The Official Zebralight Thread .

[markr6]

I have noticed a consistent and reproducible problem with my SC600w MkIV HI. It shuts off in the cold if I use H1.

Check out post #1274 and before in this same thread. Outdoorsman5 had the same problems as I did. I soon realized it wasn't the cold. The problem is random, wasn't the cold, and wasn't the bettery/dirty contacts in our case. Fortunately my replacement IV is working great.

 

[WalkIntoTheLight]

I suspect the cold battery is the issue. Try again but warm up the battery in your hand before putting it in the "frozen" light. I bet it will work just fine. My guess is that the battery can't sustain the high current draw when it's so cold, which would probably be an issue for all high output lights used in their turbo settings.

I suspect if it was the battery, the light would step-down from H1, like it does when the battery is low. That is not what is happening. The light just shuts off from H1. Well, sort of. The LED goes out, but the driver is still "on". I have to click the button once to "really" shut off the light, then I can turn it on again normally.

Check out post #1274 and before in this same thread. Outdoorsman5 had the same problems as I did. I soon realized it wasn't the cold. The problem is random, wasn't the cold, and wasn't the bettery/dirty contacts in our case. Fortunately my replacement IV is working great.

It's possible, but my issue doesn't seem random. It is reproducible, every time, when it is below freezing (around -10C in my case). As soon as I warm the light up, it works properly.

Hopefully, it's just a problem in cold weather, and not an indication of future problems at all times. I have no desire to go through a repair via China. And I know how ZL tends to just return lights with "no problem found" if it's random.

 

[terryoregon]

.
One hour in the freezer at -2F. No problems. Turned on, stayed on high for about 5min, then started throttling down in small steps as it got warm (expected).
SC600Fd Mark IV Plus
Samsung INR18650-25R (20A)

Environmental testing at Zebralight (every device) would be very expensive - especially if you're going to have buttons pushed while it's in the chamber. I worked in electronics manufacturing for 37yrs, and this was only done on every device for expensive medical monitors. On other products, like calculators, it was only done during design - or when a defect trend developed (related to heat/cold).

 

[markr6]

It's possible, but my issue doesn't seem random. It is reproducible, every time, when it is below freezing (around -10C in my case). As soon as I warm the light up, it works properly.

Hopefully, it's just a problem in cold weather, and not an indication of future problems at all times. I have no desire to go through a repair via China. And I know how ZL tends to just return lights with "no problem found" if it's random.

Try it at room temperature a bunch of times. When I started doing that, I could reproduce the problem about half the time. I first noticed it in the cold so I assumed that was the problem, but the more I used it the more I found it acting up at room temp as well. Regardless, after turning it back on once or twice, it seemed to stop. It's like it had to sit idle for a few minutes before it would act up again.

 

[WalkIntoTheLight]

.
One hour in the freezer at -2F. No problems. Turned on, stayed on high for about 5min, then started throttling down in small steps as it got warm (expected).
SC600Fd Mark IV Plus

The Plus may not have the same issue as the HI, since it likely uses a different driver. Also, I'm not sure a freezer test is sufficient to test for the flaw. As soon as my light warms up, the problem goes away.

Just a bizarre thought, but I wonder if the problem might be the temperature sensor that controls PID? Maybe if it zeros-out the sensor, it causes a bug in the driver that turns off the light? Okay, probably not, but just a thought.

Try it at room temperature a bunch of times. When I started doing that, I could reproduce the problem about half the time. I first noticed it in the cold so I assumed that was the problem, but the more I used it the more I found it acting up at room temp as well. Regardless, after turning it back on once or twice, it seemed to stop. It's like it had to sit idle for a few minutes before it would act up again.

I just tried it a few times, indoors. Works fine. I'm hoping it stays that way.

 

[IlluminationDomination]

I guess your all stumped by my photos!

 

[recDNA]

It does kill that order, you are correct. Personally I don't scroll through ever. It actually reverses since press and hold goes H-M-L. I just flipped the function of L and H and left M the same.

I'd like to change mine to M-H-L so high requires 2 clicks but too much trouble.

 

[Fireclaw18]

I'd like to change mine to M-H-L so high requires 2 clicks but too much trouble.

It takes at most 5 minutes to reprogram all 6 modes in one of the mode groups. That's too much trouble????

 

[scs]

.
What do you get when you combine a new Reed Instruments SD-1128 light-meter-data-logger and a Zebralight SC600Fd MK IV Plus?

.
. . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . .MORE RUNTIME GRAPHS (by someone who's never done them before)

Intrigued by the noted oscillations in output on gen 4 lights (as seen in page 56 of this very thread), I decided to see if mine had the same characteristics.

Since most gen 4 graphs tend to focus on the higher levels, I chose 557 lumens for some extra perspective. As you can see in the 1st graph, even at this level the oscillations are still evident. Note, the Samsung battery was capacity tested on an Xtar Dragon (results; 2506mah).

.

I then repeated the test again with ACTIVE COOLING. This time, a block of blue ice was placed behind the light with a small fan behind the blue ice. Therefore, cool air was continually blowing over the light during the test.

As you can see, active cooling makes a LOT of difference (zero oscillations). Also note that Zebralights don't just shut down unexpectedly when the battery is low, but give you plenty of extra runtime at a much lower output.

.
.

And just for good measure, I ran another test at 135 lumens. Of course PID is no longer necessary and we have excellent regulation for 9.5 hrs.

.
.
PS: this is the 1st time I've posted runtime graphs, be kind. It's fun, but was a lot of work re-learning line charts in Excel.

Thanks for the runtime plot. According to this review: http://www.candlepowerforums.com/vb...H2R-review-(Headlamp-right-angle-18650-XHP50) the H2R with a NW XHP 50 emitter, manages 600 lumens for 2 hours and 40 minutes, albeit with a 3500 mAh GA instead of the 2507 mAh used in the ZL and not with a high CRI emitter like in the ZL. There are offsetting factors at work here. Does anyone believe that the ZL would have posted similar runtimes with the NW XHP50 in the Olight or has Olight markedly surpassed ZL in efficiency in this instance?

 

[recDNA]

It takes at most 5 minutes to reprogram all 6 modes in one of the mode groups. That's too much trouble????

It takes me that long to do one setting! I have trouble finding the exact output i want

 

[ven]

1st world problems are a *beep*

I tend to set levels(what ever light, not just ZL where i can program) in the environment used. When i have in the day(of course not bright day light, but dark room), its never been right at the night time. I tend to wait till dark, more darker! in the room or outside, then just try and relax and chill doing it. Not a chore, but try and enjoy it if makes sense. With a few practices, you will be able to do it on the fly issue free. In fact, other than the h17f driver, the ZL was one of the more user friendly i found.

Well pondered around a mk IV plus and being honest, dont quite have confidence there. UK stock is none available, so any issue would be shipping outside of country................not really a want. So mkIII sc600fd plus 5000k will be my next. As much as i do like and prefer the newer UI(ability to have what i want more finally tuned), the older UI is still sweet! As long as i have a decent output/duration ratio, i am happy!

 

[sc00ts19]

It takes me that long to do one setting! I have trouble finding the exact output i want

I've found it helpful to keep the spec sheet in front of me. Then go all the way up or down in output , whichever is closer, then from there I can count my way up or down the spec sheet and know what output I'm programming to. I used to do it just by guessing roughly what output I thought useful, but it kicked my ocd into over drive.

 

[recDNA]

I've found it helpful to keep the spec sheet in front of me. Then go all the way up or down in output , whichever is closer, then from there I can count my way up or down the spec sheet and know what output I'm programming to. I used to do it just by guessing roughly what output I thought useful, but it kicked my ocd into over drive.

That's exactly what I do and it is time consuming. Soon I hope we'll be able to program with a computer or cell phone.

 

[SKV89]

For those interested, here are my ceiling bounce comparisons for the SC5w II 4500k XPL2 80CRI

SC5w II Unit 1 (advertised at 550 lumens): 44 lux
SC5w II Unit 2 (advertised at 550 lumens): 68 lux
SC5w II Unit 3 (advertised at 550 lumens): 74 lux
Thrunite Archer 2A v3 NW version (CW advertised at 500 lumens): 72 lux
Utorch UT01 NW 4000k (CW version advertised at 400 lumens) Unit 1: 54 lux
Utorch UT01 NW 4000k (CW version advertised at 400 lumens) Unit 2: 58 lux
Utorch UT01 NW 4000k (CW version advertised at 400 lumens) Unit 3: 59 lux
Nitecore TIP CRI 2007 (advertised at 240 lumens): 40 lux

These are tested with fully charged batteries. The measurements are surprisingly consistent even when tested weeks apart. For example, if I test the same UT01 unit at 59 lux on day 1 and then repeat the test on day 19 using the same fully charged battery, the results wil be exactly the same at 59. I am not saying the ceiling bounce results are accurate but just saying its consistent. Ceiling bounce favors spotty lights over floody lights so in my comparison above, it should favor SC5W more than the other lights since SC5W has the spottiest beam.

 

[SKV89]

I think you misinterpreted the graphs or something as it is quite clear the ZL can maintain over 500L..

See the uncooled one where it maintains 95% of its' initial output for 15 minutes?

I just don't know why it can't maintain 500 lumens for the entire duration. The Armytek Wizard using an older gen XHP50 and the Olight H2R Nova can maintain over 500 lumens for more than 2 hours.
http://www.candlepowerforums.com/vb...H2R-review-(Headlamp-right-angle-18650-XHP50)

Also the Imalent HR70 claims to be able to hold 1,000 lumens, although it is CW and not hi CRI.

I was just expecting more out of the SC600W Plus XHP50.2 thinking it can maintain 1,000 lumens given all the praises of the Zebralight unibody construction being able to dissipate heat.

 

[scs]

I just don't know why it can't maintain 500 lumens for the entire duration. The Armytek Wizard using an older gen XHP50 and the Olight H2R Nova can maintain over 500 lumens for more than 2 hours.
http://www.candlepowerforums.com/vb...H2R-review-(Headlamp-right-angle-18650-XHP50)

Also the Imalent HR70 claims to be able to hold 1,000 lumens, although it is CW and not hi CRI.

I was just expecting more out of the SC600W Plus XHP50.2 thinking it can maintain 1,000 lumens given all the praises of the Zebralight unibody construction being able to dissipate heat.

Right, two separate observations here: 1) the ZL doesn't appear to be able to shed heat fast enough even in the 500 lumen range to maintain that output without stepping down. 2) even when enough cooling is provided, at around 500 lumens, the ZL manages just over 1 hour of constant output, whereas the Olight H2R using the older XHP 50 emitter maintains around 6oo lumens for 2 hours and 40 minutes. Unless a convincing argument can be made that the combination of the ZL's higher CRI and therefore less efficient XHP 50.2 and the lower capacity cell used in the test accounts for the lower performance, I think ZL has fallen behind in driver efficiency at this output range.

 

[niraya]

Unless a convincing argument can be made that the combination of the ZL's higher CRI and therefore less efficient XHP 50.2 and the lower capacity cell used in the test accounts for the lower performance, I think ZL has fallen behind in driver efficiency at this output range.

Olight was measured with 40% more battery capacity. The rest is probably reasonable for high CRI ?

 

[SKV89]

Olight was measured with 40% more battery capacity. The rest is probably reasonable for high CRI ?

Olight was measured with 200% of Zebralight's efficiency using the same Sanyo NCR18650GA battery

 

[Connor]

What's the source for that graph?

 

[SKV89]

What's the source for that graph?

Maukka's review
http://www.candlepowerforums.com/vb...H2R-review-(Headlamp-right-angle-18650-XHP50)