# Are incandescent flashlights considered obsolete?



## FartLighter (May 26, 2013)

With the advances that the LED has made, it does make sense to phase out old technology, but it doesn't mean that there is no longer a market for it. I understand why many stores now only carry LED lights, but it is a shame that I have to go online to order a light based on such a simple concept of batter/wire/bulb.

For example, I went to Walmart a couple days ago to buy an incandescent flood flashlight to tide my NV illumination woes until my Surefire M1 arrives... Nothing but a wall of LEDs. Later that day I showed my nephew how to use his iPod to imitate NVG by using an IR light source, and he can't just go down to a local store and pickup a cheap incandescent light and throw a filter over the lens. I might just have to go to autozone and pick up some wire, bulbs, reflector, and a few adequate batteries and let him build one.


----------



## JCD (May 26, 2013)

LEDs are superior to incandescents in terms of efficiency, but incandescents are still a lot better in terms of light quality.


----------



## Imon (May 26, 2013)

We have about one "no one uses incans anymore" thread every other month...


----------



## LuxLuthor (May 26, 2013)

Imon said:


> We have about one "no one uses incans anymore" thread every other month...



Yeah, it is like having to do monthly pennance after going to Catholic Confession, although I can't remember the last time I did that.

To answer the OP's rhetorical question: In common mass market retail operations, the masses have moved to LED. There will always be a use and appreciation for various technologies as changes are made. In this incand example, it is why those of us seeing the changes coming stocked up on the variety of bulbs we knew and enjoyed using. Buying from the internet on almost everything except groceries and heavy, bulky products (i.e. gas grill, bed mattress, furniture, appliances, etc.) has become my preference. One of my least favorite things is having to go to a large shopping mall, or the various Walmart, Home Despot, Lowes type superstores.


----------



## langham (May 26, 2013)

I have one incan flashlight and the bulb blew in it almost a year ago. The problem for me at least is that they do have a tendency to blow and a $10-20 bulb is expensive compared to the new XM-L2 led that will put out insane amounts of light and do it cheaply. How do incans have superior light quality? With high CRI and multiple bins now leds have extremely specific color rendition and with the new designs of reflectors to accommodate all of these flashlights I don't see it. Besides Philips and a few other companies have excellent colored leds and you have to use a filter for incans. There are IR and UV leds as well and with a P60 drop in so easy to use, I just don't see the point in incans any more. Other than to burn stuff, or if you don't care about efficiency at all you can put out a lot of light, like the 20,000 lm 1000W bulb that I have (don't ever use it and it was not realistic to put in a body). To each his own as long as there is a market for it I hope they improve.


----------



## Stress_Test (May 26, 2013)

Lots of people still drive cars equipped with carburetors. The old 60s cars are worse than a modern car in every way when it comes to mileage, handling, braking, ride comfort, but there's just something about them...

It's one of those things where if you have to ask why, you'll probably never understand.


----------



## JCD (May 26, 2013)

langham said:


> How do incans have superior light quality? With high CRI and multiple bins now leds have extremely specific color rendition and with the new designs of reflectors to accommodate all of these flashlights I don't see it.



Compared to low CRI LEDs, high CRI LEDs are great. Compared to incans, they're just not quite as bad as low CRI LEDs. If you graph the amounts of each component wavelength in the light of a LED emitter, you will find lots of peaks and valleys. A similar graph of incandescent light will reveal a much smoother curve. Visually, particularly in outdoor environments, that smoother curve translates to much better color reproduction and better illumination of subtle details.


----------



## AnAppleSnail (May 26, 2013)

JCD said:


> Compared to low CRI LEDs, high CRI LEDs are great. Compared to incans, they're just not quite as bad as low CRI LEDs. If you graph the amounts of each component wavelength in the light of a LED emitter, you will find lots of peaks and valleys. A similar graph of incandescent light will reveal a much smoother curve. Visually, particularly in outdoor environments, that smoother curve translates to much better color reproduction and better illumination of subtle details.



If we want to dive down the CRI/Color Perception/etc rabbit hole, one could ask, "How long have humans been seeing by 3000K near-black-body radiation light?" And the answer to that is pretty simple: About fifty years, give or take. So it certainly isn't honest to claim that filaments give the best lighting/color rendering/color perception. Of course, you have't said that, and I acknowledge that. Sunlight is filtered near-black-body radiation, with strong tints throughout the day. Clearly our eyes have had millennia to adjust to light that has a non-smooth SPD. See this page click for some examples. Filaments are quite different from sunlight's (noontime) output, but our eyes seem to have adjusted to that difference quite nicely.

The more complex questions, like "What CRI is best?" or "What SPD gives the best color rendering" or "...is best for working" or "looks best" are each rather harder to answer. As an example, "Incandescents give better color reproduction" is false for distinguishing navy from black. Most LED or fluorescent sources will do better, partly through higher color temperature. Similarly, a high CRI LED can be weaker in reds or browns, depending on how it's made.

Incandescent lights are not obsolete, in the sense of "No Longer Produced Or Used." For general lighting, it may be phased out (Out of Date, 2nd definition). Indicator lamps, certain signal lamps, and many technical lights MUST have characteristics that are easy to get with filaments, and difficult to get other ways.


----------



## LuxLuthor (May 26, 2013)

langham said:


> I have one incan flashlight and the bulb blew in it almost a year ago. The problem for me at least is that they do have a tendency to blow and a $10-20 bulb is expensive compared to the new XM-L2 led that will put out insane amounts of light and do it cheaply. How do incans have superior light quality? With high CRI and multiple bins now leds have extremely specific color rendition and with the new designs of reflectors to accommodate all of these flashlights I don't see it. Besides Philips and a few other companies have excellent colored leds and you have to use a filter for incans. There are IR and UV leds as well and with a P60 drop in so easy to use, I just don't see the point in incans any more. Other than to burn stuff, or if you don't care about efficiency at all you can put out a lot of light, like the 20,000 lm 1000W bulb that I have (don't ever use it and it was not realistic to put in a body). To each his own as long as there is a market for it I hope they improve.



There's already "20 million" previous threads discussing the superior light quality of incands. Review some threads here before you make your assumptions.


----------



## JCD (May 26, 2013)

AnAppleSnail said:


> As an example, "Incandescents give better color reproduction" is false for distinguishing navy from black. Most LED or fluorescent sources will do better, partly through higher color temperature.



Yes, blues tend to look bluer with under LED light. That's a consequence of having an overabundance of blue component wavelengths. It comes at the expense of most other colors being reproduced quite poorly. Outdoors, those other colors tend to be pretty important. In that environment, LEDs still lag far behind.


----------



## jtr1962 (May 26, 2013)

Lots of things are obsolete as far as day-to-day use but still lots of fun as hobbies. If you enjoy incandescent lights and find value from them, then they're not obsolete to you personally. Some people still drive old cars, or use tube amplifiers, or ride old bicycles, or type on vintage typewriters, or run old steam locomotives. For the masses, these technologies are as dead as a door nail. And many others are destined to join them relatively soon, such as internal combustion engines. For now it looks like incandescent will join them, but who knows for sure? Trains were written off as obsolete technology once planes and cars become common, but evolved into today's efficient freight systems and 200 mph wonders. I wouldn't bet the house on the same thing happening with incandescent, but there is some interesting research on infrared coatings. And who knows if material science will stumble upon filament materials which can burn much hotter than tungsten? Even if none of these developments take place, there will be hobbyists who keep incandescent alive for a long time. Obsolete doesn't necessarily mean dead. Some technologies even enjoy a bit of a renaissance once relegated to hobby status.


----------



## mesa232323 (May 26, 2013)

It depends on which incandescent flashlight we are talking about. Maglite primary battery powered incandescent flashlights might be approaching the obsolete category because their size and weight outweigh their runtimes. There is still a market for incandescent spotlights because of price, and the fact that your general stores haven't been able to sell an LED spotlight for cheap. A Streamlight Stinger is still a great working mans flashlight with good brightness, decent runtime, a long track record for ruggedness and dependability, compactness, UL listed, and best of all, they are selling used for dirt cheap compared to any other rechargeable flashlight in its class. 

We still depend on this ancient technology in our everyday lives in the form of automotive headlights. Why? The price. This obsolete technology is here to stay for a while. Possibly for the next 2 decades.


----------



## n2stuff (May 27, 2013)

Stress_Test said:


> Lots of people still drive cars equipped with carburetors. The old 60s cars are worse than a modern car in every way when it comes to mileage, handling, braking, ride comfort, but there's just something about them...
> 
> It's one of those things where if you have to ask why, you'll probably never understand.



I could not agree more.


----------



## vicv (May 27, 2013)

mesa232323 said:


> It depends on which incandescent flashlight we are talking about. Maglite primary battery powered incandescent flashlights might be approaching the obsolete category because their size and weight outweigh their runtimes. There is still a market for incandescent spotlights because of price, and the fact that your general stores haven't been able to sell an LED spotlight for cheap. A Streamlight Stinger is still a great working mans flashlight with good brightness, decent runtime, a long track record for ruggedness and dependability, compactness, UL listed, and best of all, they are selling used for dirt cheap compared to any other rechargeable flashlight in its class.
> 
> We still depend on this ancient technology in our everyday lives in the form of automotive headlights. Why? The price. This obsolete technology is here to stay for a while. Possibly for the next 2 decades.



Exactly. Anyone who's tried a p91 on 2 imr cells or an eo9 or any of the custom hotwires would be hard pressed to call it obsolete. If we're talking stock maglite on primary cells than ya. They were obsolete when first created


----------



## mesa232323 (May 27, 2013)

P91 is a great example of a lamp that can still run with most single LED flashlights. It's only real practical use is for tactical purposes and a great EDC if you don't plan on using it for long. 

I think incandescent flashlight are obsolete for long run times in the small EDC form factor. That may slowly change over time in the advancement of rechargeable batteries.


----------



## Rexlion (May 28, 2013)

If I am buying a new flashlight I have no interest whatsoever in an incan bulb, so from my personal standpoint, yes they're obsolete. But everyone's different, so YMMV.


----------



## alpg88 (May 28, 2013)

they'll still be around for a while, can't beat simplicity of .99C light with a bulb. there are planty of ppl that don't care if it is led or bulb. as long as they can get a box of 10 for $9.99, and keep them in their garage for emergencys.


----------



## Lynx_Arc (May 28, 2013)

alpg88 said:


> they'll still be around for a while, can't beat simplicity of .99C light with a bulb. there are planty of ppl that don't care if it is led or bulb. as long as they can get a box of 10 for $9.99, and keep them in their garage for emergencys.


the 2D incan 99 cent lights come without batteries while you can buy a 2AA LED light with batteries for 50 cents more that has longer runtime and more lumen output and is smaller on top of it all. Compare the cost of 2AA vs 2D when the batteries deplete and you wil want to stop using D cell incans for good.


----------



## alpg88 (May 28, 2013)

Lynx_Arc said:


> the 2D incan 99 cent lights come without batteries while you can buy a 2AA LED light with batteries for 50 cents more that has longer runtime and more lumen output and is smaller on top of it all. Compare the cost of 2AA vs 2D when the batteries deplete and you wil want to stop using D cell incans for good.



i was not talking about 2d lights. i have seen plenty .99c 2aa inc/. lights at .99c stores around here, with batteries. 

like i said before, some (make it most) ppl don't care if it is led or not, some don't even know what led is, they buy things they are familiar with.


----------



## Brigadier (May 28, 2013)

If you value quality of light over quantity, you will understand the true beauty of an incand. That, and if you have ever had a finicky driver or one that just quits on you, http://www.candlepowerforums.com/vb/showthread.php?355947-JetBeam-M1XM-Died , then you will really appreciate the value of replaceable drop in bulbs.......

And if incands are so inferior, why do LED manufacturers spend millions trying to duplicate their beams?


----------



## idleprocess (May 28, 2013)

I actually find it surprising that maglite has moved away from the ubiquitous PR base C & D - I might need to move quickly to secure a few mod hosts. For all the complaints about the Maglite LED drop-in's steady reduction in output after running for more than a few minutes I thought it was both a clever realization of how people actually use flashlights (brief periods of operation) and a shrewd business move that didn't require changes to their main product line. But perhaps Wal-Mart's impressive Big Data did the talking that forced Maglite's hand - Mag surely saw a steady loss of market share (which I equated with their shrinking shelf space) over the past ~10 years or so as LED quickly went mainstream thus had to start revising even their core product line to keep up.

The simplicity of incandescent will likely be something that Maglite misses. The bulb is far and away the most common point of failure and quick to resolve. Warranty issues for maglite had likely been designed out of the product decades ago; permanently-installed LED with driving electronics will probably force expansion of their servicing department even if the users are to blame for many of the failures.

Like film cameras/film developing or desktop computers, the mass market's changing tastes will leave the smaller enthusiast base to bear the costs of maintaining the infrastructure - likely at a cost of money, time, and convenience. There will be a period of transition as incandescent flashlights exit the mainstream. Niche suppliers and retailers will move in to fill the small gaps that remain - although how long this will take is hard to say. Unless it's an incandescent product with a dedicated "invested" following that makes regular purchases at a brick-and-mortar, I would suggest adapting to this changing reality and becoming acquainted with new sources as they appear.



I would be hard-pressed to say which spectrum I prefer when it comes to bottom-end flashlights - neither the ghostly cold blue of cheap LED nor the orange-y glow of low-end incandescent are particularly appealing - but I imagine that factor doesn't matter a great deal in the marketplace. I suspect that the masses generally use flashlights in situations where quality of the spectrum (so long as it's something close to white) is orders of magnitude less of a concern than the _lack of light problem_ they're trying to resolve. Professional/enthusiast users will have more opportunity and more exacting requirements that emphasize the differences, but they're hardly defining the market and make researched/experience-based buying decisions.


----------



## jtr1962 (May 28, 2013)

Brigadier said:


> And if incands are so inferior, why do LED manufacturers spend millions trying to duplicate their beams?


That's mostly for the residential general lighting market, and even here I could argue it's due to acquired preference rather than superiority as some other countries, notably Japan, prefer cooler residential lighting. Even in North America, we're seeing a gradual shift in residential lighting preference away from 2700K or 3000K towards 3500K to 5000K. Not surprising as the latter is closer to the type of light humans spent most of their existence under.


----------



## ampdude (May 29, 2013)

I don't think it's preference so much as efficiency standards matched to the current technology available.


----------



## LGT (May 29, 2013)

I guess it depends on who is doing the considering. If you enjoy using incans, as I do, keep using them. Regardless of any info that, regarding LED's, " this is actually closer to what we're used to seeing." While I also use LED lights, it's not to the point that I think incans no longer have a place in the flashlight world. When I want a color that is more pleasant to my eye, I'll pick an incan.


----------



## mesa232323 (May 29, 2013)

Not obsolete for photography


----------



## SemiMan (May 30, 2013)

JCD said:


> LEDs are superior to incandescents in terms of efficiency, but incandescents are still a lot better in terms of light quality.



They are "better" but a lot better is not true and even better is highly debatable when you consider color gamut (ability to discriminate a wide range of colors). I would argue that for utility and effective quality of light, a 90+ CRI, 4000K Nichia 219 is superior to incandescent in most cases.

Semiman


----------



## SemiMan (May 30, 2013)

JCD said:


> Compared to low CRI LEDs, high CRI LEDs are great. Compared to incans, they're just not quite as bad as low CRI LEDs. If you graph the amounts of each component wavelength in the light of a LED emitter, you will find lots of peaks and valleys. A similar graph of incandescent light will reveal a much smoother curve. Visually, particularly in outdoor environments, that smoother curve translates to much better color reproduction and better illumination of subtle details.



That is a very narrow view of LED and in terms of an outdoor environment, with INCAN, you better hope there are not rich greens, or anything leaning towards more blue as it will look washed out.

Semiman


----------



## LuxLuthor (May 30, 2013)

We are almost into June, so we should wind down this thread. Good to have at least a week to idle before the next monthly "incands are obsolete" thread "innocently" starts up.

I think I'm going to start a new trend and start a thread every month in the LED section asserting that LED's are obsolete. Let's see how that goes over.


----------



## Brigadier (May 30, 2013)

LuxLuthor said:


> We are almost into June, so we should wind down this thread. Good to have at least a week to idle before the next monthly "incands are obsolete" thread "innocently" starts up.
> 
> I think I'm going to start a new trend and start a thread every month in the LED section asserting that LED's are obsolete. Let's see how that goes over.



Yeah, this does get old, doesn't it?


----------



## JCD (May 30, 2013)

SemiMan said:


> They are "better" but a lot better is not true and even better is highly debatable when you consider color gamut (ability to discriminate a wide range of colors). I would argue that for utility and effective quality of light, a 90+ CRI, 4000K Nichia 219 is superior to incandescent in most cases.



I doubt it. I don't have a 219 to test, but a high CRI XP-G isn't close to a good incan.



SemiMan said:


> That is a very narrow view of LED and in terms of an outdoor environment, with INCAN, you better hope there are not rich greens, or anything leaning towards more blue as it will look washed out.



I've used both extensively outdoors. Incans are still way ahead in that environment. But you're right; incans don't over-emphasize blues relative to the rest of the visual spectrum the way LEDs do.


----------



## mesa232323 (May 30, 2013)

LuxLuthor said:


> We are almost into June, so we should wind down this thread. Good to have at least a week to idle before the next monthly "incands are obsolete" thread "innocently" starts up.
> 
> I think I'm going to start a new trend and start a thread every month in the LED section asserting that LED's are obsolete. Let's see how that goes over.



That would be hilarious. It would help you get to that 10,000 post count pretty fast.


----------

