# *REVISED* NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!



## selfbuilt (Apr 6, 2009)

_*UPDATE June 10, 2009: Revised edition EZ AA added to the review*

*In my original testing of the EZ AA, I noticed reduced output and low runtime efficiency of the EZ AA Lo mode. NiteCore promptly issued a recall in early April 2009, and worked to revise the product. They have sent me a revised shipping version, which is now added to this review. I have left the background pics the same, as the light does not look appreciably different. Where appropriate, I have updated this review with the new info.*_

---------------

_*Reviewer's Note: *The NiteCore EZ AA was provided by NiteCore for review. _

*Warning: Pic heavy!*

The EZ AA is the latest much-anticipated 1xAA offering from NiteCore. Unlike the continuously-variable NiteCore models, this light is a simple two-stage twist interface similar to a number of keychain lights (e.g JetBeam Jet-μ, Aeon, etc.). In fact, the EZ AA appears to be designed to compete with 1xAAA keychain lights, given its remarkably small size for a 1xAA light.












Packaging is similar to the D10/EX10 series NiteCore lights, and comes with a one-page instruction sheet, warranty card, wrist lanyard, extra o-rings, and new "lock-style" keychain clip. No holster or body tube clip is included (or available, AFAIK).
_*
UPDATE:* The instruction sheet has been updated with new output and runtime specs, and now explicitly supports Li-ion (i.e. 14500). Here is a summary of the changes.

Original EZ AA Instructions:

Battery illustrated as "1.5V AA" only
Warning included: "do not use batteries that exceed 2 volts, as they may permanently damage the flashlight."
Hi mode listed as "130 lumens for 1.5 hrs"
Lo mode listed "15 lumens for up to 20 hours"
Revised EZ AA Instructions:

Battery illustrated as simply "AA" with voltage restriction
Previous warning against >2V replaced with: "DO NOT use rechargeable Li-ion batteries without safety circuit." (suggesting that protected 14500 IS supported).
Hi mode is now listed as "130 lumens for up to 50 minutes" (which seems more consistent with my runtime results)
Lo mode is now listed as "10 lumens for up to 20 hours" (which seems more consistent with my output readings and runtimes)
It is good to see the manual has been brought in line with actual performance. :thumbsup:
_
Since I know size is the prime concern for a keychain light, I thought I would show you how it compares to a couple of 1xAAA and 1xAA lights.






EZ AA: 85.0mm x 16.6mm, 20.9g (no battery)

The EZ AA is certainly among the smallest 1xAA lights I've seen (although the award for that goes to the Zebralight H50 headlamp). Build design is somewhat similar to my 1xAAA JetBeam Jet-μ, but on a larger scale to accommodate the 1xAA cell. 

Note that the 85.0mm height is with a battery installed but not activated. In comparison, fully engaged at max output would be ~83mm, but I doubt you'd be carrying it that way on your keychain. 














Overall and fit and finish are excellent on my sample. Emitter is well focused in the reflector and gives a nice beam (scroll down for beam shots). 

So what's under the hood? :naughty:














As you can see, the head of the EZ AA has a brass pill, instead of the typical aluminum. This is presumably for heat-sinking purposes - although aluminum has better thermal conductivity than brass, brass is considerably denser than aluminum. Normally it wouldn't be an issue, but given the low overall mass of the light, my guess is that they wanted to beef up the heat-sinking ability without raising the overall size and weight (not sure if it makes much of a difference though - scroll down this thread for a discussion). :candle:

The head contact surface includes a small spring surrounded by a foam cushion. On twisty lights that require tightening for activation, the foam is typically used to reduce battery rattle (and potentially to limit contact surfaces for multi-stage lights). The head spring is a good idea, given the lack of a spring in the tail region (note the small metal post at the base of the battery tube in the pic above). These type of lights run the risk of crushing your cells if there isn't some sort of variable-resistance spring included somewhere.

User interface is very straight-forward: tighten the head until the light comes on (Lo mode). Keep tightening until full contact is made and the light switches to Hi. In my testing, it typically took about one-and-a-quarter full turns past the Lo activation point to reach Hi. To turn off, loosen the head until the light turns off. :kiss:

_*UPDATE:* The revised EZ AA requires a shorter twist to activate Hi from Lo - a little over three-quarters of full turn now, instead of a one-and-a-quarter turn._

Note: Do NOT keep tightening past the point Hi comes on, or you risk damaging your cells.






The light comes with a standard quarter-inch tripod attachment point in the base. Note that in the pic above I am using a larger model "gorilla" flexible tripod than the one most places sell. 

*Comparison Beamshots*

Given the interest in the output of both the Hi and Lo modes, I've done some comparison beamshots at both settings. Comparators used are the NiteCore D10 (Cree Q5) and Fenix LD10.

All lights are on 100% on Sanyo Eneloop. Distance is about 0.5 meters from a white wall. 

*Hi mode :*














Spillbeam width is slightly less than the NiteCore D10 or Fenix LD10, likely due to the narrower head/reflector. Note the relative absence of Cree rings despite the good amount of centre-beam throw. Max output is certainly in the same ballpark as the others (see Summary Table later in this review for a comparison).

_*UPDATE:* The Hi mode appears to be unaltered on the revised version, so I've let these original pics stand. Here is a direct comparison of the new revised EZ AA to the original:














As you can see, my revised sample is slightly less focused for throw, but is otherwise comparable._

*Lo mode:*

_UPDATE: The original EZ AA had abnormally low output, so I have replaced the beamshots here with a direct comparison of the original EZ AA to the new revised version:










As you can see, the new EZ AA is detectably brighter on its Lo setting. Scroll down to the summary table and runtimes for more details. _

*Testing Method:* All my output numbers are relative for my home-made light box setup, a la Quickbeam's flashlightreviews.com method. You can directly compare all my relative output values from different reviews - i.e. an output value of "10" in one graph is the same as "10" in another. All runtimes are done under a cooling fan.

Throw values are the square-root of lux measurements taken at 1 meter from the lens, using a light meter.

*Throw/Output Summary Chart:*






The throw of the EZAA remains about typical for a 1xAA light of this brightness. Max output on NiMH is also about a typical for a well-driven light, in the same league as the D10 or Fenix LD10.

_*UPDATE:* The original EZ AA had an abnormally low Lo mode, likely somewhere around 6-7 lumens based on my comparisons to other lights of known lumen estimate (a far cry from the original 15 lumen specs). This new revised EZ AA seems pretty much bang on with the revised specs of 10 lumens. The new EZ AA now also supports 14500 Li-ion, as shown below:






Definitely a bit brighter on Li-ion than standard batteries, so I don't recommend you run it on Hi for extended periods without cooling. Note also that it was rather difficult to activate Hi on protected 14500 on my sample without using a LOT of twisting force. 

Here are some additional beamshots comparing Hi and Lo on 14500 vs Eneloop:






















_

*Output/Runtime Comparison*






_*UPDATE:* I have only done Eneloop runs so far, but as you can see above (dotted lines) performance on Hi is not that different from before - although regulation seems to be enhanced. Output and runtime on Lo is considerably enhanced - scroll down for a better illustration. I will continue to update these graphs as the rest of the battery types are tested. Note again that 14500 is now supported on the new EZ AA._


















Output/runtime efficiency is certainly acceptable on Hi (actually looks a lot like the Eagletac P10A). But good performance here is not that surprising - there is not really a lot of difference between various 1xAA models when driven maximally.














_*UPDATE:* The performance on Lo on alkaline has drastically improved on this revised version. Note the full regulation pattern now, and the more than double output/runtime efficiency. Also notice the particular good Lo runtime on 14500._

*Potential Issues*

Although impressively small for a 1xAA light, I am not sure if everyone would find it feasible on a keychain (it might be most suitable for those who carry their keys in a purse or in baggy pant pockets). For short periods of time, I have tried carrying it in my jeans front pocket on my keychain instead of my 1xAAA Jet-µ, and honestly I haven't noticed the difference (but I also have a fair number of keys on there, so my keychain is bulky to start). This is likely to be highly subjective and variable among users, so YMMV. 

Tighten-to-activate twisty lights always have the potential to be battery crushers, so care needs to be used not to over-tighten. Inclusion of the head spring is a good idea, but common sense should still prevail.

*Preliminary Observations*

The EZ AA certainly lives up to its name - it's an easy to use light. Basically, you could treat it as a single-stage low light, like the Fenix E01 - simply twist to activate. But you also have the option to fully tighten to jump to the max possible output you could reasonably expect on a 1xAA light (on standard batteries). 

What is really different about this light is its slim lined design - they have kept it as thin as possible to allow you to potentially run it on a keychain. The limited storage capacity of a 1xAAA battery (which is the usual dominion of keychain lights) can be frustrating, so I can see the appeal of this design. But I'm not sure yet it if it will be comfortable enough for EDC keychain pocket carry over the long-term - in short testing so far, I honestly haven't noticed the difference compared to my Jet-µ :shrug: I will report back on my extended experience with it once all the runtime testing is complete.

Consistent with NiteCore offerings, the light appears to be of high quality, with careful attention to detail in the design (e,g. small spring on the head, brass heatsink, etc.). Despite the small size, the reflector does a very good job in balancing decent throw with a very smooth beam (especially for a Cree). And despite the thin battery tube walls, the light still feels solid to me. I would think many would find this an attractive package even if they weren't looking for the thinnest possible 1xAA. :twothumbs

As with all lights, it comes down to what your intended use is. Even if keychain carry isn't a priority for you, you might prefer the KISS interface and slim-lined design of the EZ AA.  But if you are looking for a good all-around general purpose light, I think you would want to carefully consider the NiteCore D10. For a little more money, you get a slightly larger light with much greater versatility (i.e. lower Lo, continuously variable interface, choice of twisty or piston-clicky action, etc.).

For a simple two-stage light intended for EDC use, I personally like the choice of output levels on the EZ AA. The Lo mode is lower than I expected, and the option for max power is appreciated. I think these are sensible output choices for the intended usage, but given the lower body mass I don't recommend you run it on Hi for extended periods of time without some form of cooling (i.e at least hand-hold it).
_
*UPDATE:* The revised EZ AA has considerably improved output/runtime efficiency on Lo - more than double that of the original EZ AA overall. :thumbsup: And the performance on 14500 is very impressive. oo:

Lo output is now a believable 10 lumens on standard batteries. Some may still find this too low for a two-stage light, but I rather like it for keychain carry. For those that want more, Lo output on 14500 is measurably higher for most the time (i.e. 15+ lumens).

The reduced amount of twisting necessary to access Hi from Lo is useful on the new EZ AA. Also, 14500 Li-ion support is a nice addition, as it gives users more options (although again, I wouldn't recommend running it for extended periods on Hi).

All in all, a good upgrade from the original version.  _


----------



## csshih (Apr 6, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*

ouch.. that was fast.. great review!


----------



## tempman (Apr 6, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*

I wonder what the runtime would be in a very cold enviroment, or just with some sort of cooling method.


----------



## adirondackdestroyer (Apr 6, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*

Another great review Selfbuilt! I figured it would be too large for keychain carry, and your comments comfirmed it for me. 
I wish they would make a AAA version of this light, and make it with a spring in the tail (like Fenix E01), so that it won't be a cell crusher. A super small two stage single AAA cree light would be killer!


----------



## qip (Apr 6, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*

very nice ...i guess heat factored in to why L91 couldnt give the usual high FLAT regulation


----------



## Zeruel (Apr 6, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*

Thanks for the review :thumbsup:
Noob question, is it regulated? Not sure if I read the graphs right, light output starts dips constantly....

Hmm...low seems bright, but that's cool by me.


----------



## applevision (Apr 6, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*

Outstanding review.

Thanks so much!!


----------



## Woods Walker (Apr 6, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*

Nice..


----------



## Burgess (Apr 6, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*

Thank you, SelfBuilt !


:goodjob::kewlpics::thanks:





Does it get *hot* on High, when holding it ?

_


----------



## Benson (Apr 7, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*



selfbuilt said:


> P.S.: My light came directly from NiteCore, so I have no idea what the bonus rechargeable option 4sevens is providing with his lights.


:mecry:

Great review, though.


adirondackdestroyer, why do you say it's a cell crusher now? There _is_ a spring in the head already (presumably the hi mode contact), so unless you keep cranking _after_ that spring makes contact, there's no crushing.

A (stiff) tailspring could let you crank farther, but it adds that much extra length, too.


----------



## eyeeatingfish (Apr 7, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*

So the EZAA had better throw than the D10?
That doesnt make the most sense given its smaller size. Maybe it gets higher throw because it lacks flood?

Also does the body look too thin? Meaning do you think it would be very durable? I guess i doubt you could really crush it with your hands but if the body were too thin then it could bend and mess up the threading making it not work or be less water resistant...

I carry a lumapower incendio on my keychain and its not too bad so personally I think that the EZAA would not even be an issue. I was thinking about getting a connexion or a nitecore d10 to replace it because of the common battery size and the keychain hole.


----------



## coloradogps (Apr 7, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*

Great review!

:twothumbs :twothumbs


----------



## Abyssos (Apr 7, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*

Another well deserved :thumbsup::twothumbs:thumbsup::twothumbs review.

I am concerned with the foam cushion. Seems like this will be a weak link in the reliability of the light in general. I am assuming that this foam is silicone based. And if so, degradation by heat and moisture is likely down the road; not to mention, thermal and compression set.

Any idea what is the material of this foam?


----------



## RocketTomato (Apr 7, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*



Abyssos said:


> Another well deserved :thumbsup::twothumbs:thumbsup::twothumbs review.
> 
> I am concerned with the foam cushion. Seems like this will be a weak link in the reliability of the light in general. I am assuming that this foam is silicone based. And if so, degradation by heat and moisture is likely down the road; not to mention, thermal and compression set.
> 
> Any idea what is the material of this foam?



The light should work without the foam. The downside is that the battery will rattle and you lose some shock protection if the light is dropped.


----------



## Chao (Apr 7, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*

Thanks again for this excellent review,:thumbsup: I can't wait mine.


----------



## Bullzeyebill (Apr 7, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*



Abyssos said:


> Another well deserved :thumbsup::twothumbs:thumbsup::twothumbs review.
> 
> I am concerned with the foam cushion. Seems like this will be a weak link in the reliability of the light in general. I am assuming that this foam is silicone based. And if so, degradation by heat and moisture is likely down the road; not to mention, thermal and compression set.
> 
> Any idea what is the material of this foam?



Arc AAA has been using foam for years, no problems with foam. Also, Endeavors lights,no problem their either. You hear that foam is a problem?

Bill


----------



## AFAustin (Apr 7, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*

selfbuilt, thanks for enlightening us once again, and your extremely rapid response time is much appreciated! With so much speculation and so little information on the EZ, it was good of you to get this to print so quickly. :thanks:

The EZ looks like a very nice offering, and I jumped in on the pre-order based on the remarkably small size (for an AA light) more than anything. After reading your review, I guess I was initially a bit disappointed with only about 45 minutes flat runtime on an eneloop on high, when the promos kept touting 1.5 hrs. With the EZ posing with an eneloop in some of the photos, I associated the two things. In fairness, now that I read a bit more carefully, the specs do say "up to 1.5 hrs." and they don't specify the cell. But, even though an e2 squeezes out 1.5 hrs. before dropping below 50%, as qip points out, the e2 fails to produce its usual flat runtime....?

OTOH, the output on high and the attractive beam are not a bit disappointing! :thumbsup: And I'm still mightily impressed with the small size, based on the comparison photos. I'm really looking forward to knowing how it feels in the hand.

Like Abyssos, I'm also wondering about the foam cushion long term. I've had a few lights in the past that used them, and I can remember some problems---like their falling off after the glue quickly gave out. :shakehead 

But, those are small nits to pick, and overall I am impressed with what I've seen, reinforced by your always spot on comments.

Thanks again for your excellent work!


----------



## Penguin (Apr 7, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*

Thanks SeflBuilt! I look forward to seeing mine in the mail!


----------



## ruriimasu (Apr 7, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*

Thank you for your review  now waiting for mine to come  come to think of it, maybe this light should have come in 3 stages, a middle at 25-40lumens would be great!


----------



## kaichu dento (Apr 7, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*



ruriimasu said:


> Thank you for your review  now waiting for mine to come  come to think of it, maybe this light should have come in 3 stages, a middle at 25-40lumens would be great!


Can't wait for the EZ AA II :devil:


----------



## DM51 (Apr 7, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*

Excellent review! This is sure to appeal to those who want something as small as possible, but with better performance than is obtainable with an AAA cell. It looks a very neat little light, and is bound to generate a lot of interest.

Moving to the Reviews section.


----------



## EngrPaul (Apr 7, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*

This is the review I was looking forward to. :twothumbs All positives as far as I'm concerned. 

Because of density, brass could be a better heat sink than aluminum for the first seconds only. Once both metals get to the same temperature, thermal conductivity is the only variable.

The job of the heat sink is to keep the emitter cool. The emitter will be hotter using brass when the light is on for a length of time.

If you turn both lights off, the aluminum will get cooler more quickly while the brass stays warm. 

*So there is only one circumstance when brass might be better, when the flashlight is stone cold and for a few seconds.*

I'm not going to make additional posts on the subject to avoid taking the thread OT. Anyone who is familiar with thermal analysis will understand... it's pretty basic.

Brass is like a gallon jug attached to a drinking straw. Aluminum is like a quart jar attached to a garden hose. Start filling them with water at the same rate, and see which one overflows.

The reason brass is better in the EZAA? First, I doubt the emitter won't run hot enough that the emitter goes into an unsafe temperature, regardless which metal is used. Second, brass makes for smoother, more durable threads. Third, brass won't oxidize as fast, providing better electrical contact. Finally, exposed brass looks way cooler.


----------



## mighty82 (Apr 7, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*

The D10 was rated 3-5 lumens, but was in reality about 0.3 lumens, so I should have known it was the same deal with this one.

The 15 lumens seems to be about 6-7 from the measurements here. Now I hope the runtime will be at least as long as with the LD10. 
It should be, with constant current regulation and much lower output.


----------



## selfbuilt (Apr 7, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*

Just a quick update - runtimes are continuing, and I plan to do a 2650mAh NiMH Hi mode run after the Lo mode eneloop is done (sometime today).

FYI, NiteCore informs me that their runtimes are based on higher capacity NiMH, so we'll see how my results compare. The graphs will be update as new runs come in. :wave:



tempman said:


> I wonder what the runtime would be in a very cold enviroment, or just with some sort of cooling method.





Burgess said:


> Does it get *hot* on High, when holding it ?


All my runtimes are done under a cooling fan. I haven't tried extended use by hand yet. 



Zeruel said:


> Noob question, is it regulated? Not sure if I read the graphs right, light output starts dips constantly....


Yes, I would definitely say it is regulated. The pattern looks a little different from some others, but it is still regulated.



eyeeatingfish said:


> So the EZAA had better throw than the D10?
> .. Also does the body look too thin? Meaning do you think it would be very durable? I carry a lumapower incendio on my keychain and its not too bad so personally I think that the EZAA would not even be an issue.


Actually, the throw is within the range of the others - raw Lux is always bound to be a misleading variable from one sample to another (i.e. the difference from 2400 lux to 2000 lux is 20% more lux, but only 10% more throw when taking the square roots). That's within the variation you would see between samples.

I don't find the body to be fragile - despite being thin, it still seems fairly firm. And glad to hear the size of the Incendio is good for you - keychain carry is a subjective issue, I suspect. 



AFAustin said:


> I guess I was initially a bit disappointed with only about 45 minutes flat runtime on an eneloop on high, when the promos kept touting 1.5 hrs. ... But, even though an e2 squeezes out 1.5 hrs. before dropping below 50%, as qip points out, the e2 fails to produce its usual flat runtime....? ... Like Abyssos, I'm also wondering about the foam cushion long term.


Runtimes are progressing, and we'll see how the 2650mAh does.  As for the L91 runtime, I realize it may not be quite as flat as some others - but I don't see anything abnormal about it. In fact, all the runs look remarkable similar to the EagleTac P10A.

As for the foam cushion, I understand the concern (especially unsticking - used to happen with me on the JetBeam C-LE). We'll see how this one survives the testing. It can always be replaced (Dr Sholl corn pads worked well in the C-LE, may need to be trimmed to be used here). And it may work fine without it (although I would expect some possible battery wobble with the cushion).



EngrPaul said:


> So there is only one circumstance when brass might be better, when the flashlight is stone cold and for a few seconds. ...
> I'm not going to make additional posts on the subject to avoid taking the thread OT. Anyone who is familiar with thermal analysis will understand... it's pretty basic.


Since the light is meant to be run in the hand (with your own circulatory system serving as the ultimate heat exchanger), my guess is that they simply wanted to increase the overall density without overly increasing the weight. But I am not an engineer, so I will bow to your expertise on this one. :bow:



mighty82 said:


> The D10 was rated 3-5 lumens, but was in reality about 0.3 lumens, so I should have known it was the same deal with this one. The 15 lumens seems to be about 6-7 from the measurements here. Now I hope the runtime will be at least as long as with the LD10. .


Yes, I was pleasantly surprised by how low both the D10 and EZ AA are, relative to their specs. I really think this apparent ~5-10 lumen low on the EZ AA is a good level for a keychain light. We'll see how the runtimes do (so far, I'm at 14 hours on the eneloop low mode run, and still going ...) 

More to come ... :wave:


----------



## Ble (Apr 7, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*

Great review.

I'm very disappointed about the low level, I expected 15 (anounced) lumens and this is less than half. :thinking:
Very low and very high for two levels.
I would preferred 15 and 90 or even 20 and 80 and 1,5 or 2 hours high with an Eneloop (that's what I'm going to use on it).


----------



## rayman (Apr 7, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*

Great review :thumbsup:.

Makes me want to have the light even more. But I ordered the warm-white version so I have to wait even more .

rayman


----------



## Bullzeyebill (Apr 7, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*

As I noted in an earlier post, the foam in the EZ should be no real problem. To come to this conclusion I use years of experience with foam in two of my Arc AAA's, one of them I purchased in 2003. The foam, for one, keeps the AAA cell from moving around when the light is turn off. For another, it serves as a mechanical devise to prevent reverse polarity, if a cell is inserted backwards. Now my poor little 6 year old Arc AAA, has, not intentionally, been through three wash and dry cycles in our washing machine,  and the foam has not been affected. It has been used and used and used, and the foam is ok. So, when I say that the foam will, and maybe I should say, should, not be a problem. The maker of that light did (does) supply extra foam for those that might have need for some, and one time I inadvertantly knocked the foam piece off. Was able to stick it back on, but sent for some extra foam just in case.

My Endeavor CR2 Ion has never had a problem with the foam, and extra foam is available. So, extra foam should be made available for the EZ, and may never have to be used. Foam used in the EZ, is something that does not need to be worrried about, and should not be considered a deal breaker for those considering this light. Just my not too humble, but based on my experience with foam used in flashlights, opinion.

Bill


----------



## regulator (Apr 7, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*



Ble said:


> Great review.
> 
> I'm very disappointed about the low level, I expected 15 (anounced) lumens and this is less than half. :thinking:
> Very low and very high for two levels.
> I would preferred 15 and 90 or even 20 and 80 and 1,5 or 2 hours high with an Eneloop (that's what I'm going to use on it).


 
Thanks for getting the quick review up. I am a bit disappointed in the first stage output being only half of what it is advertised as. I was hoping this to be the ideal pocket AA light with a nice “primary” first stage of 10-15 lumens. Most lights like the Novatac and Ra where careful in selecting the most useful setting to be near this rating. There are so many other lights that provide a low-low level for night navigation or extreme long emergency runtime. And an AAA light can already provide a decent runtime at the lower setting. 

This light only has two settings and the nice 10-15 lumen primary setting would be possible with good runtime with the AA cell.

Not as critical to me – but - I would have preferred the high to be set to a bit lower to give a runtime of at least two hours. Set the max current to the LED to stay within its efficiency range of approximately 350mA to the LED which would be approximately 1 amp or so draw from the battery. Brightness would hardly be affected but runtime would go up considerably. 45 minutes of regulated high output from an Eneloop is not very good. But I can live with the high level of the EZAA since it would only be used very occasional.

I think this light will be nice but I could see myself purchasing an EZAA- II if it came out with the three levels as mentioned (or with the claimed 15 lumens setting and a better more efficient use of high - that way the two stage switch would remain).


----------



## BabyDoc (Apr 7, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*

Since there is a tripod attachment, is there any caution issued in the instructions or needed when running this light in high mode on a tripod, where you will not have the heat sinking advantage of your hand?


----------



## AFAustin (Apr 7, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*



Bullzeyebill said:


> As I noted in an earlier post, the foam in the EZ should be no real problem. To come to this conclusion I use years of experience with foam in two of my Arc AAA's, one of them I purchased in 2003. The foam, for one, keeps the AAA cell from moving around when the light is turn off. For another, it serves as a mechanical devise to prevent reverse polarity, if a cell is inserted backwards. Now my poor little 6 year old Arc AAA, has, not intentionally, been through three wash and dry cycles in our washing machine,  and the foam has not been affected. It has been used and used and used, and the foam is ok. So, when I say that the foam will, and maybe I should say, should, not be a problem. The maker of that light did (does) supply extra foam for those that might have need for some, and one time I inadvertantly knocked the foam piece off. Was able to stick it back on, but sent for some extra foam just in case.
> 
> My Endeavor CR2 Ion has never had a problem with the foam, and extra foam is available. So, extra foam should be made available for the EZ, and may never have to be used. Foam used in the EZ, is something that does not need to be worrried about, and should not be considered a deal breaker for those considering this light. Just my not too humble, but based on my experience with foam used in flashlights, opinion.
> 
> Bill



Yes, now that selfbuilt refreshes my tired recollection, I think it was with the C-LEs that I had my "foam problems" (sounds like a bad dental condition ). Bill, thank your your comments on the flip side of this---needless to say, I'm hoping the EZ is more like your Arcs and less like my C-LEs. And....the EZ will be presumed innocent till proven otherwise! 

selfbuilt, I meant also to ask your opinion of the "mucho twisting to change levels" issue, but I guess we'll all have a personal opinion on that soon enough.....


----------



## BabyDoc (Apr 7, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*



AFAustin said:


> selfbuilt, I meant also to ask your opinion of the "mucho twisting to change levels" issue, but I guess we'll all have a personal opinion on that soon enough.....


 Yes, in particular could you comment regarding ease of one handed operation?


----------



## Phaserburn (Apr 7, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*

Great job, as always! I am impressed by the smooth beam of this light; I like the minimal cree rings.


----------



## StandardBattery (Apr 7, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*

Interesting. Would have been nice to see it compared to the LD01 as well, since they are targeting the keychain users.

I'm surpised that it does not have better runtime/regulation. I thought with it's limited voltage range and 2 output levels it would beat the D10 for runtime.

Still waiting to try it myself. I hope the low, is not too low, or to me it won't be very general purpose.

*Thanks for the Review! :twothumbs*


----------



## AardvarkSagus (Apr 7, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*

Excellent review! You always do a wonderful job on these! My review is coming soon as well but my light apparently got held up in customs. It's out for delivery right now though so I should receive it sometime today. I'll skip the unboxing thread though since that is covered here. 

I am very impressed with the job they have done with this light. My thoughts on the brass are that they used it primarily for the smooth threading. I have been cautioned not to leave the light on High too long unattended (or at least un-cooled) but that completely makes sense in a light as small as this. It does seem to go against having a tripod mount however...


----------



## geek4christ (Apr 7, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*

Thanks for the review selfbuilt. Looks like a nice light and I think my initial concerns with the foam donut are mostly gone.

I don't expect you to mar your sample, but I wonder if shortening the spring a little bit would mean less turning to switch from low to high. What do you think?


----------



## Flying Turtle (Apr 7, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*

Thanks for your review, selfbuilt. I think I'll be liking the EZAA having a less than expected low. This should fit my typical use better. Also curious about whether the extra twisting to high is tedious? That high level does look nice, too.

Geoff


----------



## Cosmo7809 (Apr 7, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*

As usual kick *** review. Thanks


----------



## selfbuilt (Apr 7, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*



Ble said:


> I'm very disappointed about the low level, I expected 15 (anounced) lumens and this is less than half. :thinking: I would preferred 15 and 90 or even 20 and 80 and 1,5 or 2 hours high with an Eneloop (that's what I'm going to use on it).





regulator said:


> I am a bit disappointed in the first stage output being only half of what it is advertised as. I was hoping this to be the ideal pocket AA light with a nice “primary” first stage of 10-15 lumens.


I hear you. Personally, I tend to like 15+ lumens as the low on a general purpose 2-stage light (e.g. Fenix L2T). But for a _keychain_ light, I find that too bright. Maybe it's how I use my lights, but I hate getting zapped with a bright light when trying to find a keyhole or for looking for something under a table, etc. (when the keychain light usually comes out). 

I agree that the max output doesn't need to be quite as bright as this ... but I'm sure they are just responding to perceived market demand (everyone always seems to scream for the brightest light possible ). 



Bullzeyebill said:


> As I noted in an earlier post, the foam in the EZ should be no real problem. To come to this conclusion I use years of experience with foam in two of my Arc AAA's ...


Thanks for the input. If the foam does fall off, I've found the Dr Sholl's brand corn pads to be a very good replacement on my JetBeam C-LEs. They adhere very well (sticky adhesive), but would need to be trimmed a bit to fit here though.



BabyDoc said:


> Since there is a tripod attachment, is there any caution issued in the instructions or needed when running this light in high mode on a tripod, where you will not have the heat sinking advantage of your hand?


No mention of it in the instructions, but I would personally not recommend running such a small light at such a high output unattended without cooling. 

NiteCore did emphasize with me their wish to have runtime testing done under a cooling fan (which I do anyway). Their concern with heat seemed to be more for battery longevity/safety as opposed to the actual light, though.



AFAustin said:


> selfbuilt, I meant also to ask your opinion of the "mucho twisting to change levels" issue ...





BabyDoc said:


> Yes, in particular could you comment regarding ease of one handed operation?


I find it very easy to use one-handed (i.e. the screw action is very smooth). This may be the true benefit of the brass pill/screw threads.  

The one-and-a-quarter turn from Lo to Hi is a bit more than I might have expected, but is not an issue for me - you quickly get used to it.



AardvarkSagus said:


> My thoughts on the brass are that they used it primarily for the smooth threading. I have been cautioned not to leave the light on High too long unattended (or at least un-cooled) but that completely makes sense in a light as small as this. It does seem to go against having a tripod mount however...


Great minds think alike. 



StandardBattery said:


> Interesting. Would have been nice to see it compared to the LD01 as well, since they are targeting the keychain users.
> I'm surpised that it does not have better runtime/regulation. I thought with it's limited voltage range and 2 output levels it would beat the D10 for runtime.


Unfortunately, I don't have a LD01 - and my old L0D is an early Cree P4 edition, so I didn't think a comparison would be fair. I've never been a big fan of 1xAAA batteries, so I've been reticent in building up that part of my collection. 

As for the runtime, I think the performance on Hi is quite acceptable. There is bound to be some variability from sample to sample (due to emitter variability, etc.), and the results here are very in-keeping with the competition (i.e. look at the current-controlled two-stage EagleTac P10A on Hi). Realistically, there's is not much to differentiate any of the lights driven at really high maximal levels. :shrug:


----------



## Spidey82 (Apr 7, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*

i wonder if anyone will be able to reduce the amt of turns from low to high.. i'm for sure gg to see if i can do anything to save some turns.

and btw, i bought this light in full faith that 4-7s will come out with a clip for it sooner or later... => a light with a clip is ALOT more practical IMO.
but thats how i use it..


----------



## Sgt. LED (Apr 7, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*

Will you be doing an add-on to this great review when the Q3 5B version lands?


----------



## alfreddajero (Apr 7, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*

Once again another great review.


----------



## DM51 (Apr 7, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*

LOL Sgt., this review is still less than 12 hours old, and already you want v.2.0??


----------



## Sgt. LED (Apr 7, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*

 I know, I know, there's just no excuse for me!


----------



## TooSharp (Apr 7, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*

As always selfbuilt, great job!! Can't wait to get mine. It should fit nicely in my jeans watchpocket when I don't want to carry my Ra Clicky.


----------



## AardvarkSagus (Apr 7, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*



selfbuilt said:


> Great minds think alike.


And gosh darnit, so do ours!


TooSharp said:


> As always selfbuilt, great job!! Can't wait to get mine. It should fit nicely in my jeans watchpocket when I don't want to carry my Ra Clicky.


That's an excellent use for the watchpocket. Too bad I already carry a USB drive there, otherwise I could cram yet another light onto my person!


----------



## kaichu dento (Apr 7, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*



AardvarkSagus said:


> That's an excellent use for the watchpocket. Too bad I already carry a USB drive there, otherwise I could cram yet another light onto my person!


You can put a light in there too; I've got my fingernail clippers, car keys and Titan in mine!


----------



## selfbuilt (Apr 7, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*

Just updated the main runtime graph with higher capacity NiMH. Hit your browser reload if you don't see the new trace:







This was originally a Duracell-branded "2650mAh" cell, but that pack was heavily used in my earlier testing. Last time I ran a Maya capacity check, it was coming in ~2550mAh (originally they were 2700-2750mAh new), so I'm estimating ~2500mAh now for this review. 

Obviously, I need to get new cells here - but I've pretty much standardized on eneloops now, so I'm not likely to bother. Note that NiteCore explained to me that they used higher capacity cells for their runtime testing, so I thought it was appropriate to add this one run in.



Sgt. LED said:


> Will you be doing an add-on to this great review when the Q3 5B version lands?


Not likely ... along with the obvious tint differences, I would expect just slightly lower output. Everything else should be the same.



TooSharp said:


> It should fit nicely in my jeans watchpocket when I don't want to carry my Ra Clicky.


Yes, it would fit pretty well in there - just the tip of the light would show.


----------



## regulator (Apr 7, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*

I’m a bit surprised that Nitecore was so far off with the rating of the first stage output. Looking at the EZAA first stage output and comparing it to the Lumapower X2, they are pretty close at 3 and 3.1 respective. Lumapower rates the X2 lowest output as 4 lumens which seems pretty accurate. This would mean that the EZAA listed 15 lumens output is WAY off! 

The Fenix L1D is rated at 9 lumens low and has a value of 11 which is “pretty” close in relation. I think the LD1 was lowered by customer request but the literature did not change (not sure). 

I know there are always slight discrepancies in actual output numbers (especially at the high end) but this seems like a big inaccuracy. I’m not saying that I will dislike the light but I was at least hoping to get around 10 lumens if it was listed as 15.


----------



## frosty (Apr 7, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*

Another great review.:thumbsup::thumbsup:


----------



## mighty82 (Apr 7, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*

At less than 1/3 of the output the L1D has, it should at least be able to go 24 hours on one eneloop. But no. I'm not very impressed with the regulation here.


----------



## selfbuilt (Apr 7, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*



regulator said:


> Looking at the EZAA first stage output and comparing it to the Lumapower X2, they are pretty close at 3 and 3.1 respective. Lumapower rates the X2 lowest output as 4 lumens which seems pretty accurate. ... The Fenix L1D is rated at 9 lumens low and has a value of 11 which is “pretty” close in relation. I think the LD1 was lowered by customer request but the literature did not change (not sure).





mighty82 said:


> At less than 1/3 of the output the L1D has, it should at least be able to go 24 hours on one eneloop.


Well, I've never measured the runtime on Lo on my L1D on Eneloop, so I don't know how it compares. EZ AA Lo mode alkaline runtime will likely be done by tomorrow (or thursday at the outside) - that should tell us more, since I have data for a number of lights on alkaline at low levels.

As for lumen estimates on Lo, it is frankly hard to say with my simple milk carton lightbox. I think we can safely say that on Eneloop, the EZ AA is is roughly equivalent to the Lumapower X2 on Lo, and a bit less than the LD10 on Lo. That would seem to place it closer to 5 lumens than 10 or 15, assuming the other makers are referring to NiMH and you trust their estimates. :shrug: But note that alkaline output is a little higher on the EZAA (above 4 ROV on my current run) - if Fenix were using alkaline as their comparator, the lumen estimate would be more in the middle of the 5-10 lumen range. Any way you slice it, it definitely seems to be <10 lumens by any comparator I can think of.


----------



## Sharpy_swe (Apr 7, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*

Another great review, thanks!


----------



## Ble (Apr 7, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*

"Low Mode: 15 lumens for up to 20 hours" that's what you can read in the specs.

I get this light in order to use mainly the low mode. But I can get more light from a Fenix E01.

Lets see...
E01: 10 lumens x 10 hours = 100 (if I remenber correctly, can't find a runtime right now)
EZ AA: 6? lumens x 16,3 hours = 97,8

and the EZ uses an AA that have 2,5 times more energy than an AAA.

I'm thinking in cancel my order.


----------



## Paul6ppca (Apr 7, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*



Spidey82 said:


> i wonder if anyone will be able to reduce the amt of turns from low to high.. i'm for sure gg to see if i can do anything to save some turns.
> 
> and btw, i bought this light in full faith that 4-7s will come out with a clip for it sooner or later... => a light with a clip is ALOT more practical IMO.
> but thats how i use it..


 

Would a spacer in the end compress the spring some so less turns are needed to reach max???


----------



## mighty82 (Apr 7, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*



Ble said:


> "Low Mode: 15 lumens for up to 20 hours" that's what you can read in the specs.
> 
> I get this light in order to use mainly the low mode. But I can get more light from a Fenix E01.
> 
> ...


I'm thinking the same thing. What's the point of making a new super small AA light to get more capacity than AAA lights if you're going to make it half the efficiency of the competition? I don't know how they manage make a constant current regulated circuit with less efficiency than the average pwm circuit. :thinking:


----------



## Spidey82 (Apr 7, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*



Ble said:


> "Low Mode: 15 lumens for up to 20 hours.............
> E01: 10 lumens x 10 hours = 100 (if I remenber correctly, can't find a runtime right now)
> EZ AA: 6? lumens x 16,3 hours = 97,8
> and the EZ uses an AA that have 2,5 times more energy than an AAA.



From 4sevens.com
EZ AA Features

World’s smallest AA flashlight
Ultra-lightweight - just 20 grams (without battery)
Renowned CREE XR-E LED capable of over 50,000 hours of output
Surprisingly bright output of 130 lumens
*Continuous runtime of up to 15 hours*
Brass heat sinking guarantees efficient and effective thermal management
Twist-activated output for easy one-handed operation
Straight-forward UI with two modes of output
Military-grade aluminum alloy
Mil-Spec Type-III Hard-Anodized finish resists scratches
Extensive knurling for excellent grip
Current-regulated circuitry eliminates flickering
Water resistant to IPX-8 standard
Reflector optimized for a great balance of output distance and spread
Impact-resistant optical-grade glass lens with anti-reflective coating
Flat base allows light to tail-stand like a candle
Designed to fit standard camera mounts

i think 20 hrs is intermittent usage.
but still, if its not close to 15 lumens, i am doubting the efficiency of the circuitry
since, the EZaa isn't shipped yet, i will wait a day or 2 for the alkaline/L91 low runtime chart.


----------



## mighty82 (Apr 7, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*



Spidey82 said:


> i think 20 hrs is intermittent usage.


Intermittent usage? What does that mean? I think they just changed it to 15 hours and forgot to change it the other place or something.
"5 years on the lowest setting (if you use it 2 minutes a week)" :laughing:


----------



## richardcpf (Apr 7, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*

Thanks for such a great review!

I'm really impressed with the numbers. This light has a small reflector but the lux readings were surprinsingly high, the hotspot is more intense than the D10 and the Defender Infinity!

The only thing that worries me is the fact that the head must be unscrewed a lot to turn it off. This expoxes the oring to dust and dirty and the head has more chances to fall off (although i haven't had any problems with the fenix twisty lights.) I really wish this mechanism was more sentitive, half turn to turn on, screw it fully to go to high, then an almost full turn to turn it off.

Now I'm gonna preorder the EZAA instead of the P100A2.  This is a hard time for flashaholics.




mighty82 said:


> Intermittent usage? "5 years on the lowest setting (if you use it 2 minutes a week)" :laughing:


 
I know it is unfair to test a runtime with intermitten usage, but I dont think anyone needs 16 straight hours of light. That is using the flashlight from the moment you wake up until you sleep. A true flashaholic.


----------



## mighty82 (Apr 7, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*



richardcpf said:


> I know it is unfair to test a runtime with intermitten usage, but I dont think anyone needs 16 straight hours of light. That is using the flashlight from the moment you wake up until you sleep. A true flashaholic.


With intermitten usage any light will last for anything from a day to months. You can't measure runtime like that. If you mean intermitten as in using it now and then and combining the total usage, the runtime would still be the sames as if you used it 16 hours straight. 
I could easily get through a day and night with 16 hours, but that's not really the point. Sometimes I need battery efficiency.


----------



## Sgt. LED (Apr 7, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*

Also considering cancelling my order.

:sigh: Runtime is off, output is off too. What happened?


----------



## ruriimasu (Apr 7, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*

now it seems that my D10 is really going to stay. the runtime for the light just does not run in sync with what was touted. there was mention of a new efficiency in this light. I meant, as someone pointed out, an E01 on an *AAA* can already run 10hrs on 10lumens, but an EZAA on an *AA* only 16hrs? just not right :thumbsdow

im considering cancelling my order too to get a LF3XT, LF2XT or NDI, but i will just wait for AardvarkSagus' review, to be fair. oo:


----------



## qip (Apr 7, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*

stick a L91 in their im sure you will get the 20 hours on low


----------



## jhanko (Apr 7, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*

Nice review! Thanks for taking the time to do it. :goodjob:


----------



## StandardBattery (Apr 7, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*

 I'm not sure what to do. Between This review and the other on light-reviews it's clear that this light does not match the specifications advertized. It is also not a compelling example of AA superiority over AAA, rather it seem to support that AAA is the way to go, and carry a spare (which is a lot easier for AAA). :shakehead:shakehead 

I might keep my order for WW since at least that would offer something and they have a chance to fix things... maybe cancel the regular version.... hmmm.... there might be some good prices on B/S/T.

I guess I'll wait to test it myself, as that's where it counts.


----------



## Sgt. LED (Apr 7, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*



I requested that my order be cancelled. Nitecore needs to deliver what they advertize. I understand that 1 unit is not indicitive of all of them however the results here match another reviewers findings and the odds of both reviewers getting bum units argues against that explanation. 
Skimping out on hours of low runtime and 10 lumens of low brightness without an appropriate proportionate lengthening of runtime is not acceptable to me.

Nitecore has made a mistake in design or they are taking a page from the DX playbook and think it's OK to just get close enough to what they tell us it is.

Hopefully the company will take another look at it and fix it so I can re-order it.

My appologies to the dealer 7777's, I regret having to cancel my order.


----------



## TooSharp (Apr 7, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*



Sgt. LED said:


> Also considering cancelling my order.
> 
> :sigh: Runtime is off, output is off too. What happened?



That would be a shame if the light didn't meet specs, but I'm still awaiting runtimes on other samples before making final judgment. Not saying selfbuilt is wrong by any means, I'd just like to see a little larger sample space. Maybe David or Peter can do a couple of runtime tests since they pushed the release back a week.

Again, selfbuilt Thanks for the great review! I love the fact manufactures are sending you products so we can see a review at the same time or before a product ships.

Edit: I see light-reviews had comparable runtimes. This isn't the first time Nitecore has had inflated specs. When the DI came out the lumen rating had to be adjusted. Hopefully 4sevens will chime in.


----------



## zip22 (Apr 7, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*

http://www.light-reviews.com/nitecore_ez_aa/

here's the other review that confirms shorter than expected run times.


----------



## Sgt. LED (Apr 7, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*

Thank you for the link Zip22.

Runtime 1x AA 2000mAh Eneloop: High 00:40 to 50% Low 14:42 to 50%


----------



## regulator (Apr 7, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*

Well thats it - I have to cancell unless these two reviewers got a bad light. The output from the EZAA on low is lower than either a AAA Fenix LOD stainless on low and an AAA Liteflux 2FX on low. This is just too low of a level for me to be useful - especially in a larger light with only two modes and the high mode has such short runtime.

I would reorder if Nitecore meets output specs.


----------



## Cosmo7809 (Apr 7, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*

If 7777's does not give an explanation by tomorrow I think I will cancel my order... I could use my 50 bucks towards a better light.

From 1 and a 1/2 hours to 40 mins on high is crazy... And that even lower low aint too great for my application. :shakehead


----------



## selfbuilt (Apr 7, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*



zip22 said:


> here's the other review that confirms shorter than expected run times.





regulator said:


> The output from the EZAA on low is lower than either a AAA Fenix LOD stainless on low and an AAA Liteflux 2FX on low


Just to clarify - as mentioned in my review, NiteCore has stated to me that they used higher capacity 2500mAh NiMH for their runtime estimates. My result of 16+ hours on a 2000mAh eneloop thus seems very consistent with the original 20 hour specs on 2500mAh.

The greater issue seems to be the output level for that runtime (and thus its relative overall efficiency). We should have an answer on relative efficiency compared to other lights on alkaline soon - I'll post updates here as soon as I have them.


----------



## qip (Apr 7, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*

my god it sounds like a revolution in here :laughing: i was just checking some old reviews and saw that the L1D on low does 19.5 hours on ALKS if the EZ has a lower low it should definitely have more runtime than that


but i still have to try out the light first so im still in , besides i have been through enough torture and have to find out what the secret power is


----------



## qip (Apr 7, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*



selfbuilt said:


> The greater issue seems to be the output level for that runtime (and thus its relative overall efficiency). We should have an answer on relative efficiency compared to other lights on alkaline soon - I'll post updates here as soon as I have them.





exactly , lower output should have better runtime than advertised


----------



## Sgt. LED (Apr 7, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*



qip said:


> my god it sounds like a revolution in here :laughing:


Off with their heads.


----------



## regulator (Apr 7, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*

I think the stated runtime is probably pretty accurate - but not the level of output being reported.

I think someone posted from a Chinese website that they measured a current draw from the battery of 100mA on low and 1.7 A on high. I set my Nitecore D10 to 100mA to try to get an idea of what the output would be like. It was in my opinion too low for a light of this size as a primary setting. The output at 100mA does seem to correlate to the understated lumen output. 

I wonder if the circuit in the EZAA is set too low for the first stage? I think to realistically get approximately 10-15 lumens you would need to draw about 200-300 mA. 100mA is a pretty low current draw - which would be only approximatley 1/3 that to the LED. This would explain the low output. I think this light would see 20-25 hours runtime on a lithium primary if it is indeed only drawing 100 mA from the cell.


----------



## Burgess (Apr 7, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*



regulator said:


> I think someone posted from a Chinese website that they measured a current draw
> from the battery of 100mA on low and 1.7 A on high.


 

Very good point, Regulator.


Noticed that one myself.


4Sevens stated that Low mode was *1/8th* of High mode. (brightness)


But, these Current readings seem to indicate (to me, at least)

a difference of perhaps Sixteen Times.


Methinks something is not right, eh ?



_


----------



## Bullzeyebill (Apr 8, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*



Burgess said:


> Very good point, Regulator.
> 
> 
> Noticed that one myself.
> ...



Don't compare mA draw from battery and brightness. It is what the LED is seeing as current that is important. We are asking a single AA to do a lot to produce around 60 lumens. The circuit has to convert 1.2- 1.3 volts to 3.2 volts using a NiMh AA, then it has to maintain a more off less steady current to the LED. I am surprised it is only pulling 1.7A's from the battery. Ratio of brightness (lumens in this case) between low mode and high mode is probably right at about 1:8 or so, and has nothing to do with the difference between 100mA and 1.7A draw from the battery, except that it takes that much more to drive the LED from 6-7 lumens to around 60 lumens.

Bill

Well, I rechecked numbers from post 1 and like most of the compared lights, the EZ is pushing 80+ lumens on high instead of what I called 60 lumens. I did not take into account quickbeams formula for converting lightbox numbers into extimated lumens. Also, low is more like 5 lumens. I, too can not see the relatively short runtime on low. Not sure about runtime for high mode. Maybe heat is an issue with this smaller form factor AA light. 

Just maybe we need another sample light tested, and I am surprised people are basing their decisions to drop out based on one light sampled for testing. Has anyone talked to 4Sevens re these results?

Bill


----------



## Ble (Apr 8, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*

I requested that my order be canceled too.

Higher low (than ~6 lumens) and efficiency are important to me and in this case is nowhere near the 15 lumens for 20 hours announced.


----------



## regulator (Apr 8, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*

Just maybe we need another sample light tested, and I am surprised people are basing their decisions to drop out based on one light sampled for testing. Has anyone talked to 4Sevens re these results?

Bill[/quote]

Actually there are 3 reviews. The one here, the one on light-reviews, and the beamshot from the Chinese website aganst an E01. All seem to indicate the lower output at stage one at least.


----------



## Daekar (Apr 8, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*

Well... that was an interesting read! Thank you for your efforts, self-built, I always appreciate them. On the whole, the revealing information you've shared with us makes me glad I purchased these lights as gifts for non-flashaholics... they'll never notice the difference and they'll be wowed by how small and bright they are, even if they don't conciously notice the neutral-tint emitters. 

I'm wondering why things were so misrepresented, and the only thing I can come up with is that Nitecore felt like the compromises in circuit design they made to achieve the itty-bitty size wouldn't be accepted by the community. Of course, that doesn't justify spec-inflation, but that may be the reason. IMHO, the circuit would probably have been easier to make and more efficient if they make low somewhere around 10-13 lumens and high somewhere from 60 to 80 instead of 130. Oh well, time for Nitecore to go back to the drawing board, 4Sevens to lament his position as both victim and one that people might blame, and us to see if all the lights follow these same patterns of output and runtime. 

Either way, Nitecore should take note: You were on the right track with this light! Good concept, great size, good styling and knurling - but you've got to get the electronics right. Please don't insult the collective intelligence of the community by hoping we wouldn't notice the substantial descrepancies between the advertised and actual specs.  Honesty is always (always!) the best policy, because while a lie might sell more of one product, once revealed it decreases sales of all products because of bad PR. Plus, lying is just bad, we all learned that when we were little. Even though the EZ AA might've gotten off to a bumpy start, please continue to refine the circuit design - you've hit upon a niche with this light and you _do_ have potential buyers (practically anyone who bought/would've bought an Arc AA!) if you can improve efficiency and advertise truthfully. And I can't emphasize enough how great it is that you're making neutral-white versions available, even if only for one run. By doing so you're taking a leadership position in the industry and taking one more step toward establishing your products as world-class.


----------



## selfbuilt (Apr 8, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*



Bullzeyebill said:


> Well, I rechecked numbers from post 1 and like most of the compared lights, the EZ is pushing 80+ lumens on high instead of what I called 60 lumens. I did not take into account quickbeams formula for converting lightbox numbers into extimated lumens. Also, low is more like 5 lumens. I, too can not see the relatively short runtime on low. Not sure about runtime for high mode. Maybe heat is an issue with this smaller form factor AA light.





regulator said:


> Actually there are 3 reviews. The one here, the one on light-reviews, and the beamshot from the Chinese website aganst an E01. All seem to indicate the lower output at stage one at least.


Although my lightbox is based on Quickbeam's design, I have modified sensor placement to faciliate runtimes. In any case, there is no real way to compare across milk-carton lightboxes.

I agree that one shouldn't make a decision based on a single sample. To help clarify the issue of comparisons between reviews, I've just added this text to my review:

_*UPDATE:* For those wanting to compare my results to other reviews, note that there is no real way to compare relative output values between different lightboxes - you can only compare among the lights tested on a given lightbox. You can however compare relative center beam throw with a lux light-meter - although absolute numbers vary considerably from one meter to another (and is affected by individual focusing of emitter/reflector combos), the relative differences within a flashlight should be roughly consistent across reviews. For comparison purposes, my EZAA centre beam on Lo is 94 Lux, vs. 2400 Lux on Hi. _

I'll keep you posted when the Lo mode alkaline run is done.


----------



## f22shift (Apr 8, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*



Ble said:


> "Low Mode: 15 lumens for up to 20 hours" that's what you can read in the specs.
> 
> I get this light in order to use mainly the low mode. But I can get more light from a Fenix E01.
> 
> ...


 
*Default**06:50 to 50%*
http://www.light-reviews.com/fenix_e01/

geez ppl


----------



## mighty82 (Apr 8, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*

I really don't know now. I guess I could live with the runtimes although they are not as advertised, it's just so anoying that they have to LIE like this about the specs. :shakehead

No flashlight company can get it THAT wrong by accident. It can't be THAT hard for a company to measure output at least aproximatly, when every guy with a light meter and a milkbox can do it. They could at least measure the current to the led instead of just grabbing a number out of thin air.


----------



## qip (Apr 8, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*

well i cancelled, it was a toughy but the only reason i had left for keeping it was design looks ...the high is too high without a medium and low to low without a medium and im sure nitecore may make a revised version later so i will just save my money for now


----------



## Ble (Apr 8, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*



f22shift said:


> *Default**06:50 to 50%*
> http://www.light-reviews.com/fenix_e01/
> 
> geez ppl



Well, those are the runtimes I saw:
https://www.candlepowerforums.com/threads/196078

Close enough to 10 hours for me and 13,75 hours with lithium.

The point is that for a $52 flashlight is not very efficient, and specs are heavily overrated.


----------



## kaichu dento (Apr 8, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*



qip said:


> well i cancelled, it was a toughy but the only reason i had left for keeping it was design looks ...the high is too high without a medium and low to low without a medium and im sure nitecore may make a revised version later so i will just save my money for now


As someone who really likes my low to be as low as possible, I agree that it's not good to do so in less than a three level light.

That said, I'm still looking forward to mine due to the warm tint and attractive package which I think may be a great giveaway with no difficulty for non-flashaholics. :kiss:


----------



## f22shift (Apr 8, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*



Ble said:


> Well, those are the runtimes I saw:
> https://www.candlepowerforums.com/threads/196078
> 
> Close enough to 10 hours for me and 13,75 hours with lithium.
> ...


 
seems the price is the thorn for most. expectations are high for that price.


----------



## Bullzeyebill (Apr 8, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*

My point was not to compare lightboxes but to note that the lumens is higher than your lightbox numbers. Yes, not easy to compare lightboxes. Quickbeam did use a formula, 1.5X his lightbox numbers. After the Lightmeter Benchmark lights were tested for lumens by LSI he dropped that number to about 1.4X his number. You must have developed a formula for comparing your numbers to proven lumen output lights. I said 80+ and it is probably more in that you compared the EZ on high to a Novatac 120P on high, though I do not know that the Novatac is really 120 lumens.

Anyway, my point is that we do ask a lot of an AA NiMh cell to deliver high lumen numbers, and it takes an excellent converter to give that push and do it effeciently. I am not sure how the low stage works. Is it PWM? The high mode is no doubt constant current, a boost regulator being used. If low is PWM that could explain the low effeciency with resultant relatively short runtime. Just thinking out loud here. 

Looking at the other review on Light Reviews . com and if this is a different EZ, then the output on low is terribly overrated by the maker. Not sure I would buy it if I wanted 15 lumens on low for 15 hours.

Bill


----------



## lrp (Apr 8, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*

One of the best reviews of any light I've read....great job Selfbuilt!!


----------



## selfbuilt (Apr 8, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*



Bullzeyebill said:


> My point was not to compare lightboxes but to note that the lumens is higher than your lightbox numbers. Yes, not easy to compare lightboxes. Quickbeam did use a formula, 1.5X his lightbox numbers. After the Lightmeter Benchmark lights were tested for lumens by LSI he dropped that number to about 1.4X his number. You must have developed a formula for comparing your numbers to proven lumen output lights. I said 80+ and it is probably more in that you compared the EZ on high to a Novatac 120P on high, though I do not know that the Novatac is really 120 lumens.


Thanks for the clarification Bill - yes, I agree that actual lumen values are generally higher than my lightbox ROVs (I thought you were trying to compare my numbers to Quickbeams).

I have attempted to create a conversion factor for my lightbox to lumens, but it's nearly impossible to do unless you can test the same lights in a calibrated integrating sphere. Using the Novatac published specs for the 120P, I did construct a simple power relationship conversion that gave me an excellent correlation - but that's only as good as the Novatac specs (which many believe are inaccurate, especially at the really low levels). :shrug: If you are curious, you can see my my lightbox conversion discussion here.

Low mode run just finished, so I will be updating the main post shortly ...


----------



## BigBluefish (Apr 8, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*

Thanks, selfbuilt, for another great review. 

Of course, now I think I really want one of these little lights, and will have to spend more money!


----------



## selfbuilt (Apr 8, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*

*UPDATE*

I've just updated the main review with Lo mode alkaline results and some additional discussion. 

All the additional info is also presented below:







_I'm sorry to report that the relative output/runtime efficiency of the EZ AA on Lo seems considerably lower than competing multi-stage 1xAA lights, at least on alkaline._ :sigh: 

_ Runtimes confirm that output/runtime efficiency of my EZ AA on Lo is less than competing multi-stage Cree lights. Although total runtime is consistent with NiteCore specs (i.e. Lo mode 20 hours on a 2500mAh NiMH is consistent with the 16+ hours on a 2000mAh Eneloop I report here), the output level of my sample appears to be considerably below the estimated 15 lumens. The efficiency disparity is most clearly illustrated in the Lo mode alkaline test above. 

I don't know the source of the discrepancy, although you should keep in mind this is only one sample. Further reports on other samples should help to confirm/clarify these results, especially around the actual Lo output level. But I as I like to point out in my round-up reviews, output/runtime efficiency is only one variable to consider when selecting a light. The question is whether the features and performance of a given light matches your needs (i.e. what actually matters to you). As always, I am just providing the data - what you choose to do with it, is up to you. _


----------



## mighty82 (Apr 8, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*

Wow! It has the same runtime as the L1D, only 4 times lower output. And it's not even a semi-flat output! :shakehead


----------



## gunga (Apr 8, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*

Ugh, that's not so good ...

Disappointing.


----------



## Bullzeyebill (Apr 8, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*

Zebralight is the runtime king, high and low mode, if one likes a floody beam. It also is not being pushed too high, current wise, in high mode, it would appear.

Bill


----------



## hatethatgiraffe (Apr 8, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*

Great review!
Superbly in depth!

Looks like it's not all it's shouted up to be though!


----------



## StandardBattery (Apr 8, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*

Based on the High runtime the low is basically what I expected. Very dissapointing. :shakehead 

All that talk of AAA vs. AA energy storage seem pretty funny now when looking at the final product. I'm glad I canceled half my order, but I still have some warm-tint ones on order. I'm debating now about those, but there is a chance they could find a circuit issue and have it fixed for the next batch (including the warm). I'll have to see if there is any word on the sales thread. The levels should have been 15-25 and 85-120 with general market efficiencies. I think 20/85 with typical efficiency would have been the killer light I had hoped for. As with many people I feel the high level is less important than the low on this light. 

I'm hoping this light is saved by a quick, or not so quick, circuit fix.


----------



## regulator (Apr 8, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*

Wow - give me that Fenix L1D output/runtime for the first level and make high around 100 lumens and update the EZAA please! This is what I was hoping for and would be in line with the original specs for the light.

I cancelled my order - but would definately reorder if they improve the circuit or find there was an issue in the first place. The small size and AA format is fantastic. Are you listening Nitecore?


----------



## EngrPaul (Apr 8, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*

Things didn't quite add up from the start. 

15 lumens * 20 hours = 300 lumen*hours

1.2V * 2.5 A*h = 3 watt*hours

300/3 = 100 lumens/watt !!

That would have to be an almost perfect driver, but efficiencies over a run are typically about 75% on average for a 1.2V>3.6V driver.

Alien Technology? Perhaps, if it really could do what it says. 

Not cancelling my pre-order, though. Extra AA's are EZ to find, EZ to carry... :tinfoil:


----------



## Bullzeyebill (Apr 8, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*

Maybe 15 lumens is a typo, and it is 5 lumens for 15 hours, which it seems to be.

Bill


----------



## qip (Apr 8, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*



Bullzeyebill said:


> Maybe 15 lumens is a typo, and it is 5 lumens for 15 hours, which it seems to be.
> 
> Bill




that would not be something to brag about, awful spec 5 lumen for 15 hrs on a AA , at least 30-40+hrs for that lumen


----------



## adirondackdestroyer (Apr 8, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*

This is why I always wait for the reviews to pour in before I order a light. Pre-ordering is almost never a good idea, unless maybe the price break is substantial.


----------



## richardcpf (Apr 8, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*



EngrPaul said:


> Extra AA's are EZ to find, EZ to carry... :tinfoil:


 
This should be the new slogan. EZ battery change too...


----------



## csshih (Apr 8, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*



Bullzeyebill said:


> Anyway, my point is that we do ask a lot of an AA NiMh cell to deliver high lumen numbers, and it takes an excellent converter to give that push and do it effeciently. I am not sure how the low stage works. Is it PWM? The high mode is no doubt constant current, a boost regulator being used. If low is PWM that could explain the low effeciency with resultant relatively short runtime. Just thinking out loud here.


I was under the impression that it was all current based regulation.

I doubt that both 2 samples would be bad, but I should be receiving my light soon, with any luck.


----------



## f22shift (Apr 8, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*

any current measurements at the tailcap? i wonder if their are ineffeciencies elsewhere. like the lens or small reflector..


----------



## johnny3073 (Apr 8, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*

I'm really glad I went with my gut feeling on this light and waited for a detailed review. All of the hype and "super top secret energy source" made me really, really nervous.

It looks to me like the EZ AA's really small size is this light's only real attribute. Other lights in this class/price range perform so much better in terms of output and runtime. I'm just not willing to give up that much performance for 0.25" +/- in size.

Thanks again selfbuilt for another outstanding review, and saving me $50! :thumbsup:


----------



## Sharpy_swe (Apr 9, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*

I'm so glad that I didn't pre-order it, I was so close


----------



## ruriimasu (Apr 9, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*

if the cool white is already so low in brightness in the low setting, how bad will the neutral white fare assuming its set at the same low lumen output? will it be useful light at all? i have a wee set at 25lumens, neutral white and i cant imagine a neutral white at 5lumens.. probably worse than a mag solitaire  kindly enlighten me thanks.


----------



## selfbuilt (Apr 9, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*



ruriimasu said:


> if the cool white is already so low in brightness in the low setting, how bad will the neutral white fare assuming its set at the same low lumen output? will it be useful light at all? i have a wee set at 25lumens, neutral white and i cant imagine a neutral white at 5lumens.. probably worse than a mag solitaire  kindly enlighten me thanks.


Don't have a solitaire to compare, but I personally find this amount of light good for keychain use. Of course, I fully understand if others would prefer brighter in a two-stage light.

FYI, given all the interest in the actual low level, I've tested a large number of batteries on my EZ AA and have updated the summary table with an "average" eneloop rating (basically 3.3 now instead 3.0 listed originally). I've also noted that alkaline is a little higher. Hit your browser re-load if the new table doesn't show up below:







The variation seems to be in the charge state of the eneloop. Hot-off-the-charger (the way I do all my runtimes), output is 3.0-3.1 on my lightbox. However, if the eneloop has been sitting around for a few weeks, or has been lightly used (<1min), initial output on the EZAA appears to be more around 3.4-3.6 (which is what I used for the beamshot pic comparison).

Again, I have no way to really ascertain lumens - but my sample EZAA is at best only slightly brighter than my Connexion X2, and definitely not as bright as my LD10 (all lights on Lo). :shrug: Have to wait and see how everyone else's does.


----------



## Sgt. LED (Apr 9, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*

I wanted to say thanks!
You saved me money that should of gone to Milky to start with.
:thumbsup:
Now I know what I am gettting.


----------



## EngrPaul (Apr 9, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*



selfbuilt said:


> EZ AA does not support batteries >2V, so Li-ion (i.e. 14500) should not be used.


 
:devil: 

When you get your other testing done, maybe you can have a go.


----------



## BigBluefish (Apr 9, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*



BigBluefish said:


> Thanks, selfbuilt, for another great review.
> 
> Of course, now I think I really want one of these little lights, and will have to spend more money!


 
Ugggh. It seems I spoke too soon. That low output runtime is ... discouraging.  Looks like I'll keep the Connexion X2 on my list for my small AA light.


----------



## f22shift (Apr 9, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*

the connection x2 looks pretty good. seems to be flying under the radar. how did i miss it 
is it the smallest handlight 1aa with a clickie?


----------



## selfbuilt (Apr 9, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*



EngrPaul said:


> When you get your other testing done, maybe you can have a go.


Actually Paul, I was going to let you have that honour :nana: ... just in case there's a risk of the old magic smoke. 



f22shift said:


> the connection x2 looks pretty good. seems to be flying under the radar. how did i miss it  is it the smallest handlight 1aa with a clickie?


It's one of the smallest, along with the D10 and Proton Pro. Check out my 1xAA round-up review for a size comparison.


----------



## edc3 (Apr 9, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*

I reluctantly canceled my pre-order. As many have already mentioned, the low level is just too low for me to use as a primary level and the runtime on high is too short. 20/80 lumens would have been great for me, but you can't please everybody. Looks like a neat light. Depending on future changes I may end up ordering one down the road. Last year I might have kept the pre-order, but this year I have to be more choosey. 

Thanks for the review!


----------



## StandardBattery (Apr 9, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*



adirondackdestroyer said:


> This is why I always wait for the reviews to pour in before I order a light. Pre-ordering is almost never a good idea, unless maybe the price break is substantial.


Ya, I broke my long standing no Pre-orders for this light because it seemed like it really was aready to ship, fully speced and manufactured. It was not even really a pre-order, they said shipping 1WEEK after order. 

I didn't think that it might not be the light I wanted. It sounded so simple (EaZy). An 8/1 light ratio twist for two levels, small top quality build, AA battery. I thought it was a slam dunk, no room for error. 

The warm tint option only for pre-order is what really got me. Then I figured, I wanted to have the regular one in my hot little hands to play with while I wate for the warm version. They sounded like perfect gifts (still might be OK for that).

Turns out we're still waiting for both. Sometimes we forget the lessons we've learned.

_... the bad part is I broke the rule again for another light... it must be a month of breaking rules._


----------



## f22shift (Apr 9, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*



StandardBattery said:


> _... the bad part is I broke the rule again for another light... it must be a month of breaking rules._


 
your like the Transporter. always says he has his rules but constantly breaking them in each movie.


----------



## Haz (Apr 10, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*

Thanks for another magnificent review selfbuilt. It is unfortunate to see than the efficiency is significantly lower than other lights in it's class. I was hoping to use this light as a backup light to provide a reasonable long runtime at the output provided on the specs. It will be interesting to see if Nitecore makes any modification to the light in future versions. I believe this light has potential to be a great seller, given the small form factor and utilising common AA. However if this light doesn't perform better in runtime on low compared to some other AAA lights, then the design and purpose of using AA is somewhat wasted.


----------



## selfbuilt (Apr 10, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*

*UPDATE: NITECORE ANNOUNCES EZ AA PRODUCT RECALL*

I have been in contact with NiteCore (aka EDGETAC) throughout the review process, and have shared with them my results regarding the apparently reduced output on the EZ AA Lo mode (and corresponding reduced output/runtime efficiency). They have advised me that they are insuing a product recall for the first batch of lights.

Full details available here:
Notice of Official Recall of NiteCore EZ AA Flashlights

I will keep you posted of any updates I receive from NiteCore regarding a replacement/revised model for re-testing.

:wave:

PS: Here's a link to the the recall notice on NiteCore's website.


----------



## richardcpf (Apr 10, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*

Those are good things to hear...

If they are going to revise upgrade the circuity it will worth the waiting.


----------



## Bullzeyebill (Apr 11, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*

selfbuilt, thanks for your intervention. Glad they are acknowledging probable issues with the EZ. If they get it fixed I may end of getting one of them. I just like the size, and my only AA light is my ICON which is too big for pants pocket use.

Bill


----------



## EngrPaul (Apr 11, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*

Good deal on the recall.

Makes me wonder why the manufacturers of the Jetbeam E3P and the Dereelight C2H let their products soldier-on with poor efficiency.


----------



## regulator (Apr 11, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*

THANK YOU SELFBUILT! You have gone above and beyond your typcial great job. I am very greatful for all you hard work and dedication to this hobby. I always look forward to your reviews because they provide great information and test results for review. And like you state - yours is just one review of one sample. But it is one I use along with others as a source to get an idea of how a light performs without actually being able to first try one out for myself. Thanks again.


----------



## AFAustin (Apr 11, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*



selfbuilt said:


> *UPDATE: NITECORE ANNOUNCES EZ AA PRODUCT RECALL*
> 
> I have been in contact with NiteCore (aka EDGETAC) throughout the review process, and have shared with them my results regarding the apparently reduced output on the EZ AA Lo mode (and corresponding reduced output/runtime efficiency). They have advised me that they are insuing a product recall for the first batch of lights.
> 
> ...



Thank you, selfbuilt. Now we are not only in your debt for your terrific reviews, but also for your intervention in our behalf in making EDGETAC aware of the issues with this light. I have no doubt that it is your skill and reputation that caused them to listen closely to what you said.

Donation gratefully sent to your battery fund, and I hope others will do the same (link in selfbuilt's sigline, or here: http://www.sliderule.ca/cpf.htm) :bow: :twothumbs

Cheers,

Andrew


----------



## cave dave (Apr 11, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*

Maybe they will consider a lower Max to get a solid 1.5 to 2hr runtime on high with eneloops. At the Max drive levels its at now a ~10% (barely noticeable) decrease in brightness will result in a ~20% (significant) increase in runtime.


----------



## AardvarkSagus (Apr 11, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*

I too have been in contact with Nitecore regarding this issue and when Nitecore informed me that something was going to be done to correct the issues being discovered with the EZ AA, I was hoping that it was going to be something along these lines. I heartily applaud them for their decision. As it was stated, this only serves to increase my loyalty to their company as one who is willing to do the hard thing when it is the right thing to do.


----------



## BigBluefish (Apr 11, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*

Kudos to both you, selfbuilt, and Nitecore for addressing this issue. If the product is improved with some better runtimes, I'll put it back on my list. The size, warm tint option, simple UI and great knurling (small, slippery lights are so easy to drop) are all big plusses. Once they fix the runtimes (and the D10s, EX10s and other good products show they DO know what they are doing), it will be a winner.


----------



## AFAustin (Apr 11, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*



AardvarkSagus said:


> I to have been in contact with Nitecore regarding this issue and when Nitecore informed me that something was going to be done to correct the issues being discovered with the EZ AA, I was hoping that it was going to be something along these lines. I heartily applaud them for their decision. As it was stated, this only serves to increase my loyalty to their company as one who is willing to do the hard thing when it is the right thing to do.



Many thanks to you as well, A/S. Your review laid out in a very factual and straightforward way the issues with this light, including some problems in your sample with the twisty action that got my attention---a twisty light without a smooth action is a no-go for me.

Thanks, also, for your role in communicating these issues to NiteCore/EDGETAC. :goodjob:


----------



## guam9092 (Apr 11, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*

With the recall I'm wondering if I'll have to return to 7777 for refund or replacement? I'll have to wait for his announcement since I already received the EZ AAoo:


----------



## selfbuilt (Apr 11, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*



AFAustin said:


> Thank you, selfbuilt. Now we are not only in your debt for your terrific reviews, but also for your intervention in our behalf in making EDGETAC aware of the issues with this light. I have no doubt that it is your skill and reputation that caused them to listen closely to what you said. ... Donation gratefully sent to your battery fund, and I hope others will do the same (link in selfbuilt's sigline, or here: http://www.sliderule.ca/cpf.htm) :bow: :twothumbs


Thanks for the donation Andrew - and the the kind words.  

To their credit, NiteCore had sent out lights to multiple reviewers for independent testing, and I have no doubt that it was the combined responses that urged them to act. :twothumbs

In my case, I think the data reported here (showing abnormally Lo output and runtime efficiency of the EZ AA compared to other lights) spoke for itself. :candle:



AardvarkSagus said:


> I too have been in contact with Nitecore regarding this issue and when Nitecore informed me that something was going to be done to correct the issues being discovered with the EZ AA, I was hoping that it was going to be something along these lines. I heartily applaud them for their decision. As it was stated, this only serves to increase my loyalty to their company as one who is willing to do the hard thing when it is the right thing to do.


Agreed, a very good sign - it shows a measure of respect for their customers. Hopefully they will also be able to address the build issues you identified in your review. :thumbsup: 



EngrPaul said:


> Good deal on the recall. Makes me wonder why the manufacturers of the Jetbeam E3P and the Dereelight C2H let their products soldier-on with poor efficiency.






guam9092 said:


> With the recall I'm wondering if I'll have to return to 7777 for refund or replacement? I'll have to wait for his announcement since I already received the EZ AAoo:


I've sure 4sevens will take good care of everyone - he's well known for his customer service around here.  But it might take them a few days to sort it all out, given the holiday long weekend (and I'm sure NiteCore's decision also took them by surprise). 

Hopefully, only a limited number of lights were actually shipped by his shop. All of which underscores why it's good for manufacturers to have shipping samples in the hands of reviewers a few days before their distributors receive them (and the mass distribution begins).


----------



## regulator (Apr 11, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*



cave dave said:


> Maybe they will consider a lower Max to get a solid 1.5 to 2hr runtime on high with eneloops. At the Max drive levels its at now a ~10% (barely noticeable) decrease in brightness will result in a ~20% (significant) increase in runtime.


 
I agree. This to me would be icing on the cake if they back off just a bit on the high level while working to achieve the design spec on the low level. Lets hope.


----------



## Sgt. LED (Apr 12, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*

That would be good. :thumbsup:


----------



## Beamhead (Apr 12, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*



cave dave said:


> Maybe they will consider a lower Max to get a solid 1.5 to 2hr runtime on high with eneloops. At the Max drive levels its at now a ~10% (barely noticeable) decrease in brightness will result in a ~20% (significant) increase in runtime.


 That is why I will keep my pre recall pocket rocket, I like the output it has. AA cells are cheap people, they are not 45 lb $15 exoto-cells.


----------



## Benson (Apr 12, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*



Beamhead said:


> That is why I will keep my pre recall pocket rocket, I like the output it has. AA cells are cheap people, they are not 45 lb $15 exoto-cells.



+1

If I'd received mine (instead of waiting for the battery), I'd likely be hanging onto it as well, just in case. Besides, who knows -- as brought up on one of the EZAA threads, maybe this'll be a collectible after the "fixed" ones arrive.


----------



## guam9092 (Apr 14, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*

Sent my EZ AA head back to 7777 for replacement when they receive them from Nitecore. Hopefully it will perform as advertised.


----------



## Burgess (Apr 14, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*

Gee . . . .


I'd have kept it, at least until the updated ones *ship* !




_


----------



## regulator (May 27, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*

Is Selfbult going to be getting the fixed EZAA? I would love to see how the two compare.


----------



## Burgess (May 27, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*

I'm sure SelfBuilt will be getting one.


But, he's in Canada . . . .


and Customs often seems to delay things a while.




Like you, i eagerly await SelfBuilt's 2nd EZAA review.



_


----------



## Sgt. LED (May 27, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*

Not buying one unless he really likes it.


----------



## selfbuilt (May 28, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*

Thanks guys. I haven't heard any details from NiteCore, but I will check with them to see what their plans are regarding a replacement model to test.


----------



## Cosmo7809 (May 28, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*



Sgt. LED said:


> Not buying one unless he really likes it.


Could not have said it better.


----------



## Beamhead (May 28, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*



Sgt. LED said:


> Not buying one unless he really likes it.


 


Cosmo7809 said:


> Could not have said it better.


I really like my non updated one. Ten second to single mode/quarter twist to high mod and all.


----------



## selfbuilt (May 31, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*

NiteCore confirms that they are getting the review samples ready to ship out. Will likely be a few more days, then typically a week or so getting to me. I should have the revised runtimes ready within a couple of days after that.

:wave:


----------



## benlg (May 31, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*



selfbuilt said:


> NiteCore confirms that they are getting the review samples ready to ship out. Will likely be a few more days, then typically a week or so getting to me. I should have the revised runtimes ready within a couple of days after that.
> 
> :wave:



Thanks, looking forward to it. Ive been messing around with the EZAA for a bit, just admiring the beam and trying to run the batteries out on high to get an estimate.. It would be nice to hear a more technical answer :laughing:


----------



## selfbuilt (Jun 1, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*



benlg said:


> Thanks, looking forward to it. Ive been messing around with the EZAA for a bit, just admiring the beam and trying to run the batteries out on high to get an estimate.. It would be nice to hear a more technical answer :laughing:


I don't know if they've changed the output on Hi - my understanding is that they were only going to fix the lower output. The original shipping EZAA had an acknowledged bug that reduced the output on Lo without increasing the runtime. The new EZAA should match the published specs.

Scroll back to the first post for runtimes of the original EZAA on Hi. I will update these as well when the new EZAA gets here.


----------



## Spidey82 (Jun 2, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*



selfbuilt said:


> I don't know if they've changed the output on Hi -


my EZ AA is brighter den my D10 r2...

don't ask me y...


----------



## regulator (Jun 2, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*

Got my EZAA from 4-7’s and love the compact format. The light is a fantastic size for an AA light and feels very well built despite being designed for minimum size and weight. Finish is also very good and looks great. Tint is nice and white and I think the beam is good for such a small light.

I measured around 110mA draw from the 1.5 alkaline battery which would correspond pretty well for the amount of light that it is putting out on the first level – around 5-7 lumens guesstimate and should easily meet 20 hours runtime. This does not come close to the original published rating of 15 lumens and falls short of 10 lumens. I have an Incendio that is rated at 7 lumens on low and is just a bit brighter than the EZAA. When my D10 is set to the same 110 mA drive level by multimeter, the output is very similar to the EZAA. There are times when shining around that I wish it had every so slightly more output.

I do not think there is anything wrong with the EZAA but I do believe the circuit was not designed to put out a good 10-15 solid lumens on level 1 like I was hoping. This is confirmed by just by looking at the drive level. However, the level 1 is very useable. IMO it compares too closely with what can be achieved with an AAA light and decent runtime.

I would prefer the circuit to pull 200-250mA from the battery (and approximately 75-100 mA to the LED) for a better amount of light on level 1. Runtime would still be a very respectable 10-15 hours on a primary lithium cell. This slight boost would make the level much more useable for general task lighting. It would probably be putting out close to 10-15 lumens. This would set the EZAA further apart from what is offered in an AAA light.

I think the format of the EZAA is fantastic and Nitecore hit a home run with it. I only wish the drive levels were better suited for such a great light. I would buy another EZAA with revised output levels in a heartbeat! Overall I think it is a nice light and I am happy with it – but it could be sooooooo much better.


----------



## HKJ (Jun 2, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*



regulator said:


> I measured around 110mA draw from the 1.5 alkaline battery which would correspond pretty well for the amount of light that it is putting out on the first level – around 5-7 lumens guesstimate and should easily meet 20 hours runtime. This does not come close to the original published rating of 15 lumens and falls short of 10 lumens. I have an Incendio that is rated at 7 lumens on low and is just a bit brighter than the EZAA.



I got about the same current in my measurement (Published in my Danish review) and the light output is very close to the same as the Fenix LD01 on low (Rated 10 lumens). The Fenix LD10 on lower (Rated 9 lumen), all measured with ceiling bounce and a lux meter.


----------



## regulator (Jun 2, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*



HKJ said:


> I got about the same current in my measurement (Published in my Danish review) and the light output is very close to the same as the Fenix LD01 on low (Rated 10 lumens). The Fenix LD10 on lower (Rated 9 lumen), all measured with ceiling bounce and a lux meter.


 
I agree with these - but Fenix is usually a bit optimistic with their output levels. It probably would have been close to 10 lumens output if Nitecore did not change the rating from 15 lumens as originally posted to 10 lumens. 

I just love the compact form and being so slim - I don' know anyting else currently available in an AA light. I would pay a premium to have a custom run with a slightly higher level one and a lower level two to get 2 hours runtime. Maybe Nitecore could offer two versions - now that would be cool. Even a new UI light based on the same dimensions with 4 levels would be cool.


----------



## kaichu dento (Jun 3, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*



regulator said:


> I would pay a premium to have a .... new UI light based on the same dimensions with 4 levels would be cool.


My PayPal is locked and loaded for this light!


----------



## selfbuilt (Jun 4, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*

Just an update - the revised EZ AA is on its way to me from NiteCore.

FYI, NiteCore informs me that the revised circuit now supports Li-ion. :thumbsup: So you can expect some 14500 runtimes once it gets here.


----------



## AFAustin (Jun 4, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*

selfbuilt, that's great to hear---looking forward to your comments and comparison.

Just gave my EZAA a quick try with a 14500---only a slight increase in low, and my flat top cell needed a magnet to make + contact.


----------



## Zeruel (Jun 4, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*



selfbuilt said:


> Just an update - the revised EZ AA is on its way to me from NiteCore.
> 
> FYI, NiteCore informs me that the revised circuit now supports Li-ion. :thumbsup: So you can expect some 14500 runtimes once it gets here.



What the??! We can use 14500 on EZ AA now??? I thought it's not suppose to?


----------



## selfbuilt (Jun 4, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*



AFAustin said:


> Just gave my EZAA a quick try with a 14500---only a slight increase in low, and my flat top cell needed a magnet to make + contact.





Zeruel said:


> What the??! We can use 14500 on EZ AA now??? I thought it's not suppose to?


It doesn't seem like NiteCore has updated the packaging specs or their website yet with any info on Li-ion.

But they tell me Li-ion is acceptable now, so I will test it out on my review sample when it gets here. To be on the safe side, you all may want to hold off until I can confirm it runs safely on 14500. Wouldn't want yours to go


----------



## Zeruel (Jun 4, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*



selfbuilt said:


> It doesn't seem like NiteCore has updated the packaging specs or their website yet with any info on Li-ion.
> 
> But they tell Li-ion is acceptable now, so I will test it out on my review sample when it gets here. To be on the safe side, you all may want to hold off until I can confirm it runs safely on 14500. Wouldn't want yours to go



Tempted..... almost tempted.....
It's overpowering. Someone pass me a straitjacket. :sick2:


----------



## regulator (Jun 4, 2009)

*Re: NiteCore EZ AA Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, PICS & more!*

Actually there is information in the User Manual pdf on the website. Is says - DO NOT use rechargable Li-ion batteries without safety circuit.

So it appears it can use a Li-ion with a safety circuit. It probably does not have low voltage cutoff built into the light and you can damage a Li-ion battery if you let it drain too low. 

Unfortunately my EZAA stopped working last night and I have a replacement on the way. I hope it gets here Saturday.


----------



## selfbuilt (Jun 10, 2009)

*I've revised the main post with updates on my testing of the new shipping version of EZ AA.*

*BACKGROUND:* In my original testing of the EZ AA, I noticed reduced output and low runtime efficiency of the EZ AA Lo mode. NiteCore promptly issued a recall in early April 2009, and worked to revise the product. The revised shipping version is now added to this review. I have left the background pics the same, as the light does not look appreciably different. Where appropriate, I have updated this review with the new info (summarized below)

_*UPDATE:* The instruction sheet has been updated with new output and runtime specs, and now explicitly supports Li-ion (i.e. 14500). Here is a summary of the changes.

Original EZ AA Instructions:

Battery illustrated as "1.5V AA" only
Warning included: "do not use batteries that exceed 2 volts, as they may permanently damage the flashlight."
Hi mode listed as "130 lumens for 1.5 hrs"
Lo mode listed "15 lumens for up to 20 hours"
Revised EZ AA Instructions:

Battery illustrated as simply "AA" with voltage restriction
Previous warning against >2V replaced with: "DO NOT use rechargeable Li-ion batteries without safety circuit." (suggesting that protected 14500 IS supported).
Hi mode is now listed as "130 lumens for up to 50 minutes" (which seems more consistent with my runtime results)
Lo mode is now listed as "10 lumens for up to 20 hours" (which seems more consistent with my output readings and runtimes)
It is good to see the manual has been brought in line with actual performance. :thumbsup:
_

_*UPDATE:* The revised EZ AA requires a shorter twist to activate Hi from Lo - a little over three-quarters of full turn now, instead of a one-and-a-quarter turn._

*Comparison Beamshots*

*Hi mode:*

_*UPDATE:* The Hi mode appears to be unaltered on the revised version, so I've let these original pics stand. Here is a direct comparison of the new revised EZ AA to the original:















As you can see, my revised sample is slightly less focused for throw, but is otherwise comparable._

*Lo mode:*

_UPDATE: The original EZ AA had abnormally low output, so I have replaced the beamshots here with a direct comparison of the original EZ AA to the new revised version:










As you can see, the new EZ AA is detectably brighter on its Lo setting. Scroll down to the summary table and runtimes for more details. _

*Throw/Output Summary Chart:*






_*UPDATE:* The original EZ AA had an abnormally low Lo mode, likely somewhere around 6-7 lumens based on my comparisons to other lights of known lumen estimate (a far cry from the original 15 lumen specs). This new revised EZ AA seems pretty much bang on with the revised specs of 10 lumens. The new EZ AA now also supports 14500 Li-ion, as shown below:






Definitely a bit brighter on Li-ion than standard batteries, so I don't recommend you run it on Hi for extended periods without cooling. Note also that it was rather difficult to activate Hi on protected 14500 on my sample without using a LOT of twisting force. 

Here are some additional beamshots comparing Hi and Lo on 14500 vs Eneloop:






















_

*Output/Runtime Comparison*






_*UPDATE:* I have only done Eneloop runs so far, but as you can see above (dotted lines) performance on Hi is not that different from before - although regulation seems to be enhanced. Output and runtime on Lo is considerably enhanced - scroll down for a better illustration. I will continue to update these graphs as the rest of the battery types are tested. Note again that 14500 is now supported on the new EZ AA._















*Preliminary Observations*

_*UPDATE:* The revised EZ AA has considerably improved output/runtime efficiency on Lo - more than double that of the original EZ AA overall. :thumbsup:

Lo output is now a believable 10 lumens. Some may still find this too low for a two-stage light, but I rather like it for keychain carry. 

The reduced amount of twisting necessary to access Hi from Lo is useful on the new EZ AA. Also, 14500 Li-ion support is a nice addition - although again, I wouldn't recommend running it for extended periods on Hi.

All in all, a good upgrade from the original version.  _


----------



## AFAustin (Jun 10, 2009)

Selfbuilt, thank you for your excellent revised EZAA review. I really have come to like this little light, eccentricities and all, and I'm glad to see both the significant improvements and the more accurate specs.

Thanks again for your outstanding work. :thumbsup:

Cheers,

Andrew


----------



## Zeruel (Jun 11, 2009)

Thanks, Selfbuilt. Now I can promptly try to blind myself with 14500.


----------



## StandardBattery (Jun 11, 2009)

Thanks alot for the update, we now have a clear picture of the two revisions.

I think the distance between hi/low may still have considerable variation between samples, and have some variation with battery as well.


----------



## selfbuilt (Jun 11, 2009)

StandardBattery said:


> I think the distance between hi/low may still have considerable variation between samples, and have some variation with battery as well.


Agreed, there is bound to be some variability between samples due to Vf, variation in circuit settings, etc. (i.e. the problem with n=1 experiments). But this is likely to be less than the variation between batteries (i.e. Li-ion is >50% brighter on each level). 

I have to say my revised sample seems pretty bang on for 10 lumens on standard batteries.


----------



## Crenshaw (Jun 11, 2009)

selfbuilt said:


> Agreed, there is bound to be some variability between samples due to Vf, variation in circuit settings, etc. (i.e. the problem with n=1 experiments). But this is likely to be less than the variation between batteries (i.e. Li-ion is >50% brighter on each level).
> 
> I have to say my revised sample seems pretty bang on for 10 lumens on standard batteries.


 im not sure, but i think he meant the distance you have to turn the head...:tinfoil:

I just had to relube and clean my light again today cos it was acting up...

Crenshaw


----------



## VF1Jskull1 (Jun 11, 2009)

thanks for the review... ordered one for my bro-in-law for his high school grad gift... came in last night and played with it a bit....

me likes very much. quite compact for being a AA. makes my Fenix L1P feel and look bulky in comparison obviously.


----------



## regulator (Jun 11, 2009)

Thanks Selfbuilt. I really like the light a lot and it feels very well balanced in the hand for a small light. 

I would really like to see a low runtime with the 14500 cell. I wonder if the circuit works much more efficiently at the higher voltage. 

The low is very nice when using a 14500 and gives the light a different personality. I will need to experiment with the foam and/or o-ring on bottom for best operation with a 14500 flat top AW cell. As it is now, it does not work well and requires a lot of force just to get to low.


----------



## selfbuilt (Jun 11, 2009)

Crenshaw said:


> im not sure, but i think he meant the distance you have to turn the head...:tinfoil:


Ah right, sorry about that StandardBattery.  I guess I just have output levels too much on my mind. :laughing: 

Quite true, there is bound to be some variability in twisting required to switch from Lo to Hi. But it seems like others are also reporting reduced twisting on this revised version.

But I can tell you I'm not very comfortable with how much force is required to switch to Hi on my AW protected 14500. 



regulator said:


> I would really like to see a low runtime with the 14500 cell. I wonder if the circuit works much more efficiently at the higher voltage.
> The low is very nice when using a 14500 and gives the light a different personality. I will need to experiment with the foam and/or o-ring on bottom for best operation with a 14500 flat top AW cell. As it is now, it does not work well and requires a lot of force just to get to low.


Your wish is my command  ... just starting the the low 14500 runtimes now.

I agree it does give the light a different feel. And that may be appropriate for those wanting a higher Lo mode (i.e. I'd estimate Lo on 14500 is somewhere between 15-20 lumens). But I also find the force required for Hi on protected 14500 to be disconcerting. It's possible some sort of mod may help (I'm thinking you might need to file down the negative post in the body a bit). :shrug:


----------



## richardcpf (Jun 12, 2009)

Nice to hear it supports 14500 and has better runtime on low..

If the EZAA with 14500 is any brighter than my Raw Al then I would definetly buy it... For the moment my Raw is my edc, being brighter than my LD01 on 10440. Awesome little flashlight.


----------



## PhantomPhoton (Jun 12, 2009)

Thanks for the update. Yet another light for consideration.


----------



## selfbuilt (Jun 12, 2009)

FYI, just added the Lo mode alkaline run to the review:







The performance on Lo on alkaline has drastically improved on this revised version. Note the full regulation pattern now, and the more than double output/runtime efficiency. :thumbsup:

Still not as efficient as some of the other defined-output current controlled lights (e.g. Fenix), but definitely an improvement.


----------



## selfbuilt (Jun 13, 2009)

Runtimes on Lo on 14500 just added to the review:






A very impressive showing - greater output than NiMH, and slightly more runtime. I would estimate initial output on Lo on 14500 is the 15-20 lumen range initially, and gradually declines to about the level of standard batteries at the end its ~24 hour run. :thumbsup:

Certainly adds another option for those that like a slightly higher Lo than just 10 lumens (on standard batteries).


----------



## regulator (Jun 13, 2009)

Thanks Selfbuilt. That is pretty impressive on 14500. The low is approximately twice as bright (at start) but still manages super long runtime. Are there any protected 14500 cells shorter than an AW? The AW cell is a bit longer than a typical AA and does not allow the head to be on very good when in the OFF position. The head seems like it could come off too easily.

BTW - I was refering to the AW cells from a while back that had the flat top with protective tab on top.


----------



## selfbuilt (Jun 14, 2009)

regulator said:


> Thanks Selfbuilt. That is pretty impressive on 14500. The low is approximately twice as bright (at start) but still manages super long runtime. Are there any protected 14500 cells shorter than an AW? The AW cell is a bit longer than a typical AA and does not allow the head to be on very good when in the OFF position. The head seems like it could come off too easily.
> 
> BTW - I was refering to the AW cells from a while back that had the flat top with protective tab on top.


I just tried one of the older flat-top AW protected 14500, and I see what you mean. Frankly, the head is too loose in off position, and it's pretty much impossible to activate Hi. Even the newer button-top 14500s are hard to activate on Hi (I suspect some filing down of the negative battery post would be in order if you really want to run protected 14500).


----------



## eljuez (Jun 15, 2009)

I've owned several "high-end" lights and currently have a McGizmo Ti-PDS and a 170 RA Clicky. I wasn't expecting much when I received an EZ AA as a gift. Was I wrong! what a lot of light in a small package. A very good low coupled with a suprisingly bright high. Given the price and the very usable size, it's a bargain.


----------



## NonSenCe (Jun 22, 2009)

thanks for updating the review. good job again. but making it harder for me to resist buying one. for fun. argh,.

***
curious note.. when they started talking about this EZAA they said they will start whole lineup of EZ series. 

but there has been no news of the next model. 

not even little rumors.. 
nope, just silence. 

i kinda thought there would of actually been an concept of a second flashlight in the EZ "series" in 3 months?


----------



## mr.snakeman (Jun 24, 2009)

I received both my EZ AA several days ago but have been down with a monster flu so haven´t been able to do a lot of testing. One thing I noticed was that the threads on the neutral light were real "gritty". Using an ultra-fine diamond powder (I use it for polishing my goldsmithing tools) mixed with Finish Line synthetic grease helped to solve that problem. As for beam tint, I personally think the neutral is too cold and the warm is too warm. By imposing the two beams over one another gives what to me seems to be a great beam color but walking around with two lights taped together just doesen´t work. Has anyone else who has both tints tried this? I would really like to have a light with this tint. I would really like to know what the color specs. would be and if there exists an emitter on the market with this tint. All in all, I like these lights. Using the included usbNimH batteries means that super long run times is not a problem as I can recharge/top up on my home and work computers any time (plus, the shorter battery length makes one handed operation even up to high fairly easy). I`m having the same problem with AWs 14500 that others have mentioned, hopefully there is a fix just waiting around the corner.


----------



## DM51 (Jun 24, 2009)

mr.snakeman said:


> I... have been down with a monster flu


Yikes! Swinezilla?!? LOL


----------



## mr.snakeman (Jun 26, 2009)

DM51 said:


> Yikes! Swinezilla?!? LOL


Luckally not, all better now. :thumbsup:


----------



## powernoodle (Jul 6, 2009)

*Is there a substantive difference in the output of the EZ AA and Fenix L0D Q4? 

I recognize that the EZ AA has almost twice the output, and with a larger reflector, so I'm sure you can see the difference. But can you quantify the difference, i.e., is the EZ AA 50% brighter? More throwy?

thanks*


----------



## selfbuilt (Jul 6, 2009)

powernoodle said:


> Is there a substantive difference in the output of the EZ AA and Fenix L0D Q4?
> 
> I recognize that the EZ AA has almost twice the output, and with a larger reflector, so I'm sure you can see the difference. But can you quantify the difference, i.e., is the EZ AA 50% brighter? More throwy?


If I extrapolate from my L0D P4, a Q4 would be expected to be ~25% brighter with ~25% more throw (on average) than a P4.

That would mean that on Hi on standard batteries, the EZ AA would be ~40-50% brighter overall, and throw would probably be at least 75% further than a L0D-Q4.

Those are just "guestimates", but I hope it helps.


----------



## Mikellen (Jul 12, 2009)

When the EZAA's head is removed, does the location of the emitter allow the flashlight to be used as floodlight similar to the Lumapower ConneXion X2 or is the emitter located in the head like a Fenix?

Thanks.


----------



## Flying Turtle (Jul 12, 2009)

There does not seem to be an easy way to remove the reflector and use the light for pure flood. It's all well sealed up, I think.

Geoff


----------



## Mikellen (Jul 12, 2009)

Thanks for the reply. I guess I still need a Zebralight then.
I was kinda looking for an excuse to purchase the EZAA with warm LED.
I just wish it came with a pocket clip. What is the recommended way for carrying the EZAA?


----------



## Flying Turtle (Jul 13, 2009)

I just pocket carry the EZAA. It doesn't feel much different from my AAA lights. A clip would be nice, though.

Geoff


----------



## Haz (Jul 14, 2009)

I think most will use this as a pocketlight rather than a keychain light. 
How many are actually using this as a keychain light i wonder???...


----------



## Zeruel (Jul 14, 2009)

Mikellen said:


> Thanks for the reply. I guess I still need a Zebralight then.
> I was kinda looking for an excuse to purchase the EZAA with warm LED.
> I just wish it came with a pocket clip. What is the recommended way for carrying the EZAA?



4Sevens said Nitecore is coming up with the clips. ETA TBC.
Now.... satisfy your excuse. :devil:


----------



## Solstice (Jul 14, 2009)

Haz said:


> I think most will use this as a pocketlight rather than a keychain light.
> How many are actually using this as a keychain light i wonder???...



Actually, I have been using it as a keychain light ever since I got it over a month ago. I keep my keys and other keychain tools on a Civilian Labs retractor, which serves the dual purpose of keeping everything in compact order in my pocket and preventing me from losing anything. Honestly, the EZ AA is not much bigger than the L0D I was EDCing (while providing a much higher high and better value/more common AA energy source). My only complaint regards the finish; even the L0D didn't chip as fast. I've never been too concerned about outward aesthetics, but my EZ AA looks like its been through a war already. Here's hoping they either improve the black finish, or offer an HA natural version.


----------



## tsask (Aug 20, 2009)

BabyDoc;2909151[QUOTE="Haz said:


> I think most will use this as a pocketlight rather than a keychain light.
> How many are actually using this as a keychain light i wonder???...


 
I've been EDCing my EZ AA neutral on keys since they were first avilable.
It replaced my neutral Raw Ns which replaced my fenix P1D CE.

That swivel attachment means it will not break off. The colour is outstanding and the 2 levels make it even more versitile.

I highly suggest the EZ AA for keychain carry. The first time you find yourself needing a light in an unexpected situation, and have that powerful and beautiful beam, you'll never ignore keychain EDC again.


----------



## Ctrain (Aug 27, 2009)

Any news on the clips yet?


----------



## tankahn (Aug 28, 2009)

I bought the NiteCore EZ AA yesterday. While using it it suddenly turn dim. Its so dim that I can look at the LED without hurting my eye. Its 2 modes is still there. Dim and super dim. I thought I must have fried the circuit. But the battery is inserted correctly and fresh ones does not help either. I had it for one day and now I have to go through the hassle of getting it replaced. It will never again be my EDC light if it is going to be unreliable I thought. I decided to give it a firm whack on the palm and it became normal again. 
Any explanation for what I just did?


----------



## thedeske (Sep 2, 2009)

tsask said:


> BabyDoc;2909151
> I highly suggest the EZ AA for keychain carry. The first time you find yourself needing a light in an unexpected situation said:
> 
> 
> > Agree - When I purchased an LD01 I though I'd use it once a month at best. In reality, I use it all the time in situations I never considered without one on hand. I have one of the new Red EZAAs on order as a backup or alternate for the keys. There's an extra Fenix Claw in stock if I don't like the one Nitecore includes with the AA. I love being able to quickly unhook and hand the light to someone.


----------



## Hitthespot (Sep 11, 2009)

I must of originally missed this review. I find myself wanting / attracted to AA lights more and more. Especially since everything I take in the field with me takes AA. I also am becoming a sucker for small packages.

Thanks for the review Eric. I am ordering the R2 version of this light today. Now my only problem is what Color. lol.

Bill


----------



## Dobbler (Sep 24, 2009)

Got the R2 today. Nice light, but it needs a clip!


----------



## KevlarSix (Dec 16, 2009)

No need for a clip as my Nitecore EZ AA is small enough to fit inside the sidepocket of the Leatherman pouch which enable me to bring it everywhere and everyday. :twothumbs


----------



## Dobbler (Dec 16, 2009)

I like that.


----------



## -o0(GoldTrader)0o- (Jan 13, 2010)

* What is the notch for on the bottom? 





*


----------



## Brasso (Jan 13, 2010)

So the split ring will sit flat for tail standing.

I just got a Quark Mini Ti AA, and honestly, I think I like the EZAA better.


----------

