Right I see.
So you're saying that there should be a difference since 1050 is 'deeper' in terms of your analogy and is emitting more packets of light.
So whilst I don't see the difference close up, if I use it, as you said, in a field, technically the 1050 lumen setting would comparably be of higher lux than the 800 lumen setting and make more objects visible in the dark?
Yes...if you pick targets far enough away to be relevant, you will be able to see the added lux from the added lumens.
Otherwise, you're using a bathroom scale that goes up to 300 lb to see if 800 lb weighs more than 1,050 lb.
Its getting dark now (Around here at least...).
Go outside, and find some stuff a long way off that you can't see well due to the dark and distance.....and compare the outputs and what you see, and report back.
Most people can tell ~ 5-10% output difference under those circumstances...with 5% attainable if the target choices are better for differentiation.
I find most see it best if they have a good place to BACK UP from a target....so you do this:
1) Find a target you have a long line of sight to....turn the light to low, and start backing up until you can't see it any more....then hit high.
2) You should see it again, and, you can drop something to mark the low's limit, and take more steps away to get the high's limit...and mark that too.
As the lux falls off according to the inverse square law, in practice, the lux will drop to a 1/4, if you double the distance. (Twice as far = quarter as bright, or, half the distance = 4x brighter, etc....)
By the same token, if your high was 4x brighter, you could DOUBLE the distance that the target looked as bright at.
As its only going to be ~ 22% brighter, the added distance will not be as dramatic as if it were 4x brighter....but, you WILL see the target from farther off than on low.
Last edited: