# Zebralight SC5 MKII



## ktsl (Jan 24, 2017)

Looks interesting:
SC5c Mk II $69 Cree XP-L *CRI 93-95* spill + spot 14 modes 400+lm 0.8 hrs, due in 2017 (i.e. Dec. 31 2017?)


----------



## gunga (Jan 24, 2017)

Where is this info from?

Edit : ah. Found out it. Hope they slimmed the body down but I doubt it.


----------



## Dave-ish (Jan 24, 2017)

Zebralights product comparison page was updated


----------



## night.hoodie (Jan 24, 2017)

gunga said:


> Where is this info from?
> 
> Edit : ah. Found out it. Hope they slimmed the body down but I doubt it.



For others, here is the source

Happy to hear about this! That spec says a lot of lumen (400+) for AA format _plus_ hi CRI. I will be waiting in anticipation for it to be released and immediately unavailable, sold out, and on backorder eternally, when I try to purchase. It happens nearly every time, so expect it to happen, ZebraLight, and realize that running out of inventory is bush league and reduces your profits.

I realize it doesn't bother most, but I can only hope ZebraLight decides to upgrade their drivers to unequivocal, undeniable and true constant current, and leaves their PWM-like step-pulsing behind. At that point, I don't think there will be any way anyone could disagree ZebraLight has an absolutely perfectly designed and perfectly implemented flashlight. That's all anyone wants... is it asking too much?


----------



## StorminMatt (Jan 24, 2017)

And bring back 14500 compatibility. Zebralight had a good thing going as far as this with the SC52. Doing away with it in the SC5 was a HUGE step backward, and resulted in a FAR less usable high mode. Li-Ion capability also means better charging on the go.


----------



## markr6 (Jan 24, 2017)

Previously mentioned in the Official ZL thread way back in December  : http://candlepowerforums.com/vb/showthread.php?395603-The-Official-Zebralight-Thread/page16

But yea, it should have a really pleasing output. Not a fan of the size though.


----------



## twistedraven (Jan 24, 2017)

Let the tint lotteries begin.


----------



## Fireclaw18 (Jan 24, 2017)

ktsl said:


> Looks interesting:
> SC5c Mk II $69 Cree XP-L *CRI 93-95* spill + spot 14 modes 400+lm 0.8 hrs, due in 2017 (i.e. Dec. 31 2017?)



Nice!

But I think when they say "due in 2017" they really mean "maybe by Dec 31, 2018, unless we decide to cancel it"


----------



## night.hoodie (Jan 24, 2017)

StorminMatt said:


> And bring back 14500 compatibility. Zebralight had a good thing going as far as this with the SC52. Doing away with it in the SC5 was a HUGE step backward, and resulted in a FAR less usable high mode. Li-Ion capability also means better charging on the go.



I wouldn't be against it, but I understand the silent argument that 14500 compatibility is superfluous in ZebraLight (but not other brands). ZL uses regulation, and limits top brightness. The dual-chem compatible SC52 is the exception to the rule, in that with 14500, the brightest level was given a boost. But isn't the SC5 top level on AA brighter than the SC52 on 14500? So why would you expect ZL to open the glorious doors of brightness just because you have given it more voltage? Seems to me, ZL likes consistency over brightness.

So consider that even if the SC5 was compatible with 14500, the light would operate exactly the same as on AA, with identical regulated mode brightnesses between the chemistries, but with less runtime and more inherent safety risk with 14500. This isn't necessarily the case, this is just an extrapolation of ZebraLight's mode level ideology, and it seems clear to me, you would not be wowed with 14500 in an SC5.


----------



## Fireclaw18 (Jan 24, 2017)

night.hoodie said:


> ...But isn't the SC5 top level on AA brighter than the SC52 on 14500? So why would you expect ZL to open the glorious doors of brightness just because you have given it more voltage? ...



That was back then.

Today, lights from other manufacturers can output 900 lumens on 14500 and still run on AA if needed. There's a pretty huge difference between 400 lumens and 900 lumens. Not supporting and allowing for better output on 14500 is one feature that makes Zebralight inferior to the competition.

That said, I haven't been too impressed with Zebralight's support for lithium ion cells. Starting with my SC52w just about every Zebralight I've owned that supports lithium ion has had a major problem: They simply refuse to stay in turbo mode. Even on a fresh quality IMR cell they typically don't stay in turbo mode for more than 5 seconds or so, then they immediately step down to lower modes. None of my lights from other manufacturers have this problem when using the same cells.

I've experienced this with:
SC52w
SC32w
SC62
SC62w

I do not have this problem with:
SC63w
SC600w Mk III HI


----------



## Tachead (Jan 24, 2017)

twistedraven said:


> Let the tint lotteries begin.


It is spec'd with 2 step Macadam Ellipse XP-L's so the tint lottery will be very minimal.


----------



## jon_slider (Jan 24, 2017)

night.hoodie said:


> I can only hope ZebraLight decides to upgrade their drivers to unequivocal, undeniable and true constant current, and leaves their PWM-like step-pulsing behind.



I agree.

here is an SC52 on Low 1






I do think the next SC5 has a positive improvement in CRI

Max lumens for 1 minute does not impress me. An AA battery cannot do more than 150 lumens for long. Zebras have great features, but I would not buy one for the Turbo feature.. there needs to be other reasons that would make me buy a light that has "noise", even if its not officially called PWM.


----------



## night.hoodie (Jan 24, 2017)

Fireclaw18 said:


> That was back then.
> 
> Today, lights from other manufacturers can output 900 lumens on 14500 and still run on AA if needed. There's a pretty huge difference between 400 lumens and 900 lumens. Not supporting and allowing for better output on 14500 is one feature that makes Zebralight inferior to the competition.



I believe this is a bit of unsupported handwaving, and I'd like to explore it.

First of all, I want to reiterate what I have already posted, that Li-ion in an SC5 is superfluous, not because ZL could not design a driver that is capable of more lumens with Li-ion, but that by now we have a predictive model of behavior from ZL, and that model of their ideology clearly favors consistency in their driver interface across the product models. This is not a bad idea, and their success is admirable, as having consistent interface and consistent brightnesses and _consistency_ everywhere you look at their products is unmatched in the industry, as far as I'm aware. In this regard, ZebraLight seems to stand alone.

Your post doesn't offer any competition for ZebraLight by name for direct comparison. Regarding specifically the SC5 stepdown from Turbo, there is only so much one can expect from an Eneloop, amazing and beloved as they are. I am unaware of any other light by any other maker that has achieved 500+lm output from an AA cell _and has regulated constant brightness_ of that 500+lm before the Turbo steps down. Most other competition that I am aware of may breach 500lm with an AA cell, but the brightness only stays there for seconds, dimming immediately. After three minutes, when SC5 steps down, there is no other AA light from other makers that is even close to 500lm. And this is usually true of the dual chem models, that while the higher voltage cell gives higher lumens, the lumen output doesn't stay put, and starts dropping immediately, and as you point out, often they also have step down after a few minutes. 

I'm sure some members remember when vinhnguyen54 got his hands on the SC600 w/ XHP35, and everyone was expecting he would do what he always does, make a light 4 to 10 times brighter. I believe he has had success with another ZebraLight model in increasing voltage and output, but in that particular thread, while he was successful getting inside of the ZL (which is no small triumph), he only praised ZL design and engineering, and in the end, decided he couldn't make it brighter enough to make it worth offering the mod.

I think this last point stands in stark contrast to your suggestion that ZebraLight is inferior for not offering Li-ion in their SC5 models, and your unsupported inferrence ("That was back then") that anyone else could do better, or is doing better today. ZebraLight isn't holding back, and Vinh's experience supports this: they are cutting edge. And it is clear other manufacturers are not putting any emphasis on consistency of interface or regulated constant brightness of the modes across their models. If the competition has a model that accepts both chemistries, the modes and brightness levels are not consistent between the chemistries nor their other models. And many of them are not doing anything much of note even with Li-ion drivers, but often still lack advancements standard in ZebraLight such as low voltage protection for their Li-ion models.

If you want a flashlight that takes both chems, has no low voltage protection nor regulated output nor interface consistency, and stays in a mode without stepdown no matter the state of your cell, along with the heat effects and eventual damage to its own driver, I bet you don't have to look too hard to find them, nor pay too much to own them.

That isn't ZebraLight's bag. They are doing something else, and it still isn't clear at all, because you offer no examples, that ZL is inferior for leaving Li-ion support out of the SC5. Let's see these superior duel chemistry competitors to the SC5, then we can decide if they are in fact superior, or just cheap crap, which is my suspicion.


----------



## Connor (Jan 24, 2017)

re: PWM and Zebralights

There is *ZERO *visible PWM (to the human eye) in recent Zebralights, so don't let yourself be alienated about this brand by the above discussion. 
There are, however, people with a somewhat exaggerated dislike of PWM on CPF.


----------



## chillinn (Jan 24, 2017)

Connor said:


> re: PWM and Zebralights
> 
> There is *ZERO *visible PWM (to the human eye) in recent Zebralights, so don't let yourself be alienated about this brand by the above discussion.
> There are, however, people with a somewhat exaggerated dislike of PWM on CPF.



Also, Carbon Monoxide cannot be seen, so don't worry about it! Breathe easy, friend. Bullets move so fast you can't see them, so there is no way they could harm anyone!! Frigid temperatures can't be seen, so something else must have killed those people during the last winter storm. You can't see cancer, not without some special scientific instruments, so it can't ever be a problem.

Those that make fallacious argument, however, do tend to be oblivious to their invalid argument.

What is it with the PRO-PWM camp? Wouldn't you rather it not be there, even if unseen? It is an inferior circuit to Constant Current. Why hedge? Why defend it? What is so great about PWM that you couldn't live without it? Why argue against the desire for better engineering? Meh, the rope bridge was good enough, we don't need these fancy suspension bridges!


----------



## jon_slider (Jan 24, 2017)

Left to right, Worm low (measures 2.2 lumens on my meter), ReyLight Copper Tool w Nichia on low (calibrated my meter to 1 lumen spec), and my Lumintop Copper Tool w N219b on low (measures 2.5 lumen)





I dont have a spectrograph to measure CCT. In practice, my Worm and ReyLight seem to be the same CCT, and the latest Tool, far right, looks slightly lower CCT

Maukka measured the N219b in his TiTool at 4300k and his CuTool at 4360k 
His TiTool CCT tests 200k below the 4500k spec (less than 5% lower), and I would expect that to be in the "normal variation" range for a batch of LEDs. 

I look forward to photo comparisons between Zebralights 4000k Cree High CRI LED, and a similar CCT Nichia 219b


----------



## Random Dan (Jan 24, 2017)

chillinn said:


> Also, Carbon Monoxide cannot be seen, so don't worry about it! Breathe easy, friend. Bullets move so fast you can't see them, so there is no way they could harm anyone!! What is it with the PRO-PWM camp? Wouldn't you rather it not be there, even if unseen? It is an inferior circuit to Constant Current. Why hedge? Why defend it? What is so great about PWM that you couldn't live without it?


I've been using Zebralight for years. I currently have four sitting within arm's reach of me. In all that time none of them have tried to poison my air or shoot at me. Maybe I'm just lucky?

I don't think anyone has said that they can't live without pwm, just that they don't see it as turn-off. In lights like ZL where the pwm is too fast to be seen, the only noticeable difference is that pwm reduces the tint shift you get with current control. Seems like a non-issue to me.


----------



## chillinn (Jan 24, 2017)

Random Dan said:


> I've been using Zebralight for years. I currently have four sitting within arm's reach of me. In all that time none of them have tried to poison my air or shoot at me. Maybe I'm just lucky?
> 
> I don't think anyone has said that they can't live without pwm, just that they don't see it as turn-off. In lights like ZL where the pwm is too fast to be seen, the only noticeable difference is that pwm reduces the tint shift you get with current control. Seems like a non-issue to me.



Ah, I see: apathy eclipses empathy... because _I don't care_, then it shouldn't matter to anyone.


----------



## eraursls1984 (Jan 24, 2017)

chillinn said:


> Those that make fallacious argument, however, do tend to be oblivious to their invalid argument.
> 
> What is it with the PRO-PWM camp? Wouldn't you rather it not be there, even if unseen? It is an inferior circuit to Constant Current. Why hedge? Why defend it? What is so great about PWM that you couldn't live without it? Why argue against the desire for better engineering? Meh, the rope bridge was good enough, we don't need these fancy suspension bridges!


It's not so much that people are so pro-PWM, it's just that not everyone cares to jump through hoops to figure out if a light has PWM, Pulses, or is CC. When you can't tell unless you take specific pictures or use tools that you don't use normally, it doesn't really matter. I hated PWM in the past because it was noticeable, and it would effect pictures. I hated constant current because of the tint shift (why do the pro-CC/anti-PWM love tint shift so much?). They all have their pros and cons. Most lights with PWM are so fast that it doesn't effect most people, only a few niche hobbies/tasks that it may interfere with. I love constant current because of the complexity, efficiency(sometimes), and general advanced circuitry, but it's not the be all, end all without its own flaws.


----------



## Fireclaw18 (Jan 24, 2017)

Random Dan said:


> I've been using Zebralight for years. I currently have four sitting within arm's reach of me. In all that time none of them have tried to poison my air or shoot at me. Maybe I'm just lucky?
> 
> I don't think anyone has said that they can't live without pwm, just that they don't see it as turn-off. In lights like ZL where the pwm is too fast to be seen, the only noticeable difference is that pwm reduces the tint shift you get with current control. Seems like a non-issue to me.



Fast PWM: No tint shift, but may be much less efficient at low power settings.
Current control: may tint shift quite dramatically at low power, but provides the best efficiency. Battery life at lowest power settings can be dramatically longer than a PWM light.

They each have their advantages and disadvantages. If you're like me and recharge your lights every night, good tint matters much more than long battery life. On the other hand if you use disposable cells or don't charge often, you probably want the light to turn on when you need it more than you care about having the perfect tint.


----------



## eraursls1984 (Jan 24, 2017)

Random Dan said:


> ...In lights like ZL where the pwm is too fast to be seen...


Zebralights don't even have PWM.


----------



## chillinn (Jan 24, 2017)

eraursls1984 said:


> Zebralights don't even have PWM.



Didn't take long for the denial. PWM is rapid on/off where the LED light output drops to zero. It has been clearly demonstrated in other threads on CPF that ZebraLight drivers don't _technically_ utilize PWM _strictly speaking_, but the evidence presented, and the oscilliscope measurements prove, whatever you want to call it, it most certainly *is not* Constant Current, but something much closer in form to PWM than CC.

If no one really cares, let's just call it PWM for the sake of intellectual honesty, at the expense of technical accuracy. 



Fireclaw18 said:


> Fast PWM: No tint shift, but may be much less efficient at low power settings.
> Current control: may tint shift quite dramatically at low power, but provides the best efficiency. Battery life at lowest power settings can be dramatically longer than a PWM light.



Fireclaw18, you have boiled it down to all that could matter, and done so with brevity.

But it should be mentioned that the light levels we're talking about, with the worst tint shift with CC, are extremely low light levels, especially the sublumenal. Human eyes, when dark adapted to see when light levels are subluminal, can't distinguish color very well. Though tint for the sake of tint is it's own reward (tint snobs know), the tint that is best at rendering color won't matter as much at those low levels. So though this competition between tint shift and efficiency is all there really is to the PWM vs CC argument (for those that don't mind PWM), the emphasis on this tint shift is exaggerated, while efficiency seems to be disregarded as not important, in comparison.


----------



## JDodd (Jan 24, 2017)

I'm new to non-eBay lights, but I went in with about a dozen models, two of which are Zebras. They're my favorites because of their feel in my hand and their (to my uneducated eyes) pleasing beams.

I've never seen an HDS, McGizmo, or Malkoff in person, but so far ZebraLight is my favorite brand and I'm very much looking forward to the SC5 Mark II and the four-18650 C3. I'd preorder these two lights right now if I could.


----------



## Tachead (Jan 24, 2017)

chillinn said:


> Didn't take long for the denial. PWM is rapid on/off where the LED light output drops to zero. It has been clearly demonstrated in other threads on CPF that ZebraLight drivers don't _technically_ utilize PWM _strictly speaking_, but the evidence presented, and the oscilliscope measurements prove, whatever you want to call it, it most certainly *is not* Constant Current, but something much closer in form to PWM than CC.
> 
> If no one really cares, let's just call it PWM for the sake of intellectual honesty, at the expense of technical accuracy.
> 
> ...



You seem to be forgetting that ZL makes some of smallest, most efficient drivers in the industry. 

None of you guys(PWM/Pulsing/creative camera work whiners) have any idea why ZL does what it does with it's drivers. You know next to nothing about driver design and most of you don't even fully understand simple electronic algorithms. You also seam to claim there is some massive downside to the system ZL is using in some of it's lights yet it can't be seen by the human eye, can't be seen by under normal filming or photography conditions, and has no other proven ill effects. You can only produce any evidence by creative camera work and/or waving your lights around like an 8 year old baton twirling kid at a school talent show. 

So, ZL is pretty much the industry leader in driver design, they have excellent efficiency/runtimes(better then most other brands), you like their other features, you can't see any ill effects under normal usage or filming conditions yet you still make a huge deal out of some tiny algorithm anomaly. I just don't get it. I really think you guys need to get a life and quit cluttering up half the threads in CPF with your obsessive blabber. If you already didn't notice, it is annoying a lot of people and taking away from the great atmosphere here at CPF. You already have a thread about PWM so, why don't we keep the PWM/Pulsing/CC/etc. discussion in there and stop derailing and causing arguments in half the threads on CPF. I for one am sick of it and it sure seems many other are as well.

_*I'm sick of it too! So Tachead... here's a suggestion... STOP POSTING! YOU are MOST of the problem! STOP! NOW! - This is your one and only warning. Next step is to be given some time off. Don't push me any further. -Greta_


----------



## Lucky Duck (Jan 24, 2017)

You already have a thread about PWM so, why don't we keep the PWM/Pulsing/CC/etc. discussion in there and stop derailing and causing arguments in half the threads on CPF. I for one am sick of it and it sure seems many other are as well.[/QUOTE]

Yes, agreed. I have heard/seen enough on this subject.


----------



## amanichen (Jan 24, 2017)

Tachead said:


> You seem to be forgetting that ZL makes some of smallest, most efficient drivers in the industry.
> 
> None of you guys(PWM/Pulsing/creative camera work whiners) have any idea why ZL does what it does with it's drivers. You know next to nothing about driver design and most of you don't even fully understand simple electronic algorithms. You also seam to claim there is some massive downside to the system ZL is using in some of it's lights yet it can't be seen by the human eye, can't be seen by under normal filming or photography conditions, and has no other proven ill effects. You can only produce any evidence by creative camera work and/or waving your lights around like an 8 year old baton twirling kid at a school talent show.
> 
> So, ZL is pretty much the industry leader in driver design, they have excellent efficiency/runtimes(better then most other brands), you like their other features, you can't see any ill effects under normal usage or filming conditions yet you still make a huge deal out of some tiny algorithm anomaly. I just don't get it. I really think you guys need to get a life and quit cluttering up half the threads in CPF with your obsessive blabber. If you already didn't notice, it is annoying a lot of people and taking away from the great atmosphere here at CPF. You already have a thread about PWM so, why don't we keep the PWM/Pulsing/CC/etc. discussion in there and stop derailing and causing arguments in half the threads on CPF. I for one am sick of it and it sure seems many other are as well.



+1

There are also aspects such as ripple current on boost drivers and the fact that PWM lights are usually LESS efficient at partial power than CC lights, and yet AA powered Zebralights (and other cell types) are basically one of the most efficient brands at all drive levels.

Aside from seeing "pulsing" on an oscilloscope (which seems to cause some people to do the flashlight equivalent of concluding that unidentifiable lights in the sky must be ALIENS) I have yet to see anybody do an actual electrical engineering analysis of the circuits. I'm talking about identifying the actual components of the driver and pulling spec sheets to determine capabilities, and using voltage probes to identify the signals being sent between components.

I have a beater SC52w that I dedomed and I'm willing to ship to someone with a an actual BSEE for analysis if that will help squash rumors, speculation, and inuendo.


----------



## snowlover91 (Jan 24, 2017)

I posted in the main ZL thread a few days ago but I'll post a summary here too. I emailed them and they said they're hoping for a late March or early April release date for this light. However, they don't plan on putting the new programmable UI into it. They said they'll release that in one of their 18650 lights later this year.

Regarding the PWM debate, some may consider it part of the topic but I would rather that be kept separate so those who like discussing it can do so. Let this thread be about the features of the light because at the end of the day that's what people go to this thread for. Jmho.


----------



## chillinn (Jan 24, 2017)

The PWM posts are on topic, as the subject was introduced naturally, and the discussion evolved organically. However, anytime someone starts a sentence with the pronoun "you," or directs their statements or argument toward an individual, _it is in fact off topic_. Speculating what is in someone elses' mind, or what educational history they have or do not have, is in fact off topic.. Telling someone what to do is in fact off topic, no matter how many agree with the sentiment. Focusing on the argument will keep the thread on topic, but focusing on the person is never on topic. Clear?

_* You seriously need to take note of nbp's post below. I am sick and tired of your "reported posts" and whining. YOU are as much the problem as anyone else. STOP! NOW! The next step is time off. -Greta_


----------



## nbp (Jan 24, 2017)

Yay! PWM destroys another thread! This is getting fun! 

Seriously, there are not enough :beatingadeadhorse: emojis in the world...

Move on from the PWM discussion and discuss something! anything! else about this light. 

Jon slider and Chillinn, your PWM crusade is driving people nuts. Please please please drop it! If people want to talk about it they can come to your PWM threads. You need not bring it to every other thread and force your way in. Seriously.


----------



## snowlover91 (Jan 24, 2017)

Has anyone here tested out the Hi-CRI XP-L like ZL plans to use? 93-95 cri sounds great, 4k is a little warm for me but I probably could get used to it if it has a pleasing tint. I wonder if they plan any design changes since it's called the MK2? Plenty of questions to be answered and I hope they can get these out by late March so I won't have to wait too long!


----------



## jon_slider (Jan 24, 2017)

nbp said:


> Jon slider and Chillinn, your PWM crusade is driving people nuts. Please please please drop it!


I agree that any post about whether PWM is an issue, or not, is a waste of opinions.
I agree not to argue the pros and cons of PWM.
I agree posts in this thread about PWM, that do not contain the word SC5, could be deleted.
I tried to just post a photo of a Zebra SC52, without arguing about PWM theory.

Please delete any posts you feel are off topic. 

In no way am I interested in arguing about PWM.
Im doing my best to just report what I see, without judging, and hopefully without being attacked.
If you have a problem with Chillin, please address him separately. 
Im glad to see Greta also addressed Tachead.

I try hard to respect the title of a thread and stay on topic. Specific to the SC5 Mk2, I look forward to learning more about its beam color and quality. I have no doubt that Zebras are great lights, better than many in some ways. I actually like that Zebras are regulated, and personally feel no need for LiIon capability in an AA light.


----------



## scs (Jan 24, 2017)

snowlover91 said:


> I posted in the main ZL thread a few days ago but I'll post a summary here too. I emailed them and they said they're hoping for a late March or early April release date for this light. However, they don't plan on putting the new programmable UI into it. They said they'll release that in one of their 18650 lights later this year.



Thanks for the update. That's just fine. The smaller output range of 1-AA lights naturally does away with perceived gaps in useful output levels. It's when the range is broad, as in the case of 18650 lights, and only a handful of modes can be directly access, as in the case with ZL's UI, that tough compromises with regard to what modes to keep and hide are necessary. With the new programmable UI, let's hope folks will have more options and their lights become even more useful.


----------



## Random Dan (Jan 24, 2017)

Sad it won't have the programmable UI. The only thing I'd actually change is to make medium a single click and high a double click from off. My only complaint with my SC52 is that it's slow to access medium without a high flash. Probably 90% of my usage is medium and I only rarely use high. Hopefully there will be an SC53c with programmable driver and the same emitter.


----------



## snowlover91 (Jan 24, 2017)

Random Dan said:


> Sad it won't have the programmable UI. The only thing I'd actually change is to make medium a single click and high a double click from off. My only complaint with my SC52 is that it's slow to access medium without a high flash. Probably 90% of my usage is medium and I only rarely use high. Hopefully there will be an SC53c with programmable driver and the same emitter.



I set mine up to have the lowest high setting so when I single click it will go directly to that. It's not that much brighter than the medium setting and is the best work around I've found. For the way I use my SC5w it covers most of my intended applications and I rarely need medium or the brighter H1 setting. With this setup I mainly press and hold for my low modes or single click for the lowest high. Works great


----------



## Random Dan (Jan 24, 2017)

snowlover91 said:


> I set mine up to have the lowest high setting so when I single click it will go directly to that. It's not that much brighter than the medium setting and is the best work around I've found. For the way I use my SC5w it covers most of my intended applications and I rarely need medium or the brighter H1 setting. With this setup I mainly press and hold for my low modes or single click for the lowest high. Works great


Yeah that's kinda what I've ended up with. I have my H2 set to the lowest value but it still goes through battery over twice as fast as M1 and four times faster than M2


----------



## snowlover91 (Jan 25, 2017)

Random Dan said:


> Yeah that's kinda what I've ended up with. I have my H2 set to the lowest value but it still goes through battery over twice as fast as M1 and four times faster than M2



Yeah not the best but it works pretty well. If they did a programmable UI down the road for this light and it allowed you to customize what 1 click, 2 clicks and the press/hold did it would be perfect. Think about it. Take their already great UI and let users choose how to set up the clicks based on what they want most. Add in the good build quality and hopefully high cri going forward (better tint consistency too hopefully) and you have a recipe for the perfect AA light. Either way I'm excited to see what they bring to the table this year with it and their new UI in other lights. I hope the XP-L has good tint consistency, I think Tac posted that it should due to it being a 2 step.


----------



## eraursls1984 (Jan 25, 2017)

scs said:


> Thanks for the update. That's just fine. The smaller output range of 1-AA lights naturally does away with perceived gaps in useful output levels. It's when the range is broad, as in the case of 18650 lights, and only a handful of modes can be directly access, as in the case with ZL's UI, that tough compromises with regard to what modes to keep and hide are necessary. With the new programmable UI, let's hope folks will have more options and their lights become even more useful.


The medium modes need tweaking to make it perfect. This is true for the AA and 18650 versions. The lowest M2 is too close to L1, and the highest M2 is too close to M1. If it could split the difference it would be perfect for the AA models, and good enough for the 18650. For the 18650 to be perfect, IMO, I would use the highest M2 and the lowest H2 as M1. I also hope we can enable more than 2 modes for each subset.


----------



## Cobraman502 (Jan 25, 2017)

eraursls1984 said:


> The medium modes need tweaking to make it perfect. This is true for the AA and 18650 versions. The lowest M2 is too close to L1, and the highest M2 is too close to M1. If it could split the difference it would be perfect for the AA models, and good enough for the 18650. For the 18650 to be perfect, IMO, I would use the highest M2 and the lowest H2 as M1. I also hope we can enable more than 2 modes for each subset.



Right on. That is my biggest complaint with the SC600w MKIII hi. The medium should go up a little higher maybe the lowest high setting. I find when I'm walking my dog the lowest high setting is all I need to see far off objects but then for just navigation I have to jump to the medium setting by holding the button for a few seconds. Not a critical problem just observation. The brightness spacings need a little work or allow me to set them. Something like the brightness selection in DR JONES driver would be cool. 

I really like the ZL way of double clicking for changing brightness in that mode (high med low).


----------



## JStraus (Jan 25, 2017)

EDIT: Deleted Post.


----------



## marinemaster (Jan 25, 2017)

Cant wait for the ZL SC5 MKII. Definitely a buy.


----------



## ktsl (Jan 26, 2017)

It's quite bulky but not that lengthy though. I thougt the CRI would be tickling your fancy



markr6 said:


> Previously mentioned in the Official ZL thread way back in December  : http://candlepowerforums.com/vb/showthread.php?395603-The-Official-Zebralight-Thread/page16
> 
> But yea, it should have a really pleasing output. Not a fan of the size though.


----------



## ktsl (Jan 26, 2017)

I don't get it why we should care so much about pwm? 24fps was movie industry standard, 60fps you got great gaming experience, above 1kHz I really couldn't care. The only situation that pwm might come into play is if you use your it as lighting source in photography - but that's not such a great idea to begin with. Other than that, human eyes have very slow response and automatically do the integral at the receiver cell level.


----------



## ktsl (Jan 26, 2017)

I also notice the number of modes seems to have increased by 1 over the old model. I'd be super happy if this time they include the beacon mode of 0.2Hz on H1. Well, last time I asked them and they said "sure we can do that", but who knows. 
This is actually the reason I didn't buy anything in ZL's AA lineup. Since I'd like to use my flashlight as beacon to mark my camp location.


----------



## iamlucky13 (Jan 26, 2017)

The specs so far look very good. Finish it up and then get cracking on adapting the concept to a headlamp.

I also just noticed the H52 series, although still listed as in stock on their individual pages, have been moved to the discontinued section on the spreadsheet.

Hopefully they're not simply being replaced with the Eco series.



snowlover91 said:


> Has anyone here tested out the Hi-CRI XP-L like ZL plans to use? 93-95 cri sounds great, 4k is a little warm for me but I probably could get used to it if it has a pleasing tint. I wonder if they plan any design changes since it's called the MK2? Plenty of questions to be answered and I hope they can get these out by late March so I won't have to wait too long!



There was a thread specifically with your question a few weeks ago. Apparently they're not easy to find in the wild so far:
http://www.candlepowerforums.com/vb/showthread.php?428036-Hi-CRI-XPL-2-in-a-Flashlight

Also, based on other high CRI models Zebralight currently offers, it seems likely they'll also offer an SC5D Mk II with a 5000K emitter.


----------



## tops2 (Jan 27, 2017)

Unless I missed it..I'm curious why they decide to upgrade the SC5 vs the SC52 series?

Aside from the high CRI, do you guys think the throw and spill will be equivalent to the SC5(w) if at the same lumen level? I'm not really sure about the LED difference between these.

Otherwise, sounds like an interesting light. If it works well, maybe they can bring the LED to the SC63 series! I did think my "recently" purchased SC62w will the the last light for a while..but if they have a high CRI verison of this with decent output (which it looks like it may have) and long enough throw...I may have to bite!


----------



## snowlover91 (Jan 27, 2017)

I believe, all things being equal, the XP-L should throw slightly better than the XM-L2 but I don't think it would be much of a difference. It's possible they could change the reflector some which would change things though. They may release this in the SC64 and it's possible they could do the programmable circuit in the SC64 and MK4 series since they mentioned the 18650 lights would be the first to get it.


----------



## gunga (Jan 27, 2017)

Since XPL has the same die size as XML2, why do you think it would throw better? Is it because of the slightly increased output?


----------



## iamlucky13 (Jan 27, 2017)

The XP-L package is slightly smaller than the XM-L2, but the die is the same and the radius on the dome is the same, or nearly so. As a result, the way it interacts with the reflector or other secondary optic is nearly the same. Thus, you get more or less the same beam pattern.

Some beamshots I've seen, as well as a comparison of intensity plots in the XP-L datasheet seem to be ever-so-slightly less round than those of the XM-L2 due to the trimmed size of the dome, but it's not enough effect that I'd really worry about.

The high intensity variant of the XP-L, does have produce more throw due to the flat dome, but it looks like the SC5 II will have the regular "high density" XP-L.


----------



## StorminMatt (Jan 27, 2017)

night.hoodie said:


> I wouldn't be against it, but I understand the silent argument that 14500 compatibility is superfluous in ZebraLight (but not other brands). ZL uses regulation, and limits top brightness. The dual-chem compatible SC52 is the exception to the rule, in that with 14500, the brightest level was given a boost. But isn't the SC5 top level on AA brighter than the SC52 on 14500? So why would you expect ZL to open the glorious doors of brightness just because you have given it more voltage? Seems to me, ZL likes consistency over brightness.
> 
> So consider that even if the SC5 was compatible with 14500, the light would operate exactly the same as on AA, with identical regulated mode brightnesses between the chemistries, but with less runtime and more inherent safety risk with 14500. This isn't necessarily the case, this is just an extrapolation of ZebraLight's mode level ideology, and it seems clear to me, you would not be wowed with 14500 in an SC5.



It's not a matter or being 'wowwed' by the extra brightness of an SC5 with a 14500. And it's not about getting more brightness (like 900 lumens) either. Rather, it's about getting more consistent performance at higher brightness levels. I was never very impressed by the higher brightness modes with my SC5, particularly H1. To me, it seems like they built the light so that they can brag about 500 lumens from AA more than it is about a useful 500 lumen mode. The problem here is that a AA battery simply isn't up to the task of providing this kind of power. As a result, the light rapidly dims at 500 lumens, drops out early (ie requires a high state of charge), and can only run at this brightness level with the freshest and most capable of NiMH AA batteries. By contrast, you can still run the SC52 for a minute at 500 lumens even with a fairly discharged and relatively low current capacity Sanyo UR14500p. And given the limitations of AA, I don't think this poor performance is something that will be improved without vastly more efficient emitters.


----------



## snowlover91 (Jan 27, 2017)

gunga said:


> Since XPL has the same die size as XML2, why do you think it would throw better? Is it because of the slightly increased output?



I've seen beamshots and some discussion over the years which indicates the XP-L has a negligible throw advantage, with all things being equal. For all intents and purposes it probably won't produce a notable difference but when measured by someone like selfbuilt there might be a small difference.


----------



## scs (Jan 27, 2017)

StorminMatt said:


> ...To me, it seems like they built the light so that they can brag about 500 lumens from AA more than it is about a useful 500 lumen mode. The problem here is that a AA battery simply isn't up to the task of providing this kind of power. As a result, the light rapidly dims at 500 lumens, drops out early (ie requires a high state of charge), and can only run at this brightness level with the freshest and most capable of NiMH AA batteries. By contrast, you can still run the SC52 for a minute at 500 lumens even with a fairly discharged and relatively low current capacity Sanyo UR14500p....



Agreed.


----------



## snowlover91 (Jan 28, 2017)

StorminMatt said:


> It's not a matter or being 'wowwed' by the extra brightness of an SC5 with a 14500. And it's not about getting more brightness (like 900 lumens) either. Rather, it's about getting more consistent performance at higher brightness levels. I was never very impressed by the higher brightness modes with my SC5, particularly H1. To me, it seems like they built the light so that they can brag about 500 lumens from AA more than it is about a useful 500 lumen mode. The problem here is that a AA battery simply isn't up to the task of providing this kind of power. As a result, the light rapidly dims at 500 lumens, drops out early (ie requires a high state of charge), and can only run at this brightness level with the freshest and most capable of NiMH AA batteries. By contrast, you can still run the SC52 for a minute at 500 lumens even with a fairly discharged and relatively low current capacity Sanyo UR14500p. And given the limitations of AA, I don't think this poor performance is something that will be improved without vastly more efficient emitters.



I suppose it all depends on how one uses their light... and what they expect from it. I don't expect to be using the 300+ lumen levels on an AA light for long. My primary use is the 180 lumen mode set to come on with a single click. I've used the 500+ level only on a few occasions, for a short burst of time only when needed. Sure the 14500 might give more brightness but it decreases circuit efficiency to do so. If I want 900 lumens of light I won't be bringing a 14500/AA based light I'll use an 18650 light that can easily handle that with superior runtimes and regulation.


----------



## marinemaster (Jan 30, 2017)

I had a SC5 but the step down was drastic. I had to return it for refund. I did run Eneloop in it so it was either the Eneloop or maybe the light. Not sure. My SC52 does not do that. Hopefully the MK II will run good.


----------



## Tachead (Jan 30, 2017)

marinemaster said:


> I had a SC5 but the step down was drastic. I had to return it for refund. I did run Eneloop in it so it was either the Eneloop or maybe the light. Not sure. My SC52 does not do that. Hopefully the MK II will run good.



The SC5 is still brighter then the SC52 after it steps down(in 3 min). The difference is you get 3 minutes with 210 lumens more output. And, if the step down bothers you, you can just run the light on H2 which is still 25 lumens brighter then the SC52 and has no step down. I am not sure what more you could want? I guess they could make it thermally regulated like some of their other models so the step down is less noticeable. But really, it is a single AA light and if you need to use high all the time for extended periods, you should probably go with a larger light/cell.


----------



## marinemaster (Jan 30, 2017)

This was from lowest setting in a level as I run all my ZL on lowest setting they have. I always done that since I had ZL years ago when they came out. It was in any mode, the lowest setting in a specific level it would go down to next level down. I will just get the MK II warm when it comes out and use the newest Eneloop Pro I have. 60 lumens is plenty for me I'm interested in runtime not brightness.


----------



## Lumencrazy (Feb 2, 2017)

There is a sound technical reason for using PWM for Led's. Led's experience a significant color shift as voltage changes. PWM keeps the forward voltage constant. It is used in most critical lighting applications where minimizing color shift is important. "Why argue against the desire for better engineering" I would do a little more learning before ripping into this subject matter with such aplomb.


----------



## marinemaster (Feb 2, 2017)

Plus 1


----------



## marinemaster (Feb 2, 2017)

I wonder if it would be possible for the ZL to make it such that just keep holding the button increases the brightness. Basically press and hold. Not sure what it would take maybe a different switch button or a complete different circuit.


----------



## Tachead (Feb 2, 2017)

Lumencrazy said:


> There is a sound technical reason for using PWM for Led's. Led's experience a significant color shift as voltage changes. PWM keeps the forward voltage constant. It is used in most critical lighting applications where minimizing color shift is important."Why argue against the desire for better engineering" I would do a little more learning before ripping into this subject matter with such aplomb.



While this is true, I don't see the relevance of this in this thread. ZL has confirmed that they don't use PWM.


----------



## Tachead (Feb 2, 2017)

marinemaster said:


> I wonder if it would be possible for the ZL to make it such that just keep holding the button increases the brightness. Basically press and hold. Not sure what it would take maybe a different switch button or a complete different circuit.



There is a couple of Black Diamond lanterns with a feature like that. So, it can be done.


----------



## BigBluefish (Feb 2, 2017)

Yes, this sounds great. But ya know, I've got my SC62D, my SC5W, and I think I'm good. OK, maybe I want an SC32W or -D or -C or whatever warm/hi-cri option is currently_ available _in the real world. But I'm not going to get all worked up about this.


----------



## Cobraman502 (Feb 5, 2017)

Contacted Zebralight and they said the new UI will be introduced on an 18650 light this year.


----------



## Tachead (Feb 5, 2017)

Cobraman502 said:


> Contacted Zebralight and they said the new UI will be introduced on an 18650 light this year.



They told me that there are no plans for a "c" variant of the 18650 models in the near future and with the "d Plus" only released a while back, I am guessing it will just be a standard model(5-step 80CRI) light. 

I don't understand why they don't put the 4000K high CRI XP-L they are using in this light in a 18650 model? I personally think single AA lights are the least appealing lights over anything other then AAA, especially in a huge body like the SC5. I think an enthusiast targeted high CRI model would sell much better in another cell format like 18650, 16340, or even 18350. With so many people bugging ZL for a high CRI variant("c" in particular) of the SC63, SC600, or SC32 I don't understand why they would chose to go with a SC5 variant? It seems like most people didn't even like the SC5 because of its extremely portly form factor. Maybe this MKII will have a smaller body like the SC52?


----------



## marinemaster (Feb 5, 2017)

SC5 huge body ? Is great for pocket carry. To me is the most portable and tough 1xAA light there is.


----------



## gunga (Feb 5, 2017)

It's a tad fat. Length is nice. It'd be nice if it was a touch thinner.


----------



## Tachead (Feb 5, 2017)

marinemaster said:


> SC5 huge body ? Is great for pocket carry. To me is the most portable and tough 1xAA light there is.


Maybe huge was a bit of a strong adjective but, it is quite a bit larger and heavier then a lot of the other lights in its class(single AA lights) including the SC52. This surprised a lot of people when it was unveiled because compact and light is normally ZL's thing. It is fatter in diameter then the SC63 and only just over a cm shorter which is a bit ridiculous imo considering how much more output and runtime the SC63 has. 

As for toughness, while ZL's are relatively tough, I don't think most people would classify them anywhere near the toughest. That honor would likely go to the likes of Malkoff, Elzetta, Surefire, etc. 

YMMV of course but, I would much rather have an SC63, SC32, or even SC600 body using this emitter. I think that many of the enthusiast types that a high CRI model like this appeal to would rather this as well. Comparatively, single AA lights don't offer many advantages over other single cell lights(especially with a model like the SC5 that doesn't support 14500). The only real advantage, in fact, is the availability and low cost of primary batteries. And, that is more of an advantage for average users as apposed to the enthusiast types who usually buy high CRI lights because they often use/have rechargeable cells.


----------



## marinemaster (Feb 5, 2017)

I only consider ZL and think of ZL only with Eneloop, referring to AA models. No matter how you slice it is smaller than 18650. Yea 18650 has its place, and my SC62 has proven that time and time again but anything 18650 is specialized lightning in my view. 30 years ago and 20 years ago and 10 years ago all I was using was D and C batteries lightning. In the past 5 years or more I am done with any lights D or C type and have not purchased any such battery. ZL has been the primary reason for that and of course the advancements in led technology and drivers. 18650 is a whole another animal and ZL also mastered that format but that is more if someone uses the light an entire day, days long trips, needs to reach out, etc. yes for sure 18650 is perfect fit. For 80% of the time ZL with Eneloop AA is what I use.


----------



## Cobraman502 (Feb 6, 2017)

Tachead said:


> They told me that there are no plans for a "c" variant of the 18650 models in the near future and with the "d Plus" only released a while back, I am guessing it will just be a standard model(5-step 80CRI) light.
> 
> I don't understand why they don't put the 4000K high CRI XP-L they are using in this light in a 18650 model? I personally think single AA lights are the least appealing lights over anything other then AAA, especially in a huge body like the SC5. I think an enthusiast targeted high CRI model would sell much better in another cell format like 18650, 16340, or even 18350. With so many people bugging ZL for a high CRI variant("c" in particular) of the SC63, SC600, or SC32 I don't understand why they would chose to go with a SC5 variant? It seems like most people didn't even like the SC5 because of its extremely portly form factor. Maybe this MKII will have a smaller body like the SC52?



I just bought the sc52w for EDC as I wanted an AA light with the ZL UI that I like. I chose the ZL over the olight because of the UI and the aa cells. The sc5 is too close in size to my SC600w MKIII hi to consider it. Might as well just carry that for edc and have 2x more light and $70 still in my pocket.


----------



## Cobraman502 (Feb 6, 2017)

marinemaster said:


> I only consider ZL and think of ZL only with Eneloop, referring to AA models. No matter how you slice it is smaller than 18650. Yea 18650 has its place, and my SC62 has proven that time and time again but anything 18650 is specialized lightning in my view. 30 years ago and 20 years ago and 10 years ago all I was using was D and C batteries lightning. In the past 5 years or more I am done with any lights D or C type and have not purchased any such battery. ZL has been the primary reason for that and of course the advancements in led technology and drivers. 18650 is a whole another animal and ZL also mastered that format but that is more if someone uses the light an entire day, days long trips, needs to reach out, etc. yes for sure 18650 is perfect fit. For 80% of the time ZL with Eneloop AA is what I use.



Precisely why I just bought my sc52w. I know in a pinch I can grab a bunch of AAs and be good for a while with this light. I really like the ZL UI with multiple moonlight levels. I know some people don't like the UI but I find it the best UI switch combination. Also the support for 14500 cells at 500+ lumens put me over the edge in this one. Sc5 does not support 14500s and is too big.


----------



## Tachead (Feb 6, 2017)

marinemaster said:


> I only consider ZL and think of ZL only with Eneloop, referring to AA models. No matter how you slice it is smaller than 18650. Yea 18650 has its place, and my SC62 has proven that time and time again but anything 18650 is specialized lightning in my view. 30 years ago and 20 years ago and 10 years ago all I was using was D and C batteries lightning. In the past 5 years or more I am done with any lights D or C type and have not purchased any such battery. ZL has been the primary reason for that and of course the advancements in led technology and drivers. 18650 is a whole another animal and ZL also mastered that format but that is more if someone uses the light an entire day, days long trips, needs to reach out, etc. yes for sure 18650 is perfect fit. For 80% of the time ZL with Eneloop AA is what I use.



The SC52 can use 14500 or Eneloops(NiMH). I am not sure why ZL didn't design the SC5 to take both as well. Hopefully the MKII will allow both cell types. 

The SC63 is actually thinner in diameter and lighter in weight then the SC5(with or without the batteries). The SC5 is just over a cm shorter(11.2mm) but, imo an increase of diameter and/or weight is more noticeable in your pocket then length. Personally, I will take an 11.2mm increase in length in exchange for a thinner body, lighter weight, almost triple the available output(you don't have to use it but, its nice to have it available), and over 4 times the runtime but YMMV of course. 

I like Eneloop's too but, in a light the size of the SC5 it just doesn't seem practical. If I wanted small, I would go with the SC32 or even the SC52 if I was hell bent on AA's. 

I just don't understand why ZL would chose the SC5 to put this emitter in. Especially, when there is already a "c" version of the SC5. It seam like a bad decision to me and I bet a "c" version of the SC63, SC32, or SC600 with this emitter would have sold much better.


----------



## snowlover91 (Feb 6, 2017)

Perhaps ZL is planning to update more of their models with the same emitter they're using in the upcoming SC5 MK2? I know I'm excited about it and may buy one depending on the final specs, design, etc.


----------



## eraursls1984 (Feb 6, 2017)

Tachead said:


> The SC52 can use 14500 or Eneloops(NiMH). I am not sure why ZL didn't design the SC5 to take both as well. Hopefully the MKII will allow both cell types.


For efficiency. The wider the voltage range, the less efficient. Also I think they would have issues with the boost driver.



Tachead said:


> The SC63 is actually thinner in diameter and lighter in weight then the SC5(with or without the batteries). The SC5 is just over a cm shorter(11.2mm) but, imo an increase of diameter and/or weight is more noticeable in your pocket then length. Personally, I will take an 11.2mm increase in length in exchange for a thinner body, lighter weight, almost triple the available output(you don't have to use it but, its nice to have it available), and over 4 times the runtime but YMMV of course.
> 
> I like Eneloop's too but, in a light the size of the SC5 it just doesn't seem practical. If I wanted small, I would go with the SC32 or even the SC52 if I was hell bent on AA's.
> 
> I just don't understand why ZL would chose the SC5 to put this emitter in. Especially, when there is already a "c" version of the SC5. It seam like a bad decision to me and I bet a "c" version of the SC63, SC32, or SC600 with this emitter would have sold much better.


I agree the size doesn't work for me. I'd love the SC5 driver in a SC52 body. An SC52c would warrant an upgrade from my SC52w, especially if it had the newer fully programmable UI. I'm really hoping we see a SC64c this year. Fully programmable with a 4000K Hi-CRI XP-L. Along with headlamp models with the same.


----------



## Tachead (Feb 6, 2017)

snowlover91 said:


> Perhaps ZL is planning to update more of their models with the same emitter they're using in the upcoming SC5 MK2? I know I'm excited about it and may buy one depending on the final specs, design, etc.


They aren't unfortunately. I asked them that exact question in email last week. They said there is no plans for a SC63c or SC600c in the near future. I didn't ask about the SC32 however.


----------



## Tachead (Feb 6, 2017)

eraursls1984 said:


> For efficiency. The wider the voltage range, the less efficient.
> 
> 
> I agree the size doesn't work for me. I'd love the SC5 driver in a SC52 body. An SC52c would warrant an upgrade from my SC52w, especially if it had the newer fully programmable UI. I'm really hoping we see a SC64c this year. Fully programmable with a 4000K Hi-CRI XP-L. Along with headlamp models with the sI ame.



While this might be true in theory, it doesn't make much of a difference in practice. The SC52, with the wider voltage range, gets almost the exact same efficiency as the SC5 and it is an older design. 

Yeah, an SC52c with this emitter would be slightly more appealing(due to its smaller size and probable higher output on 14500)but, I likely still wouldn't buy it. I just don't buy AA lights anymore these days. If I am gonna go small I would rather have a SC32c. Or, how about a new 18350 powered light(SC42c?). It could run on 16340, 18350, or CR123a, now that would be sweet. Unfortunately, ZL has confirmed that no SC64c is coming anytime soon, I was hoping for that as well. I don't see the 18650 powered headlamps being updated anytime soon either because there already is c & d models that were released not very long ago.


----------



## eraursls1984 (Feb 6, 2017)

Tachead said:


> While this might be true in theory, it doesn't make much of a difference in practice. The SC52, with the wider voltage range, gets almost the exact same efficiency as the SC5 and it is an older design.


We will just have to disagree on what we consider "almost exact same efficiency". I wouldn't consider 16.7% increase almost exact. I'd consider that a significant step in efficiency.


----------



## Tachead (Feb 6, 2017)

eraursls1984 said:


> We will just have to disagree on what we consider "almost exact same efficiency". I wouldn't consider 16.7% increase almost exact. I'd consider that a significant step in efficiency.



I am not looking for an argument but, where do you get that number from? I think you may have done your calculations incorrectly. The closest mode to compare between the SC5 and SC52 L2 is the lowest H2 mode(115 vs 116 lumens).

SC5 - 115 lumens for 3.5 hours on an Eneloop Pro(2450mAh)

SC52 L2 - 116 lumens for 3 hours on a regular Eneloop(2000mAh)

So, if you do the math... 

2000/2450 = 0.816326531

So the Eneloop has about 18% less capacity then the Eneloop Pro.

3 hours + 18.3673469% = 3.55 hours(rounded) runtime on a 2450mAh Eneloop Pro

So both the SC5 and the SC52 L2 get almost exactly the same runtime(efficiency) if you go by ZL's numbers. In fact, the SC52 L2 actually gets slightly better efficiency because it was at 116 vs 115 lumens.


----------



## snowlover91 (Feb 6, 2017)

Tachead said:


> They aren't unfortunately. I asked them that exact question in email last week. They said there is no plans for a SC63c or SC600c in the near future. I didn't ask about the SC32 however.



When I emailed them last they said they might be coming out with the MK4 this year and an SC64 but weren't sure. Just an assumption here but if they use the new programmable circuits in one or both then maybe they will also use the same led as they plan to use in the SC5 MK2, assuming it performs well.


----------



## eraursls1984 (Feb 6, 2017)

Tachead said:


> I am not looking for an argument but, where do you get that number from? I think you may have done your calculations incorrectly.
> 
> SC5 - 115 lumens for 3.5 hours on an Eneloop Pro(2450mAh)
> 
> SC52 L2 - 116 lumens for 3 hours on a regular Eneloop(2000mAh)


I did not see where they stated the battery used. Surprised that the SC5 isn't more efficient, maybe due to the design of the boost driver.


----------



## Tachead (Feb 6, 2017)

snowlover91 said:


> When I emailed them last they said they might be coming out with the MK4 this year and an SC64 but weren't sure. Just an assumption here but if they use the new programmable circuits in one or both then maybe they will also use the same led as they plan to use in the SC5 MK2, assuming it performs well.



I sure hope they do come out with a "c" variant of one of their 18650 based lights one day but, it doesn't look like it will be for quite some time considering what they told me unfortunately. Who knows which emitter they will use by then. I would think they likely have a limited supply of the XP-L's so, maybe they won't have any left by then? Honestly, I kind of hope they go with something newer then the old generation XP-L for the 18650 lights anyway. Cree makes a 2-step 90+ CRI XP-L2 Easywhite in 4000K that would be a good option. They also make a 2-step 90+ CRI XHP50 in 4000K. Or, how about a Nichia for a change ZL


----------



## Tachead (Feb 6, 2017)

eraursls1984 said:


> I did not see where they stated the battery used. Surprised that the SC5 isn't more efficient, maybe due to the design of the boost driver.



Generally, I don't think drivers take a very large efficiency hit by having a higher voltage range, especially when just driving a 3V emitter. It is probably just a very slight difference. And, a small efficiency hit is worth it for the added cell compatibility and increased output potential on Li-ion imo.


----------



## StorminMatt (Feb 6, 2017)

Another thing I would like to see on a new AA/14500 Zebralight is PID on high. If they can use it in the SC32, then why do they stick with a stupid timer stepdown in the SC52 and SC5?


----------



## Tachead (Feb 6, 2017)

StorminMatt said:


> Another thing I would like to see on a new AA/14500 Zebralight is PID on high. If they can use it in the SC32, then why do they stick with a stupid timer stepdown in the SC52 and SC5?




I agree:thumbsup:


----------



## roger-roger (Feb 6, 2017)

Instead of just sitting on the sidelines, I'd like more development on the CR123A/SC32x.


----------



## Tachead (Feb 6, 2017)

Here is a pic to show the difference in size between the SC5 and SC63...







And, here is the size difference between the SC5 and SC32...






And finally, here is the SC5 vs the SC52...


----------



## Tachead (Feb 6, 2017)

roger-roger said:


> Instead of just sitting on the sidelines, I'd like more development on the CR123A/SC32x.




+1

It would be nice to see a new version of the SC32, especially a "c" version. I think it would be a perfect candidate for the second light using this emitter.


----------



## roger-roger (Feb 6, 2017)

Tachead said:


> Here is a pic to show the difference in size between the SC5 and SC63...
> 
> 
> 
> ...




The SC5 felt very good in *my* hand, and less so in *my* pocket. In pursuit of minimalism, the choice came up between the two, and I chose the SC52.


----------



## eraursls1984 (Feb 6, 2017)

Tachead said:


> Cree makes a 2-step 90+ CRI XP-L2 Easywhite in 4000K that would be a good option. They also make a 2-step 90+ CRI XHP50 in 4000K. Or, how about a Nichia for a change ZL


Yes, but aren't both of those quad die? That's the problem with the SC600Fd Plus, and the H600Fc/d (not available as a H600c/d).


----------



## eraursls1984 (Feb 6, 2017)

Tachead said:


> Generally, I don't think drivers take a very large efficiency hit by having a higher voltage range, especially when just driving a 3V emitter. It is probably just a very slight difference. And, a small efficiency hit is worth it for the added cell compatibility and increased output potential on Li-ion imo.


I'm not sure if it's just poor engineering, but that's the reason I've seen some other manufactures use for only supporting a small voltage range.


----------



## marinemaster (Feb 6, 2017)

14500 battery is a LiIon pretend battery. 

18650 is a real LiIon battery. Millions of $$$ have been invested by laptop manufacturers research batteries groups to come up with it. It was not designed to power led parts. Just so happen that leds got lucky as they like 3V or higher which 18650 provides in spades.

All flashlight are designed around the batteries.


----------



## Tachead (Feb 6, 2017)

eraursls1984 said:


> Yes, but aren't both of those quad die? That's the problem with the SC600Fd Plus, and the H600Fc/d (not available as a H600c/d).




Quad die emitters are only a problem if the dies are spaced too far apart like on the XHP50/70 and XM-L2 Easywhite. The XHP35 and XHP35 HI that ZL is using in many of their new models are quad die but, they can be used with a clear lens without beam artifacts because the dies are spaced closely together. 

The XHP50 I mentioned needs a frosted lens or a heavily op reflector to get rid of any beam artifacts(it's the same emitter as in the Plus now just 4000K instead of 5000K). But, the 4000K version that they could use in a "c" version of the Plus is 2-step vs. the 3-step one in the current "d" version of the Plus. So, it will have considerably lower tint variation. 

The XP-L2 could be used with a clear lens. It is just a newer version of the one ZL is using in this SC5 MKII. 

Nichia options like the 219C SW40 R9050 sm403 and the NV4L144AMT/ART SW40 R9050 smX03 could be used with a clear lens as well and will have very low tint variation like the 2-step MacAdam Ellipse Cree's(sm403 is Nichia's tightest tint bin). They are also high output and quite efficient.

There is also a 90+ CRI 3500K XHP35 Easywhite available that could be used with a clear lens but, it is only available in a 3-step bin.


----------



## Tachead (Feb 7, 2017)

eraursls1984 said:


> I'm not sure if it's just poor engineering, but that's the reason I've seen some other manufactures use for only supporting a small voltage range.



Although in theory it should slightly affect efficiency, I suspect it is mainly excuses for poor engineering or cost savings most of the time. Judging by the SC5 and SC52 it can't affect efficiency very much if the drivers are built right. And really, we are at a point now that efficiency is already so high we can afford a very slight penalty for the benefits of an expanded voltage range imo anyway. Look at the runtimes we are getting on some of these lights.


----------



## snowlover91 (Feb 7, 2017)

Tachead said:


> +1
> 
> It would be nice to see a new version of the SC32, especially a "c" version. I think it would be a perfect candidate for the second light using this emitter.



Unfortunately ZL told me in their email no plans for the SC32 to be updated right now. It seems their focus is on the AA and 18650 models, however I'd love a SC32 update.


----------



## Tachead (Feb 8, 2017)

snowlover91 said:


> Unfortunately ZL told me in their email no plans for the SC32 to be updated right now. It seems their focus is on the AA and 18650 models, however I'd love a SC32 update.



That's unfortunate considering the SC32 hasn't been updated in quite a while and has never had a "c or d" version. You would think they would want to stay current and compete with lights like the Olight S1, Smini, and all the other CR123a/16340 based lights. It seems like they(CR123a/16340 lights) are some of the best selling lights in the flashlight world right now. I think a lot of people would buy a SC33c or d.

I am not sure what they can really do with their 18650 models at this point. They have already said they aren't making any "c" versions anytime soon, the Plus "d" version just came out fairly recently, and they already use the latest LED's so, other then a programmable UI what could they really improve on over the MKIII series? Just a programmable UI wouldn't be enough of an upgrade to warrant spending another $100 for people that already own a MKIII. Except for the real ZL junkies anyway and they are only a very small part of their market. You would think they would be better to concentrate on their outdated models first and wait to update the models that were just updated until there is newer LED's available and more improvements could be incorporated. Or, at least offer different variants like other frosted lens c & d models, clear lens c & d models, SC63 HI models, etc. I really don't get their thinking and I guess we will just have to wait and see what they will release going forward.


----------



## markr6 (Feb 8, 2017)

Tachead said:


> Just a programmable UI wouldn't be enough of an upgrade to warrant spending another $100 for people that already own a MKIII. Except for the real ZL junkies anyway and they are only a very small part of their market.



I agree. Even I will probably hold off on that. Sometimes I want a higher medium (M1), but it's not a big deal.


----------



## snowlover91 (Feb 8, 2017)

Yeah for me it depends on how the programmable UI is implemented and what options it gives as to whether I go for it or not. I would love to see the SC32 updated as well, it's probably the most neglected as far as updates go. The one I had I gave to my dad for Father's Day one year and he loves it. The tint was really nice too for the lower cri. Updating it with higher cri, new design, and programmable UI would make it a compelling option.


----------



## ssanasisredna (Mar 1, 2017)

Deleted


----------



## Lex Icon (Apr 4, 2017)

The idea of a two-step HiCri 93-95 sounds great, but if I traced the right product information and binning chart, those of us hoping for a Rose biased tint could be in for a letdown, with a likely bet the tint will remain above the ANSI BBL.

http://www.cree.com/led-components/media/documents/dsXPL2-0D.pdf






Personally, I would prefer to have them produce a 3500K. version instead of a 4000K.
In fact, everything below a color temperature of 4000K. looks well centered on the line.


----------



## scs (Apr 4, 2017)

Lex Icon said:


> The idea of a two-step HiCri 93-95 sounds great, but if I traced the right product information and binning chart, those of us hoping for a Rose biased tint could be in for a letdown, with a likely bet the tint will remain above the ANSI BBL.
> 
> http://www.cree.com/led-components/media/documents/dsXPL2-0D.pdf
> 
> ...



Saw that graphic and had the same thought. Also concerned that the reflector might introduce tint shift across beam. If so hope a frosted version would fix that.


----------



## markr6 (Apr 4, 2017)

Same odds as winning $1 on those scratch-offs  Fingers crossed!


----------



## Lex Icon (Apr 4, 2017)

scs said:


> Saw that graphic and had the same thought. Also concerned that the reflector might introduce tint shift across beam. If so hope a frosted version would fix that.


You are right.
After seeing the chart, I would like to find 3 CREE XPL2 3500K. HiCri 2 step Easy Whites to feed into a triple, TIR optics might help a lot.
CREE Order Code: XPLBWT-00-0000- 000UU535H


----------



## roger-roger (Apr 4, 2017)

snowlover91 said:


> Unfortunately ZL told me in their email no plans for the SC32 to be updated right now. It seems their focus is on the AA and 18650 models, however I'd love a SC32 update.




They told me there were no plans for an SC53 as well. I'd hope for an update (SC33?) near the end of summer.


----------



## twistedraven (Apr 4, 2017)

Time to buy 5 and sell 4 on cpf.

Speaking of tints, I'm wondering how the tint difference from hotspot to corona to spill will be on these easywhites. They're not HI versions so they will interact with the reflectors differently, whereas the HI emitters don't have any tint difference from hotspot to spill. I'm so spoiled off that.


----------



## Lex Icon (Apr 4, 2017)

twistedraven said:


> Time to buy 5 and sell 4 on cpf.


When they released the 3 step SC600Fd III Plus Hi Cri, they seem to have had a lot of returns. I hear they complained about spending too much time explaining things to unhappy customers, and then stopped production to free up their time in order to make money assembling lights people really did want for the Christmas Season. 

If the bin chart is correct, which I truly wish not to believe, it is mind-boggling to imagine they would go with an 2 step led barely brushing the ANSI BBL after their unpleasant experience. What would be the sense of buying a HiCri led nearly certain to be greenish tinged, unless of course you are part of the apparent minority.
Maybe CREE gave them a discount to unload these odd duck off-the-line, 2 step bin emitters.


----------



## twistedraven (Apr 4, 2017)

They are above the BBL, but I bet it's close enough to where most people wouldn't see a green tinge unless directly compared against another that's on or below the BBL.


----------



## Strintguy (Apr 5, 2017)

Any idea why they wouldn't use Nichia for high CRI?


----------



## Lex Icon (Apr 5, 2017)

Strintguy said:


> Any idea why they wouldn't use Nichia for high CRI?


I remember reading in this forum that remarks made by George Yo, one of the owners, justified their avoidance of using Nichia due to sourcing issues, and the tints usually being too rosy. 

Eagtac (with their 219Cs) has proven Nichia knows how to provide greenish and yellowish tints, and they, along with other manufacturers, have seemed able to establish a supply line relationship with Nichia.


----------



## markr6 (Apr 5, 2017)

Strintguy said:


> Any idea why they wouldn't use Nichia for high CRI?



They always say "difficult to source". Can't anyone just get online and buy a reel? I know there's a minimum, but it seems like they would go thru a reel on this light, and the SC64 they know they need to make with a Nichia!


----------



## markr6 (Apr 5, 2017)

Lex Icon said:


> Eagtac (with their 219Cs) has proven Nichia knows how to provide greenish and yellowish tints, and they, along with other manufacturers, have seemed able to establish a supply line relationship with Nichia.



Yeah I bought one of those Sportac dropins with a 219B...NASTY YELLOW! I was totally shocked after having so many nice Nichia lights.


----------



## Tachead (Apr 5, 2017)

Strintguy said:


> Any idea why they wouldn't use Nichia for high CRI?


Likely because Nichia's are generally far less efficient and offer much less output. This light, for instance, is only slightly less bright then the most powerful 18650 powered 219C lights and it is running on a single AA. ZL seems to try and offer the brightest and most efficient lights they can. Nichia's also aren't immune to tint variation and most of the lights using their newer emitters(219C) have been said to have tints above the BBRL as well. 

Unfortunately there are only so many emitters available and this is one of the newest and best offerings in 4000K CCT even if its tint lottery does lean towards tints above the BBRL. At least ZL is offering us lights with emitters like this. No other mainstream flashlight company, that I am aware of, is offering any lights with tightly binned high CRI emitters like this. I think we need to keep that in mind.


----------



## Tachead (Apr 5, 2017)

Lex Icon said:


> The idea of a two-step HiCri 93-95 sounds great, but if I traced the right product information and binning chart, those of us hoping for a Rose biased tint could be in for a letdown, with a likely bet the tint will remain above the ANSI BBL.
> 
> http://www.cree.com/led-components/media/documents/dsXPL2-0D.pdf
> 
> ...



I agree and also would have preferred the 3500K version but, ZL generally uses 4000K for their "c" models and probably didn't want to deviate from that. We also have to keep in mind that there is still a tint lottery with the 3500K model, you just increase your chances of getting an example below the BBRL by about 25-30%. At least they were able to source 2-step bins so they tint variation should be quite small.


----------



## Lex Icon (Apr 5, 2017)

twistedraven said:


> Time to buy 5 and sell 4 on cpf.


Surely the post was innocent, and meant to be facetious, I take no issue and was in fact thinking of posting something along the same lines. I avoided doing so because it has previously been a sore point among members here.

The main reason I have never purchased direct from ZL has to do with their sales policy permitting people to cherry pick, returning lights with tint shift, donut holes, undesirable colors, hues, tones or whatever it is that displeases a buyer. Everybody should have the right to return items they are displeased with; if they were resold at a reduced price as rejects or defective merchandise instead of resold as new, ZLs reselling practice could be defended. Obviously, nothing prevents them from pawning returns off on other re-sellers who lack the same disposition, perhaps resulting in the reason I stopped adding to my collection of nasty tinted ZLs.

Human nature being what it is, I understand enough reasons for liberal return and refund policies not working out in the end, just look at Sears. Years ago they offered a 3 month unconditional return or replacement policy that left them open for abuse, People would buy lawnmowers, chain saws or whatever, use them for just under three months, then bring them back for a refund. Others would buy beat up, worn out or broken Craftsman brand sockets and hand tools at garage or rummage sales, get a new replacement, and sell them for a neat profit. Even Best Buy had to cut their unconditional return policy from 30, down to 15 days.

To their credit, ZLs are compact, efficient, powerful, durable, and innovative, with some of the best drivers available; ZLs remain a ‘tour de force’ worthy of emulation. It is perplexing two of the most popular ZL model series, the SC52 and SC62/3, are no longer available in the ‘d’ permutation with higher Cri (albeit much less efficient) Rebel leds. At least for the time being, the SC5x/6x models cited seem relegated to the back burner. The SC600w Mk III Hi appears to have the most admirable tint of the SC series, but fits outside of my needs size-wise, and I don’t require another headlamp. Count me among those frustrated with the direction the company has chosen. A year ago, I thought of selling all my other lights, eventually limiting myself to ZLs when the new generations appeared. 
Not needing more powerful lights, or models with lumen proud mass-market appeal, now I have gradually stopped using ZLs, in favor of lights kinder to my particular, perhaps worn out retinas.


----------



## jon_slider (Apr 7, 2017)

Lex Icon said:


> if I traced the right product information


nice sleuthing
and if I overlaid the blue square properly.. orange yellow tint, not green






Im looking forward to beamshots


----------



## Swedpat (Apr 8, 2017)

I will probably get it. Maybe it will be superfluous to keep both the present SC5W and MKII but I can sell or give SC5W to a friend. But I will wait until august before the purchase because it is only a few weeks left of dark nights in my location.


----------



## Lex Icon (Apr 8, 2017)

FYI; Paraphrasing a post from 3 days ago in another forum, purportedly copying an email sent from ZL (which obviously I should not post in full), the company stated that they are willing to try using Nichia emitters when, and if, 2 step leds are made available.


----------



## recDNA (Apr 8, 2017)

What makes it MKII as opposed. to. MKIII?


----------



## eraursls1984 (Apr 8, 2017)

recDNA said:


> What makes it MKII as opposed. to. MKIII?


Because it's the first major change? So far there was only variations of the same SC5, I believe. The original SC5 was discontinued and a SC5F, and SC5 OP replaced it because the beam was terrible, but no major change.


----------



## GarageBoy (Apr 26, 2017)

There still havent been any runtimes posted on the ZL site...


----------



## iamlucky13 (Apr 26, 2017)

GarageBoy said:


> There still havent been any runtimes posted on the ZL site...



That has been on my mind, too.

Hopefully they're just waiting to perform official runtime tests with copies straight off the final production line, in which case they might be doing those tests at the same time as they start shipping the pre-ordered copies. If that's the case, we could even see people posting runtimes here before ZL posts their own figures on their website.

It could also be due to unexpected results with the runtimes they're trying to fix. I'm going to stick to hoping for the more optimistic scenario for the time being.


----------



## snowlover91 (Apr 26, 2017)

iamlucky13 said:


> That has been on my mind, too.
> 
> Hopefully they're just waiting to perform official runtime tests with copies straight off the final production line, in which case they might be doing those tests at the same time as they start shipping the pre-ordered copies. If that's the case, we could even see people posting runtimes here before ZL posts their own figures on their website.
> 
> It could also be due to unexpected results with the runtimes they're trying to fix. I'm going to stick to hoping for the more optimistic scenario for the time being.



They've had a few lights recently where they didn't post the runtimes until the lights either shipped or after the fact. I expect it will be similar to the previous model with runtime with minor variances.


----------



## snowlover91 (Apr 27, 2017)

Update from Zebralight... I asked them about how soon these will start shipping. They said 2-3 days for international orders and about 10 days for US orders. Runtimes will be added in the next few days with measurements from the first production batch. 

I also asked about the new pocket clip if it would be compatible with older Zebralights. They said it is and they may sell it as an accessory too. Those who live internationally may get a shipping notice before the week is out! Good luck to all.


----------



## GarageBoy (Apr 27, 2017)

Did the old SC5 stay brighter and longer on a single AA vs. some 2xAA lights? Seems to do as well as a quark AA^2 XML


----------



## Swede74 (Apr 28, 2017)

Runtimes are up on Zebralight's website. This is a table for easy comparison between the old SC5 Fc Mark 1 and then new SC5c Mk 2.


 ZL SC5 Fc (Mk1) ZL SC5c (Mk 2)ModeOutputTimeOutputTimeH1375 then 2283 min total 0.8 h475 then 3523 min total 0.5 hH2a2280.9 h3520.9 hH2b1401.8 h2361.5 hH2c813.5 h1442.8 hM1348.5 h794.9 hM2a1416.5 h409.6 hM2b5.642 h1821 hM2cn/a7.448 hL12.24 days2.84.2 daysL2a0.816 days1.014 daysL2b0.250 days0.2850 daysL2c0.074 months0,084.3 months
Screen capture for people using Forum Runner or other apps that sometimes do not display tables properly.





[/URL] photo album upload[/IMG]


----------



## markr6 (Apr 28, 2017)

Looks good. Now that we can program it further, I think I'll use the following to keep me from using 475lm mode too often (I won't be able to resist otherwise!)

H1: 352 (0.9 hr)
H2: 144 (2.8 hr)


----------



## snowlover91 (Apr 28, 2017)

It seems to be a bit more efficient from what I can tell. The closest comparison is the old 81lm mode at 3.5 hours vs the new 79lm mode for 4.9 hours. That's a jump of 1.4 hours with a 2 lumen difference.. which would indicate this light is even more efficient. The old 140 lumen mode is now outpaced by the 144 lumen mode for a longer runtime as well. Great news!


----------



## iamlucky13 (Apr 28, 2017)

Rock solid. The "low" CRI model runtimes are up, too, and also look very good, assuming the regulation patterns are similar.

Here's a few scattered comparisons instead of a full table like Swede's helpful post above.

SC5w: 
304 lumens x 0.9 hrs = 274 lumen*hours
45 lumens x 8.5 hrs = 383 lumen*hours
1 lumen x 16 days = 384 lumen*hours

SC5w II:
407 lumens x 0.9 hrs = 366 lumen*hours
46 lumens x 9.6 hrs = 442 lumen*hours
1.1 lumens x 14 days = 370 lumen*hours

Depending how much of this is preliminary pending or estimated in lieu of months of low mode testing, there might be some sort of change to the way the driver operates below 1.1 lumens, because in the next mode down, the Mk II spec moves back ahead of the Mk I.

We're looking possibly better than a 15% improvement in overall efficacy AND a bump in CRI. It almost sounds too good to be true.


----------



## LightObsession (Apr 28, 2017)

Yee-haw! I like those output level options, but must hold off a bit longer.

I'm eager to see the run-time numbers for the H53Fc. I'm wanting an angle light.


----------



## wolfgaze (Apr 28, 2017)

markr6 said:


> Looks good. Now that we can program it further, I think I'll use the following to keep me from using 475lm mode too often (I won't be able to resist otherwise!)
> 
> H1: 352 (0.9 hr)
> H2: 144 (2.8 hr)



If I get this light I will likely configure it in the following order:

79/236/40


----------



## GarageBoy (Apr 30, 2017)

That circuit is sorcery


----------



## vadimax (May 1, 2017)

I am curious if it is possible to see anything with 0.08lm


----------



## iamlucky13 (May 1, 2017)

vadimax said:


> I am curious if it is possible to see anything with 0.08lm



Definitely. When your eyes are fully adjusted to the dark, it's an excellent level for finding your way around a darkened bedroom or tent without disturbing others or ruining your night vision.

Your mileage may vary, of course. I know not everybody has the same level of night vision.

If there's any competing light at all, however, it seems very dim.


----------



## LightObsession (May 1, 2017)

GarageBoy said:


> That circuit is sorcery



That's why Harry Potter has one.


----------



## Hugh Johnson (May 1, 2017)

I have lights with 0.2 and 0.4 lumens. The 0.2 is a more focused beam so the intensity between the 2 is similar. When I'm checking on the kids they seem like high powered spotlights. I'm concerned about waking them up. When I'm walking down the hall the flashes of light are disturbing for my wife. A fraction of the output would suit me much better. It sounds like a perfect level for me.


----------



## markr6 (May 1, 2017)

iamlucky13 said:


> Definitely. When your eyes are fully adjusted to the dark, it's an excellent level for finding your way around a darkened bedroom or tent without disturbing others or ruining your night vision.
> 
> Your mileage may vary, of course. I know not everybody has the same level of night vision.
> 
> If there's any competing light at all, however, it seems very dim.



No doubt. I use 0.06lm on my H600w all the time when backpacking. Waking up at 3am in the pitch dark, it's very easy to have too much light. Especially when working with things up close under a tarp or in a tent.


----------



## BugoutBoys (May 3, 2017)

I just don't really understand the point of a sub-1 hour flashlight. I'd so much prefer the runtime to the output in that case.


----------



## markr6 (May 3, 2017)

BugoutBoys said:


> I just don't really understand the point of a sub-1 hour flashlight. I'd so much prefer the runtime to the output in that case.



That's why I stick with mainly 18650 lights. It's just too hard to resist using the high mode most times, leaving you with a dead battery way too soon on 1xAA lights. But I'm still looking forward to this one for less critical applications...just a few minutes here and there around the house.


----------



## snowlover91 (May 3, 2017)

BugoutBoys said:


> I just don't really understand the point of a sub-1 hour flashlight. I'd so much prefer the runtime to the output in that case.



Its only sub-1 hour if used at the highest setting. Otherwise you easily get 2 hours or more of runtime. It's better to have an AA light with the option for higher brightness if needed than one without the option, imo. I run my SC5 lights around the medium or low high settings and get plenty of runtime that way. It all depends on what you use the light for and how you use it too.


----------



## iamlucky13 (May 3, 2017)

BugoutBoys said:


> I just don't really understand the point of a sub-1 hour flashlight. I'd so much prefer the runtime to the output in that case.



You and I clearly use lights differently. I prefer to switch back and forth between higher and lower modes as needed.

I keep my lights on lower modes depending on what I'm doing, and only turn them up when needed for as long as needed. When I'm hiking or working outside, I find 50 lumens a pretty good level, but if I need to see something further away, I turn it up for however long I need, then back down. Aside from preserving battery life, this helps preserve night vision. If I'm blasting the ground in front of me at max output while walking, then regardless of what the max output is, it seems feeble when I look up and try to see into the distance.

More simply, if you need high lumens for multiple hours, a 1xAA flashlight just isn't the best choice. If you don't need it, Zebralight gives you a lot of choices for specific light levels - too many for some.


----------



## BBL (Jun 13, 2017)

I just ordered a SC5mk2. Now i realised they are on back order. Did i just miss the first batch, or are there none out yet?


----------



## markr6 (Jun 13, 2017)

BBL said:


> I just ordered a SC5mk2. Now i realised they are on back order. Did i just miss the first batch, or are there none out yet?



They went quick. I ordered back in May and it shipped last week (SC5w II). Unfortunately USPS lost it and it's just sitting somewhere 2miles away from me. I can't do anything about until 4 more days when I can file a claim.


----------



## Lumencrazy (Jun 13, 2017)

vadimax said:


> I am curious if it is possible to see anything with 0.08lm



Perfect amount of light waking up in a tent in the middle of the night ( not talking about a public campground with street lights). You can find whatever you need without waking anyone up. Also completely preserves ones night vision.


----------



## gunga (Jun 13, 2017)

I use it all the time. In a few circumstances I find it too bright (no joke).


----------



## TCY (Jun 14, 2017)

My H53Fc's firefly is 0.26lm and I find it a bit too bright when it's completely dark out there. I guess 0.06 is the spot on firefly level but I'd like to keep things brighter than it should be.


----------



## Hugh Johnson (Jun 14, 2017)

vadimax said:


> I am curious if it is possible to see anything with 0.08lm



I have a light with 0.1 lumens (may actually be a bit brighter), which is close, and I find it overwhelmingly bright when I check on the kids (try shining it on someone's face when they're sleeping and you'll be concerned about waking them up). I actually even find it a bit much to ceiling bounce when I'm doing these night time checks. It's also more than I need for walking around a dark house. Yup, I definitely need a light with sublumen level at the second decimal place.


----------



## tigman_tim (Jun 14, 2017)

I too use firefly for camping. I just leave my spare light on 24/7 in firefly mode in the top of my tent; it's good for weeks


----------



## markr6 (Jun 14, 2017)

markr6 said:


> They went quick. I ordered back in May and it shipped last week (SC5w II). Unfortunately USPS lost it and it's just sitting somewhere 2miles away from me. I can't do anything about until 4 more days when I can file a claim.



I tried the lost package form online. 20 minutes later I check the tracking again and it finally got updated. Scheduled for tomorrow. Who knows.


----------



## snowlover91 (Jun 15, 2017)

markr6 said:


> I tried the lost package form online. 20 minutes later I check the tracking again and it finally got updated. Scheduled for tomorrow. Who knows.



I guess it didn't come today?


----------



## markr6 (Jun 16, 2017)

snowlover91 said:


> I guess it didn't come today?



It did, I just got busy working on painting the exterior of my house (worst job ever). I gave it a test and I like it. Not real excited about it, but OK. Compared to my SC63w is nearly impossible to tell the difference; the SC63w may be a slightly warmer. It's about the same as my SC600w HI, a little warmer than my SC52w (the most noticeable difference) and a little warmer than my H52w.

The SC5c was just too yellowish for me, especially when comparing to other 4000K high CRI lights. So this was sort of an impulse buy since I liked the form of the actual body so much. Everything is fine - anodizing, switch, threads, etc. Next to the SC63w, I wonder why I keep buying 1xAA lights since the SC63w is not much bigger. I still have a habit of thinking I "need" at least a few AA lights...that's my only justification


----------



## TCY (Jun 16, 2017)

markr6 said:


> It did, I just got busy working on painting the exterior of my house (worst job ever). I gave it a test and I like it. Not real excited about it, but OK. Compared to my SC63w is nearly impossible to tell the difference; the SC63w may be a slightly warmer. It's about the same as my SC600w HI, a little warmer than my SC52w (the most noticeable difference) and a little warmer than my H52w.
> 
> The SC5c was just too yellowish for me, especially when comparing to other 4000K high CRI lights. So this was sort of an impulse buy since I liked the form of the actual body so much. Everything is fine - anodizing, switch, threads, etc. Next to the SC63w, I wonder why I keep buying 1xAA lights since the SC63w is not much bigger. I still have a habit of thinking I "need" at least a few AA lights...that's my only justification



Of course you need AA lights, how else are we going to survive a zombie apocalypse with no power to charge our fancy 18650s?:naughty:

Glad the tint on your new light is OK though, before I clicked into this thread I thought you might go "ugh" on the tint and return it too.


----------



## markr6 (Jun 16, 2017)

TCY said:


> Glad the tint on your new light is OK though, before I clicked into this thread I thought you might go "ugh" on the tint and return it too.



I figured I had a 50/50 chance of keeping it, at best. Glad it worked out! And the new UI I thought I would love? I don't think I'll even mess with it; stock settings are fine. Number on paper always work out differently once you start using it.


----------



## eraursls1984 (Jun 16, 2017)

markr6 said:


> I figured I had a 50/50 chance of keeping it, at best. Glad it worked out! And the new UI I thought I would love? I don't think I'll even mess with it; stock settings are fine. Number on paper always work out differently once you start using it.


I can understand that because IMO they already made some of the necessary changes in G5.


----------



## marinemaster (Jun 18, 2017)

The Zebralight AA is more fun, more personal, pretty much fits in any pocket, backpack, drawer, is the size that makes it so versatile.

The SC62 is too much all business.


----------



## ven (Jul 12, 2017)

1st ZL for me, could not resist the hi cri and to try out an AA light(for a change). I can not believe how light the light is!, 49g on the scale . But what a difference the eneloops pro makes at 30g as it does almost feel double in weight. Empty very light, pop an AA in and it moves from very light to a hefty/solid feel. Form factor reminds me more of a 16340 light of which I do like a lot.
UI wise seems good so far , like the options available but most of my uses will be medium 79lm. Is there a way to make this one click (high)other than two clicks from off?

Dont know if to use as EDC rotation or simply keep in work and use to break up other lights.


----------



## newbie66 (Jul 12, 2017)

ven said:


> 1st ZL for me, could not resist the hi cri and to try out an AA light(for a change). I can not believe how light the light is!, 49g on the scale . But what a difference the eneloops pro makes at 30g as it does almost feel double in weight. Empty very light, pop an AA in and it moves from very light to a hefty/solid feel. Form factor reminds me more of a 16340 light of which I do like a lot.
> UI wise seems good so far , like the options available but most of my uses will be medium 79lm. Is there a way to make this one click (high)other than two clicks from off?
> 
> Dont know if to use as EDC rotation or simply keep in work and use to break up other lights.



Congratulations! Finally you got the Zebra after decades!!! 

I can't give any advice on the new ui since I don't own one of the new models. 

But have fun with it!


----------



## autoxer (Jul 12, 2017)

ven said:


> 1st ZL for me, could not resist the hi cri and to try out an AA light(for a change). I can not believe how light the light is!, 49g on the scale . But what a difference the eneloops pro makes at 30g as it does almost feel double in weight. Empty very light, pop an AA in and it moves from very light to a hefty/solid feel. Form factor reminds me more of a 16340 light of which I do like a lot.
> UI wise seems good so far , like the options available but most of my uses will be medium 79lm. Is there a way to make this one click (high)other than two clicks from off?
> 
> Dont know if to use as EDC rotation or simply keep in work and use to break up other lights.



You can definitely program the light to work this way. 

I would suggest putting your light in mode Group 6 or 7. You can do this with 6 (or 7) quick clicks from off. That way you can keep your stock mode Group 5 in tact.

Once in G6 or G7, you can program *any* level (and also it's sub level) to *any* available brightness. To do this you enter that level, then perform 6 double-clicks, and that will put that level into programming mode. To change the brightness you can double-click to increase the brightness level, and triple-click to decrease it. When you're at the brightness level you want to save, a single click off saves it.

Hopefully that's an OK description... basically to program your single-click light level, select G6 with 6 clicks. Then single click it on, double-click 6 times to enter programming mode, then double and triple-click the brightness up and down to program it to the light level you desire, then single click off.

Keep in mind you can program any level and sub-level this way in G6 and G7. Only thing to note is that if you enter a level, then double-click into a sub-level, you will need to turn the light off and back on to program that specific sub-level. Otherwise the double-click you used to select the sub-level will actually try to program the first level... it's a little hard to explain but you will get the hang of it. (Basically, make sure when you program a level that you turn the light on straight into that level, then do your 6 double-clicks - that's the most fool-proof way).

Note also that once you select a mode group, your light will stay in that group, even through battery changes. You can easily swap between mode groups quickly with 5, 6, or 7 clicks from off if needed.

I bought the SC5w MKII recently. It was also my first ZL, and I am really enjoying it so far!


----------



## newbie66 (Jul 12, 2017)

autoxer said:


> You can definitely program the light to work this way.
> 
> I would suggest putting your light in mode Group 6 or 7. You can do this with 6 (or 7) quick clicks from off. That way you can keep your stock mode Group 5 in tact.
> 
> ...



Good to know you are enjoying it. Nice lghts.


----------



## recDNA (Jul 12, 2017)

autoxer said:


> You can definitely program the light to work this way.
> 
> I would suggest putting your light in mode Group 6 or 7. You can do this with 6 (or 7) quick clicks from off. That way you can keep your stock mode Group 5 in tact.
> 
> ...


Great explanation but whoosh it blew right by me. Fortunately I don't think reprogramming you describe works in my old sc62w.


----------



## ven (Jul 12, 2017)

newbie66 said:


> Congratulations! Finally you got the Zebra after decades!!!
> 
> I can't give any advice on the new ui since I don't own one of the new models.
> 
> But have fun with it!




Thank you newbie, its a cute light for sure. Next to the t10t AA



Nice ano, nice beam with no fuglyness or holes etc. Tint/CT wise defo towards yellow, kind of reminds me a little of the 219c 4000k. 



Fits in well with 16340 size lights for my edc uses anyway.



Compared to one of my other work users, its tiny!








autoxer said:


> You can definitely program the light to work this way.
> 
> I would suggest putting your light in mode Group 6 or 7. You can do this with 6 (or 7) quick clicks from off. That way you can keep your stock mode Group 5 in tact.
> 
> ...



Thank you autoxer, great info/ description , appreciate the time. I have managed(thanks to your help) to get a decent level on 1 click, not sure which or how bright it is but guess anywhere between 80-140lm= pretty much perfect for 90%+ of my general uses,home or work.

So i have it 1 click for a medium level which would get most use(most use for this light will be in artificial light where bellow 60lm does not cut it, even close up). 2 clicks is a high, not the highest of the H's though as i dont need 500 or so lumens. But to the eye its a noticeable bump up for that odd use that requires more output.


----------



## newbie66 (Jul 12, 2017)

Awesome collection as always. :twothumbs


----------



## Tixx (Jul 12, 2017)

Lex Icon said:


> The idea of a two-step HiCri 93-95 sounds great, but if I traced the right product information and binning chart, those of us hoping for a Rose biased tint could be in for a letdown, with a likely bet the tint will remain above the ANSI BBL.
> 
> http://www.cree.com/led-components/media/documents/dsXPL2-0D.pdf
> 
> ...


Yes, rose biased would be my most preferred. Thanks for posting this info!


----------



## TCY (Jul 13, 2017)

ven said:


> 1st ZL for me, could not resist the hi cri and to try out an AA light(for a change). I can not believe how light the light is!, 49g on the scale . But what a difference the eneloops pro makes at 30g as it does almost feel double in weight. Empty very light, pop an AA in and it moves from very light to a hefty/solid feel. Form factor reminds me more of a 16340 light of which I do like a lot.
> UI wise seems good so far , like the options available but most of my uses will be medium 79lm. Is there a way to make this one click (high)other than two clicks from off?
> 
> Dont know if to use as EDC rotation or simply keep in work and use to break up other lights.



Grats, your first Zebra after so many years:twothumbs

I'm sure you'll get more

A good way to know exactly which mode you've programmed into each level is crank it up to the max and follow the brightness table provided by Zebralight as you step down.


----------



## markr6 (Jul 13, 2017)

I was reminded once again last night that I just don't care much for 1xAA lights. I feel like I hardly used this light, but after a battery check I got 1 flash. 1.19v.

I know it's not the light's fault, but running it on medium with a few high bursts here and there still ran it down before I knew it. OTOH, I feel like I never charge my SC63w...when I do it's something like topping it off from 75%.

Just a personal thing...but I still feel the need for 1xAA lights even though I never ran into the end of the world where everyone was making a run for batteries and I needed an easily available AA.


----------



## eraursls1984 (Jul 13, 2017)

markr6 said:


> I was reminded once again last night that I just don't care much for 1xAA lights. I feel like I hardly used this light, but after a battery check I got 1 flash. 1.19v.
> 
> I know it's not the light's fault, but running it on medium with a few high bursts here and there still ran it down before I knew it. OTOH, I feel like I never charge my SC63w...when I do it's something like topping it off from 75%.
> 
> Just a personal thing...but I still feel the need for 1xAA lights even though I never ran into the end of the world where everyone was making a run for batteries and I needed an easily available AA.


This is why I carry a SC62w. However, I love having several AA lights around, and they work well for low and moonlight modes.


----------



## ven (Jul 13, 2017)

TCY said:


> Grats, your first Zebra after so many years:twothumbs
> 
> I'm sure you'll get more
> 
> A good way to know exactly which mode you've programmed into each level is crank it up to the max and follow the brightness table provided by Zebralight as you step down.




Cheers TCY, i am enjoying it and been using it in work some more today. I tend to top my cell/s off either later in the day or in the morning. After quite a bit of on/off use, the V showed 1.27v. So enough to get through a days light use. Thanks for the tip



----------



## KhazukX (Sep 10, 2017)

markr6 said:


> I was reminded once again last night that I just don't care much for 1xAA lights. I feel like I hardly used this light, but after a battery check I got 1 flash. 1.19v.
> 
> I know it's not the light's fault, but running it on medium with a few high bursts here and there still ran it down before I knew it. OTOH, I feel like I never charge my SC63w...when I do it's something like topping it off from 75%.
> 
> Just a personal thing...but I still feel the need for 1xAA lights even though I never ran into the end of the world where everyone was making a run for batteries and I needed an easily available AA.



Hello. May I know what brand of battery you used and an estimate on the runtime you got on medium before it drained? I'm planning to purchase either a SC5w Mk 2 or SC63c as backup/rotation EDC for my SC600 Mk 3 HI soon. Thank you!


----------



## jon_slider (Sep 10, 2017)

markr6 said:


> running it on medium with a few high bursts here and there still ran it down before I knew it. OTOH, I feel like I never charge my SC63w...when I do it's something like topping it off from 75%.



high bursts use high amounts of power

SC5 Eneloop AA 2450mAh @ 1.5v = 3.675 mW
SC63 Generic 18650 3000mAh @3.7v = 11,100 mW… 3 times more capacity


----------



## Keitho (Sep 10, 2017)

jon_slider said:


> high bursts use high amounts of power
> 
> SC5 Eneloop AA 2450mAh @ 1.5v = 3.675 mW
> SC63 Generic 18650 3000mAh @3.7v = 11,100 mW… 3 times more capacity


The story is actually a bit worse than that for eneloops when using brighter settings. I use two different kinds of 18650 cells that get more than 10 watt-hours when discharged down to 3.0v (that's a limit on some of my lights), and that is when drawing 5A. At only 2A, eneloops give less than 2.5 Wh. So, if using brighter modes, the 18650 can give more than 4 times the capacity; or, more realistically, roughly double the current for double the time.

That doesn't stop me from loving my AA lights. Had one with me all day yesterday, ended up being useful at a nighttime bbq last night.


----------



## terjee (Sep 10, 2017)

KhazukX said:


> I'm planning to purchase either a SC5w Mk 2 or SC63c as backup/rotation EDC for my SC600 Mk 3 HI soon. Thank you!



I wouldn't see the AA-lights as a backup or rotation for an SC600, I'd see it more as a better high-capacity AAA-replacement.

I've almost settled on the SC5c Mk II, but it won't be backup for my SC600 Mk III HI. It'll be a higher capacity (and hopefully more durable) alternative to my keychain carried Lumintop Tool, and specifically to give me a good AA-option.

Not trying to steer you away from it, not at all, just make sure you're happy with the limitations and expectations from it. Your needs might be different from mine, and for you it might be a great SC600 backup.


----------



## KhazukX (Sep 10, 2017)

terjee said:


> I wouldn't see the AA-lights as a backup or rotation for an SC600, I'd see it more as a better high-capacity AAA-replacement.
> 
> I've almost settled on the SC5c Mk II, but it won't be backup for my SC600 Mk III HI. It'll be a higher capacity (and hopefully more durable) alternative to my keychain carried Lumintop Tool, and specifically to give me a good AA-option.
> 
> Not trying to steer you away from it, not at all, just make sure you're happy with the limitations and expectations from it. Your needs might be different from mine, and for you it might be a great SC600 backup.



I appreciate the feedback!  You're right, my light needs are different from most. I work exclusively from home (online), seldom leaves the house at all. EDC/rotation for me means something else that I can use to prolong the lifespan of the few lights I currently own. Not that I use them a lot (at most a few minutes a day, if at all). I do want something that I can use in case of a prolonged emergency and the availability of AA batteries is the main factor that makes me consider this light.


----------



## pantagana23 (Jan 19, 2018)

Just got an SC5w yesterday, dropping a few photos next to Maratac AA Titanium:

















It's pretty much a small tank, as you can see from the pictures (for you who don't have it already).

I give it an A-, because the white is very close to yellowish tint of Nichia, which I'm not a big fan of.

Anway, a new edc for now.


----------



## markr6 (Jan 19, 2018)

I've never had a yellowish nichia. That would be a total bummer!

I take that back! I remember buying a triple-nichia Eagtac dropin for my T25C which was very yellow. But other than that they were all totally colorless.


----------



## Tachead (Jan 19, 2018)

markr6 said:


> I've never had a yellowish nichia. That would be a total bummer!
> 
> I take that back! I remember buying a triple-nichia Eagtac dropin for my T25C which was very yellow. But other than that they were all totally colorless.


I think it all depends on what you are comparing it to Mark. For instance, if you compare a 4000K Nichia(even one with the most pure tint on the planet, right on the BBL) to a 5500K light, it is always going to look yellow as warmer tints have more orange/yellow in the spectrum. He probably just prefers cooler CCT's.


----------



## ven (Jan 19, 2018)

I find the 219c 4000k a little towards yellow, i am sure optics and actual reflector type can effect the "tint" as well. I do have some 219c 4000k that are more of a creamy tint............with very little yellow. As you mark, both my sportac 219c's are towards yellow. However i have found the xp-l2 4000k on another level...............not towards, but quite yellow. Depending on where used, it is not much of an issue for me. So i can still enjoy the xp-l2's a bit. The xp-l2 4500k i prefer in the sc53w, but its all subjective anyway. Still cant beat the 219b's imho, i do prefer these the most............regardless of less lumens or not being as efficient. I would rather have 60mins of nice beam, than 70mins of not so nice! 

Pantagana, it sure is a tank! Certainly a chunk for an AA light..................flip side is i actually like the form and i seem to prefer the feel of the sc5c over the sc53! The sc53 kind of almost feels too small in hand, where as the sc5c just feels more confident(not as easy to drop kind of thing).





As long as its used alone, not mixed up with others in use...............i do enjoy the sc5c


----------



## pantagana23 (Jan 19, 2018)

Tachead said:


> I think it all depends on what you are comparing it to Mark. For instance, if you compare a 4000K Nichia(even one with the most pure tint on the planet, right on the BBL) to a 5500K light, it is always going to look yellow as warmer tints have more orange/yellow in the spectrum. He probably just prefers cooler CCT's.



Yeah, that would be pretty much that. I've previously used Fenix LD22, which does have an adequate output, but is too long and you can't really differentiate much under this light. This is why I went for Maratac AA, being titianium and Nichia 219, hoping this would be "the last flashlight I'll ever buy as it's perfect". Now resembling colors, but the light seems like I'm in a '50s movie. 
Then I saw the 5w: I'm thinking to myself - a pocket rocket, the light isn't as if the cops are behind me, nor a wax candle tint. 
It is leaning more to neutral white than with Nichia, but still not my "light for retirement".

Or maybe I just got the diesase, who knows what's next X-D


----------



## markr6 (Jan 19, 2018)

I'm to the point where I get a new light, turn it on, and know right away if it's too yellow, green, etc. Only then do I compare to be sure. The last two Zebralights I got I didn't even bother until later on; I knew they were a clean neutral white right away.


----------



## ven (Jan 20, 2018)

I agree Tac, i do find nichia most* of the time just work for me, most of the time straight away look good. The xp-l2 in the sc5c has looked great as well, just less frequent. I have had it look quite clean without much yellow a few times, but the majority of use started out very yellow(or like smoke stain kind of thing.........not nice!). I do think my ambient lighting around the house effects it significantly. Just some LED's are not as effected . Kind of frustrates me, also mean i will pick up/use certain lights less..............*Last night i had a clean 4500k 219b look "dirty" for a bit................so i know its my eyes/brain/ambient light effecting most of this. Of course the colour of the wall or ceiling plays a big part to. Maybe certain colour temps are just safer to use around the house, but then it all changes outside or in other lit places(work). So many variables...............good job we have so many lights


----------



## Flint Hills (Jan 20, 2018)

I got a light with a Nichia 219c 4000k recently. Really like the warm tint but I prefer the UI of the Zebralights, so I ordered an SC5c. Looking forward to it! I'll post my impressions once it comes in. I hope that it's at least somewhat similar to this 219c.


----------



## Tac Gunner (Jun 30, 2019)

I know this is an old thread but is the SC5 MKII still in production? They are not on the ZL site but they also have not been moved to the discontinued section of the product comparison chart.


----------



## JStraus (Jul 1, 2019)

I see a C and W version of the MKII when I search for SC5 available.


----------



## Tac Gunner (Jul 1, 2019)

JStraus said:


> I see a C and W version of the MKII when I search for SC5 available.



Yup, I do too.....I must have been more asleep than I thought when I first looked lol. Thanks!


----------



## chillinn (Aug 16, 2020)

I just bought 2 from gpknives a few days ago. Should arrive tomorrow. idky I just checked the gpknives product page, and this reseller is out of stock. Did I happen to buy their last 2? Or did some other CPFers buy the rest of the SC5c from gpknives? 

So the new clip is compatible with the older models. Might one assume the old clip is compatible with the SC5c MkII? Let me know if anyone wants to swap the old chrome clip for my new black one. 

I really don't know what to expect in tint. CPFers got some yellow, some green and at least one without any cast or colorless.

I'm not sure when it was moved in the spreadsheet, but SC5c is definitely out of production. I guess everyone retired theirs and no one is using it anymore, because after the initial months-long excitement for it... crickets.


----------



## NPL (Aug 17, 2020)

Sc5c mkii is a fantastic little light, but tint will be green. Add a Lee Zirco minus green filter on top of the glass lens using double sided tape and you can make the tint as neutral or rosy as you like. 

Sent from my Pixel using Candlepowerforums mobile app


----------



## chillinn (Aug 17, 2020)

According to mhanlen's excellent review and others, the cast may be green or yellow/orange, or not at all. Should arrive today, hope I get the colorless or the yellow/orange. 

Annoying that Zebralight screwed up the reverse polarity protection, apparently light heats up when cell inserted backwards. But that is easily avoided.

What I want to know from SC5c owners and users, before finding out myself, if like the Li-ion Zebralights, if there is low voltage protection. Will my eneloops be depleated to 1V or below when I'm not careful? Or does it cut out at, say, 1.19V? Thanks in advance if you know and take the time to share.

I am again fishing for anyone that wants to swap their old chrome clip with my new black one, if their clip is unadulterated and not bent.


----------



## WalkIntoTheLight (Aug 17, 2020)

chillinn said:


> What I want to know from SC5c owners and users, before finding out myself, if like the Li-ion Zebralights, if there is low voltage protection. Will my eneloops be depleated to 1V or below when I'm not careful? Or does it cut out at, say, 1.19V? Thanks in advance if you know and take the time to share.



My SC5 cuts out at about 0.9v. In reality, it takes a long time to turn off. What happens is that when the voltage reaches 0.9v, it will step down to medium (if you are running it on high). Then, the voltage recovers a bit, but after about 20 minutes, it will reach 0.9v again and then step down to low. Low is either L1 or L2, whatever you have the light set to. Then it runs at that level for a long time before cutting out completely.

So, yes, it won't drain your cell down to 0v. At least, not in any reasonable time-frame. I suppose the few microamps of current when off (mine uses only 2.4 microamps), would continue to drain the empty cell over the next few weeks. Or perhaps the electronics would shut down completely at some point, without enough voltage to keep it going. I'm not sure.

In any case, Eneloops aren't like lithium-ion cells. You can drain Eneloops down to 0v without any safety concern. It's not great for them, but it won't do them harm if you just do it a few times.


----------



## chillinn (Aug 17, 2020)

Thanks WalkIntoTheLight. That kind of blows, eneloops don't like being depleted that much, but I have found regular eneloops are a bit more resilient to overdischage, will bounce back better to almost complete capacity better than eneloop pro. But I will consider just investing in Energizer Lithiums. Depends how much I like the light. If I like it too much, it will have to be eneloops... few can afford to constantly run Energizer Lithiums.

Light arrived. Now to figure out the new interface and program this thing to go to H1 on two clicks, M1 on one click. I am so excited I can barely make out the instructions.

I cannot tell what the tint is yet, will have to wait for tonight, but with my daytime preliminary guess... tint is sand colored. Maybe that is the yellow? or the colorless?! Honestly, I don't really care. 

Clip is insanely tight, as usual for Zebralights. I may just take it off. The SC5w MkI (I am not sure that was the model number?) ate 3 pairs of pants before I gave it away. I'm running out of pants.

Edit: I do not understand these instructions. Is there a chart online somewhere to explain what G5, G6, G7 mode groups are? Review mentioned that the single click on, double click on can be programmed, but I do not see that in the instructions.

Edit2: I don't get it. I think mhanlen must have used G6 or G7 to reprogram the high as medium and medium as high to get high mode a double click from off. But that fouls the press and hold to scroll up from low to medium to high. If someone can explain that it is otherwise, and that's not what mhanlen did, and hold and press from low to high stays intact, thanks.

If G6 and G7 allows programming of all levels at either LMH1 or LMH2... then what is the difference between G6 and G7? Isn't one redundant? 

Now I just have to stare at this thing until it gets dark. :/ Excrutiating.


----------



## WalkIntoTheLight (Aug 17, 2020)

Eneloops are fine to discharge down to 0.8v or 0.9v. That's about where they are essentially empty. If you stopped at 1.19v, you'd probably be giving up about 20% capacity. And that's assuming it was true resting voltage.

In reality, I find that if I discharge Eneloops down to 0.9v (when the light drops to low), they rebound up to around 1.10v resting, after an hour or so.

And with the SC5 running on max, it draws about 5 amps, which drops the running voltage down to about 1.1v even on a freshly charged cell.

All that to say, don't worry about it. The SC5 is not going to over-discharge and damage an Eneloop.

Oh, and to get to G6, press the button 6 times quickly from off. For G7, it's 7 clicks from off. The standard G5... you guessed it, 5 clicks. You can then program G6 or G7 modes to whatever you want, using double-clicks to increase brightness, and triple-clicks to lower brightness.


----------



## chillinn (Aug 17, 2020)

Happy to hear that about eneloops, I thought otherwise, and figured a depleted cell after rest showing 1.10V indicated it was damaged. So it is good news.



WalkIntoTheLight said:


> And with the SC5 running on max it draws about 5 amps,



Wow. That makes this my most AMPy light I think (assuming those 1000lm bulbs I got from fivemega draw 3 amps). As far as I know, eneloops are the only 1.x volt cells that can handle 5 amps. I'm not even sure Energizer Lithiums are safe at 5 amps. Seems strange Zebralight says alkaline can be used. Drawing 5 amps from an alkaline is just asking for leakage.



WalkIntoTheLight said:


> Oh, and to get to G6, press the button 6 times quickly from off. For G7, it's...



That is pretty clear, but not what I was asking. mhanlen, right near the end of the review after the comparisons, states that he programmed the light to go to medium on a single click from off, and to high on the double click, which is the reverse of the default, and how the previous interface worked.

I don't see any mention in the instructions how to do this... so I am assuming he used G6 or G7 mode group to have access to all 12 levels to reprogram M1 or M2 to a high level and H1 or H2 to a medium level. But then mhanlen states he prefers ramping up from low, which I do also and most manufacturers just don't get, giving an interface that starts on high and ramps down to low as you go through the modes. L M H is what I like, not H M L or the brain dead M L H. 

Is there a separate way to program what single press from off does or what double press from off does?

edit: now I understand why there is both G6 and G7 mode groups. They _are_ identical, because the programming is retained, and some users will switch mode groups during usage, programming G6 and G7 to their liking. This flashlight is insane.

edit2: The turbo mode is a great tester of the health of eneloops. If max doesn't quite get there, cell damaged. All my eneloops, about 20, are bad. I sort of knew that already. I just ordered 16 more.


----------



## WalkIntoTheLight (Aug 17, 2020)

chillinn said:


> Wow. That makes this my most AMPy light I think (assuming those 1000lm bulbs I got from fivemega draw 3 amps). As far as I know, eneloops are the only 1.x volt cells that can handle 5 amps. I'm not even sure Energizer Lithiums are safe at 5 amps. Seems strange Zebralight says alkaline can be used. Drawing 5 amps from an alkaline is just asking for leakage.



You won't get max brightness from alkaleaks. They'll work fine for medium modes and lower, and even one of the lower high modes for a few minutes, though they won't last long. Consider them only for emergencies, if you haven't got any charged Eneloops.



> That is pretty clear, but not what I was asking. mhanlen, right near the end of the review after the comparisons, states that he programmed the light to go to medium on a single click from off, and to high on the double click, which is the reverse of the default, and how the previous interface worked.



You just have to reprogram your high mode, and lower its brightness (doing triple-clicks), until its output is whatever level you want (such as a medium output). Then for high on double-click, reprogram one of your medium modes to a higher output (using double-clicks).

Basically, just consider all the default outputs as simple place-holders. Reprogram each of them to whatever output you want (12 different levels to choose from). Single-click will go to whatever H1 (or H2) was reprogrammed to be. That can be anything from 500 lumens down to 0.01 lumens (or whatever the lowest is).



> edit2: The turbo mode is a great tester of the health of eneloops. If max doesn't quite get there, cell damaged. All my eneloops, about 20, are bad. I sort of knew that already. I just ordered 16 more.



I find that older Eneloops will work fine, but only up to the 2nd highest output level. To get the full output, you really need new Eneloops. This light is the one case I would recommend Eneloop Pros, they will deliver slightly higher voltage under the 5 amp load.


----------



## chillinn (Aug 17, 2020)

WalkIntoTheLight said:


> You won't get max brightness from alkaleaks. They'll work fine for medium modes and lower, and even one of the lower high modes for a few minutes, though they won't last long. Consider them only for emergencies, if you haven't got any charged Eneloops.



Only in an emergency without other options would I use alkaline. And I'd never leave an alkaline in a flashlight





WalkIntoTheLight said:


> You just have to reprogram your high mode, and lower its brightness (doing triple-clicks), until its output is whatever level you want (such as a medium output). Then for high on double-click, reprogram one of your medium modes to a higher output (using double-clicks).
> 
> Basically, just consider all the default outputs as simple place-holders. Reprogram each of them to whatever output you want (12 different levels to choose from). Single-click will go to whatever H1 (or H2) was reprogrammed to be. That can be anything from 500 lumens down to 0.01 lumens (or whatever the lowest is).



That's what I guessed. But after reading this, what I suspect he did was just program H2 as a medium, and then M1 as a high, without totally swapping H1&2 with M1&2.

Edit2: I figured out how to make this LMH with the first press from off as low. In G6 or G7, program H1 & H2 as lows, L1 & L2 as mediums, and M1 & M2 as highs. So one press from off is low, then holding down cycles back to L1 or L2 as mediums, still holding goes to M1 or M2 highs. Double press from off then goes to high (M1 or M2). Caveat is that from high (M1 or M2) press and hold goes back to medium (L1 or L2), still pressing goes back to high (M1 or M2), still holding goes to low (H1 or H2)... Cycling from low (H1 or H2) this way goes LMH, but cycling from high goes HMHL, and press and hold cycling from off goes MHL, so that's a little weird twice, but it is mostly LMH after single press from off, except when you start cycling from high (M1 or M2). Hope that makes sense.




WalkIntoTheLight said:


> I find that older Eneloops will work fine, but only up to the 2nd highest output level. To get the full output, you really need new Eneloops. This light is the one case I would recommend Eneloop Pros, they will deliver slightly higher voltage under the 5 amp load.



As one could expect from my last edit, I have been guilty of NiMH battery abuse. I have overdischarged all my eneloops several times, if not more, using my Surefire AA Outdoorsman (with Elite incan heads), generally falling asleep while using them as room lamps. I have used Eneloop Pro and found them far less forgiving of overdischarge. One overdischarge I think is enough to ruin an Eneloop Pro's amp output, while Eneloops seem to tolerate it if it only happens a few times. So with my luck, I'll stick to non-Pro. But my eneloops are about 5 years old, anyway. It was time for a refresh long ago.

Edit: It is dark enough to see this one does not have the green cast. It must be the yellow-orange cast, but I would describe it as merely warm. Colors appear saturated, nice reds, greens, yellows and violets. I like it better than the Nichia 219b lights I have, and they're very good. The Tint Mafia are really picky.


----------



## chillinn (Aug 18, 2020)

chillinn said:


> the new clip is compatible with the older models. Might one assume the old clip is compatible with the SC5c MkII? Let me know if anyone wants to swap the old chrome clip for my new black one.





chillinn said:


> I am again fishing for anyone that wants to swap their old chrome clip with my new black one, if their clip is unadulterated and not bent.



Mods, can I post this link? I expect not... please edit! Don't beat me up too much, I can't remember if this is bad or not.

deep carry custom Ti clips for Zebralight

eBay seller blade4sell has some nice custom deep carry Ti clips for sale, at a premium price, I think. Correct me if I am wrong, and the price is fine. 

I ordered one with the satin finish, we'll see how it does. I am concerned it may fowl tail-standing. 

I'd prefer SS to Ti (_blasphemy!_), precisely because it is a softer metal, easier on the fingertips, easier to manipulate over the pocket fabric. I realized last night, I do have the stock Zebralight SS clip on my SC62c, so if I don't like the Ti, I'll cannibalize that, swap out for the new ZL clip or the custom Ti deep carry.



Last thought. I hope I can say this without upsetting everyone. I had real problems with the pulse schema with the SC5w Mk I. Used as the only light source, ceiling bounced room lamp, for extended periods on certain modes gave me migraine. I could never see the pulse, and it took me months to realize that was the source of my migraines, which I really have never experienced before. Gifted it. But I have missed it for its other great qualities.

Cursory tests last night doing the same thing with SC5c Mk II... no migraine. I have not tested all modes, but for hours using it as the only light source, ceiling bounced, no ill effects. Is there a selfbuilt review of the SC5c Mk II? I'd like to see the oscilloscope and analysis. I think something is definitely different, and I am soooo happy about that, because I love this thing.

Our brains oscillate just like AC power. There must be a compromise with PWM or pulse schemes that makes it compatible with eyesight and brain discomfort, yes, even if it can't be detected with the naked eye.

Kids, please don't devolve into a nasty discussion about this. Please don't get upset. Mods, please don't ban me. This is agnostic information, anecdotal, but nevertheless worth knowing by those that may care. I am saying to those that hate PWM and Zebralight's pulse scheme... try this, it may be just fine for everyone now. If you can find one. But I should expect all the Mk II lights to have this upgrade or slight adjustment, or whatever it is.

PEACE.


----------



## chillinn (Aug 18, 2020)

Let's switch direction a bit.

Firstly, I noticed that the tail stand is a little less solid than the Mk I lights. The Mk I versions tail stand almost like a Weeble, sort of throw it down on a surface, and even if you don't get it flush, wobbles to solid tail stand. Loved that about the SC5w OP and the SC62c. The SC5c Mk II needs to be placed a little more carefully. I thought I was imagining it. But examining the bottom cap and comparing reveals the Mk I tail cap is perfectly flat, and a little larger than the Mk II, which has a raised circle on it. Maybe that is there to help it tail stand better on surfaces that are not completely flat? Thoughts?


Secondly, I get a little anxious when tightening the tail cap looking for the flash that indicates the cell is activated. I feel like I am going to tighten it too much and slightly damage the end of the threads. Shouldn't there be something that stops the twist so it will tighten no further? 


Thirdly, why are Zebralight clips so crazy tight? They're tight and stiff beyond what would be ideal or practical. Maybe this gives it more longevity? Anyone not bending their clip to make it more practical? Is the Zebralight clip a little dangerous, considering most makers seem to have a clip that will intentionally give way before something nasty happens if caught on something? Like injury? Thoughts? What light has a better OEM clip? If that exists, why is it better?


Lastly, what is a "2 step tint deviation?"


----------



## WalkIntoTheLight (Aug 19, 2020)

chillinn said:


> Firstly, I noticed that the tail stand is a little less solid than the Mk I lights. The Mk I versions tail stand almost like a Weeble, sort of throw it down on a surface, and even if you don't get it flush, wobbles to solid tail stand. Loved that about the SC5w Mk I and the SC32c. The SC5c Mk II needs to be placed a little more carefully. I thought I was imagining it. But examining the bottom cap and comparing reveals the Mk I tail cap is perfectly flat, and a little larger than the Mk II, which has a raised circle on it. Maybe that is there to help it tail stand better on surfaces that are not completely flat? Thoughts?



Interesting. I have the MkI, and one of the best things about it is how easily it tailstands on just about any surface. Great for a night light. It's unfortunate they changed it. I have noticed that Zebralight is tending to more of a rounded curvy design of their lights, compared to earlier versions. This seems to be a trend across all their models. It's dumb if they're extending that design to the tails.




> Secondly, I get a little anxious when tightening the tail cap looking for the flash that indicates the cell is activated. I feel like I am going to tighten it too much and slightly damage the end of the threads. Shouldn't there be something that stops the twist so it will tighten no further?



That's just how it works on most lights. Don't worry, you're not going to damage the threads no matter how hard you hand-tighten it.



> Thirdly, why are Zebralight clips so crazy tight? They're tight and stiff beyond what would be ideal or practical. Maybe this gives it more longevity? Anyone not bending their clip to make it more practical? Is the Zebralight clip a little dangerous, considering most makers seem to have a clip that will intentionally give way before something nasty happens if caught on something? Like injury? Thoughts? What light has a better OEM clip? If that exists, why is it better?



Yeah, the SC5 clip is a real pants-shredder. At least the the MkI version is, since the clip rests on the knurled surface of the body. Dumb. They should have done it like the SC52 or other models.



> Lastly, what is a "2 step tint deviation?"



It's a way that Cree uses to classify how much variability in tint there is in their LEDs. Step 2 is supposed to be good, and results in good consistency. That is, less "tint lottery". AFAIK, it doesn't mean you'll like the tint, just that it will be similar on all the lights.


----------



## chillinn (Aug 19, 2020)

Thank you, WalkIntoTheLight. Nailed it. 













My tail cap description is not quite accurate. It is probably better described as a recessed circle rather than a beveled circle. Or the perimeter is raised.

Still tail stands exceptionally well, just takes the slightest extra care not to wobble it before letting go.

Edit: I really wish someone would make and sell a solid copper Zebralight tail cap for bling. It would mess withe the balance of the light, moving the center of gravity towards the tail, but it would probably tail stand half the time by itself if you spun the light into the air and let it fall back to Earth.


Edit 2: eBay seller blade4sell recommended I do this for some clip relief. 1/4" of folded paper left overnight. Reassess. If necessary, then 3/8" folded paper left overnight. etc. I have his deep carry clip ordered, but it will be 6 weeks before it arrives. I won't have any pants left by then. He's also accommodating my request for a not so tight clip, but touching the head "just so," and not leaning into it with 25lbs. of force.


----------



## chillinn (Aug 22, 2020)

WalkIntoTheLight said:


> chillinn said:
> 
> 
> > Firstly, I noticed that the tail stand is a little less solid than the Mk I lights. The Mk I versions tail stand almost like a Weeble, sort of throw it down on a surface, and even if you don't get it flush, wobbles to solid tail stand. Loved that about the SC5w Mk I and the SC32c. The SC5c Mk II needs to be placed a little more carefully. I thought I was imagining it. But examining the bottom cap and comparing reveals the Mk I tail cap is perfectly flat, and a little larger than the Mk II, which has a raised circle on it. Maybe that is there to help it tail stand better on surfaces that are not completely flat? Thoughts?
> ...



I found the original product page for the SC5w OP on archive.org

The friend I gifted it to sent me a picture he took a few days ago.

First of all, the branding on the light on the product page is different from the one I gifted. 
Product page: "SC5"
Gifted SC5w: "SC5w OP"

Also, as I correctly recalled, the tail caps of the light I gifted (in 2017, love the look of a well used flashlight), and the SC62c I still have are flush flat, but the light on the product page has the recessed circle, like my new SC5c Mk II. But at least pic shows the new tail cap is not new. Can't say for certain, but if these 2 SC5 tailcaps are compatible, swapping them would prevent bodies from being flush with swapped tailcaps, because I think the diameter of the tail cap for the older light is a little bit larger, the diameter of the new body a little smaller.











/pedant

(sorry about resolution... imgur just keeps removing functionality)

Around 1.30V - 1.28V on these brand new standard Eneloops, level 12 no longer fires with an unrested cell. Twist tail cap and letting cell rest a bit will allow turbo to fire, and as long as it is left on, will continue at level 11 (or 10 or whatever H1 is set at) after 3 min. step down... right on down to 1.20V and below, but then switching off and on prevents those modes from firing until cell rested again.

So the parasitic drain does not steal much capacity, but it does steal amps and prevent the cell from resting. So lock it out when not in use, not just when not in use for a long time, but anytime, at least at medium voltages, and don't forget to retighten before use... unless you need the quick draw and fire.

note: With the the D4 charger, I have no way to break in these new cells without using them, so if you do break in your new Eneloops or refresh your old ones, YMMV


----------



## WalkIntoTheLight (Aug 22, 2020)

I have the original SC5w (bought via a pre-order), before they even gave it a OP reflector ( I like my smooth reflector, because it throws a bit further, and the beam still looks good). Anyway, my tail looks pretty similar to the pictures you posted. Perhaps the edge is a little less rounded, but it's hard to tell. If they did change the tail, they didn't change it much.

As for the comment about parasitic drain, it's only 2.4 microamps (my measurement), so the cell is basically fully resting. That's probably less than self-discharge. Sometimes, getting level 12 is just a matter of making sure you have good battery contact with the pogo pins. It needs very low resistance to get the 5 amps out of the cell it needs. Clean contacts with alcohol, and use a bit of deoxit or deoxit gold on the contacts and battery to remove any oxidation.


----------



## chillinn (Aug 22, 2020)

WalkIntoTheLight said:


> Sometimes, getting level 12 is just a matter of making sure you have good battery contact with the pogo pins. It needs very low resistance to get the 5 amps out of the cell it needs. Clean contacts with alcohol, and use a bit of deoxit or deoxit gold on the contacts and battery to remove any oxidation.



Good info. Thanks.

REQ: Sure wish someone would make and sell that solid copper tail cap for ZL (for AA lights first, then 18650 lights). TIA maker.


----------



## AstroTurf (Aug 22, 2020)

just glue a big ole magnet on it...



chillinn said:


> Good info. Thanks.
> 
> REQ: Sure wish someone would make and sell that solid copper tail cap for ZL (for AA lights first, then 18650 lights). TIA maker.


----------



## chillinn (Aug 22, 2020)

AstroTurf said:


> just glue a big ole magnet on it...



Wouldn't a magnetic field raise resistance? We want low or no electrical resistance in the tail cap, thus a copper or silver tail cap would be more ideal.


----------



## chillinn (Aug 24, 2020)

Just for background, I set G6 up for nighttime dark adapted vision preservation, 1&2 submodes interchangeable, and I can't remember which way was set which, so this is a guess
H2 1, H1 2; M2 3, M1 4; L2 5, L1 6

and G7 for daytime brightness
H2 6, H2 7; M2 8, M1 9; L2 10, L1 12

I did this for the same reason CPF reviewer mhanlen did, to have the lowest mode group appear on one press, highest on double press. Only caveat is it is a little funky when on high and press and hold dips to medium, then high, then low, but I was mistaken above, from off hold and press appears to do LMH

I do not see level 12 in L1 stepping down after 3 minutes in G7. Just runs at that level 12 until the cell is depleted, then steps down rather rapidly to off, leaving me with ~1.20V. After resting cell, lower modes still work.

Maybe someone who also programmed their G6/G7 in the new programmable interface can confirm that there is no 3 minute step down from 12? Maybe this has to do with programming the highest level into the L mode group? Obviously, low 0.08lm programmed into H1 would have no where to step down to, nor any reason to step down.

Anyway, happy to discover.

Edit: just did a second test of level 12 with cell at 1.26V, no 3 minute step down, again stepping down and shutting off at low voltage, immediately checking voltage showed 0.97V, so previous cell must have done the same and rested before i checked. This Eneloop recovered to 1.20V after resting.

Edit2: Was doing these tests during the day outside. M1 was set to 11, not 12... >< tonight set it to 12, it steps down. :/ sry folks.


----------



## chillinn (Aug 28, 2020)

SC5 II's (and I would imagine many Zebralight's) spot and spill at distance on turbo, especially compared to incan E2e (w/ Tad Customs A7212, max 200Lm), is floody. The SC5 II spill is bright enough to be very usable at distance, and when actually looking at complex shapes such as trees, the spot sort of blends into the spill. All I see with E2e at distance is the spot. At closer range, the distinction between SC5 II's spot and spill becomes more obvious, and with the incan E2e spill becomes usable. Except for spill, I put the incan 200Lm (probably more like 120Lm on the remaining capacity of the 16340's I have in it) at about equal with the LED 475Lm.


----------



## WalkIntoTheLight (Aug 28, 2020)

The SC5 is much less floody than its sibling, the SC53. I have the smooth reflector version, which actually makes it a bit throwy. But even with OP, it has a much larger reflector.


----------



## chillinn (Aug 28, 2020)

I am just noticing now (sunset in 5 minutes here), when there is enough ambient light, all that can be seen is spot from about 15 feet, can't see much of any SC5c II light much beyond that. In the dark is when the spill appears. I don't mind it this floody, actually because of this light, now appreciating what flood flashaholics have always been on about. I very recently had been turning my nose up at flood. Wall of light is a neat thing, just like a spotlight is a neat thing.


----------



## chillinn (Sep 9, 2020)

In the customer review section of the SC5c page at Zebralight, someone left this review with 2 of 5 stars (and, whoever you are, if you are a member here, I think you are a total narcissist):



narcissist said:


> Its green.
> I love almost everything about this light. My main gripe is that this 90+ CRI light has a noticably green tint on the outer portion of the hotspot. Its noticable indoors and outdoors. A $70 high cri AA light shouldnt have a tint shift that is so intrusive it can be noticed no matter where you point it. Given my disgust for being mislead, I have offered this light in a giveaway. I dont want it that badly. Until this issue is rectified, someone else can take my money.
> Reviewed by: a user from United States. on 12/10/2018



Loves almost everything about it, rates 2 stars. Entitled asswipe.

On the two that I have looked at, I see no such green tint compared to my cool white lights or my nichias or my incans. Compared to my SC62c, it does appear a little green. Remove the SC62c, I can't see any cast. Color is subjective... much depends on the colors it is next to when examining. I fail to see how cast in anyway affects the use of a flashlight. If there is such green cast, unless there is something wrong with the observer's brain, it will naturally adjust white balance to make the cast invisible. Therefore, when the narcissist claims it is "noticable" _[sic]_ he is imagining things or lying. If it is there, within a few seconds, it can no longer be seen.

I rate this whiny narcissist and this dishonest review zero of 5 stars.
Points go to Zebralight for leaving this review up for so long.


----------



## AstroTurf (Sep 9, 2020)

The Green is Real!!!

The Tint Lottery is Real!!!

IMO, Jim


----------



## chillinn (Sep 9, 2020)

What I take issue with is the single and minor problem and it causing more than a single star to come off, the dishonestly, the exaggeration, and plastering it on their site in such a complaint as though he had been raped. The green is incidental.


----------



## raggie33 (Sep 11, 2020)

what kind of runtimes will this light get on the lowest seting with a energizer l91 lithium cell


----------



## AstroTurf (Sep 11, 2020)

ZL says 4.3 months...


----------



## raggie33 (Sep 12, 2020)

but wasnt it 4.3 months with a eneloop? im useing a lithium aa. im hoping its more


----------



## chillinn (Sep 12, 2020)

raggie33 said:


> but wasnt it 4.3 months with a eneloop? im useing a lithium aa. im hoping its more



Well, Eneloop Pro is about 2500mAh, and Energizer L91 is 3000mAh, so a ratio and algebra can tell us the L91 runtime without knowing the draw of ZL lowest setting

2500:4.3::3000:x

x = (4.3)(3000)/2500

x = 5.16 months of runtime on L91


----------



## chillinn (Sep 17, 2020)

Not that I think that I am clever, but this has worked out for me. 

I use the G5 mode group during the day, for one click high and turbo. I programmed G7 to only use the top 2/3rd or 3/4ths of the brightness levels, and I'll switch to that in the evening, with low on one click, high on two. G6 is the opposite of G7, but more extreme, and it is for nighttime... stuffed only the lower half of modes into the program, also low on one click, high on two.

I find myself constantly tweaking the modes. I prefer each successive mode to be 3 times the lumens. Can't always get there, which is probably why I tweak.

Interesting thing about putting the highs in M1&M2, the mediums in L1&L2, and the lows in H1&H2, is how the click and hold works when the light is on. From medium, click and hold goes to high, and then (if I let go first) from high, click and hold goes first back to medium. I like that. To get to low, I either have to keep holding to cycle through high, or turn the light off and on, which is what I usually do to save the dark adaptation.


----------



## Swedpat (Sep 19, 2020)

chillinn said:


> I find myself constantly tweaking the modes. I prefer each successive mode to be 3 times the lumens. Can't always get there, which is probably why I tweak.



I like Zebralight and have several lights and headlamps. Personally I sometimes find the UI a bit too complex. The UI of Thrunite is my favorite.
I really agree with you here: the difference between each step should be at least 3 times. And I think 4-5times it's ok too. It's well known that the eyes don't perceive the difference as big as the number could lead us to believe.


----------

