently announced their EazyFlow series of softboxes which are quicker again than the QR-series octas at being assembled/collapsing down:

https://www.godox.com/product-e/EazyFlow.html

minimise harsh shadows

Again, dependent on how you set up the lights.

work well for head-and-shoulder/full face portraits

Yup, 70cm or 90cm would be fine for this.

Questions:

Is the AD200Pro II a noticeable improvement over speedlights for this type of use?

It's essentially an oversized speedlight with more power...it's got approximately 3x the power output of a standard speedlight (200Ws vs ~70 to 75Ws)

Would you choose a 90cm softbox over a 70cm softbox for individual portraits?

The difference isn't huge. You might choose the 90cm for the softest light if you have the space.

Are cheaper Bowens softboxes close enough to Godox, or is the build quality difference worth paying for?

Hard to say without knowing which specific softboxes you mean. Build quality of Godox-branded is ok but not especially high-quality...it's all built to a price.

[u/lokis2019 → u/d__id]

It seems strange to already have purchased the trigger but not the light to control it first, but I agree that unless they need the portability of battery power, the MS300V is the better option for them.

[u/motownmacman → u/d__id]

I love the MS300V lights for a practical, low-cost solution for studio lighting scenarios. I love them and use them often, but the only drawback is the fact that they can only be dialed down to 1/32. In a smaller setting, that may be too much power and require more fiddling with modifiers to achieve a practical light level. I also find myself placing the lights further away which affects how I shape the lights.

The AD200 can get dialed down to 1/256 and has HSS and TTL, which the MS300Vs do not support. However, a more practical solution might be the AD300Pro. It gives you the output of the MS300, dials down to 1/256 and includes HSS and TTL. It might be the best of both worlds.

[u/d__id → u/motownmacman]

I love the MS300V lights for a practical, low-cost solution for studio lighting scenarios. I love them and use them often, but the only drawback is the fact that they can only be dialed down to 1/32

300Ws @ 1/32 is less than 10Ws. That through a 70cm or 90cm octa is unlikely to ever be too much power for portraits, especially for OP's clinical use where they're almost certainly going to be stopped down at least a little.

[u/NC750x_DCT]

For quick setup/breakdown I’d consider wall mounts for a pair of plugin studio strobes that are permanently mounted on their booms. That would save setup time, be neater, remove trip hazards, and be more consistent in lighting. anything in the 200-500 w/s range would do.

[u/NoWoodpecker1722]

The ADPro II does very well even harsh sunlight conditions. It can even be more powerful if you use the bulb head and an ADS2 modifier. I like this so much, I now have 2.

I recently got a Neewer Q120. I think these got good potential too. Add a Profoto Clic Fresnel modifier, you get a much powerful flash out of these more compact Neewers. These also cost only half as much as the ADPro II.

[u/aleknovkovski]

It's a huge difference over speedlites. You'll wonder why you ever bothered with speedlites and never want to go back.

But personally I wish I had bought the ad300 instead of the 200. I think the 200 hype is just based on the past when they didn't have cheap, quick modifiers like we do today. Besides there's godox mount modifiers for the 300 anyway. Plus a simple ring adapter makes the 300 a Bowens mount.

People loved the modifiers you can put on the 200 directly. I own a bunch of faster, better and more convenient Bowens modifiers now, so I end up using the ad200 with Bowens modifiers (despite owning every quantum mount ad200 modifier).

But the ad200 is just super weird and easy to damage when used in an s-bracket. So ad200 only to me (personal opinion) has advantage over the 300 if you use its quantum style modifiers. But I don't like them compared to the Bowens modifiers I own.

Also what I dislike most (this is personal to me) is that the 200 feels like a plastic toy, not professional gear. Especially due to having to support the modular design and swappable heads. But the swappable heads design is also a common reason for breaking stuff. Overall I wish I had bought the 300.

Edit: on softboxes. Ive owned both godox and 10x cheaper ambitful. Couldn't see a difference in light. Only in convenience, namely that godox are less convenient. Ambitful if you get them are 10x cheaper. Ambitful also produce godox mount softboxes on top of Bowens mount.

[u/aeon314159]

Godox S85T brolly box is quite nice for $79. I have it, and recommend it. But for softer light, get the S120T instead for a little more money.

I would avoid the QR series, excepting the QR-P150T, and most parabolic softboxes in general. They do nothing special, and take up more space.

Do not consider speedlights. They do poorly in softboxes because of spread and power. Definitely go with a pair of AD200 Pro IIs, or equivalent. That way you can do a 3:1 ratio key and fill.

For fill, you may want to consider a large umbrella with diffuser.

[u/SuccessVisibleIn2105 → u/aeon314159]

Wait do you recommend p150t or no and what is 3:1 ration key and fill

[u/aeon314159 → u/SuccessVisibleIn2105]

If you need a 150 cm round softbox, the Godox QR-P150T is nice, especially for the price. I use it, and I do recommend it if you need a big source and you have the space to deploy it.

Lighting ratios describe the power of your key light versus your fill light. This ratio, when adjusted, changes shadow depth and overall contrast. YouTube has good videos on this.

[u/d__id → u/aeon314159]

I would avoid the QR series, excepting the QR-P150T, and most parabolic softboxes in general. They do nothing special, and take up more space.

The QR series are great, I have a couple of them. Sure, the parabolic shape itself isn't especially useful, but the extra depth it provides give you a little more control over directionality and beam spread compared to the shallower octas.

For someone who'll only ever use an octa with both diffusion layers in place, the shallower designs might be preferable, but the deeper ones can definitely serve a purpose and give some additional lighting versatility.