The ARTDNA 48” soft box arrived today hot on the heels of the 36'“. It does not at first seem that much larger, but in comparison to the other already decently sized one, it is a monster. It actually blocks out the ceiling light.

The 36” is a self assemble model with, 14 ribs inserted into the Bowens S-mount. To break it down requires some real dis-assembly, but unlike when you recieved it, the assembly is not too tedious and the diffuser panels do not need to be removed. Out of the bag, each rib has to be inserted, but after, they only need to be taken out of the Bowens mount.

The 48” is umbrella-like in assembly, that is you don’t have to insert all of the ribs. Unlike my other 120cm brolly soft boxes though, it is a shoot through from the Bowens S-mount, not a shoot from inside reflector. It is pre-made, assembled into working form by pushing down the stem from the inside. Rather than clipping in the diffuser, it simply velcros into place taking a few seconds, so easier overall than the 36”, but different.

My main concern is its weight. The thing is huge and by its very nature, fairly front heavy. There is no way I would attach it to front of one of my cheaper COB lights, but a plastic Bowens bracket held it happily on an angle for an hour or so. The smaller one can just fit through a standard door assembled, the bigger one has no hope.

The big question for me is whether there is any real advantage in these over the reflector 48” soft box brollies I have. They are physically heavier and bigger by design, harder to assemble and generally dearer (not in this case, but generally), so they will have to offer something. There are easier to change on the fly, but that assumes they are assembled and the lights used will take them.

The 36” on the left has a nice brilliance to it (no processing applied, not even exposue). It is also about a stop brighter (1/16, f5.6, ISO 200 with a YN560 III). The bigger unit has a more neutral, softer look and more open shadows, similar to my 7’ white brolly (it is also a tie for unwieldiness). Apart from the lack of brilliance, this thing manages the magical one light portrait. Maybe with a hair light?

I prefer the colour and brighness of smaller one, but the larger one more pleasantly shapes Meg’s face. The difference in magnification is because the smaller one actually sticks out further, forcing me to move closer or catch its edge.