Well, finally got mine.

I too lack the proper equipment to test actual CRI, but my first observation was that it's warmer, in the 4900K area. my Z96 are well over 6000, and the cn160 is in the 5500 area. all according to various white balances. The light seems fairly pleasant to my eyes, but i'll try and put them next to something for comparison. at least it doesn't have the awful shoe that the cn160 has.

Ordered two of these on 22 April. Finally seem to have been shipped from HK today. Looking forward to receiving them!

I'll give some impressions when I've played with them a bit.

Just remember that either LED or CFL, these are not perfect. But you can get good results if you really get a good white balance and light the subject well.

CFLS are pretty cheap, as V says, so I think you should try one and see for yourself. Here's my 2 cents.

I think the ALZO's are slightly overrated and a bit more noise (hum) than I would like. I think the BlueMax CFL bulbs are very good and very quiet, and I feel a bit safer since the mercury is bound into the glass, in case a whole row of them goes over.

Having said that, it is also pretty clear that these bulbs vary a bit from batch to batch.

If you look at the light from the CFL and the new LED, the LED looks whiter and does not have that odd color cast that even the best CFLs have. But you can get good results with good CFLs, if you balance your WB very carefully. I would have to do a long session with both to really see what the deal is, but for now I'm keeping my 95 CRI CFL's and using the LED for other things.

@DrDave Thanks for your feedback.

Do you, or anyone else, have any experience how does this LED light compare to high CRI photo CFL lights (like the acclaimed ALZO CFLs with CRI of 91)?

I am pondering if I should stick with soft-boxes/umbrellas with high CRI CFLs or make the jump to LEDs. It is for on location interviews.

@vicharris @DrDave

What did you find out in your tests?

I'm pretty happy with my CN-160's, but I would love to check these lights out.

I use eneloop batteries with mine and I find that after about 5 min that the output drops down to minimum.

Check voltage on eneloop batteries. It must be lower than usual batteries, I think.

Otherwise Sony NP batteries are very cheap.

Yeah would be nice to see some test. CRI is next megapixel, just put a sticker and there it is.

In fact CRI is closer to DR. As it is complicated anyone can brandy any number as 90% people won't be abel to test it.

And it is just plain wrong and incorrect. Better spend some time looking at lights measurements and CRI calculation.

Yeah would be nice to see some test. CRI is next megapixel, just put a sticker and there it is. It is like when I had my Nikon 12 megapixel D300 two years ago. I remember people with their compact camera who looked astonished when I told them it was 12 mega pixel. They thought that their tiny 14+ megapixel sensor would resolve better, just because it was written that there was more megapixel on the box. Manufacturers are like this, they just put sticker and search for catchy words to sell their product. Sometimes it is correct and many times only marketing bullshit.

What really is annoying for me is their image above. So they show you a supposed test of their product with 90 to 100 daylight. What is more suspicious is that it is the same image. They just put saturated one image or desaturated it. And who would use such a light with daylight!!!!!!!!!!! A candle would not make much more difference.

@vicharris thanks a lot and looking forward to your effort.

Oh, I'm happy with many things. My Black Magic cameras, my new Sigma lenses, My Hoya IRNDs, my Alphatron EVF, the Tascam DR-60, even my 312 Bi Color LEDs.......but not these that claim 95 CRI. It's bullshit. Don't even need scopes to see the green spike.

You were baiting me to talk about budget speedboosters weren't you? :)