# The New King of Throw: Reflector Types Only; Tested and Confirmed!



## MrGman (Jan 28, 2009)

*Comment**__A10 R2**___A10 R2__** DBS R2 SMO__**Raidfire Spear Hi__**Raidfire Spear Hi__**DBS R2 OP__**DBS MCE__**Lumens FACT. EO9,*
*Lux @ 5m: **2021___**1962____**920.4________**836.5___________**578.2_________**556.4_____**395.8_________**389.8,*
*Lux 1m:__**50525__**49050___**23010________**20912.5_________**14455________**13910_____**9895__________**9745,*
*(calculated) best____fully_____not___________best______________fully___________not________not_____________not ,*
*___________focus__tightened__adjustable_____focus_____________tightened______adjustable__adjustable______adjustable,*

MrGman (me) and WBP just finished taking readings in a collaborative effort to determine which of the hot thrower flashlights had the best lux readings at 5 meters, 16 feet and 5 inches from torch front glass to Orb Optronics SP100 ($8,500.00 Spectral Radiometer) meter. In a darkened room with this calibrated meter, the following lights were tested multiple times each. Those that had adjustable focusing were adjusted for best possible readings and set to fully tightened down position. The best reading of each is shown.

The RaidFire Spear, using a very good brand 18650 battery, The Dereelight DBS 3SD V2 R2 (think I got that full title right, thrower model with R2 pill), also with a very good brand 18650 battery. Then the new Tiablo A10 R2, with 2 mostly fresh Surefire CR123 batteries. That is what it can take for best performance and since we are looking for best possible performance, that is what is used The Dereelight DBS with the MCE pill and orange peel reflector, was then tested also. 

For grins I threw in the Lumens Factory incandescent Extreme Output 9V (EO-9) lamp inside a Solarforce host with 2 new AW 18650 batteries and the custom modified A/R coated glass in the bezel. This is supposed to be a 380 bulb lumen lamp. I am guestimating its 260 or less lumens out the front, have not yet measured this one.

Those readings were then compared and calculated back to 1 meter by multiplying by the square of the change in distance from 5 meter back to 1, which is 5 squared or 25, so each reading at 5 meter was multiplied by 25 to give the "calculated" 1 meter reading. We believe based on other testing that these powerful lights with big reflectors and tight spot beams are measured far more accurately at 5 meters than at 1. These units were all done tonight at the same distance and with the same meter so there is no way to say that the technique favored one over the other. Being thrower type flashlights no one is going to really use them at 1 meter anyway so we believe these results are far more realistic.

Don't ask for measurements at 1 meter, we aren't going to bother.

In case the table above gets messed up when I post this, the Tiablo A10 was far and away the brightest light with up to 2K lux at 5 meters, the Dereelight DBS with R2 pill was only 920 lux, the Spear was 836 lux, Dereelight MCE only 395, and the Lumens Factory module only 390 lux. We also threw in the Dereelight DBS R2 with the Orange peel reflector.

There is no question that the Tiablo A10 was much brighter in the hot spot than the other lights period!. 

We took the 3 contenders outside and looked at some trees about 80 yards away back and forth and there was no question, the Tiablo A10 was the clear winner. Smaller but much brighter hot spot. Didn't have time for beamshots, don't want to bother with more pics of green trees in the dark, seen enough of that. At another time if necessary I shall pull out my color targets and post them about 100 yards out. 

WBP simply said, "I am buying the A10 tomorrow!".

Truth is Truth. 

Thanks to WBP for his time and use of his excellent equipment.

This glorious work does not include or pertain to lights with specialized optics that are so finely focused that they act like a projector. :nana:


----------



## nanotech17 (Jan 29, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*

finally the DBS relinquish the top spot


----------



## Ryanrpm (Jan 29, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*

The only question I have is this:

Why would someone invest in a $8500 light meter??:eeksign::wow:

But, I for one do appreciate calibrated instruments. Thanks for giving us this feedback. I'm curious to see how the Eagle 8w would fair.


----------



## WadeF (Jan 29, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*

Technically the DBS is adjustable, but with the DBS the best results are usually with the pill screwed in all the way. The DBS can also throw a bit better if a CL1H pill is used as it gets the emitter a bit further in, but I'm pretty sure you'd have a hard time getting over 30,000LUX with the DBS. The A10 should beat the DBS with the larger reflector, but the entire light is larger than the DBS, Spear, Tiablo A9, etc. It's almost in a new size class.  

Can the A10 fit in a front jeans pocket? I'd be interested if it was easy to pocket carry.


----------



## Splunk_Au (Jan 29, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*

Err.. you do realise that the beam from a flashlight is diffused right? Unlike that of something like a lens focused spotlight or projector, you cannot use the square-root ratio for this calculation. The result will be higher than it actually is.


----------



## MrGman (Jan 29, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*



Splunk_Au said:


> Err.. you do realise that the beam from a flashlight is diffused right? Unlike that of something like a lens focused spotlight or projector, you cannot use the square-root ratio for this calculation. The result will be higher than it actually is.


 
Yes we know which is why we took the readings at 5 meters, which we believe are more accurate overall, and clearly posted that the 1 meter readings are calculated, its a rough order number. Some have shown that the 1 meter readings actually taken can't be accurate for these high power lights. Going strictly with the 5 meter numbers the results are clear.

The A10 does not fit in you pocket. I already have 2 holsters for it, one I made myself, that works quite well. Its not that much bigger than the other 2 lights other than the reflector.


----------



## Splunk_Au (Jan 29, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*

Actually its not the readings which are innacurate for high powered lights, it's the visual perception. Using a proper lux meter will be accurate regardless of distance as long as the intensity is within the meters range. I personally feel this calculation method incures uneccesary complications to measurements trends, but hey that's just me


----------



## MrGman (Jan 29, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*



Splunk_Au said:


> Actually its not the readings which are innacurate for high powered lights, it's the visual perception. Using a proper lux meter will be accurate regardless of distance as long as the intensity is within the meters range. I personally feel this calculation method incures uneccesary complications to measurements trends, but hey that's just me


 

The measurments at 5 meters to compare the actual lights and determine which had the better throw was the goal, the calculated numbers of 1 meter was thrown in. As you said the measured numbers are accurate, definitely taken with a good proper meter that reads out true lumen/meter squared (lux), calibrated, has a known reliable usage history. 

The readings at 5 meters show a clear difference of these lights, which does not contradict the order of results by Light-review.com, just provides what I would say is a good correlation.


----------



## Outdoors Fanatic (Jan 29, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*

Outstanding job!!!

Thanks a lot for doing it for our community.

That's it now, I'm gonna have to order an A10...


----------



## wbp (Jan 29, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*



Ryanrpm said:


> The only question I have is this:
> Why would someone invest in a $8500 light meter??:eeksign::wow:



It's much more than a light meter! It's a full on spectroradiometer, the only truly accurate instrument for measuring light and color. In my business I have to have this kind of accuracy. If I could afford one I'd have a Minolta CS-2000 instead, but that's nearly 4 times the price... :eeksign:indeed!

GMan's right, the A10 was far and away the best thrower of the bunch. That big reflector really concentrates the light. Some beam shots in light fog would be fun.

William


----------



## woodrow (Jan 29, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*

Thanks For The Hard Work!!!....also, good job Tiablo!


----------



## 300winmag (Jan 29, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*

BEAUTIFUL!!!


----------



## paulr (Jan 29, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*

What about the Tiablo ACE?


----------



## wbp (Jan 29, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*



paulr said:


> What about the Tiablo ACE?



Buy one and send it to us and we'll be happy to measure it... 

But it's not a thrower, which is what this thread is about.


----------



## wbp (Jan 29, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*



MrGman said:


> WBP simply said, "I am buying the A10 tomorrow!".



"tomorrow"? Nope...


----------



## jenskh (Jan 29, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*



MrGman said:


> The measurments at 5 meters to compare the actual lights and determine which had the better throw was the goal, the calculated numbers of 1 meter was thrown in. As you said the measured numbers are accurate, definitely taken with a good proper meter that reads out true lumen/meter squared (lux), calibrated, has a known reliable usage history.
> 
> The readings at 5 meters show a clear difference of these lights, which does not contradict the order of results by Light-review.com, just provides what I would say is a good correlation.


I fully support the method of taking the lux readings at a longer distance for throwers, and calculating back to 1 m. It is true that the value you get is different from what you would measure at 1 m, but it is a value much more representative of the throw.

At long distance (throw distance) the square root law is quite accurate. If we get a lux measurement somewhere out in the region where this law applies, we can calculate the illuminance at any other distance where it applies. I have inverstigated this for my DBS, and found out that from about 5 m and outwards, the sqare root law is quite accurate. The bigger the reflector and the better the throw, the longer this minimum distance has to be.

For lights with smaller reflectors the law becomes quite accurate also at 1 m. This means that they can be directly measured at 1 m and get a number representative for the throw. To be able to compare lights, it is nice if the illuminance is given at a standard distance, and this distance seems to have been standardised at 1 m. This is also very practical. If you want the distance where the illuminance is 1 lux (usable light), you just take the square root of the (representative) illuminance (lux) at 1 m.

So many thanks to MrGman and WBP for these very interesting measurements. The only thing that concerns me is that you do get so much lower readings for the DBS than I do. I have a quite cheap lux meter, but most of my earlier measurements seems to correspond much better with what others get. Is there any way to check a lux meter without having access to advanced equipment?


----------



## 1 what (Jan 29, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*

Thanks Guys.


----------



## shahzh (Jan 29, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*

Yessss! Finally its confirmed Tiablo A10 R2 is the new 'King of Throw', thanks for results and effort:twothumbs.


----------



## paulr (Jan 29, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*

Looking at some of the beamshots it looks like the ACE has around the same central hotspot intensity as the R2, but a bigger hotspot (and higher power drain) because of the multi die led. If I do buy one I'll be happy to send it to you for testing.


----------



## TITAN1833 (Jan 29, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*

Thanks for doing the tests at 5m this should be the standard for throw,but for size I'm sticking with my Eagle and DBS.
now we need a test for the flood/throw MC-E lights Jet M1X,DBS MC-E and ACE my guess is the M1X will be the winner here  that said we have to wait for Neoseikan's L2 to be finalised this could be the dark horse in the MC-E league IMO


----------



## 5.0Trunk (Jan 29, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*

Thanks for the time an effort that you 2 put into this. :twothumbs


----------



## FLT MEDIC (Jan 29, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*

Thanks to both of you for taking time to do the tests and for posting.


----------



## Kiessling (Jan 29, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*

Teh set-up sounds perfect to me. For bigger reflectors the beam needs some distance to fulle "develop", converge. After that, the inverse square root law is applicable IIRC. So what was done here is a perfect measurement as long as the beams are all fully converged at 5m.

Measurements of bright lights at 1m are a crapshot and really not that reliable in my limited experience.

bernie


----------



## Pabs D (Jan 29, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*

Very interesting. Thanks!


----------



## MrGman (Jan 29, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*



wbp said:


> "tomorrow"? Nope...


 
That's right, you were waiting for your newly posted ads on ebay for those "other" two lights to sell. .

Some day might actually get a shot of Scotch out of all of this, it doesn't ruin the taste of diet coke does it? :buddies:


----------



## TONY M (Jan 29, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*

Thanks MrGman and wbp! :twothumbs

The A10 sure seems like a smashing thrower.


----------



## jblackwood (Jan 29, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*



nanotech17 said:


> finally the DBS relinquish the top spot



DAMN! I've only had mine for about 2 months! Come on, Dereelight, put out another pill!!!


----------



## wbp (Jan 29, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*



jblackwood said:


> DAMN! I've only had mine for about 2 months! Come on, Dereelight, put out another pill!!!



The pill's fine, they'll need a new reflector design. Not trivial given the size constraints but with computer aided optics design what it is today, it could probably be done. The A10's big advantage is the size (and shape) of the reflector.


----------



## ergotelis (Jan 29, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*

Nice results, really impressive! Though i am thinking that a DBS can do better than what we see! Wade said about CL1H pills, personally i have cut off a bit the bottom side of the reflector of the DBS in order to get better focus an put in the custom pill the led a bit higher with a metal base(But as logical the head cannot be fully tightened in the body). With a UCL and a harder driven pill(1,4amp at the tailcap) i can get up to 34000 lux.Though still far away from Tiablo A10! I would like also to see results with an ACE if possible sometime in future! 
Have you taken any amperage measurements?
WBP, you are saying about DBS' worser shape of the reflector. Is it something that you are saying based on your equipment? Or it is noticeable even with naked eye? We are at the moment sure that the geometry is worser in DBS,even though it concentrates more light it is not properly focused on the hotspot.
Another question, if the hotspot of Tiablo is 70% of that of a DBS(just a case) , that percentage is kept over longer distances or is it getting smaller?


----------



## nanotech17 (Jan 29, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*

R2 :rock:


----------



## Drifter721 (Jan 29, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*

MrGman,

I don't live far from you. We spoke on the phone the other night. I should have an ACE in hand by this weekend. Would you have the time and interest in comparing the ACE with the A10? I'll bring it over anytime you want.


----------



## Outdoors Fanatic (Jan 29, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*



Drifter721 said:


> MrGman,
> 
> I don't live far from you. We spoke on the phone the other night. I should have an ACE in hand by this weekend. Would you have the time and interest in comparing the ACE with the A10? I'll bring it over anytime you want.


Please do it!

Thanks.


----------



## MrGman (Jan 29, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*

I didn't want to mention that in this thread I wanted to leave it as a surprise since we talked on the phone and I knew it was coming. WBP is the one with the equipment and I will have to take it to his top secret lair and test it there with him at his convenience, he is also a very busy man, with a real business making real money, so I can't make guarantees as to getting it done soon. I know he is interested in seeing that model and comparing it to the MC-E module for his Dereelight, so its really just a matter of timing to get it done. But lets just keep that under the radar for now. (Am I typing this out load?). 


_You didn't read anything._


----------



## Drifter721 (Jan 29, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*

OK MrGMan, Going dark on this for now. Will contact you covert for a meeting point.


----------



## xpea (Jan 29, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*

While I highly respect the numbers, and after looking at many A10 beam shots, I still prefer the much more usable dbs beam than the tiny, mostly useless, A10 hotspot. Of course, it's my opinion and many may disagree but dbs has still the best balanced beam of any current single LED throwers. I really see the A10 as a desesperate move to get the king of throw title, but for the kind of beam it produces, an aspheric lens does much better job...


----------



## MrGman (Jan 29, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*

I will only say the beam shots don't do any of those lights justice. Having seen them side by side in the dark with my own eyes, I will say I like the Tiablo best, it has some useable spill as well. You simply can't judge how good a beam it is by looking at nothing more than pictures of green tree branches 100 yards away. Have to see the real deal. I have no regrets buying it and have no intention of getting rid of it.


----------



## WadeF (Jan 29, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*

I wonder if we should come up with a class system for these throwers.

The DBS, MRV, Tiablo A9, Spear, are all basically in the same size class. They have been known as super throwers, etc. 

Maybe the A10 should be in a new class, a larger class, and know as a mega thrower.  We wouldn't put the DBS, MRV, Tiablo, etc, in the same class as smaller throwers like the D-Mini, Regalight WT1, Dereelight CL1H w/ smooth, etc. 

I have a feeling we'll be seeing more lights like the A10, if not larger. At this point these lights become almost like HID's, etc, where they can't be slipped in a pocket and need to be carried in a holster, or by other means (really big cargo pocket maybe). 

It would be silly to compare a DBS, MRV, Tiablo A9, Spear to a smaller light, as it seems silly to compare the new A10 to the smaller DBS, MRV, Tiablo A9, Spear, etc. Thoughts?


----------



## wbp (Jan 29, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*

I really, really like the idea of a new class of lights, "mega throwers" or whatever.

ergotelis: I would not say that the DBS' reflector is worse than the A10's. It's just different. From the look of the shape and the results, Tiablo designed the A10 to concentrate nearly all of the light into a very tight beam. This was not done by accident, I'm sure they did this to take the "top thrower" spot (for a while, anyway). Next time we've got all these lights together we'll measure the hot spot sizes, that would be interesting.

The DBS is a great light, no question. I'm not about to sell mine. The beam it throws with the smooth reflector and R2 chip is great, and in many situations it will be more useful than that A10's tiny spot. And, in a matter of a minute or two the DBS becomes an MCE, putting out a measured 500+ lumens over a much larger area. I can run it on a pair of RCR123's or add the extension tube and use 18650's. I doubt Tiablo will offer new pills or reflectors for the A10, but I am pretty sure that Dereelight will continue to offer new upgrades for the DBS.

Drifter721: I am very interested in seeing the ACE, and will be happy to measure it.

William


----------



## Bullzeyebill (Jan 29, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*

Was wondering, do we have some real lumen ratings on these lights. Would be good if they were well over 200 lumens for good beam spread at distance, more light "out there". I have a three inch reflector for one of my lights using a Seoul P4, one of the early U bins, and I measured 42,000 lux corrected to one meter, from 6 meters using inverse square law. Problem is it is mostly a pencil beam at distance.

Bill


----------



## TITAN1833 (Jan 29, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*

I'm in no doubt of the numbers and I think we are fortunate to have guys that can test accurately,but something is bugging me.

when the A10 first came onto the scene it was underpowered IIRC and according to Erns review the DBS clearly threw further,so my question is it's not just down to the reflector is it? it has to be power/reflector ratio 

I'm guessing both are around 1.2A and rated 230 ish lumens, or are they?is the A10's output more than 1.2A :shrug:

Don't jump on me JMO but I think this"king of throw" could swing either way depending on power output,BTW I'm happy for A10 owners but for me I'll stick with DBS at this time. :thumbsup:


----------



## lightforce2 (Jan 29, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*



xpea said:


> While I highly respect the numbers, and after looking at many A10 beam shots, I still prefer the much more usable dbs beam than the tiny, mostly useless, A10 hotspot. Of course, it's my opinion and many may disagree but dbs has still the best balanced beam of any current single LED throwers.


 
I own both lights & use them a lot (weather permitting, too hot & dry now), the beam of the A10 is fully & easily adjustable by rotation of the head, the DBS requires removal of the head which is not convenient for my style of field use



xpea said:


> I really see the A10 as a desesperate move to get the king of throw title, but for the kind of beam it produces, an aspheric lens does much better job...


 
I thought companies that produce quality, high performance products do so primarily to remain competive, stay in bussiness & hopefully prosper. There's clearly a lot of people that can make good use of lights such as the A10



WadeF said:


> I wonder if we should come up with a class system for these throwers.
> 
> It would be silly to compare a DBS, MRV, Tiablo A9, Spear to a smaller light, as it seems silly to compare the new A10 to the smaller DBS, MRV, Tiablo A9, Spear, etc. Thoughts?


 
You have a fair point here WadeF, there has to be a limit on size somewhere in comparsins between lights, however I think the style of usage would also have to be a factor for some people.

Personally the difference in size between the DBS & A10 isn't an issue since I'm already carrying a lot of other gear (rifle, backpack, etc) however I wouldn't want to go bigger than an A10.
But If I were walking to the corner store, walking the dog, etc, then I would much preffer a light that comfortlly will fit into my pocket so I'd go the DBS before the A10, hence I would'nt compare the two


----------



## WadeF (Jan 29, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*

I'm not surprised by the A10's numbers at all. What I was surprised at were Ern's #'s when they were lower than what we would expect. If I got a A10 I would expect to see 40,000+ LUX on my LUX meter at 1 meter. 

For the DBS to compete with the current XR-E they would need to offer a larger "turbo" head for the DBS. Simply unscrew the current head, screw on the new head with a larger reflector, move the pill over, etc. It could also enhance the MC-E's throw. 

The question would be if Dereelight would be willing to make such a head, if enough people would buy one, etc. For me I'd probably pick one up since it should be cheaper than buying a whole new light, but it will also probably make the light too large to pocket carry. 

I have a feeling Dereelight will hang on and wait for improvements in LED's to allow for more throw with the same size light. If we look to Sunlight (or however they spell it), they are getting similar throw to the DBS in a smaller light.

I'll be interested to see how the new XP-E LED's work in these throwers. Obviously if there is an improvement in LED's that result in more throw, there will be even more gains if they are used in a light like the A10.


----------



## lightforce2 (Jan 29, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*



WadeF said:


> For the DBS to compete with the current XR-E they would need to offer a larger "turbo" head for the DBS. Simply unscrew the current head, screw on the new head with a larger reflector, move the pill over, etc. It could also enhance the MC-E's throw.


 
I've thought about this too, I hope Dereelight are thinking about it too!!


----------



## WadeF (Jan 29, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*

Now the question is, can they make an even larger reflector than the A10? At one point will we reach a point of diminishing returns?  Be funny to see a XR-E in some 1 foot wide reflector, and very deep.


----------



## insaned (Jan 29, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*

thks for sharing this. :thumbsup:

Let's wait for the ACE test!!


----------



## evenchaos (Jan 29, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*

What we need now is to get Tiablo to fix up the A10 power regulator to give nice flat output on a 18650 cell, 2x(r)cr123 and 2x18650s with max output because right now the only choice is to have either one 18650 cell which gives poor regulation and doesn't output necessary light to reach the title, and with 2xprimary cells - it isn't cost effective.
*
Tiablo, if you are reading this post then please seriously consider making a properly regulated LED module for flat output on real 2.7-8.5V input voltage end to end and make sure it really works at all those voltages without "stability issues" and include the R3 or R4 led when it comes out* (which I am really hoping is going to happen soon /fingers crossed).


----------



## ergotelis (Jan 29, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*

just to add that the 3sd circuit in the dbs provides 0,95amp to the led, measured with multimeter between the red wire and the + positive sign of the led.At the tailcap it was about 1,25amp.


----------



## MrGman (Jan 29, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*



evenchaos said:


> What we need now is to get Tiablo to fix up the A10 power regulator to give nice flat output on a 18650 cell, 2x(r)cr123 and 2x18650s with max output because right now the only choice is to have either one 18650 cell which gives poor regulation and doesn't output necessary light to reach the title, and with 2xprimary cells - it isn't cost effective.
> 
> *Tiablo, if you are reading this post then please seriously consider making a properly regulated LED module for flat output on real 2.7-8.5V input voltage end to end and make sure it really works at all those voltages without "stability issues" and include the R3 or R4 led when it comes out* (which I am really hoping is going to happen soon /fingers crossed).


 
And Tiablo, please contact MrGman for an address to send it to for testing when its ready :candle:.

Although I hate to disagree with this guy but I would much rather have one that runs on 3.7 to 9V and takes either 3 CR123 or 2 each 17500 or 18500 with a short extension or 2 18650's with a long extension. Since this is a big head flashlight and it ain't going in my pocket I don't care if gets longer. But its my thread and I can hijack it back if I want!  :nana:

If you can also clarify that this specific model will or will not accept 8.7V because the separate note that came in the box saying not to use 2 RCRs only the CR123 primary or 18650 is still kind of confusticating. If it does take up to 8.7V can I run 2X18500's in it as soon as you make the extension piece?


----------



## TITAN1833 (Jan 29, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*



ergotelis said:


> just to add that the 3sd circuit in the dbs provides 0,95amp to the led, measured with multimeter between the red wire and the + positive sign of the led.At the tailcap it was about 1,25amp.


Hmmm I thought they were supposed to be 1.2A according to specs,or did they mean from the tail cap


----------



## WadeF (Jan 29, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*



TITAN1833 said:


> Hmmm I thought they were supposed to be 1.2A according to specs,or did they mean from the tail cap



It should be 1.2A at the emitter. I don't know how accurate his testing methods were. Draw at the tailcap should increase as the 18650's voltage drops. When the battery is around 4v it may draw around 1.2A, but as the voltage drops it will draw more current to keep providing the proper voltage and current to the emitter. It may also depend on the Vf of the emitter, if someone has an emitter with a very high Vf it may not draw the full current.

Also is the A10 regulated? How does it compare to the DBS after the A10 and DBS have been run for 20-30 minutes?


----------



## I came to the light... (Jan 29, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*

Thanks for the testing. Wow, it really took a long time to beat the DBS. Too bad the new king has to be yet larger...


----------



## saabluster (Jan 29, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*



wbp said:


> Drifter721: I am very interested in seeing the ACE, and will be happy to measure it.
> 
> William


Wonder if you'd be interested in measuring the DEFT for me. I would really like some solid numbers and you guys are doing it right by taking the measurements from farther away. Thanks for the info so far. Keep it up!


----------



## evenchaos (Jan 29, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*



MrGman said:


> Although I hate to disagree with this guy but I would much rather have one that runs on 3.7 to 9V and takes either 3 CR123 or 2 each 17500 or 18500 with a short extension or 2 18650's with a long extension. Since this is a big head flashlight and it ain't going in my pocket I don't care if gets longer. But its my thread and I can hijack it back if I want!  :nana:


Actually, that is a much better suggestion though I was keeping mine confined to the advertised specs. Speaking of which, I was expecting it to work with 2x18650 with the extension tube (it was even initially advertised as being for both A10 & ACE until they changed their mind later on and said its only for ACE). 2x18650 max voltage = 8.4v < 8.5V.

Anyways, reason for my post is that it's hard to call it the new "king" when it doesn't completely work as expected. I would say its the prince of throw that could be crowned king if its bugs & shortcomings were amended :nana: We just need Tiablo to step up to the plate and do the right thing.



MrGman said:


> If you can also clarify that this specific model will or will not accept 8.7V because the separate note that came in the box saying not to use 2 RCRs only the CR123 primary or 18650 is still kind of confusticating. If it does take up to 8.7V can I run 2X18500's in it as soon as you make the extension piece?



Well I just tried it with 2x18650's and the tactical switch -  instant blue light from flashlight :sick2::shakehead It still works now, so hopefully no permanent damage sustained maybe just slightly bluer tint, could be from still hot emitter. Surprising that it didn't do that when I was measuring current at the tailcap with two 18650 cells way back - the current was very high, but the light had just a hint blue. Alright, time to start ranting again in the CPF marketplace as soon as the Chinese New Year is over and they go back to work. If I recall correctly, they said that it should be usable for brief periods of time ~10 min but it doesn't look like that is the case, so much for the max 8.5V rating.


----------



## Mike89 (Jan 29, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*

To tell the truth, this thread hasn't really told me much about this light. King of this, king of that, light meter this, light meter that. King is in the eye of the holder of the light. Only way I'm really going to know about this light is to take it out and test it in the night next to another light. This light (from limited beamshots I've seen) is a little too focused for me (too small of a spot at distance). I think I'd be much more interested in the Ace version. I'd like to test the Ace to compare it to my T1.


----------



## lightforce2 (Jan 29, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*



evenchaos said:


> Well I just tried it with 2x18650's -  instant blue flashlight :sick2::shakehead


 


I tested my A10 on 2 x 18650 earlier on & was OK, though very high current draw. Ultimately that current has got to go somewhere, looks like yours went straight to the emitter.

Someone also asked about whether the MCE module will take a bit more than 12V, I put 4 RCR123 LiFePo4's (4 x 3.35v = 13.4v open circuit) no doubt these small cells had a fair bit of internal resistance which would have droped the volts. I wont be doing it again especialy after evenchaos's drama with 2 x 18650's


----------



## divine (Jan 29, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*

Is it just me or does it look like he's testing an OP DBS vs an A10?

Doesn't really say much.

But... I think the A10 does throw further than the DBS according to beamshots I've seen, but it doesn't put out as much light as a DBS.

How far do you need it to throw and how much light output do you need? I bet you that the DBS will still be the answer to 90% of the people who ask that question. :shrug:

At 64 meters in Ernie's beamshots, the DBS puts out much more useful light.

I will probably check out an A10 when the price goes below $100 USD.


----------



## evenchaos (Jan 29, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*



lightforce2 said:


> I tested my A10 on 2 x 18650 earlier on & was OK, though very high current draw. Ultimately that current has got to go somewhere, looks like yours went straight to the emitter.
> 
> Someone also asked about whether the MCE module will take a bit more than 12V, I put 4 RCR123 LiFePo4's (4 x 3.35v = 13.4v open circuit) no doubt these small cells had a fair bit of internal resistance which would have droped the volts. I wont be doing it again especialy after evenchaos's drama with 2 x 18650's



Did you test it with just the switch or the meter inline? I only held the button for a second so hopefully it didn't do any permanent damage.


----------



## wbp (Jan 29, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*



saabluster said:


> Wonder if you'd be interested in measuring the DEFT for me. I would really like some solid numbers and you guys are doing it right by taking the measurements from farther away. Thanks for the info so far. Keep it up!




Absolutely! Throw and lumens, both. PM to discuss details...


----------



## WadeF (Jan 29, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*



ergotelis said:


> just to add that the 3sd circuit in the dbs provides 0,95amp to the led, measured with multimeter between the red wire and the + positive sign of the led.At the tailcap it was about 1,25amp.



I should have mentioned, how old is your 3SD? I think the early 3SD's were 1A to the emitter. The current 3SD's should be 1.2A, and draw more around 1.4A from the 18650.


----------



## wbp (Jan 29, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*



evenchaos said:


> Well I just tried it with 2x18650's -  instant blue flashlight



So now it puts out blue light? You got the emitter hot enough to burn off the phosphor! :eeksign:
Amazing that it even works at all now...


----------



## wbp (Jan 29, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*



divine said:


> Is it just me or does it look like he's testing an OP DBS vs an A10?
> 
> Doesn't really say much.



Who is this "he"? We tested a DBS with the R2 pill and SMO reflector.

Which, by the way, I measured at 265 lumens output the last time I checked this particular pill.

William


----------



## evenchaos (Jan 29, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*



wbp said:


> So now it puts out blue light? You got the emitter hot enough to burn off the phosphor! :eeksign:
> Amazing that it even works at all now...



Yes, it still works now, tint is slightly blue (could even be just a preconception now). It put out blue light the moment I powered it on with the 2x18650 cells - no gradual transition, but wasn't kept on for more than a second. It may be possible that my emitter isn't glued on quite right so it wasn't able to stand up to the high current unlike lightforce2's copy.


----------



## saabluster (Jan 30, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*



wbp said:


> Absolutely! Throw and lumens, both. PM to discuss details...


PM to ya. Thanks


----------



## saabluster (Jan 30, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*



Mike89 said:


> To tell the truth, this thread hasn't really told me much about this light. King of this, king of that, light meter this, light meter that. King is in the eye of the holder of the light. Only way I'm really going to know about this light is to take it out and test it in the night next to another light. This light (from limited beamshots I've seen) is a little too focused for me (too small of a spot at distance). I think I'd be much more interested in the Ace version. I'd like to test the Ace to compare it to my T1.


What do you want this thread to tell you? Its obvious by the title of the thread what the point is. The king of throw. Thats it. If you want more on this light go find a different thread. Guess what? If you want to find the "King of Throw" you _need_ a light meter. :shakehead


----------



## MrGman (Jan 30, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*

I just tested my A10 R2 with 2 primary batteries and it drew 1.19A of current off of fresh ones. With one freshly charged 18650 it draw 1.25 amps from that battery. Not going through the switch, just the ammeter on the back end. 

Its interesting because I tested the 2 batteries that were in it and one read 100 percent and the other only 20 percent and those were the ones I measured the lux at 5 meters with. Can't help but wonder if they were totally fresh how much better it would have been. So those got dumped for the fresh ones to measure the current draw. 

Its amazing to me how some people want to know the truth until it goes against the light they already have or made their favorite. If you think lighting up a fairly large swatch of tree branches at some distance is meaningful and have no gauge for the size of that beam and call that important and another beam as "too small" when you don't even know what it is, you are clueless. This is all about throw at long distances. I have no vested interest in Tiablo, This is my first light from them. If the Dereelight or Raidfire Spear were better I would have simply ordered up one of those this morning to be my "keeper". The Tiablo A10 puts out a rock solid beam of light that is well defined. It also has a very good amount of spill.

The photos I have seen thus far don't do this light or the other 2 for that matter any justice at all. Sorry to say it and no offense to the hard work those guys put in trying to get those pics, but they just don't measure up to what the eyes see with these lights. They don't show the true difference. This beam would be great for lighting up various animals in the field at 100 yards or a man size perp sneaking out behind that tree.

When I have the time and better night time weather I fully plan to take some beamshots of color poster targets of people that I have used before leaning against those trees, hopefully at 100 yards to show that this beam is more than adequate to light them up compared to those other lights. If it was a mediocre beam I would have no problem saying it. WBP owns the Dereelight with various accessories and the Raidfire Spear and he saw and acknowledged immediately the Tiablo was far and away the better thrower type light. It is what it is and truth is truth. 

I have been one of the few who have said from the very beginning of all the beam shots I have taken that they just don't do the lights justice and this is very much more the truth with thrower lights like these. Either they are overexposed and the beam looks too good or they are too dim and without sufficient depth of the contrast to show the variations in spill patterns next to the hot spot which make up part of what these lights are and what they can do.

Now on another note I saw my friend who did in fact get his brandy spankin new Tiablo A10 ACE. His batteries didn't come in so I dropped in 2 of my 18650's and then four of his new SureFire CR123's (it says it takes up to 12 volts). Worked fine on either. It was very bright and strong and steady with my 2X18650's. We lit up the creek behind his house like nobody's business. I also saw the "+" sign on his wall and could not dial it out. If I turned the front end enough to get rid of it I had a donut hole instead. So I found a combination of soft blur of the + sign and no real donut. Looking out in the yard at the trees along the creekbed of course there was no + sign to see in the beam pattern. It is very bright. Even with the big reflector (OP of course), it is not nearly as tightly focused as that of the R2 unit. Its very nice to have. I am sure it is over 600 lumens easily. I had my Eagletac T10C2 and Fenix T1 together making a single beam pattern to the left of it in the grass below and that is well over 450 lumens. I could easily see they were not as bright as this ACE off to the right. Its a nice light, but I am confident it won't have the peak lux of the A10 R2. But it will get tested, probably in a week with WBP and his very accurate equipment.

Now I am not a big fan of thrower type lights in general. My Fenix T1/EagleTac T10C2 and Malkoff M60 have been my favorite style lights which I have said in numerous threads. But I recognize a great thrower when I see it, and what it can be used for. The Tiablo A10 is a great tactical thrower type light. Its a keeper. 

To me the MCE and P7 style lights are semi disappointing in that all they are only flood lights. Big soft beam with no real well defined hotspot. If they do get focused you see the actual gap between die which drives me crazy but evem still, a wide soft beam pattern. Great if you need that much light but not really impressive beam pattern.

More to come.


----------



## evenchaos (Jan 30, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*



divine said:


> At 64 meters in Ernie's beamshots, the DBS puts out much more useful light.



And everyone else who is saying the beam is too narrow on the A10. Yes, that is what a better "real" thrower is going to put out. You will get that "useful beam" distribution at a further distance. The thing is that it will be dimmer because of the distance - you need more lumens emitted. Given the same led, hotspot MUST be smaller to get more throw.


----------



## PhantomPhoton (Jan 30, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*



> To me the MCE and P7 style lights are semi disappointing in that all they are only flood lights. Big soft beam with no real well defined hotspot. If they do get focused you see the actual gap between die which drives me crazy but evem still, a wide soft beam pattern. Great if you need that much light but not really impressive beam pattern.
> 
> More to come.



Have you seen a Wolf Eyes P7 or MC-E yet? My P7 has a very decent hotspot; a bit larger than a single emitter light, but definitely a nice hotspot; no doughnut, no crosshairs.

Anyway thanks for reporting your findings. 'Bout time something (non custom, and in the same class (18650) beat out the DBS.  
I'd love to see what the DEFT gets for both OTF lumens and lux. I absolutely love mine, especially on foggy nights. I'll soon buy an MC-E for it too. :naughty:


----------



## alohaluau (Jan 30, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*

To MrGman and wbp,

Thanks for the hard work and testing you have put into this thread, I'm glad I've got my Tiablo A10 R2, just playing the waiting game for my ACE to arrive...

Cheers,
Luau


----------



## jirik_cz (Jan 30, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*



paulr said:


> Looking at some of the beamshots it looks like the ACE has around the same central hotspot intensity as the R2, but a bigger hotspot (and higher power drain) because of the multi die led. If I do buy one I'll be happy to send it to you for testing.



Don't think so. I've meausured around 20k lux with Tiablo ACE and 30k lux with DBS R2. Both measured from 4 meters and converted to 1m.

The important thing is, that in the real world the difference between 20k, 30k or even 50k lux is not as big as it seems on the paper


----------



## lightforce2 (Jan 30, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*



evenchaos said:


> Did you test it with just the switch or the meter inline? I only held the button for a second so hopefully it didn't do any permanent damage.


 
With the DMM in series at the back end. I forget the amperage now but I remember it was scary at the time


----------



## Megalops (Jan 30, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*



MrGman said:


> To me the MCE and P7 style lights are semi disappointing in that all they are only flood lights. Big soft beam with no real well defined hotspot. If they do get focused you see the actual gap between die which drives me crazy but evem still, a wide soft beam pattern. Great if you need that much light but not really impressive beam pattern.



I'm pretty much a newbie as far as flashlights, but I have an MCE Jetbeam M1X which has a very well defined hotspot. It will also light up reflectors along the end of a dead end road at 0.7 miles away. You may want to check one out if you get a chance. The cross pattern is noticeable against a flat surface at distances less than 50', but not an issue for most real life situations. Needless to say, it has a very well defined beam.


----------



## ergotelis (Jan 30, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*



WadeF said:


> I should have mentioned, how old is your 3SD? I think the early 3SD's were 1A to the emitter. The current 3SD's should be 1.2A, and draw more around 1.4A from the 18650.



I think i am having the oldest ones.I bought a 3sd circuit at the very first launch. I am not using them anymore in DbS only in other flashlights!


----------



## supergravy (Jan 30, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*



MrGman said:


> To me the MCE and P7 style lights are semi disappointing in that all they are only flood lights. Big soft beam with no real well defined hotspot. If they do get focused you see the actual gap between die which drives me crazy but evem still, a wide soft beam pattern. Great if you need that much light but not really impressive beam pattern.



I felt the same way until I bought a Solarforce L900M. Sure it has a wide spill area but it also has a beautiful beam with a tight hot spot. The X in the hot spot is almost non-existant and can only be seen on a wall from less then a foot. Outside it is like a D26 drop-in on steroids. For reference with my light meter I am getting 17,000 lux at one meter with the L900M compared to under 10,000 lux with my DBS MC-E. This is short of the 26,000 or so lux I get with a R2 DBS but still the most impressive quad die light I have tried.

As for your test for the king of the throw - thank you! Even though I am a DBS owner I really appreciate your test and the methodology used. I would be tempted by the A10 if I weren't having so many quirky problems with Tiablos' other new light the TL-1.


----------



## Glenn7 (Jan 30, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*

is this thread only for lights with reflectors?? - if not - then I have the LED king of throw its the DEFT :nana: and thats 5 x as brighter than the DBS in lux so what are these puny lights you are all talking about  - just stirring  but if you want to see my DEFT then just look up into the night sky :ironic: 

PS: Saabluster could chime in and give the lux @ 1 meter as i have forgotern it just now - but i know its real scary high :wave:


----------



## MrGman (Jan 30, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*



Glenn7 said:


> is this thread only for lights with reflectors?? - if not - then I have the LED king of throw its the DEFT :nana: and thats 5 x as brighter than the DBS in lux so what are these puny lights you are all talking about  - just stirring  but if you want to see my DEFT then just look up into the night sky :ironic:
> 
> PS: Saabluster could chime in and give the lux @ 1 meter as i have forgotern it just now - but i know its real scary high :wave:


 
Is the DEFT a production light or a one of a kind custom build? If its one of a kind that not everyone can simply order off a website and buy it doesn't really count. I understand WBP is going to test it for you and I am probably going to be right there to help him and would love to check it out. So if this is something we can all run out and buy tell us where we can get one. I have seen some photos of it you have posted in the past and I already know its awesome, but doesn't do me any good if I can't get one for myself. 

I have not seen the Solarforce L900 or the Wolf Eyes MC-E units personally to see if they have a good hot spot or not. I haven't seen any test results saying that they have hot spot lux readings higher than the Tiablo A10 posted anywhere (separate issue). I will say that I have my Malkoff Triple Drop which already has over 700 lumens out the front, its a wonderful light. It has somewhat of a mid range hot spot, its in a convenient form factor, so when I say I am not all that impressed with the P7/MC-E's not having a good hot spot, its because I want something a step above what I already have in that department, but not something I have to custom build myself. A single diode with a big reflector should have a tighter beam than a triple unit with 3 smaller reflectors to my way of thinking. A screw on front aspheric lense to replace the bezel crown would be nice.


----------



## saabluster (Jan 30, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*



MrGman said:


> Is the DEFT a production light or a one of a kind custom build? If its one of a kind that not everyone can simply order off a website and buy it doesn't really count. I understand WBP is going to test it for you and I am probably going to be right there to help him and would love to check it out. So if this is something we can all run out and buy tell us where we can get one. I have seen some photos of it you have posted in the past and I already know its awesome, but doesn't do me any good if I can't get one for myself.


Well MrG the DEFT certainly is one-of-a-kind. I think there is an argument that could be made either way as to whether or not it is a custom or a production unit. Personally I consider it a production piece albeit production is small right now. I do plan on expanding in the coming year to have stock so that anyone who wants one can have it shipped immediately. As is there is no plan to have it be a limited run custom kind of thing. Production will continue for the forseeable future. There is a waiting line for a lot of high-end cars like Ferrari but I don't think that the fact that someone can't go and immediately buy some of these cars makes them non production pieces. Yes but the DEFT uses a host you say. Well a lot of production cars are built on the platforms and use the parts of other cars. Maserati comes to mind. Limited production built using Ferrari parts. Probably about as close an analogy as I can think of. I'd say its fair to say the DEFT is the Maserati of the flashlight world.

Regardless of how you view it it is the king of throw. Debating size class is another issue however as the DEFT is clearly in a different size class than the A9, DBS and so forth. Seems to me that one logical divider to decide what class one of these lights would fall into is whether or not it fits easily in a pocket. Even there it would be hard to define but the new Tiablo does seem to be in a different size class than even the DBS. I think the DBS was already pushing it.


----------



## Glenn7 (Jan 30, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*

well then for this Maserati the DEFT - I seem to remember a lux reading of 156.000 lux @ 1meter - but correct me if I'm wrong :naughty:


----------



## MrGman (Jan 30, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*



Glenn7 said:


> well then for this Maserati the DEFT - I seem to remember a lux reading of 156.000 lux @ 1meter - but correct me if I'm wrong :naughty:


 
I am guessing you meant 156,000 or 156K lux and not a paultry 156 lux with 3 meaningless zeroes behind the decimal point. That would be a good number, 156 lux would be a total joke. 

But I still would consider it a custom mod light and not a production unit but that's just my vote.


----------



## Glenn7 (Jan 30, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*

yes 156000 not 156


----------



## saabluster (Jan 31, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*



Glenn7 said:


> well then for this Maserati the DEFT - I seem to remember a lux reading of 156.000 lux @ 1meter - but correct me if I'm wrong :naughty:


Its somewhere in that range. Someone did a calculation based on my measurements from about 500' where I found the DEFT to have 8X the throw of a Tiablo A9. But it would be nice to have even more accurate testing results.


----------



## wbp (Jan 31, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*



Glenn7 said:


> yes 156000 not 156



With what instrument? Most light meters are calibrated for Illuminant A and are rather inaccurate when measuring LED sources.


----------



## waddup (Jan 31, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*



MrGman said:


> There is no question,
> 
> We took the 3 contenders outside and looked at some trees about 80 yards away



absolute science


----------



## MrGman (Jan 31, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*







This is why we use the wonderous Orb Optronics sp100. It don't do no stinking lux readings. It gives you the entire spectrum readout, intensity at 1000 points across the wavelengths. Here we see the actual outputs of the Raidfire Spear, Tiablo A10 R2, Dereelight DBS with R2 and then the MC-E, measured in their respective "spots". Not going to get this with a $49.95 meter and, the accuracy of measuring the intensity across the spectrum is excellent. 

This is the real "Science", the rest is just gravy. Thanks again to wbp. 

The Tiable A10 ACE will be getting measured along with the SureFire E2DL, all in due time!


----------



## saabluster (Feb 1, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*



wbp said:


> With what instrument? Most light meters are calibrated for Illuminant A and are rather inaccurate when measuring LED sources.


Well you just lost me. I have no idea what you were referring to when you said "Illuminant A". I have a cheap DX light meter and I have no illusions as to its accuracy. I have noticed that it seems to read higher with an LED that is more blue in tint. But I figure it's _relatively_ accurate when comparing two lights that are both LED based and have similar bin tints when all you want is a relative measurement between two lights. This is essentially what I did with my Tiablo A9 and the DEFT. That measurement was even taken with one of my reject lenses as that was all I had at the time of the test.


----------



## TITAN1833 (Feb 1, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*



wbp said:


> With what instrument? Most light meters are calibrated for Illuminant A and are rather inaccurate when measuring LED sources.


I thought they were calibrated for lux have I missed something :thinking:


----------



## LuxLuthor (Feb 1, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*

I have no business stepping into an LED thread (LOL!), and although it looks like MrGman and wbp did some excellent work, I do think your thread should be qualified up front as stating your label requires a Production/Retail LED model which appeared to be added after Saabluster's DEFT arrived in the thread.

However if your guideline is being able to go out and purchase a light, well then anyone who wants can buy an aspheric lens from a number of locations, stick it on a generic Maglite, and decimate your ranked models in first post. 

Then the DEFT which currently has a waiting line--will blow those away. Maybe change your topic/claim to "King of Throw LED Production Retail Lights." Obviously there are also many incan lights that will dramatically out-throw your LED results.

Now the only substantive questions I would raise relate to the methodology in making sure that it is conforming with guidelines from a resource such as section 8.2 in this International Light IL-1400a NIST Radiometer/Photometer.

Then also that the distances & angles comply with The Ryer Manual p.17 regarding reflectors & use of the inverse square law, and Chapter 7 beginning on p. 29.

No question that your results are valid from a relative comparison of one light tested to the next, but I'm not sure if you complied with all the requirements to make an absolute inverse square extrapolation, however expensive the spectral radiometer used. You may have, there is just insufficient documentation of the testing methodology to ascertain.


----------



## Glenn7 (Feb 1, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*

Good answer LUX :thumbsup:
and I have to agree - just because you cant get a specific light of your choice today - doesn't make it qualify for a non production light.
Jetbeam is a production light manufacturer and you cant buy a M1X as they are sold out (but making more) - Orb - you cant just always go on line and buy the model you want without waiting.
Just because a manufacturer maybe (for costs and lack of employees) cant keep up with demand - doesn't make it a non production light IMO - it just makes it a high demand very much sort after production light.

Question: how many lights does someone have to make and sell before they are considered a manufacturer? 
Or is the definition of a manufacturer what someone does for a living?
Or is it sour grapes because you only have light A and don't/cant have light B - that you make up the "manufacturer/production" rules.


----------



## TITAN1833 (Feb 1, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*



> We took the 3 contenders outside and looked at some trees about 80 yards away back and forth and there was no question, the Tiablo A10 was the clear winner.


I'm sorry that is too funny to let go,
I too took three contenders outside a DBS,sunlite 8W and a spartanian II I looked at some trees about 300 meters I looked back and forth and there was no question the sunlite 8W was the clear winner,now that is scientific testing at it's best in my book 



[edit] on a serious note maybe we should just rely on our own eyes when testing throw lights,as we don't all have expensive equipment..just a thought.


----------



## Ryanrpm (Feb 1, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*



TITAN1833 said:


> I'm sorry that is too funny to let go,
> I too took three contenders outside a DBS,sunlite 8W and a spartanian II I looked at some trees about 300 meters I looked back and forth and there was no question the spartanian II was the clear winner,now that is scientific testing at it's best in my book



I take it you are just kinda of on the sarcastic side there? 

Speaking of Sunlite, and based on the nice photos of Glenn7 comparing it against the DEFT, DBS, Snipe, ect.....I'd like to see how the 8w measures on that _spectral radiance chart_.  http://picasaweb.google.com.au/glennkath/Eagle8W?authkey=-UtBFuAevDo#

Especially since Sunlite makes their own LED and are not your standard Cree, Seoul, etc...


----------



## TITAN1833 (Feb 1, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*



Ryanrpm said:


> I take it you are just kinda of on the sarcastic side there?


yes just a little but I made an apology for that already :green: but crazy hmmm I make no apologises for being that 

Look testing with instruments is one way testing out in the field is another,but you need to back up the looking with beam shots IMO, placing a object at increasing distance until one light can't reach the object will determine what light throws light the furthest how else can you say one throws further than the other,this thread is about a confirmed test but all I see is numbers and words we need long distance beam shots as well :twothumbs


----------



## StandardBattery (Feb 1, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*

Isn't this a case of people simple wanting more that what the test shows, or what the testers claimed? They just said one light has more lux at 5m than this other one. Use that information as you see fit.

For them that was enough for them to crown it, but kings are toppled every day. Quite frankly the world has moved on from monarchies as they proved unable to satisfy all the people. If you're still living in the dark ages, no flashlight is going to provide enlightenment. 

Now we can all enjoy the future tests for what they are.


----------



## Alan B (Feb 1, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*

I am glad to see tests run with such care and precision. This yields a lot of information that we can use. I think testing things that are less available is still useful. Availability is a relative thing, if you want something enough you can almost always get it, with patience. They come up used, or you can commission or build one, etc. 

As far as classifying throwers, it might be useful to classify them by head diameter. That's the real feature that both gives them an edge and makes them hard to carry.


----------



## MrGman (Feb 1, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*



LuxLuthor said:


> I have no business stepping into an LED thread (LOL!), and although it looks like MrGman and wbp did some excellent work, I do think your thread should be qualified up front as stating your label requires a Production/Retail LED model which appeared to be added after Saabluster's DEFT arrived in the thread.


 
_Your right, this is an LED thread, no relabeling will be done. I didn't post this in the General Flashlight Discussion, the Incan, or HID, sections for a reason. The Saabluster is a custom modified light of 1 copy so far. I have never seen it, I have never seen any independent testing of it. When its available it can be considered. _



LuxLuthor said:


> However if your guideline is being able to go out and purchase a light, well then anyone who wants can buy an aspheric lens from a number of locations, stick it on a generic Maglite, and decimate your ranked models in first post .


 
_Go post it in the incan section. I don't care. In the LED section the major hot topic in regards to the best thrower flashlight has been the Tiablo A10 taking over the top spot from Deree DBS when Light-Reviews.com published that it had over 45K lux. Many of those in this thread on LED lights wanted to know if it was really true for this single LED flashlight to have such a high lux reading and actually beat out those other lights. It appears to have done that. I am sure you can put together an incan or an HID light that would still be brighter. Like I said, go post it in the incan or HID sections, this is about LEDs and nobody ever claimed otherwise._ 



LuxLuthor said:


> Then the DEFT which currently has a waiting line--will blow those away. Maybe change your topic/claim to "King of Throw LED Production Retail Lights." Obviously there are also many incan lights that will dramatically out-throw your LED results.


 _Still no, still don't care about incans. We aren't in the incan thread section. _



LuxLuthor said:


> Now the only substantive questions I would raise relate to the methodology in making sure that it is conforming with guidelines from a resource such as section 8.2 in this International Light IL-1400a NIST Radiometer/Photometer.
> 
> Then also that the distances & angles comply with The Ryer Manual p.17 regarding reflectors & use of the inverse square law, and Chapter 7 beginning on p. 29.
> 
> *No question that your results are valid from a relative comparison of one light tested to the next,* but I'm not sure if you complied with all the requirements to make an absolute inverse square extrapolation, however expensive the spectral radiometer used. You may have, there is just insufficient documentation of the testing methodology to ascertain.


 
_As you said, the results are valid, ( I highlighted his text, just for the record) never said that the inverse square extrapolation back to the standard 1 meter was accurate, just a reference, that clarification was posted early on. Don't really care if it is or not. _

We compared the three LED lights that are still in the published top 3 spots for LED type lights on Light-Reviews.com using accurate equipment at a distance that is far more realistic than one meter. That is because some people argue that measurements of such lights with deep reflectors cannot be accurately measured at 1 meter (regardless of meter sensitivity range). They were already tested by some one else at 1 meter, there is no reason to duplicate that data yet again. Spot measurements are spot measurements. They do not have to be taken at 1 meter, we aren't submitting this for a Nobel science prize, just doing a direct comparison, get over it. They just have to be taken the same way. In this set of measurements the data indicates that the Tiablo is clearly brighter than the other 2 in question. Confirming the data published at Light-Reviews.com The Sunlight Eable 8w and saabluster havent been tested _yet_. I would love to see the Eagle 8W, if it turns out to be higher lux, that would be great. If RyanRPM wants to send us his, I am sure wbp and I would love to see it in action. I haven't seen it on light-reviews.com yet either, but at least people can order it up and buy it. If it turns out to be the next King of LED Throwers that would be great. 

In regards to the outdoor beam shots, we looked at the 3 lights that we were testing as a double check to our readings. Already stated didn't have the time to do some _decent_ beamshots. Of those 3 lights that were being compared, the Tiablo A10 was to the both of use clearly brighter with a better defined beam. It wasn't a close call as to be subjective, side by side at the same distance, the Tiablo was clearly better without question. I would love to do beam shots of some targets and not just tree branches up in the air. Something more meaningful, but don't have the time to do it just now. Said that back on page 1. Nobody is paying us anything to do this, we have real jobs and real lives to get on with.

Personally I would be embarassed to even mention a maglight incandescent flashlight as a serious light.


----------



## Alan B (Feb 1, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*

Anyone can buy an aspheric lens and put it and an LED drop-in on a [email protected] and make a terrific thrower as well, at a cost far below the other top-end lights reviewed here. It would be great to see that tested as well, so that we could see how it compares.

The quest is for knowledge.

Thanks for all your effort in this, and the really interesting results. Guess it is time to sell the old Tiablo A9.


----------



## jirik_cz (Feb 1, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*

DEFT independent testing is here https://www.candlepowerforums.com/threads/211519

Just FYI LED-lenser X7 has also around 50000 lux with fresh alkaline cells (current draw around 3,3A). Yesterday I've tried it with four AA eneloops in D holders (1AA in one holder) and it scored over 90000 lux (*current draw was 7A*) and I'm pretty sure that with rechargeable D nimh it would have more than 100000 lux (before it will make ). This is a retail light, so is it a new King of throw now ?


----------



## Jay T (Feb 1, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*

LuxLuthor Posted.


LuxLuthor said:


> However if your guideline is being able to go out and purchase a light, well then anyone who wants can buy an aspheric lens from a number of locations, stick it on a generic Maglite, and decimate your ranked models in first post.



Mrgman responded with


MrGman said:


> [
> _Go post it in the incan section. I don't care. In the LED section the major hot topic in regards to the best thrower flashlight has been the Tiablo A10 taking over the top spot from Deree DBS when Light-Reviews.com published that it had over 45K lux. Many of those in this thread on LED lights wanted to know if it was really true for this single LED flashlight to have such a high lux reading and actually beat out those other lights. It appears to have done that. I am sure you can put together an incan or an HID light that would still be brighter. Like I said, go post it in the incan or HID sections, this is about LEDs and nobody ever claimed otherwise._
> 
> .......
> ...




Umm Mr G, Lux was talking about an aspheric lens on a mag lite. An aspheric lens does not work well on an incandescent light. Lux was talking about LEDs. Please click on the link in his post, notice the aspheric lens lights in his post are LEDs? His post does not belong in the Incandecent section, nor does it belong in the HID section.

Rather than foaming at the mouth telling him to GTFO of the LED section. You should concider his point that an aspheric lens on a $25 Mag could possibly beat any of the kings of throw.


----------



## saabluster (Feb 1, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*



MrGman said:


> _ The Saabluster is a custom modified light of 1 copy so far. I have never seen it, I have never seen any independent testing of it. When its available it can be considered. _


 MrG it is very clear you haven't taken the time to look at my thread/s on the DEFT. You will find a link in my sig. Just to clear this up, I am saabluster and the light is the DEFT. There has already been 17 built and shipped with many more to come. So I'm not sure where you are getting that there is only "1 copy so far". Lux gave you a link to some testing that he did that I think most anyone would consider independent. Glenn7 has linked to his thread showing the DEFT next to a DBS and Eagle 8w if I remember correctly. 



MrGman said:


> Personally I would be embarassed to even mention a maglight incandescent flashlight as a serious light.


I'm sure Lux will be along shortly to confirm but I think he was referring to a mag LED not an incan as he knows quite well that an incan does not really work with an aspheric. And don't take what he says too seriously he was  you a little. I think everyone here really appreciates what you guys have done here with the test. It rare that any of us CPFers have access to equipment like the "big boys" do. Thanks.


----------



## TITAN1833 (Feb 1, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*



jirik_cz said:


> DEFT independent testing is here https://www.candlepowerforums.com/threads/211519
> 
> Just FYI LED-lenser X7 has also around 50000 lux with fresh alkaline cells. Yesterday I've tried it with four AA eneloops in D holders (1AA in one holder) and it scored over 90000 lux (current draw was 7A) and I'm pretty sure that with rechargeable D nimh it would have more than 100000 lux (before it will make ). This is a retail light, so is it a new King of throw now ?


Wow impressive can you measure [email protected] i'm guessing here but it may come second to the DEFT,but yes as it's a light that you can purchase over the internet like the DEFT can then it has to be considered IMHO


----------



## jirik_cz (Feb 1, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*



TITAN1833 said:


> Wow impressive can you measure [email protected] i'm guessing here but it may come second to the DEFT,but yes as it's a light that you can purchase over the internet like the DEFT can then it has to be considered IMHO



Sorry I've forgot to mention that those values were already measured at 4 meters (5790 lux) and converted to 1 meter value (92640 lux). 

Other thing is that manufacturer doesn't allow use of other than alkaline D batteries... So the "record" is probably not valid 

But believe me, it is pretty impressive to get around 1600 lumens and 90000 lux with just four AA eneloops :naughty:


----------



## PhantomPhoton (Feb 1, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*

First, I'd like to distribute a couple chill pills...



Okay good now maybe we can go back to rational discussion.
The DEFT is not a one of a kind light, I have one as well. I hope that many more people will be able to get them in the future and that Saabluster eventually sees some reward for all the time and money he's invested into making this great light available to people.

Second I've played with some of the new LED lensers and they do indeed throw very well. I'd like to try and put one up against the DEFT soon as I think they will do pretty well against it. The larger LED lensers do blow away my DBS.

Third I agree with a lot of what LuxLuthor said and thank him for his comments and for lending us LED nuts his vast experience with other light sources. Really, there is no standardized way to test LED superthrowers. Therefore being as open as possible with data and trying different measurement processes, distances, etc may in the end give a better overall picture of the real world performance one may expect. 
It reminds me of fanboys each claiming their computer setup is better because a certain benchmark tests always seems to favor one company over the other. In the end the good revewers post results from a multitude of synthetic and real game-fps/ encoding-time tests and just make comments not really declaring one better than the other in absolute terms.


----------



## Ryanrpm (Feb 1, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*



Alan B said:


> As far as classifying throwers, it might be useful to classify them by head diameter. That's the real feature that both gives them an edge and makes them hard to carry.



I really like your way of thinking Alan. Like a 30-39mm class, then a 40-49mm class....etc....

*First*,you would have your light placed in one of 3 groups: _Reflector, TIR, or Aspheric._

*Second*, by head diameter.

The emitter, driver, battery configuration and shape of the reflector will be what is unique for every manufacturer to experiment with to achieve the greatest throw....if that's their goal.


----------



## LuxLuthor (Feb 2, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*



MrGman said:


> _Your right, this is an LED thread, no relabeling will be done. I didn't post this in the General Flashlight Discussion, the Incan, or HID, sections for a reason. The Saabluster is a custom modified light of 1 copy so far. I have never seen it, I have never seen any independent testing of it. When its available it can be considered. _
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Your response was most curious. My comments were prefaced with sincere praise of some excellent work that was done, and a "LOL!" 

The rest of my post was not insulting, personal, nor mean-spirited. I linked to objective resources that many people may not have read and might find interesting, particularly the PDF's. My linked shootouts focussed on LED Aspherics. 

It was simply not clear that your presentation bestowing and confirming the title of "King of Throw" had disqualifications of non-retail based, or any other light beyond those four tested.

If you interpreted my mention of a Maglite host to imply it must be incan, that was not what I stated. If you didn't want questions, feedback, or input regarding validity of testing methodologies, then maybe it would be best to make a single announcement post and have the moderator lock the topic?

From the equipment that wbp has purchased, and an obvious dedication of this topic, I would think he would enjoy having the Ryer, and IL-1400a manuals referenced as resources for others to learn more and appreciate the work he does.

For reference, in addition to aspheric LED setups providing tremendous throw, another superb throwing device is using a fresnel lens. I have experimented with about 15 different types that all behave differently.


----------



## MrGman (Feb 2, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*

Lux, I get up grumpy in the morning, I looked at the reference of incan lights and took it the wrong way. Got off on the wrong start and went from there. I didn't speak for wbp, what he may or may not enjoy in learning from those manuals I can't say. It came off as if you were trying to show us that we didn't do it "right", but in second light review your comments, I think differently. I have not had time to actually look at those references yet. I actually had a very busy weekend. I will look at them through this week. 

I know that wbp was interersted in testing Saabluster's DEFT, and I am still interested in helping do that if I can. If it turns out to be the best thrower that's fine, I think it should be in a whole different class unto itself.

I do think though that we have to limit what would be considered into different categories. Not every custom homebuilt unit should be lumped together with lights we could all run out and purchase. Not everyone wants to be a custom light modder or builder. 

I certainly was interested in testing and confirming (and of course owning) what Light-Reviews.com had shown to be brighter than a Boxer 10W HID, and was available to the general public. I don't know about these LED Lenser's, I haven't seen any real test data on them. My understanding is that they are not regulated and output falls off pretty quick (if that's correct, I can see why no one wants to invest time testing them, but I haven't researched them thoroughly myself, not on my radar). 

So my chill pill is working, Lets start over.



I have to go get my cup of coffee and get grumpy again.


----------



## Alan B (Feb 2, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*

Great way to start the day, :grouphug:

Keep up the good work!

Thanks,


----------



## wbp (Feb 2, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*



LuxLuthor said:


> Now the only substantive questions I would raise relate to the methodology in making sure that it is conforming with guidelines from a resource such as section 8.2 in this International Light IL-1400a NIST Radiometer/Photometer.



This is a pretty old document (1998). However, you refer specifically to section 8.2, and in this case yes, the methodology does conform.

It's interesting - instrumentation that was for years considered reference quality is now coming into question because of the very different spectra of LED light sources. Until recently most measurements of this type were done with photo diode or similar single sensor instruments with filters designed to correspond to the CIE photopic response curves. The main reasons for this are cost - a spectroradiometer cost $20K or more, while a photo diode with filters was in the $5k range - and sensitivity of the instrument. 

A spectroradiometer uses a diffraction grating to spread the light out and then many sensors to read the light at different frequencies. A processor takes these readings and applies the CIE photopic curves to compute the various data needed.

In 1998 a Photo Research PR series device had a 128x1 sensor array and cost $18-20K. The brand new Gretag Lightspex had 256x2 pixels and sold for $9K, doubling the accuracy. Both of these instruments are very slow, needing long integration times to collect the light needed to take an accurate measurement.

Very recently new companies have entered this market, and are producing spectroradiomters that have array, rather than line, sensors, making them more sensitive and more accurate. The Orb Optronics SP-100 is an example of such a device. I expect to (and hope to) see this trend continue.

An instrument built in 1998, and virtually every single sensor light meter built today, are calibrated with an incandescent light source which is tuned to a specific color temperature, known as "Illuminant A". Here is what the spectrum of such a light source looks like:







This is the actual spectrum of a Hoffman LS-65 85C reference light source, considered an industry standard. It is a heated filiment source; the radiometric output increases toward the infrared.

Now look at the spectrum of a typical LED flashlight:






Note the very different spectra. The strong blue peak is the actual LED; the rest of the output is from the phosphor coating.

Ideally, if the filters used in a single sensor meter were good, there would be little difference in the lux measurements taken by either. However, that is not what we see when we compare them. It appears that the filters, which were designed with incandescent sources, are not as accurate as people thought they were. There are some very expensive instruments being sold today that are proving to be rather innacurate when measuring LED sources!

I realize this is a bit off topic but I wanted to show why we are using the instrument that we used to do this. MrGman and I have spent considerable time trying to work out how to do accurate measurements, and I think there is still more work to be done.

The purpose of these measurements at 5 meters was to try to come up with a more accurate and quantitative measurement of the output of a "thrower" type flashlight. We took these measurements using an accurate instrument fitted with a cosine receptor, as direct measurements of the output from the flashlight in question at that distance. For others to take similar mesurements for comparison, they will need to use the same distance AND have an instrument of similar accuracy. They will also need to ensure that there are no other light sources being picked up by the instrument in question - not too difficult in this case since we are taking relatively high level signal measurements, but still a consideration.

These are irradiance measurements. I have also proposed that we take illuminance measurements at the same distance using a reference screen. I feel that this would be a better indication of the flashlight's performance as it shows the illumination of a surface. We are still discussing how this could be done in a way that others can reproduce, and I am interested in suggestions from people with experience in this area. There are some relatively inexpensive "standard targets" used in film and cinema photography that might work well.

Perhaps this discussion shoud be in a new thread ?

William


----------



## was.lost.but.now.found (Feb 2, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*

William - fascinating. Have you tested or can you guess what a "natural" LED might look like on that radiometric spectrum?


----------



## wbp (Feb 2, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*



was.lost.but.now.found said:


> William - fascinating. Have you tested or can you guess what a "natural" LED might look like on that radiometric spectrum?



What is a "natural" LED? Did a search but didn't find anything that explained this term.


----------



## richardcpf (Feb 2, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*

I think he meant neutral tint by "natural". Like the TK20 and M20...


----------



## LuxLuthor (Feb 2, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*

MrGman, thanks for recent responses. I appreciate your update. :thumbsup: There are drop-in boost buck regulated solutions (KD had one) for the aspherics that I illustrated here.

William, I realize we are drifting a bit into the technical when discussing methods of testing that your work requires, but I would bet that most members are not aware that specialized spectralradiometric/photometric testing equipment is required due to the unique properties of LED's. 

I also did not find that most radiometry equipment such as your Orb Optronix SP-100 or even the Minolta CS-2000 have any detailed information in their product manuals as did the IL-1400a pdf, which was why I linked an older product. Similarly, the Ryer manual is even older at 1997, but most of the concepts seem to remain as valid and useful foundational principles. 

Despite having mentioned in other discussions on how Lumens are defined, most people (not all) using a cheap Meterman LM631 with its CIE spectral response think they are getting reliable results testing LEDs. The issue of having a vailid point source which your 5m measurements attempts to address is the only way that the inverse square law can be used in the face of reflector, lens complications (discussed in Ryer).

Again, great work, what you both are trying to contribute is useful and valuable. Thank you for the additional information in your last post. It is very much appreciated! If you know of useful resources more up to date, please post when you have a chance. I enjoy continuing to learn.


----------



## wbp (Feb 2, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*



LuxLuthor said:


> Despite having mentioned in other discussions on how Lumens are defined, most people (not all) using a cheap Meterman LM631 with its CIE spectral response think they are getting reliable results testing LEDs. The issue of having a vailid point source which your 5m measurements attempts to address is the only way that the inverse square law can be used in the face of reflector, lens complications (discussed in Ryer).



I purchased an Extech meter a while back, paying for "NIST" certificate, and when I got it found it off by over 20%, and that at Illuminant A. So I called and asked to speak with the person doing the calibration, to see if I could help determine the cause of the problem. After a few calls and some "hemming and hawing", they told me that person was out ill, had been for a while. So what about my certificate? The phone equivalent of a shrug. Apparently if you pay for the certificate they print one and send it. And that's that...

I have several inexpensive light meters here, including the AEMC CA831, which is supposed to have CIE spectral response. There is no sign of a filter in the head that I can see, so I'm not sure what that means. It was within specs at Illuminant A, but way off at D65. When I asked about this, they offered to send the service doc so I could recalibrate it. I took them up on their offer...

William


----------



## LuxLuthor (Feb 3, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*



wbp said:


> I purchased an Extech meter a while back, paying for "NIST" certificate, and when I got it found it off by over 20%, and that at Illuminant A. So I called and asked to speak with the person doing the calibration, to see if I could help determine the cause of the problem. After a few calls and some "hemming and hawing", they told me that person was out ill, had been for a while. So what about my certificate? The phone equivalent of a shrug. Apparently if you pay for the certificate they print one and send it. And that's that...
> 
> I have several inexpensive light meters here, including the AEMC CA831, which is supposed to have CIE spectral response. There is no sign of a filter in the head that I can see, so I'm not sure what that means. It was within specs at Illuminant A, but way off at D65. When I asked about this, they offered to send the service doc so I could recalibrate it. I took them up on their offer...
> 
> William



William, again I am grateful to be able to learn from your experience. I am not questioning this event at all, but I'm stunned that a company of Extech's size and status would do such a thing. While I don't hold them at the same level of standards as say Fluke, it is very discouraging to hear of this...and only the most experienced, knowledgeable at detecting an accurate NIST certificate of calibration would even know to suspect.

Is this the other one you mentioned - AEMC CA-813 ?


----------



## wbp (Feb 3, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*



LuxLuthor said:


> William, again I am grateful to be able to learn from your experience. I am not questioning this event at all, but I'm stunned that a company of Extech's size and status would do such a thing. While I don't hold them at the same level of standards as say Fluke, it is very discouraging to hear of this...and only the most experienced, knowledgeable at detecting an accurate NIST certificate of calibration would even know to suspect.
> 
> Is this the other one you mentioned - AEMC CA-813 ?



To be clear, the certificate was issued by a company selling the meter, not by Extech. Still pretty discouraging though.

I have more stories like this, including one about a very large company... I seem to find bugs no one else does...

Yes, that is the AEMC meter. If you have one and want it to be more accurate for LED sources, it can be recalibrated. In some cases this is a "simple" readjustment, but it can also require replacing a resistor (SMD) to change the gain in one of the circuits.

William


----------



## MrGman (Feb 3, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*

Having been in the electronics business for 29 years and doing failure analysis and working with expensive electronics equipment that I have bought and had to deal with for those years for my company since its in my lab, I can tell you horror stories as well about getting equipment that cost $ 5 to 20 grand that wasn't calibrated correctly or even working right. We buy something brand new and they say its calibrated and we get certs and it doesn't even work. They turn around and tell us we don't check it for functionality to do the calibration routine! Every type of equipment that needs a calibration also needs to be given a reality check by someone (preferably who knows what they are doing and what they are looking for). I have had presidents of companies contradict their engineers, contradicting their service technicians trying to back up a lie that what happened couldn't have happened. I have told sales reps from companies to lose my phone number because they already lost our business permanently.

wpb certainly knows what he is doing and what to look for in his realm of expertise, the data that we have published thus far on various lights has been as good its going to get, and yet we are both striving in this collaborative effort (strictly that came together through Candle Power Forums) to do even better. Its unfortunately slow, because we both have our "real" jobs to do and other things in our lives that take time, but we are getting closer. 

In regards to the spectrum of a "neutral" white light, its not going to look very much different than the spectrums we have already published on LEDs, the color chart on page 3 is actually the full spectrum of the 3 LED lights we tested on the Orb Optronics sp100. The only real difference for a slightly warmer light with less of a blue tint is that the curve or "hump" in the middle of the green yellow region doesn't slump down as sharply going to red and the blue peak is slightly lower. If you didn't see them overlapped with the bluish tint lights the curve would otherwise be almost the same.

I would say the Fenix TK20 is not a neutral white LED light but is warmish, very similar to the Malkoff M60W. The M60W showed up with a very strong red tint CRI on wpb's readout. I have the graph but it needs to be converted to a jpeg to upload and I have to call it a night. The Malkoff M60 that I originally got from Gene's shop is a more of a neutral tint, not going to blue or red, I would say.


----------



## was.lost.but.now.found (Feb 3, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*



MrGman said:


> In regards to the spectrum of a "neutral" white light, its not going to look very much different than the spectrums we have already published on LEDs, the color chart on page 3 is actually the full spectrum of the 3 LED lights we tested on the Orb Optronics sp100. The only real difference for a slightly warmer light with less of a blue tint is that the curve or "hump" in the middle of the green yellow region doesn't slump down as sharply going to red and the blue peak is slightly lower. If you didn't see them overlapped with the bluish tint lights the curve would otherwise be almost the same.


 
Thanks for the response.


----------



## Swedpat (Feb 3, 2009)

*Worth to replace A9 with A10?*

Since a year ago I have a Tiablo A9. My first impression was that it's a very bright flashlight with a very bright spill as well. I ordered it with both textured and smooth reflector. After a short comparison between the reflectors I realized that the textured was my choice. The artifacts and rings with the smooth was annoying and I liked better the textured with the much smoother beam. The throw is good even with the textured reflector. 

Last autumn I ordered Fenix TK10. A short comparison was enough to make TK10 to my replacement for the A9. TK10 has an even better and more suitable beam for normal use, though I still like A9 for these occations when it's fun to throw far. Therefore I replaced the textured reflector to the smooth to make the best of it's throwing ability. For most usual tasks TK10 is better, but when I want to throw the A9 is great.

*My question is to the owners of A10:*

I understand that the lux value isn't the only important issue for a thrower. If the hotspot is too narrow it will illuminate too small area and will still not be very suitable, therefore I ask. A9 has a very narrow hotspot. *Is the hotspot even narrower with A10? *

According to http://www.light-reviews.com/reviews.html A 10 has around 34% brighter spill than A9. When I compared the total light output I could see that A9 is around 10% dimmer than TK10, though a higher stated brightness. If the lumen rating of 225lumens with TK10 is correct it seems to be a quite correct statement than A10 has around 260 lumens. 
*Is it correct that A10 has around 30% higher light output than A9?* According to the claimed numbers it's hardly brighter.

Apologize if some of the questions are answered in some of the previous posts, I may have missed it.

Regards, Patric


----------



## wbp (Feb 3, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*

It occurs to me that it would be useful is to measure and plot the output of a light at a fixed distance while rotating the light thru 180 degrees. Like what is done for antennas or loudspeakers. This would give a graphical representation of the lights output AND beam pattern, including spill...

All we need is a small turntable driven by a stepping motor... and a small PC program to drive it and automate the measurements.

This could be fun!


----------



## shahzh (Feb 3, 2009)

*Re: Worth to replace A9 with A10?*



Swedpat said:


> *My question is to the owners of A10:*
> *
> Is the hotspot even narrower with A10? *
> 
> *Is it correct that A10 has around 30% higher light output than A9?*



Yes the A10 has a narrower hotspot then A9.

With my naked eye, yes A10 is much more brighter then the A9.


----------



## Alan B (Feb 3, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*



wbp said:


> It occurs to me that it would be useful is to measure and plot the output of a light at a fixed distance while rotating the light thru 180 degrees. Like what is done for antennas or loudspeakers. This would give a graphical representation of the lights output AND beam pattern, including spill...
> 
> All we need is a small turntable driven by a stepping motor... and a small PC program to drive it and automate the measurements.
> 
> This could be fun!



I have thought about exactly the same thing. Excellent idea!


----------



## Swedpat (Feb 3, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*

Thanks for answers Shahzh, 

Do you consider A10 to be an improvement in comparison to A9? Not too narrow hotspot? Worth getting if one already have A9?

Several questions, thanks in advance,

Patric


----------



## jenskh (Feb 3, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*



wbp said:


> It occurs to me that it would be useful is to measure and plot the output of a light at a fixed distance while rotating the light thru 180 degrees. Like what is done for antennas or loudspeakers. This would give a graphical representation of the lights output AND beam pattern, including spill...
> 
> All we need is a small turntable driven by a stepping motor... and a small PC program to drive it and automate the measurements.
> 
> This could be fun!


This would be very valuable information.
I have been trying to get the same information by measuring the illuminance in a plane in front of the light, and as a function of the radius. I have done this for all my lights, and presented the output in other treads. This is a little simpler way to do it manually, but it requires more work.
This information also gives us the possibility to calculate the lumens output, by just integrating the illuminance over the surface. If the light output is not centered good enough, or is not axis-symetrical around the senter of the hot spot, the measurements have to be taken along several lines to enable the lumens calculation.
We can also calculate the are that the light will illuminate with for instance more than 1 lux. I have also illustrated this in another tread.


----------



## FLT MEDIC (Feb 3, 2009)

*Re: Worth to replace A9 with A10?*



shahzh said:


> Yes the A10 has a narrower hotspot then A9.
> 
> With my naked eye, yes A10 is much more brighter then the A9.


 
Many thanks for the info, much appreciated! An owner's feedback is always important too.


----------



## shahzh (Feb 3, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*



Swedpat said:


> Thanks for answers Shahzh,
> 
> Do you consider A10 to be an improvement in comparison to A9? Not too narrow hotspot? Worth getting if one already have A9?
> 
> ...



The A10 is an R2 the A9 a Q5, sizewise both are different. Though the A10 hotspot is narrower then the A9 its still usable....its worth it. You can buy the MCE module as an option and it will transform your light from spot to a wall of light:naughty:.


----------



## 656nm (Feb 5, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*



wbp said:


> It occurs to me that it would be useful is to measure and plot the output of a light at a fixed distance while rotating the light thru 180 degrees. Like what is done for antennas or loudspeakers. This would give a graphical representation of the lights output AND beam pattern, including spill...
> 
> All we need is a small turntable driven by a stepping motor... and a small PC program to drive it and automate the measurements.
> 
> This could be fun!



I've considered doing this using my telescope mount many times (Celestron CGE). It has a programmable slew rate that would allow you to get a very fine grained resolution to the scan, basically limited only by the size of your sampling aperture and the distance from the light source. It would even feed back the positional angle of the mount at any given time in the scan.

Maybe one of these days I'll get off my backside and actually do it.


----------



## saabluster (Feb 5, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*



656nm said:


> I've considered doing this using my telescope mount many times (Celestron CGE). It has a programmable slew rate that would allow you to get a very fine grained resolution to the scan, basically limited only by the size of your sampling aperture and the distance from the light source. It would even feed back the positional angle of the mount at any given time in the scan.
> 
> Maybe one of these days I'll get off my backside and actually do it.


That is genius! I seriously think this testing methodology part of the thread needs to be in its own thread.


----------



## wbp (Feb 5, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*

656nm: well, I guess I could use my AP1200, do you think that would be overkill? 

I was actually thinking of using an RC servo for positioning. Cheap and easy to control. Stepper motor isn't bad either. To do this properly it needs to stop at each measuring position to allow time for the instrumentation to take a reading. I hope to combine this with something I'm working on for run time testing (which needs to monitor temperature as well as output).

William


----------



## Swedpat (Feb 5, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*

Thank you Shahzh for the answers!

Recently I got to know that Tiablo offers an aspheric lens head for A9 with ca 50% higher lux value than A10.
It may be an even better alternative...

Regards, Patric


----------



## maxilux (Feb 5, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*

I think the real King of throw is the Tiablo A9 with the collimator head.
It is more throw as my 10W Hid and the A10.
You can see some pics and beamshots here: 

http://www.schiermeier.biz/html/tiablo_zoomoptik.html


----------



## MrGman (Feb 5, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*

Sorry no!, since it actually focuses on the die so that you can see the die image projected out 260 meters away it gets reclassified as a "Projector" and no longer a flashlight with long throw. Put the Batman symbol in front of that and we can call the caped crusader.

Now if you sent me a complete A9 with the optic or if they make one for the A10, send that and I may reconsider. 

wpb can we set up to measure it a 260 meters away and confirm, just to be sure? It looks questionable at best to me. 

And we haven't compared it to the SAABluster DEFT yet now have we?


----------



## maxilux (Feb 5, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*

??


----------



## TITAN1833 (Feb 5, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*

MrGman i think that was 256 lumens at 110 meters that's how I read it,that said it does just look like a TV picture set in a tree :laughing:


----------



## maxilux (Feb 5, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*

All pictures are real.


----------



## TITAN1833 (Feb 5, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*



maxilux said:


> All pictures are real.


I don't doubt you it was just my opinion sorry


----------



## maxilux (Feb 5, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*

The Collimator Head, is one of the best update for Flashlights, i see in the last years, i was very impressed when i see it first time. You get near the same throw with Collimator Head on low as with SMO on high.


----------



## TITAN1833 (Feb 5, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*



maxilux said:


> The Collimator Head, is one of the best update for Flashlights, i see in the last years, i was very impressed when i see it first time. You get near the same throw with Collimator Head on low as with SMO on high.


Then you should look at this beauty


----------



## maxilux (Feb 5, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*

What is it, i only see same thread we write.


----------



## TITAN1833 (Feb 5, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*



maxilux said:


> What is it, i only see same thread we write.


Click the word beauty again :thumbsup:


----------



## maxilux (Feb 5, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*

Ok, thanks, but the Tiablo Head is about $30,- so i think it great.


----------



## MrGman (Feb 5, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*



TITAN1833 said:


> MrGman i think that was 256 lumens at 110 meters that's how I read it,that said it does just look like a TV picture set in a tree :laughing:


 
Its 256 lumen source (set on high as opposed to the 60 lumen on low) throwing out an image of the die at 110 meters. Its not measuring 256 lumens at 110 meters away that would not possibly be a lumen measurement at best you would measure a spot reading of lux.

On the one hand its beautiful, on the other hand I really don't like it if it simply projects a bluish image of the die out there at 110 meters and not simply a cone of white light. its not really a torch any more its a projector. Its too focused? Would I ever really use it, other than as a novelty to show off? Probably not. This is a serious question. But it is a tight spot. I don't want to see the die image, I can do that with a 2 dollar fresnel lens anytime. 

As to actually trying to measure the lux at 260 meters to confirm (it has the best throw readings), I was yanking maxilux' chain. I am quite certain it would have higher readings at any given distance than the A10 with just a polished reflector.


----------



## maxilux (Feb 5, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*

In real it is not bluish. i can`t write it, you must see it, it`s great. for this price, i know no better flashlight. I will make better pictures.


----------



## wbp (Feb 5, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*



maxilux said:


> Ok, thanks, but the Tiablo Head is about $30,- so i think it great.



Yes but you must also purchase the A9 (if you can find one), which at $150 makes the total $180, not so much less than the DEFT. Then again, from what I read in the DEFT thread, it's not available either. So we're talking about two lights that cannot be purchased at this time...

William


----------



## maxilux (Feb 5, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*

I cant understand, where is the problem to buy an A9 ?
Sorry, but i did not know the US market, but i wonder that you must pay more than $100,- for an A9.


----------



## Alan B (Feb 5, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*

A9's used to cost over $100, now I see them for $45-89.

You can always defocus a projector slightly to get a less sharp image of the die, and then the intensity goes down a bit. Find the compromise you like.

The best thrower is a laser, but not a very useful flashlight.

What exactly is, and is not a thrower?


----------



## TITAN1833 (Feb 5, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*



Alan B said:


> What exactly is, and is not a thrower?


Good question,IMO not an offical term I prefer far projection lights better and all the lights mentioned fit that term.I guess it a bit like the term pocket rocket only bigger meaning it throws a spot of light further than other lights in its class.


----------



## PhantomPhoton (Feb 5, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*

You can play semantics games like a politician all you want but it doesn't change the fact that aspheric lens setups are the best throwers. 

Now if you're only concerned with reflector lights that's fine, just say so.  (And than maybe re-title this thread to reflect that it is the king of reflector throwers, not all throwers)

There are reflectors that do a pretty good job of projecting the square image of the die as well, so how would you classify say a Pelican Recoil LED setup? How about a tight focused TIR optic? Just curious.:nana:


----------



## MrGman (Feb 5, 2009)

As much as I hate to do it but in order to have other light types put in another thread as their testing becomes a reality because they really are a completely different class of light, I renamed this thread for reflector types only. I think projector optics is cheating  (do they make one for the A10 yet?????)

I am calling the photon police.


----------



## richardcpf (Feb 5, 2009)

If we include the A9 with colminator lenses, the aspheric mag or the DEFT, which are light with no flood at all and a relatively small area of useful light, we should also consider lasers, or am i wrong? :naughty:

It is unfair to compare throw-only spotlights with a real flashlight.


----------



## wbp (Feb 5, 2009)

MrGman said:


> As much as I hate to do it ..., I renamed this thread for reflector types only.



Wimp!:nana::devil:


----------



## MrGman (Feb 5, 2009)

richardcpf said:


> If we include the A9 with colminator lenses, the aspheric mag or the DEFT, which are light with no flood at all and a relatively small area of useful light, we should also consider lasers, or am i wrong? :naughty:
> 
> It is unfair to compare throw-only spotlights with a real flashlight.


 

I don't know if I can handle "colminators" and collimators all in the same world, let alone lasers. (Is a colminator a special flashlight the terminator would use?) Next thing you guys will want to include light sabres and a hot red head shining the glare of moonlight off of her ruby red lipstick off an especially clean and shiny make up mirror. Where does it end!. :shakehead


----------



## MrGman (Feb 5, 2009)

wbp said:


> Wimp!:nana::devil:


 

e tu Brute?  Now I will have to try the Scotch to ease the pain.


----------



## lightrod (Feb 5, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*



656nm said:


> I've considered doing this using my telescope mount many times (Celestron CGE). It has a programmable slew rate that would allow you to get a very fine grained resolution to the scan, basically limited only by the size of your sampling aperture and the distance from the light source. It would even feed back the positional angle of the mount at any given time in the scan.
> 
> Maybe one of these days I'll get off my backside and actually do it.


 

Can't help but jump in 656nm and wpb - brings back some memories of a lot of fun I had playing with this concept. I don't get around in these forums so much anymore. It's been a while - would be excellent if someone picked up and made it better... would LOVE to see this info on more recent lights.

https://www.candlepowerforums.com/threads/146540


----------



## wbp (Feb 5, 2009)

MrGman said:


> e tu Brute?  Now I will have to try the Scotch to ease the pain.



You keep threatening to do this - the offer's been open for some time now, and the collection has recently been added to. :drunk:

Hey, if we're going to include collimators, can we include my 300mw green laser too? :green:


----------



## selfbuilt (Feb 5, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*

A very interesting thread, I've enjoyed reading it. Kudos to wbp and MrGMan for all their detailed work (in both this thread and the IS result thread). It's great to see the rigour they've applied in their approach to standardized testing with proper equipment. :thumbsup:



wbp said:


> It occurs to me that it would be useful is to measure and plot the output of a light at a fixed distance while rotating the light thru 180 degrees. Like what is done for antennas or loudspeakers. This would give a graphical representation of the lights output AND beam pattern, including spill...


I had much the same idea when I first started testing lights. Not being mechanically inclined, I opted a for simple manual method (tripod mount, meter sticks, manual rotation, and way too much time on my hands ). 

I had hoped to present comparison "beam profiles" of various lights, but quickly ran into a problem - even small focussing differences can lead to quite noticeably different profiles (especially around the center peak, which stands out to the eye). After seeing the variability between different samples of a given light (i.e. on ones with a factory-set focus that wasn't user-adjustable), I eventually abandoned the project. 

But if you can look past center-beam throw variability, this approach is very useful for comparing spillbeam widths and intensities (which doesn't vary much with precise focusing). Would be interesting to see the data over a wide sample of lights, if you can work out the automation.

Good luck, and keep up the good work!


----------



## shahzh (Feb 6, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*



Swedpat said:


> Thank you Shahzh for the answers!
> 
> Recently I got to know that Tiablo offers an aspheric lens head for A9 with ca 50% higher lux value than A10.
> It may be an even better alternative...
> ...



Yes, just got to know about it a while ago and I've just ordered the JB M1X. Since I already got the A9, this upgrade is a must then.:naughty:


----------



## jirik_cz (Feb 6, 2009)

I think that reflector-king-of-LED-throw is Streamlight Fire Vulcan. Manufacturer claims 80,000 candela peak beam intensity. So it should beat the A10 
Considering size of the reflector it is highly probable.


----------



## Ryanrpm (Feb 6, 2009)

jirik_cz said:


> I think that reflector-king-of-LED-throw is Streamlight Fire Vulcan. Manufacturer claims 80,000 candela peak beam intensity. So it should beat the A10
> Considering size of the reflector it is highly probable.



Great.

Don't cause him to change the title again! Now it'll read: *"The New King of Throw: Reflector Types Only - Flashlight Style Only; Tested and Confirmed!"


*


----------



## TITAN1833 (Feb 6, 2009)

To add a bit of cheer to this thread,how would this compare LOL 
The contender


----------



## MrGman (Feb 6, 2009)

jirik_cz said:


> I think that reflector-king-of-LED-throw is Streamlight Fire Vulcan. Manufacturer claims 80,000 candela peak beam intensity. So it should beat the A10
> Considering size of the reflector it is highly probable.


 

Hasn't been tested by anybody, buy one and send it to me, I'll get back to you. I have never been impressed with the actual output of Streamlight products, not to say they don't work well.


----------



## divine (Feb 6, 2009)

wbp said:


> Who is this "he"? We tested a DBS with the R2 pill and SMO reflector.
> 
> Which, by the way, I measured at 265 lumens output the last time I checked this particular pill.
> 
> William


Sorry, I guess I meant you. Why is the DBS R2 listed as "DBS R2 OP" ? 


MrGman said:


> *Comment**__A10 R2**___A10 R2__** DBS R2 SMO__**Raidfire Spear Hi__**Raidfire Spear Hi__**DBS R2 OP__**DBS MCE__**Lumens FACT. EO9,*
> *Lux @ 5m: **2021___**1962____**920.4________**836.5___________**578.2_________**556.4_____**395.8_________**389.8,*
> *Lux 1m:__**50525__**49050___**23010________**20912.5_________**14455________**13910_____**9895__________**9745,*
> *(calculated) best____fully_____not___________best______________fully___________not________not_____________not ,*
> *___________focus__tightened__adjustable_____focus_____________tightened______adjustable__adjustable______adjustable,*


----------



## divine (Feb 6, 2009)

Oh, I see it... it's just out of order. :thinking:


----------



## WadeF (Feb 6, 2009)

Hi all! 4sevens kindly sent me a Tiablo A10, ACE, and TL-1 for me to review, evaluate, etc. Since I had the DBS R2, MC-E, I could compare them directly.

I will be working on a full review of the lights, but here are some initial impressions.

While the lights are larger, they are nice. They appear to be well built and very solid. (Tiablo A10/ACE). 

I took some quick lux readings. The A10, with a single stage switch, was giving me around 38,000-39,000LUX at 1 meter with an 18650, or 2xCR123's. My DBS V2 R2 gives me around 28,000LUX at 1 meter. The A10 does beat the DBS. I'll have to get them outside to see how noticeable the difference is.

Also I wanted to comment about taking lux at 1 meter. I don't know if taking a reading at 3 meters, 5 meters, etc, and calculating back to 1 meter is all that accurate. I think the 50,000LUX figure found by Gman, calculating back from a further distance, may not be accurate and is over done. Either that, or my lux meter reads much lower, but my meter is usually in the ball park of some of the other reviewers here. 

I will attempt to take lux readings at 3 meters, or 5 meters, to see what I come up with. If the Tiablo A10 was really 50,000LUX at 1 meter, it would read 50,000LUX at one meter. The problem with the one meter distance is two throwers could measure about the same at 1 meter, but at 5 meters there could be a larger difference between them. I think this is because at 1 meter the hot spot is so small, most of it fits within the sensor. However, at 5 meters one light might have a larger hot spot than the other, so it will measure less intense. I found this to be the case between my DBS and Raidfire Spear. At 1 meter, they both have very small hot spots that basically fit the sensor. At 3+ meters the Spear's hot spot got noticeably larger than the DBS. I'd expect the Tiablo A10 to keep a smaller hot spot than the DBS, and hold a higher lux reading at a longer distance. 

So basically what this means is at 1 meter the DBS could read closer to the A10 (28,000LUX vs 39,000LUX, the A10 having about a 40% greater LUX reading), but at 5 meters the difference between them could be greater, maybe 50%, 60%, or whatever. I'll try to figure that out. 

Not really the right topic for the ACE and DBS MC-E, so I'll be brief. The ACE generates around 19,000LUX at 1 meter, the DBS MC-E around 12,000LUX at 1 meter with the 2.4A pill, and around 10,000LUX with the 2.1A pill. In my home made light box, the ACE only has slightly more output than my DBS MC-E 2.4A (650lux vs 690lux). So the ACE appears to only be about 7% brighter from what I can figure. However, the larger reflector on the ACE allows it to throw better, but I find when it is focused for maximum throw there is a visible donut hole in the hot spot. You can focus this out, but as you do this the throw will reduce. I found if you take most of the donut hole out of the beam it was around 15,000lux, and if you diffused it further the lux would drop more, down to 12,000LUX and so on. Now, different units may focus differently. I can't wait to try it outside as 19,000LUX isn't far off from a Tiablo A9, Spear, etc, but with a larger beam.  Also I was running the ACE on 2x18650's which appears to offer the most output. If this isn't correct, let me know!  

The A10 and ACE are certainly cool lights. If you don't mind the size, they are great.

Edit: I looked at Gman's numbers again, and at 5 meters the A10 basically has twice the lux of the DBS, but at 1 meter the A10 is also twice as bright as the DBS, which shouldn't be the case. This is where the flaw is. The DBS should be closer in intensity to the A10 at 1 meter, but there should be a larger difference between them at 5 meters. This is because the DBS's hot spot expands in size faster than the A10's as you move farther away from the light source. This is why you can't simply calculate back to 1 meter with the same formula for both lights. You have to figure in distance from the light source, plus the area of the hot spot. The distance figure is consistent, but the area of the hot spot isn't. If one hot spot expands faster than the other, it will screw up the calculation. That's the best way I can try to describe it anyway.


----------



## Outdoors Fanatic (Feb 6, 2009)

So is the A10-R2's driver/regulator still pretty pretty messed up or has Tiablo got it right already?


----------



## jirik_cz (Feb 6, 2009)

WadeF said:


> ...



Do you use throwers for 1 meter illumination? No... So the measurement from longer distance is much closer to the real world performance.


----------



## WadeF (Feb 6, 2009)

jirik_cz said:


> Do you use throwers for 1 meter illumination? No... So the measurement from longer distance is much closer to the real world performance.



So why don't you address Gman as well? I was only commenting on his 1 meter estimate. You are right though, the 1 meter reading is pretty irrelevant.


----------



## WadeF (Feb 6, 2009)

Outdoors Fanatic said:


> So is the A10-R2's driver/regulator still pretty pretty messed up or has Tiablo got it right already?



Well, with a fresh off the charger I was getting 38,000-39,000lux, but after the light had run for a couple minutes it was down around 34,000lux. I'm not sure where it would be after 15 minutes, 30 minutes, etc.


----------



## wbp (Feb 6, 2009)

WadeF said:


> Also I wanted to comment about taking lux at 1 meter. I don't know if taking a reading at 3 meters, 5 meters, etc, and calculating back to 1 meter is all that accurate. I think the 50,000LUX figure found by Gman, calculating back from a further distance, may not be accurate and is over done. Either that, or my lux meter reads much lower, but my meter is usually in the ball park of some of the other reviewers here.



What meter are you using? Unless it's a spectroradiometer or it has been specifically calibrated for LED it will not be accurate. Relative readings are fine, but absolute will not be correct. 

That said, MrGman did say that we don't claim accuracy for the 1m figure. Our measurements were done at 5 meters.

William


----------



## jirik_cz (Feb 6, 2009)

WadeF said:


> So why don't you address Gman as well? I was only commenting on his 1 meter estimate. You are right though, the 1 meter reading is pretty irrelevant.



Well you are right. Maybe it shouldn't be called 1 meter illuminance estimate but just peak beam candela...


----------



## TITAN1833 (Feb 6, 2009)

I always prefer the old method at determining throw,long distance beam shots :twothumbs


----------



## wbp (Feb 6, 2009)

WadeF said:


> I took some quick lux readings. The A10, with a single stage switch, was giving me around 38,000-39,000LUX at 1 meter with an 18650, or 2xCR123's.



Wait, you got the same reading with both 18650 and 2xCR123? That isn't right.

William


----------



## wbp (Feb 6, 2009)

So here's what I'm getting with an A10, using the single stage switch, using 2xCR123:

At 5 meters: 2159 to 2166 lux
At 1 meter: 32000 to 34650 lux

The problem is that at 1 meter this light has an intense tiny hot spot in the center of the beam. I can put that dead center on the cosine receptor (the meter's sensor for this type of reading) and get a higher reading. I could probably get even higher numbers if I tried hard enough. For this type of light, lux readings at 1 meter are really is not indicative of the light's output!

I think the 5 meter lux readings are more useful - but still, there is a noticeable pattern there as well. I really want to experiment with illumination of a "standard target" for this...

There is also the problem of how accurate the distance is and where you measure from - at 1 meter a cm or 2 is significant; at 5 meters much less so...

William


----------



## WadeF (Feb 6, 2009)

wbp said:


> Wait, you got the same reading with both 18650 and 2xCR123? That isn't right.
> 
> William



Should the 2xCR123 give a higher reading than a 18650? When I measure at 1m I move the hot spot around on the sensor to find the brightest part. If I project it across the room I would move the meter around in the hot spot to find the brightest part of the hot spot. You just have to be more precise and steady at 1m.


----------



## wbp (Feb 6, 2009)

WadeF said:


> Should the 2xCR123 give a higher reading than a 18650?



Yes, it should. 



WadeF said:


> When I measure at 1m I move the hot spot around on the sensor to find the brightest part. If I project it across the room I would move the meter around in the hot spot to find the brightest part of the hot spot. You just have to be more precise and steady at 1m.



In real use that tiny hot spot won't be there. I think it gives a false high reading.



WadeF said:


> My DBS V2 R2 gives me around 28,000LUX at 1 meter.



I get around 19500 at 1 meter with a DBS V2 R2 3SD on high, with fresh AW RCR123's. I think your meter is rather optimistic!

William


----------



## MrGman (Feb 6, 2009)

divine said:


> Sorry, I guess I meant you. Why is the DBS R2 listed as "DBS R2 OP" ?


 
We tested the Dereelight DBS with the R2 pill both ways, with the smooth and orange peel reflectors and I thought I put them in order of brightness left to right not by name. That OP reflector takes a lot out of the beam hot spot. G


----------



## MrGman (Feb 6, 2009)

WadeF, the A10 should have a higher output with the CR123 batteries. Light Reviews had already shown it wasn't a great regulator and have peak output with a 18650 battery. I don't care about the price of batteries, I am going to use it with what works best.

I have stated and its been repeated here but just to make it really really clear, my readings were intended to be accurate for comparitive results at 5 meters as there are those of us who believe this is the more accurate way to read big reflector lights that need more distance to converge the beam. The calculated numbers back to 1 meter were simply a rough estimate number for those who just have to have a number to compare.

Most importantly at 5 meters, I could see the beam and fine tune its focus such that it was as good as it could be and see what the difference was to that of simply having the head and all body tube pieces fully tightened which slightly dimmed the center of the beam at 5 meters. I could see the slight difference and it showed up in the meter readings on page 1. That's why you see the notes below the readings as "best focus" and "fully tightened", with the best focus reading being higher. 

Light Reviews got much higher readings at 1 meter for the A10 than the DBS, as well.

Your theory that the 2 sets of lights should have a much closer reading because the meter you are using catches most of the beam I believe is an incorrect one because there is more to it than just that. But still a lot of us agree that the closer we get with these bigger thrower lights the greater the potential for erroneous readings there is (which again goes right back to just taking them all at 5 meters). However I think we still are all beginning to see the light laughing, that for lights like this the true differences in the light can be seen further out which is why I went with 5 meter readings and wbp and I were very careful to measure that out, set the light into a specific foam V to hold them and keep the distance constant, the meter was in a tripod at a fixed distance and we actually took a long time to collect these readings, collected multple readings of each unit to make sure these were good. 

I think if you spend more time taking readings at 5m with fresh CR123 batteries and fine tune the focus of the A10 for the brightest central spot, you will get higher numbers.


----------



## WadeF (Feb 6, 2009)

wbp said:


> I get around 19500 at 1 meter with a DBS V2 R2 3SD on high, with fresh AW RCR123's. I think your meter is rather optimistic!
> 
> William



The 3SD pill is only for 18650's. If you're using R123's you would need a 3SM pill. Which one were you using? And you're getting that with a smooth reflector installed? Many DBS owners who have tested their DBS at 1 meter with their lux meters have gotten around 26,000-30,000LUX. I will play around with the A10 using 2xCR123's some more.


----------



## WadeF (Feb 6, 2009)

Alright, thanks to Gman's advice I retested at 5m in my basement. I am with Gman and think this would make a good standard distance for testing throwers. It gives the beam a chance to "mature" and leave less room for error when measuring. I was able to focus the A10 and get a higher lux reading than if I had it fully tightened. A very nice feature of the A10 as it could be adjusted in the field easily. At 5M I got 2,320lux from the A10, and 1,380lux from my DBS V2 3SD R2 WH. That's a pretty big difference in the A10's favor I think. I still need to test these puppies outside.  I may in a few minutes. 

However, I can't get more output from the CR123's. I actually got a higher reading from the 18650. ? Maybe the circuit in my A10 is different than the circuit in the A10 you tested Gman? I was using the highest voltage tested (3.3v) CR123's I have, but they are Titanium brand. I have some fresh Panasonics I'm going to try next just to be sure it isn't the batteries sagging a lot under load or something. 

Edit/Update: Same results with Panasonic CR123's. No gain over 18650 in the A10.

Update #2: Popped outside. Only problem is I'm in town and my furthest target is only about 300 feet, a tree that is mostly in darkness. I light it up easily with the DBS and the A10. The A10 had a smaller and slightly more intense hot spot, the DBS has the R2 WH so it had a warmer color temp, but was slightly dimmer, but both were sufficiently bright at that distance. I will try to get over to my parents this weekend as I can hit targets that are in darkness at 700 feet and beyond. I'm sure the A10 will be better, but I want to see just how big of a difference it really is. 

I did try the A10 in my jeans pocket. It does fit. It's not as comfy as the DBS V2 which can clip to my pocket, but it's doable. Not sure how it would feel after walking several miles (which I have done with the DBS no problem). I found the A10 fit more comfortably in my rear jeans pocket and was fairly easy to extract that way. Should work well in a jacket pocket, and of course a holster, but I generally shy away from holstering a large light on my belt if I can help it.


----------



## wbp (Feb 7, 2009)

WadeF said:


> The 3SD pill is only for 18650's. If you're using R123's you would need a 3SM pill. Which one were you using? And you're getting that with a smooth reflector installed? Many DBS owners who have tested their DBS at 1 meter with their lux meters have gotten around 26,000-30,000LUX. I will play around with the A10 using 2xCR123's some more.



Sorry, I get confused by all the pills. I'll have to check again next week. It was probably the newer 3SM, or else in all the switching around I put the wrong pill in again...

Again, "lux meters" are calibrated at factory rather poorly, and with an Illuminant A (incandescent) source. They will NOT be accurate with LED's.

William


----------



## wbp (Feb 7, 2009)

Between us (MrGman and myself) we have two different A10's. BOTH put out substantially more light on 2xCR123 than on a single 18650. If yours doesn't, that is a real puzzle.

Which switch are you using?

William


----------



## WadeF (Feb 7, 2009)

wbp said:


> Between us (MrGman and myself) we have two different A10's. BOTH put out substantially more light on 2xCR123 than on a single 18650. If yours doesn't, that is a real puzzle.
> 
> Which switch are you using?
> 
> William



I've been using the single stage switch. I was under the impression that is the brighter of the two?


----------



## MrGman (Feb 7, 2009)

WadeF said:


> Alright, thanks to Gman's advice I retested at 5m in my basement. I am with Gman and think this would make a good standard distance for testing throwers. It gives the beam a chance to "mature" and leave less room for error when measuring. I was able to focus the A10 and get a higher lux reading than if I had it fully tightened. A very nice feature of the A10 as it could be adjusted in the field easily. At 5M I got 2,320lux from the A10, and 1,380lux from my DBS V2 3SD R2 WH. That's a pretty big difference in the A10's favor I think. I still need to test these puppies outside.  I may in a few minutes.
> 
> However, I can't get more output from the CR123's. I actually got a higher reading from the 18650. ? Maybe the circuit in my A10 is different than the circuit in the A10 you tested Gman? I was using the highest voltage tested (3.3v) CR123's I have, but they are Titanium brand. I have some fresh Panasonics I'm going to try next just to be sure it isn't the batteries sagging a lot under load or something.


 
The more important aspect is that we got correlation. The 3 Tiablo A10 R2's are reading well over 2K lux at 5m fare more than the Dereelight DBS. Taking the reaadings a 5 meter for greater "resolution" of the reading appears to be the way to go. :thumbsup: lovecpf :thumbsup:

Looking back at Light-Reviews.com results for the A10 With a freshly charged 18650 at turn on the peak readings was right up there with the CR123. Its just that with the CR123's it stays flat where as the 18650 starts to taper down, so its possible for you to get the performance you got. I would say run the 18650 down for 15 minutes and see if it compares to the fresh CR123's still?


----------



## wbp (Feb 9, 2009)

The DBS that we tested is a V3 (black) and it had a 3SD R2 pill running on a single 18650 for our first set of tests. The reflector was the SMO. I just repeated the measurements at 5 meters and 1 meter, this time with a 3SD Q5 pill.

At 5 meters I got 1080 lux at first turn on, dropping to 1060 in a minute or so.

At 1 meter, with several measurements trying for the highest I could get, with several different 18650 cells, the highest value I could get was 21740 lux.

I did a cross check with a properly calibrated AEMC CA813 meter. With that I managed to get 22.1 klux.

I would think that anyone measuring 26,000 to 30,000 lux at 1 meter from a DBS has a wildly optimistic meter.

For reference this DBS V3 Q5 measures 255 lumens in the I-Sphere.

I also measured a second Tiablo A10. At 5 meters was able to get it up to 2380 lux. At 1 meter, adjusting it for tight focus, I am able to get it up to 35,500 or so. (using a pair of LiFEPO4's)

Measurements at 1 meter are very difficult to do with any consistency with this type of light. A small change in focus, producing what looks like a brighter more uniform beam, and which is probably much more useful to actually light up a subject, dropped the reading to 22,000 lux!

Switching the DBS between MCE with 2 cells and 3SD with one cell is hazardous. I forgot to switch the cells and fried my favorite (and best) 3SD R2 pill. All in the cause of doing these tests for you folk.

William


----------



## ernsanada (Feb 9, 2009)

wbp,

Your lux readings at 1 meter with the DBS R2 is close to my readings.

Dereelight DBS V2 R2 1S WC, 18650 - 20,001 lux @ 1 meter

Dereelight DBS V2 R2 1S WH, 18650 - 21,500 lux @ 1 meter

Dereelight DBS V2 Q5 3S, 18650 - 20,767 lux @ 1 meter


This is my 1 meter reading for the Tiablo A10 R2

Tiablo A10 R2 WC, 18650 - 27,115 lux @ 1 meter (1 level switch)


BTW, Im using a Meterman LM631 Light Meter.


----------



## jenskh (Feb 11, 2009)

wbp said:


> The DBS that we tested is a V3 (black) and it had a 3SD R2 pill running on a single 18650 for our first set of tests. The reflector was the SMO. I just repeated the measurements at 5 meters and 1 meter, this time with a 3SD Q5 pill.
> 
> At 5 meters I got 1080 lux at first turn on, dropping to 1060 in a minute or so.
> 
> ...


Thanks a lot for all your quality readings. I am looking for more of these to try to find out how accurate my lux meter is. I have compared my readings of several lights with the readings given in light-reviews. My readings have been very consistent with those, and also with several other readings I have found around. This has earlier lead me to believe my light meter is OK. 

The statement you make above does how ever mean that the light meter used in light-reviews is wildly optimistic, and then so are mine. I would really appreciate getting good readings for other torches than the throwers because I think small differences in focusing or in the reflectors, easily leads to big differences in lux readings. Do you know of such readings, or is it something you could do?

One more thing. I have observed that you get 15 % higher lux reading for your Q5 pill than for your earlier tested R2 (at 5m). Isn't that a little strange?

Many thanks from
Jens


----------



## wbp (Feb 11, 2009)

jenskh said:


> One more thing. I have observed that you get 15 % higher lux reading for your Q5 pill than for your earlier tested R2 (at 5m). Isn't that a little strange?



The R2 pill was damaged...


----------



## Power_of_the_Sun (Feb 15, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*



jirik_cz said:


> DEFT independent testing is here https://www.candlepowerforums.com/threads/211519
> 
> Just FYI LED-lenser X7 has also around 50000 lux with fresh alkaline cells. Yesterday I've tried it with four AA eneloops in D holders (1AA in one holder) and it scored over 90000 lux (current draw was 7A) and I'm pretty sure that with rechargeable D nimh it would have more than 100000 lux (before it will make ). This is a retail light, so is it a new King of throw now ?



*I'd like to see the LED Lenser X7 tested* against other standard retail (non-mod/non-custom) lights. *It amazes me that no one has yet bothered to really test these lights! * Most people here at CPF seem to hate LED Lenser. Well, how about a test! Let's put the P14 up against the best other 4AA thrower you can find, and the X7 up against the best 4D thrower you can find, and see which one comes out on top. Sure, they don't use high powered batteries- just every day common ones... but that's the point! (At least, it is for me) I want a powerful, reliable light, that I can recommend to others, that is easy to use, readily available, and uses common batteries- batteries you could buy at any gas station, Wal-Mart, or supermarket. I work with missionaries, and I can tell you right now, for them, complicated is bad. Throw complicated in the mix, and the product recommendation goes out the window. So they need simple. Simple is good. And throwing four AAs or four Ds into a flashlight, screwing the cap on and pressing the "on" button" works for them. LED Lenser offers that. I work as an audio/video tech for a large missionary organization and have enjoyed learning more about the inner workings of LED technology. But LED Lenser flashlights are actually what got me wanting to learn more about LED flashlights in the first place. I never would have come to CPF if it weren't for them. How about it guys? Can somebody please do an actual lux and/or lumens rating on the X7 and (if possible) the P14? Run times also would be appreciated by (I'm sure) more than just me. 

Also, I'm new to all this, so I'm not really sure how it all works. Do you normally get a "sample" item from the manufacturer and test that? Or do you need someone that's purchasd one (like me) to send you one? If I sent you one for testing, I would expect it back. 

Regards,

Power


----------



## MrGman (Feb 15, 2009)

If you haven't figured it out by reading this thread, we aren't in the _*business*_ of testing flashlights, we do this because we are flashoholics with a capital HOLIC. We have bought the flashlights we tested and I have no interest in buying a LED Lenser. However if you want one tested then you could send me one plus cash for the return shipping to you if you want it back. We don't get paid for this, we don't advertise, we don't have a website to promote. We do this for the love of science and the truth. If you want your Peewee 14 tested party send us one. Don't make us have to spend money to send it back. I work at a real job for a living and so does wbp. I already have way too many flashlights I bought and have no intention to buy anything from COAST. 

On a side note it is my understanding that the LED lensers are not regulated and whatever output that have with fresh batteries doesn't last long because they drop with the output of the batteries. So their output at that may be really high with a brand new set of batteries doesn't stay their for long. _If _that is true then whatever their "fresh" battery output level is kind of meaningless because they don't hold it. That may be the reason nobody cares to test it because its a constantly moving target in the wrong direction. If I am wrong so be it, but that's what I understand.

Like I said if you have one that you want to submit, I am sure we can get it tested. We have some lights coming in for testing in the near future. If you are serious pm me for an address to ship your light to. G.


----------



## Bushman5 (Feb 15, 2009)

whats Lux compared to Lumens? ie is 1 lumen = 1 lux or ??????


----------



## HKJ (Feb 15, 2009)

Bushman5 said:


> whats Lux compared to Lumens? ie is 1 lumen = 1 lux or ??????



You can't do that.
Lux is used to measure the brightness of a single point, mostly the brightest point in the beam.
Lumen is used to measure the total light output of the flashlight.

With a typical led it is possible to focus about 250 lumen to a spot of about 30000 lux at 1 meter (Tiablo A10), but a "normal"" light is not focused that much, it is more in the range of 2000 to 6000 lux.


----------



## jirik_cz (Feb 15, 2009)

*Re: The New King of Throw Tested and Confirmed!*



Power_of_the_Sun said:


> *I'd like to see the LED Lenser X7 tested* against other standard retail (non-mod/non-custom) lights. *It amazes me that no one has yet bothered to really test these lights! *
> 
> Can somebody please do an actual lux and/or lumens rating on the X7 and (if possible) the P14? Run times also would be appreciated by (I'm sure) more than just me.



I've posted runtime test of X7 here.
According to ceiling bounce test (very unscientific method of testing :green and comparison to other lights it has around 900 lumens with fresh alkaline D batteries.


----------



## Ryanrpm (Feb 15, 2009)

What type of emitter does the X7 use? I didn't see it listed in the specs in that info page.


----------



## jirik_cz (Feb 15, 2009)

7x Cree XR-E


----------



## WadeF (Feb 15, 2009)

wbp said:


> The DBS that we tested is a V3 (black) and it had a 3SD R2 pill running on a single 18650 for our first set of tests. The reflector was the SMO. I just repeated the measurements at 5 meters and 1 meter, this time with a 3SD Q5 pill.
> 
> At 5 meters I got 1080 lux at first turn on, dropping to 1060 in a minute or so.
> 
> ...



So how come I got basically the same LUX results you did with the Tiablo A10, but with my DBS R2 (I've tried a few R2 pills and some perform better than other) I get around 28,000LUX but that's "I would think that anyone measuring 26,000 to 30,000 lux at 1 meter from a DBS has a wildly optimistic meter." ? 

I would think if my LUX meter was wildly optimistic the A10 would be reading much higher, rather than agreeing with your #'s. 

There are some variations with the DBS's. Some reflectors appear to perform better than others, some pills perform better than others (could be down to the actual emitter's output, how it focuses in the reflector, etc). 

Also in real world use I didn't see that much difference between my DBS R2 and the A10. The A10 was slightly brighter, but it wasn't a big difference.


----------



## wbp (Feb 15, 2009)

WadeF said:


> So how come I got basically the same LUX results you did with the Tiablo A10, but with my DBS R2 (I've tried a few R2 pills and some perform better than other) I get around 28,000LUX but that's "I would think that anyone measuring 26,000 to 30,000 lux at 1 meter from a DBS has a wildly optimistic meter." ?
> 
> I would think if my LUX meter was wildly optimistic the A10 would be reading much higher, rather than agreeing with your #'s.
> 
> ...



I suppose it's possible that you have a very different reflector than any of the ones that I have seen on a DBS. If there is that much variation then my statement is incorrect. However, I also know that it is really difficult to get accurate readings of this kind of output using inexpensive meters at short distances. I'd like to see how your DBS V2 measures at 5 meters compared to the A10 - why don't you do that and tell us what you get?

We (MrGman and I) do see a significant difference in both the spot size and brightness when comparing the A10's we have to my DBS V3. If you don't, that means your DBS has a significantly tighter focus than the ones I've seen...

William


----------



## wbp (Feb 18, 2009)

WadeF, 

Can you please take readings at 5 meters, of your A10 and DBS, taken at the same sitting. It seems to me that readings taken 1 meter of these lights with small hot spots are difficult to reproduce accurately.

If you can get similar readings from both lights at 5 meters that will tell us something.

William


----------



## wbp (Feb 20, 2009)

Well, let's have some more fun, shall we? :tinfoil::devil:

I received a new 3SM WH R2 pill from Flashcrazy this week. Meanwhile someone asked me which light would I carry when camping in the woods in places where one might encounter things that one might want to be able to identify at, for example, 100 yards or so. Things that might have sharp teeth and claws, for example, or might just be a big brown bush. The idea being to be able to tell which was which before it got too close... 

So I hauled my thrower collection and a camera over to a nearby community college campus, where I knew there happened to be an unlighted sports field, and took some pictures.

Disclaimer: these could be better, this was kind of a practice run, but I still think they show pretty well what I see with my eyes.

The target is an oil drum trash can, a little over 100 yards away, in front of some bleachers.

All images were taken with a Canon XSI set to manual, 4 seconds at f5.6, camera on tripod at eye level, flashlight handheld at roughly normal carrying height. White balance was set to manual, fl 4000k (probably will use daylight 6000k next time).

The camera is right next to the light, in the same relative position your eyes would be. I think beamshots with the camera back behind the light are interesting, but they don't show what you would actually see (unless someone else is carrying the light, obviously).

The Spear was running on a freshly charged 18650; the others were running on fresh CR123 primaries, except the last one...

So, here we go... First up, Raidfire Spear on high:







Next up, Dereelight DBS with 3SM WH R2 pill, new OP reflector, on high:






And now, (as he looks around for someplace to hide) the Tiablo A10, with the multimode switch, on the highest level:







Why didn't I use the single mode switch on the A10? Because that's not how I would carry that light. In practical use I want at least 2 output levels.

And finally, just because I had it with me and wanted to play with it, a Wolf Eyes Boxer 24W HID (yes, I know, wrong section, and not very practical either):







So now which one would YOU carry into the woods?

William


----------



## TITAN1833 (Feb 20, 2009)

wbp; thanks for the pictures, for me I would take either of the DBS's both show in my eyes better than the spear and A10,for one the green fence to the right is shown better due to the spill and for my eyes they show colors better look at the grass? :devil:


----------



## jenskh (Feb 20, 2009)

I think you have posted a wrong photo for the DBS MCE or...
This makes me even more pleased that I have the DBS with the R2 WH pill.


----------



## WadeF (Feb 20, 2009)

No DBS with a smooth reflector?


----------



## wbp (Feb 20, 2009)

WadeF said:


> No DBS with a smooth reflector?



No measurements at 5 meters?


----------



## SCEMan (Feb 20, 2009)

Thanks for the beamshots - very interesting. But no way that's an DBS MC-E beamshot or maybe only one die is working....:thinking:


----------



## electric sheep (Feb 20, 2009)

Stood in my garden i can replicate the comparison of R2 and MC-E and the pictures here bear no relation to my experience.


----------



## wbp (Feb 20, 2009)

electric sheep said:


> Stood in my garden i can replicate the comparison of R2 and MC-E and the pictures here bear no relation to my experience.



Details, please. Which R2? Which reflector? Positions of light and camera? Makes a big difference.


----------



## wbp (Feb 21, 2009)

electric sheep said:


> Stood in my garden i can replicate the comparison of R2 and MC-E and the pictures here bear no relation to my experience.



You're right. I went back and checked, and I had made an error in my notes. Those shots are not with the MC-E. I've removed them.

I went out to do a new set of pictures, hoping to get some with the smooth reflector, and found that I could no longer remove the R2 pill from the new OP reflector, it's stuck.

William


----------



## electric sheep (Feb 22, 2009)

It just did not add up. Hope anyone put off the MC-E will take another look. My favourite light right now and i could not go back.


----------



## Art Vandelay (Mar 28, 2009)

Hats off to MrGman and WBP for doing so much fantastic work on this thread. It is great to get these measurements from trusted sources. I think one reason the A10 and a few other lights have not gotten as much interest as I think they deserve is that people don't believe the super high lux readings that are posted about them. The lux readings I've read for the A10 vary widely.

Because of the five times rule, I think they are right that for the A10 it is better to measure lux at 5 meters and use the Inverse Square Law to calculate the lux at one meter. 

The standard of lux at one meter is helpful because that is the most common measurement given so it makes it easier to compare lights.

I agree with MrGman and WBP. I don’t think it’s necessary to measure the lux at one meter. It is probably the easiest way to get that measurement, but lights with large reflectors may give misleading readings at one meter. I want a reliable reading. With a reliable reading and the Inverse Square Law I can see how bright the light is all along the beam. 

I'll post a link below which I think has a good idea to help overcome the distortion of the point source’s position. By measuring the beam at two distances, it is possible to find the virtual point source. 
Link:
" You can solve for the virtual origin of a source by measuring irradiance at two points and solving for the offset distance, X, using the Inverse Square Law:
E1(d1 + X)2 = E2(d2 + X)2 "


----------



## TITAN1833 (Mar 29, 2009)

Hi guy's I think the thrown will be short lived,we will have another contender shortly 

Suffice to say it puts out 550+lumens out front and has SMO reflector.BTW the lumens has been tested independently with IS and from what I see it has the potential to be crowned the new throw king,I should have it soon stay tuned for my first impressions 



[edit]Oh what I can tell you it's the sunlites 8Wfp's bigger brother,IMO the 8w out throws the DBS and anything else I have seen so far.There will be a thread on this light very soon.


----------



## Glenn7 (Mar 29, 2009)

TITAN1833 said:


> Hi guy's I think the thrown will be short lived,we will have another contender shortly
> 
> Suffice to say it puts out 550+lumens out front and has SMO reflector.BTW the lumens has been tested independently with IS and from what I see it has the potential to be crowned the new throw king,I should have it soon stay tuned for my first impressions
> 
> ...



hey Titan yes i sence a butt kicking coming on :naughty: and i cant wait to put it up against my bad boys and watch their mouths drop in awe   :thumbsup:


----------



## 276 (Mar 30, 2009)

TITAN1833 said:


> Hi guy's I think the thrown will be short lived,we will have another contender shortly
> 
> Suffice to say it puts out 550+lumens out front and has SMO reflector.BTW the lumens has been tested independently with IS and from what I see it has the potential to be crowned the new throw king,I should have it soon stay tuned for my first impressions
> 
> ...



I have been anxiously awaiting that one.


----------



## TITAN1833 (Mar 30, 2009)

276 said:


> I have been anxiously awaiting that one.


Yes I'm hoping Ryan will put up his review shortly,and I will add my little bit too


----------



## Tatjanamagic (Oct 1, 2010)

*Does aspheric with OP reflector qualify for this thread?*

It has OP reflector inside, and at the end of OP reflector comes aspherical lenses, it easily out throws tiablo A9 so probably would out throw DBS V3 R2 also.

Wolfeyes nighthunter.

Wish Mr.Gman can test it( I would send flashlight to U on test but I don't live in USA post is very expensive here in darkonia  )


----------



## utlgoa (Oct 1, 2010)

Checkout the deep reflector on this new SST-50 Flashlight. It must be a great thrower!

http://www.shenzhen-wholesale.com/loongsun-lx9012-sst50-led-aluminum-flashlight_sku2308.html

http://www.szobm.net/sdp/489907/4/pd-2645629/7400879-1298069.html


*Untested and Unconfirmed*


----------



## MrGman (Oct 2, 2010)

Tatjanamagic said:


> *Does aspheric with OP reflector qualify for this thread?*
> 
> It has OP reflector inside, and at the end of OP reflector comes aspherical lenses, it easily out throws tiablo A9 so probably would out throw DBS V3 R2 also.
> 
> ...


 

An aspheric lens on top of anything makes it an aspheric lens type output and doesn't qualify for this group. I have not seen any light that normally takes a reflector with an aspheric put in front of it that did not have a very ugly beam. I would be very curious to see what this light that you have looks like. 

But I am not in the Lux testing business any more. I focus on practical lights and I have not seen any aspheric thrower that I am interested in. It was my friend WBP who actually had the really good equipment to do the testing we did on those lights and I helped and published the data. He hasn't been active and I am 2400 miles away from his shop, so not going to do any more testing like we did that night.

There are a few good lux meters to buy out there. I had an AEMC CA813, sold that off as well. There are others. You have enough lights to consider getting a good lux meter and start doing some comparative testing.


----------



## recDNA (Oct 3, 2010)

Is the Masterpiece Pro 1 in this thread anywhere? It's my best thrower.


----------



## precisionworks (Oct 3, 2010)

I didn't see the Catapult V2 :nana:

In my shop built integrating sphere (which cannot be compared to the IS that was used for these tests) the V2 shows 744 lumens on a pair of AW 18650's (2900 mAh). Current draw is 1700 mA on freshly charged cells.

Do you think it might qualify?


----------



## Tatjanamagic (Oct 3, 2010)

MrGman said:


> An aspheric lens on top of anything makes it an aspheric lens type output and doesn't qualify for this group. I have not seen any light that normally takes a reflector with an aspheric put in front of it that did not have a very ugly beam. I would be very curious to see what this light that you have looks like.
> 
> But I am not in the Lux testing business any more. I focus on practical lights and I have not seen any aspheric thrower that I am interested in. It was my friend WBP who actually had the really good equipment to do the testing we did on those lights and I helped and published the data. He hasn't been active and I am 2400 miles away from his shop, so not going to do any more testing like we did that night.
> 
> There are a few good lux meters to buy out there. I had an AEMC CA813, sold that off as well. There are others. You have enough lights to consider getting a good lux meter and start doing some comparative testing.



This wolf-eyes nighthunter has a ringy beam... Is it ugly? Well maybe little... I have small review here...

https://www.candlepowerforums.com/posts/3496571#post3496571

Please look.


----------



## bigchelis (Oct 3, 2010)

Tatjanamagic said:


> This wolf-eyes nighthunter has a ringy beam... Is it ugly? Well maybe little... I have small review here...
> 
> https://www.candlepowerforums.com/posts/3496571#post3496571
> 
> Please look.


 

Yeah thats uggly all right. 

I got the aspheric bug sometime ago too, but now there are Deep Reflectors out there that I have seen surpass the Aspherical lights.

I have seen/tested/used a SST-90 light with Deep Rebel Reflector out throw the DeFT FTP. Well at least I got more lux at 5m from it. And to be fair the SST-90 was alot heavier, bigger, and with 2000 plus lumens not really a fair fight.

The huge loss in OTF lumens when you go ASpheric is the bigger reason I switched over to the reflector side. MrGman and I have seen as much as 40% less light when going aspherical. The only aspherical I like is the DEFT cause he minimizes this loss by using a 2 lens system:thumbsup:


This is my ASpherical killer
https://www.candlepowerforums.com/threads/295105


----------



## saabluster (Oct 4, 2010)

bigchelis said:


> Yeah thats uggly all right.
> 
> I got the aspheric bug sometime ago too, but now there are Deep Reflectors out there that I have seen surpass the Aspherical lights.
> 
> ...



The only way the SR-90 can out-throw a DEFT is if there is a problem with the light. Practically speaking though the SR-90 was close enough that the human eye would have a difficult time discerning the difference. The later HO models were well above the FTP for throw however. Now I have a prototype DEFT of the same size and weight that pushes over 400K cp. For an SR-90 to equal this DEFT you would have to buy four of them. Now if I go to the same size head as the SR-90 you would have to buy 6 1/2 SR-90s just to equal what I can do with an aspherical. 

Also you are being very kind to asphericals when it comes to light loss. When I added the pre-collimator I calculated I was getting a 60% increase in throughput.


----------



## bigchelis (Oct 4, 2010)

The CBT-90 was the VARA2000 light that hit 97.5k lux at 1m, but at 2300 plus OTF lumens on turn-on it was not exactly a fair fight. So, now what if I was able to put an Aspherical lens on this domeless SST-90
https://www.candlepowerforums.com/threads/288524

Gswitter runs his VARA2000 with an Aspherical lens (sometimes) and I will admitt it does throw more when he puts that lens on it.


*EDIT: I got 132.5K lux with the DEFT FTP. My mistake. DEFT is still king of throw/lux that I have seen and tested.*


----------



## bigchelis (Oct 4, 2010)

I did get to test a handfull of custom and off the shelf aspherical lights. 

Here is a typical one with single lens system.

Dereelight DBS_____Dereelight XR-E R2_______ 2 AW 2600mAh _________ 225.4 ______ 1 sec_______529______13,225___
__________________________________________________ _____________ 213.8_______30 sec_______________________
_______________________*1.2A Single Mode* ______________________________________ 209.2_______1 min________________________
__________________________________________________ _____________________________204.6_______2 min________________________
________________________*___________*___________________________________________202.3_______3 min________________________
Dereelight DBS_____Dereelight XR-E R2_______ 2 AW 2600mAh _________ 140.8 ______ 1 sec______2,500_____62,500___
__________________________________________________ _____________ 137.7_______30 sec_______________________
_______________________*1.2A Single Mode* ___________*Aspherical Installed*__________ 135.4_______1 min________________________
__________________________________________________ _____________________________133.8_______2 min________________________
________________________*___________*___________________________________________133.1_______3 min________________________


The lenslight mini CR123 when put to wide and not focused actually gained alot of lumens. I think the one I tested was a 1.2A version and I suspect up towards 220 plus OTF if it had a reflector in lieu of the aspherical lens. It is cool though.

*LensBright CR123 Mini___XR-E R2____Wide____Surefire CR123_______164.6______1 sec_____________________*
*LensBright CR123 Mini___XR-E R2___Focused__ Surefire CR123_______89.2_______1 sec_____________________*


----------



## MrGman (Oct 4, 2010)

Olight SR-91 - 2,550 lux at 5 meters x 25 = 63,750 lux at 1 meter
Stanley HID - 11,920 lux at 5 meters x 25 = 298,000 lux at 1 meter

Taken from a top secret source. The HID doesn't count just like aspheric's don't count for LED lights with reflectors.


----------



## MrGman (Oct 4, 2010)

Tatjanamagic said:


> This wolf-eyes nighthunter has a ringy beam... Is it ugly? Well maybe little... I have small review here...
> 
> https://www.candlepowerforums.com/posts/3496571#post3496571
> 
> Please look.


 

I actually did see your review when you first posted it. Good work, but the truth is, yes, that is an ugly ringy beam. I am sure it works out in the field but not what I want to see in my lights. 

As far as I know the O-Light SR90 Intimidator is the best standard reflector type LED light for the king of throw. But for the king of what's on my belt, that doesn't weight a ton and has a very useful beam, that is the Malkoff Hound Dog.


----------



## Tatjanamagic (Oct 4, 2010)

Mr.Gman

Most people wants only throwers for every day use... They have no intention to use it on rifle in combination with good scope...

For night hunting with scope side spill or flood are not so important...

The most important thing is that scope field of view is covered with bright hotspot.

And usable throw of many reflector flashlight is not so good as of aspherical ones.

For example. Tiablo A9 with stock reflector can throw about 150-200 meteres but usable throw is only 80 - 100 meters.
When U put aspherical head on it throws lets say more than 400 meters but it is usable only up to 220 meters.

My definiton of usable throw is: " Throw is distance at which U can clearly identify target". 

And I finally ordered DBS V3 aspherical r2 with extension tube and I will compare it with Tiablo A9 aspherical, and I really hope it will be better...

I don't have lux meters but I think that with this scope I will see difference







Respect for DEFT. This is really something that I would want in smaller size and gun mountable... Amazing throw... 

Mr.G I like your Malkoff Hound Dog but it does not seem by viewing your video on youtube that it could outthrow tiablo(a9,a10) and deerelight(dbs r2) it has only larger hotspot than them...

Am I wrong?

But sure... for normal use more than enough throw with bigger hotspot...

_Good night:candle:_


----------



## recDNA (Oct 4, 2010)

MrGman said:


> I actually did see your review when you first posted it. Good work, but the truth is, yes, that is an ugly ringy beam. I am sure it works out in the field but not what I want to see in my lights.
> 
> As far as I know the O-Light SR90 Intimidator is the best standard reflector type LED light for the king of throw. But for the king of what's on my belt, that doesn't weight a ton and has a very useful beam, that is the Malkoff Hound Dog.


 

You're not claiming it is in a league with the top R2 throwers right?


----------



## recDNA (Oct 4, 2010)

Of course aspherics out-throw reflectors. We all know that. It's simply not what _this_ thread is about.






Tatjanamagic said:


> Mr.Gman
> 
> Most people wants only throwers for every day use... They have no intention to use it on rifle in combination with good scope...
> 
> ...


----------



## recDNA (Oct 4, 2010)

MrGman said:


> Olight SR-91 - 2,550 lux at 5 meters x 25 = 63,750 lux at 1 meter
> Stanley HID - 11,920 lux at 5 meters x 25 = 298,000 lux at 1 meter
> 
> Taken from a top secret source. The HID doesn't count just like aspheric's don't count for LED lights with reflectors.


 
If it didn't have the stupid "handgun" grip I'd buy one for every car in my house.


----------



## Tatjanamagic (Oct 4, 2010)

recDNA said:


> Of course aspherics out-throw reflectors. We all know that. It's simply not what _this_ thread is about.



Well plenty of people on CPF claims that some reflectors can outthrow aspherics...

I would be happy with reflector thrower(acceptable size of course) that could concentrate the beam into one big hotspot...

But I can only dream that.

Good night


----------



## recDNA (Oct 4, 2010)

Tatjanamagic said:


> Well plenty of people on CPF claims that some reflectors can outthrow aspherics...
> 
> I would be happy with reflector thrower(acceptable size of course) that could concentrate the beam into one big hotspot...
> 
> ...


 
Yes, it all comes down to size. A big enough refector does the job but is too large for EDC or rifle use...although some people use some pretty large lights on rifles. I bet someone somewhere is rigging an Olight SR90 to attach to a rifle at this moment!


----------



## MrGman (Oct 5, 2010)

Tat, I will answer your comments inside below in blue. I have seen your work on flashlights for night hunting use and I don't disagree with your comments or philosophy. Just not where my particular interest lies or what this thread was about. 




Tatjanamagic said:


> Mr.Gman
> 
> Most people wants only throwers for every day use... They have no intention to use it on rifle in combination with good scope... True and that is my interest as well since I am not in a place where I can do night hunting.
> 
> ...


 
So continue on for your search for the perfect long distance throwing flashignt, I am just not interested in testing one with an aspheric lens for such a specific purpose. I have seen the DEFT, yes its powerful, still don't like the projection of the die type of beam, When some one figures out how to make a smooth cone of white light that can be collimated down like a rifle scope from 20 degree field of view to a 1 degree field of view type beam with no rings, no image of the die pattern and certainly don't want to see the bond wire outline, that doesn't turn blue the further away it gets, then I will be interested. 
 
Tat you have invested a lot of money in flashlights and riflescope(s), you should simply buy a good lux meter with photopic curve filter correction and start taking measurements of lights out at 5 or 10 meters and publish the results in a new thread.


----------



## Tatjanamagic (Oct 6, 2010)

Plenty of people here have lux meters.

But lux meter readings vary from member to member on CPF(even 20-30% difference that I saw on some readings of same flashlights?).

Probably my readings would vary also. So who would believe me anyway I am no pro like U  I am amateur... I learn from U and other guys:thumbsup:

Sure it would be nice to C smooth cone of white light like U said(I think every hunter dream about that)... *But:*

If I can do my primary objective when using "as" thrower flashlights (clearly identify target on certain distances) than I am pleased with it.

Especially if I have compact 15 cm flashlight that can throw more than 200 meters.

For now more than enough for long distance shooters.

But U know... The last "as" flashlight(r2 version) I ordered is excellent for EDC I prefer it over Tiablo A9 reflector. Beam shots in my thread U saw are really crappy. It does not look that crappy in real life and U can unfocus and loose die pattern of led emitter and still get an awesome throw.


*What do U say about this: *













From this thread

https://www.candlepowerforums.com/posts/3528778#post3528778

Can it be? Or not to be?

And if really can be than this qualify for this thread.


----------

