# olight sr90 or hid?



## bigsteve (Feb 8, 2010)

I wanted 2 add to my collection of only one eagletac m2xc4 cool white and was thinking about the soon to be released sr90 or a hid 35w 3500 ebay flashlight which i no are hit and miss with there quality control having battery issues and any advice welcome thanks


----------



## Lighthouse one (Feb 8, 2010)

Post removed....not needed


----------



## bigsteve (Feb 8, 2010)

post removed not needed


----------



## saabluster (Feb 9, 2010)

banned in 3..2..


----------



## sqchram (Feb 9, 2010)

Ill have to vote for the sr90, matt from battery junction said that compared to a 35W HID, the SR90 would throw as well, or better, but HID will flood more and output more lumens. So that said, and rolling the dice from DX where any warranty or repair could spell big delay, cost, and headache, try the sr90, or a higher priced titanium innovations hid from battery junction.


----------



## bigsteve (Feb 9, 2010)

saabluster said:


> banned in 3..2..




WTF :shakehead


----------



## Lightcrazycanuck (Feb 9, 2010)

SR90.:thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup:



lovecpflovecpflovecpf


----------



## carrot (Feb 9, 2010)

I'd say the SR90 is a real winner! Got to play with one all week during SHOT and it's an incredible handheld. I would pick the SR90 over a HID simply due to instant start and no bulb to break... 4sevens.com also will be stocking the SR90.


----------



## bigsteve (Feb 10, 2010)

thanks for your opinions everyone and looks like its the sr90 then lovecpf


----------



## Ronin28 (Apr 10, 2010)

I'm thinking about possibly getting the Olight SR90...in a few months when I've saved up some funds, but is the light really that bright (2200 Lumens)??? And how is the quality of the light/are there quality issues?

How about the amount of power draw and the batteries? Any issues there...like the batteries exploding because of the massive power draw, or are we alright there?

Thanks for any info!


----------



## Locoboy5150 (Apr 12, 2010)

I'd rather get an HID spotlight. For the price of one SR90 you can get a nice HID spotlight that will throw further than just about any LED flashlight and have some cash left over for a really nice smaller LED light for your pocket or belt holster.


----------



## Dioni (Apr 12, 2010)

Comparisons between SR90 and some HID 35W? :candle:


----------



## StarHalo (Apr 12, 2010)

There are a few threads that feature the SR90 vs HIDs; the SR90 has a pretty tight beam - think of it as a DEFT with a marginal spill. The larger HIDs (Titanium, Stanley, etc.) have the same intense hotpot but with a very broad spill, in some instances out to 160 degrees (which accounts for the 1000+ lumen increase over the Olight.) 

Think of it as SR90 vs DEFT, the HIDs are different beasts entirely.


----------



## saabluster (Apr 13, 2010)

StarHalo said:


> There are a few threads that feature the SR90 vs HIDs; the SR90 has a pretty tight beam - think of it as a DEFT with a marginal spill. The larger HIDs (Titanium, Stanley, etc.) have the same intense hotpot but with a very broad spill, in some instances out to 160 degrees (which accounts for the 1000+ lumen increase over the Olight.)
> 
> Think of it as SR90 vs DEFT, the HIDs are different beasts entirely.


I don't know that I would call the spill of the SR90 "marginal". It actually has more intensity in the spill than almost all of those HID lights. I have not commented on this yet but this is the reason I think some people think the SR90 can hang with the big HIDs. Even though the SR90 is producing less lumens than the larger HIDs all of the emitting surface is faced outwards and contributes to the spill whereas the HID lights have less than half of the emitter surface to contribute to spill. Not the corona mind you but the spill.

Even if you are talking purely about the angle of the spill light I don't think the increased amount of light that comes from the extra spill of the HIDs over the SR90 add much benefit if any. In most circumstances it would be a bad thing.


----------



## stallion2 (Apr 13, 2010)

2200 lumens is a fair rating...but unless i'm mistaken, i think Olight took that number from Luminous' data sheet for the SST-90. regardless, its bright as hell...it does not disappoint in that department. the power pack seems to be well designed. the heat managment is excellent...4Sevens has a thread on here showing temp increase over time and a lot of us were impressed w/ how slow the increase was. i've used it a lot the last two weekends and haven't felt much heat at all. you outta be able to find that thread easily. one hour at 2200lumens and 6 or 7 hours at '700 lumens'...that should tell you all you need to know about burn time. and the 700 lumen 'low' mode....they are being too humble. at low mode it still puts out significantly more light than my Olight M30 or Catapult (rated for 900lumens). and the spill is by no means marginal. i have to stand at the edge of my pier to keep from blinding myself. if i stand back a little then the spill will fall on 2 or more skinny pier pipes and thats more than enough to disrupt my nightvision.


----------



## HKJ (Apr 13, 2010)

Dioni said:


> Comparisons between SR90 and some HID 35W? :candle:



Here.


----------



## StarHalo (Apr 13, 2010)

HKJ said:


> Here.



Those were the beamshots I was basing my assessment on; going by that distance, the SR90 looks a lot closer to a DEFT than any of the HIDs. But if actual owners are saying it's closer to an HID, it must just be the distance/angle of those beamshots..


----------



## HKJ (Apr 13, 2010)

StarHalo said:


> Those were the beamshots I was basing my assessment on; going by that distance, the SR90 looks a lot closer to a DEFT than any of the HIDs. But if actual owners are saying it's closer to an HID, it must just be the distance/angle of those beamshots..



It is impossible to see weak spill in photos, except with multiple shots with different exposure. The camera will show weak spill as black, even when the eye can easily see in it.


----------



## StarHalo (Apr 13, 2010)

HKJ said:


> It is impossible to see weak spill in photos



Roger that. This does at least sound like a fine replacement for the low-wattage HID category that was always derided as being inefficient..


----------



## HKJ (Apr 13, 2010)

HKJ said:


> It is impossible to see weak spill in photos, except with multiple shots with different exposure. The camera will show weak spill as black, even when the eye can easily see in it.





StarHalo said:


> Roger that. This does at least sound like a fine replacement for the low-wattage HID category that was always derided as being inefficient..



I already have a good example in my beam shot, the long distance shots was done with two different exposures (or at least processed to it).

Here is the first one, where only the beam can be seen:






Next one with increased exposure, there grass can easily be seen due to the spill:





And for comparison, here is the last exposure without any help from SR90:






All these pictures and a lot more can be found in the full beam shot thread.


----------



## easilyled (Apr 13, 2010)

StarHalo said:


> Those were the beamshots I was basing my assessment on; going by that distance, the SR90 looks a lot closer to a DEFT than any of the HIDs. But if actual owners are saying it's closer to an HID, it must just be the distance/angle of those beamshots..



I have to say that I don't understand your observations.
From the beamshots, the SR90 looks much closer to the Titanium L35 than it does to the DEFT.
As for the Microfire Warrior III, this looks pathetic in comparison with the SR90.
Its only the Titanium L70 out of the HIDs shown that has a more diffuse beam than the SR90, but does it provide more useful illumination? I would argue that it doesn't based on what I see in the beamshots.


----------



## easilyled (Apr 13, 2010)

saabluster said:


> I don't know that I would call the spill of the SR90 "marginal". It actually has more intensity in the spill than almost all of those HID lights. I have not commented on this yet but this is the reason I think some people think the SR90 can hang with the big HIDs. Even though the SR90 is producing less lumens than the larger HIDs all of the emitting surface is faced outwards and contributes to the spill whereas the HID lights have less than half of the emitter surface to contribute to spill. Not the corona mind you but the spill.
> 
> Even if you are talking purely about the angle of the spill light I don't think the increased amount of light that comes from the extra spill of the HIDs over the SR90 add much benefit if any. In most circumstances it would be a bad thing.



+1. I would certainly agree with everything above.


----------



## Dioni (Apr 13, 2010)

HKJ said:


> Here.


 
Thanks for the link!

Judging by the pics the SR90 looks to have a better throw than the Warrior III. I'm impressed with the result and I cant believe totaly in this!

SR90






Warrior III


----------



## easilyled (Apr 13, 2010)

Dioni said:


> Thanks for the link!
> Judging by the pics the SR90 looks to have a better throw than the Warrior III. I'm impressed with the result and I cant believe totaly in this!



You'll believe it if you use one.


----------



## headophile (Apr 13, 2010)

saabluster said:


> I don't know that I would call the spill of the SR90 "marginal". It actually has more intensity in the spill than almost all of those HID lights. I have not commented on this yet but this is the reason I think some people think the SR90 can hang with the big HIDs. Even though the SR90 is producing less lumens than the larger HIDs all of the emitting surface is faced outwards and contributes to the spill whereas the HID lights have less than half of the emitter surface to contribute to spill. Not the corona mind you but the spill.
> 
> Even if you are talking purely about the angle of the spill light I don't think the increased amount of light that comes from the extra spill of the HIDs over the SR90 add much benefit if any. In most circumstances it would be a bad thing.



very enlightening post


----------



## Dead_Nuts (Apr 23, 2010)

I have been accused of exaggerating my comparison of the SR-90 to 35w HID lights and that it would take several of them to equal a 35w HID. I just didn't have the photographic abilities of some here. I am thankful that the evidence seems to back up exactly what I was observing. This is one fantastic LED search light that shows the future capabilities of LED's.


----------



## Patriot (Apr 24, 2010)

Just a second folks.... 

HID bulb output is very predictable. If you run a quality 35W bulb at 35W it's going to result in about 3200 bulb lumens. We can safely assume that given the Warrior's price point, as well as first hand knowledge, that it's not using a premium Phillips or Osram bulb and isn't using premium electronics either. Perhaps the actual output is less than 3000 bulb lumens but it's still rather high compared to the SR-90, or at least it should be.

Looking at the two comparison pictures between the lights, I have to guess that either the SR-90 is terribly underrated and is actually using more current than 10A or the Warrior has an issue of some type. If it doesn't have an issue, were did all the light disappear to? :thinking: LED's have very predictable output if we know the current level. The SR-90's lumen rating is based off of the SST-90 running at 10A. So what's more likely, that HKJ's light SR-90 was running at 12-14A or that his Warrior was under-performing? 

To my knowledge, HID still has much higher surface brightness than even the best XRE, never mind an SST-90 with it's massive surface area. If the HID is using a high quality, smooth reflector it should still out throw any SST-90 with comparably sized reflector. 

Maybe this comparison simply points out that there's a higher throw- performance to dollar ratio with this newest generation high current LED lights as compared to HID but it doesn't mean that LED technology is outdoing HID as a general rule. If you put the SR-90 against a 35W Polarion I'm certain that HID would more than hold its own. If you start comparing current for current, (LED compared to HID) the HID is going to greatly outperform today's LEDs. 

As to the specific question of this thread.... it does indeed seem that there's more throw capability inherent in the SR-90 than a comparably sized and priced HID lights. There's just not a lot of development in HID lights so we don't have high quality manufacturers producing small 35W lights at the price point of the O-light. In fact, it can't be done give the price of today's quality HID components. 

If money is a factor purchase the SR-90. If money isn't a factor, purchase a Polarion X1. It's more compact, produces 1500 more lumens with better throw and color temperature than the SR-90.


----------



## HKJ (Apr 24, 2010)

Patriot said:


> Looking at the two comparison pictures between the lights, I have to guess that either the SR-90 is terribly underrated and is actually using more current than 10A or the Warrior has an issue of some type. If it doesn't have an issue, were did all the light disappear to? :thinking: LED's have very predictable output if we know the current level. The SR-90's lumen rating is based off of the SST-90 running at 10A. So what's more likely, that HKJ's light SR-90 was running at 12-14A or that his Warrior was under-performing?



I would guess that the Warrior is below 35 watt, in the beam shot where the above pictures comes from I also have another 35 watt hid (L35) and it has higher performance than the Warrior.
When comparing bulb lumen it is also important to remember that a HID bulb has higher loss than a led in the optic system.


----------



## easilyled (Apr 24, 2010)

Patriot said:


> Just a second folks....
> If money is a factor purchase the SR-90. If money isn't a factor, purchase a Polarion X1. It's more compact, produces 1500 more lumens with better throw and color temperature than the SR-90.



I have to disagree with you there.

Its not only about money. Its about several other advantages that the SR90 would have:-

1) No warm up time
2) No UV emissions
3) Never needing to replace the light source.


----------



## Patriot (Apr 25, 2010)

easilyled said:


> I have to disagree with you there.
> 
> Its not only about money. Its about several other advantages that the SR90 would have:-
> 
> ...





1)Understandable in most situations but these usually aren't factors associated with the Polarion. It's actually matching the SR-90 in output at 1 second and exceeding it by 1/3 at 2-3 seconds. At 4-5 seconds the Polarion is producing about 7000 lumens as it reaches the pinnacle of it's boost phase before the voltage drops back down. The Polarion can be considered "instant" for in intents and purposes.

2)Again, not really a factor with Osram and Phillips bulbs behind a big thick piece of Borafloat glass. With regards the to the spectrum, it could actually be argued that the HID has a much more useful one with superior CRI. Even if it did leak a bit of UV which I'm not sure it does, I'm not sure how much of a practical advantage point this notion really provides.

3)The projected life of the 35W Osram bulb run at 35W is several thousand hours. A person could run the Polarion for an hour every single day and the bulb would still last years longer than say, the projected battery life of the SR-90. The point being that any number of other components are going to wear out before the bulb does. See BVH's bulb replacement poll here and keep in mind that this poll includes replacement for any reason and includes Asian generics as well. Again, in this case I just don't recognize the perceived advantage here as a real world or practical advantage. 

Regarding the guess work surounding the actual lumen ouput of a quality 35W HID light, see Selfbuilt's ceiling bounce tests results here. The 35W HID produced 122 lux as compared to the SR-90's 73 lux. Keep in mind that we're looking at OTF figures now despite the loses that HKJ rightly attributes to HID vs LED. I'm not going to point out Selfbuilts recorded throw advantage here given that the L35 has a larger reflector but I will point out that the Polarion has a smaller more efficient reflector and thus produces higher lux than the L35 despite its smaller size. 

Touching once again on value, I sort of forgot about the L35 but it does in fact cost less, weighs less, produce at least a 1/3 more light output and runs for longer than the SR-90 on high. The main disadvantages of the L35 would be the warm-up time and variable output levels.

Lastly, please understand that my points aren't to create a HID vs large format LED fan battle. It's only natural to compare the SST-90 to HID since it's the first hand held capable LED to even approach the performance of HID. With that stated, I'm still inclined to keeps things real in light of those suggesting that the SR-90 is beating "35W" HIDs. We see that there's still a big gap between the two in Selfbuilt's tests, and this gap translates to paper when we simply look at performance vs. output with relation to electrical current for example. HID is not only brighter but it's more efficient. Perhaps in a couple of years these LEDs will run cooler and more efficiently but they still have a little way to go.


----------



## easilyled (Apr 25, 2010)

Patriot said:


> 1)Understandable in most situations but these usually aren't factors associated with the Polarion. It's actually matching the SR-90 in output at 1 second and exceeding it by 1/3 at 2-3 seconds. At 4-5 seconds the Polarion is producing about 7000 lumens as it reaches the pinnacle of it's boost phase before the voltage drops back down. The Polarion can be considered "instant" for in intents and purposes.



True but the Polarion is a high-end HID and costs thousands of dollars compared to the O-lights's hundreds of dollars. So its rather an unfair comparison. Even then Polarion is not instant on compared to leds.
I think a comparison with warm up time between the SR90 and L35 would be quite telling.




Patriot said:


> 2)Again, not really a factor with Osram and Phillips bulbs behind a big thick piece of Borafloat glass. With regards the to the spectrum, it could actually be argued that the HID has a much more useful one with superior CRI. Even if it did leak a bit of UV which I'm not sure it does, I'm not sure how much of a practical advantage point this notion really provides..



Unwanted UV emissions is definitely a concern with many HIDs and all the more so with those in the price range of the SR90. They have the potential to be very dangerous both to eyes and skin and the extent of the UV emissions is an unknown quantity in many HIDs which is a big worry for me and not to be underestimated in my opinion.


----------



## Patriot (Apr 25, 2010)

easilyled said:


> True but the Polarion is a high-end HID and costs thousands of dollars compared to the O-lights's hundreds of dollars. So its rather an unfair comparison. Even then Polarion is not instant on compared to leds.
> I think a comparison with warm up time between the SR90 and L35 would be quite telling.
> 
> Unwanted UV emissions is definitely a concern with many HIDs and all the more so with those in the price range of the SR90. They have the potential to be very dangerous both to eyes and skin and the extent of the UV emissions is an unknown quantity in many HIDs which is a big worry for me and not to be underestimated in my opinion.





Easilyled, I think you may have lost the perspective boundaries of my comments. Here's my original quote.



> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Patriot*
> 
> 
> _If money is a factor purchase the SR-90. If money isn't a factor, purchase a Polarion X1. It's more compact, produces 1500 more lumens with better throw and color temperature than the SR-90._





> *easilyled*
> 
> I have to disagree with you there.
> 
> ...


I'm not talking about other HID lights. I was only speaking of the Polarion when I made the above suggestion to purchasing it, *if *money wasn't a factor. This addresses your concern of "unfair comparison" in that I recognize and pointed out this difference already. You proceeded to point out start-up time, UV emissions, and bulb life (for the Polarion) none of which are real issues. 

Regarding the start up time of 1.5 seconds to the intensity of the SR-90, let's be practical. Obviously I realize that it's not "instant" in the true sense but it's darn close. What bearing does a 1.5 second start really have when a light plays the role of a large task light, spotlight or searchlight? I could understand your point if you were talking about tactical use in close quarters battle or some very narrow application but I think you're hyping up a very small point to suggest a major advantage to the SR-90. I have trouble lending credence to this notion especially when you seem to discount the larger performance issues including, more output, more throw, and slightly more efficiency. Even color temperature for example is generally far higher on the list of concerns with more CPF's.



With regards to the L35's warm-up time specifically, that was also acknowledged in my previous post.........



> Patriot
> Touching once again on value, I sort of forgot about the L35 but it does in fact cost less, weighs less, produce at least a 1/3 more light output and runs for longer than the SR-90 on high. The main disadvantages of the L35 would be the warm-up time and variable output levels.


As mentioned in my "main disadvantages" comment it does have a couple. What I was pointing out is that the L35 is a definite consideration for someone who's thinking of dropping $450 on a searchlight. If one is willing to sacrifice start-up time and variable levels, they in turn gain more throw, more output, more run-time at max output, better color temperature, lighter weight package and all for about 1/3 less cost. Additionally, the L35 does have a task light LED array built in which adds value to its role flexibility. One could argue that the L35 would make a good hurricane light while the SR-90 is far from the sort due to the lack of a true low level.


----------



## headophile (Apr 25, 2010)

*post deleted*


----------



## easilyled (Apr 25, 2010)

Patriot said:


> I'm not talking about other HID lights. I was only speaking of the Polarion when I made the above suggestion to purchasing it, *if *money wasn't a factor. This addresses your concern of "unfair comparison" in that I recognize and pointed out this difference already. You proceeded to point out start-up time, UV emissions, and bulb life (for the Polarion) none of which are real issues.



Ok, you are right to correct me in the context of your original statement:-

I would agree that a Polarion is no doubt more desirable and superior to the Olight SR90. (The price reflects that many times over)
I am not 100% sure about its UV emissions but I'll assume that you are correct in suggesting that they are insignificant.

Comparing the Olight to 35W HID lights in a similar price range though, I would rather have the Olight SR90 for the reasons I mentioned.

The beamshots in HKJ's comparison appear to trump the Microfire Warrior resoundingly and also to hold their own with the L35, if you look at the long-distance shots.

True the L35 puts out more overall output, but is it more useful? Not from what I can see of the tree illuminated.


----------



## Patriot (Apr 26, 2010)

easilyled said:


> Comparing the Olight to 35W HID lights in a similar price range though, I would rather have the Olight SR90 for the reasons I mentioned.




I would tend to agree based on price alone. It's just too expensive to build fully waterproof aluminum HID enclosures with "grade A" electrical components. The component costs alone make it a "no contest" in favor of the SR90 which seems to have used the best of everything but in LED form.



> Patriot from post #27
> Maybe this comparison simply points out that there's a higher throw- performance to dollar ratio with this newest generation high current LED lights as compared to HID






> *easilyled*
> The beamshots in HKJ's comparison appear to trump the Microfire Warrior resoundingly and also to hold their own with the L35, if you look at the long-distance shots.


We were discussing some of the possible Mircrofire problems over in HKJ's review thread as well. In my own lux tests, the K3500 runs right on the heals of other inexpensive 35W lights like the POB, Costco and N30. I'm not sure why HKJ's example performed so poorly but maybe that's a QC/QA issue on the part of Microfire and might be chalked up to sample variation.

Costco 296 lux
*K3500 305 lux*
POB 326 lux
N30 333 lux
X990 341 lux (remote power)





> *easilyled*
> True the L35 puts out more overall output, but is it more useful? Not from what I can see of the tree illuminated.


The key here being, "not from what we can see of the illuminated tree."

We don't want to discount everything that we know about lumens and throw comparisons on the basis of a single comparison picture. Historically, HID beamshots at CPF have been snapped and studied over several hundred meters. I've even taken shot's at 900+ meters myself in the PH50 thread. HKJ's beamshots and review, although professional and fantastic are lacking this. I will add that this doesn't diminish his excellent work in any way and I'm quite grateful for his sacrifice in time and labor. 

Is 1000+ lumens more useful? Well, it would be hard to argue against the idea on the point of sheer logic and reasoning, especially if we acknowledge that the L35 throws farther in the process. Remember, we now have Selfbuilt's test results to draw from well. 

If we asked the same question of whether 1/3 more output was significant when comparing a couple of one cell EDC lights we'd admittedly have to concede that 300 lumens would be provide more real illumination than 200 lumens. We're so generally "lumen happy" in this community that a difference of 10% usually makes CPF headlines.


----------



## bigchelis (Apr 26, 2010)

After seeing in person last night (san Jose, CA night hike) the SR90 vs. the Stanley HID.....HID all the way.

The SST-90 is super bright, but the Stanley awed me more. Even my sweetie was asking me what is that gun light that is really bright? 


The only SST-90 that I would recommend is the Lambda lights: VARA Power 2000. 

http://www.lambdalights.com/varapower.html

Gswitter had it on the night hike and holly cow is it insane and a true 2000 OTF light. I wish I could measure the OTF lumens, but I can only do 1500max.


----------



## Patriot (Apr 26, 2010)

bigchelis said:


> After seeing in person last night (san Jose, CA night hike) the SR90 vs. the Stanley HID.....HID all the way.
> 
> The SST-90 is super bright, but the Stanley awed me more. Even my sweetie was asking me what is that gun light that is really bright?




When you say "HID all the way" I take it that your saying that based off of output alone right? Obviously the Stanley can't match all of the other fine attributes of the SR90 with regards to run-time, variable output, water resistance, lighter weight, build quality, warranty, etc. The Stanley has a very short run-time. 




> *bigchelis*
> The only SST-90 that I would recommend is the Lambda lights: VARA Power 2000.


Does this mean that you didn't like the SR90 at all and wouldn't recommend it? Just curious since I'm impressed with everything that I've seen and read about it. I personally consider it a revolutionary leap over traditional LED performance boundaries. Most CPFers are raving about it as well.


----------



## bigchelis (Apr 26, 2010)

Patriot said:


> When you say "HID all the way" I take it that your saying that based off of output alone right? Obviously the Stanley can't match all of the other fine attributes of the SR90 with regards to run-time, variable output, water resistance, lighter weight, build quality, warranty, etc. The Stanley has a very short run-time.
> 
> 
> Does this mean that you didn't like the SR90 at all and wouldn't recommend it? Just curious since I'm impressed with everything that I've seen and read about it. I personally consider it a revolutionary leap over traditional LED performance boundaries. Most CPFers are raving about it as well.


 

The HID runtime is a factor, but I like the throw and perhaps the throwy beam is a false perseption of total brightness. 

The SR90 is a tank and at that size/form/weight you might as well get a HID light. Honestly; I blame Gswitter for my lack of interests in the SR90. That 3D Mag by Lambda SST-90 driven at full power off 4 NiMH C cells had me hooked from the 1st time I saw it. ( it was fully regulated too)

I like the SR90 beam and output, but for me I got to see lights in its category (output wise) and I wasn't blown away, just happy that its bright.

I will PM csshih , to explain his view point on it. Craig still has it as I type this along with other beasts that he may not be allowed to disclose yet.


----------



## csshih (Apr 26, 2010)

bigchelis directed me into this thread, so I'll drop down my point of view.

Purely from a spotlight point of view, HID will probably always be superior to the LED as the arc is miniscule! The warm up time is relatively negligible -- instant ons for a spotlight usually aren't a huge requirement. With the higher output ~50% brighter (~3k vs ~2k bulb) and better throw with an HID - it would serve as a better spotlight.

Also, UV? what, are we pointing the lights point blank at our faces? .... ugh, forget I asked that..

Now, through an enthusiasts point of view -- 
yes, instant one is fun
yes, shining it at your face without getting a suntan is fun (unless you want a suntan)
yes, knowing you don't ever need to replace the bulb is nice (though, really.. have any of you replaced a burned out HID bulb from use? not abuse?)
yes, strobing a light @ 2000 lumens is fun
yes, being able to say that a LED light can compete with a HID light is fun

.....but face it.. we were comparing a 40$ CHEAPO HID with a 450$ LED light.. and the cheapo HID was beating the LED light.............. :mecry: I don't want to know how well a 450$ quality HID would compete (say.. LiPo packs, properly focused reflector, etc)

of course, I like the SR90, regardless . 
These 2 types of lights, though similar, seem to have different applications.


----------



## kramer5150 (Apr 26, 2010)

Having seen the SR-90 in person this weekend (finally), and comparing it with a stock Stanley... it was no contest. The HID was able to sustain a visibly higher Lux at its center spot, over longer distances (~3-400 yards).

That one factor alone does not make the stanley a better light overall... it just makes it a better (farther) thrower.

I thought both lights had sufficient side flood at 200+ yards, and the SR-90 seemed to emit more Lumens overall, with its brighter spill beam and broader hot spot.


----------



## easilyled (Apr 26, 2010)

Patriot said:


> Is 1000+ lumens more useful? Well, it would be hard to argue against the idea on the point of sheer logic and reasoning, especially if we acknowledge that the L35 throws farther in the process. Remember, we now have Selfbuilt's test results to draw from well.



I would argue that the usefulness of the beam depends as much on its its distribution (related to its designated purpose) as the amount of total lumens it provides.

I'd say that selfbuilt's wall shots explain quite a lot of what we're seeing in HKJ's tree-shot which he took at 200m (600 ft)

The tree illuminated by the Olight is even all round. The tree illuminated by the L35 is brighter in the center and less bright surrounding the centre.
The tree fades more quickly into the surroundings. The surrounding themselves are lit up more by the L35.

Looking at selfbuilt's wallshots:-

The hotspot of the L35 seems to consist of a more intense central part which is smaller than the entire even hotspot of the Olight, surrounded by a less intense part (which is larger) and then a higher spill.

It seems to me that most of the 1000+ lumens are going into this spill compared to the Olight. 

Would I need this when I'm trying to illuminate a central area rather than the entire landscape in front of me? I'm not convinced I would.

In fact some may argue that the higher peripheral spill of the L35 drowns out night vision, causing the pupils to contract and therefore conversely enabling someone to see less.


----------



## easilyled (Apr 26, 2010)

csshih said:


> Also, UV? what, are we pointing the lights point blank at our faces? .... ugh, forget I asked that..



Yes, we might if we don't know better. Some of us don't. (especially children!!!)

In the hands of irresponsible users, other people's faces, pet's faces could be illuminated.

If you're walking with the light on at night, it also has the potential to cause skin burns eg. if dangling down directed towards bare calves/feet.


----------



## easilyled (Apr 26, 2010)

kramer5150 said:


> That one factor alone does not make the stanley a better light overall... it just makes it a better (farther) thrower.



BINGO!!

I am sure that we have the technology to make led lights that throw further than the Stanley. (The High output DEFT might, for instance)

Again, the usefulness depends entirely on the application in mind.

I don't think the Olight SR90 was designed solely with the intent of throw, but its combination of throw and beam distribution is admirable for most long distance illumination, if not for extreme long distance illumination.


----------



## kramer5150 (Apr 26, 2010)

easilyled said:


> BINGO!!
> 
> I am sure that we have the technology to make led lights that throw further than the Stanley. (The High output DEFT might, for instance)
> 
> ...




Another big advantage the LED throwers have over the low end HIDs is the optical quality of the designs. The cheap HIDs use inferior glass lenses and low efficiency parabolic reflectors. So, IMHO the HID-VS-LED battle doesn't get really interesting until you go to battle with the higher end HIDs, that use quality reflectors and glass optics.

IMHO of course.


----------



## Patriot (Apr 27, 2010)

kramer5150 said:


> Another big advantage the LED throwers have over the low end HIDs is the optical quality of the designs. The cheap HIDs use inferior glass lenses and low efficiency parabolic reflectors. So, IMHO the HID-VS-LED battle doesn't get really interesting until you go to battle with the higher end HIDs, that use quality reflectors and glass optics.
> 
> IMHO of course.




I believe you're correct in that there's much more quality involved with the SR90 than *most* $300-$400 HID's. Imo, the K3500 looks "cheap" when pictured next to the SR90. Even so, an inexpensive Walmart light like the Stanley gives the SR90 a licking even at its $69 price point, as evidenced by CPFers attending PF14. In that regard I'm not sure if inferior glass and cheap parabolic reflectors matter much if we're just comparing the characteristics of exiting photos. Even so, I agree with your thoughts about the lesser components in most HIDs at that price point. The SR90 seems to be much more purposefully designed and specialized than nearly all of them, the exception being the L35 and RL11. Frankly, I'm surprised that the SR90 doesn't cost more.


----------



## IMSabbel (Apr 27, 2010)

Well, I agree with the quality aspect.

A year ago or so I bough one of these 35W HK HIDs in aluminium flashlight form factor. Dont know the brand, but this type has been around with lots of names.

It was about $300. Its nice, in a way. Way bright, too.
But i would not even dare to dunk it in water, and I am pretty sure you should not ever drop it.
Battery carrier is way cheap, and the battery module has no electronics in it (one can hope the battery charger has...), not to speak of "fuel gauge" or others. 
Plus its not much smaller, and has a pretty ugly beam pattern (like most hids do, simply by the fact of the vertical alignment with connection wire, etc.

In contrast, 30% more for the olight seems like a bargain.


----------



## garden (Apr 27, 2010)

If you are just a collector, then maybe you should get something different from LED lights, the HID, but if you are really going to need good build quality, instant start, less heat then get the SR90.

Personally I would recommend the SR90, definately.


----------



## Patriot (Apr 27, 2010)

IMSabbel said:


> Well, I agree with the quality aspect.
> 
> A year ago or so I bough one of these 35W HK HIDs in aluminium flashlight form factor. Dont know the brand, but this type has been around with lots of names.
> 
> ...







Now this is a valid and fair comparison! Similar form factor, materials and price point, with the SR90 being the clear winner every category. The 35W generic aluminum produces more lumens but comes up short everywhere else including run-time.


----------



## jcw122 (Apr 27, 2010)

If your a fan of warm light, one idea would be a modded Stanley. But a Stanley should really only be for fun and light duty work...the build quality is decent but I would be worried if I dropped mine.


----------

