# Fenix TK35UE (MT-G2, 2x18650, 4xCR123A) Review: BEAMSHOTS, RUNTIME, VIDEO+



## selfbuilt (Apr 8, 2014)

*Warning: even more pic heavy than usual. *















This is the first Fenix light to use the popular Cree MT-G2 emitter. Interestingly, Fenix has chosen to update an existing build – the relatively compact 2x18650 TK35. 

Although this light was officialy announced a little over a week ago, Fenix is expecting to actually launch the model sometime around mid-month.

Let's see how it compares to the original TK35, and to other MT-G2-based lights that I have tested. :wave:

*Manufacturer Reported Specifications:* 
(note: as always, these are simply what the manufacturer provides – scroll down to see my actual testing results).


LED: Cree MT-G2 emitter
Uses two 18650 rechargeable batteries (Li-ion) or four 3V CR123A batteries (Lithium)
Low: 25 lm/150hr; Mid: 250 lm/13hr 30min; High: 750 lm/4 hr; Turbo: 1800 lm/1hr 30min; Strobe: 1800 lm; SOS: 250 lm
Max beam distance: 242 meters
Peak beam intensity: 14,640cd
Digitally regulated output - maintains constant brightness
Reverse polarity protection to protect from improper battery installation
Low-voltage warning function to remind users of low power
Dual button switch in the tail, convenient operation
Made of durable aircraft-grade aluminum
Premium Type III hard-anodized anti-abrasive finish
Toughened ultra-clear glass lens with anti-reflective coating
Intelligent memory circuit
Over-heat protection
Low-voltage warning function
Impact resistant: 1m.
Waterproof to IPX-8 standard, underwater 2m.
Dimensions: 165mm (Length) × 44mm (Diameter) × 52mm (Head)
Weight: 265-gram weight (excluding batteries)
Include accessories: Lanyard, holster, o-ring
MSRP: $129.95 (confirmed by Fenix)
Packaging is unknown, as I was just sent the bare light for review. I would expect the usual Fenix cardboard box (with specs and details print the outside), with the standard accessories described above (i.e., extra o-rings, wrist lanyard and belt holster) and manual and warranty card.













From left to right: AW Protected 18650 2200mAh; Fenix TK35UE, TK35; Eagletac SX25L3; Sunwayman T45C; Thrunite TN32.

All dimensions directly measured, and given with no batteries installed (unless indicated):

*Fenix TK35UE*: Weight 270g, Length 164mm, Width (bezel): 48.6mm
*Fenix TK35*: Weight 256.1g, Length 162mm, Width (bezel): 48.6mm
*Fenix TK51*: Weight: 476.9g (627g with 3x18650), Length: 187mm, Width (bezel narrowest): 58.2mm, (bezel widest): 70.8mm
*Crelant 7G10*: Weight 643.4g (827g with 4x18650), Length: 198mm, Width (bezel): 79.0mm
*Eagletac SX25L3*: Weight: 315.9g, Length: 150.2mm, Weight (bezel): 47.0mm
*Niwalker BK-FA02*: Weight: 687.6g (870g with 4x18650), Length: 209mm, Width (bezel): 80.0mm, Width (tailcap): 50.3mm
*MiniMax Nova MM15 Prototype #2*: Weight (with handle): 332.7g (516g with 4x18650), Length: 115.3mm, Weight (bezel): 60.7mm
*Rofis TR51*: Weight: 242.2g, Length: 146.7mm, Width (bezel) 45.9mm, Width (widest part): 48.1mm
*Sunwayman T45C*: Weight: 216.6g, Length: 136.0mm, Width (bezel) 40.4mm, Width (widest part): 40.8mm
*Thrunite TN35 (MT-G2)*: Weight: 571.4g (723g with 3x18650), Length: 201mm, Width (bezel): 78.9mm






















The overall body design of the TK35UE has not changed greatly from the earlier versions. As before, the light remains very streamlined, and quite comfortable to hold and handle. 

I have one of the original TK35s, and can see some small changes over time (although I'm not sure when these changes were introduced). As before, anodizing remains a matte black (hard anodized), and without blemishes on my sample. Lettering is clear, but less bright against the dark background now.

The light still lacks knurling as such, but the ridge detail along both sides of the battery handle has been improved (i.e., less fine now, with sharper edges). I would describe overall grip as ok.

As before, screw threads are square-cut and anodized. 

The tailcap area features boot covers for a physical clicky off/on switch and an electronic mode-changing switch, as before. However, I find both switch covers have been extended further than before (i.e., both protrude more now). Although the original TK35 looked like should be able to tailstand, it was always somewhat unstable due to the bulging on/off switch. The TK35UE takes this even further, with an even easier to access bulging switch. That said, the light can still tailstand at something of an angle (just a bit wobbly). 

Let's look at the carrier:














The carrier is largely unchanged from before. This was always one of the more unique aspects to the TK35, as you don't often see carriers in this class. Made entirely of plastic, it slides fully into the aluminum handle when correctly oriented for the tailcap buttons. The carrier chambers hold all my protected 18650 cells snugly, even the newer high capacity ones. There is a raised button at the positive terminal in each chamber, so flat-top cells work fine.

As before, the carrier contains two different types of switches – a forward clicky for on/off activation, and a secondary electronic switch for mode changing. At the base of the body handle, you will see two buttons. The smaller of these is basically just a small plastic rod with a rubber top that serves as the mode changing button. When assembled, it makes contact with the actual electronic switch on the battery tube. The larger button is connected to the traditional on/off clicky switch on the carrier. Switch feel is good for both buttons, with perhaps a slightly higher traverse than typical. See User Interface discussion below for more info.

Note that there can be a bit of a rattle effect, even when fully assembled. This is likely due to the mode-changing plastic rod. 














The Cree MT-G2 is certainly a different beast from the standard XM-L2 emitters most people are used to. The MT-G2 is a remarkably large emitter, with a dome diameter of almost 8.9mm (vs. 5mm on the XM-L2). Of course, what really matters is the surface area of the die underneath, which is only 2x2mm on the XM-L2. I am not sure of the actual die dimensions on the MT-G2, but there appears to be a grid of 72 distinct segments on it.

Note that the MT-G2 only comes in neutral-warm tint bins. All the MT-G2 samples I've seen have certainly been in the typical "Neutral White" range, although I would peg this example at closer to the cooler ~5000K end of that range.

Due to the large die, don’t expect great throw from a MT-G2 light – especially with the relative small reflector that comes with the TK35UE. The reflector is heavily textured here as well, to help smooth out the beam. This should produce the most "floody" single-emitter MT-G2 I've tested to date. Scroll down for beamshot comparisons.

*User Interface*

User interface is unchanged from the original TK35. Turn on/off by the raised large forward clicky switch (press-on for momentary, click for locked on). 

Mode changing is controlled by the smaller secondary electronic switch. Click and release the smaller button to advance through output modes, in sequence from Lo > Med > Hi > Turbo, in repeating sequence. Note the manual incorrectly states the reverse level order. The light has mode memory, and retains the last level set when you turn the light off and back on. 

Note that you cannot set the output level while the light is off. The electronic switch only works when the light is powered on by the clicky switch first. As such, there is no standby current on the TK35UE.

The “hidden” strobe and SOS modes are accessed by clicking and holding the mode-changing electronic switch for more than 1 sec. Press and hold for ~1 sec, and the light will first enter a rapid Strobe mode. Press and hold for ~3 secs and the light will enter into SOS mode. To return to the constant out modes, a quick press of the electronic mode switch will suffice (or turn the light off/on at the main switch). 

The TK35 always had an automatic step-down period when run on Turbo (originally, after 25 mins). On the new TK35UE, the light automatically steps down after 5 mins of continuous runtime. Simply pressing the mode-changing switch once restores the initial max Turbo mode (i.e., don't need to cycle off-on).

The TK35UE steps down in output as the batteries drain, and has an additional low-voltage warning feature. As the batteries drain further in the Lo mode, eventually the light will blink 3 times per second, every 5 mins. There is no automatic battery shut-down feature in the circuit.

*Video*: 

For more information on the overall build and user interface, please see my video overview:



Video was recorded in 720p, but YouTube typically defaults to 360p. Once the video is running, you can click on the configuration settings icon and select the higher 480p to 720p options. You can also run full-screen. 

As with all my videos, I recommend you have annotations turned on. I commonly update the commentary with additional information or clarifications before publicly releasing the video.

*PWM/Strobe*

There is no sign of PWM on any level – I believe the light is current-controlled, like other Fenix TK-series lights.  

TK35UE Strobe:





As with other Fenix TK-series lights, strobe is an oscillating frequency strobe, switching between 6.6Hz and 15.3Hz on my sample. Each frequency lasts for about ~2 secs. Here is a blow-up of each strobe frequency individually:










*No Standby Drain*

Due to the physical clicky switch design, there is no standby drain on the TK35UE.

*Beamshots:*

And now, what you have all been waiting for.  All lights are on AW protected 18650 2200mAh. Lights are about ~0.75 meter from a white wall (with the camera ~1.25 meters back from the wall). 

I've used either Daylight or Automatic white balance on the camera for these MT-G2 lights (typically has the same result, as Daylight is the usual auto choice for this neutral emitter). 





























































_Due to the automatic white balance, don't infer any significant difference between the various Cree MT-G2s shown above._ All MT-G2s are somewhere in the traditional "Neutral white" range.

The most obvious observation is that the TK35UE has lower max output than the 3x/4x18650 MT-G2 lights (as you would expect, given the smaller size and lower 2x18650 battery source). The TK35UE is also relatively less throwy – again as expected, given the smaller reflector used here. It is certainly a different beam pattern from the original XM-L-equipped TK35 shown above.

Spring has finally arrived in my part of Canada, but there isn't much of interest for outdoor pics at the moment (i.e., still a pretty bleak landscape). I will be heading out within the next few weeks for some outdoor pics, and will update this review when ready.

In the meantime, you will have to make do with some indoor shots in my basement. For your reference, the back of the couch is about 7 feet away (~2.3m) from the opening of the light, and the far wall is about 18 feet away (~5.9m). Below I am showing a couple of exposures, to allow you to better compare hotspot and spill. For these beamshots, the camera is on auto white balance again, which will distort tints somewhat.

For these comparisons, I'm comparing the Fenix TK35UE to the Eagletac SX25L3 (MT-G2) and the original TK35 (XM-L).





















Again, don't make a big deal of tint – the MT-G2 lights are actually warmer in real life (i.e., this is just an artifact of the auto white balance).

As you would expect, the SX25L3 has more overall output than the TK35UE, and is slightly "throwier" as well. A very different beam pattern from the original XM-L-equipped TK35. Scroll down for my detailed testing results

_*UPDATE May 17, 2014:*_ Weather conditions have finally improved enough to start taking outdoor beamshots around here. Here is a comparison of the TK35UE to the original TK35 (XM-L version) and the Eagletac SX25L3. 

As always, these are done in the style of my earlier 100-yard round-up review. Please see that thread for a discussion of the topography (i.e. the road dips in the distance, to better show you the corona in the mid-ground). 











Please note that the color balance of the MT-G2 shots are a little off, as I had automatic white balancing on (i.e., they are not consistent to the adjustment used for the cool white emitter). 

The MT-G2 emitter does indeed provide much more of a "wall of light" effect, thanks to the larger emitter. Unfortunately, the relatively small build of the TK35 doesn't let it throw very far. Hopefully these standardized outdoor shots give you a better idea what to expect. :wave:

*Testing Method:* 

All my output numbers are relative for my home-made light box setup, as described on my flashlightreviews.ca website. You can directly compare all my relative output values from different reviews - i.e. an output value of "10" in one graph is the same as "10" in another. All runtimes are done under a cooling fan, except for any extended run Lo/Min modes (i.e. >12 hours) which are done without cooling.

I have devised a method for converting my lightbox relative output values (ROV) to estimated Lumens. See my How to convert Selfbuilt's Lightbox values to Lumens thread for more info. 

*Throw/Output Summary Chart:*

My summary tables are reported in a manner consistent with the ANSI FL-1 standard for flashlight testing. Please see http://www.flashlightreviews.ca/FL1.htm for a discussion, and a description of all the terms used in these tables. Effective July 2012, I have updated all my Peak Intensity/Beam Distance measures with a NIST-certified Extech EA31 lightmeter (orange highlights).






As expected, the TK35UE has relatively low center beam "throw" for the MT-G2 class (although my sample was slightly higher than the specs would indicate). I suggest you refer back to the beamshots, as that is probably the best way to compare beam profiles between the MT-G2 lights.

It terms of output, you will see my max and min measures look pretty close to the Fenix specs. Here is a breakdown of the estimated lumen values for each level, on my sample:






I generally get very good concordance between my estimated output measures and Fenix specs. Of course, my calibration standard is based only on the lights I have tested, so I don't insist on the absolute value accuracy of relative output values. In this case, I would note that my throw measures for the TK35UE on Turbo were similarly slightly higher than spec. I trust my throw measures to be accurate in absolute terms, as they are based on a NIST-certified and calibrated lightmeter, with the lights tested using standard ANSI FL-1 testing conditions. 

*Output/Runtime Graphs:*

As always, note that all my runtimes are done under a cooling fan, and I use AW protected 2200mAh cells for all my 18650 tests.

Fo start, I am limiting comparisons to 2x18650 sources (to keep the comparisons fair).



















As you can see above, the TK35UE has flat regulation at all levels, with defined step-downs as the batteries drain (with an initial timed step-down of 5 mins on Turbo). Note that you can re-activate max output by simply pressing the mode switch again, after it has stepped down to Hi. 

Output/runtime efficiency is excellent for the class. In absolute terms, runtime is at least as good as the latest current-controlled XM-L2 lights driven to equivalent output levels. :thumbsup: And of course, the MT-G2 is brighter initially on Turbo than any of my XM-L2 lights.

Now let's see how it does against all the 3x/4x-18650 MT-G2 lights in my collection:










Again, all these comparisons are taking into account different numbers of 18650 cells. But the 2x18650 Fenix TK35UE actually manages to do pretty well for the class, nearing the runtime performance of some of the larger lights.

*UPDATE APRIL 10, 2014:*
_
On request, I have gone and done repeated re-starts every 5 mins on Turbo, to see what total effective runtime would be at this level. Note that these were all done under a cooling fan, giving the light a few mins to cool before re-starting (see below). I've edited out the pauses to better show what to expect (the spikes show the times when I shut-down). I've also plotted this comparison on my estimated lumen scale, for better resolution.






As you can see, the light seems to be largely direct-drive on Turbo, eventually dropping to the Hi level around the time that the batteries are nearly exhausted. Effectively, these means the max output drops by ~5% every 5 mins of Turbo runtime (which is too slow of a rate for you to notice visually).
_
*Potential Issues*

The TK35UE uses a plastic battery carrier, as before. Normally, I have some concerns when using all-plastic carriers in lights than can generate a fair amount of heat. However, the TK35 carrier has been around for awhile, and seems to be holding in well.

The TK35UE is not as "throwy" as most lights in this size or class (i.e., has a relatively "floody" beam).

Light is not as "grippy" as some, but is improved from the original TK35. Tailstanding is possible (at an angle), but is not likely to be very stable.

Quality of bundled extras in unknown as full retail packaging wasn't provided (i.e., I haven't seen the holster and lanyard). On my original TK35, quality of these items acceptable (but fairly basic).

*Preliminary Observations*

In my initial review of the TK35 (XM-L version), I described it as something of a Goldilocks model - as it had a pretty good balance of output and throw, with a reasonable range of levels, while still sitting comfortably in the hand. I would say the TK35UE manages that same sweet spot pretty well for higher output – although with a more evenly "floody" beam now.

It has been interesting to watch the MT-G2 emitter make large in-roads into the flashlight world. Designed for directional lighting applications (e.g., as a halogen spot bulb replacement), this relatively large and "floody" emitter has a different beam pattern than typical flashlight emitters. But it does have a pleasing neutral white tint, and a lot of people do seem to prefer a more even flood beam over throw. The main limiting factor right now seems to be a relative scarcity of MT-G2s – I understand it's hard for manufacturers to secure sufficient inventory.

With the exception of the pure flood Niwalker Nova MM15, most makers have tried to compensate for the large MT-G2 die size by coupling it with a large reflector. Fenix has gone a different route, choosing instead the more compact TK35 build. Keep in mind that this will mean a relatively floody beam, with little directed throw. That said, the beam is very nice and even on my sample. 

One area where you can always expect Fenix to excel is in overall output/runtime efficiency and regulation. TK35UE typically shows slightly longer runtime (for equivalent output) compared to recent current-controlled XM-L2 lights I've tested. :thumbsup: The flat step-down pattern regulation is also appreciated here. Note the TK35UE steps down on Turbo after 5 mins (previously 25 mins on the TK35), although you can restore max output by pressing the mode switch. Keep in mind the TK35UE may get hot quickly if you attempt to maintain Turbo output in this way.

In my original TK35 review, I was concerned about the durability of the all-plastic battery carrier/switches, and the overall "grippiness" of the light. Grip has been improved somewhat, and there have been a few minor tweaks on the switches as well - but generally the build is largely unchanged. The TK35 has been quite a popular model for Fenix, and I am not aware of any significant build issues. This makes me think the design has held up well to continued use.

At the end of the day, the TK35UE builds on a successful model, incorporating a popular new style of emitter. It is nice to see a MT-G2 emitter meeting a mainstream model – I'm curious to hear what the general community thinks of the novel beam pattern. :wave:

----

TK35UE provided by Fenix for review.


----------



## Ryp (Apr 8, 2014)

Thanks for the review!


----------



## ven (Apr 8, 2014)

Thank you selfbuilt again for an excellent review,really do like the light,just not sure if i can justify one...............yet

The older tk35 has always been on my radar as a wanted light,just never bought one,maybe this is the one!!!!


----------



## Dr.444 (Apr 8, 2014)

Thanks you


----------



## kj2 (Apr 8, 2014)

Thanks for the review 
What I understand from Fenix, the TK35UE has been released in China but not worldwide yet.
Release worldwide would come when they have more stock of this light.


----------



## selfbuilt (Apr 8, 2014)

ven said:


> The older tk35 has always been on my radar as a wanted light,just never bought one,maybe this is the one!!!!


Well, it depends on what sort of beam profile you would like. The TK35 (XM-L2) has a very "traditional" beam profile. The TK35UE is really much more of a flood beam (with ~twice the overall output).



kj2 said:


> What I understand from Fenix, the TK35UE has been released in China but not worldwide yet.
> Release worldwide would come when they have more stock of this light.


Yes, that could very well be what they meant - I was just told that "release" would occur around mid-month (presumably they meant worldwide). They have also directly confirmed the $129.95 MSRP.

I know from other makers that MT-G2s can be in short supply (especially when needed in volume).


----------



## kj2 (Apr 8, 2014)

selfbuilt said:


> I know from other makers that MT-G2s can be in short supply (especially when needed in volume).


So order quick


----------



## Blue Steel (Apr 8, 2014)

Nice review. Thanks for taking the time to test out it's impact resistance.


----------



## Capolini (Apr 8, 2014)

Great review SB! I have the TK35 XM-L2. It is a nice back up torch for my walks!! Actually good enough to use for the entire walk!

It is sufficient enough as this new one w/ the MT-G2 emitter. It is amazing that it has 1800/2000 lumens for just One emitter and 2 x 18650! 

**


----------



## mcorp (Apr 8, 2014)

Awesome review!:twothumbs If only it could tail stand more stably instead of at an angle though:shrug:
Nonetheless hoping the final price wouldn't be any higher than $129.95!

Got this feeling that they might even do a triple MT-G2 version for their TK75 even:naughty:


----------



## SimulatedZero (Apr 8, 2014)

Hmph, and just when I was starting to complain about Fenix continuing to head in the wrong direction they go and release a nearly perfect light for me. Lol, I was just talking to Vinhnguyen about building something like this into my old TK41. Thanks for the top notch review as always SB :thumbsup:


----------



## Camille Hong (Apr 9, 2014)

Excellent review! Look forward to your ourdoor pics and updated review soon.


----------



## selfbuilt (Apr 9, 2014)

Blue Steel said:


> Nice review. Thanks for taking the time to test out it's impact resistance.


Glad to hear someone is watching the videos. :laughing:



Camille Hong said:


> Excellent review! Look forward to your ourdoor pics and updated review soon.


Yes, as of Monday, the snow was almost all gone from my testing area - but it was still pretty brown and bleak. Another week or two, and signs of Spring should be present.

And :welcome:


----------



## Ernst from Germany (Apr 9, 2014)

Die TK 3will be my next lamp!Very nice little lamp with much flood!
Best Greets Ernst


----------



## leon2245 (Apr 9, 2014)

In the beamshots vs. the original tk35, those are of the ultimate edition's 750l hi, or in its initial five minute turbo mode?

Great review!


----------



## Swedpat (Apr 9, 2014)

Thanks for the review Selfbuilt!

In very short time I have went from having no MT-G2 light to having two(Malkoff Wildcat and Thrunite TN35). 

*I understand this new TK35UE has a beam character somewhere between these two lights, is that right?

*What would you expect for total effective runtime at turbomode? 

*Will TK35UE manage one restoring(10min continious runtime at turbomode) without risk for overheating?


----------



## selfbuilt (Apr 9, 2014)

leon2245 said:


> In the beamshots vs. the original tk35, those are of the ultimate edition's 750l hi, or in its initial five minute turbo mode?


All my beamshots always show the highest possible output, corresponding to ANSI FL-1 standard (of 30-120 secs post activation). So that is the max ~2000 lumen mode in all my beamshots.



Swedpat said:


> TIn very short time I have went from having no MT-G2 light to having two(Malkoff Wildcat and Thrunite TN35).
> *I understand this new TK35UE has a beam character somewhere between these two lights, is that right?


Hmm, I haven't see beam intensity measures for the Wildcat, but I would expect it to be close to the TK35UE. Giiven that the Malkoff output specs are a little lower (and the reflector looks a little smaller - although I don't have exact measures), I suspect the TK35UE could throw a little further. But realistically, there probably isn't that much of a difference. The TN35 in comparison would be much throwier than either the Wildcat or TK35UE.



> *What would you expect for total effective runtime at turbomode?


Hard to say, as it would be a pain to restart the light every 5 mins (with cooling in-between) in order to find out. But I'll see if I can find the time.



> Will TK35UE manage one restoring(10min continious runtime at turbomode) without risk for overheating?


Probably, but again hard to say without concurrent temperature measuring (and surface temp measuring is very limited). I would go with the standard hand test - if it feels too warm by 10 mins on an immediate re-start, step down. :shrug:


----------



## Swedpat (Apr 9, 2014)

Thanks Selfbuilt. Regarding the throw Malkoff states 2900Cd at the 5000K option. And now I see that TK35UE has 14,640cd, so yes, I answered my own question here: TK35UE is percentually pretty exact between Wildcat v5 and TN35.


----------



## MichaelW (Apr 9, 2014)

When you say you can get the TurboBoost mode (2,000 lumens) by turning off/on, can you get that by re-cycling the mode select button L-M-H-T, or does it stay L-M-H-H?


----------



## selfbuilt (Apr 9, 2014)

MichaelW said:


> When you say you can get the TurboBoost mode (2,000 lumens) by turning off/on, can you get that by re-cycling the mode select button L-M-H-T, or does it stay L-M-H-H?


Actually, it's even simpler than that. The step-down from Turbo actually resets the level to Hi. So in order to get back to Turbo, you just need to press the mode select once (i.e., it jumps right back to Turbo on a single press).


----------



## Swedpat (Apr 9, 2014)

Consequently TK35UE would be a great between complement to Wildcat and TN35. And when I read your runtime graphs and compare to TN35 it seems that TK35UE actually is more efficient than TN35: if I calculate correct lumen-hours are higher compared to the number of cells. And that despite TN35 much more massive head will make a better heat dissipation. Not a big issue anyway, but having three MT-G2 lights in the collection isn't that bad...


----------



## selfbuilt (Apr 9, 2014)

Swedpat said:


> And when I read your runtime graphs and compare to TN35 it seems that TK35UE actually is more efficient than TN35: if I calculate correct lumen-hours are higher compared to the number of cells.


One comment there - my relative output scale (on the graphs) is not the same as lumens. My estimated lumen scale is based on the power relationship coversion of raw lightbox output. So you would need restate the runtime graphs in estimated lumens (at least approximately) in order to do a true lumen-hours comparison. 

All that said, my TK35UE is indeed an unusually good performer for a MT-G2 light.


----------



## MichaelW (Apr 9, 2014)

selfbuilt said:


> Actually, it's even simpler than that. The step-down from Turbo actually resets the level to Hi. So in order to get back to Turbo, you just need to press the mode select once (i.e., it jumps right back to Turbo on a single press).


Ah, I see.
But how many presses will it take before the 'Over-heat protection' decides to veto your vote?


----------



## selfbuilt (Apr 9, 2014)

MichaelW said:


> But how many presses will it take before the 'Over-heat protection' decides to veto your vote?


Hard to say, but I would expect it's a reasonable one.

I have gone and done repeated re-starts every 5 mins on Turbo (below) - but these were all done under a cooling fan, and giving the light a few mins to cool before re-starting. I've edited out the pauses to better show what to expect (the spikes show the time I shut-down). I've also plotted it on my estimated lumen scale, for better resolution.







As you can see, the light seems to be largely direct-drive on Turbo, eventually dropping to the Hi level around the time that the batteries are nearly exhausted.



Swedpat said:


> *What would you expect for total effective runtime at turbomode?


Based on the above, a little over an hour on my 2200mAh cells. Should be proportionately longer on larger capacity.


----------



## MichaelW (Apr 10, 2014)

You'd figure Fenix would have the step down on Turbo, be to a somewhat higher output than just High, say 1200 lumens.
That level should allow flat regulation with 4x cr123A or 2x 18650, and probably shouldn't overheat in the real world (and if it did, step down to the 800 lumen mode)


----------



## selfbuilt (Apr 10, 2014)

MichaelW said:


> You'd figure Fenix would have the step down on Turbo, be to a somewhat higher output than just High, say 1200 lumens.
> That level should allow flat regulation with 4x cr123A or 2x 18650, and probably shouldn't overheat in the real world (and if it did, step down to the 800 lumen mode)


I'd have to let those with more circuit experience comment, but my impression (based on the early MT-G2 lights I've tested) is that it seems to be hard to keep them flat-stabilized at higher current draws. Note sure how much it matters, but the forward voltage of these MT-G2 emitters is higher than standard flashlight LEDs. :shrug:

Of course, the step-down decision here may simply have been one of convenience - unlike many lights, the TK35UE "officially" changes mode to Hi as a step-down feature (i.e., which is why a single mode-click brings you back up to Turbo).


----------



## Swedpat (Apr 10, 2014)

selfbuilt said:


> One comment there - my relative output scale (on the graphs) is not the same as lumens. My estimated lumen scale is based on the power relationship coversion of raw lightbox output. So you would need restate the runtime graphs in estimated lumens (at least approximately) in order to do a true lumen-hours comparison.
> 
> All that said, my TK35UE is indeed an unusually good performer for a MT-G2 light.





selfbuilt said:


> Hard to say, but I would expect it's a reasonable one.
> 
> I have gone and done repeated re-starts every 5 mins on Turbo (below) - but these were all done under a cooling fan, and giving the light a few mins to cool before re-starting. I've edited out the pauses to better show what to expect (the spikes show the time I shut-down). I've also plotted it on my estimated lumen scale, for better resolution.
> 
> ...




What I thought about was your measured values for TK35UE compared to TN35 at Hi mode vs level 4:

TK35UE: 2h 28m at 800lm - 2,47h x 800lm = 1976 lumen hours

TN35: 2h 43m at 1010lm - 2,72h x 1010lm = 2747 lumen hours

Then I calculate: 2747/1976 = 1,39 = 39% more lumen hours with TN35 despite the battery capacity is 50% higher. Yes; the 800lm does not fall completely straight down as with level 4 of TN35 so the difference will be slightly less.

I think the much more substantial head of TN35 should weigh up when it comes to heat dissipation for the slightly higher output in this case. 
But: at turbomode with TK35UE it's really obvious according to your runtime graph that two cells can't handle the output as good as three cells with TN35. 
As you show TK35UE isn't regulated at all at the 1800(2000)lm mode, while TN35 can provide almost flat output until end at ~2400lm.

Therefore in my opinion it would be more fair to name turbomode of TK35UE as a boost mode. It had been better if TK35UE had turbomode as 1400-1500lm. Maybe it could then be regulated and not limited to 5min step down. But as we know: lumen number sells better than flat output or useful runtime and therefore we see many lights of different brands with many lumens as a selling argument even if these lumens hardly are useful. 
Malkoff Devices flashlights is a great example of the opposite.

Having that said: TK35UE is still an attractive light.


----------



## selfbuilt (Apr 10, 2014)

Swedpat said:


> What I thought about was your measured values for TK35UE compared to TN35 at Hi mode vs level 4:
> ... Therefore in my opinion it would be more fair to name turbomode of TK35UE as a boost mode. .


Yes, I'd say those numbers are an accurate distillation from my runtime graphs.

To be fair though, flat-regulation is really more of a selling feature for those who look at runtime graphs.  In practical terms, you wouldn't notice that sort of Turbo output drop off in use (i.e., it is only a ~5% reduction over 5 mins - far too slow to detect visually). 

I suppose another way to look at it as that each time you re-start the light after a 5 min Turbo mode run, you are down another ~5% from max Turbo. So after ~1 hour of restarts, you are down to the Hi level (at least on my 2200mAh cells - you'd do better with higher capacity cells).


----------



## ma tumba (Apr 11, 2014)

is it possible to take the smooth reflector from the original tk35, and put it to the new tk35 in order to check if it makes it a bit more of a thrower?


----------



## selfbuilt (Apr 11, 2014)

ma tumba said:


> is it possible to take the smooth reflector from the original tk35, and put it to the new tk35 in order to check if it makes it a bit more of a thrower?


Well, you would have to modify the original TK35 reflector to increase the opening for the larger MT-G2 emitter. And judging from the sealed head design, you would have to remove the circuit housing/pills etc to access the reflectors from behind. Not sure it is worth the effort, as any change from texturing to smooth would be minimal on the beam (i.e., all texturing really does is fuzz-out the edges of the hotspot, and increase the corona). I doubt you would see much of a difference at all. The MT-G2 is never going to be any kind of thrower in this build.


----------



## Swedpat (Apr 11, 2014)

selfbuilt said:


> Yes, I'd say those numbers are an accurate distillation from my runtime graphs.
> 
> To be fair though, flat-regulation is really more of a selling feature for those who look at runtime graphs.  In practical terms, you wouldn't notice that sort of Turbo output drop off in use (i.e., it is only a ~5% reduction over 5 mins - far too slow to detect visually).
> 
> I suppose another way to look at it as that each time you re-start the light after a 5 min Turbo mode run, you are down another ~5% from max Turbo. So after ~1 hour of restarts, you are down to the Hi level (at least on my 2200mAh cells - you'd do better with higher capacity cells).



Yes, it's not that bad when I think about it. If I think correct: after 1 hour at hi mode(without any minute at turbo) I should get at least 1400lm at turbomode so that is pretty good.


----------



## scintillator (Apr 12, 2014)

Great review selfbuilt you are really a great asset here on the forums.
I have the original tk35 and have not really been pleased with the tint,but still like the light.
This looks promising.


----------



## selfbuilt (Apr 12, 2014)

scintillator said:


> I have the original tk35 and have not really been pleased with the tint,but still like the light.
> This looks promising.


Yes, that was one of my issues with the original TK35 as well (i.e., my XM-L sample had one of the greenest tints I have ever seen in a commercial light).

The nice thing MT-G2 emitters is that they are all a pleasing (to my eye) neutral white. Although this some range in the samples I've seen, most would fall into the ~5000K to ~4500K range. It is just the relative lack of throw on the TK35 build that may give some people pause to consider.


----------



## leon2245 (Apr 12, 2014)

We don't know the spot intensity on high correct, because that 17,800cd is measured during its 5 minute mode?


----------



## selfbuilt (Apr 12, 2014)

leon2245 said:


> We don't know the spot intensity on high correct, because that 17,800cd is measured during its 5 minute mode?


That's right, I don't typically do beam intensity measures outside of the ANSI FL-1 standard time window for Peak intensity. I can try to to do this on Hi next time I'm testing some lights, and report back.


----------



## leon2245 (Apr 12, 2014)

Awesome, thank you.


----------



## WonkotheSane (Apr 13, 2014)

Well I pre-ordered one. Always hated the greenish tint of the original TK35. Hope it will be better....


----------



## historyfuzz (Apr 14, 2014)

WonkotheSane said:


> Well I pre-ordered one. Always hated the greenish tint of the original TK35. Hope it will be better....


 Could you tell me how to preorder? Link? Thanks.


----------



## scintillator (Apr 15, 2014)

I had to preorder one also.
Use code APP10 for discount.


----------



## FlyingHi (Apr 15, 2014)

Is that off of the fenix website?


----------



## kj2 (Apr 15, 2014)

FlyingHi said:


> Is that off of the fenix website?


Fenix Store / Denix Outfitters probably  -Fenix manufacturer doesn't sell there lights of there own website.


----------



## scintillator (Apr 16, 2014)

Yes Fenix Outfitters is where I preordered my tk35ue.
Nice folks there at least over the phone.


----------



## RemcoM (Apr 16, 2014)

Hi Selfbuilt,

Does this TK35UE, almost the same flood, like the TM11 of Nitecore has?

Almost the same output.


----------



## markr6 (Apr 16, 2014)

Got close to pulling the trigger on this last night, but I don't know. I'm thinking my next purchase should be a true thrower since my EA4 is the best I can do right now. Maybe a TK61 or something similar. I do like the more neutral tint though.


----------



## cagenuts (Apr 16, 2014)

markr6 said:


> I'm thinking my next purchase should be a true thrower since my EA4 is the best I can do right now. Maybe a TK61 or something similar. I do like the more neutral tint though.



Get the Tk61vn. Fair throw


----------



## Tmack (Apr 16, 2014)

Yeah its fair  . 600kcd fair haha.


----------



## selfbuilt (Apr 16, 2014)

RemcoM said:


> Does this TK35UE, almost the same flood, like the TM11 of Nitecore has?


The TM11 has a wider spillbeam. On that measure, it would seem more "floody" to many. That said, the TM11's hotspot is actually more intense at close range. It's a very different beam pattern, not easy to compare.



markr6 said:


> Maybe a TK61 or something similar. I do like the more neutral tint though.





cagenuts said:


> Get the Tk61vn. Fair throw



The TK61vn dedome (PDT) that I reviewed actually has a pretty similar overall tint to my TK35UE (i.e., both around ~5000K). The TK61vn dedome does have more green though, especially at lower levels. Perhaps better to consider the MT-G2 emitter as a premium neutral white, and dedomed cool white XM-L2 as non-premium greenish neutral.


----------



## 18650 (Apr 30, 2014)

At first I thought that was a hair on the MT-G2 dome in your close up photo of the emitter but in the low mode beam shots I can see what looks like a thin hair line across the upper part of the hotspot. Your lens or camera sensor might need a cleaning!


----------



## selfbuilt (May 17, 2014)

Weather conditions have finally improved enough to start taking outdoor beamshots around here. Here is a comparison of the TK35UE to the original TK35 (XM-L version) and the Eagletac SX25L3. 

As always, these are done in the style of my earlier 100-yard round-up review. Please see that thread for a discussion of the topography (i.e. the road dips in the distance, to better show you the corona in the mid-ground). 












Please note that the color balance of the MT-G2 shots are a little off, as I had automatic white balancing on (i.e., they are not consistent to the adjustment used for the cool white emitter). 

The MT-G2 emitter does indeed provide much more of a "wall of light" effect, thanks to the larger emitter. Unfortunately, the relatively small build of the TK35 doesn't let it throw very far. Hopefully these standardized outdoor shots give you a better idea what to expect. :wave:


----------



## kj2 (May 17, 2014)

Thanks for the pictures


----------



## TheThor (May 28, 2014)

As far as I know, the TK35 is one of the bestselling flashlights of Fenix. 
The carrier is surely a very thoughtful design, but i see that the reflector is textured, then the output should be floody. any recommendation if I want a thrower, compact and good value for money?


----------



## kj2 (May 28, 2014)

TheThor said:


> As far as I know, the TK35 is one of the bestselling flashlights of Fenix.
> The carrier is surely a very thoughtful design, but i see that the reflector is textured, then the output should be floody. any recommendation if I want a thrower, compact and good value for money?



TK41 comes to my mind. Of course, there are lights that thrower further, but money-wise the TK41 is a good choice


----------



## MasterBlaster (May 30, 2014)

I love my TK35 and was excited about the UE version until I saw the beam pattern. So I guess what I want/need is a TK61 with the MT-G2, if they ever make such a thing.

Perhaps I should be more clear. I love my TK35 because it is truly in the "goldilocks" zone of flashlights. Perfect size, great power and throw, but only two batteries. I like the flat siding, how it feels in hand. Great flashlight. More light and warmer colors would be welcome.

So, in comes the UE version that has more power and warmer color in the same great TK35. I was literally filling out an order online when I noticed the beam pattern test. I don't mind a "wall of light". If anything, a flood is great. What bothered me was the very pronounced black hole in the middle of the trees, and at only 100 yards. Maybe the larger reflector on the TK61 would be a better match for the MT-G2.


----------



## selfbuilt (May 30, 2014)

MasterBlaster said:


> If anything, a flood is great. What bothered me was the very pronounced black hole in the middle of the trees, and at only 100 yards. Maybe the larger reflector on the TK61 would be a better match for the MT-G2.


The camera settings were really designed to show throwers the best (so, in real life, the UE may not seem as bad as the close up pics suggest). But these pics are certainly useful in gauging relative differences between beams. You would certainly have found it less throwy than the regular XM-L/XL-L2 version. Glad you found the pics useful. :wave:


----------



## Swedpat (May 31, 2014)

MasterBlaster said:


> Maybe the larger reflector on the TK61 would be a better match for the MT-G2.



Well, then I think Thrunite TN35 is very close to that desire.


----------



## ven (May 31, 2014)

Swedpat said:


> Well, then I think Thrunite TN35 is very close to that desire.




+1 on that

Another as always excellent review from selfbuilt
http://www.candlepowerforums.com/vb...650)-Review-RUNTIMES-BEAMSHOTS-VIDEO-and-more!


----------



## MasterBlaster (May 31, 2014)

Thank you for the excellent advice. The TN35 does appear to be what I am looking for in my next flashlight. And thank you to selfbuilt for the excellent reviews.


----------



## BoCoMo (Jun 9, 2014)

I am new here & looking for my first light and I just wanted to add my thank you to the many others before me. Your reviews are proving VERY helpful with my decision. Thanks!


----------



## selfbuilt (Jun 10, 2014)

MasterBlaster said:


> Thank you for the excellent advice. The TN35 does appear to be what I am looking for in my next flashlight. And thank you to selfbuilt for the excellent reviews.





BoCoMo said:


> I am new here & looking for my first light and I just wanted to add my thank you to the many others before me. Your reviews are proving VERY helpful with my decision. Thanks!


My pleasure ... and :welcome:


----------



## Prototype3a (Jul 7, 2016)

Has anyone measured to see if the battery carriers on the TK35 and TK35ue are identical or if the UE is slightly larger. I got some nice new 3400mah protected 18650s and they fit VERY tightly in my TK35. So, I was thinking if they fit better in the UE, then I might upgrade. If not, I may have to find some slightly smaller 18650s to put in the TK35 I already own.


----------



## sidecross (Jul 7, 2016)

Prototype3a said:


> Has anyone measured to see if the battery carriers on the TK35 and TK35ue are identical or if the UE is slightly larger. I got some nice new 3400mah protected 18650s and they fit VERY tightly in my TK35. So, I was thinking if they fit better in the UE, then I might upgrade. If not, I may have to find some slightly smaller 18650s to put in the TK35 I already own.


I stopped using protected batteries in TK35UE because of the tight fit; I now use flat-top unprotected 18650 batteries.


----------

