Lights being tools doesn't really help, as I am always trying to find the best most efficient tool for the job. This includes lights, so I have ended up with a lot of tools and lights. This does have a positive side, when my kids move out, as my son just did, I can supply them with a set of tools and some nice lights.
Stop buying lights that "mostly" do the job. If one spec is weak, don't buy-as most the money is wasted on lighting we want to love but cannot. Figuring out the specs takes years of research, field testing, lux meters, eye exams, and money buying subpar lights.
I am telling you, don't buy any light with sub par, led efficiency, subpar driver efficiency, sub par heat sink, sub par battery configuration, sub par ar glass, sub par reflector/columumnation, subpar runtime level, or optimized for higher drive level than needed, don't buy that too heavy light. People get hung up on cri, tire proof, and water tight. Most post 2014 lights render color fine, and Kelvin matters more than cri. You can always water proof your own lights. I don't run over my lights with car any more than my cell phone. Well, I did back up over a laptop in 1995, had one phone ran over in 2003, but never a headlamp or flashlight. Used for tasks, you don't need same parameters as jogging, edc, extreme sports. Biking, may need a third or quarter runtime of task. Painting, 4 to 10- even 40- times more lux than carpenter (closer to biking at high speed). Navigating dark room , a quarter lux. All people over age 40 need more light to see details up close, so buyers in their late 30s beware.
To recap, stop buying subpar lights, of any price-high or low. Light makers need to stop and design task specific lighting! They need to list the lamp level lpw, not the lumen output which is the, "Wow, I am really stupid! Impressed now?" factor. (Unfortunately, usually, there is, sadly, a correlation between the max lumen number and led bin used the light.)
Defining the specifications, cost the most. So, is it an addiction or a quest done poorly?
