Leonard Levy

Has anyone got experience with these fixtures and can comment on pros/cons?
or an alternative option

I have both the intellytech TC-160 and the Falcon Eyes RX-24 which is very similar but cheaper and have  worked just a bit with the LiteMats version. I have used both lights on every job I’ve had since I bought them a little over a month ago. Love the concept and have 2 falconeyes RX12’s ( 18x12”) for back lights etc. I’ve tested all carefully.

I like the TC-160 better. Its very similar unit to the Falcon Eyes but probably made better and I expect would last longer  though I can’t prove that by experience.
The LiteMats is a more expensive alternative  and looks more substantial ( hence a lot of gaffers use them), but it doesn’t fold or roll up so its a bigger thing to  carry around . 

The TC-160 and RX-24 Both:
- Light output is substantial  - with the diffusion box its about 1.5x’s the FC output of a  Diva light but considerably softer.
The light is soft but still has a bit of a specular quality because you can still see the little  source bulbs through the diffusion. That can be nice or if you double diffuse then its flatter and softer quality. Great through a 4x4.
- Good Color - seems spot on at 3000K  but just a little bit off in G/M axis at Daylight.

The RX-24 seems to go a about 1/8 Green and the TC-160 goes 1/8 magenta  at 5000K and both have some G/M  at 4300 as well but its not bad.
I found it easy to correct the TC-160 with a 1/8 Green gel and a standard sheet fits the box well. For some reason 1/8 magenta on the RX-24 is overkill and also warms it up so then you really want  1/16M  ( how do you do that?) and 1/8 CTB to make it right.  Both lights seem to maintain color when dimming. 

While the basic light design  is very similar the electronics and build of the lights is different. They have  controller boxes that look almost identical but that’s only because Intellytech  couldn’t find another manufacturer for the box  though they intend to replace the current one with a smaller box in a few months. 
The TC-160 goes from 3000 to 10K while the RX-24 goes from 3000 to 5600K . Those are nominal numbers though as in practice with the diffusion on  and both controllers reading 5600  my measurements show them both barely reach 5000K. However you can push the TC-160  cooler and get the real output to an honest 5600.

Aside from the light quality the TC-160 folds cup nicely into a pelican size box so its great for transporting. The falcon eyes gives you a cheap bag  that’s woefully inadequate for  carrying the electronics and if you find another case for that , the mat itself is still in a 2’ tube that needs to go in some kind of a bag.  

I like putting them together for 4’x2’ key with lots of punch that’s still very soft  and intend to sell the RX-24 so I can have 2 TC-160’s that match. However the RX-24 at $540 is dirt cheap and the light quality & functionality is  very similar . 

The only hassle with these lights is that you have to assemble and disassemble at the set so while they are great for a small crew or they also take a little more time and are fussy with a short cable from the controller to the light, and then  another cable from the AC adapter to the controller, and an AC cable  to the  power. If you want to get the light away from the controller then you need to add another dedicated cable. ( BTW the falcon eyes cables work with the TC-160 and they sell them in shorter lengths.) 

A cool thing is that falcon eyes sells a 1/2 china ball type diffuser that is cheap and works  very well with both lights . Very cool as an overhead. You can also get one for the smaller Falcon eyes units.

Met the Intellytech guys at NAB and they were great . Seemed very dedicated to  designing a well thought out light after looking at the  competition carefully.  And they are  USA company . Falcon Eyes was also at NAB but the guy I met barely spoke English.

Leonard Levy, DP
San Rafael, CA