# New Zebralight SC5



## Quality

Zebralight is coming out with a 6 mode, 3.2 inch, 1xAA SIDE clicky, sometime in 2014 (theoretically ).

-XM-L2 emitter
-the head is a little wider and ostensibly has a deeper reflector, so it will be a bit throwier than the sc52
-1/10 inch longer than the sc52
-max output is 400+ lumens, .7 hours
-Min output .2 lumens
-MSRP $49


Looks interesting. Max output above is Eneloop I believe, however I also wonder how it performs with a 14500.

Edit: When I originally posted this info the light was listed as having micro usb charging, and a tail clicky. It has since been relisted under the side clicky series (probably something I should have assumed due to the nomenclature). 

I'm not sure if it will have the micro usb charging (probably not) but it was listed that way originally.

Edit 2 - The 400+ max output is in fact not a turbo mode, but is listed as a .7 hour high mode akin to the 300 lumens of the current SC52

Edit 3 - anodizing was originally listed as black, but they have taken that down now

Edit 4 - The length has gone from 3.6 inches to 3.2

Edit 5 - Its been almost a year since I've checked this thread. Its a bit bigger than I remember lol. Well this thing finally came out so I guess I should update to reflect the final product. Its hard to believe that this light started out as a $39 Christmas special back in 2011. 

-XM-L2 emitter
-$69 MSRP
-wider head than SC52 with a smooth reflector, definitely throwier
-535lm Turbo mode for 3 min then 325lm for 0.8hr with Eneloop Pro
-bigger heavier body to heatsink higher lumens, 2.0oz vs 1.4oz SC52
-not rated for 14500 use, this light is built from the ground up for Eneloops

As always selfbuilt's review is the best resource of information (and this thread of course ) for the SC5.


----------



## Random Dan

I'll believe it when I can buy one.


----------



## kj2

Keeping my eyes on this


----------



## Negroj

Quality said:


> Zebralight is coming out with a 6 mode, 3.6 inch, black anodized, 1xAA Tail clicky, sometime in 2014 (theoretically ).
> 
> -XM-L2 emitter
> -the head is a little wider and ostensibly has a deeper reflector, so it will be a bit throwier than the sc52
> -the light will have a micro usb charging port
> -max output is 400+ lumens (presumably a turbo mode with a step down to high)
> -Min output .2 lumens
> -MSRP $49
> 
> Looks interesting. Max output above is Eneloop I believe, however I also wonder how it performs with a 14500.



Where are you getting this info?

*EDIT* Nevermind -saw they edited the comparison spreadsheet with this model.


----------



## GordoJones88

I'll try to remember to check back to this thread in a couple of years to see if Zebralight ever releases this.


----------



## ip_86

Quality said:


> -MSRP $49



Really? This is good news.

Yesterday I received SK52w L2 for $64. Great flashlight. I'll wait for the novelty


----------



## 18650

SC5 is the name of a previously announced product from them IIRC. From a looong time ago. Longer than the Q50.


----------



## Quality

18650 said:


> SC5 is the name of a previously announced product from them IIRC. From a looong time ago. Longer than the Q50.



Yep. I started the original SC5 thread years ago. It was deleted, but back then it was a 3 mode cheaper version of the sc51.

Its quite a bit different now but at least its still cheaper.

They seem to have changed the listing since I posted the OP. Its a side clicky and may or may not have micro USB charging. I'm guessing not.


----------



## feifei

Do you have a picture of the new product?


----------



## markr6

GordoJones88 said:


> I'll try to remember to check back to this thread in a couple of years to see if Zebralight ever releases this.



LOL! Zebralight doesn't know what Zebralight will be doing 2 weeks from now. Sounds like this could be their response to the Neutron 2A v2?

65CRI, cool blue,  but interested to see if this will even come out, and if a NW will follow.


----------



## shelm

i'd love a zebra with more throw!


----------



## treek13

Quality said:


> Yep. I started the original SC5 thread years ago. It was deleted, but back then it was a 3 mode cheaper version of the sc52.


It was going to be a cheaper version of the SC51 that was going to be released as a Christmas special in 2011 for $39 as can be seen here. 

I wonder if your original thread was lost in the Great Crash of 2011.


----------



## treek13

shelm said:


> i'd love a zebra with more throw!



+1


----------



## Quality

treek13 said:


> It was going to be a cheaper version of the SC51 that was going to be released as a Christmas special in 2011 for $39 as can be seen here.
> 
> I wonder if your original thread was lost in the Great Crash of 2011.



Hah yeah the sc51. Its hard to remember back that far. 

I think this light is actually going to come out. I have a feeling that with this light's added mass 14500 performance could possibly be 800+ in turbo mode.


----------



## newbie66

treek13 said:


> +1



+2


----------



## ginaz

newbie66 said:


> +2



+3


----------



## Etsu

ZL, instead of coming out with vaporware, how about fixing your quality issues and customer service?!?


----------



## justanotherguy

GordoJones88 said:


> I'll try to remember to check back to this thread in a couple of years to see if Zebralight ever releases this.



Zingo!

how true....I'll have to set a calendar reminder for an annual look-see for this thread


----------



## pblanch

18650 said:


> From a looong time ago. Longer than the Q50.



Now that's a name I haven't heard since Obi Wan threw Lukes dad in a river of lava.

Still waiting.


----------



## leaftye

Apparently I'm not the only person that doesn't expect this until 2016.


----------



## markr6

Before Thanksgiving...I have faith this time


----------



## UnderPar

Hope to see this real soon. Seems interesting. Will keep a watch in this


Sent from my iPhone using Candlepowerforums


----------



## treek13

I really like their lights but I never expect (or even hope) to see their new products soon. I think they operate on more of an eventually/maybe timetable.

They seem to be copying this part of the Surefire business model.


----------



## f22shift

GordoJones88 said:


> I'll try to remember to check back to this thread in a couple of years to see if Zebralight ever releases this.


without further scrolling down. +10


----------



## jak

Quality said:


> Zebralight is coming out with a ... black anodized .... (theoretically ).


*Micro-update:* The black anodizing attribute has been removed from the ZL spreadsheet.


----------



## Snipe315

GordoJones88 said:


> I'll try to remember to check back to this thread in a couple of years to see if Zebralight ever releases this.



+1000!

I'm STILL waiting for Zebralight to actually produce the Vaporware SC82!!


----------



## redtruck

Looking at past threads it doesn't seem like they are that great about getting new products out, but they are worth it when they finally come. This onelooks promising.


----------



## Quality

jak said:


> *Micro-update:* The black anodizing attribute has been removed from the ZL spreadsheet.



Thanks. Another micro update;

I also updated a couple days ago that the 400+ lumen output is in fact not a turbo mode, but is listed as a .7 hour high mode akin to the 300 lumens of the current SC52. Pretty impressive.


----------



## neutralwhite

+1.



Etsu said:


> ZL, instead of coming out with vaporware, how about fixing your quality issues and customer service?!?


----------



## shelm

There is an older merged thread which should be credited. Maybe the mods can merge _this _thread too, never mind.

I've been informed by a fella that ZL CS said that the SC5 would be announced within shortly (1-2 months). Apparently the product is at the end of the pipeline, otherwise they wouldn't give such a short  frame, would they.

There was nothing wrong with the SC52 and i am wondering what the major difference will be. SC5 is supposed to be less expensive, brighter (>400lm OTF), have a bigger head and probably also a bit more throw. And with 2 ounces not a light-weight anymore. That's okay with me if it does have a more focused beam.

SC52 did have 1 shortcoming. It lacked reverse polarity protection. Several users across the forums reported having fried their SC52 by inserting the battery (NiMH or 14500) the wrong way. It'd be so easy to install a solid mechanical protection, see for example Eagtac D25AAA, instead of a foam pad insulation (Klarus MiX6, Thrunite Ti1).


----------



## shelm

The word is out, the SC5 has reverse polarity protection. And due to the slightly bigger head, higher lumens output and altered reflector will also have more throw.

*Now. Are you looking into :thinking: buying the Zebralight SC5?*


:santa:


----------



## 5S8Zh5

Maybe. Definitely not until after selfbuilt does a review.


----------



## twl

shelm said:


> The word is out, the SC5 has reverse polarity protection. And due to the slightly bigger head, higher lumens output and altered reflector will also have more throw.
> 
> *Now. Are you looking into :thinking: buying the Zebralight SC5?*
> 
> 
> :santa:


No.


----------



## burntoshine

shelm said:


> The word is out, the SC5 has reverse polarity protection. And due to the slightly bigger head, higher lumens output and altered reflector will also have more throw.
> 
> *Now. Are you looking into :thinking: buying the Zebralight SC5?*
> 
> 
> :santa:



Maybe.


----------



## C.M.S

ginaz said:


> +3




+4


----------



## mbzeitz

*Zebralight SC5 Updates?*

Does anyone have any updates on the SC5 release date?

It's it still expected to be 400+ lumens on a single NiHM AA?

So far it sounds like my idea of a perfect EVERYday carry, small, not too expensive, bright, can run on common batteries, and quality.


----------



## 18650

*Re: Zebralight SC5 Updates?*

The SC5 has become another Q50.


----------



## mbzeitz

*Re: Zebralight SC5 Updates?*



18650 said:


> The SC5 has become another Q50.



I'm afraid I do not know the tale of the Q50, care to share?

Should I stop waiting and just get the SC52?


----------



## UnderPar

*Re: Zebralight SC5 Updates?*

Before, In ZL website, this was supposed to be out in 2014. Now, its 2015 in their website. Maybe we could expect this model to be out by next year, the earliest. &#55357;&#56836;


----------



## Fireclaw18

*Re: Zebralight SC5 Updates?*



mbzeitz said:


> I'm afraid I do not know the tale of the Q50, care to share?
> 
> Should I stop waiting and just get the SC52?



Q50 was a very compact 4xAA Zebralight that was supposed to come out a few years ago. Zebralight even went so far as to build a prototype and post a picture of it. It looked great. The batteries were arranged side-by-side similar to a skyray kng, but the entire light was rectangular. Very small for a 4xAA light.

The Q50 kept getting pushed back until finally it was confirmed canceled. Promising... but ultimately the light was vaporware.


----------



## jak

*Re: Zebralight SC5 Updates?*



mbzeitz said:


> Should I stop waiting and just get the SC52?



Yes. (Or the perhaps the SC32.)

The SC52 has more features, power, and compact size. 

You could by a new SC52 right now for $64. Try it for a few months until the SC5 comes out. If you like it, great! Keep it. If not, I bet you could sell it on cpfmarketplace.com for what the price of a new SC5 will be.


----------



## treek13

*Re: Zebralight SC5 Updates?*



mbzeitz said:


> Should I stop waiting and just get the SC52?


Just checked the Zebralight Product Comparison table, the MSRP of $49 for the SC5 has disappeared & the space has been left blank.
So considering the unknown future price & the fact that Zebralight is not the fastest to get products on the market, I would probably go for the SC52 if I were you.


----------



## jak

Some interesting developments on this according to the Zebralight spreadsheet...
A "w" version has been added.
Price has gone from $49 to $69.
Number of modes has gone from 6 to 13.
Lumen claims are in the 500+ range from a mere Eneloop (3 minutes).

This no longer looks like an entry level light. It's got the numbers of the SC52 off the power of a non li-ion rechargeable. Quite the departure from the original specs, but still potentially interesting.

Available for pre-order in April (2015-ish)


----------



## SubLGT

HaHa.


----------



## kj2

That's powerful indeed! 
Thanks for the update.


----------



## Dr.444

uhmmmm .. Oky then , if any 1 is interested in my SC52W L2 , let me know


----------



## markr6

500lm for 3 minutes on the Eneloop. I guess that means until it steps down, right?


----------



## kj2

markr6 said:


> 500lm for 3 minutes on the Eneloop. I guess that means until it steps down, right?



Yes


----------



## 18650

jak said:


> Some interesting developments on this according to the Zebralight spreadsheet... A "w" version has been added. Price has gone from $49 to $69. Number of modes has gone from 6 to 13. Lumen claims are in the 500+ range from a mere Eneloop (3 minutes). This no longer looks like an entry level light. It's got the numbers of the SC52 off the power of a non li-ion rechargeable. Quite the departure from the original specs, but still potentially interesting. Available for pre-order in April (2015-ish)


 Did they mention anything about the Q50?


----------



## markr6

18650 said:


> Did they mention anything about the Q50?



Funny little light, but I want one!

p.s. they missed that 2-week ETA


----------



## Sarlix

It says on the spreadsheet 535Lm with Eneloop Pro, what's the difference between the pro and non pro?


----------



## run4jc

Sarlix said:


> It says on the spreadsheet 535Lm with Eneloop Pro, what's the difference between the pro and non pro?



IIRC, it's capacity (2450mAh versus 1900?) and #of discharge cycles (500 versus 1200). Probably more, but that's what I remember


----------



## Phry

markr6 said:


> Funny little light, but I want one!
> 
> p.s. they missed that 2-week ETA




No need for sarcasm. Zebralight are going to release a new light that can produce 12,000 lumens from a single AAA Eneloop, "coming soon"

It will be released on exactly the same date as the ten million other lights they have never actually made.


----------



## tobrien

good find


----------



## markr6

SC5 is on the Zebralight site!

Light Output (runtimes)

High: H1 *535* Lm (3min, then 325lm, total hr) or H2 *325* Lm ( hr) / *200* Lm ( hrs) / *115* Lm ( hrs)
Medium: M1 *48* Lm ( hrs) or M2 *20*Lm ( hrs) / *8* Lm ( hrs)
Low: L1 *3.2 *Lm ( days) or L2 *1.1* Lm ( days) / *0.3 *Lm ( days) / *0.1 *Lm ( months)
Beacon Strobe Mode: 4Hz Strobe at H1 / 19Hz Strobe at H1
Light output are ANSI out the front (OTF) values. Runtimes tested (and parasitic drain estimated) using Panasonic Eneloop Pro AA batteries.






So what do we have here?

No black anodizing. Not the ribbed design (good - this SC5 looks more professional). Barely longer than the SC52. Just a little heavier (2oz) and wider (1in bezel) than both SC52 and SC62. No PID.

I like that it steps down to 325lm OR you can simply select that same output with H2.


----------



## markr6

Comparing the SC5w to the SC52w, it seems like my SC52w may get sold or moved to the shelf! I'd pay the extra $5 just to the non-ribbed design!


Model
MSRP
Battery
Modes
ANSI OTF Max Output
ANSI OTF Low Output
Bezel Diameter
Length
Weight
Notes
(USD)
AA
(Lumens)
(hrs)
(Lumens)
(hrs)
(Inch)
(Inch)
(oz)
SC5w
69
1
13
500
0.8
0.1
1
3.2
2
max 500Lm (3 min) with Eneloop (Pro)
SC52w L2
64
1
11
280
0.9
0.01
3 mo
0.93
3.1
1.4


----------



## Overclocker

great to see zebralight retake the 1x AA crown from thrunite

so what's the estimated draw from an eneloop? 5 amps?


----------



## kj2

Darn good looking!


----------



## markr6

I do like the look. That diamond knurling just looks better than the ribbed design IMO. And while it's not very aggressive, I never find it to be slippery. I sometimes think people are rubbing a stick of butter before handling some lights then complaining about the knurling  With a clip, knurling and non-uniform body, I don't see how you could lose a grip - for any light, not just Zebralights.


----------



## Swede74

This great news took the edge off the pain of having to wait until 2016 for new episodes of Better Call Saul. To me it looks like a miniature version of the SC600 - with a screw-on clip. The best of two worlds


----------



## JKolmo

Interesting indeed! Also it has a smooth reflector instead of the normal OP.


----------



## kreisl

Swede74 said:


> This great news took the edge off the pain of having to wait until 2016 for new episodes of Better Call Saul. To me it looks like a miniature version of the SC600 - with a screw-on clip. The best of two worlds



i don't watch Saul. i found The Good Wife not too bad until the protagonist was shot dead (wtf). Now i am after Being Erica. Lol


----------



## scout24

SC5? I'm in.


----------



## markr6

Swede74 said:


> To me it looks like a miniature version of the SC600 - with a screw-on clip. The best of two worlds



Yes, also has the same 80° spill/10° flood. I'm excited for this one!


----------



## snowdriver

The light is now published on the zebralight website. Looking great. It says "not for sale". What does that mean?


----------



## kj2

snowdriver said:


> It says "not for sale". What does that mean?


That it's not for sale 

It's just an announcement. Available for pre-order, probably soon.


----------



## markr6

snowdriver said:


> The light is now published on the zebralight website. Looking great. It says "not for sale". What does that mean?



They always seem to post info about a new light well in advance...days, months, years! This one is pretty far along, so I'm sure they will update the status to "pre-order" sometime soon. Maybe within a couple weeks?

I was curious so I checked - the photo online has EXIF data and they shot these product photos just today, so they're working on the rest. I'll be jumping on this one for sure!


----------



## LessDark

I don't really see the difference between this one and the sc52 on a 14500, other than the slight design change. Am I missing something?


----------



## markr6

LessDark said:


> I don't really see the difference between this one and the sc52 on a 14500, other than the slight design change. Am I missing something?



Thoughts from my previous post this morning. I could be missing something too, but there are some notable differences. I guess I can't get too excited until they publish the runtimes, though.



markr6 said:


> SC5 is on the Zebralight site!
> 
> Light Output (runtimes)
> 
> High: H1 *535* Lm (3min, then 325lm, total hr) or H2 *325* Lm ( hr) / *200* Lm ( hrs) / *115* Lm ( hrs)
> Medium: M1 *48* Lm ( hrs) or M2 *20*Lm ( hrs) / *8* Lm ( hrs)
> Low: L1 *3.2 *Lm ( days) or L2 *1.1* Lm ( days) / *0.3 *Lm ( days) / *0.1 *Lm ( months)
> Beacon Strobe Mode: 4Hz Strobe at H1 / 19Hz Strobe at H1
> Light output are ANSI out the front (OTF) values. Runtimes tested (and parasitic drain estimated) using Panasonic Eneloop Pro AA batteries.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So what do we have here?
> 
> No black anodizing. Not the ribbed design (good - this SC5 looks more professional). Barely longer than the SC52. Just a little heavier (2oz) and wider (1in bezel) than both SC52 and SC62. No PID.
> 
> I like that it steps down to 325lm OR you can simply select that same output with H2.





markr6 said:


> Comparing the SC5w to the SC52w, it seems like my SC52w may get sold or moved to the shelf! I'd pay the extra $5 just to the non-ribbed design!
> 
> 
> Model
> MSRP
> Battery
> Modes
> ANSI OTF Max Output
> ANSI OTF Low Output
> Bezel Diameter
> Length
> Weight
> Notes
> (USD)
> AA
> (Lumens)
> (hrs)
> (Lumens)
> (hrs)
> (Inch)
> (Inch)
> (oz)
> SC5w
> 69
> 1
> 13
> 500
> 0.8
> 0.1
> 1
> 3.2
> 2
> max 500Lm (3 min) with Eneloop (Pro)
> SC52w L2
> 64
> 1
> 11
> 280
> 0.9
> 0.01
> 3 mo
> 0.93
> 3.1
> 1.4





markr6 said:


> Yes, also has the same 80° spill/10° flood. I'm excited for this one!


----------



## turkeylord

You do gain a cell capacity checker, which is nice. I wonder what the performance will be like on a normal alkaline.

Interesting light for sure.


----------



## hurld

2 volt max? Why no 14500 love?


----------



## StorminMatt

turkeylord said:


> You do gain a cell capacity checker, which is nice. I wonder what the performance will be like on a normal alkaline.
> 
> Interesting light for sure.



The SC52 has a capacity checker as well. So nothing new here. As far as alkaline performance, I can't see it as being very good. At least on the higher modes. 300 lumens HAS to mean right around a three amp draw from the battery, which is going to do in an alkaline battery in a snap.


----------



## scout24

Different products for different niches. Choices are good...  I can't want to carry an AA light for maximum output. These have great runtime on the lower levels with common cells, and similar output/ runtime on high to that of my HDS 325. On a single Eneloop! It's a good time to be a Flashaholic...


----------



## Overclocker

hurld said:


> 2 volt max? Why no 14500 love?




apparently the way to get that much out of a single eneloop is to narrow the voltage range


----------



## turkeylord

StorminMatt said:


> The SC52 has a capacity checker as well. So nothing new here. As far as alkaline performance, I can't see it as being very good. At least on the higher modes. 300 lumens HAS to mean right around a three amp draw from the battery, which is going to do in an alkaline battery in a snap.


Whoops, you're right. I wonder if it works correctly for all battery chemistries? May have to do some more reading.


----------



## lampeDépêche

A lot chunkier body, when compared to the SC52, and 18 grams heavier: 58 grams vs. 40. 

I'm not crazy about that. Some of it probably was required by the larger head and reflector, but not the chunkier battery-tube.

Also a shame to lose the 14500 support (and support for primary lithiums e.g. 1/2 of a CRV3).

Very cool to get those lumens out of NIMH, and I'm not saying I won't buy it. But I wish they had gone with the slimmer body style of the SC52.


----------



## davidt1

If I were in the market for an AA light, I would pick the SC5 over the SC52. Right now I use 14500 battery to get 500lm. Problem is the 14500 battery can not be used for anything else like mouse, keyboard, remote control, etc. 

The SC52 gives users the best of both worlds -- 14500 performance out of multi-use Eneloop.


----------



## amanichen

Kind of scratching my head on this one compared to the SC52. There are a few refinements but some other wacky design choices...

40% Heavier
Around 10% brighter (ignoring the 3 minute burst)
Larger body for no real reason...was heatsinking really that big of a problen before?
Larger head but apparently no significant throw increase?
Unknown efficiency improvements but unlikely to be radically different due to same emitter and similar circuit design as before.


The SC52 debuted almost two and a half years ago.
Maybe the SC5 is as refined as an AA light can be without major leaps in NIMH cells or emitters. It just doesnt feel like the big leap that the SC52 did.


----------



## fcbrian

lampeDépêche said:


> A lot chunkier body, when compared to the SC52, and 18 grams heavier: 58 grams vs. 40.
> 
> I'm not crazy about that. Some of it probably was required by the larger head and reflector, but not the chunkier battery-tube.



Wow. That is odd. My 62w is 40gms empty. 96gms with 3400mah loaded up on my gram scale.


----------



## StorminMatt

davidt1 said:


> If I were in the market for an AA light, I would pick the SC5 over the SC52. Right now I use 14500 battery to get 500lm. Problem is the 14500 battery can not be used for anything else like mouse, keyboard, remote control, etc.
> 
> The SC52 gives users the best of both worlds -- 14500 performance out of multi-use Eneloop.



Besides the 500 lumem burst, there were always other reasons to go 14500 rather than NiMH AA. One is a flatter brightness curve at 280 lumens. The other was better efficiency - you could always get better runtime from a fully charged Sanyo UR14500p than you could with an Ion Core. Especially at 280 lumens. And none of this takes into account that a 14500 is just ALOT easier to charge when you are away from home. Whether or not Zebralight has made any improvements as far as the first two factors remains to be seen. But the third advantage of a 14500 is just an advantage of the chemistry and available chargers.


----------



## Overclocker

StorminMatt said:


> Besides the 500 lumem burst, there were always other reasons to go 14500 rather than NiMH AA. One is a flatter brightness curve at 280 lumens. The other was better efficiency - you could always get better runtime from a fully charged Sanyo UR14500p than you could with an Ion Core. Especially at 280 lumens. And none of this takes into account that a 14500 is just ALOT easier to charge when you are away from home. Whether or not Zebralight has made any improvements as far as the first two factors remains to be seen. But the third advantage of a 14500 is just an advantage of the chemistry and available chargers.





well it's true a 14500 is just a lot more convenient to charge (missed termination always an issue w/ nimh). and a UR14500P 840mah probably has a bit higher energy than an eneloop pro. but sc52 doesn't have stellar li-ion efficiency:

from http://www.candlepowerforums.com/vb/showthread.php?354117


----------



## Bad_JuJu

Its interesting thats for sure. Looks like the sc600 to the sc62. It'll be fun comparing them when this hits the shelfs. I am a little surprised they didn't call this the sc500 to go along with the current scheme.

[Joking]Maybe there will be a sc3 down the road!? [/Joking]


----------



## markr6

Also makes you think about an H5 headlamp version.

One thing we need to remember when comparing the runtimes is this SC5 will be with 2500mAh Eneloops. I believe all their other AA light specs are with 2000mAh Eneloops.


----------



## StorminMatt

Overclocker said:


> well it's true a 14500 is just a lot more convenient to charge (missed termination always an issue w/ nimh). and a UR14500P 840mah probably has a bit higher energy than an eneloop pro. but sc52 doesn't have stellar li-ion efficiency:
> 
> from http://www.candlepowerforums.com/vb/showthread.php?354117



Never compared runtimes on H2 between Eneloop and 14500. But I know that on H1 (280 lumens), I get about fifty five minutes to an hour with a naked UR14500p vs around forty to forty five minutes with an Eneloop 2000 - BIG difference. Then again, the 14500 is probably going to have a greater efficiency advantage at higher currents (due to the need to boost voltage more with the Eneloop to produce that current). And I am using naked UR14500p cells rather than protected AW cells. The UR14500p is a MUCH better cell, both in terms of capacity AND ability to maintain voltage during discharge.

As far as charging on the go, proper termination IS a problem with NiMH. No doubt, this is probably the result of the low charge rate of portable chargers (.5A or less) vs 120VAC home chargers (like the Maha 808, for instance). And MANY small travel chargers aren't even smart chargers. Of course, the low charge rate also means it will take FOREVER to charge even an Eneloop 2000. A half amp charge rate, on the other hand, will fairly quickly charge a Sanyo UR14500p. And even in the case of an 18650, the higher voltage of Li-Ion means that a half amp charge can actually put energy on a battery fairly quickly.


----------



## fcbrian

StorminMatt said:


> And none of this takes into account that a 14500 is just ALOT easier to charge when you are away from home.



Forgive me, but I don't understand why it is easier to charge a 14500? I put AA nimh in the charger and walk away? I thought nimh was easier and "safer" to leave alone??

Thanks,
Brian


----------



## StorminMatt

fcbrian said:


> Forgive me, but I don't understand why it is easier to charge a 14500? I put AA nimh in the charger and walk away? I thought nimh was easier and "safer" to leave alone??
> 
> Thanks,
> Brian



When I said 'away from home', I didn't mean 'charging them at home, but not being there to babysit'. I meant charging them on the go in a car, at a campsite, etc. As I said above, 120VAC home chargers (like the Maha 808) do a VERY good job charging NiMH batteries quickly and terminating properly. But the same cannot be said about more portable chargers. Most of these don't terminate properly (probably due to low charge rate). Many don't even terminate at all, and simply use a C/10 (or lower charge rate) to minimize the damage from overhcharging. This is still not ideal for batteries. Furthermore, the low charge rates (typically half an amp or less) mean that charging times are prohibitively long.

14500 Li-Ion batteries have lower coulombic capacities than NiMH AA batteries (ie lower mAH). But the higher voltage means the energy content is no lower than a NiMH AA. So even at a .5A charge with, say, an Xtar MC1, you are charging the battery to a similar energy level as a AA NiMH quite quickly. Even with an 18650 or 26650, a charge rate of .5A is capable of increasing usable energy fairly quickly due to the higher voltage of Li-Ion. So if you are in your car or out backpacking, Li-Ion is a more viable option than NiMH if you have to charge 'on the go'.


----------



## GordoJones88

Nice Clip!




snowdriver said:


>


----------



## marinemaster

I definitely like it. I don't have any 14500 and don't care for it. Basically SC5 is a Eneloop driven light. Is designed around Eneloop. That is the bottom line here. I'm in.


----------



## fcbrian

StorminMatt said:


> When I said 'away from home', I didn't mean 'charging them at home, but not being there to babysit'. I meant charging them on the go in a car, at a campsite, etc. As I said above, 120VAC home chargers (like the Maha 808) do a VERY good job charging NiMH batteries quickly and terminating properly. But the same cannot be said about more portable chargers. Most of these don't terminate properly (probably due to low charge rate). Many don't even terminate at all, and simply use a C/10 (or lower charge rate) to minimize the damage from overhcharging. This is still not ideal for batteries. Furthermore, the low charge rates (typically half an amp or less) mean that charging times are prohibitively long.
> 
> 14500 Li-Ion batteries have lower coulombic capacities than NiMH AA batteries (ie lower mAH). But the higher voltage means the energy content is no lower than a NiMH AA. So even at a .5A charge with, say, an Xtar MC1, you are charging the battery to a similar energy level as a AA NiMH quite quickly. Even with an 18650 or 26650, a charge rate of .5A is capable of increasing usable energy fairly quickly due to the higher voltage of Li-Ion. So if you are in your car or out backpacking, Li-Ion is a more viable option than NiMH if you have to charge 'on the go'.



Thanks Matt, now I understand what you were referring to. I have a lacross 1000, nitecore d4 and opus 3400. I believe they are all 12 input, but I've never tried AA's at hi mah charge I will have to do some testing.

I'm pretty much an 18650 guy since the SC62w showed up,and yes I use 3-900 lumens daily AND it lasts forever on a 3400. MY AAA and AA lights are for backup or if I am forced to wear yoga pants at gunpoint and don't have the pocket space for the 62  . 

But, I have to admit this SC5 does look appealing.

Thanks again,hijack over

Brian


----------



## Overclocker

StorminMatt said:


> Never compared runtimes on H2 between Eneloop and 14500. But I know that on H1 (280 lumens), I get about fifty five minutes to an hour with a naked UR14500p vs around forty to forty five minutes with an Eneloop 2000 - BIG difference. Then again, the 14500 is probably going to have a greater efficiency advantage at higher currents (due to the need to boost voltage more with the Eneloop to produce that current). And I am using naked UR14500p cells rather than protected AW cells. The UR14500p is a MUCH better cell, both in terms of capacity AND ability to maintain voltage during discharge.
> .





you're comparing different lumen levels, that's why i specifically quoted selfbuilt's graphs comparing SAME lumens on 2 different batteries. post-stepdown on li-ion is like 25% brighter than on nimh.

i'm getting 49mins at Hi1 on zebralight's protected 14500 (sanyo UR14500P). and 52 mins using an unprotected UR14500P.

apparently the sc52 is optimized for nimh. just take a look at the runtime at the lower levels. HUGE difference, even after taking into account the difference you'd get between an AW-14500 and a bare UR14500P


----------



## WalkIntoTheLight

I was thinking of buying an Armytek Prime A1, to get high output from a single Eneloop. But, this looks pretty good too, though probably not as rugged. Still, I like the ZL interface.

Anyone have an Armytek Prime A1 (preferably warm), and know how it compares to a SC52?


----------



## StorminMatt

WalkIntoTheLight said:


> I was thinking of buying an Armytek Prime A1, to get high output from a single Eneloop. But, this looks pretty good too, though probably not as rugged. Still, I like the ZL interface.
> 
> Anyone have an Armytek Prime A1 (preferably warm), and know how it compares to a SC52?



The Prime A1 is simply the handheld version of the Tiara A1. One important thing to keep in mind about output is that Armytek rates their lights in LED lumens. Just guessing and comparing my Tiara A1 to other lights I have, I would put output at around 320-340 lumens. This is somewhat higher than an SC52 with NiMH, but significantly lower than maximum on the SC5. It is, however, able to maintain this output for some time. So it beats the SC5 in sustained output. Tint is also pretty good.


----------



## WalkIntoTheLight

StorminMatt said:


> The Prime A1 is simply the handheld version of the Tiara A1. One important thing to keep in mind about output is that Armytek rates their lights in LED lumens. Just guessing and comparing my Tiara A1 to other lights I have, I would put output at around 320-340 lumens. This is somewhat higher than an SC52 with NiMH, but significantly lower than maximum on the SC5. It is, however, able to maintain this output for some time. So it beats the SC5 in sustained output. Tint is also pretty good.



I like warm tints. One thing that the armytek light claims is 4000K tint, which is lower than what I measure on my SC52w-L2. Is the armytek tint warmer, or is it the same as the neutral tints that ZL uses?


----------



## kj2

WalkIntoTheLight said:


> I like warm tints. One thing that the armytek light claims is 4000K tint, which is lower than what I measure on my SC52w-L2. Is the armytek tint warmer, or is it the same as the neutral tints that ZL uses?


I've a Wizard Pro warm and a H602w. My ArmyTek is way warmer, than my ZL. I prefer the tint from my Wizard, most of the times.


----------



## WalkIntoTheLight

kj2 said:


> I've a Wizard Pro warm and a H602w. My ArmyTek is way warmer, than my ZL. I prefer the tint from my Wizard, most of the times.



Good to know. I wasn't sure if Armytek's use of "warm white" just meant neutral white. Sounds like it's on the warm side.


----------



## reppans

WalkIntoTheLight said:


> Good to know. I wasn't sure if Armytek's use of "warm white" just meant neutral white. Sounds like it's on the warm side.



I recently posted a side-by-side tint pix of a warm A1 Prime Pro in the C2 Prime thread below. Did not incl. a warm ZL, but there's a N219A next to it.


----------



## Erik1213

I don't need it...but I want one.

I know everyone is loving the tint on the new "w" models but how have the cools come along recently?

I would love to have a very white cool white light with that much brightness that will run on one eneloop.

My last cool white Zebra was the SC52 and it was very green. Not FourSevens green but it was definitely greener than I could handle. My S6330 is slightly green at low outputs but much better. However, that was a one off light (or so it would seem) so I expect this to be a different tint.


----------



## reny0519

Is this light regulated? I can't find any information regarding this detail.


----------



## Erik1213

Most definitely.


----------



## snowlover91

Found out that details for runtime should be posted Monday (today) and preorders should begin this week. Who else is excited about this release? Looks to be a great light and runtime details will tell a lot about it as well!


----------



## markr6

snowlover91 said:


> Found out that details for runtime should be posted Monday (today) and preorders should begin this week. Who else is excited about this release? Looks to be a great light and runtime details will tell a lot about it as well!



I really excited about this one, just like most of their new lights. No matter how may specs/reviews I will see, I just have a feeling this one will need to be used along with my SC52w to see which one I like best. I already have too many unused/lightly-used lights, but can't resist this one!


----------



## mekquake

Runtimes added to sc5w description


----------



## Dubois

Pre-order has started. Estimated shipping date start 30th April. 2015.


----------



## markr6

BOOM! Preordered! Don't tell my wife.

SC5w High: H1 *500* Lm (3min, then 304lm, total 0.8 hr)____H2 *304* Lm (0.9 hr) / *187* Lm (1.8 hrs) / *107* Lm (3.5 hrs)
SC52w High: H1 *280* Lm (0.9 hrs) (500lm on Li-Ion)_______ H2 *172* Lm (1.7 hrs) / *108* Lm (3 hrs)

I like the customization for high levels on the SC5w. I can see H1 for quick bursts, 187 for a "normal" high. This on an Eneloop? Yes please.

edit: remember we're comparing apples and oranges (2000mAh vs 2500mAh Eneloops), so I'm assuming the SC5w has less runtime with a standard 2000mAh cell.


----------



## marinemaster

I always keep the High on the lowest setting they offer, in this case 107 lumens. For me anything higher than 100 lumens is overkill in most cases. Plus the battery will last longer. Is rare that I used more than 100 lumens except when I am outside.


----------



## holygeez03

Based on the fact (as mentioned by markr6) that the runtimes are based on batteries with 25% more capacity than those used to test the SC52w... are those runtimes all that great? 

I'm not being a hater, I have lots of ZL's that I use regularly... but what am I gaining with the SC5w over the SC52w, besides some different output levels and a slightly longer turbo runtime (compared to the SC52w 500lm with a 14500)?

It also looks like I would lose the 0.06 lumen level... which I actually find incredibly useful for "nightstand mode"...


----------



## markr6

holygeez03 said:


> Based on the fact (as mentioned by markr6) that the runtimes are based on batteries with 25% more capacity than those used to test the SC52w... are those runtimes all that great?
> 
> I'm not being a hater, I have lots of ZL's that I use regularly... but what am I gaining with the SC5w over the SC52w, besides some different output levels and a slightly longer turbo runtime (compared to the SC52w 500lm with a 14500)?
> 
> It also looks like I would lose the 0.06 lumen level... which I actually find incredibly useful for "nightstand mode"...



This onecould be a gamble by ZL being close to the SC52, but I think it will do well. I guess it's more of a Li-Ion vs NiMH thing. I really think I need to use both for a while before I choose one over the other though. And while I like floodier lights, I think I'll like this slightly thrower beam more.


----------



## snowlover91

Price of the SC52 dropped $5 to $59 now and this one is $10 more. The added brightness is nice and pretty incredible for an AA flashlight. I preordered and will give it a try, my first Zebralight!


----------



## kj2

Hope dealers will receive stock soon. Am also still waiting on the SC32 to come in stock, at my dealer. Takes quite long now...


----------



## markr6

snowlover91 said:


> Price of the SC52 dropped $5 to $59 now and this one is $10 more. The added brightness is nice and pretty incredible for an AA flashlight. I preordered and will give it a try, my first Zebralight!



Nice catch. Still some lonely SC52 frosted lens versions too; I have a feeling these didn't sell so well.

BTW I only have 4 Eneloop XX (Pro) cells, being (un)used in my EA4w. I'll probably steal them to feed this SC5. I ran a "conditioning" cycle on them with my C801D overnight to get them back into shape.


----------



## JKolmo

Pre ordered! I hope ZL keeps the nice W tint they've had lately!


----------



## Swede74

kj2 said:


> Hope dealers will receive stock soon.



+1.
I was very tempted to pre-order, but $22.95 (EMS) or $43.95 (DHL) for shipping to Sweden, plus the terrible turnaround time, should I be unfortunate enough to receive a faulty light, just takes the fun out of it. I will have to wait impatiently for it to become available in an online shop in the EU. Hopefully I (we?) won't overload and crash their websites with too much traffic :naughty:


----------



## markr6

JKolmo said:


> Pre ordered! I hope ZL keeps the nice W tint they've had lately!



I know I sound like a pessimist, but I'm never hopeful. Tints are all over the place, between all models. Unfortunately you can't isolate it to a sepcific model, timeframe or dealer. Every time I get a new ZL and get ready to turn it on for the first time, I feel like Ed Harris in The Abyss right before he cuts the wire on the nuke...the anticipation!!! 50/50 chance.


----------



## JKolmo

markr6 said:


> I know I sound like a pessimist, but I'm never hopeful. Tints are all over the place, between all models. Unfortunately you can't isolate it to a sepcific model, timeframe or dealer. Every time I get a new ZL and get ready to turn it on for the first time, I feel like Ed Harris in The Abyss right before he cuts the wire on the nuke...the anticipation!!! 50/50 chance.



Yeah you're so right! I've had plenty luck in the ZL tint lottery with my latest purchases, so I'm hoping for the same luck now...!


----------



## JKolmo

Swede74 said:


> +1.
> I was very tempted to pre-order, but $22.95 (EMS) or $43.95 (DHL) for shipping to Sweden, plus the terrible turnaround time, should I be unfortunate enough to receive a faulty light, just takes the fun out of it. I will have to wait impatiently for it to become available in an online shop in the EU. Hopefully I (we?) won't overload and crash their websites with too much traffic :naughty:



Uuuhhh, you can always choose free shipping also to Sweden. Turnaround times aren't always that bad IME, and ZL usually is kind of "customs friendly". I've had plenty of good experience ordering directly from ZL (China) to Sweden!


----------



## funkychateau

Had this been available before I bought my SC52W L2 last fall, I would have chosen the SC5. Then I would not have felt the need to invest in 14500 batteries, which I use in no other device besides the ZL. I have eneloops with me always, for my camera.

Now that I'm set up with 14500s, there doesn't seem to be a compelling reason to own both lights.

Of course, I could sell the SC52W L2 ....


----------



## kj2

JKolmo said:


> Uuuhhh, you can always choose free shipping also to Sweden. Turnaround times aren't always that bad IME, and ZL usually is kind of "customs friendly". I've had plenty of good experience ordering directly from ZL (China) to Sweden!



Good to hear, but personally still prefer to deal with a local (or inside EU) dealer. Specially since I can return a online bought product here, within 14 days after receiving, without have to tell why. And when you receive a faulty or somehow not pleasing light, it's way harder and more expensive, to ship it back to China/USA.


----------



## Swede74

JKolmo said:


> Uuuhhh, you can always choose free shipping also to Sweden. Turnaround times aren't always that bad IME, and ZL usually is kind of "customs friendly". I've had plenty of good experience ordering directly from ZL (China) to Sweden!



You're making the temptation even harder to resist! I know ZL offers free shipping to Sweden, but it says on their website that_ "Delivery time varies from 10 days to several months depending on customs and local delivery conditions"_ which I thought was a bit of a deterrent. I wasn't worried about customs duties as there aren't any if the value doesn't exceed SEK 1400. Much as I would like to place an order this instant, I'm going to keep my cool and play it safe.


----------



## chuckhov

I was hesitant to order anything direct from China for a long time. Then I got into a GB and decided that it's now or never.

21 days after I pressed "pay", no regrets at all! - China to Florida.

Looking forward to the next one!

Thanks,
-Chuck


----------



## gunga

Last time I ordered direct from Zebralight, it took 2 months (China to Canada). Not doing that again.


----------



## markr6

chuckhov said:


> I was hesitant to order anything direct from China for a long time. Then I got into a GB and decided that it's now or never.
> 
> 21 days after I pressed "pay", no regrets at all! - China to Florida.
> 
> Looking forward to the next one!
> 
> Thanks,
> -Chuck



Remember, *U.S. *orders placed at Zebralight.com ship from Texas. I usually get mine in 3 days, but many locations will get it in 2 days via 1st class mail.


----------



## funkychateau

Just noticed that ZL dropped the price of the SC52-L2 by five bucks (from 64 to 59) on their web site. Could be the beginning of a phase-out.


----------



## Martin L

SC5 vs 52L2. In the end it will come down to OP vs smooth reflector, i.e floody vs more intens/defined hotspot. The SC5 will throw longer, but ZL do not state these figures as "cd" or beam distance on their web site, but it is a fact due to its larger and smooth reflector... The lack of 14500 is a big mistake. I´m probably out... The 52d is quite throwy with a 14500 as well. That is an option...


----------



## marinemaster

14500 is a novelty to me. Really nonsense battery. Eneloop can do what 14500 can do. Problem with Li-Ion rechargeable is that if they do not have high mAh capacity like 18650 they are pathetic. Just look at RCR123 so what if they have higher voltage ? their capacity sucks. The only Li-Ion rechargeable worth using is 18650 and maybe, barely maybe 17670. 
In AA format what ZL is doing makes perfect sense, Eneloop is a proven, reliable platform. I trust Eneloop over any 14500 battery any day. 

Just like Surefire built their reputation around 123 batteries, so is Zebralight building their platform around Eneloop.


----------



## Martin L

I´m just saying that they should not leave our pathetic 14500 to become shelf queens... I love the pathetic 14500 bursts in my 52w L2.


----------



## dts71

holygeez03 said:


> Based on the fact (as mentioned by markr6) that the runtimes are based on batteries with 25% more capacity than those used to test the SC52w... are those runtimes all that great?



Zebralight indicates that there might be more power left than before:
_Runtimes tested (and parasitic drain estimated) using Panasonic Eneloop Pro AA batteries. Remaining battery power, about 10-20%, after step-down are not counted towards the runtimes. 
_
Perhaps this step-down explain why the runtime on the chosen level appears to be slightly lower on SC5 than on SC52 (considering 25% more capacity battery).

Too bad that the step-down is as drastic as H->M->L. I'd prefer using more of the available steps H1->H2->M1->M2>L1->L2.


----------



## markr6

Martin L said:


> I love the pathetic 14500 bursts in my 52w L2.



I don't. It's only for 1 minute and just sucks the battery dry so quick. And I can't select 280lm right from the start, so that's fairly limiting. I was sort of looking for a reason to go back to Eneloops in my SC52w, and this may be it (totally new model). I may keep the SC52w though. It's just nice to have a set of full charged Eneloops that will not destroy themselves sitting at 100% in storage ready to be swapped out with a low battery.

But I agree it would have been nice to still have that 14500 support to make everyone happy. I think this is a nice addition to the line to make "average Joe" happy, not even having an option to complicate things with Li-Ion.


----------



## lampeDépêche

I wonder if this light will be able to milk a few more lumens out of an L91, i.e. a primary lithium AA. They come out of the package at 1.7v, and serve most of their life at 1.5, so it should provide more volts than an Eneloop at 1.2.

But I don't know whether they provide current to match, and I don't know whether ZL's driver would respond to extra voltage in by putting extra current out, or just accommodate the higher input and still provide the same output.


----------



## abras

Would be better if they would release AAA light with 200 lumens on Eneloop.


----------



## Beacon of Light

Or a AAA light at all. For now I can use any AA light or headlamp and run it with a AAA battery in a AA sleeve.


----------



## Beacon of Light

kj2 said:


> Darn good looking!



Looks like a baby SC600 Mark II. I guess that can be perceived as good or bad. Good that it is more robust and solid feeling in the hands, bad that it will be a little larger (slightly heavier too) and some people may not like the cross hatching feel in their hands as it is pretty grippy and rough.


----------



## holygeez03

As much as I do get a kick out of the 500lm burst mode of my SC52w using 14500... It seems like they should have eliminated the "burst mode" on the SC5, or provided a _proper _way to program it out... I realize that you can set H2 to 304lm, but then you lose the ability to quickly switch to anything between 45lm and 304lm.. so no, that is not acceptable.

By eliminating the 14500 support on the SC5, ZL seems to be saying "this light is completely designed around the NiMH" for maximum utility... so why provide a 3 minute mode that will allow time for your eyes to adjust to 500lm, while zapping battery life for 3 min, then stepping down to a noticeably darker 304lm, which will be further exaggerated for a while since your eyes will be adjusted to 500lm.

It seems like the SC52 has better mode spacing, especially using NiMH (which properly eliminates the burst mode)... and I believe it has better runtimes since the SC52 specs use a lower capacity (2000 mAh). In fact, I am still very surprised at the SC5's surprisingly low runtimes since it is tested with a 2,500 mAh cell.


----------



## kovalszky

I'll believe it when I can buy one.


----------



## marinemaster

lampeDépêche said:


> I wonder if this light will be able to milk a few more lumens out of an L91, i.e. a primary lithium AA. They come out of the package at 1.7v, and serve most of their life at 1.5, so it should provide more volts than an Eneloop at 1.2.
> 
> But I don't know whether they provide current to match, and I don't know whether ZL's driver would respond to extra voltage in by putting extra current out, or just accommodate the higher input and still provide the same output.



You right the limit is 2 volts pretty sure to accommodate the Li 1.7 volts. Good catch.


----------



## holygeez03

Due to the regulated circuit, I don't think you will get any extra lumens out of a L91, despite the higher voltage... the runtimes will probably be different than those stated for the Eneloop Pro, although I don't know enough about the capacity of L91's to tell you if it will be more or less than the Eneloop numbers.

I really wish ZL had stuck with runtime specs based on regular Eneloops for easier comparison to their own previous models as well as other lights that have been extensively tested with Eneloops.


----------



## Beacon of Light

I'm still hoping someday Zebralight will allow the user to program both the H1 M1 and L1 modes. They could use the 4 light levels for each sub group but just let user define what they both are. For me I would probably opt for a much lower H1/M1/L1 light level. Especially at high I would like the H1 to be slightly higher than H2 mainly for preserving battery life.


----------



## markr6

Beacon of Light said:


> I'm still hoping someday Zebralight will allow the user to program both the H1 M1 and L1 modes. They could use the 4 light levels for each sub group but just let user define what they both are. For me I would probably opt for a much lower H1/M1/L1 light level. Especially at high I would like the H1 to be slightly higher than H2 mainly for preserving battery life.



That would be great. For now, I usually use H1 and use the second highest H2.

For this SC5w, I think the *H1 @ 5**00lm* will be great for quick bursts/showing off, and the *H2 @ 187lm*. (304lm is nice, but I don't like burning anything that's spec'd to run under 1hr...0.9hr in this case.) But who says you can't choose that if you want, or for a specific application. The next step down into the Medium levels isn't too far either (187>45). I love it.

p.s. this is still always on my mind: when is someone going to make a light that connect via USB and allows you to fine-tune each level to the exact lumens you want (within reason)? I'm looking at my VHF radio on my desk as we speak. Programming in 128 separate channels would be impossible. But there is a free program (CHIRP) that is basically a 'spreadsheet' that you fill out, choosing several parameters for each channel, then upload that file to the radio. This on a flashlight would be killer!!!

Maybe something like that exists and I just missed it.


----------



## marinemaster

Mark is that shortwave ?


----------



## moozooh

lampeDépêche said:


> I wonder if this light will be able to milk a few more lumens out of an L91, i.e. a primary lithium AA.



Probably not because their AA lights already run on a fully-regulated boost circuit full-time, so operating voltage should mostly dictate runtime rather than brightness. That 500 lm on AA claim, though... is rather unbelievable at best.

That being said, there's something new this time: the reflector on SC5 is *smooth*! Throw lovers, rejoice!

And one more: _"Runtimes tested (and parasitic drain estimated) using Panasonic Eneloop Pro AA batteries."_ So this isn't directly comparable to earlier lights' runtime values (mitigated by adding ~25%).


----------



## reppans

An Eneloop should be able to outperform an L91 and a CR123 in terms of sheer output. Watts are what count and an Eneloop is rated for 6W (1.2V x 5A) while both lithium primaries are rated for 4.5W (1.5Vx3A or 3Vx1.5A). 

Shouldn't be too hard for them to hit 500 lms on an Eneloop (at least in terms of Zebralight/Selfbuilt lumen scale) - the TN Neutron already hits 460 lms on this scale.


----------



## pepekraft

markr6 said:


> p.s. this is still always on my mind: when is someone going to make a light that connect via USB and allows you to fine-tune each level to the exact lumens you want (within reason)? I'm looking at my VHF radio on my desk as we speak. Programming in 128 separate channels would be impossible. But there is a free program (CHIRP) that is basically a 'spreadsheet' that you fill out, choosing several parameters for each channel, then upload that file to the radio. This on a flashlight would be killer!!!
> 
> Maybe something like that exists and I just missed it.



Check out nextorch. Selfbuilt review


----------



## Fireclaw18

The SC5 and SC5w have now changed from "Not for Sale" to "Pre Order" on the Zebralight website. It is now possible to pre-order them.

Estimated shipping date for pre-orders is April 30.


----------



## WalkIntoTheLight

reppans said:


> An Eneloop should be able to outperform an L91 and a CR123 in terms of sheer output. Watts are what count and an Eneloop is rated for 6W (1.2V x 5A) while both lithium primaries are rated for 4.5W (1.5Vx3A or 3Vx1.5A).
> 
> Shouldn't be too hard for them to hit 500 lms on an Eneloop (at least in terms of Zebralight/Selfbuilt lumen scale) - the TN Neutron already hits 460 lms on this scale.



Yes, it's pushing the technology in terms of NiMH battery current and LED efficiency, but with a good driver, 500 lumens should be achievable. However, Zebralight tends to exaggerate lumen claims, so even if it's really in the 400-450 lumens, that's still very impressive.

I wonder how hot the light will get at the highest H2 output. Seems like it would get too hot after 10 or 15 minutes. No?

Pity they aren't using their PID thermal controller to determine step-down.


----------



## fnsooner

funkychateau said:


> Just noticed that ZL dropped the price of the SC52-L2 by five bucks (from 64 to 59) on their web site. Could be the beginning of a phase-out.



Good eye. I just ordered an fw just in case they are phasing them out.


Not sure what to think about the SC5. I normally don't like smooth reflectors.


----------



## reppans

WalkIntoTheLight said:


> Yes, it's pushing the technology in terms of NiMH battery current and LED efficiency, but with a good driver, 500 lumens should be achievable. However, Zebralight tends to exaggerate lumen claims, so even if it's really in the 400-450 lumens, that's still very impressive..



We've generally been in agreement on other threads re: Eneloop output potential and ZL lumen/runtime exaggerations (esp, low lows off by multiples), so no surprises there. But I wonder if achieving 400+ (real ANSI lumens) is really so impressive - I know my Neutron is nearly there. IMHO, that output is technologically feasible for many manufacturers, but most simply will not attempt it. 

Reason - while it might satisfy a miniscule flashaholic market that understand batteries and have excellent smart chargers that can properly cycle/condition cells, I believe there's a much larger retail consumer base that will use alkalines, L91s, and aged Eneloops (they develop resistance over time and with poor cycling/conditioning habits), and then be disappointed with the output from feeding the light inappropriate fuel. JMHO, but I think is one of the reasons for the Neutrons poor reviews/complaints.

This same issue does not exist in the CR123 market because you generally just have a good cell (primary) and outstanding cell (Li-ion). In the AA world, you have garbage (Alks), good (L91s), excellent (Eneloop Pro), and outstanding (Li-ion). I think the SF Titan 300 lm AAA might be in for some rough [retail] reviews for the same reasons.


----------



## amanichen

reppans said:


> An Eneloop should be able to outperform an L91 and a CR123 in terms of sheer output. *Watts are what count *and an Eneloop is rated for 6W (1.2V x 5A) while both lithium primaries are rated for 4.5W (1.5Vx3A or 3Vx1.5A).



Really, watts are all that matter? What about the 3.0V produced by a CR123A being closer to the LED Vf and therefore allowing for a more efficient driver? An eneloop at 1.2V needs to be run through a boost circuit to get the voltage over 3V, which isn't exactly efficient. Believe me, I think CR123As are an utterly wasteful means of energy storage and delivery, but lets be realistic here.



reppans said:


> We've generally been in agreement on other threads re: Eneloop output potential and ZL lumen/runtime exaggerations (esp, low lows off by multiples), so no surprises there.


You seem to show up to every zebralight thread to repeat this ad nauseum. I'm all for holding manufacturers accountable, but do you have any actual evidence to back this up with?


----------



## markr6

marinemaster said:


> Mark is that shortwave ?



FM (something like 130-175mHz/400-500mHz?)



pepekraft said:


> Check out nextorch. Selfbuilt review



First time seeing this! I'm surprised someone like Fenix or Nitecore didn't make their own version (which would have been a lot better I'm sure)


----------



## jak

Welp, I pre-ordered. It's not likely that it will replace my SC62w, but I'm a ZL fanboy. I want to see what this thing is like for myself. (I'll probably start a new thread for 1st impressions or something.)


----------



## reppans

amanichen said:


> Really, watts are all that matter? What about the 3.0V produced by a CR123A being closer to the LED Vf and therefore allowing for a more efficient driver? An eneloop at 1.2V needs to be run through a boost circuit to get the voltage over 3V, which isn't exactly efficient. Believe me, I think CR123As are an utterly wasteful means of energy storage and delivery, but lets be realistic here.



Fair point and I guess a CR123 has reclaimed the small batt. output lumen wars (Archer V2), out of what Selfbuilt has reviewed, and I suppose an SC3 would be along to beat that too. 



> You seem to show up to every zebralight thread to repeat this ad nauseum. I'm all for holding manufacturers accountable, but do you have any actual evidence to back this up with?



On the contrary, I only mention exaggeration here in agreement/response with/to another member that raised it first.... same thing in the SC62 thread. I will troll other exaggerating manufacturers as well. Yes, it does bother me to see honest manufacturers trying to do the right thing and losing sales for it. The implementation of the ANSI standard was supposed put everyone on level playing field, but it's going right back to a free for all that rewards bad behavior and IMHO is a disservice to buyers. Evidence? 

HERE is my recent post on what should be true ANSI lumens, let me know if you want to get into details of the common flashlight review.

HERE is another independent review with nearly identical output/runtime graphs (Fenix-lumen calibration) - I did the same test with the same results. Zebralight specs 324 lms-hrs (108lms x 3hr), Selfbuilt's review found it to be a 300 lm-hrs (120lms x 2.5hrs), and Eagletac specs 187 lms-hrs (75x2.5). The D25As are every close to ti-force's lumen scale, if slightly conservative. 

There's more of course.


----------



## gunga

I don't follow all the Zebralight threads too closely, so I appreciate knowing about the exaggerated claims. Thanks for the info. I'm sure someone who follows closely (or perhaps fanboys too) may get irritated but I appreciate it (and truth in advertising).


----------



## snowlover91

reppans said:


> Fair point and I guess a CR123 has reclaimed the small batt. output lumen wars (Archer V2), out of what Selfbuilt has reviewed, and I suppose an SC3 would be along to beat that too.
> 
> 
> 
> On the contrary, I only mention exaggeration here in agreement/response with/to another member that raised it first.... same thing in the SC62 thread. I will troll other exaggerating manufacturers as well. Yes, it does bother me to see honest manufacturers trying to do the right thing and losing sales for it. The implementation of the ANSI standard was supposed put everyone on level playing field, but it's going right back to a free for all that rewards bad behavior and IMHO is a disservice to buyers. Evidence?
> 
> HERE is my recent post on what should be true ANSI lumens, let me know if you want to get into details of the common flashlight review.
> 
> HERE is another independent review with nearly identical output/runtime graphs (Fenix-lumen calibration) - I did the same test with the same results. Zebralight specs 324 lms-hrs (108lms x 3hr), Selfbuilt's review found it to be a 300 lm-hrs (120lms x 2.5hrs), and Eagletac specs 187 lms-hrs (75x2.5). The D25As are every close to ti-force's lumen scale, if slightly conservative.
> 
> There's more of course.



Regarding relative accuracy of lumens in selfbuilts reviews, from what I've seen of the AA lights he's reviewed it is one of the brightest, is it not? In his review it clearly beats every single AA light he tested and the beam shots likewise show it brighter as well. He even states that it has class leading output among all AA lights, so while it may not be the 280-300 claimed lumens, it certainly seems as if it easily beats every other AA light he reviewed and that is commendable in my opinion. 

Also, using runtime graphs to estimate output can be deceptive IMO. The new Nitecore EA11 and EC11 lights have quite impressive output yet their run times on low modes are horrible, less than 20 hours for the AA version on the 1 lumen low. This is most definitely a result of the circuitry and driver used resulting in low efficiency. To compare one lights runtime with another and then use that to estimate lumens is not a valid method, in my opinion, because the variables present such as different battery voltage, different drivers and circuitry efficiency, etc will likely skew the numbers one way or another. While the SC52 may not have been a true 280-300, selfbuilts tests showed that on a relative scale it outperformed and had class leading output for a single AA flashlight. The claim that zebralight is grossly exaggerating its lumen levels is unfounded IMO as his review shows it to be a leader in single AA lights.


----------



## Wiggle

marinemaster said:


> 14500 is a novelty to me. Really nonsense battery. Eneloop can do what 14500 can do. Problem with Li-Ion rechargeable is that if they do not have high mAh capacity like 18650 they are pathetic. Just look at RCR123 so what if they have higher voltage ? their capacity sucks. The only Li-Ion rechargeable worth using is 18650 and maybe, barely maybe 17670.
> In AA format what ZL is doing makes perfect sense, Eneloop is a proven, reliable platform. I trust Eneloop over any 14500 battery any day.
> 
> Just like Surefire built their reputation around 123 batteries, so is Zebralight building their platform around Eneloop.



I'm a big fan of the 14500. Energy is similar to the Eneloop (2.8Wh 14500 vs 2.4 Wh Eneloop). But the cell is noticeably lighter and is much better at providing flat regulation in the lights I have used that allow both cells (Quark AA-T and SC-52). I also feel that li-ion chemistry performs better with frequent topping off of the cell compared to Eneloop, this is a benefit in EDC use. 

After seeing the 14500 compared to Eneloop in both my Quark AA-T and SC52 I would pick it everytime except cold weather (in which case I go L91/EA91). I also do find the 500 lumen burst mode quite useful, a large percentage of my light use requires short but strong bursts of light and a timed turbo is perfect for that.


----------



## fnsooner

jak said:


> Welp, I pre-ordered. It's not likely that it will replace my SC62w, but I'm a ZL fanboy. I want to see what this thing is like for myself. (I'll probably start a new thread for 1st impressions or something.)



I am very interested to see if your new SC5(I assume w) out throws your SC62w. I have a SC62w and a SC52w, and am not sure where the SC5w fits in.


----------



## snowlover91

I preordered as well, will report once it ships and also when I receive it and compare to some of my other lights! The smooth reflector should definitely help with throw.


----------



## reppans

snowlover91 said:


> Regarding relative accuracy of lumens in selfbuilts reviews, from what I've seen of the AA lights he's reviewed it is one of the brightest, is it not? In his review it clearly beats every single AA light he tested and the beam shots likewise show it brighter as well. He even states that it has class leading output among all AA lights, so while it may not be the 280-300 claimed lumens, it certainly seems as if it easily beats every other AA light he reviewed and that is commendable in my opinion.
> 
> Also, using runtime graphs to estimate output can be deceptive IMO. The new Nitecore EA11 and EC11 lights have quite impressive output yet their run times on low modes are horrible, less than 20 hours for the AA version on the 1 lumen low. This is most definitely a result of the circuitry and driver used resulting in low efficiency. To compare one lights runtime with another and then use that to estimate lumens is not a valid method, in my opinion, because the variables present such as different battery voltage, different drivers and circuitry efficiency, etc will likely skew the numbers one way or another. While the SC52 may not have been a true 280-300, selfbuilts tests showed that on a relative scale it outperformed and had class leading output for a single AA flashlight. The claim that zebralight is grossly exaggerating its lumen levels is unfounded IMO as his review shows it to be a leader in single AA lights.



Don't get me wrong, the SC52 is an excellent light and one of the best AAs available period, I just find it wrong that ZL will spec the light for both output and runtime, almost every mode btw, with the then class leading 3V lights - ET D25C and 47 Quark AA2-X - both of which I find to use reasonably truthful specs. Just overlay SB's output/runtime graphs for these three lights and compare their spec claims. 

ZL is not the only to overstate - both the TN Neutron and AT Prime A1 do as well (and I'm sure others I don't own) and I have, and will, troll their threads too (btw, both are brighter than the SC52, the former holds SB's AA output record.. by a lot). Interestingly, TN used to be conservative (see SBs Neutron V1 review) but I believe has chosen to now follow ZL's path. ZL does "grossly" (not my word) overstate its sub-lumen outputs though...4-10x, which I find interesting given the 2 decimal point carry. 

I'm sorry, but I don't understand your point about estimating lumens on runtime graphs - I only refer to 3rd party output/runtime graphs which show both dimensions on each axis. I have a lux meter and DIY lightbox and triangulate results with these third parties... I completely agree with them on a relative basis, but not on lumen scale.


----------



## StorminMatt

Wiggle said:


> I'm a big fan of the 14500. Energy is similar to the Eneloop (2.8Wh 14500 vs 2.4 Wh Eneloop). But the cell is noticeably lighter and is much better at providing flat regulation in the lights I have used that allow both cells (Quark AA-T and SC-52). I also feel that li-ion chemistry performs better with frequent topping off of the cell compared to Eneloop, this is a benefit in EDC use.
> 
> After seeing the 14500 compared to Eneloop in both my Quark AA-T and SC52 I would pick it everytime except cold weather (in which case I go L91/EA91). I also do find the 500 lumen burst mode quite useful, a large percentage of my light use requires short but strong bursts of light and a timed turbo is perfect for that.



Agreed about 14500. The flat regulation you mention is most pronounced at 280 lumens, which is where a AA will REALLY start to drop off as it is drained. Of course, the other thing I often mention that I like about a 14500 is the fact that they are easier to charge when away from home. Just the other day, I put a couple of fully drained 14500s in my Xtar MC2, connected it to my USB solar panel, and put it out in the yard. Less than two hours later, I had two fully charged 14500s. I could have been all alone up in the Warner Mountains, and seen the exact same results. Eneloops? FORGET IT! The best I have for wilderness charging of Eneloops is my Xtar XP1. And that charger (1) doesn't terminate well, and (2) charges VERY slow (500mA for a 4 hour charge!). The XP4 may be faster and better. But it's MUCH larger and heavier. And even that charger can't charge two Eneloops as fast as my MC2 can charge (and put MORE energy on) two 14500s.


----------



## WalkIntoTheLight

snowlover91 said:


> While the SC52 may not have been a true 280-300, selfbuilts tests showed that on a relative scale it outperformed and had class leading output for a single AA flashlight. The claim that zebralight is grossly exaggerating its lumen levels is unfounded IMO as his review shows it to be a leader in single AA lights.



I measure the output of the SC52 at about 230 lumens. It might be a bit higher (my measurement is not exact), maybe 250 tops. But this is only on freshly charged Eneloop. It drops quite a bit as the Eneloop drains and its voltage goes down. It's down to about 200 lumens by the time the Eneloop is half-depleted. This is on a regular Eneloop. Maybe it holds up better on an Eneloop Pro.

I'm not complaining, though. It's still very bright for a 1xAA light. When I bought mine (I have two), I knew the specs were a bit exaggerated. And at the time, it was the brightest 1xAA available.




reppans said:


> ZL does "grossly" (not my word) overstate its sub-lumen outputs though...4-10x, which I find interesting given the 2 decimal point carry.



Yes, I'm not sure why they do that. It's not like people are looking for bright moonlight modes, or care that it runs for 3 months. There doesn't seem to be any marketing reason for exaggerating the moonlight claims, and yet that's where they really do "grossly" exaggerate.

For moonlight runtimes, I just measure the current at a few different states of battery level, and then extrapolate how long it will last. I estimate about 16 days / 34 days / 41 days for the three moonlight modes on an Eneloop. I haven't tried it, though. I'm sure it would be quite a bit longer on an alkaline, because the drain is so low.


----------



## Sarlix

WalkIntoTheLight said:


> For moonlight runtimes, I just measure the current at a few different states of battery level, and then extrapolate how long it will last. I estimate about 16 days / 34 days / 41 days for the three moonlight modes on an Eneloop. *I haven't tried it, though*. I'm sure it would be quite a bit longer on an alkaline, because the drain is so low.



I'm not an expert here, you surly know more than I do. But if you haven't tried it then how do you know they are exaggerating their runtimes? Is it possible that their circuit works in a way that makes your method of testing insufficient? I think that until some one actually tries it, firm conclusions can't be drawn one way or the other.


----------



## WalkIntoTheLight

Sarlix said:


> I'm not an expert here, you surly know more than I do. But if you haven't tried it then how do you know they are exaggerating their runtimes? Is it possible that their circuit works in a way that makes your method of testing insufficient? I think that until some one actually tries it, firm conclusions can't be drawn one way or the other.



Like I said, I'm going by current measurements on those moonlight modes, and then dividing that into the capacity of a battery. I admit it's only a rough estimate, but it does work with higher modes (the most I've accurately been bothered to measure is a medium mode on a Quark). I don't see why it wouldn't work on moonlight modes, as long as they are regulated (they appear to be, at least for most of the run).

But, perhaps I will do a test and see. Probably I can only be bothered to test L2a, which would still take over 2 weeks.


----------



## reppans

gunga said:


> I don't follow all the Zebralight threads too closely, so I appreciate knowing about the exaggerated claims. Thanks for the info. I'm sure someone who follows closely (or perhaps fanboys too) may get irritated but I appreciate it (and truth in advertising).



Appreciate the kind words Gunga... I know you like fine US lights like HDSs and Malkoffs - you should know they are very truthful in terms of output and runtime. I suspect Surefire is as well, but I don't own any. Something about US-based companies - and that includes warranty/customer support.



WalkIntoTheLight said:


> Yes, I'm not sure why they do that. It's not like people are looking for bright moonlight modes, or care that it runs for 3 months. There doesn't seem to be any marketing reason for exaggerating the moonlight claims, and yet that's where they really do "grossly" exaggerate..



Well I'm an exception to that  - bright moonlights are my most important/often used (it's a general purpose low for me). My H51w's 0.2 lms was accurate and I was looking for a brighter 0.3+... but instead, I got a third (0.07 lms). 

BTW, thank you for chiming in.




Sarlix said:


> I'm not an expert here, you surly know more than I do. But if you haven't tried it then how do you know they are exaggerating their runtimes? Is it possible that their circuit works in a way that makes your method of testing insufficient? I think that until some one actually tries it, firm conclusions can't be drawn one way or the other.



I output/runtime test my lights side-by-side on the sub-/low- lumens I use most - I like efficient lights. For sub-lumen testing, I use AAAAs from a 9V to shorten the test, but in Eneloop equivalent, the SC52 170 lm-hr spec (0.34x504) came in at ~22 lm-hrs (0.07x306) or 13 days. At the other extreme was the Malkoff MDC AA, it's 60 lm-hr spec (0.3x200) came in at ~120 lm-hrs (0.45x266). THIS was the start of that run.... my "bright" moonlight lights.


----------



## WalkIntoTheLight

reppans said:


> Well I'm an exception to that  - bright moonlights are my most important/often used (it's a general purpose low for me). My H51w's 0.2 lms was accurate and I was looking for a brighter 0.3+... but instead, I got a third (0.07 lms).



You'd probably like my D40A. It rates its moonlight mode at 0.5 lumens, but in reality it's at least 1 lumen. Too bright for a middle-of-the-night light for me, but that's not what I ever intended to use it for anyway.



> I output/runtime test my lights side-by-side on the sub-/low- lumens I use most - I like efficient lights. For sub-lumen testing, I use AAAAs from a 9V to shorten the test, but in Eneloop equivalent, the SC52 170 lm-hr spec (0.34x504) came in at ~22 lm-hrs (0.07x306) or 13 days.



So, are you saying that based on the capacity of AAAA's, and the run-time you got from those, that the SC52 L2a moonlight mode on a 2000mah battery should last 13 days? What's the capacity of the AAAA's you use?

BTW, there seems to be some variance across SC52's, when it comes to run time. My SC52 cool white has different run times than my SC52w-L2.


----------



## snowlover91

I think the best option would be for someone to do a runtime test on one of the low modes to see how accurate it is. It would certainly be a sacrifice to be without a light for a month or more but would answer our questions for us without having to guess or make assumptions! When I get mine I will probably do a test on one of the lower modes to see how it performs, even though it'll take awhile it will certainly be worth it to find out.


----------



## thedoc007

snowlover91 said:


> I think the best option would be for someone to do a runtime test on one of the low modes to see how accurate it is. It would certainly be a sacrifice to be without a light for a month or more but would answer our questions for us without having to guess or make assumptions! When I get mine I will probably do a test on one of the lower modes to see how it performs, even though it'll take awhile it will certainly be worth it to find out.



selfbuilt has written on this topic before...one of the things he has found out in his testing is that very low "moonlight" modes tend to vary widely even among examples of the same light (and this is not unique to Zebralight). So I'm not sure that a single test would prove anything either way. Now if a random sample was taken, with fifty people trying fifty different lights, you could probably get a pretty accurate composite average. Still wouldn't mean YOUR light would perform that way, though.

As for me, I leave my SC600 Mk II L2 permanently on low...basically a beacon, so I can find it easily in the dark. I've left it on continuously for more than a month, and still had over four volts in my Redilast 3400. Frankly, that's all I need to know. I don't care whether it can last 90 or 250 days...either one is more than adequate. 

I do agree that misleading marketing is a major problem even if a light is exceptional...but in the real world, is it really the most important concern you have? I guess it might be, to some...but not for me. The form factor, user interface, beam profile, ability to carry easily, etc., are all far more important than runtime. 18650s have such a large capacity that unless a light is TERRIBLY inefficient, runtime is way down on the list of priorities.

I'm not trying to convince anyone...I can understand both sides of the argument. Just providing my own perspective.


----------



## reppans

WalkIntoTheLight said:


> You'd probably like my D40A. It rates its moonlight mode at 0.5 lumens, but in reality it's at least 1 lumen. Too bright for a middle-of-the-night light for me, but that's not what I ever intended to use it for anyway.
> 
> So, are you saying that based on the capacity of AAAA's, and the run-time you got from those, that the SC52 L2a moonlight mode on a 2000mah battery should last 13 days? What's the capacity of the AAAA's you use?



Yeah, I have the D40A, love it - specs is actually 1 lm for 500 hrs, I get 0.7 lms for 133 hrs on 3xAAAAs, that about 500 Eneloop hrs in my book . 

Yes on 13 days - my SC52 0.34 mode ran 92 hrs on a 600mah (standard 9V spec) AAAA. 92 x 3.33 (2000/600) = 306 hrs. Techically, one could argue the nominal voltage difference, but Alks and NiMh average closer V than nominal implies.


----------



## snowlover91

thedoc007 said:


> selfbuilt has written on this topic before...one of the things he has found out in his testing is that very low "moonlight" modes tend to vary widely even among examples of the same light (and this is not unique to Zebralight). So I'm not sure that a single test would prove anything either way. Now if a random sample was taken, with fifty people trying fifty different lights, you could probably get a pretty accurate composite average. Still wouldn't mean YOUR light would perform that way, though.
> 
> As for me, I leave my SC600 Mk II L2 permanently on low...basically a beacon, so I can find it easily in the dark. I've left it on continuously for more than a month, and still had over four volts in my Redilast 3400. Frankly, that's all I need to know. I don't care whether it can last 90 or 250 days...either one is more than adequate.
> 
> I do agree that misleading marketing is a major problem even if a light is exceptional...but in the real world, is it really the most important concern you have? I guess it might be, to some...but not for me. The form factor, user interface, beam profile, ability to carry easily, etc., are all far more important than runtime. 18650s have such a large capacity that unless a light is TERRIBLY inefficient, runtime is way down on the list of priorities.
> 
> I'm not trying to convince anyone...I can understand both sides of the argument. Just providing my own perspective.



Valid points you have there and I agree the practical nature of the moonlight modes is more important than it being exactly as advertised. This begs the question though, if the moonlight modes are so variable then one couldn't really say that ZL overstates its moonlight modes because they may be different for different lights of the same type? In that case one person might have a light pretty close to specs and another tests and finds the light has a shorter runtime or some other variable. Not to mention other variables which would impact it as well. That's why I'm not usually a major critic of most companies lumens claims, especially the low modes because they're so difficult to measure and variable. Even high modes can vary among lights. From my point of view, the claim about Zebralight grossly exaggerating is a little overdone as there is little evidence to support this and quite a bit of variability in the lower lumen range, as has been discussed, along with the high range. Most reviews and comparisons I've seen give it great marks versus other lights of a similar category and when you get a good one it is an admirable performer for a single AA light. I'm looking forward to seeing the new SC5 tested!

reppans, perhaps you happen to have a less efficient copy of the SC52?


----------



## jak

fnsooner said:


> I am very interested to see if your new SC5(I assume w) out throws your SC62w. I have a SC62w and a SC52w, and am not sure where the SC5w fits in.


Me too. I'll be sure to post pix and observations. Yes I got the w version.


----------



## Bedlam

Not sure whether I'll preorder this one, or wait for the initial batch to come out and see what the switch is like (600W MKII L2 switch = perfect, SC52W L2 switch = mushy and horrible after a year) but either way I'll be getting my hands on one at some point. Now all I need is the 2015 D25A Ti to come out and I'm set..


----------



## WalkIntoTheLight

Okay, I'll run a moonlight test using two Zebralights: a SC52 cool white, and a SC52w-L2 neutral white. Freshly charged regular Eneloop in each. I'll start today. I'm only going to test the brightest moonlight mode.


----------



## Swede74

WalkIntoTheLight said:


> Okay, I'll run a moonlight test using two Zebralights: a SC52 cool white, and a SC52w-L2 neutral white. Freshly charged regular Eneloop in each. I'll start today. I'm only going to test the brightest moonlight mode.



Can I join the fun? I have an SC52 cool white. I'll run a test too, starting today at 3:00 PM Central European Summer Time (UTC/GMT +02:00). The brightest moonlight mode, and a freshly charged Eneloop (1900 mAh) in mine too.


----------



## Bedlam

Emailed through to ZL to ask re the switch, and got the following response just now:


"Department: Sales


Subject: SC5W - switch


From what I know, the switch in the SC5(w) is a firm one with loud click, like the one in your SC600w Mk2 II L2. " 


Looks like I might be preordering after all


----------



## markr6

fnsooner said:


> I am very interested to see if your new SC5(I assume w) out throws your SC62w. I have a SC62w and a SC52w, and am not sure where the SC5w fits in.



The SC5 has the same 80/10° beam as the SC600. So I guess it will be the same? I look forward to comparing all my ZLs when this arrives!


----------



## markr6

Bedlam said:


> Emailed through to ZL to ask re the switch, and got the following response just now:
> 
> 
> "Department: Sales
> 
> 
> Subject: SC5W - switch
> 
> 
> From what I know, the switch in the SC5(w) is a firm one with loud click, like the one in your SC600w Mk2 II L2. "
> 
> 
> Looks like I might be preordering after all



Unfortunatley this is the same lottery as the tint from my experience...no matter what ZL told me. I was using my H52 last night. I sure wish they were all like mine; a firm but almost silent switch with a nice clicky feel.


----------



## snowlover91

Swede74 said:


> Can I join the fun? I have an SC52 cool white. I'll run a test too, starting today at 3:00 PM Central European Summer Time (UTC/GMT +02:00). The brightest moonlight mode, and a freshly charged Eneloop (1900 mAh) in mine too.



Sounds good we should start a separate thread for the testing of the moonlight mode as the results come in! I plan to do one for the SC5W when I receive it to see what the runtime looks like as well on the highest moonlight mode.


----------



## markr6

snowlover91 said:


> Sounds good we should start a separate thread for the testing of the moonlight mode as the results come in! I plan to do one for the SC5W when I receive it to see what the runtime looks like as well on the highest moonlight mode.



That would be fun. I wish I had something like Selfbuilt uses to measure the output over a period of time, instead of just comparing to another light or subjectively guessing.

I once used an AAA primary in my SC52w, but got tired of waiting. Even that lasted a long time on M2 then down to one of the low levels.


----------



## WalkIntoTheLight

markr6 said:


> That would be fun. I wish I had something like Selfbuilt uses to measure the output over a period of time, instead of just comparing to another light or subjectively guessing.
> 
> I once used an AAA primary in my SC52w, but got tired of waiting. Even that lasted a long time on M2 then down to one of the low levels.



Okay, moonlight mode duration test thread started. Anyone that wants to join, please do!

http://www.candlepowerforums.com/vb...ebralight-moonlight-mode-duration-test-thread


----------



## reppans

WalkIntoTheLight said:


> Okay, I'll run a moonlight test using two Zebralights: a SC52 cool white, and a SC52w-L2 neutral white. Freshly charged regular Eneloop in each. I'll start today. I'm only going to test the brightest moonlight mode.





Swede74 said:


> Can I join the fun? I have an SC52 cool white. I'll run a test too, starting today at 3:00 PM Central European Summer Time (UTC/GMT +02:00). The brightest moonlight mode, and a freshly charged Eneloop (1900 mAh) in mine too.





snowlover91 said:


> Sounds good we should start a separate thread for the testing of the moonlight mode as the results come in! I plan to do one for the SC5W when I receive it to see what the runtime looks like as well on the highest moonlight mode.



LOL.... you guys are hard-core! And I thought I was a spec nerd. Well OK, I have my calendar marked .

I think this is great, but let's put something in perspective. Whether you come in around the 2 week mark (as the quad-A and tail-cap measurements suggest) or you hit the 3 week spec, we are still in the 2/3rds of spec range.... this is NOT a "gross exaggeration," and as the Doc mentions, an extra week (on top of 2 wks) would have no impact on my purchase decision. 

Where the moonlight efficiency (lm-hrs) spec falls apart is on OUTPUT - my sample meters 0.07 on a 0.34 spec, *or ~5x off*. So, if you are really interested in testing the validity of the ML spec, and I doubt many (any?) of you have a lightbox capable of metering down to 0.01 lms, can you please link in (OP, to avoid thread clutter) a side-by-side photo with other sub-lumen lights? LIKE THIS**

Lastly, I know we got off on a huge sub-lumen tangent due to this "gross exaggeration" term, but other than myself that uses "bright" moonlights most of the time, I doubt most others here use or care about sub-lumen. 

Doesn't anyone find ZLs 73% higher lumen-hr spec (in my earlier post) than the nearly same performing D25A (true ANSI) a bit much? How about claiming 280 lms on 1AA against the then _highest spec'd "280" 2AA lights_ - CLICKY? 

(** - HDS is on 0.02, all lights closely approximate specs, except the S15 and SC52 (2.5x and 5x off, respectively), and D25As have poor ML voltage regulation so need an Alk or topped-up NiMh)


----------



## markr6

Well, I never thought of the accuracy aspect. Other than some fancy $3000 piece of equipment, can anything measure these super low modes effectively? If we're using homemade boxes made out of PVC and a bed sheet or some styrofoam, we're just kidding ourselves. And if we're just comparing to other lights using our own eyes, that's not any better (but definitely good enough for me)


----------



## fnj

holygeez03 said:


> By eliminating the 14500 support on the SC5, ZL seems to be saying "this light is completely designed around the NiMH" for maximum utility... so why provide a 3 minute mode that will allow time for your eyes to adjust to 500lm, while zapping battery life for 3 min, then stepping down to a noticeably darker 304lm, which will be further exaggerated for a while since your eyes will be adjusted to 500lm.



I believe the criticism is ill-founded.

1) 500 -> 300 is not at all a large stepdown. Without question you can tell the difference in an A-B comparison, and you will see the stepdown clearly if your eyes are open and watching at the moment, but it is not a very significant difference in brightness. If you turn on 500 now, and then turn on 300 an hour later, there is essentially no difference in utility.

2) According to ZebraLight's web page as of today, the 500 does not "zap the battery" markedly. Right now it is telling me that you get either 535 for 3 minutes PLUS 325 for 0.8 hours, OR you can get a straight 325-only for 0.9 hours. Big deal! The initial burst would seem to be without a significant runtime cost. It's just a bonus. It is virtually certain that the stepdown is heat-related, not necessitated to save runtime. Either the LED or something in the driver is being saved from meltdown.

3) That is certainly not to say that the current required for 500 is without any cost at all. If you extrapolate from the above figures, it would appear that a steady 500, if available, might be good for about 0.4+ hours, which would hardly be useless.

I am very excited about 500, even just burst, on a single AA without resorting to a weird oddball cell like a 14500.


----------



## fnj

holygeez03 said:


> I realize that you can set H2 to 304lm, but then you lose the ability to quickly switch to anything between 45lm and 304lm.. so no, that is not acceptable.



I am probably skirting a pointless difference of subjective opinion here, but IMHO 304/45 (ZL site says 325/48 right now) is not a poor mode spacing at all. It is practically ideal. Anything much closer than that doesn't give you a useful difference. Try a 6:1 ratio on some other light if you can set it up. Remember the eye is logarithmic in response, not linear.

I will certainly admit that the HDS scheme, with 20+ settings to choose from with each successive step 1.5x the one before, is the ultimate.


----------



## holygeez03

fnj said:


> I believe the criticism is ill-founded.
> 
> 1) 500 -> 300 is not at all a large stepdown. Without question you can tell the difference in an A-B comparison, and you will see the stepdown clearly if your eyes are open and watching at the moment, but it is not a very significant difference in brightness. If you turn on 500 now, and then turn on 300 an hour later, there is essentially no difference in utility.



But my eyes _will _be open during the stepdown if I am using the light for more than 3 minutes on high... and based on my SC52/14500 experience, with a similar stepdown, it is *quite *noticeable. The stepdown, during continuous use, is extremely annoying in my opinion... It is great that the 500lm burst is possible, as it can be useful, but there should be an acceptable way to avoid it if you plan to use the light continuously on high... and again, programming H2 to 300lm is not the answer because then you lose the other modes H2 offers... With the SC52, at least you can avoid the stepdown during continuous use, by using AA.

If 500lm has "essentially no difference in utility" compared to 300lm, then why are you so excited about it from a single AA?


----------



## markr6

fnj said:


> I am very excited about 500, even just burst, on a single AA without resorting to a weird oddball cell like a 14500.



That's exactly how I'm feeling about this mode. In fact, I'm really pleased with the 3 min. Would have expected another 1min burst mode.



fnj said:


> I am probably skirting a pointless difference of subjective opinion here, but IMHO 304/45 (ZL site says 325/48 right now) is not a poor mode spacing at all. It is practically ideal. Anything much closer than that doesn't give you a useful difference. Try a 6:1 ratio on some other light if you can set it up. Remember the eye is logarithmic in response, not linear.



Agreed. On paper, it sucks. In real life, the spacing isn't so big and quite surprising actually.

OK I'll stop talking this thing up...I just want it!!


----------



## holygeez03

So am I the only one who finds it extremely annoying when my light automatically dims by about 40% after minutes of use? Maybe it could at least be a gradual dimming, not sudden? 

But ultimately, I think ZL should have made it possible to program H1 to either 500lm w/stepdown, or just 300lm continuous...


----------



## markr6

holygeez03 said:


> But ultimately, I think ZL should have made it possible to program H1 to either 500lm w/stepdown, or just 300lm continuous...



That would have been ideal. I wonder why they didn't do that?


----------



## snowlover91

reppans said:


> Don't get me wrong, the SC52 is an excellent light and one of the best AAs available period, I just find it wrong that ZL will spec the light for both output and runtime, almost every mode btw, with the then class leading 3V lights - ET D25C and 47 Quark AA2-X - both of which I find to use reasonably truthful specs. Just overlay SB's output/runtime graphs for these three lights and compare their spec claims.
> 
> ZL is not the only to overstate - both the TN Neutron and AT Prime A1 do as well (and I'm sure others I don't own) and I have, and will, troll their threads too (btw, both are brighter than the SC52, the former holds SB's AA output record.. by a lot). Interestingly, TN used to be conservative (see SBs Neutron V1 review) but I believe has chosen to now follow ZL's path. ZL does "grossly" (not my word) overstate its sub-lumen outputs though...4-10x, which I find interesting given the 2 decimal point carry.
> 
> I'm sorry, but I don't understand your point about estimating lumens on runtime graphs - I only refer to 3rd party output/runtime graphs which show both dimensions on each axis. I have a lux meter and DIY lightbox and triangulate results with these third parties... I completely agree with them on a relative basis, but not on lumen scale.



My main point would basically be this; self built and other reviewers have mentioned the difficulty in measuring such a low lumen output accurately. Furthermore, they also mention the extreme variability which can occur at such low lumen modes simply due to differences in emitter efficiency, circuitry, etc which will vary slightly from light to light and make a large impact on the low lumen modes. In order to accurately make a claim that they overstate their outputs I think one would need a much larger sample size of the same light to test, say 15-20 at least, to get a good overview and average of the differences between them. In addition I think DIY equipment is good for general output but extreme low levels and accuracy is going to be difficult to measure without professional level equipment. These super low modes require extremely sensitive equipment, even professional cameras are going to have a hard time picking these low levels up if using beamshot comparisons. I think the runtime thread will be beneficial and show the variability from light to light and under different conditions which will illustrate and prove my point. While your model may seem off, someone with the exact same light may find output closer to specs or measure it with a similar setup as yours and achieve different results. There are a lot of variables to consider which can drastically impact these low lumen modes and actual output.


----------



## holygeez03

I don't know markr6... oversight? It wasn't as much of an issue with the SC52 because there is no stepdown with AA/Eneloop... and most people (including myself) that are using a 14500, are doing so for access to the "burst mode". But whenever I think I will be using my SC52w continuously on high, I always use Eneloop to avoid the stepdown (and also because I have several spare Eneloops handy). 

This is not possible with the SC5 and I think it will be the first "stepdown experience" for a lot of ZL users that are upgrading from the SC51/52... so it will be interesting to see how many complaints crop up. I wouldn't even be surprised if the ZL customer service reps get a lot of phone calls from people who think their light is malfunctioning...


----------



## reppans

snowlover91 said:


> My main point would basically be this...



Fair enough... so skip my SC52 as a inefficient moonlight sample, and WITL's sample / output estimates, and Toykeeper's multiple samples (she's a BLF reviewer that uses a ZL lumen calibration, btw), and let's agree to drop the "gross" adjective, and once again, who really cares about moonlight mode? Does that mean you find the other independent graphs to be in the acceptable range of marketing specs?

Look, we're going around in circles, let people decide for themselves, and we should let this thread get back on topic. Sorry for the disturbance folks.


----------



## Sarlix

WalkIntoTheLight said:


> Okay, I'll run a moonlight test using two Zebralights: a SC52 cool white, and a SC52w-L2 neutral white. Freshly charged regular Eneloop in each. I'll start today. I'm only going to test the brightest moonlight mode.






So you're going to be testing it in L2 mode 0.36 Lm (3 weeks) ?


----------



## snowlover91

reppans said:


> Fair enough... so skip my SC52 as a inefficient moonlight sample, and WITL's sample / output estimates, and Toykeeper's multiple samples (she's a BLF reviewer that uses a ZL lumen calibration, btw), and let's agree to drop the "gross" adjective, and once again, who really cares about moonlight mode? Does that mean you find the other independent graphs to be in the acceptable range of marketing specs?
> 
> Look, we're going around in circles, let people decide for themselves, and we should let this thread get back on topic. Sorry for the disturbance folks.



To measure such a low lumen output accurately is difficult, imho and most don't have access to equipment able to accurately resolve values below 1 lumen. When dealing with tenths and hundredths of lumens I don't find the home made data and estimations compelling or accurate enough to make an informed conclusion. Maybe ZL has improved on the new SC5, I certainly am curious to see the results but as you said to most people moonlight mode is moonlight, the human eye can't tell the difference between .1 or .34 lumens so to me the more important metric is runtime at these low levels. It never hurts to have different opinions and perspectives


----------



## WalkIntoTheLight

Sarlix said:


> So you're going to be testing it in L2 mode 0.36 Lm (3 weeks) ?



Correct. Test was started today.



snowlover91 said:


> but as you said to most people moonlight mode is moonlight, the human eye can't tell the difference between .1 or .34 lumens so to me the more important metric is runtime at these low levels. It never hurts to have different opinions and perspectives



I can certainly tell the difference between .1 and .3 lumens. One of my Quarks claims it's 0.3 lumens, and it's far brighter than either of my Zebralights "0.34 lumens". Same for another that claims 0.2 lumens. I have several lights with moonlight modes. The only one that is dimmer than my SC52's is a L10 running a Nichia 219 LED.

That said, I find the brightness of the SC52's is just about right. Not too bright, not too dim. Perfect for a middle-of-the-night light, when used as a ceiling-bounce.

The lower moonlight levels of the SC52 I find not very useful. So, to me, I need about 0.1 lumens (which I estimate the SC52 does). I don't need brighter, so run time becomes more important than a "bright" moonlight mode. But really, anything beyond a couple of weeks is plenty. At those kinds of run times, it's basically free light I don't count as running down the battery.


----------



## markr6

I can clearly tell the difference between that ~.2lm my SC52w, especially at night. The 0.34 and 0.06 settings are like night and day, but is that accruate? I can't say. Sometimes I think it's in medium mode when in fact I had it on 0.34. But again, after running the battery down it would be impossible to "remember" what .34 looked like if it was in fact now down to 0.20. Ahhh, getting way too technical here!!


----------



## snowlover91

markr6 said:


> I can clearly tell the difference between that ~.2lm my SC52w, especially at night. The 0.34 and 0.06 settings are like night and day, but is that accruate? I can't say. Sometimes I think it's in medium mode when in fact I had it on 0.34. But again, after running the battery down it would be impossible to "remember" what .34 looked like if it was in fact now down to 0.20. Ahhh, getting way too technical here!!



Whats more interesting even is how tint affects light and how the human eye perceives it. My Nitecore D10 is 3 lumens on low according to specs but is dimmer than my EA41 on low at 1 lumen. My SRT5 appears the same at its lowest which is .1 according to specs, but a different tint than my D10. My dimmest light currently is actually my EX11.2, not sure why or at least it appears to be the dimmest even though it specs 5 lumens on low. Never had a ZL before so can't say what the differences in the low modes look like until I try it out. Maybe I should get beam shots to compare with my other low lights?


----------



## WalkIntoTheLight

snowlover91 said:


> Whats more interesting even is how tint affects light and how the human eye perceives it. My Nitecore D10 is 3 lumens on low according to specs but is dimmer than my EA41 on low at 1 lumen. My SRT5 appears the same at its lowest which is .1 according to specs, but a different tint than my D10. My dimmest light currently is actually my EX11.2, not sure why or at least it appears to be the dimmest even though it specs 5 lumens on low. Never had a ZL before so can't say what the differences in the low modes look like until I try it out. Maybe I should get beam shots to compare with my other low lights?



That much discrepancy is almost certainly due to misleading lumen claims, not tint. There's no way your eye would perceive 3 lumens as dimmer than 1 lumen, or 0.1 lumens, etc.

The lumen scale is designed to take into account how our eyes perceive light, specifically tint. We're most sensitive to green wavelengths, which is partially why a cool white LED (which has a lot of wavelength in the blue-green part of the spectrum) has more lumens than a warm white LED (which has more energy in the red part of the spectrum). It's also about efficiency, but tint does explain part of it.

If you really want to measure brightness without regard to tint, take a photograph of your lights side-by-side, and covert the image to black & white. (Using a suitable algorithm that uses all colour channels.)


----------



## thedoc007

WalkIntoTheLight said:


> That much discrepancy is almost certainly due to misleading lumen claims, not tint. There's no way your eye would perceive 3 lumens as dimmer than 1 lumen, or 0.1 lumens, etc.
> 
> The lumen scale is designed to take into account how our eyes perceive light, specifically tint. We're most sensitive to green wavelengths, which is partially why a cool white LED (which has a lot of wavelength in the blue-green part of the spectrum) has more lumens than a warm white LED (which has more energy in the red part of the spectrum). It's also about efficiency, but tint does explain part of it.
> 
> If you really want to measure brightness without regard to tint, take a photograph of your lights side-by-side, and covert the image to black & white. (Using a suitable algorithm that uses all colour channels.)



Beam profile can have a profound impact on perceived brightness too...certainly more impact than tint usually has. I've seen multiple instances where people think a 200 lumen light is brighter than a 500 lumen light. That is a pretty major difference in perception. I'm not familiar with all the lights he was referring to, but it certainly could be a factor to consider.

Also, simple variability is a possibility. It doesn't have to be intentionally misleading claims...especially at low levels, there is a very broad relative range. At 800 lumens, you might expect a range from 700-900 lumens...which is only a ~12% difference. But I've seen a number of tests, and at the low end, sometimes the ratings are off by several times due to natural variation. That is to say, a one lumen light might do .5 lumens, or three lumens. A five lumen light might do two, or nine lumens. 

With all those factors, trying to rank them in order of brightness is a tougher job than many realize.


----------



## snowlover91

I did a beam shot comparison of those lights I mentioned to show the differences. I guess the thing we've found out through this discussion is its not as simple as just measuring lumens and then assuming all lights by the same company output the same amount of light at extremely low levels. The reason I mentioned those lights is simply that the one which should have been brightest and used a higher voltage battery was actually dimmest while the one I thought would be dimmer was, or appears at least, brighter. Here is a link to the beam shot comparison, you'll see exactly what I mean. Thanks for the help and thoughts on this everyone  Can't wait to get a shipping notification for my SC5!

http://www.candlepowerforums.com/vb/showthread.php?400364-Nitecore-Beamshot-Comparison


----------



## Sarlix

snowlover91 said:


> My Nitecore D10 is 3 lumens on low according to specs but is dimmer than my EA41 on low at 1 lumen.


 I contacted Nitecore once because I had issue with the moonlight mode my EA1. I was comparing it to the low on my D10. They said not bother using the D10 for comparison because back then they didn't have the sophisticated equipment (presumably integrated sphere) to measure the output accurately, so yeah.


----------



## snowlover91

Sarlix said:


> I contacted Nitecore once because I had issue with the moonlight mode my EA1. I was comparing it to the low on my D10. They said not bother using the D10 for comparison because back then they didn't have the sophisticated equipment (presumably integrated sphere) to measure the output accurately, so yeah.



Thanks for the info, that's quite interesting! I did find when using rcr123 on my ex11.2 it was far brighter on moonlight, similar to my D10 while lithium primaries were far dimmer on the moonlight modes. I actually prefer it with the brighter moonlight it's the perfect balance IMO. 

Regarding the SC5, has anyone heard about shipping yet? I know ZL is notorious for having delays and hope this isn't one of them, the anticipation is killing me! Yes, I'm addicted


----------



## snowlover91

As an update to this thread, I contacted Zebralight to see how the preorders are coming along and they said due to an extremely high number of preorders that it would likely be an additional 3-4 weeks before they start shipping out. Just thought everyone who has preordered might want this little bit of info!


----------



## kj2

snowlover91 said:


> As an update to this thread, I contacted Zebralight to see how the preorders are coming along and they said due to an extremely high number of preorders that it would likely be an additional 3-4 weeks before they start shipping out. Just thought everyone who has preordered might want this little bit of info!



3-4 weeks!? Wauw! ... Ohwell, it's something we could have expected.


----------



## markr6

snowlover91 said:


> As an update to this thread, I contacted Zebralight to see how the preorders are coming along and they said due to an extremely high number of preorders that it would likely be an additional 3-4 weeks before they start shipping out. Just thought everyone who has preordered might want this little bit of info!


----------



## Sarlix

snowlover91 said:


> As an update to this thread, I contacted Zebralight to see how the preorders are coming along and they said due to an extremely high number of preorders that it would likely be an additional 3-4 weeks before they start shipping out. Just thought everyone who has preordered might want this little bit of info!


 I'm glad I held off on the preorder now. Thanks for the update!


----------



## markr6

Sarlix said:


> I'm glad I held off on the preorder now. Thanks for the update!



Not me. I'm too impatient to wait any longer than necessary. First in, first out!


----------



## snowlover91

After rereading what ZL said in their email, I'm slightly confused as to if their reply for 3-4 weeks wait time means it is delayed or if they're talking about new preorders? I will paste what they said below and see what everyone thinks. 



> With a lot of pre-orders received so far, we expect the lead time to fill new pre-orders placed now is about 3-4 weeks.


----------



## WalkIntoTheLight

snowlover91 said:


> After rereading what ZL said in their email, I'm slightly confused as to if their reply for 3-4 weeks wait time means it is delayed or if they're talking about new preorders?



Sounds pretty clear they mean new pre-orders will be delayed by 3-4 weeks, not those who pre-ordered earlier this month.

However, we all know that ZL doesn't have a stellar record when it comes to releasing lights without delay. So, I wouldn't throw away all your other lights at the end of April, in anticipation of getting the SC5 on-time.

I'm going to wait until later this summer, when stocks from resellers aren't back-ordered, and some reviews have been posted. I'm especially interested in knowing what the true output of the light is, and how long it can maintain that output.


----------



## snowlover91

Yeah I think I originally read it wrong, it does sound as if preorders are on track for those who placed them early. However those who waited a few days or weeks could see a longer delay into late May before they ship all depending upon when you ordered. I ordered a few minutes after they went live so hopefully I'll get one of the first shipments and can report on it  I have several lights in the 400-700 range I can compare it to.


----------



## Sarlix

> With a lot of pre-orders received so far, we expect the lead time to fill _new_ pre-orders placed now is about 3-4 weeks



Damn it, why didn't I pre-order sooner! :sick2:


----------



## kj2

I also didn't pre-order. I usually order via dealer. Have to wait a bit longer.. Ohwell..


----------



## snowlover91

If the shipping is on track I would expect for some of us to see shipping notifications later this week.. I really am hoping so as I want to compare it with my SC32w and do some runtime testing of it.


----------



## feifei

Sounds great,it seems that I missed the chance.


----------



## geokite

Late to the discussion, but I don't see the attraction for the SC5. More weight, and no way to avoid the step down on H1? At least with the SC52 you can choose to not have the step down by choosing a different battery.

Very happy with my SC52w.

Steve


----------



## markr6

geokite said:


> Late to the discussion, but I don't see the attraction for the SC5. More weight, and no way to avoid the step down on H1? At least with the SC52 you can choose to not have the step down by choosing a different battery.
> 
> Very happy with my SC52w.
> 
> Steve



• You can't avoid the stepdown on the SC52w. You're stuck with 500lm or way down to 172. I don't think that's horrible though. But at least with the SC5w, you can program the next level down (304lm)

SC5w High: H1 *500* Lm (3min, then 304lm, total 0.8 hr)____H2 *304* Lm (0.9 hr) / *187* Lm (1.8 hrs) / *107* Lm (3.5 hrs)
SC52w High: H1 *280* Lm (0.9 hrs) (500lm on Li-Ion)_______ H2 *172* Lm (1.7 hrs) / *108* Lm (3 hrs)

• The 80° spill/10° spot may be a bonus to some.

• I like the design better. 17 grams heavier? No biggie.

I think I'll like it as much as the SC52, but will have to wait to see.


----------



## geokite

You can avoid the step down by using something other than a 14500 battery. Correct?

Steve


----------



## markr6

geokite said:


> You can avoid the step down by using something other than a 14500 battery. Correct?
> 
> Steve



Yes with an alkaline or NiMH you don't even have the option of 500lm.


----------



## snowlover91

The new SC5 seems to have a slightly larger and deeper reflector and it's a smooth reflector. This should give the benefit of extra throw which for me is a great option. Most of the time I'll use the 172 lumen mode as I find that plenty of light for most activities but when I need the extra burst I can bump it up to 500 for a short burst. The extra size isn't much and doesn't matter to me since it's already a very compact light. To see this put out close to 500 lumens on an Eneloop Pro will be quite impressive, imo. We should start seeing shipments this week and hopefully we can start testing this light out.


----------



## WalkIntoTheLight

snowlover91 said:


> Most of the time I'll use the 172 lumen mode as I find that plenty of light for most activities but when I need the extra burst I can bump it up to 500 for a short burst.



With the SC52, you only get anywhere close to 280 lumens on a freshly charged Eneloop. Once it's been used for a few minutes on max, you're getting much closer to 172 lumens than 280. In fact, as the battery depletes about half-way, it's often difficult to notice much of a difference between H1 and H2a.

I really hope they fix that in the SC5. Even if they can't maintain 500 lumens for very long, I'd be happy if the H2a mode could pump out 300 lumens at a regulated level.


----------



## newbie66

WalkIntoTheLight said:


> With the SC52, you only get anywhere close to 280 lumens on a freshly charged Eneloop. Once it's been used for a few minutes on max, you're getting much closer to 172 lumens than 280. In fact, as the battery depletes about half-way, it's often difficult to notice much of a difference between H1 and H2a.
> 
> I really hope they fix that in the SC5. Even if they can't maintain 500 lumens for very long, I'd be happy if the H2a mode could pump out 300 lumens at a regulated level.



Agreed.


----------



## holygeez03

geokite said:


> You can avoid the step down by using something other than a 14500 battery. Correct?
> 
> Steve



Yes... there was some discussion about this earlier in this thread... ZL really should provide a H1b mode which eliminates the 500lm burst... now that there is no way around it. Then a user could have 500lm burst with stepdown if desired, or a continuous 300lm mode...


----------



## snowlover91

It'll be interesting to see how well an eneloop pro can power this light at the 500 lumen level and how much it drains the battery. That's some serious power being sucked out of an AA battery to get 500 lumens. I think I'll probably use mine primarily on the 180 lumen setting for high most of the time and then the times where I need the extra brightness I can just double click to get 500 lumens. I have a SC32 to compare it with as well as a SRT5 to see how the brightness compares. I do like that they really worked on the low level modes to further extend runtime. One thing I've found is that at night around the house or for closeup activities 45-50 lumens is plenty for most tasks.


----------



## marinemaster

I hope they offer a warm frosted lens version as flood light is more useful to me.


----------



## fnj

holygeez03 said:


> ZL really should provide a H1b mode which eliminates the 500lm burst... now that there is no way around it. Then a user could have 500lm burst with stepdown if desired, or a continuous 300lm mode...



Are you sure you understand the UI? The user _has exactly that choice now_. Of course there is a way around the burst. Just select H2. There's your 300. Now when you want 500, just double-click. That takes you to H1, 500. Double-click again to return to 300.

If I am wrong about this, please tell me how. I haven't seen the SC5. I use the SC600, and everything I read about the SC5 indicates the UI is the same.


----------



## snowlover91

fnj said:


> Are you sure you understand the UI? The user _has exactly that choice now_. Of course there is a way around the burst. Just select H2. There's your 300. Now when you want 500, just double-click. That takes you to H1, 500. Double-click again to return to 300.
> 
> If I am wrong about this, please tell me how. I haven't seen the SC5. I use the SC600, and everything I read about the SC5 indicates the UI is the same.



I think what was meant was if you could bypass the 500 lumen mode altogether. Instead of having 500 lumens as one of the two modes you can click between, instead let the user select 300 and then be able to program the secondary mode to something other than 500 lumens. That way you could do 300 lumens as h1 and then double click and get 187 or 100 lumen mode. However the way it's setup is you must have the 500 lumen mode as choice one, and then select a second mode. What I would prefer is to be able to program both h1 and h2 instead of only h2.


----------



## markr6

Yeah that's just how it is. On my H600w II L2, sometimes I would like both H2 modes available right away - 620lm and 330lm instead of only having H1 at a blowtorch 1020lm. But after you start using it, you realize the jump from 1020lm to 330lm is very appropriate. For example, If I'm backpacking and trying to conserve battery life, but still want to light up everything in sight, I use 330lm. 1020lm is reserved for when you just absolutely need to see further or light up a larger area. Having 620 and 330 wouldn't really matter much and you're gaining another hour or so of runtime.


----------



## WalkIntoTheLight

snowlover91 said:


> I think what was meant was if you could bypass the 500 lumen mode altogether. Instead of having 500 lumens as one of the two modes you can click between, instead let the user select 300 and then be able to program the secondary mode to something other than 500 lumens. That way you could do 300 lumens as h1 and then double click and get 187 or 100 lumen mode. However the way it's setup is you must have the 500 lumen mode as choice one, and then select a second mode. What I would prefer is to be able to program both h1 and h2 instead of only h2.



I'd like to be able to program all the modes to whatever I want. If I want H1 to be a moonlight mode, I could do that. If I want L2 to be 300 lumens, I could do that.

It would add a bit more effort to the programming sequence, but it would allow much more flexibility for how people set up their lights.


----------



## snowlover91

I agree that would be a nice feature.. It would be hard to figure a way out to program the UI as it is in that way but if they could that would be great. It could be something as simple as H1 you click 6 times and then once it enters programming mode you double click and can go through every brightness level and select whichever one you want for H1, and for H2 you click 6 times while on H2 and then it enters programming for that mode, and so on for medium and low modes. That would be great because you could set H1 to a moonlight mode or medium mode if you want, and customize it directly. For the SC5 I would have H1 set at 187 and H2 at 300, then medium at 100 lumens for M1 and M2 at the 45 level. Then for moonlight probably the .34 as L1 and 2.5 for L2, something similar. Would love to see this UI in the future so we could select any brightness setting at any mode.


----------



## markr6

Jailbreak my Zebralight!!


----------



## ChrisGarrett

snowlover91 said:


> It'll be interesting to see how well an eneloop pro can power this light at the 500 lumen level and how much it drains the battery. That's some serious power being sucked out of an AA battery to get 500 lumens. I think I'll probably use mine primarily on the 180 lumen setting for high most of the time and then the times where I need the extra brightness I can just double click to get 500 lumens. I have a SC32 to compare it with as well as a SRT5 to see how the brightness compares. I do like that they really worked on the low level modes to further extend runtime. One thing I've found is that at night around the house or for closeup activities 45-50 lumens is plenty for most tasks.



They should do pretty well. What? The XM-L2 puts out ~1050+LM at 3A and while I'm not saying things are linear, 500LM would probably be less than 2A, so looking at HKJ's Eneloop branded Pro graphs here:

http://lygte-info.dk/review/batteries2012/Eneloop AA BK-3HCC 2450mAh (Black) UK.html







Even 3A doesn't phase them too much.

Currently, I'm itching to buy a light and I'm torn between the SC62W, the SC52w and the SC5w. I have a CW SC-600, so I'm used to the engrossing U.I. of the ZL lights. I'm really not that picky about this level, or that level, or whether ZL fudges the .34LM mode, or is off on the 1.5LM mode. They are what they are and I adapt to them and don't expect ZL to adapt to my whims.

Right now, I don't see why I would pay $10 more for the SC5w over the SC52w, since I do have li-ions and NiMH cells/batteries in spades. A part of me thinks that I should just buy the bigger, but more powerful SC62w and leave it at that, but I don't often carry my SC-600 and so it sits, yielding to my ET D25C Ti. clicky and V11R EDC lights. This puts me back into the SC52w/SC5w camp for being a smaller lights with better capabilities than my L3 L10, Icon Rogue 1 and Xeno E03 for AA size duties.

Decisions, decisions, decisions. Any thoughts on the 3 ZL lites mentioned above would be appreciated.

Chris


----------



## WalkIntoTheLight

ChrisGarrett said:


> They should do pretty well. What? The XM-L2 puts out ~1050+LM at 3A and while I'm not saying things are linear, 500LM would probably be less than 2A, so looking at HKJ's Eneloop branded Pro graphs here:
> 
> Even 3A doesn't phase them too much.



If you're putting 2 amps through the LED, you need to provide a voltage a little over 3 volts. An Eneloop under very high load has a voltage sag down to about 1 volt. So, the battery would need to provide 6 amps (at 1 volt) to be able to deliver 2 amps at 3 volts. Probably a bit more, due to driver inefficiency, etc.

You probably don't need to provide 2 amps into the LED to get 500 lumens. Maybe 1.5 amps would do, plus a bit more for OTF lumens. I expect the Eneloop would use close to 5 amps to get that.


----------



## markr6

Great post Chris; I feel like you got inside my brain for a lot of that!

My SC600 sits often as well. Just too big for jeans pocket. In fact, I feel that way about everything! So I don't EDC at all. Good timing because I just thought about my SC62w today. As much as I like it, I almost feel like selling it. No longer a size advantage over the larger SC600 since I don't carry them in my pocket.

There's no doubt the SC52w is a winner. Such a great light with the option of 14500 or AA. I am just so curious about the SC5w so I had to buy it. Plus I'm looking for a reason to get back into Eneloops. I have too many 18650 lights. I guess it would be best to wait for a review since you didn't already order it.

(BTW, I am particularly interested in your feedback to the "only one 18650" thread I just started...when you get a moment )


----------



## holygeez03

ChrisGarrett... you going to have to decide if the SC62w is too big for your intentions or not... if it is not, then you will probably be happiest with it since it has a wide range of outputs and long runtimes... if the physical size is a hard limit, then you will need to determine which is more important:

The ability to use 14500's and/or the ability to avoid the turbo/stepdown (by using AA) = SC52w

The 500lm turbo with AA at a longer duration before stepdown = SC5w

Since you don't seem to care about mode spacing and all that, those are probably the biggest factors...

I think every enlightened individual should have at least 1xSC62w and 1xH52Fw... those are my two most used carry lights by FAR... and I often carry them together. The deep-carry pocket clip on the H52 makes it seem even smaller in the pocket. I also have a SC52w, but mostly just keep it in the car now that I have the SC62w... in case I forget to bring one of my other lights.


----------



## ChrisGarrett

WalkIntoTheLight said:


> If you're putting 2 amps through the LED, you need to provide a voltage a little over 3 volts. An Eneloop under very high load has a voltage sag down to about 1 volt. So, the battery would need to provide 6 amps (at 1 volt) to be able to deliver 2 amps at 3 volts. Probably a bit more, due to driver inefficiency, etc.
> 
> You probably don't need to provide 2 amps into the LED to get 500 lumens. Maybe 1.5 amps would do, plus a bit more for OTF lumens. I expect the Eneloop would use close to 5 amps to get that.



You're right. I was looking at Cree's datasheets just last night for the XP-L, XM-L2 and XP-G2 emitters, among others and noticed that most of the forward voltages listed were either just under 3.0v, or just over.

I didn't really think things through, but I'm an English Lit./Communications major, after all.

I have Sanyo 840mAh 14500s here and generally don't worry about runtimes when I'm out and about on a daily basis, so I'd probably just run the li-ions if things don't get too hot.

I have Ion-Core Duraloops here and run them and Gen. 2s in my L10 due to heat, so li-ions aren't always the answer.

Thanks, Chris


----------



## ChrisGarrett

holygeez03 said:


> ChrisGarrett... you going to have to decide if the SC62w is too big for your intentions or not... if it is not, then you will probably be happiest with it since it has a wide range of outputs and long runtimes... if the physical size is a hard limit, then you will need to determine which is more important:
> 
> The ability to use 14500's and/or the ability to avoid the turbo/stepdown (by using AA) = SC52w
> 
> The 500lm turbo with AA at a longer duration before stepdown = SC5w
> 
> Since you don't seem to care about mode spacing and all that, those are probably the biggest factors...
> 
> I think every enlightened individual should have at least 1xSC62w and 1xH52Fw... those are my two most used carry lights by FAR... and I often carry them together. The deep-carry pocket clip on the H52 makes it seem even smaller in the pocket. I also have a SC52w, but mostly just keep it in the car now that I have the SC62w... in case I forget to bring one of my other lights.



I'm a city slicker, as you can see and when I leave the condo everyday, I carry a Seecamp .32, a SAK SwissChamp, pack of gum, LG flip phone, keys on belt loop, watch, wallet and right now, either a SWM V11R, or a ET D25C Ti. clicky. The latter use IMR 16340s and really/truly handle most all of my FL needs and rarely am I at a loss with either.

You can see my lights in my sig and I've since added a DQG Tiny Triple and a modded SupFire M6, so I have a decent range in lights and I end up carrying the smaller lipstick lights because of all of the other stuff. I'm in shorts 340 days a year down here, but damn, I like to keep them up around my waist, lol.

I concede that the SC62 is a tad smaller than the SC600Mk and has more output/features than my SC600cw, but if I'm not carrying my SC600cw, nor wanting for its benefits, will I really carry the SC62?

I'm starting to answer my own questions and I'm leaning towards the SC52w and/or SC5w, with the option to run a li-ion tipping me towards the cheaper and in stock SC52w.

Thanks for the help.

Chris


----------



## ChrisGarrett

markr6 said:


> Great post Chris; I feel like you got inside my brain for a lot of that!
> 
> My SC600 sits often as well. Just too big for jeans pocket. In fact, I feel that way about everything! So I don't EDC at all. Good timing because I just thought about my SC62w today. As much as I like it, I almost feel like selling it. No longer a size advantage over the larger SC600 since I don't carry them in my pocket.
> 
> There's no doubt the SC52w is a winner. Such a great light with the option of 14500 or AA. I am just so curious about the SC5w so I had to buy it. Plus I'm looking for a reason to get back into Eneloops. I have too many 18650 lights. I guess it would be best to wait for a review since you didn't already order it.
> 
> (BTW, I am particularly interested in your feedback to the "only one 18650" thread I just started...when you get a moment )



You can see my reply above where I 'run the numbers,' but my SC600w was actually my first li-ion light and I love it, for sure, but it's just a bit on the larger side of things. It's funny, but after I upgraded all of my NiMH batteries and chargers to the tune of $400-$500 bucks, I swore that I'd not venture into li-ions, as NiMH 'were' sufficient enough at the time.

LOL.

Anyhow, I'll decide today whether I'll carry the SC52w as much as the V11R/D25C Ti. and/or whether I should just get the a D25A Ti. light, but the ET is still a good deal more than the SC52w. 

I wanted the TN 2A v2 Neutron a six months back, but a lot of people had problems with that light and I got spooked.

I'll go look for your thread now.

Chris


----------



## Erik1213

Did anyone get a shipping notification today?


----------



## gkbain

I was waiting for the notification also. April 30 is "Estimated" shipping date. Zebralight is known for being late on new releases. But I am hopeful it will be soon.


----------



## marinemaster

Chris, if you don't use 14500 then forget the SC52. Get some Eneloop Pro which you may already have, cause SC5 was designed for Eneloop. The only thing of the SC5 i wish they come out with a flood version. The way it looks the SC5 is more of a throw light.


----------



## markr6

Erik1213 said:


> Did anyone get a shipping notification today?



I had my hopes up since a lot of the ZL action seems to be on Fridays (initial shipments, product releases, etc). I'm good to wait another week, then I'll start getting impatient!


----------



## holygeez03

Chris... I don't have a SC600 to compare directly, but based on photos and feedback from forum members, the SC62 seems FAR more pocketable than the SC600... Granted, the SC52 is still significantly smaller, but the output can be disappointing after experiencing the SC62. All great lights... but I don't bring my SC52w with me very much anymore now that I have the SC62w.

It seems like you have quite a stable... do you have any "right-angle lights"? As I said before, the H52Fw is my most carried light by far... it disappears the best in my pocket, is extremely useful as a work-light or light up the pathway light... and the frosted lens is way easier on the eyes and more useful indoors and/or at close range... or you can get a regular H52w and put diffuser film (scotch tape) on it if you want to be able to go back and forth with a regular lens.


----------



## snowlover91

Just emailed ZL asking how long before the first batch of preorders ships, I'll post their response once I hear back from them, probably sometime tomorrow.


----------



## snowlover91

As promised here is the response from ZL. It appears we in the U.S. have a few more weeks to wait..



> Shipping started on the 27th for international orders (directly from our factory in China). We expect to start shipping U.S. orders around the 10th of this month (when we receive our first batch from China).


----------



## kj2

Dealer here indicates it should be in stock around 1st of June.


----------



## Fireclaw18

snowlover91 said:


> As promised here is the response from ZL. It appears we in the U.S. have a few more weeks to wait..
> 
> [/FONT][/COLOR]



Ah darn. So it sounds like all the SC5s are made in China.

I hope it will still be good quality. The U.S. made SC62w and 32w have much better anodizing than my Chinese made SC62d.


----------



## kj2

Fireclaw18 said:


> Ah darn. So it sounds like all the SC5s are made in China.
> 
> I hope it will still be good quality. The U.S. made SC62w and 32w have much better anodizing than my Chinese made SC62d.


:thinking: aren't all ZL's made in China? have 4 ZL's, and every box says made in China.


----------



## Fireclaw18

kj2 said:


> :thinking: aren't all ZL's made in China? have 4 ZL's, and every box says made in China.



Nope. Some of the more recent ZLs are made at their factory in Texas. The factory is new... just opened last year I think.


----------



## kj2

Fireclaw18 said:


> Nope. Some of the more recent ZLs are made at their factory in Texas. The factory is new... just opened last year I think.


Nice  didn't know that.


----------



## StorminMatt

So does this mean that the box might say that it is made in China despite actually being US made?


----------



## thedoc007

Fireclaw18 said:


> Nope. Some of the more recent ZLs are made at their factory in Texas. The factory is new... just opened last year I think.



Source? Every Zebralight is still made in China, as far as I know. The US address is for warranty work and also acts as a distribution center, so lights with plenty of stock may ship from the USA...but they are still entirely manufactured in China, to the best of my knowledge. I did read a few other threads, and that seems to be the general consensus as well, not just my opinion. 

Rest assured that the "MADE in USA" label is still much sought after. There is no way a light that is truly made in the USA (as defined by the FTC) would fail to make that clear.


----------



## chuckhov

It would also cost way more.

Would be hard to explain to customers just how a $150 light would be better than a $80 light, if they were both the same model.

Once you start Off-Shore, how do you then bring it home without a HUGE price increase?

Thanks,
-Chuck


----------



## thedoc007

chuckhov said:


> It would also cost way more.
> 
> Would be hard to explain to customers just how a $150 light would be better than a $80 light, if they were both the same model.
> 
> Once you start Off-Shore, how do you then bring it home without a HUGE price increase?



This is not always the case. The main cost is usually labor...if you have a highly automated facility, USA production can make good sense, and does not necessarily increase costs by much (if any). China has been getting progressively more expensive for decades, too...labor costs are still lower than in the USA, for sure, but the gap is not nearly as large as it once was.


----------



## chuckhov

You're a pretty Smart guy, Doc

http://www.businessinsider.com/manufacturing-wages-china-vs-us-2014-1

But what about Surefire? - $60 for what China is charging $20?

Thanks,
-Chuck


----------



## dc38

chuckhov said:


> You're a pretty Smart guy, Doc
> 
> http://www.businessinsider.com/manufacturing-wages-china-vs-us-2014-1
> 
> But what about Surefire? - $60 for what China is charging $20?
> 
> Thanks,
> -Chuck



Growth of growth vs. Growth actual...2 different things. Businesses base "losses" on growth losses, not purely assets losses. While loss of growth relative to previous growth is semantically a loss, it is hardly a loss if growth still occurred. 1% growth is still growth, and I cannot fathom how people so intelligent could fall to the fallacy of "realized illusions". (Including money trading for "exchange rates", interest, and fabricated credit.) even if China's wage growth is statistically substantial, how much are they making an hour in comparison to USA?


----------



## chuckhov

"even if China's wage growth is statistically substantial, how much are they making an hour in comparison to USA?"

Good point, and I would like to know the answer, buy we are way OT.

Sorry folks,
-Chuck


----------



## thedoc007

dc38 said:


> Growth of growth vs. Growth actual...2 different things. Businesses base "losses" on growth losses, not purely assets losses. While loss of growth relative to previous growth is semantically a loss, it is hardly a loss if growth still occurred. 1% growth is still growth, and I cannot fathom how people so intelligent could fall to the fallacy of "realized illusions". (Including money trading for "exchange rates", interest, and fabricated credit.) even if China's wage growth is statistically substantial, how much are they making an hour in comparison to USA?



No, slowing growth is not a loss, semantically or otherwise. Companies are measured (at least in part) in comparison to expectations, which is why slower than expected growth can negatively impact stock prices, for example. But no economist (or anyone else I know) conflates failing to meet market expectations with an actual loss.

Not sure who you are referring to when you talk about "the fallacy of realized illusions", but if you actually read my earlier post, you'll note that I specifically mentioned labor costs are still an important (often dominant) factor. That is also why I brought up automation, which can greatly reduce the impact of labor costs. The point is to realize that lower productivity, increased quality control issues/expenses, and higher energy/transportation costs can largely offset higher labor costs in some cases. It is absolutely NOT the case that outsourcing is always cheaper...sometimes it is, and sometimes it is not.

Regarding Surefire vs. Chinese brands, the comparison is a bit misleading. Surefire is a top-end brand, and you pay a quite hefty premium for their lifetime warranty and name. Whereas the majority of Chinese companies occupy an entirely different segment of the market. I'm positive that Surefire's manufacturing costs are higher, but that is only one part of the equation. 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/08/average-cost-factory-worker_n_1327413.html


----------



## WalkIntoTheLight

thedoc007 said:


> Regarding Surefire vs. Chinese brands, the comparison is a bit misleading. Surefire is a top-end brand, and you pay a quite hefty premium for their lifetime warranty and name. Whereas the majority of Chinese companies occupy an entirely different segment of the market. I'm positive that Surefire's manufacturing costs are higher, but that is only one part of the equation.



You're also paying for their team of patent/litigation lawyers. :shakehead


----------



## kreisl

right now i am in shenzhen, the city of. ( also surfing right now with a special chinavpn ) 
i asked ZL if i could visit their factory. they declined. the factory be not open to the public.

aha.

disappointing.

and i still dont have the address of their factory. must be top secret facility.


----------



## davidt1

There is no ZL factory. All lights are made by various Chinese manufacturing sweatshops.


----------



## g.p.

Shipping notice!!!

Woot! Woot!


----------



## snowlover91

g.p. said:


> Shipping notice!!!
> 
> Woot! Woot!



Wow that's great are you in the U.S.? How soon are you expected to get it?


----------



## ghosty

Just got the tracking too, international shipment. I guess will get it in about 3 to 4 days time (if shipment is as fast as before.)


----------



## Mr Floppy

ghosty said:


> Just got the tracking too, international shipment. I guess will get it in about 3 to 4 days time (if shipment is as fast as before.)



Not that I have ordered on but where to?


----------



## JKolmo

Shipping notice received here too! Heading for Europe.


----------



## markr6

Nice! U.S. shipments should be starting soon. Only takes 2 days to get to me so now it's time to get excited!!


----------



## snowlover91

markr6 said:


> Nice! U.S. shipments should be starting soon. Only takes 2 days to get to me so now it's time to get excited!!



Zebralight had said the shipment should arrive by the 10th for US customers so I expect we will see shipments begin either this weekend if it comes faster or early next week. I'm hoping this Thursday so I can get it by Saturday!


----------



## gkbain

I wonder how many will be in the initial shipment, from China. I hope the number at least matches the number of pre-orders.


----------



## markr6

gkbain said:


> I wonder how many will be in the initial shipment, from China. I hope the number at least matches the number of pre-orders.


Darn! I'll be out of town starting Thursday night, so I'm sure it will arrive Friday!


----------



## snowlover91

Anyone else see shipping notifications or estimated delivery date?


----------



## ghosty

Mr Floppy said:


> Not that I have ordered on but where to?



I am in Hong Kong, and the shipment was fast 






something different to my sc52d tail cap





I love it.


----------



## Slumber

Nice....looks MUCH nicer with the knurling instead of that ugly, slick ribbing. I hope this carries over to more of their product line.


----------



## snowlover91

Wow that's great can you do any tests for us? Very nice looking little light, what's the 500 lumen mode like on it? How is throw compared to other versions like the 52?


----------



## holygeez03

Very much looking forward to seeing a decent beamshot comparison between the 52 and 5... Also a side-by-side size comparison.

Also, the tailcap photo above looks like there is no spring in the cap... is there a spring in the head portion now? Or is there a spring under the seven prongs?


----------



## markr6

Slumber Pass said:


> Nice....looks MUCH nicer with the knurling instead of that ugly, slick ribbing. I hope this carries over to more of their product line.



Hell yeah! Can't wait for this one!! No shipment yet...


----------



## markr6

holygeez03 said:


> Also, the tailcap photo above looks like there is no spring in the cap... is there a spring in the head portion now? Or is there a spring under the seven prongs?



Yeah what's going on there? Looks like something to scratch the hell out of a battery!


----------



## holygeez03

markr6 said:


> Yeah what's going on there? Looks like something to scratch the hell out of a battery!



My guess is that the prongs are designed to reduce the electrical resistance? And if the prongs are wide and smooth enough, they _could _scratch the battery less than the current spring sometimes does... but I want to know how the new design holds tension? We need more and higher-res photos!

PS... I started a "First Impressions" thread for this kind of talk regarding the actual physical specimens that people receive. Hopefully photos/comparisons/mini-reviews will start showing up there...


----------



## kreisl

holygeez03 said:


> Also, the tailcap photo above looks like there is no spring in the cap... is there a spring in the head portion now? Or is there a spring under the seven prongs?


 It's the reverse polarity protection 👺


----------



## ghosty

Just try to answer as much here as possible, I took so much, just trying to give something back to the community here 



snowlover91 said:


> Wow that's great can you do any tests for us? Very nice looking little light, what's the 500 lumen mode like on it? How is throw compared to other versions like the 52?



Personally, I don't see too much difference between H1 from SC5w (eneloop) and SC52d (14500).
I just did some simple measurement with my phone, it is only very slightly brighter, I think we need someone like selfbuilt to do some serious measurement.
Although CRI is lower on SC5w I like the tint better, maybe I am lucky, mine feel a little rosy, don't feel green at all..
Throw-wise, reflector and deeper and larger, the difference definitely not to the point I would say "wow", I always thought the throw is really good on the 52d anyway.



holygeez03 said:


> Very much looking forward to seeing a decent beamshot comparison between the 52 and 5... Also a side-by-side size comparison.
> ok
> 
> Also, the tailcap photo above looks like there is no spring in the cap... is there a spring in the head portion now? Or is there a spring under the seven prongs?



7 "prongs" are 7 large copper/brass contact points, each one sitting on top of a mini spring, looks like trying to reduce resistance. I think my SC52d spring scratched my battery much worse than these contact points. Sorry, all photos from my phone. kind of busy (and lazy) lately to get my photo gear for anything.

About the beamshot, I don't have decent ones, but just some tease. SC5w have larger hotspot due to larger emitter. the picture don't show that much of the tint difference, but I think the SC5w is a little more pleasing.





SC5W on the left and SC52d on the right, Both are on H1.





SC5W on the left and SC52d on the right, Both are on M1.





"side-by-side size comparison" I stuck a huge magnet on my SC52d, that's the silver part on top.



Slumber Pass said:


> Nice....looks MUCH nicer with the knurling instead of that ugly, slick ribbing. I hope this carries over to more of their product line.



Yes, the knurling is nice, I really like that too. the whole thing is a little (just a little) bigger and heavier, I have medium/large size and with relative longer finger, but I prefer the thickness of the SC52d a little more, not that I am complaining about the SC5w. Now I really want zebralight to come out with the H5w after having the SC5w.




kreisl said:


> It's the reverse polarity protection 


I think it has, and looks like it is on the positive terminal (inside the tube). I ain'g going try that out though.

Hope I answer some of your questions, enjoy


----------



## holygeez03

Excellent thanks for your pics... glad to see it's not _that _much bigger than the 52... Comparing the brightness and beam profile to the 52d is tricky since it's a completely different emitter... and I'm assuming the Rebel is smaller since the hotspot is tighter. The hotspot size is also probably throwing off the perceived brightness difference. I'm assuming the beamshot is after the stepdown, so its comparing roughly 300lm to 200lm, which looks about right since the SC5/300lm has more spill.

So still looking forward for a comparison to the 52... 

And I hope the 7 battery prongs with "mini springs" doesn't decrease the long-term reliability... but it could increase it as well... though it has got to be harder to fix than a spring.


----------



## markr6

Thanks for the pics! I still don't know about this one, but figured it was worth the $69 to try and resell whichever one I like the least. I do like the thin tube on the SC52.


----------



## ronniepudding

How's the clip action compared to the SC52? The latter has a smooth spot on the head where the clip touches the body, and the new light looks to not have that...


----------



## Sarlix

Wooo pics, nice to see it next to a SC52, thanks!


----------



## markr6

ronniepudding said:


> How's the clip action compared to the SC52? The latter has a smooth spot on the head where the clip touches the body, and the new light looks to not have that...



Good catch, I missed that.

Such a nice, sturdy looking light!


----------



## gkbain

Thanks for the "First Impressions" *ghosty*. Time is getting closer and I am getting anxious.


----------



## Fireclaw18

Now we just need someone daring to try sticking a 14500 in their SC5!!!!

Does it blast out 900 lumens?:twothumbs
or does it


----------



## markr6

Fireclaw18 said:


> Now we just need someone daring to try sticking a 14500 in their SC5!!!!
> 
> Does it blast out 900 lumens?:twothumbs
> or does it



HAHA I volunteer ghosty...he has two!!


----------



## chuckhov

Nitecore does 900 lm on 14500 with it's EA11, so it is possible.

Of course the circuit Must be designed for it, though. - Don't Try It! 

-Chuck


----------



## Overclocker

with the very high current draw perhaps a simple spring doesn't cut it anymore


----------



## ghosty

ronniepudding said:


> How's the clip action compared to the SC52? The latter has a smooth spot on the head where the clip touches the body, and the new light looks to not have that...


The SC52d that I have, the clip does not meet on the flat spot on the body and the tension is very strong, therefore, it is a great pocket shredder . I also tested the clip on the SC5w, sorry to tell you, it is just as bad and almost torn my pants :fail:. I guess why they call Zebralight, not ZebraPocketclip




gkbain said:


> Thanks for the "First Impressions" *ghosty*. Time is getting closer and I am getting anxious.


I am sure you will like it, if this is your first Zebralight. Nothing that exciting if you already have at least one. One thing I like the most is to be able to have that turbo mode with a easily available AA battery



markr6 said:


> Thanks for the pics! I still don't know about this one, but figured it was worth the $69 to try and resell whichever one I like the least. I do like the thin tube on the SC52.


I prefer the thinner tube too, but this one is not bad.



markr6 said:


> HAHA I volunteer ghosty...he has two!!


... the other one is just to sharing the shipping cost with my friend... I will pass on that one.
well... the output is regulated anyway, it shouldn't get any brighter....


----------



## Mr Floppy

ghosty said:


> I am sure you will like it, if this is your first Zebralight. Nothing that exciting if you already have at least one. One thing I like the most is to be able to have that turbo mode with a easily available AA battery



Got a multimeter? I'd like be interested to see what it is trying to pull from an AA battery.


----------



## ghosty

chuckhov said:


> Nitecore does 900 lm on 14500 with it's EA11, so it is possible.
> 
> Of course the circuit Must be designed for it, though. - Don't Try It!
> 
> -Chuck


Of course, 14500 direct drive can even go up to 1000+ lm on an XM-L emitter, but that kind of battery is harder to come by and take care of for average Joe (i.e. me). Of course, I could get 5 USD a pop now, without waiting for shippment, it was not like this a few months ago though.



Mr Floppy said:


> Got a multimeter? I'd like be interested to see what it is trying to pull from an AA battery.


broke the fuse inside trying to measure the current of something else, can't really do much about it right now Anyway, I did some rough calculation before, considering 80% conversion efficiency, need to pull about 5A to get 500 lm, which is in the spec of eneloop (pro or not). For actual measurements, I don't think my cheap multimeter probe can take that high current, have you seen how much wire they have inside them, I melted some while measuring something else before.


----------



## Mr Floppy

ghosty said:


> need to pull about 5A to get 500 lm,



I'm sure someone will do a current vs. voltage plot, although it could be harder with the step down. As the cell gets depleted, it might be harder to get 500lm I imagine. Still have some Elite 2000 10C NiMH batteries although quite a few years old now. I wonder the lower voltage sag would help there?


----------



## funkychateau

ghosty said:


> The SC52d that I have, the clip does not meet on the flat spot on the body and the tension is very strong, therefore, it is a great pocket shredder . I also tested the clip on the SC5w, sorry to tell you, it is just as bad and almost torn my pants :fail:. I guess why they call Zebralight, not ZebraPocketclip



The trick to removing these lights without scraping your pocket is to pull in the direction away from the cloth, so that it slides tightly against the clip and loosely against the light. In other words, make the cloth force the clip "open" as you pull. The clip is smooth and won't damage the cloth.


----------



## markr6

funkychateau said:


> The trick to removing these lights without scraping your pocket is to pull in the direction away from the cloth, so that it slides tightly against the clip and loosely against the light. In other words, make the cloth force the clip "open" as you pull. The clip is smooth and won't damage the cloth.



That's a good point. What I've found in the past, though, is that lights and knives wear fabric from just moving side to side as you walk, sit, stand, kneel, etc.


----------



## scout24

I've been pocket clip carrying knives, multitools and lights for so long that the trailing edge of my pockets is usually the first thing to start fraying. The flashaholic "Skoal Ring"...


----------



## markr6

I was hoping for a shipping notice today...no go


----------



## gkbain

My inbox empty also.


----------



## scout24

Same, no notice yet...


----------



## cyclesport

FWIW I asked for a ship status update on 5/4 *(ordered on 4/14) and was told mine would ship by 5/11-12.


----------



## Erik1213

This was in my mailbox today!







I ordered the cool white version hoping they had their tint issues worked out.

OMG. It's an amazing cool white tint! 

Here's a comparison:

SC52w L2 (Bottom):





SC62d (bottom):





SC600w L2 (Bottom):





And my only other cool white Zebralight without a frosted lens, the S6330:




Yes, the S6330 tint is that bad.

So far, I am super impressed. I have been craving a nice cool white light recently and I think I have found the ideal cool white tint for me!


----------



## Sarlix

Yeah that S6330 shot looks like my SC52  Part of the reason I didn't pre order the SC5. I wonder if you just won the tint lottery or if it's a good batch...thanks for the pics and congrats


----------



## kj2

Buying one as soon it's available here. Unfortunately.. Have to wait 2-4 weeks.


----------



## jds1

Did everyone order directly from Zebralight?

Jeff


----------



## Erik1213

Sarlix said:


> Yeah that S6330 shot looks like my SC52  Part of the reason I didn't pre order the SC5. I wonder if you just won the tint lottery or if it's a good batch...thanks for the pics and congrats



I also had a green SC52. It was the first generation with the XM-L instead of XM-L2. I sold it for about what I had in it, which wasn't a bad deal, and bought the SC52W L2 when it was released.

I have been big into the warmer tints but, for some reason, lately I have been craving a good cool white. Even Nichia 219s and Luxeon T's (SC62d) have been "feeling" too warm lately. Weird.



jds1 said:


> Did everyone order directly from Zebralight?
> 
> Jeff



I did.


----------



## Slumber

Erik1213 said:


> I also had a green SC52. It was the first generation with the XM-L instead of XM-L2. I sold it for about what I had in it, which wasn't a bad deal, and bought the SC52W L2 when it was released.
> 
> I have been big into the warmer tints but, for some reason, lately I have been craving a good cool white. Even Nichia 219s and Luxeon T's (SC62d) have been "feeling" too warm lately. Weird.
> 
> 
> 
> I did.



I too still enjoy a nice cool white. I get really excited when I get a nice neutral/warm tint, but it seems the excitement fades and I miss the contrast a cool white provides as opposed to the warms that seem to get absorbed by warm ambient light.


----------



## ghosty

Erik1213 said:


> Here's a comparison:
> 
> SC62d (bottom):



Wow, your beamshot really shows the tint difference. good for comparison


----------



## Erik1213

You must have a good monitor because I can barely tell a difference on my 24" LED Dell monitor. On my iPhone, I can see the notably more yellow tint in the SC62d.


----------



## WalkIntoTheLight

Erik1213 said:


> You must have a good monitor because I can barely tell a difference on my 24" LED Dell monitor. On my iPhone, I can see the notably more yellow tint in the SC62d.



Yes, you need a new monitor. But, of course this tint is highly dependent on the white balance setting on the camera, and also on your monitor's calibration. The SC62d could be more white, and the SC5 a bit purplish for example.

I have yet to see a Cree LED that didn't have at least a hint of some green in the corona. But, perhaps he won the tint lottery here.


----------



## Lite_me

Nice shots showing tint differences! They look great on my Dell Ultra Sharp. I'm a warm kinda guy. but I kinda like your SC5. Congrats.


----------



## karbon007

I hope mine shows up soon


----------



## LlF

I like the wavy design so much better.. 
This and the side click is why I choose zebra. 
Since this is a niche market, I think I should voice my opinion..


----------



## hatman

That's a good-looking light -- and thanks for the beam shots.

I ordered a neutral, which was listed as shipping days ago but now says "pre-order."


----------



## Erik1213

Just a quick update, this thing tears through standard eneloops like nothing. eneloop pros are a bit expensive but may be worth the extra expense. 

I wish the SC62 had this tint. It would be awesome.


----------



## Sarlix

WalkIntoTheLight said:


> I have yet to see a Cree LED that didn't have at least a hint of some green in the corona.



I swear the tint of the r2 led in my Nitecore d10 is the purest white I have seen, it makes swans look dirty! I've never tried an other r2 led light so don't know if they're all like that, or just my sample. 



Erik1213 said:


> this thing tears through standard eneloops like nothing.



That doesn't sound good..What sort of runtimes are you getting, close to spec? 




LlF said:


> I like the wavy design so much better..
> This and the side click is why I choose zebra.
> Since this is a niche market, I think I should voice my opinion..



You mean like the ribbing on the SC52 etc ? I think I prefer this design too, the SC5 is basically an SC80, not that is a bad thing.


----------



## Erik1213

Doing a quick runtime test, starting off in H1 (535lm) with an eneloop hot off of the charger (Maha C9000):

First stepdown at 3:00 (as expected) to 325lm.

Second stepdown at 37 minutes (total, not excluding the three minutes) to medium 48lm.

I will update if I get time to sit and wait on the stepdown to low then off.

[EDIT]

I was out of the room for a few minutes but at around the one hour five minute mark, the light dropped into L1 (3.2lm).


----------



## Sarlix

Wow thanks for doing a runtime test. 37min is pretty close to spec, think it's supposed to be 40min for H1 inc 3mins of turbo.


----------



## WalkIntoTheLight

Yeah, 37 min on H1 doesn't sound too bad for the brightness you get.


----------



## snowlover91

Keep in mind this test was done with a regular eneloop, from what it sounds like. They have 1900-2000mah in storage and the pro has 2400-2600mah capacity. If it gets 40 mins total on H1 before stepping down then that would mean a 2500mah battery should give around 50 mins at H1. Maybe someone could test how quickly the battery would last if you run it 3 mins then cut it off, let it cool and run it 3 more mins until it no longer does turbo. I'm thinking it may last 15 mins? Should see US shipping notifications within a few days.


----------



## Erik1213

I calculated 48 minutes with an eneloop pro. I don't think it's worth the extra expense. 

I'm in the U.S. Am I the only one that received a light in the states so far?


----------



## WalkIntoTheLight

snowlover91 said:


> Maybe someone could test how quickly the battery would last if you run it 3 mins then cut it off, let it cool and run it 3 more mins until it no longer does turbo. I'm thinking it may last 15 mins?



If someone posts tailcap current measurements, we could probably have a pretty good estimate on run times.


----------



## gkbain

Erik1213 said:


> I calculated 48 minutes with an eneloop pro. I don't think it's worth the extra expense.
> 
> I'm in the U.S. Am I the only one that received a light in the states so far?



Did you get a shipping notification? Still waiting on mine. US


----------



## Erik1213

Yep, had the notification Thursday and it was in my mailbox Saturday.


----------



## snowlover91

No notification here in the U.S. yet either.. It's hard waiting for a new flashlight to ship! For those who have it, how useful do you find the 500 lumen burst mode and does it seem to be fairly close to 500 lumens? Does it heat up quickly at that level?


----------



## defloyd77

Sarlix said:


> You mean like the ribbing on the SC52 etc ? I think I prefer this design too, the SC5 is basically an SC80, not that is a bad thing.



I definitely prefer the SC52's look myself, it's a very unique and distinct look, nothing about the SC5's look feels that unique. Sure, it's not all about looks, I myself take function over form, but never have I had any problems with grip with the 52 and wished for knurling.


----------



## Swede74

defloyd77 said:


> I definitely prefer the SC52's look myself, it's a very unique and distinct look, nothing about the SC5's look feels that unique.



I like both, but my favourite body design is still the SC51. That's purely from an aesthetic standpoint - I too take function over form and the lack of knurling makes the SC51 somewhat slippery.


----------



## snowlover91

Still no shipping notification.. Hoping it ships by Thursday this week at the latest so I can get it by this weekend.


----------



## markr6

snowlover91 said:


> Still no shipping notification.. Hoping it ships by Thursday this week at the latest so I can get it by this weekend.



For once I kind of hope mine doesn't...I'll be out of town until Sunday!


----------



## Sarlix

markr6 said:


> For once I kind of hope mine doesn't...I'll be out of town until Sunday!



I'll take delivery of it :naughty:


----------



## seasam

ordered 4/14 got my ship notice today. looking forward to it - hopefully good like my sc52w.


----------



## snowlover91

Shipping notice today will compare it to my SC32w. Should arrive on Thursday!


----------



## markr6

Shipped! Damn, leaving town Thursday...I think mine will arrive Friday. Oh well, something to look forward to.


----------



## Tixx

Shipping Notice! WooHoo!


----------



## markr6

Of course I have to live in this little dot which is 3-days instead of 2 :scowl:


----------



## gkbain

Shipping notice received. I guess now we can compare notes. US


----------



## scout24

Notice received as well. Must have gotten a big shipment in!


----------



## snowlover91

scout24 said:


> Notice received as well. Must have gotten a big shipment in!



Must have been a big shipment of different lights as they now list the SC32w as in stock instead of back order. Probably received a shipment of multiple lights including the SC5 preorders as well, good news that they're in finally! Those who waited to preorder may have to wait up to 2-4 weeks per ZL before the next shipment arrived since preorder volume was apparently far higher than anticipated.


----------



## Random Dan

Sorry if this is a dumb question; I don't feel like reading through twelve pages. What is the point of the SC5? I thought it was supposed to be a budget version of the SC52, but it actually is more expensive. 
Not trying to knock it, just curious.


----------



## markr6

Random Dan said:


> Sorry if this is a dumb question; I don't feel like reading through twelve pages. What is the point of the SC5? I thought it was supposed to be a budget version of the SC52, but it actually is more expensive.
> Not trying to knock it, just curious.



It's sort of a strange model with the SC52 around, but here's my take posed awhile back:


Barely longer than the SC52. Just a little heavier (2oz) and wider (1in bezel) than both SC52 and SC62. No PID.

I like that it steps down to 325lm OR you can simply select that same output with H2.

80° spill/10° flood

SC5w High: H1 *500* Lm (3min, then 304lm, total 0.8 hr)____H2 *304* Lm (0.9 hr) / *187* Lm (1.8 hrs) / *107* Lm (3.5 hrs)
SC52w High: H1 *280* Lm (0.9 hrs) (500lm on Li-Ion)_______ H2 *172* Lm (1.7 hrs) / *108* Lm (3 hrs)


----------



## thedoc007

Random Dan said:


> Sorry if this is a dumb question; I don't feel like reading through twelve pages. What is the point of the SC5? I thought it was supposed to be a budget version of the SC52, but it actually is more expensive.
> Not trying to knock it, just curious.



There are numerous small differences (runtime, output, throw, body style, etc.) but the only major difference is that it gives you the same performance on an Eneloop. A number of people don't like lithium-ion, and with the SC5 you don't need them.


----------



## WalkIntoTheLight

If someone could compare a SC52-L2 on a 14500 vs. a SC5 on an Eneloop, that would be nice to see if the output is the same.


----------



## snowlover91

Last two posts are spot on. It basically eliminates the need for using lithium batteries by providing similar outputs from a single AA battery, it actually lasts 3 mins according to specs at the turbo level vs 1 minute on the SC52 with lithium ion. It is optimized for NIMH batteries and appears to have a slightly deeper/larger reflector which would increase throw slightly. Not sure if the SC52 is being phased out but my guess is they will as the SC5 is better all around. Mine arrives Thursday!


----------



## jak

snowlover91 said:


> Last two posts are spot on. It basically eliminates the need for using lithium batteries by providing similar outputs from a single AA battery, it actually lasts 3 mins according to specs at the turbo level vs 1 minute on the SC52 with lithium ion. It is optimized for NIMH batteries and appears to have a slightly deeper/larger reflector which would increase throw slightly. Not sure if the SC52 is being phased out but my guess is they will as the SC5 is better all around. Mine arrives Thursday!


Ditto. I doubt the 52 will be phased out, just like the 62 didn't phase out the SC600. Mine arrives any minute now... 

Was there a first impressions post that was created for this light?


----------



## markr6

WalkIntoTheLight said:


> If someone could compare a SC52-L2 on a 14500 vs. a SC5 on an Eneloop, that would be nice to see if the output is the same.



I will, but I'm sure someone will beat me to it. I'll be out of town for a bit but should have this when I get back.


----------



## GordoJones88

snowlover91 said:


> It basically eliminates the need for using lithium batteries by providing similar outputs from a single AA battery, it actually lasts 3 mins according to specs at the turbo level vs 1 minute on the SC52 with lithium ion.* It is optimized for NiMH batteries *and appears to have a slightly deeper/larger reflector which would increase throw slightly.




Ditto.


----------



## snowlover91

jak said:


> Ditto. I doubt the 52 will be phased out, just like the 62 didn't phase out the SC600. Mine arrives any minute now...
> 
> Was there a first impressions post that was created for this light?



Eagerly awaiting your results, pics, beam shots and more  Might as well keep everything together in one thread unless you do a comprehensive review of it, then you could probably start a separate thread!


----------



## gkbain

Mine is in Dallas. Delivery Saturday. I have a lot of lights but never had to wait like this......


----------



## jak

snowlover91 said:


> Eagerly awaiting your results, pics, beam shots and more  Might as well keep everything together in one thread unless you do a comprehensive review of it, then you could probably start a separate thread!


I went ahead and started a first impressions post. (This one has too many pages of talking about runtime theory and the economics of China.) With a "first impressions" thread, any one can add their opinions -it doesn't have to be a full on review.
http://www.candlepowerforums.com/vb/showthread.php?401372-Zebralight-SC5-and-SC5w-First-Impressions


----------



## recDNA

Zebralight needs consistently good tint to get my business


----------



## scs

recDNA said:


> Zebralight needs consistently good tint to get my business



I'm with you. And better durability as well. But enough folks will keep buying ZL despite those things and ZL will likely not improve those areas anytime soon.


----------



## Tixx

gkbain said:


> Mine is in Dallas. Delivery Saturday. I have a lot of lights but never had to wait like this......


Saturday for me too!


----------



## Tixx

scs said:


> I'm with you. And better durability as well. But enough folks will keep buying ZL despite those things and ZL will likely not improve those areas anytime soon.



I've not had any durability issues. Pushing 25+ ZL lights. Tint is better than most mass produced. Olight was a nighmare of green tint for their neutrals...ZL is much better.


----------



## marinemaster

My Zebralight has been rock solid reliable.


----------



## gkbain

marinemaster said:


> My Zebralight has been rock solid reliable.



Rock solid also. Many of us are sold on ZL.


----------



## scs

marinemaster, gkbain,

How long have you had your rock solid samples and what level of usage do they see?

Thanks.


----------



## Fireclaw18

Biggest problem with my Zebralights is they don't stay in turbo long enough.

On a fresh cell they'll stay in turbo the specced amount of time.

If the cell is even slightly depleted, they tend to bump down to medium. This is the case for all my recent Zebras (SC52, SC52w, SC62w, SC32w).


----------



## gkbain

scs said:


> marinemaster, gkbain,
> 
> How long have you had your rock solid samples and what level of usage do they see?
> 
> Thanks.



I don't remember when I got the SC80, 3yrs? My son still carries it daily. Probably not many many hours but the switch must have been cycled thousands of times. Holding up well. Doesn't look like a new light but still works like one. My SC52 I have only had for a year or so. Carry it daily and use it 10-15 times a day. I am an old guy and need extra light several times a day. Probably has got ~10 hrs of total run time. No issues with either one. I tried to carry my Olight S10 L2 NW, which I really like, but accidental activation caused it to get hot in my pocket several times so it is my night stand light which for that purple I like better than the ZLs. For a small EDC with a good clip the ZLs, for me anyway, fit the bill better than any of my other small lights. I like the side clicky as opposed to a tail switch. My 52 is a CW. The SC5 I ordered is the NW version as I now prefer that tint. If my 52 was a NW I would have not ordered the SC5 as I don't need another light. What kind of issues have you had with ZL?


----------



## SubLGT

recDNA said:


> Zebralight needs consistently good tint to get my business



Me too.


----------



## StorminMatt

recDNA said:


> Zebralight needs consistently good tint to get my business



Hard to say exactly how consistent you are looking for. But Zebralight has improved ALOT in this area compared to, say, two years ago. Admittedly, there is some tint variation in the Zebralights I own. But ALL of them are ALOT better than the SC52w I got back in 2013.


----------



## scs

gkbain said:


> I don't remember when I got the SC80, 3yrs? My son still carries it daily. Probably not many many hours but the switch must have been cycled thousands of times. Holding up well. Doesn't look like a new light but still works like one. My SC52 I have only had for a year or so. Carry it daily and use it 10-15 times a day. I am an old guy and need extra light several times a day. Probably has got ~10 hrs of total run time. No issues with either one. I tried to carry my Olight S10 L2 NW, which I really like, but accidental activation caused it to get hot in my pocket several times so it is my night stand light which for that purple I like better than the ZLs. For a small EDC with a good clip the ZLs, for me anyway, fit the bill better than any of my other small lights. I like the side clicky as opposed to a tail switch. My 52 is a CW. The SC5 I ordered is the NW version as I now prefer that tint. If my 52 was a NW I would have not ordered the SC5 as I don't need another light. What kind of issues have you had with ZL?



Thanks, gkbain. I don't have a ZL. Negative feedback regarding general quality and customer service is keeping me away thus far, as usual, with any light. I feel all the negative emotions associated with a bad light or customer service experience vicariously through all the folks here on CPF.


----------



## gkbain

SCS, I can understand that. I have had some good and bad experiences with lights and or customer service. I have had a couple of lights from the same mfg. returned in the last couple of weeks because they were faulty. I also have some lights from that same mfg. that have been great. I have several different brands and sizes of lights and the vast majority have exceeded my expectations. It only takes one sometimes on bad light to burn you out on that brand. I use to buy only big lights in CW. Now I want small lights in NW. I haven't had to contact customer service from ZL yet and hope it stays that way.


----------



## marinemaster

Sc50 80 52 they all work perfect. No issues with the switch, tint, they turn on every time after many, many sets of batteries. Sc5 will be next.


----------



## gkbain

At last!!!!!!!


----------



## mactavish

markr6 said:


> • You can't avoid the stepdown on the SC52w. You're stuck with 500lm or way down to 172. I don't think that's horrible though. But at least with the SC5w, you can program the next level down (304lm)
> 
> SC5w High: H1 *500* Lm (3min, then 304lm, total 0.8 hr)____H2 *304* Lm (0.9 hr) / *187* Lm (1.8 hrs) / *107* Lm (3.5 hrs)
> SC52w High: H1 *280* Lm (0.9 hrs) (500lm on Li-Ion)_______ H2 *172* Lm (1.7 hrs) / *108* Lm (3 hrs)
> 
> • The 80° spill/10° spot may be a bonus to some.
> 
> • I like the design better. 17 grams heavier? No biggie.
> 
> I think I'll like it as much as the SC52, but will have to wait to see.



You are not "stuck" with 172lm, with the SC52w, the step down after a minute with 14500 is 280lm, pasted from ZebraLights website. 




Light output are ANSI out the front (OTF) values. Runtimes tested (and parasitic drain estimated) using Sanyo 2000mAh Eneloop AA batteries. Light output with 14500 batteries are the same except that the H1 is 500Lm for the first minute and then step down to 280Lm.


----------



## JKolmo

I love my SC5W! Very small yet more quality feeling than the SC52W. Super nice tint and hot spot/spill! And very impressive punch from an AA Eneloop. Well done XL!


----------



## markr6

mactavish said:


> You are not "stuck" with 172lm, with the SC52w, the step down after a minute with 14500 is 280lm, pasted from ZebraLights website.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Light output are ANSI out the front (OTF) values. Runtimes tested (and parasitic drain estimated) using Sanyo 2000mAh Eneloop AA batteries. Light output with 14500 batteries are the same except that the H1 is 500Lm for the first minute and then step down to 280Lm.


Understood. But that's the LAST thing I would want to do. Sit around for one minute, sucking the juice out of my battery (small 14500 to being with), just to get to a lower level.


----------



## chuckhov

Mark,

I think that you Get It! (SC52)

Thanks,

-Chuck


----------



## DavidD

scs said:


> marinemaster, gkbain,
> 
> How long have you had your rock solid samples and what level of usage do they see?
> 
> Thanks.



Well, I only have ever had 1 zebralight so not a big sample. But I'm still rocking the SC51. It has over 5,000 hours on it. Works like new. Mostly looks like new. I did not preorder the SC5w, but I believe I will get it soon.


----------



## mactavish

markr6 said:


> Understood. But that's the LAST thing I would want to do. Sit around for one minute, sucking the juice out of my battery (small 14500 to being with), just to get to a lower level.



Not sure I understand, if the SC52w comes on in turbo high mode a double click brings it down a level, or your custom programmed level. If you turn the light off at the lower level, it is in memory, and when turned back on will be at the same lower level. Granted, one minute is a short time, but I still like having a turbo-high mode option. If you don't like 14500 batteries, that's a whole different topic that has also been debated here. I like that the new SC5 gives 3 minutes of turbo with an Enelope, but the larger, thicker body is not interesting to me, to consider buying one.


----------



## Fireclaw18

Now that more people have the SC5 has anyone tried a 14500 in it yet?


----------



## newbie66

Fireclaw18 said:


> Now that more people have the SC5 has anyone tried a 14500 in it yet?



14500 will definitely fry the circuits. According to Zebralight, it only handles voltage of up to 2.0 volts.


----------



## Fireclaw18

newbie66 said:


> 14500 will definitely fry the circuits. According to Zebralight, it only handles voltage of up to 2.0 volts.



Actually we don't know that for sure.

The original SC600 is only rated for 18650. But I recall reading a post from someone who used 2xCR123 in his. That's 6v... far beyond the rating. And it actually worked without frying.

Just because the light is rated for 2v doesn't mean it won't actually function at higher voltage. Only way to know for sure is for some daring individual to test it.


----------



## TweakMDS

Fireclaw18 said:


> Actually we don't know that for sure.
> 
> The original SC600 is only rated for 18650. But I recall reading a post from someone who used 2xCR123 in his. That's 6v... far beyond the rating. And it actually worked without frying.
> 
> Just because the light is rated for 2v doesn't mean it won't actually function at higher voltage. Only way to know for sure is for some daring individual to test it.



Similarly, just because it works for some, doesn't mean it works for other batches or will continue working.

If it's not rated for 3.7V but for 2V, and you put a 14500 in it, it might work for a little bit, but you'd be running it outside of it's design specs. You might kill the electronics over a few months instead of immediately and potentially void your warranty.


----------



## WalkIntoTheLight

markr6 said:


> Understood. But that's the LAST thing I would want to do. Sit around for one minute, sucking the juice out of my battery (small 14500 to being with), just to get to a lower level.



Then just use an Eneloop in your SC52w. 280 lumens, no step-down.


----------



## markr6

WalkIntoTheLight said:


> Then just use an Eneloop in your SC52w. 280 lumens, no step-down.



That's what I do. No step down, no battery killer mode (well, sort of)


----------



## Big_Sam

Does anyone know of a UK seller that will be getting the SC5 in stock?


----------



## Fireclaw18

One thing I don't like about Eneloops is they're so heavy compared to 14500.

I love the feel of my SC5w. Better grip than any of my other Zebralights except my SC80. And its' the only Zebralight with an integrated clip mount that actually feels comfortable when used without the clip. I also like that it reliably stays in turbo mode even with slightly drained cells.

Downside is with an Eneloop inside it's much heavier than other comparable sized zebralights. And at only 500 lumens, its output is much lower than I'm used to.


----------



## chuckhov

What are you used to?

Something much larger, I would suspect?

Thanks,

-Chuck


----------



## Mr Floppy

Fireclaw18 said:


> One thing I don't like about Eneloops is they're so heavy compared to 14500.



Have you not been eating your spinach?


----------



## amaretto

Big_Sam said:


> Does anyone know of a UK seller that will be getting the SC5 in stock?


This shop from the Netherlands will deliver to the UK:

http://eu.nkon.nl/zebralight-flashlights.html


----------



## Big_Sam

amaretto said:


> This shop from the Netherlands will deliver to the UK:
> 
> http://eu.nkon.nl/zebralight-flashlights.html



Thank you, I'll have a look


----------



## kj2

Expected delivery date, at my dealer, has been set back two week 
Should arrive June 15th now.


----------



## funkychateau

snowlover91 said:


> Last two posts are spot on. It basically eliminates the need for using lithium batteries by providing similar outputs from a single AA battery, it actually lasts 3 mins according to specs at the turbo level vs 1 minute on the SC52 with lithium ion. It is optimized for NIMH batteries and appears to have a slightly deeper/larger reflector which would increase throw slightly. Not sure if the SC52 is being phased out but my guess is they will as the SC5 is better all around. Mine arrives Thursday!



It may be significant to note that the price of the SC52 was recently dropped by $5. I believe this matches the price drop seen on the SC51 before it was discontinued.


----------



## funkychateau

scs said:


> marinemaster, gkbain,
> 
> How long have you had your rock solid samples and what level of usage do they see?
> 
> Thanks.



I've had my SC600-II for about two years, and my SC52L2W for about six months. Prior to getting the 52, I left the SC600 on all night, every night, in one of the low modes. Plus miscellaneous walking-around usage on high and medium. Charged the battery every couple of weeks to one month. Now I'm using the SC52 in much the same manner, and the SC600 is kept in the console of my truck. No issues of any kind with either light. I have tested all of the functions, including step-down times.


----------



## Swede74

kj2 said:


> Expected delivery date, at my dealer, has been set back two week
> Should arrive June 15th now.



If you can't wait, a UK dealer has both the SC5 and the SC5w in stock. Not as cheap as the dealer I believe you are referring to though.


----------



## kj2

Swede74 said:


> If you can't wait, a UK dealer has both the SC5 and the SC5w in stock. Not as cheap as the dealer I believe you are referring to though.


Thanks for the heads up.


----------



## WalkIntoTheLight

funkychateau said:


> It may be significant to note that the price of the SC52 was recently dropped by $5. I believe this matches the price drop seen on the SC51 before it was discontinued.



Since the SC52 is smaller and more easily pocket-carried than the SC5, I think there's still value in keeping both models. However, I wouldn't be at all surprised if they discontinued the SC52 because it is quite similar to the new SC5. If they fire-sale the SC52w at some point, I'll pick up a 3rd one. It's a really nice EDC light.


----------



## markr6

WalkIntoTheLight said:


> Since the SC52 is smaller and more easily pocket-carried than the SC5, I think there's still value in keeping both models. However, I wouldn't be at all surprised if they discontinued the SC52 because it is quite similar to the new SC5. If they fire-sale the SC52w at some point, I'll pick up a 3rd one. It's a really nice EDC light.



I'm assuming they will bottom out at $49.50 like the SC51/H51. But with a coupon, you can already get them for $54, so may not be worth waiting.


----------



## recDNA

markr6 said:


> I'm assuming they will bottom out at $49.50 like the SC51/H51. But with a coupon, you can already get them for $54, so may not be worth waiting.


If not too much trouble could you pm where I would get a coupon?


----------



## tinkerhell

recDNA said:


> If not too much trouble could you pm where I would get a coupon?



I'd like a location on said coupon too if it isn't a huge secret.


----------



## mistertech

So disappointed with the SC5! Everything is great about it EXCEPT for its larger size. I've been using the SC52 for a year and I'm used to its small size. I run it with a 14500 so the brightness is similar to the SC5. I wish they kept the great form factor of the SC52. Stinks I'll have to wait at least a year to see if Zebra fixes the problem by coming out with a smaller light again. 

The SC5 doesn't fit in my dress pants. My SC52 for perfectly with a skeletool in the same picket. Looks like I'll be sticking with the SC52.


----------



## holygeez03

That's your second post ever? And it's on the 13th page of a thread that spends a lot of time talking about how the SC5 may not be a significant enough upgrade from the 52 to warrant the larger physical size...


----------



## snowlover91

mistertech said:


> So disappointed with the SC5! Everything is great about it EXCEPT for its larger size. I've been using the SC52 for a year and I'm used to its small size. I run it with a 14500 so the brightness is similar to the SC5. I wish they kept the great form factor of the SC52. Stinks I'll have to wait at least a year to see if Zebra fixes the problem by coming out with a smaller light again.
> 
> The SC5 doesn't fit in my dress pants. My SC52 for perfectly with a skeletool in the same picket. Looks like I'll be sticking with the SC52.



I have a hard time believing it doesn't fit in your pants, it's not that much bigger. In fact the length is almost the same and the head is basically the same diameter, the only difference is the actual diameter of the battery tube and it's not a big enough difference that it shouldn't fit in your pocket. Sure it's bulkier but it's not huge, about a quarter to half inch at most extra.


----------



## markr6

Just a little weight and bulk go a long way especially in dress pants. I wear standard Dockers pants to work and the lighter, almost silky material just doesn't work with most lights swinging around when you walk. An SC52 is too much IMO. You have about 1" mass sticking out and it just doesn't feel right IMO.


----------



## WalkIntoTheLight

markr6 said:


> Just a little weight and bulk go a long way especially in dress pants. I wear standard Dockers pants to work and the lighter, almost silky material just doesn't work with most lights swinging around when you walk. An SC52 is too much IMO. You have about 1" mass sticking out and it just doesn't feel right IMO.



So... many... inappropriate... things... to... say...!


----------



## markr6

WalkIntoTheLight said:


> So... many... inappropriate... things... to... say...!



LOL! I even kept out "bulge" and a few others! What CPF member always added the "...or are you just happy to see me" line?

I think I'm an exception on the EDC aspect though. Most people seem to be OK with larger lights like a Fenix LD12 or SC62. I can't get used to even the small SC52 in jeans.

BTW, I am still tempted to try another SC5


----------



## Bad_JuJu

WalkIntoTheLight said:


> So... many... inappropriate... things... to... say...!



Seriously, aren't we doing phrasing anymore....


----------



## snowlover91

markr6 said:


> Just a little weight and bulk go a long way especially in dress pants. I wear standard Dockers pants to work and the lighter, almost silky material just doesn't work with most lights swinging around when you walk. An SC52 is too much IMO. You have about 1" mass sticking out and it just doesn't feel right IMO.



Certainly in an application like that size makes a difference. But for a person to say that it simply won't fit in their pocket due to the slightly larger size is poor wording or an overstatement. There is a difference between it fitting yet being bulky/uncomfortable and something simply not fitting at all. I wear dress pants to work and find even the SC62 to be fine for me, it all depends on preferences and a persons EDC style.


----------



## Badbeams3

Read all about it...*575 lumen off one Eneloop Pro*...and great run times on the lower 50 lumen setting...nice light! Selfbuilts"s new review: 

http://www.candlepowerforums.com/vb...-L2)-Review-RUNTIMES-BEAMSHOTS-VIDEO-and-more!


----------



## fnj

Selfbuilt said it, so I can say it. The 14500 time is past. Absolutely no point in it any more. Take it away. The Eneloop NiMH with competent light design is superior and with essentially no danger such as is always there in the background to some extent with LiIon. I also believe repeated deep discharge of single NiMH is absolutely no concern, but I never feel comfortable letting LiIons get much below 3.2-3.3v.


----------



## mactavish

fnj said:


> Selfbuilt said it, so I can say it. The 14500 time is past. Absolutely no point in it any more. Take it away. The Eneloop NiMH with competent light design is superior and with essentially no danger such as is always there in the background to some extent with LiIon. I also believe repeated deep discharge of single NiMH is absolutely no concern, but I never feel comfortable letting LiIons get much below 3.2-3.3v.



I use only protected AW lithiums, not worried the least. Nice to see the performance for Eneloops catch up. If I did not own the previous version, this might be a choice. The larger size and weight is not preferred however, in my case.


----------



## Badbeams3

Yea, I'm surprised by the lack of interest in this light. Only video on Youtube I saw was Selfbuilt"s.


----------



## Amelia

fnj said:


> Selfbuilt said it, so I can say it. The 14500 time is past. Absolutely no point in it any more. Take it away. The Eneloop NiMH with competent light design is superior and with essentially no danger such as is always there in the background to some extent with LiIon. I also believe repeated deep discharge of single NiMH is absolutely no concern, but I never feel comfortable letting LiIons get much below 3.2-3.3v.



His opinion... your opinion... not mine. 14500 is unquestionably better for solar charging purposes, and 14500 cells are lighter weight to travel with. 14500 provide higher watt-hour (total mAH X Voltage) stored energy per cell, and blow Eneloops away in stored energy per unit weight.

The 14500 is dead... long live the 14500!


----------



## Badbeams3

mactavish said:


> I use only protected AW lithiums, not worried the least. Nice to see the performance for Eneloops catch up. If I did not own the previous version, this might be a choice. The larger size and weight is not preferred however, in my case.



I wonder why they went with a wider/fatter body. Does seem a step backwards in that regard...


----------



## moozooh

Likely has something to do with heat dissipation. Thinner body takes less time to heat up, which is not exactly desirable for power levels SC5 is driving its LED. I mean, SC600 L2 is much larger, yet it only takes 5 minutes at max output for it to heat up to over 50°C...


----------



## thedoc007

moozooh said:


> Likely has something to do with heat dissipation. Thinner body takes less time to heat up, which is not exactly desirable for power levels SC5 is driving its LED. I mean, SC600 L2 is much larger, yet it only takes 5 minutes at max output for it to heat up to over 50°C...



Of course, it also has roughly double the output of the SC5...and it isn't that much larger, either. The is one reason I don't like the SC62, though...it heats up considerably faster than the SC600, despite slightly lower output. Always a trade-off...which feature is more important is entirely subjective.


----------



## Fireclaw18

thedoc007 said:


> Of course, it also has roughly double the output of the SC5...and it isn't that much larger, either. The is one reason I don't like the SC62, though...it heats up considerably faster than the SC600, despite slightly lower output. Always a trade-off...which feature is more important is entirely subjective.




My SC600 looks and feels MUCH larger and heavier than my SC5w.

Personally, I don't consider the SC600 suitable for EDC carry in a pants-pocket. It's just too big and heavy.

The SC5w on the other hand is small enough to be comfortable as an EDC pocket carry light.


----------



## thedoc007

Fireclaw18 said:


> My SC600 looks and feels MUCH larger and heavier than my SC5w.
> 
> Personally, I don't consider the SC600 suitable for EDC carry in a pants-pocket. It's just too big and heavy.
> 
> The SC5w on the other hand is small enough to be comfortable as an EDC pocket carry light.



Let's put some numbers in the debate.

The SC5 is 3.2 inches long, the SC600 is four inches long.

The SC5 is two ounces, the SC600 is 2.75 ounces.

SC5 head diameter is one inch. SC600 is just under 1.25 inches.

Certainly, the SC600 is larger in every dimension. But it is only fractionally bigger in any given dimension...the weight is probably the largest proportional difference. And again, we are talking grams, not pounds. If a fraction of an ounce bothers you, you are more sensitive to weight than I am.

The SC600 is in fact my primary EDC outside of work...it goes with me everywhere, clipped to my pocket, and I don't even notice it is there. But as always, to each his own! All I was pointing out is that everyone has a different opinion about what is acceptable...the extra heft of the SC5 vs. the SC52, for example, is hated by some, and welcomed by others.


----------



## fnj

Are those weights loaded with battery in each case?


----------



## thedoc007

fnj said:


> Are those weights loaded with battery in each case?



Those are Zebralights numbers...they are for the light only. Adding an 18650 makes the SC600 about another half an ounce heavier (lithium-ion cells are lighter per unit volume than NiMH batteries of the same size, so the difference is not as large as you might expect), putting the total difference at a little over 1-1.25 ounces, depending on exactly which battery/cell you use.


----------



## WalkIntoTheLight

thedoc007 said:


> Those are Zebralights numbers...they are for the light only. Adding an 18650 makes the SC600 about another half an ounce heavier (lithium-ion cells are lighter per unit volume than NiMH batteries of the same size, so the difference is not as large as you might expect), putting the total difference at a little over 1-1.25 ounces, depending on exactly which battery/cell you use.



A small AA light is already pushing the comfort limits of pants' pocket-carry. The SC600 sounds like it blows past those limits. Might be a great light for a jacket pocket, though.


----------



## Mr Floppy

WalkIntoTheLight said:


> A small AA light is already pushing the comfort limits of pants' pocket-carry.



You're kidding me? What sort of pants? Are they tight white ball huggers? In my pockets I have all sorts of keys, keyring tools, a light, an E01, and that's also in summer where it's shorts weather. 

Is this a fashion thing?


----------



## bdogps

Mr Floppy said:


> You're kidding me? What sort of pants? Are they tight white ball huggers? In my pockets I have all sorts of keys, keyring tools, a light, an E01, and that's also in summer where it's shorts weather.
> 
> Is this a fashion thing?



Unless they are wearing those man leggings type of jeans. So no of us carry phones or wallets anymore?


----------



## Mr Floppy

bdogps said:


> So no of us carry phones or wallets anymore?



Not me, cards and money in top pocket. They get destroyed with the keys. Phone in the other pants pocket, away from the tools. It's a bugger when I don't have a shirt pocket though


----------



## WalkIntoTheLight

I don't like stuff in my pockets, it's uncomfortable. I only carry 2 keys when I need to, a car key and a house key. Wallet is back-pocket, though sometimes I opt to carry just my driver's license and credit card. For pants pocket, I prefer a small AAA light, though I've occasionally used a L3 Illumination L10, and it's okay if I think I'll need more run-time than a AAA can do. The Zebralight SC52 is too big for in-pocket, though I will clip it to the outside of my jeans, or keep it in a jacket pocket.

I have no idea how some people put up with all the crap they keep in their pockets, including a bunch of keys that must be for opening 50 different things.


----------



## Badbeams3

Yea, me too. Wish Zebralight had includes a belt case. I don't trust the clips. And no lanyard either ...right? So I would be forced to carry it in the pocket...I occasionally have pocket carried my Olight S20. But it is thin and long with no bulbous head.. Generally the only light I have in my pocket is an AAA light and seems that's all I need. So this Zebra light would likely end up being a house light, mostly to show off to a few friends. Might see some duty in my car glove box...not sure. 

So does not make sense to buy this light...other than I just like to have a state of the art light...and this one does set a new standard for non-lithium, standard AA lights. And that's pretty cool.


----------



## mactavish

WalkIntoTheLight said:


> I don't like stuff in my pockets, it's uncomfortable. I only carry 2 keys when I need to, a car key and a house key. Wallet is back-pocket, though sometimes I opt to carry just my driver's license and credit card. For pants pocket, I prefer a small AAA light, though I've occasionally used a L3 Illumination L10, and it's okay if I think I'll need more run-time than a AAA can do. The Zebralight SC52 is too big for in-pocket, though I will clip it to the outside of my jeans, or keep it in a jacket pocket.
> 
> I have no idea how some people put up with all the crap they keep in their pockets, including a bunch of keys that must be for opening 50 different things.



I was going to add my opinion on pocket carry, but you wrote everything I would say. I'll add, its obviously all about personal preference, my SC52 stays at home, clipped to part of my keychain, in my pants pocket lives the DQG AAA. With a single Energizer lithium primary, I can see well in a totally dark room on high mode, and read a menu in a dark restaurant. When I was young (good eyes) I never needed to carry a flashlight, but back then, they were all HUGE and dim "D" cells! Don't get me wrong, of all my tiny torches, the Zebra 52w is my favorite. And I see the battery advantages of the new model, especially after reading the review, and will recommend it to friends looking to junk their crappy cheapo 3 cell/cartridge lights. If you don't mind carrying a larger light in your pocket, more POWER to you!


----------



## Mr Floppy

Badbeams3 said:


> So does not make sense to buy this light...other than I just like to have a state of the art light...and this one does set a new standard for non-lithium, standard AA lights. And that's pretty cool.



Doesn't make sense when people complain that this light is too big for pocket carry if they are used to aaa lights. I now understand better why people say that this light is too big for their pockets. It is good to hear your rationale. Except for the guy who carried a skeletool


----------



## WalkIntoTheLight

Badbeams3 said:


> Y
> So does not make sense to buy this light...other than I just like to have a state of the art light...and this one does set a new standard for non-lithium, standard AA lights. And that's pretty cool.



I already have a couple of SC52's, but I'm definitely going to get the SC5w when it becomes available at the usual retail sites. Is it going to change my life? No. But, to get 500 lumens on a single Eneloop is pretty crazy. It might replace my Sunwayman D40a as an occasional outside light. While I generally use lower modes, it's nice to have 500 lumens if I need it. Some of my other brightish lights are 2xAA, so to have even more light out of a smaller package would probably replace my need for 2xAA lights. If I don't need the additional run-time, that is. But for extended run time, I usually go for 4xAA.


----------



## markr6

I think we're just nit-picking because typically when you think "newer light", you think smaller, lighter, brighter. They hit 1 of those, sort of.

But the two models are just not a good direct comparison to each other. If you want a kiackass 1xAA light, you got it. But looking back I think some were wishing for an SC52 with 535lm on an Eneloop; no other changes. I definitely would have kept mine if it wasn't for the weird beam.


----------



## saypat

is this light so new that Amazon doesn't carry it yet? Anyone besides Zebralight have it? Thanks!


----------



## Badbeams3

WalkIntoTheLight said:


> I already have a couple of SC52's, but I'm definitely going to get the SC5w when it becomes available at the usual retail sites. Is it going to change my life? No. But, to get 500 lumens on a single Eneloop is pretty crazy. It might replace my Sunwayman D40a as an occasional outside light. While I generally use lower modes, it's nice to have 500 lumens if I need it. Some of my other brightish lights are 2xAA, so to have even more light out of a smaller package would probably replace my need for 2xAA lights. If I don't need the additional run-time, that is. But for extended run time, I usually go for 4xAA.




Well I'm ahead of ya. I ordered a SC5w about 4 hours ago, for better or worse...probably be here in a couple days...


----------



## Badbeams3

saypat said:


> is this light so new that Amazon doesn't carry it yet? Anyone besides Zebralight have it? Thanks!



Yea I normally order from Amazon when I can...

But I had to go through one of my old vendors who just got them in....

http://www.brightguy.com/


----------



## Badbeams3

WalkIntoTheLight said:


> I already have a couple of SC52's, but I'm definitely going to get the SC5w when it becomes available at the usual retail sites. Is it going to change my life? No. But, to get 500 lumens on a single Eneloop is pretty crazy. It might replace my Sunwayman D40a as an occasional outside light. While I generally use lower modes, it's nice to have 500 lumens if I need it. Some of my other brightish lights are 2xAA, so to have even more light out of a smaller package would probably replace my need for 2xAA lights. If I don't need the additional run-time, that is. But for extended run time, I usually go for 4xAA.



Agreed. 500 lumen off a regular AA...and with superb run times as well...hard to walk away from that, so I went ahead and ordered one. Just wish they had a lanyard and belt case with it.. Regardless, I'm sure I will enjoy the light.


----------



## gbelleh

I got an SC5w about a week ago from brightguy. I have no problem whatsoever with the size clipped in my pocket. But I'm one who carries keys, wallet, two knives, two flashlights, two guns, and a cell phone, every day with no complaints. 

The tint of my SC5w is beautiful, and the brightness and runtime have been great for my needs with an Eneloop Pro.


----------



## Dubois

saypat said:


> is this light so new that Amazon doesn't carry it yet? Anyone besides Zebralight have it? Thanks!



If I was in the US, I'd buy it from Illumn.com. In Europe, from nkon.nl. Both seem to have it in stock.


----------



## Badbeams3

gbelleh said:


> I got an SC5w about a week ago from brightguy. I have no problem whatsoever with the size clipped in my pocket. But I'm one who carries keys, wallet, two knives, two flashlights, two guns, and a cell phone, every day with no complaints.
> 
> The tint of my SC5w is beautiful, and the brightness and runtime have been great for my needs with an Eneloop Pro.




Good to hear! I look forward to getting mine. One reason I decided to act was I have 8 brand new Eneloop Pro's. I ordered them when I purchased a TN4A a week ago (love it). Found that in reality the TN does not go thru batts anywhere as fast as I thought (have not changed/charged yet, have not seen the blue light go red). So...realized that I should not have bought so many batteries. 4 to many. And Selfbuilts review showed this SC5 to be a outstanding light in terms of performance with awesome run time on the lower levels.

I also have a Olight S15, that I use 14500's in. But it runs through them super fast and when they run down...it just shuts off...nothing more, nada. Don't like that. At least this light continues on, albeit at a much lower level.


----------



## Burgess

Great thread here !

lovecpf


I have a ZebraLight SC5w, and absolutely LOVE it !

But really wanted to carry it in a case on my belt.


Solution:


Ripoffs model BL-95A case,
which is actually intended for cellphones !


http://www.ripoffs.com/datasheets/co95/bl95.html


You will still have plenty of room in that holster
to carry a spare AA battery.

So I got a CountyComm delrin AA battery storage case,
which fits Superbly ! Waterproof, too !

http://www.countycomm.com/batterylocker.html

:thumbsup:


This (in my humble opinion)
is a Perfect case for my SC5w !


----------



## WalkIntoTheLight

Dubois said:


> If I was in the US, I'd buy it from Illumn.com. In Europe, from nkon.nl. Both seem to have it in stock.



Unless I'm missing something, I don't see than illumn has it listed, yet. At least, not under the ZL list.


----------



## uofaengr

I don't know if it'd apply to this light also, but when I ordered my SC52w, direct from ZL was the cheapest which was very surprising.


----------



## Badbeams3

uofaengr said:


> I don't know if it'd apply to this light also, but when I ordered my SC52w, direct from ZL was the cheapest which was very surprising.



They seem to be $69 everywhere. I ordered mine from Brightguy's cause they ship the same day. Zebralight might too. Both offer free shipping.


----------



## kj2

Just seeing on the ZL spreadsheet, the SC5F and SC5Fw


----------



## Mr Floppy

kj2 said:


> Just seeing on the ZL spreadsheet, the SC5F and SC5Fw



Oh really? With a smooth reflector? Seems a bit of a waste.. TIR lens though


----------



## kj2

Mr Floppy said:


> Oh really? With a smooth reflector? Seems a bit of a waste.. TIR lens though


Don't know what type reflector ZL will use in these versions. But I start wondering, if they eventually release a SC502(w) flood version.


----------



## WalkIntoTheLight

I think I'll stick with the SC5w, but I can see some people wanting a SC5d. The Luxeon LED might be a good match to this light, driving it about as hard as the LED takes. It would be a bit dimmer than with a Cree LED, but still likely the full 320 lumens you can get with the SC62d.

Or, maybe it would be a waste, considering there's already the SC52d at 205 lumens (with an Eneloop). Diminishing returns.


----------



## eff

I'm tempted to get one, but I already have my SC51


----------



## WalkIntoTheLight

Got tired of waiting for illum to list them, so I ordered direct from ZL. Anyone from Canada know how long they usually take to get one (free shipping)? I never ordered direct from ZL before. ZL claims weeks to months, but I sure hope that's an over-estimation.


----------



## rpm00

From China it's a month or so to Canada.


----------



## WarRaven

Grats on new light.
I've found I'm being told about same time frame for delivery from China to CAN. 
From just under to just over one month.


----------



## marinemaster

I want a FW model.


----------



## velocityboy

WalkIntoTheLight said:


> Got tired of waiting for illum to list them, so I ordered direct from ZL. Anyone from Canada know how long they usually take to get one (free shipping)? I never ordered direct from ZL before. ZL claims weeks to months, but I sure hope that's an over-estimation.



The SC52w I bought from them arrived 24 days after it shipped (free) from China.


----------



## gunga

My sc62w took two months. I was pretty pissed and vowed never to order from them again.


----------



## scs

Anyone know why ZL doesn't ship to Canada from Texas?
They ship from Texas to US addresses right?


----------



## markr6

scs said:


> Anyone know why ZL doesn't ship to Canada from Texas?
> They ship from Texas to US addresses right?



Correct. And I was also going to ask the same thing. Is there something more difficult about US>Canada shipping? You would think coming from TX it would only take 3-6 days and not cost much more. But I never shipped to Canada so I have no idea.


----------



## WalkIntoTheLight

markr6 said:


> Correct. And I was also going to ask the same thing. Is there something more difficult about US>Canada shipping? You would think coming from TX it would only take 3-6 days and not cost much more. But I never shipped to Canada so I have no idea.



Normally takes almost 2 weeks from US to Canada, by USPS. But about a week of that is sitting in customs.


----------



## recDNA

Is ZL in Texas or China? I'm confused by some conflicting posts here.


----------



## kj2

recDNA said:


> Is ZL in Texas or China? I'm confused by some conflicting posts here.



Both. Manufactured in China, and shipped from there. US customers receive theirs from a US warehouse.


----------



## holygeez03

recDNA said:


> Is ZL in Texas or China? I'm confused by some conflicting posts here.




Chinese company with a distribution outlet in Texas... I think.


----------



## thedoc007

markr6 said:


> Correct. And I was also going to ask the same thing. Is there something more difficult about US>Canada shipping? You would think coming from TX it would only take 3-6 days and not cost much more. But I never shipped to Canada so I have no idea.



Shipping to Canada is more expensive by a large margin (compared to shipping within the USA), requires additional paperwork (customs invoice), takes longer, and has to clear another set of Customs hurdles. So it makes perfect sense to me...shipping it directly from China greatly simplifies the process, and saves money too. Granted, it sucks for Canadian buyers, but it makes perfect business sense.


----------



## recDNA

kj2 said:


> Both. Manufactured in China, and shipped from there. US customers receive theirs from a US warehouse.


But will ZL still charge me in USA if warehouse is empty and I have to wait for it to ship from china to texas to USA east coast?


----------



## kj2

recDNA said:


> But will ZL still charge me in USA if warehouse is empty and I have to wait for it to ship from china to texas to USA east coast?


I think so. You order a product and have to pay for it. I assume if there is no stock in the US, and the customer is in the US, you'll receive an email about it. 
Best is to ask if there is stock, before clicking 'add to cart'.


----------



## WalkIntoTheLight

recDNA said:


> But will ZL still charge me in USA if warehouse is empty and I have to wait for it to ship from china to texas to USA east coast?



You mean charge you in US dollars? Yes. That's the only currency that Zebralight's web store accepts, AFAIK. Whether or not you're in the US, you still buy it from the same web store. They just use your address to determine whether it ships from Texas or China.


----------



## scs

ZL's website features the American flag and says American owned and operated. That's good enough for me. Chinese owned and operated is fine with me as long as there's an authorized dealer and CS outpost here in the US, like Xtar.


----------



## WalkIntoTheLight

The US is a big market, and Americans tend to be more insular in wanting to buy things locally, which is probably why Zebralight set up a distribution hub there. For everywhere else, they ship out of China.

The one good thing about ordering stuff from China, is it's almost always free shipping. I presume the government must subsidize shipping in order to benefit exporters. From anywhere else, shipping to Canada can sometimes get pretty expensive. For example, I once casually looked into getting an HDS light, and they charge $65 just for shipping! That's almost $85 Canadian. Insane.


----------



## recDNA

I just don't think the USA website should show "in stock" if stock is not in USA. I shouldn't have to ask.


----------



## WalkIntoTheLight

recDNA said:


> I just don't think the USA website should show "in stock" if stock is not in USA. I shouldn't have to ask.



Oh, I see. Yeah, I'm not sure what they do if Texas runs out but they still have stock in China. Or vici-versa. When you check out, it says something like "ships from China" or (I presume) "ships from USA". Maybe they tell you then?

In any case, Zebralight seems to have solved the inventory problems they used to have 1-2 years ago. I don't think you'll have a problem.


----------



## AVService

Well I broke down and ordered one from ZL just now and it said nothing about where it will be coming from it just said they were in stock.

In the past they have arrived pretty quickly but still hardly fast enough!


----------



## recDNA

I can't make up my mind between the sc32 and sc5.


----------



## Mr Floppy

scs said:


> ZL's website features the American flag and says American owned and operated. That's good enough for me. Chinese owned and operated is fine with me as long as there's an authorized dealer and CS outpost here in the US, like Xtar.


It's an American company. Factory operations are still done in China, and frankly for the non American, perfectly fine by me if the cost is lower


----------



## Badbeams3

recDNA said:


> I can't make up my mind between the sc32 and sc5.



Does the SC32 offer longer run times? Or is it brighter?


----------



## WalkIntoTheLight

Badbeams3 said:


> Does the SC32 offer longer run times? Or is it brighter?



The SC32 isn't quite as bright as the SC5, but it's close. Runtimes seem to be pretty close too, if you compare similar lumen levels between the lights. But that's using a primary CR123 battery, so if you're using a rechargeable version the run times probably suck.

I'd only get the SC32 if you need something very short.


----------



## recDNA

Several have mentioned that the sc5 is big, heavy, and a pocket shredder and I would have to invest money in another battery type. Eneloop pros are expensive and do not come with a charger like the cheap brands do


----------



## Badbeams3

recDNA said:


> Several have mentioned that the sc5 is big, heavy, and a pocket shredder and I would have to invest money in another battery type. Eneloop pros are expensive and do not come with a charger like the cheap brands do



Understood. And the SC32 might be brighter as well, running on a rechargeable 3.7V 16340, if they are about the same running on a 123 3V primary.


----------



## AVService

I know it is an easy decision for me,I am mainly limiting myself to AA lights these days.

I have plenty of others and batteries for them too but I am determined to keep with mainstream cells these days.

No trade offs to me except the difference in length.


----------



## Badbeams3

AVService said:


> I know it is an easy decision for me,I am mainly limiting myself to AA lights these days.
> 
> I have plenty of others and batteries for them too but I am determined to keep with mainstream cells these days.
> 
> No trade offs to me except the difference in length.



Me either. I had just gotten a TN4A and to power it ordered a 4 pack of Eneloop pro's along with the charger...and another 4 pack for a total of 8. I am very happy with the TN4A, as well as the SC5. But I understand recDNA's situation is different.


----------



## AVService

Badbeams3 said:


> Me either. I had just gotten a TN4A and to power it ordered a 4 pack of Eneloop pro's along with the charger...and another 4 pack for a total of 8. I am very happy with the TN4A, as well as the SC5. But I understand recDNA's situation is different.


OK?

Obviously we each have our own reasons to pick whatever we do.

I am excited to see something this bright and capable in an AA version for sure!

I have carried the SC52 since it came out and I am hoping this one is more of the same.

I also have an SC80 with similar knurling to this SC5 and really look forward to getting another sort of similar.


----------



## 18650

recDNA said:


> Several have mentioned that the sc5 is big, heavy, and a pocket shredder and I would have to invest money in another battery type. Eneloop pros are expensive and do not come with a charger like the cheap brands do


 Is the Eneloop Pro 4 AA pack with 4 bay individual channel smart charger for $24 considered too expensive?


----------



## Lumencrazy

18650 said:


> Is the Eneloop Pro 4 AA pack with 4 bay individual channel smart charger for $24 considered too expensive?



Sometimes they package the charger with the older generation batteries. be careful!


----------



## WalkIntoTheLight

Lumencrazy said:


> Sometimes they package the charger with the older generation batteries. be careful!



Even on regular Eneloops, the SC5 probably has better run-times than an SC32 on rechargeable li-ion. Those RCR123's don't have a lot of juice.

But if length is your real concern, the SC32 is your best bet.


----------



## Badbeams3

AVService said:


> OK?
> 
> Obviously we each have our own reasons to pick whatever we do.
> 
> I am excited to see something this bright and capable in an AA version for sure!
> 
> I have carried the SC52 since it came out and I am hoping this one is more of the same.
> 
> I also have an SC80 with similar knurling to this SC5 and really look forward to getting another sort of similar.



Yea, I also like the knurling way more than the ribbing. And I still find it amazing that it can put out so much from a common AA. Blows my S15 on 14500 out of the water, so to speak. Did you order the CW or NW?


----------



## AVService

Badbeams3 said:


> Yea, I also like the knurling way more than the ribbing. And I still find it amazing that it can put out so much from a common AA. Blows my S15 on 14500 out of the water, so to speak. Did you order the CW or NW?


NW,I have a few others and for me it is the only way to go.


----------



## Badbeams3

AVService said:


> NW,I have a few others and for me it is the only way to go.



I have a Nitecore EC25 NW. Made me decide I like the NW tint more. Bean quality is better on the SC5 NW...smoother.


----------



## recDNA

AVService said:


> I know it is an easy decision for me,I am mainly limiting myself to AA lights these days.
> 
> I have plenty of others and batteries for them too but I am determined to keep with mainstream cells these days.
> 
> No trade offs to me except the difference in length.


I can understand the sentiment.


----------



## AVService

I have Zebras that are both standard and NW and a Daylight too and for my use mainly ID-ing wire and things inside of cabinets and racks there is no contest,the NW is better all the way around.

They are also far better to me outside at night as nature still looks Natural with the NW.

There are still plenty of standard lights that I like and use but it is getting tougher to live with most of them as I transition to more neutral tints too.


----------



## recDNA

18650 said:


> Is the Eneloop Pro 4 AA pack with 4 bay individual channel smart charger for $24 considered too expensive?


Kind of. I saw 17.99 for 4 pack alone. Sounds like a lot for AA batteries when I only need 1 or 2 for sc5.


----------



## AVService

recDNA said:


> I can understand the sentiment. I had a good brand 18650 vent in my home and it scared the heck out of me. I feel safe with single cr123a primaries but eneloops are even safer so I was leaning toward sc5 despite expense be it has to be comfortable to carry and clip.


I agree completely and I am counting on it being as easy to EDC as the SC52 too!

I keep telling myself I will use rechargeable's and keep buying them and better chargers but the reality for me is that I just can not trust myself to keep the charging up well enough to get me by?

So I am resigned to using Primaries as needed and go through them so fast that I have yet to suffer for it other than buying them.
Eneloops though I seem to be able to keep charged mostly as I have so many sets from Camera gear and they are there if I need them but just keeping track of them is a pain to me so I mostly use Leakers daily.


----------



## Badbeams3

recDNA said:


> I can understand the sentiment. I had a good brand 18650 vent in my home and it scared the heck out of me. I feel safe with single cr123a primaries but eneloops are even safer so I was leaning toward sc5 despite expense be it has to be comfortable to carry and clip.



Ah. If your not going to use lithium rechargeables I would definitely go with the SC5. Going with the SC32 would be very expensive to fuel over time.


----------



## WarRaven

This is like watching a couple former race car drivers talking about getting grocery getting cars and giving it all up.
Reassuring each other and settling.

Its all spiraling out of control!!!

THIS IS CPF! 
We'll keep the home lights on 🔦


----------



## snowlover91

recDNA said:


> I can understand the sentiment. I had a good brand 18650 vent in my home and it scared the heck out of me. I feel safe with single cr123a primaries but eneloops are even safer so I was leaning toward sc5 despite expense be it has to be comfortable to carry and clip.



The weight of the SC5 isn't too bad and it does have longer runtimes as well. I find the SC32 on rechargeables gets about 60-65% of the runtimes listed (since its runtimes are listed with primaries). The runtime is a little better on the SC5 compared with the SC32 on the medium and high modes. I tested the lowest high mode on my SC32w and measured 2 hours and 40 minutes. On my SC5w at the same mode and brightness I measured close to 4 hours runtime. Along with being safer since it uses NIMH it's also going to give better runtimes and a little extra brightness. The pocket clip isn't too bad but I replaced mine with a $7 clip from banggood, it's the titanium alloy clip on there and works much better. 

I I like the compact size of the SC32w better but the AA/NIMH use of the SC5w better along with the knurling. You may want to consider the Duracell branded ones, they're Eneloop pros and are a little cheaper. If you have one of the new Nitecore chargers they'll charge eneloops and do a great job charging just about any battery type and chemistry.


----------



## recDNA

No I have a 2 bay cheap eneloop charger that came with a four pack of duraloops about 5 years ago. I still have the duraloops but I don't know if they are good after all this time. Intended to use them in 4sevens titanium quark but ended up using aw 14500.


----------



## WalkIntoTheLight

AVService said:


> I keep telling myself I will use rechargeable's and keep buying them and better chargers but the reality for me is that I just can not trust myself to keep the charging up well enough to get me by?
> 
> So I am resigned to using Primaries as needed and go through them so fast that I have yet to suffer for it other than buying them.
> Eneloops though I seem to be able to keep charged mostly as I have so many sets from Camera gear and they are there if I need them but just keeping track of them is a pain to me so I mostly use Leakers daily.



Don't use alkaleaks in the SC5, if you want to use the high modes. They won't be able to supply enough current. Stick with Eneloops, or similar.


----------



## wjv

I think these new AA based lights will eventually make the 1xCR123 lights obsolete as I just don't see any movement to make CR123s with higher mAh ratings. On the flip side rechargeable AA batteries have been getting better over the past couple of years (900->1200->1900->2500). Combine this with better drivers that squeeze more power and run-times out of these new AAs and these lights are now better than ever.


----------



## AVService

Well I got the shipping email for mine already and it is coming from Dallas too,I don't know where the speculation came from about them shipping from offshore to the U.S. but I am happy it is not how this one is going!


----------



## marinemaster

Wjv you are right. This may be a question for the batt forum but I wonder what the theoretical limit is for the AA in mAh. 
AA battery capacity sure has come a long way. I am glad a company like Zebra is bringing the best out of AA. [emoji2]


----------



## WalkIntoTheLight

marinemaster said:


> Wjv you are right. This may be a question for the batt forum but I wonder what the theoretical limit is for the AA in mAh.
> AA battery capacity sure has come a long way. I am glad a company like Zebra is bringing the best out of AA. [emoji2]



HJK tests the AA Eneloops up to 10 amps. They sag down to 1.0 volts at that current, but the pros still deliver about 1750mAh and the regulars 1500mAh. I think that's probably the realistic limit, at least for now.

Someone posted the SC5 uses about 6 amps on max. When I get mine, I'll post all the tailcap current measurements.


----------



## AVService

WalkIntoTheLight said:


> Don't use alkaleaks in the SC5, if you want to use the high modes. They won't be able to supply enough current. Stick with Eneloops, or similar.


Luckily I am not too concerned with the high modes I mainly am after utility and reliability at close range as with my SC52 so I am fine with the Alkaline usually.
I know this is blasphemy here to many but I don't need or use a lot of lumens most of the time for day to day use.
Runtime vs. not having to be concerned with charging while I work is what this light is about for me and just keeping track of charged and not charged batteries is just not worth the time to me usually.


----------



## WalkIntoTheLight

AVService said:


> Luckily I am not too concerned with the high modes I mainly am after utility and reliability at close range as with my SC52 so I am fine with the Alkaline usually.



You won't find much of an improvement over the SC52 if you're using alkalines. If you want to get another light, perhaps go for the SC5w, or a SC52w, so you get a choice of tint. Otherwise, stick with the SC52.


----------



## AVService

WalkIntoTheLight said:


> You won't find much of an improvement over the SC52 if you're using alkalines. If you want to get another light, perhaps go for the SC5w, or a SC52w, so you get a choice of tint. Otherwise, stick with the SC52.


I have the SC5w inbound as we speak. 
Got notice that it shipped Yesterday.
Mainly I want a new light and with the knurling and the tint that the SC5w has over the SC52s that I already use every day.


----------



## fnj

Your use case for primary batteries is certainly valid; in fact a personal preference could hardly be said to be invalid. However, performance is the LAST reason most of us have consigned alkaleaks to the garbage heap of history. I know I am not alone when I say they have ruined my last piece of equipment and will never get another chance.

I would recommend consideration of L91 Energizer lithium iron disulfide cells for just this reason. It's "only" money.


----------



## thedoc007

fnj said:


> I would recommend consideration of L91 Energizer lithium cells for just this reason. It's "only" money.



Yep. Not only does this virtually eliminate the potential for leaks...it is also better performance-wise, AND will give you longer runtime. Except for the cost, there is no downside.


----------



## AVService

fnj said:


> Your use case for primary batteries is certainly valid; in fact a personal preference could hardly be said to be invalid. However, performance is the LAST reason most of us have consigned alkaleaks to the garbage heap of history. I know I am not alone when I say they have ruined my last piece of equipment and will never get another chance.
> 
> I would recommend consideration of L91 Energizer lithium iron disulfide cells for just this reason. It's "only" money.


I use them a lot but not day to day.
I can go through 2 or 3 AA a day in the SC52 or a ZL headlamp and for the length of time they are in the lights I have just not yet had an incident even once.
Now for lights that I do not use all the time I am not using the leakers but I am comfortable for now that cycling them through the light keeps the leaking chances to a minimum based on performance to date.

I wish I could hold myself to a higher standard with charging but I am being realistic and know I won't spend the effort it takes so I suppose I am willing to tempt fate!


----------



## WarRaven

AVService said:


> I use them a lot but not day to day.
> I can go through 2 or 3 AA a day in the SC52 or a ZL headlamp and for the length of time they are in the lights I have just not yet had an incident even once.
> Now for lights that I do not use all the time I am not using the leakers but I am comfortable for now that cycling them through the light keeps the leaking chances to a minimum based on performance to date.
> 
> I wish I could hold myself to a higher standard with charging but I am being realistic and know I won't spend the effort it takes so I suppose I am willing to tempt fate!


2-3 cells a day?
Laziness has a cost indeed.

Just abuse some Duraloops, charge when you feel like it, even if full, they go for close to what Alkaleaks do retail pricing wise. 

Who cares if you lose a few charge cycles due to abuse, you're still ahead. 
Idk, what floats your boat might sink mine I guess. 

Have a great one.


----------



## chuckhov

"Charging" to me is just another part of the hobby.

I'm charging as I type, and actually enjoy it with the digital readout of my Nitecore D4.... If it were not for the digital readout, like in the past, I would tend to let things go...

Doesn't take much to keep me entertained, I guess

Take care,
-Chuck


----------



## WarRaven

chuckhov said:


> "Charging" to me is just another part of the hobby.
> 
> I'm charging as I type, and actually enjoy it with the digital readout of my Nitecore D4.... If it were not for the digital readout, like in the past, I would tend to let things go...
> 
> Doesn't take much to keep me entertained, I guess
> 
> Take care,
> -Chuck


Can be entertaining watching numbers click by.. Imagine like Bill Gates in the 90's when they recorded his income by the second.

OK maybe not that much fun, but entertaining. ☺


----------



## Badbeams3

Why not just buy 4 Eneloop pro's that come with the charger for $25. Simplifies the whole thing and then you have a slow (slow is good, less deterioration of the cells from heat while charging) smart charger that shuts off when done? Each cell is charged s*eparately and *you can mix AAA and AA, charging at the same time.

http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00JHKSL1O/?tag=cpf0b6-20


----------



## more_vampires

WarRaven said:


> Can be entertaining watching numbers click by.. Imagine like Bill Gates in the 90's when they recorded his income by the second



Imagine like Bill Gates in the 90's when they recorded his stolen money and RICO profits by the second.

Fixed that for you. Recall that Europe says it was crime. In the US, the bribes had already been paid. Guess it's no wonder that the EU wanted their slice as well.

Remember, this is a guy who made dumb statements in his autobio that proved he'd never even heard of Shannon's law (shannon-hartley) before.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shannon–Hartley_theorem



> During 1928, Hartley formulated a way to quantify information and its line rate (also known as data signalling rate _R_ bits per second).[1]​ This method, later known as Hartley's law, became an important precursor for Shannon's more sophisticated notion of channel capacity.



Yeah, right. Bill Gates doesn't need to be pestered with *actual engineering.* Oh no.

He said dumb stuff about wireless transmission and was totally wrong about wired bandwidth. *This does not deserve billions and billions in personal wealth. He couldn't solder to save his life and ripped people off, screwing over Paul Allen. *MS would have never taken off without Paul Allen. All Bill knew was to stab him in the back and screw him over. This world would be a better place if Paul Allen had been CEO. Steve Ballmer would never have happened. A million trainwrecks would have been prevented as PA was even more OCD than Steve Jobs.

Fricking a-hole moron. Not Paul Allen, talking about evil nasty soulless person named Gates.

Sorry. We were talking about Bill Gates. Bill and Melinda (former playboy playmate worked in Microsoft mail room, and yes pics and it did happen) Gates Foundation is a pathetic attempt to try to buy back some soul from the devil. Countless honest legit businesses and people have been *destroyed* by this monstrosity! It had nothing to do with business.

Sorry, rant over.


----------



## KeepingItLight

I prefer a NiMH charger/tester that can charge/discharge/test/analyze NiMH batteries. The Opus BT-C700 is a modestly priced example. Check out the review by HKJ. I just ordered one, even though my Nitecore Digicharger D4 can also charge NiMH. The D4, however, is not an analyzer.


----------



## more_vampires

KeepingItLight said:


> I prefer a NiMH charger/tester that can charge/discharge/test/analyze NiMH batteries. The Opus BT-C700 is a modestly priced example. Check out the review by HKJ. I just ordered one, even though my Nitecore Digicharger D4 can also charge NiMH. The D4, however, is not an analyzer.


 
What does CPF like for a battery analyzer? I'm in the market for one atm. Power strike just killed lots of my gear.


----------



## KeepingItLight

more_vampires said:


> What does CPF like for a battery analyzer? I'm in the market for one atm. Power strike just killed lots of my gear.



As newbie to battery analyzers, I am the wrong person to ask. Hopefully, someone else will help out.

Having said that, I am sure many will recommend the older, but still excellent, MH-C9000 WizardOne Charger-Analyzer. Just be aware that you need to leave your batteries in it for a period of trickle charging after the charger reports they are done. See the review by HKJ.

Models by La Crosse Technology are also highly regarded. 

Opus now has analyzers that can handle both Li-ion and NiMH. I compared the HKJ reviews of them with the HKJ review of the BT-C700, and concluded that the latter does a better job at NiMH. 

I may end up regretting that choice, however, because I have nothing at present that will discharge/analyze Li-ion. I would love to have something that would automatically discharge Li-ion to its optimal voltage for storage. I have to look up the exact number, but I think that's around 3.7v.


----------



## WarRaven

Good grief, poorly chosen analogy on my behalf.

I've feelings as everyone does on the matter, but not here.

Sorry I caused a derailment.


----------



## chuckhov

Mike,

It was really my fault for saying that I liked to watch my D4 charger:-(

You're ok

Done charging now:-( - But, Lights tonight, and then Charging again tomorrow!

Wheee! - It's so much fun to be me
-Chuck


----------



## more_vampires

No prob friend, I get back on topic like lightning! ...like the kind that fried a bunch of my stuff! Anything unplugged at the time was okay.

Anyway, it's time for a battery analyzer. 



> Oh, this is how it starts, lightning strikes the heart
> It goes off like a gun, brighter than the sun
> Oh, we could be the stars, falling from the sky
> Shining how we want, brighter than the sun



--The CPF Anthem, by Colbie Caillat. "Brighter than the sun."

Maybe a lightning strike leads to better gear?


----------



## WarRaven

chuckhov said:


> Mike,
> 
> It was really my fault for saying that I liked to watch my D4 charger:-(
> 
> You're ok
> 
> Done charging now:-( - But, Lights tonight, and then Charging again tomorrow!
> 
> Wheee! - It's so much fun to be me
> -Chuck


☺👍 Chuck.
As gentle as a gentlemen does. 

I know, them darn lights, hard to look away. I'm wondering if they know we need lights to look at while our lights charge?
J/k


----------



## AVService

WarRaven said:


> 2-3 cells a day?
> Laziness has a cost indeed.
> 
> Just abuse some Duraloops, charge when you feel like it, even if full, they go for close to what Alkaleaks do retail pricing wise.
> 
> Who cares if you lose a few charge cycles due to abuse, you're still ahead.
> Idk, what floats your boat might sink mine I guess.
> 
> Have a great one.


1/2 the fun of being here is mentioning that I prefer Alkaline to charging for every workday use.
Why can you not accept that I prefer to use'em and discard vs the extra routine required to charge and all that goes with it?
I have plenty of batteries that I can charge both Lithium and Eneloop and for my work I prefer to not hassle with it,if you can not understand.......

I can be running a light on a typical day for 4 to 8 hours and so I go through a lot of batteries. I do not pay a lot either for the Panasonic or Duracell or Energizer Pro cells through local distributors and this is one thing that does not take more time for me to keep going.

So I do not.


----------



## WarRaven

AVService said:


> 1/2 the fun of being here is mentioning that I prefer Alkaline to charging for every workday use.
> Why can you not accept that I prefer to use'em and discard vs the extra routine required to charge and all that goes with it?
> I have plenty of batteries that I can charge both Lithium and Eneloop and for my work I prefer to not hassle with it,if you can not understand.......
> 
> I can be running a light on a typical day for 4 to 8 hours and so I go through a lot of batteries. I do not pay a lot either for the Panasonic or Duracell or Energizer Pro cells through local distributors and this is one thing that does not take more time for me to keep going.
> 
> So I do not.


Right on, well you've got a system.
It is different, and to each his own at the end of the day. Sorry I can't understand the waste, but that is me and I am trying to be open minded of these situations. Though in the end, it is a waste, perfect for Duracell sales and others, but not so much the rest of the picture. Like recycling etc..
Again, what floats your boat, would sink mine, cheers to being different.


----------



## more_vampires

I simply adjusted my gear until I no longer have to recharge.

It's like my paklite super 9v. I change the battery maybe once every year and a half or more. I put it on another dead smoke alarm battery when it gets a "fresher new dead battery."

Work related throws in limits that prevent some of the best flashaholic tricks.


----------



## WalkIntoTheLight

AVService said:


> 1/2 the fun of being here is mentioning that I prefer Alkaline to charging for every workday use.
> Why can you not accept that I prefer to use'em and discard vs the extra routine required to charge and all that goes with it?
> I have plenty of batteries that I can charge both Lithium and Eneloop and for my work I prefer to not hassle with it,if you can not understand.......
> 
> I can be running a light on a typical day for 4 to 8 hours and so I go through a lot of batteries. I do not pay a lot either for the Panasonic or Duracell or Energizer Pro cells through local distributors and this is one thing that does not take more time for me to keep going.
> 
> So I do not.



If you want to use disposables, that's up to you. But I'm not sure why you'd buy a top-of-the-line 1xAA light like the SC5w, if you plan to use alkalines in it. You'll end up only getting about 20% output on it, and even at that you'll be over-stressing the alkaline.

Alkalines are designed for crap lights. Buy a Maglite, or some cheap 1xAA light in Walmart or the dollar store. Then stuff it with alkalines. It'll be fine, and you'll save about $60.

Of course, if you want to save another $60 within a few months, buy a Eneloop combo pack at Costco, and just keep all your used batteries in the charger. The included BQ-CC17 is a smart single-channel charger with no trickle charge, so it can't hurt your Eneloops.


----------



## AVService

I have and use Maha chargers for the charging that I do,not a big deal.
That is not the point though and it is obvious that we will not see things the same way.
As you admit you can not see my reasoning about this and that is just fine with me too!

I clearly appreciate the advantages of better quality lights and I have many as most of us here seem to.
I am way too busy working to think about recharging if I am to have light for the next day.
I have attempted to make it work for 30 years or so and I know what is realistic for me and what is not.

Different Strokes,as they say.


----------



## chuckhov

Well, this thread has taught me something.

You can bet that I will never admit on these Forums to having a 20pk of Alkaleaks stuffed away in a drawer, for 'just in case' use.

No Sir - Not Me!
-Chuck


----------



## AVService

chuckhov said:


> Well, this thread has taught me something.
> 
> You can bet that I will never admit on these Forums to having a 20pk of Alkaleaks stuffed away in a drawer, for 'just in case' use.
> 
> No Sir - Not Me!
> -Chuck


Well I have plenty in case you need some.


----------



## WalkIntoTheLight

chuckhov said:


> Well, this thread has taught me something.
> 
> You can bet that I will never admit on these Forums to having a 20pk of Alkaleaks stuffed away in a drawer, for 'just in case' use.
> 
> No Sir - Not Me!
> -Chuck



Nothing wrong with that, as long as you _never _use them.


----------



## snowlover91

AVService said:


> I have and use Maha chargers for the charging that I do,not a big deal.
> That is not the point though and it is obvious that we will not see things the same way.
> As you admit you can not see my reasoning about this and that is just fine with me too!
> 
> I clearly appreciate the advantages of better quality lights and I have many as most of us here seem to.
> I am way too busy working to think about recharging if I am to have light for the next day.
> I have attempted to make it work for 30 years or so and I know what is realistic for me and what is not.
> 
> Different Strokes,as they say.



Just curious if you plan to use rechargeables at some point for your SC5? I know the tests so far on high show that alkalines have a super short life so you'll have to use the 180 and below lumen levels. I assume these are sufficient for your use and the 200+ lumens is not needed?


----------



## Mr Floppy

with the advent of the low self discharge NiMH, why is charging such a pain? Even my father manages to work a charger. Has a dozen charged spare and uses two at a time.


----------



## WalkIntoTheLight

snowlover91 said:


> Just curious if you plan to use rechargeables at some point for your SC5? I know the tests so far on high show that alkalines have a super short life so you'll have to use the 180 and below lumen levels. I assume these are sufficient for your use and the 200+ lumens is not needed?



When you look at the discharge curves for alkaleaks, their capacity drops about 50% if you use them at just 500mA drain. On a Zebralight, that's about 100 lumens.

The 180 lumen level is likely using about 1000mA draw on the battery, which would give it about 33% capacity. However, selfbuilt tested alkalines, and you won't even get to use the 180 lumen level for more than a couple of minutes, because the battery won't be able to do it.

So, you're pretty much stuck with using low and medium modes, if you want to use alkaleaks. Maybe some brief use at 100 lumens (the lowest "high" submode). It's still an interesting light on alkalines, but you're giving up 80% or more of its potential output.


----------



## AVService

snowlover91 said:


> Just curious if you plan to use rechargeables at some point for your SC5? I know the tests so far on high show that alkalines have a super short life so you'll have to use the 180 and below lumen levels. I assume these are sufficient for your use and the 200+ lumens is not needed?


Yes and Yes


----------



## RedForest UK

AVService said:


> I have plenty of batteries that I can charge both Lithium and Eneloop and for my work I prefer to not hassle with it,if you can not understand.......
> 
> I can be running a light on a typical day for 4 to 8 hours and so I go through a lot of batteries.



I completely understand not wanting extra hassle. But isn't carrying around primary cells, regularly swapping batteries (and finding a bin to throw away the old ones) almost as much hassle anyway?

With rechargeables I would expect you to have to do a bit less swapping batteries, so the extra effort is, I suppose, in storing the used cells and remembering which are used when putting another replacement in. 

If you use the light 4-8 hours a day generally on medium levels then I can't help but think that an 18650 light like the SC62w would save you significantly more hassle (and money in the long run) as you shouldn't even ever need to change batteries in the day. It's really not much bigger than the SC5 either..


----------



## AVService

RedForest UK said:


> I completely understand not wanting extra hassle. But isn't carrying around primary cells, regularly swapping batteries (and finding a bin to throw away the old ones) almost as much hassle anyway?
> 
> With rechargeables I would expect you to have to do a bit less swapping batteries, so the extra effort is, I suppose, in storing the used cells and remembering which are used when putting another replacement in.
> 
> If you use the light 4-8 hours a day generally on medium levels then I can't help but think that an 18650 light like the SC62w would save you significantly more hassle (and money in the long run) as you shouldn't even ever need to change batteries in the day. It's really not much bigger than the SC5 either..


No,it is not nearly as much hassle.
And I just throw them in the trash,not a hassle at all.

Crucify me for this too.


----------



## RedForest UK

AVService said:


> Crucify me for this too.



Hey, I'm really not. It's your job and I haven't done it, so while I can think to myself that rechargeables can't be that much more effort, I can't even say for sure what I'd do myself in your situation.

I'm serious about the SC62w possibility though. Have you considered 18650 and not needing to swap batteries in the day at all, or is li-ion just something you don't want to get into?


----------



## WarRaven

AVService said:


> No,it is not nearly as much hassle.
> And I just throw them in the trash,not a hassle at all.
> 
> Crucify me for this too.


AVS, sorry to hassle you.
I am, I just want throw one more thought at you OK?

What if you bought one pack of Duraloops with slow charger, and leave the thing plugged in the wall socket and take two cells out of it each day, to be replaced when you get home.
The one cell is in your light, with long run times, and you've a back up in pocket.
I am not sure I can use two AA in a eight hour shift, even if I leave my light on.
Consider it a minute.
It's a win-win for everyone, including environment, your companies waste of profits etc.
You are not being cornered but one day, the free AA ride may be over and you're back looking at rechargeable or paying out of pocket. 
Have a great one AVS.


----------



## AVService

OK this will be my last post here until I actually get the light and have a chance to use it with alkalines which I plan to do.

First off I will say that as I age I can not see anything anymore unless it is lit up like Christmas pretty much.
Couple this with the fact that I am in dark places all the time and work in even darker places and inside dark rooms ad closets and I need a light almost always during the day.

I also wear glasses and can not see well either close or far at the same time ever and it drives me insane!
So I am constantly taking the glasses off and setting them down and my ranges always require added light too.

I buy a box of 40 ProCells for under $10 ad I usually stock a few boxes of AA,AAA,9v,C and D cells as I can go through them at times.
The AA and AAA I use all the time and it will not be uncommon to use a box or two in one day if I walk into a job and find ALL of the remote controls dead and this often is the case.

So I pay less than a quarter for an AA or AAA cell.
I carry at least 4 lights at all times in my pockets,2 are AA.1 AAA and 1 123.
If I am working I have another AA and 123 light in the Skinth at all times too and lately I have been carrying an E 05 and D25aaa also in the watch pocket in my jeans as well.
I also have a small belt pouch with a ZL AA Headlamp in Neutral tint and a small Black Diamond 2aaa HL that can dim as needed.

My lights are each chosen for flexibility and ability to carry in my mouth which I need to do a lot.Headlamps need to be small and long running while still flexible in output.

So I carry AA and AAA in my main tool pouch at all times along with way too many tools and I carry a small fishing tackle bag with multiple plastic parts organizers in it too on every call or stop I make,I also carry a bag of cables of every description and often I have to walk a good distance to the site and have a small wheeled dolly to carry the pouch and parts for this.

So I am keeping track of a lot lot of stuff all the time and still I rarely have what I need and have to go back to the truck often to get things that I need and bring it all back when I am done.

I have already stated that I have many,many Eneloops and other batteries that charge and I am hardly an amateur here and I know the options for charging and have many methods available to charge as needed.
It is not a lack of know-how or resources that keeps me from charging for my work lights.

I simply choose to use Leakers for convenience,I know the features and potential of each option ad I have found a system that works for me and has for 30 years,yes I could be your Father too!

For me this Convenience means:
Not tracking charged and not charged cells
Not remembering to charge them
Not needing a way to carry and keep them separate
Using mainly AAA and AA cells means the light will fit in my mouth,18650 lights are too heavy and/or too big in diameter. Believe me I have several and have tried them.


I simply don't need to give this any more thought than making sure I have my lights with me so in the event that one dies I stick it in a pocket,grab its backup and keep working.
Later I throw the dead battery in the trash,stick a new one in there and repeat.

If this makes little sense to anyone else.....So Be It!

There is more than one way to use these lights,thats all.

I am looking forward the the SC5 too and am excited to try it with Alkaline batteries.


----------



## RedForest UK

Fair enough, let us know how you get on.

One side-note, you may be surprised how lightweight the SC62 and li-ions are:

Zebralight SC5 58g + Duracell procell AA 23g = 81g -- (48 lumens 5.6hrs)
Zebralight SC62 42g + NCR18650b 18650 45g = 87g -- (70 lumens 30hrs)

I'll admit the SC62's length may make it a bit more awkward to hold in the mouth though.


----------



## chuckhov

"Zebralight SC62 42g + NCR18650b 18650 45g = 87g -- (70 lumens 30hrs)"

Does anyone actually 'know' this to be true?

If so, that's some really Extreme runtime.

Thanks,
-Chuck


----------



## WalkIntoTheLight

AVService said:


> I am looking forward the the SC5 too and am excited to try it with Alkaline batteries.



If you looked as Selfbuilt's review, you shouldn't be looking forward to it if you're planning on using alkalines. You'll get 100 lumens out of it (instead of 500). But, it will work well at the medium and low levels (50 lumens and under). If you stay away from the high modes, it will probably last all day on 1 battery.

An SC52 would have been $10 cheaper, a little smaller, and done everything the SC5 can do on an alkaline.

Both lights are "meh" on an alkaline, but great lights on an Eneloop.

2xAA would perform better on alkalines. Something like an Armytek Prime A2 would make a good work light (stands up to abuse), and could give you more output on alkalines.


----------



## Badbeams3

Not to bad on the 50 lumen setting. And very good on the 20 lumen setting. Any other lights beat this run time at a similar levels on alkaline?


----------



## AVService

WalkIntoTheLight said:


> If you looked as Selfbuilt's review, you shouldn't be looking forward to it if you're planning on using alkalines. You'll get 100 lumens out of it (instead of 500). But, it will work well at the medium and low levels (50 lumens and under). If you stay away from the high modes, it will probably last all day on 1 battery.
> 
> An SC52 would have been $10 cheaper, a little smaller, and done everything the SC5 can do on an alkaline.
> 
> Both lights are "meh" on an alkaline, but great lights on an Eneloop.
> 
> 2xAA would perform better on alkalines. Something like an Armytek Prime A2 would make a good work light (stands up to abuse), and could give you more output on alkalines.



Really?

I already have several SC52,maybe you should pay more attention.

meh on alkaline is your impression but maybe not the only point of view too.

And yeah I said I would not post again till I got the SC5,Oh Well?


----------



## WarRaven

AVService said:


> Really?
> 
> I already have several SC52,maybe you should pay more attention.
> 
> meh on alkaline is your impression but maybe not the only point of view too.
> 
> And yeah I said I would not post again till I got the SC5,Oh Well?


Just not your weekend bud.☺

Ooh well, at least we all get to experience another's perspective that is slightly off of the normal here. I'm not saying it's bad to be different in this respect, it's just differing to us, and yourself being a flashaholic. 

Have a great Sunday AVS👍


----------



## WalkIntoTheLight

WarRaven said:


> Ooh well, at least we all get to experience another's perspective that is slightly off of the normal here. I'm not saying it's bad to be different in this respect, it's just differing to us, and yourself being a flashaholic.



It's certainly different, anyway. I do think it's bad to needlessly pollute the environment by throwing away several alkalines a day, simply because it's easier to throw them in the trash than to throw them in a charger. Especially when the light he's using them in is specifically designed for rechargeables, and vastly under-performs on alkalines.

But, yeah, his right to do what he wants.

We have all kinds of "environmental charges" on electronics, where I live. I don't like them, because there's no alternative to avoiding the tax, other than to not buy any electronics. However, a tax on disposable alkaline batteries would make sense, because there's an easy alternative to them. Might make some people rethink their use of alkalines.


----------



## uofaengr

AVService said:


> First off I will say that as I age I can not see anything anymore unless it is lit up like Christmas pretty much.



I'd think this would be even more reason to use Eneloops or L91 if hellbent on primaries rather than settle with 50 lumens all day with alkalines.


----------



## AVService

I am having a fine weekend?

It truly does not effect my breathing how this forum feels about my using batteries as they see fit aside from the idea that there is but one right way.

It is somewhat amusing how many times some of you will repeat the same arguments as though I have to reconsider my decision to use and pitch Alkaline's and maybe if you just throw it put there again I will come to my senses or something.

It is all in your point of view.


----------



## Badbeams3

AVService said:


> I am having a fine weekend?
> 
> It truly does not effect my breathing how this forum feels about my using batteries as they see fit aside from the idea that there is but one right way.
> 
> It is somewhat amusing how many times some of you will repeat the same arguments as though I have to reconsider my decision to use and pitch Alkaline's and maybe if you just throw it put there again I will come to my senses or something.
> 
> It is all in your point of view.



That's it. You need to be exactly like us or your out. Let's start by dressing properly for flashlight operation...and don't overlook the white shoes.


----------



## WarRaven

AVService said:


> I am having a fine weekend?
> 
> It truly does not effect my breathing how this forum feels about my using batteries as they see fit aside from the idea that there is but one right way.
> 
> It is somewhat amusing how many times some of you will repeat the same arguments as though I have to reconsider my decision to use and pitch Alkaline's and maybe if you just throw it put there again I will come to my senses or something.
> 
> It is all in your point of view.



I hope you're certainly not implying that its just us, concerned over waste an our environment?

The entire world that actually has a consciousness does in fact care when some waste so much like this.

This is a genuine concern, fellow old man.
We'd be remiss not to try an avoid waste where possible.

I turn 48 years young tomorrow, my eyes have lost ability to gather light as well as my son. Though even he realizes what waste is.
Point of view, sure,.. Just one worth fighting stubborn for. 

I'll have a great day too, thanks.


----------



## chuckhov

"I turn 48 years young tomorrow..."


I really hope that you Mean it when you use the word "young".

When I was 48, old guys would say "Why, you're just a Young Man". - Yeah right, I thought.

Know what? - They were right.

I think that it's important to always remember that Today is the first day of the rest of your life, and that you will Never again be any younger in this life than you are today!

Sorry guys for the OT, but I just wanted to say that...

Please don't tell on me, but I have a 4D Incan Mag, that has 4 'fairly new' Wal-Mart Ray-O-Vacs in it that I use to bring myself back to Earth on a regular basis - Just a minute of that usually does it for me

I would dearly Love to get some Tenergy LSDs for it, but with what they cost, and then a new charger too...:-(

Please don't Stone me - I mean well
-Chuck


----------



## AVService

Badbeams3 said:


> That's it. You need to be exactly like us or your out. Let's start by dressing properly for flashlight operation...and don't overlook the white shoes.



Exactly where did you find this early Pic of me?
I thought I was living off the Grid back them too?


----------



## AVService

WarRaven said:


> I hope you're certainly not implying that its just us, concerned over waste an our environment?
> 
> The entire world that actually has a consciousness does in fact care when some waste so much like this.
> 
> This is a genuine concern, fellow old man.
> We'd be remiss not to try an avoid waste where possible.
> 
> I turn 48 years young tomorrow, my eyes have lost ability to gather light as well as my son. Though even he realizes what waste is.
> Point of view, sure,.. Just one worth fighting stubborn for.
> 
> I'll have a great day too, thanks.



Well you young whippersnapper all I can say is leave your critique of others social responsibility out of this conversation if you will.

If this is the real reason you have taken this position then what about my Huge Gas Guzzling Truck,it has a V8 engine!
Do I recycle enough for you otherwise?
I do not Mulch.
I rarely Recycle at all!
I do have some older incandescent bulbs and prefer them.
I actually urge clients to leave electronics in Standby even if it means there will be some current draw.

I also have way more flashlights than I could ever need and likely will be getting more.

Judge Yourself alone,Please.


----------



## Badbeams3

AVService said:


> Exactly where did you find this early Pic of me?
> I thought I was living off the Grid back them too?



Stole it from a book...The Fine Art of Flashlight Operation 101...chapter 1 "Proper Flashlight Etiquette". Page one, "Dress Code'.


----------



## AVService

Badbeams3 said:


> Stole it from a book...The Fine Art of Flashlight Operation 101...chapter 1 "Proper Flashlight Etiquette". Page one, "Dress Code'.


Well I guess the saying is true after all,

Live by The Sword,Die by The Sword?


----------



## WalkIntoTheLight

AVService said:


> OK this will be my last post here until I actually get the light and have a chance to use it with alkalines which I plan to do.



You've changed your mind and posted 5 times since that post a few hours ago. Maybe you will eventually change your mind on alkalines as well, and try some Eneloops in that new light.

It might not save the planet, but it won't be quite as bad for it. And just as important, you'll probably enjoy your new light more. Either that, or you're so sick of being nagged about using alkaleaks, that you might just pitch the new SC5 in the garbage too!


----------



## snowlover91

Looking forward to seeing your results AV. What other AA lights do you have that you regularly use and how is their performance? I don't use alkalines for flashlights but I do always have some on standby and for emergencies I certainly wouldn't hesitate to use them. I even have some old Nitecore PD lights that I've used alkaline with for emergencies and they seem to work quite well. Of course lights back then didn't draw nearly as much so I suppose that's why they work better. 

I will say that Selfbuilts tests showed great regulation with alkalines on the medium modes so you should see good runtimes and constant brightness at those 100 and below lumen levels. With 5-6 hours on one battery at 50 lumens it might be more efficient than your current lights? How soon will your light be coming? I'm sure the anticipation of a new light is hard to wait for


----------



## WarRaven

Chuck +1

Thanks old fellar lol.

Responsibility is 24/7, AVS.
Vehicles are essential, flashlights are not.

There's small steps we can all take or just ignore because it's too much effort.
Ignorance is bliss until shown otherwise, then it's just stubbornness/ignorance.
House still full of incandescent too I presume.

_ _ _ --- _ _ _


----------



## WalkIntoTheLight

WarRaven said:


> There's small steps we can all take or just ignore because it's too much effort.
> Ignorance is bliss until shown otherwise, then it's just stubbornness/ignorance.



The thing is, using Eneloops is hardly _any _more effort than using alkalines. Instead of throwing out an alkaline in the garbage, just pop it in the charger. Instead of taking a fresh alkaline from a box, just take it out of the charger. Really simple.

The cheap BQ-CC17 charger that comes packaged with Eneloops is a single-channel smart charger, that completely stops the charge when complete, and has 4 LED indicators to show which cells are complete. You can even leave it plugged into the wall all the time (I don't think it uses much standby current), and just pop your Eneloops (or other NiMH cells) in and out of the slots as needed.

Companies like Duracell and Energizer probably make a lot more money selling alkalines than they make from NiMH batteries. So, there's not much effort made to inform customers about the benefits of modern LSD NiMH batteries. But, now everyone reading this thread knows, so there's no excuse.


----------



## snowlover91

I think at this point it's best to leave the choice up to AV. I think the position for using rechargeables is pretty clear and at this point it's a choice for AV to make and whatever works best for him. I use rechargeables myself and advocate them to all my friends but at the end of the day you can't make someone use the same battery you do. Just like how we all have preferences for clicky lights or twist on, tail switch or side, forward clicky or side, super bright or moonlight. Everyone has preferences for their lights and setup that works for them and although we may disagree with AV I think the case for Eneloops has been presented enough to get the point across. 

I for one look forward to seeing his results using alkalines. In cases of emergency where they may be the only battery available or during power outages they do have their place. I've found they also won't leak if used frequently and not depleted too low. All the ones I've had leak were either completely depleted or left in a device for months or years without use. For those who use them regularly they shouldn't give problems as long as you're careful. Btw, I saw where AV uses 123 primary batteries. If you don't have one already the SC32 by Zebralight is a great light, very efficient and excellent runtimes and it'll give you plenty of brightness options.


----------



## WalkIntoTheLight

snowlover91 said:


> I for one look forward to seeing his results using alkalines.



You should check out Selfbuilt's review in the Reviews forum. He posted several graphs using alkalines. The one graph he seems to have missed, unfortunately, is the H2c mode (a little over 100 lumens). Other than that, the SC5 works great on medium modes, but sucks on the other high modes. In an emergency, alkaleaks will definitely work, since you probably won't be using high modes during an extended power outage.


----------



## more_vampires

> You can bet that I will never admit on these Forums to having a 20pk of Alkaleaks stuffed away in a drawer, for 'just in case' use.





AVService said:


> Well I have plenty in case you need some.



LOL, Mcnair, you can be really funny and nice sometimes! 

Reminder: I sell antique batteries that spew acid all over your precious machinery. I guess there is a place for the Mcnairs of the world, as I am one as well.

Luddite? Check. Curmudgeon? Check. You still owe me a drink, Mcnair! 



> If this is the real reason you have taken this position then what about my Huge Gas Guzzling Truck,it has a V8 engine!



Oh my! My favorite motorcycle has to run on marine or racing gasoline and use antique forumlations of engine oil! It has no catalytic converter whatsoever and spews the PCV/timed breather oil onto the pavement! The EPA is having a snit-fit! OMG, solid lifter engine!


----------



## AVService

WalkIntoTheLight said:


> The thing is, using Eneloops is hardly _any _more effort than using alkalines. Instead of throwing out an alkaline in the garbage, just pop it in the charger. Instead of taking a fresh alkaline from a box, just take it out of the charger. Really simple.
> 
> The cheap BQ-CC17 charger that comes packaged with Eneloops is a single-channel smart charger, that completely stops the charge when complete, and has 4 LED indicators to show which cells are complete. You can even leave it plugged into the wall all the time (I don't think it uses much standby current), and just pop your Eneloops (or other NiMH cells) in and out of the slots as needed.
> 
> Companies like Duracell and Energizer probably make a lot more money selling alkalines than they make from NiMH batteries. So, there's not much effort made to inform customers about the benefits of modern LSD NiMH batteries. But, now everyone reading this thread knows, so there's no excuse.



Which is just your opinion.

Why is this so tough?

Now I am stubborn or Ignorant if I do not make a choice that you do?

I am not judging those who choose to recharge and I would appreciate the same consideration.


----------



## WalkIntoTheLight

AVService said:


> I am not judging those who choose to recharge and I would appreciate the same consideration.



Because you're making the wrong decision
(1) Environmentally,
(2) Economically,
(3) Performance.

For a light like the SC5, using alkalines as your main choice is _wrong_. You can choose to do it, and I'm sure you will, but it's still wrong. If you wrote to Zebralight and asked if you can use alkalines, they'd tell you to get some Eneloops too.

But, okay, 'nuff said on that. Obviously you're not going to be convinced, and anyone else reading already understands the benefits of good NiMH cells in this light.


----------



## KeepingItLight

AVService said:


> Now I am stubborn or Ignorant if I do not make a choice that you do?



Heck, no!



AVService said:


> I am not judging those who choose to recharge and I would appreciate the same consideration.



And you deserve it. If you want to use disposable batteries, that's your business.

Not sure what the law is where you live, but here in California, used batteries are regarded as hazardous waste. Regulations regarding their disposal—which have the force of law—require that they be recycled. If similar rules apply where you reside, then it is fair to judge your decision to throw your alkalines in the trash. 

I might go further. Even if not required to do so by law, perhaps a heavy user such as yourself should voluntarily recycle his spent alkalines. By all means, use them, if you wish. But, please, reconsider your choice to dump them in a landfill.


----------



## more_vampires

KIL, even expired medication pills are hazardous waste.

I recharge like an SOB. I realize the savings and performance boost. Primaries are dead as dead can be in 2015, I feel that primaries are a bad choice unless you're in the business of world wide force projections and being shot at occasionally.


----------



## KeepingItLight

more_vampires said:


> KIL, even expired medication pills are hazardous waste.



With good reason.

When I go to dispose of something, it is hard to imagine that lil' ole me could have much effect on the environment. When I think of 2 billion people in the developed countries of the world all doing it at the same time, then I get a glimmer of why these rules exist.


----------



## fnj

For the love of mike, everyone, it is obvious that AVService was in full possession of all the pertinent information even before some of us started sermonizing and condescending. I certainly apologize if I somehow wasn't clear enough before, battery choice is solely AVService's sovereign business. How about we all lay off hijacking this thread before the moderators feel the need to set us right?


----------



## WarRaven

Yes, it's a dead horse.
My comments are being taken out of context and its just not worth it beyond that.

Thanks.


----------



## Badbeams3

I have heard rumors the Duracell "iron cores" and Amazon basic high capacity are re-branded Eneloop Pro's. Any one know if that's correct?


----------



## snowlover91

Badbeams3 said:


> I have heard rumors the Duracell "iron cores" and Amazon basic high capacity are re-branded Eneloop Pro's. Any one know if that's correct?



I've seen various tests by different individuals which conclude that both are rebranded Eneloop Pro's. I know my Duracells are and give better performance than my regular Eneloops. I think the same goes for the Amazon branded ones as well, similar to how the Panasonic and Sanyo lithium batteries are rebranded your Zebralight, Olight, Nitecore, etc. 

I agree we need to let AV use what he does and not keep bringing it up. The position for using rechargeables has been clearly stated and if he chooses to use alkalines that is his choice, he very well knows the benefits and it just doesn't work for him. Similar to how some prefer a tail clicky versus side switch, forward vs reverse clicky, etc. We all have different uses and needs for our lights and buy the ones which meet them accordingly. 

Personally I find alkalines great for emergency backup batteries since they are cheap. I certainly wouldn't leave them in a light for more than a few days but in the event of a prolonged power outage the alkalines are a great backup source. They won't give a ton of light but enough to get the job done. I keep a few packs of Rayovac AA around the house for just in case events and have a few cheaper lights that I use them in occasionally. The romisen aa lights are great for this btw with a $15 price tag and 70-90 lumens.

AV, please let us know how the light does once you receive it. I hope to see you do a "mini review" of it using alkalines, I for one would be interested in seeing your results and how they correspond with Selfbuilts testing. Good luck with it!


----------



## Burgess

snowlover91 said:


> I for one look forward to seeing his results using alkalines.
> In cases of emergency where they may be the only battery available
> or during power outages they do have their place.
> 
> *- Yes, indeed. I agree.*
> 
> I've found they also won't leak if used frequently and not depleted too low.
> All the ones I've had leak were either completely depleted
> or left in a device for months or years without use.
> 
> For those who use them regularly they shouldn't give problems as long as you're careful.




I am also a fan of keeping a supply of Alkalines on hand
for unforseen situations and emergencies.
Whether for your OWN use, or to help others.

I own a ZebraLight SC5w, and did a run-time test
on Medium-2 B mode (about 20 Lumens).

Duracell Quantum Alkaline cell lasted (at ~ 74 degrees F)
for 21.5 Hours, still in perfect regulation !

Then dropped down to Low-1 mode (no blinking was involved),
and continued to run for more than 30 minutes additional.
Nice to know it won't Leave You In the DARK !
:thumbsup:

I stopped my test at this point,
fearing possibility of cell Leakage.
( there was none )

Want to point out, for MY needs,
20 Lumens is PLENTY USEFUL for lots of activities !
Alkalines would be quite acceptable in this use.

As Long As They DON'T LEAK !


Couple things going for us here:

- Single cell alkaline is less likely to leak

- Modest current drain is less likely to leak
(this was perhaps 100mA load)

- Quality alkaline (as my choice here of Duracell Quantum)
is less likely to leak

- Prompt Removal of exhausted cell is less likely to leak

- Fresh-Dated alkaline is less likely to leak


But I have certainly experienced Alkalines 
of the major brands Leaking while 
STILL IN THE SEALED PACKAGE !

Fresh on the store rack, even !

So you see the (admittedly quite low)
potential here for Leaks.


Duracell Quantums are a recent product,
and I've not seen ANY of those with problems.

Yet, anyway . . . .


Just another item in our Supply Arsenal.


lovecpf
_


----------



## WalkIntoTheLight

Burgess said:


> I am also a fan of keeping a supply of Alkalines on hand
> for unforseen situations and emergencies.
> Whether for your OWN use, or to help others.



Giving them away to others is a good use for them. I'm an Eneloop-nut, and have way more Eneloops than I'll probably ever find a use for, but I won't give them away. They'll probably be abused, or I won't get them back, etc. I like them pristine.

But I also have plenty of alkaleaks that come included with gadgets I buy. I just put them in a drawer, and figure I'll either give them away or they'll eventually leak. Most people don't understand modern rechargeables, unless they're built-in to their iPhone. For them, I'll give them alkalines, because it's not worth the effort to educate them.


----------



## Mr Floppy

Burgess said:


> Duracell Quantum Alkaline cell lasted (at ~ 74 degrees F)
> for 21.5 Hours, still in perfect regulation !
> 
> Then dropped down to Low-1 mode (no blinking was involved),
> and continued to run for more than 30 minutes additional.
> Nice to know it won't Leave You In the DARK !
> :thumbsup:
> 
> 20 Lumens is PLENTY USEFUL for lots of activities !
> 
> (this was perhaps 100mA load)



Assuming a constant draw, that would be about right for an alkaline. Don't suppose you took a voltage reading of the battery?


----------



## WalkIntoTheLight

Mr Floppy said:


> Assuming a constant draw, that would be about right for an alkaline. Don't suppose you took a voltage reading of the battery?



I'll post SC5w current reading when I receive my light, but here are my readings for the SC52w-L2 (the SC52 is similar, although I believe current and outputs vary quite a bit on lower levels, across the line of SC52's):

SC52w-L2 current draws (mostly full 2000 mAh Eneloop, 1.34v):
High 1 : 2.6 A
High 2a : 1.8 A
High 2b : 588 mA 
Medium 1: 224 mA
Medium 2a: 170 mA
Medium 2b : 82 mA
Low 1 : 28 mA
Low 2a : 5.2 mA
Low 2b : 2.4 mA
Low 2c : 2.0 mA
Off : 20 uA

Note that I believe the current (and output) drops on the highest level or two, as the battery depletes and the voltage drops. The other levels appear well-regulated, and currents likely rise as the battery depletes in order to maintain regulation.

On an alkaline, I expect the draws would be similar for low and medium modes. Perhaps a bit lower current on medium modes while the voltage is high, and more current when the battery depletes and the voltage is low.


----------



## Badbeams3

Here we see the SC52 and SC5 being run at identical levels (med 1). The SC52 (6:26) spanks the SC5 (5:53)...1/2 hour longer run time on the SC52 at the 50 lumen settings.


----------



## markr6

LOL stop talking me into getting an SC5w...again.


----------



## WalkIntoTheLight

Badbeams3 said:


> Here we see the SC52 and SC5 being run at identical levels (med 1). The SC52 (6:26) spanks the SC5 (5:53)...1/2 hour longer run time on the SC52 at the 50 lumen settings.



Well, that's more of a pat on the bum, not a spanking. In any case, we don't see how far the tail extends on the SC5 graph. From the high modes, it appears that the SC5 will drop down a level a little earlier than the SC52, but it maintains that dimmer level much longer. Perhaps Zebralight intentionally designed it that way, so you'd have more time before the light completely dies. Zebralight does mention specifically for the SC5:

_Remaining battery power, about 10-20%, after step-down are not counted towards the runtimes._

Overall, I think the efficiency of the SC5 and SC52 is about the same. Perhaps the SC5 is a bit better on high levels. Maybe it drops out a little earlier on lower levels (to conserve remaining power?). Whatever the case, it's not that different to make it a deal-breaker either way.


----------



## Badbeams3

markr6 said:


> LOL stop talking me into getting an SC5w...again.



I can't see any reason other than the perfect beam and tint. Well maybe that and the super high output on a lowly battery. Of course not everybody see's things the same...


----------



## Mr Floppy

WalkIntoTheLight said:


> I'll post SC5w current reading when I receive my light, but here are my readings for the SC52w-L2
> High 2b : 588 mA



An alkaline would still deliver almost an hour if that was constant, but yes current will increase when the voltage drops. 17 minutes, better than nothing


----------



## WalkIntoTheLight

Mr Floppy said:


> An alkaline would still deliver almost an hour if that was constant, but yes current will increase when the voltage drops. 17 minutes, better than nothing



To be clear, Selfbuilt says 17 minutes in H2b on an alkaline. However, note that the SC5 has three high submodes, so it's H2b is at 200 lumens. The SC52 H2b is about 100 lumens, equivalent to the SC5 H2c. Unfortunately, Selfbuilt doesn't list the performance of the SC5 H2c mode, on any battery type. I think he may have forgotten it.

So, we're left to guess what the SC5 100 lumen mode will do on an alkaline. It's certainly not going to give you 3.5 hours like Zebralight spec's on a Eneloop Pro. But, it may give 1 or 1.5 hours, which isn't too bad for a 1xAA alkaline.


----------



## turkeylord

Not to drag out the off-topic conversation any more, but I do get a good chuckle out of the Energizer "Eco-Advanced" battery commercials...






Really? 4%? Color me impressed. 

I figure I'll count my rechargeables 100% recycled every time I recharge them. I bet I have some that are 4000% "recycled"!


----------



## Mr Floppy

WalkIntoTheLight said:


> To be clear, Selfbuilt says 17 minutes in H2b on an alkaline. However, note that the SC5 has three high submodes, so it's H2b is at 200 lumens. The SC52 H2b is about 100 lumens, equivalent to the SC5 H2c. Unfortunately, Selfbuilt doesn't list the performance of the SC5 H2c mode, on any battery type. I think he may have forgotten it.
> 
> So, we're left to guess what the SC5 100 lumen mode will do on an alkaline. It's certainly not going to give you 3.5 hours like Zebralight spec's on a Eneloop Pro. But, it may give 1 or 1.5 hours, which isn't too bad for a 1xAA alkaline.



Ahh, good catch. So 17 for 200 lumen seems better. That would mean about an hour on most alkaline batteries for H2C. Doing a plot of the tail cap draw?


----------



## Ryp

SC5F now on Zebralight's website


----------



## markr6

Seems like it would be too floody for me, but hey...instead of telling the customer what they want, they're giving options. I'll applaud that all day long.


----------



## Mr Floppy

Ryp said:


> SC5F now on Zebralight's website



That looks like a frosted lens with a smooth reflector behind it. It would be good to see beam shots but it looks like it will have a soft hot spot


----------



## holygeez03

As much as I LOVE my H52Fw... I think one would be better served to just stick some Scotch tape over the lens of the SC5, so that it can be removed... based on my tests, it's about the same effect.


----------



## markr6

holygeez03 said:


> As much as I LOVE my H52Fw... I think one would be better served to just stick some Scotch tape over the lens of the SC5, so that it can be removed... based on my tests, it's about the same effect.



I've mentioned it in other threads, but i actually buy standard version Zebralight headlamps and put d-c-fix diffuser film on them right out of the box. I like it better than pure frost. It basically keeps your hotspot, but you don't really notice it as much since it softens up the transition so much. Perfect for hiking at night. I never removed the film, and never plan on it...but it's nice that I can should it become necessary.


----------



## WalkIntoTheLight

markr6 said:


> I've mentioned it in other threads, but i actually buy standard version Zebralight headlamps and put d-c-fix diffuser film on them right out of the box. I like it better than pure frost. It basically keeps your hotspot, but you don't really notice it as much since it softens up the transition so much. Perfect for hiking at night. I never removed the film, and never plan on it...but it's nice that I can should it become necessary.



Would 500+ lumens cause it to melt or burn or become permanently stuck?


----------



## markr6

WalkIntoTheLight said:


> Would 500+ lumens cause it to melt or burn or become permanently stuck?



I don't use it often, but 930lm mode on my H600w II is perfectly fine after 5 minutes or so. I don't believe I ran it any longer than that. I probably ran the 620lm mode for 20 minutes at a time, several times as well.


----------



## holygeez03

Agreed... DC Fix is sort of the in between diffuser... I used it often back when beams had tiny hot spots and rings... but I haven't used it since large XM-L hotspots and OP reflectors have become common... Scotch tape has similar diffusing properties to the frosted lens in my test... I'm sure there are similar materials out there. 

As far as the heat concern... I doubt it... worst case you wold need to clean the lens with a mild solvent and re-apply the diffusing material every once in a while.

I currently EDC my H52Fw and I like the frosted lens since I use the light for close-up work... but I would never get a frosted lens on a typical format light... If I foresee a need for a diffused beam from my SC52w, SC62w, Quark, etc., I will just slap some tape on the lens.


----------



## chuckhov

All well and good guys, but why isn't Amelia chiming in here about the F models?

I haven't seen her around lately - Hope she's not lost in the woods:-(

Anyone heard from her?

Thanks,
-Chuck


----------



## saypat

How long does it take Amazon to get a Zebralight up on their site? I have a gift card and I would love to get the SC5W without having to spend the cash. Anyone know anything about this?

thanks.


----------



## Badbeams3

I see Zebralight has the SC52 selling at $59, Amazon has it priced at $64.


----------



## Mr Floppy

Badbeams3 said:


> I see Zebralight has the SC52 selling at $59, Amazon has it priced at $64.



Ooh, already discounted? New model coming? Discontinued? Intriguing


----------



## WalkIntoTheLight

Mr Floppy said:


> Ooh, already discounted? New model coming? Discontinued? Intriguing



They discounted it as soon as the SC5 was released. Could be foreshadowing a discontinuation, but I hope not. The SC52 still has a place, due to it's smaller size. If they do discontinue it, hopefully it will be replaced by a SC53 of the same (or smaller) size.

But, yeah, the SC52 and SC5 overlap quite a bit, so it wouldn't surprise me if they stopped the SC52 line.


----------



## markr6

Mr Floppy said:


> Ooh, already discounted? New model coming? Discontinued? Intriguing



We're not quite sure if it's because of the SC5, if that's a "replacement", or if there's an updated SC52 coming. It could be that the SC5 demand was so high and starting to tip the scales, so they're pushing more SC52 to move inventory. Just a bunch of guesses here


----------



## more_vampires

I've recently started EDC of SC52 and SC600IIl2mk2 rev 2 version 2 super-turbo-hyperfighting Championship gold edition.

I think the two compliment each other well, the SC5 falls in between the two.

I'm going to miss the SC52 short body if ZL kills it. The hard-affixed pocket clip is sexy. Hate the pop-off stock clip on the SC600 series.


----------



## Badbeams3

more_vampires said:


> I've recently started EDC of SC52 and SC600IIl2mk2 rev 2 version 2 super-turbo-hyperfighting Championship gold edition.
> 
> I think the two compliment each other well, the SC5 falls in between the two.
> 
> I'm going to miss the SC52 short body if ZL kills it. The hard-affixed pocket clip is sexy. Hate the pop-off stock clip on the SC600 series.



So...which one has the sexier clip? The SC52...or the SC5? Wait. What? Did I just ask that...man, I need to get out more. Enough of this flashlight porn.


----------



## more_vampires

Looks like they finally addressed our clip issues with SC600x with the SC5. Two screws for the win. Pop off is lame as you lose the clip. Almost lost mine twice off of the SC600 and don't have big enough heat shrink to fix it.


----------



## Mr Floppy

markr6 said:


> We're not quite sure if it's because of the SC5, if that's a "replacement", or if there's an updated SC52 coming. It could be that the SC5 demand was so high and starting to tip the scales, so they're pushing more SC52 to move inventory. Just a bunch of guesses here



shame that h52w isn't discounted. Would really love one of those. Makes me think there won't be a h5w


----------



## rickyro

SC5Fd and SC5Fc are both listed in "compare all models" now. "Release" will be 8/2015. 

SC5Fd is very attractive to me.


----------



## StorminMatt

rickyro said:


> SC5Fd and SC5Fc are both listed in "compare all models" now. "Release" will be 8/2015.
> 
> SC5Fd is very attractive to me.



And the emitters are both listed as XM-L2?


----------



## rickyro

StorminMatt said:


> And the emitters are both listed as XM-L2?



For sure that is a typo. Must be Luxeon T as SC62d/c.


----------



## Mr Floppy

StorminMatt said:


> And the emitters are both listed as XM-L2?



They aren't the most efficient at updating specs. I am guessing luxeon T again given the notes mentioned the luxeon T


----------



## markr6

Yeah, the SC62w page still says "SC62d Flashlight" under the photo. I'm the typo king so I won't make fun 

weaker "d" version AND frosted? Man, that just seems like it would be too dim for me. SC62d can get away with it having more output and throwier beam. But just another option for some...why not. Keep em coming ZL!!


----------



## AVService

Well alas the SC5 has arrived!
It is a interesting style fusion sort of between the SC80 and SC52 and seems as nicely done as every other ZL I have had so far.

I like the tint and it is just like the S52w really which is what I was hoping and it is clearly one bright little light too!

Yes I stuck an Eneloop in it first to get the idea and will try to get it outside a little tonight to see what it can really do.

The reflector is smooth but the hotspot against a close wall is about the same as the SC52 too although it does at first seem to have a slight corona or rings in the hotspot where my SC52 does not.

Too soon to make any judgements just yet though and of course I have fresh Alkalines just standing by too!


----------



## snowlover91

Great pics of the comparison, have heard a lot about the SC80 but this is the first pic I've seen compared with similar lights. The SC5 definitely does look like a blend between the SC52 and SC80, looking forward to hearing more about it. How is the tint on your copy and the switch? Do you like the extra weight or notice it when carrying? I actually like the extra heft but I realize some prefer a lighter light like the 52 for pocket carry.


----------



## recDNA

I wish someone put an sc5w in a sphere to test actual lumens


----------



## AVService

If I had a Sphere I would but I don't even have a decent white wall that I can get far enough away from to compare lights on or get beamshots so.....

I just have to go with what I see while using the lights.

The Tint is great and seems just like my other "w" ZLs,the switch is fine on mine too.

But there definitely is a ring or rings in the hotspot too and neither of the SC52s I have have this.
It might not be any concern in use but is pretty obvious against the wall.

Oh and yes the light is heavier and it is also obvious but I think it is also built a little more solidly constructed from what I have read too.


----------



## Badbeams3

AVService said:


> Well alas the SC5 has arrived!
> It is a interesting style fusion sort of between the SC80 and SC52 and seems as nicely done as every other ZL I have had so far.
> 
> I like the tint and it is just like the S52w really which is what I was hoping and it is clearly one bright little light too!
> 
> Yes I stuck an Eneloop in it first to get the idea and will try to get it outside a little tonight to see what it can really do.
> 
> The reflector is smooth but the hotspot against a close wall is about the same as the SC52 too although it does at first seem to have a slight corona or rings in the hotspot where my SC52 does not.
> 
> Too soon to make any judgements just yet though and of course I have fresh Alkalines just standing by too!



Are the other lights NW as well? I look forward to your observations tonight!


----------



## AVService

Neither of those are Neutral aside from the SC5 but I also have another SC52 that is,an SC600w and a Headlamp that is.
For the type of work I do the w is really helpful especially at close range.

The SC80 is really just pure White but the SC52 pictured from the early days is pretty putrid as far as color goes but I love it anyway.

I hope I can get outside Tonight too,something has come up and now I am not so sure?

And it is killing me too!


----------



## geal

Just got my sc5w. Personally I don't know what Zebralight was thinking. Part of the Zebra appeal for me is the amazing form factor and this one totally deviates from what I expected based on 62w and 32w I own. This thing is way overbuilt. I don't see the advantage over 62w (slightly shorter?)


----------



## snowlover91

recDNA said:


> I wish someone put an sc5w in a sphere to test actual lumens



Best estimate so far is Selfbuilts 570 lumens measured, it's not exact but gives an idea of how bright this light is. 

AV, I think the ring/rings are normal since it's a smooth reflector. That's the negative of them is on walls they may show a ring but it's not noticeable in real world use and the advantage of better throw is worth it. Glad you got a good sample and great tint, hope you get to compare it to the other lights tonight!

Geal, I think the main advantage is the AA compatibility and ability to get 500+ lumens from a single AA battery. There are a lot of people who either don't like lithiums or would rather stick with AA batteries and this light is a great alternative. I personally don't mind the extra weight for EDC and the added heat sinking is a plus in my book.


----------



## geal

For me only advantage aa(nimh) has over 18650 is pocketability. Was hoping sc5 would replace sc32 as my edc because I prefer rechargeable batteries. Unfortunately didn't happen


----------



## StorminMatt

geal said:


> For me only advantage aa(nimh) has over 18650 is pocketability. Was hoping sc5 would replace sc32 as my edc because I prefer rechargeable batteries. Unfortunately didn't happen



Another advantage of NiMH AA over an 18650 (or other Li-Ion) is that you don't kill your batteries faster by storing them fully charged. So they're good for spontaneous, unplanned use (or emergency use).

As far as the SC32, you CAN use rechargeable batteries as well. You won't get the same runtime as from primaries. But the SC32 seems to be quite well optimized for use with Li-Ion. Runtimes are surprisingly long with 550mAH Efests.


----------



## markr6

snowlover91 said:


> Great pics of the comparison, have heard a lot about the SC80 but this is the first pic I've seen compared with similar lights.



I like it! I don't recall seeing any comparison with newer lights. All I can say is: _*BRING BACK THE SC80!!*_


----------



## Mr Floppy

markr6 said:


> All I can say is: _*BRING BACK THE SC80!!*_



When it was still available, I was close to buying one. I had talked myself into the sc80c after much deliberation. I would have basically ran it on aa as cr123a batteries are not cheap here. Well by the time I finally got my head around it, it was off the market.

No regrets. It was the cr123a issue otherwise could have easily regretted it


----------



## markr6

Mr Floppy said:


> When it was still available, I was close to buying one. I had talked myself into the sc80c after much deliberation. I would have basically ran it on aa as cr123a batteries are not cheap here. Well by the time I finally got my head around it, it was off the market.
> 
> No regrets. It was the cr123a issue otherwise could have easily regretted it



I hate CR123 cells, but this seems like the ultimate BOB, car, travel light.


----------



## jak

Mr Floppy said:


> They aren't the most efficient at updating specs. I am guessing luxeon T again given the notes mentioned the luxeon T





markr6 said:


> Yeah, the SC62w page still says "SC62d Flashlight" under the photo. I'm the typo king so I won't make fun
> 
> weaker "d" version AND frosted? Man, that just seems like it would be too dim for me. SC62d can get away with it having more output and throwier beam. But just another option for some...why not. Keep em coming ZL!!



I'm thinking that it's not a typo, and that it _will_ be using the XM-L2. Here's what the notes say:

*"ndividually measured OTF chromaticity to be within an area that's less than half of the LUXEON T we use, to achieve the industry's smallest tint variations."*_

The notes are contrasting it (the XM-L2) with the Luxeon. Furthermore, the spreadsheet indicates the runtimes for these c and d versions... which are identical to the normal SC5. A Luxeon would have different runtimes for sure.

That makes me think the frosted lenses will also be color-treated in some fashion to produce the desired tint... (It'd be cool if it wasn't actually frosted, but merely tinted for virtually perfect color correction -It would eliminate the tint lottery problem.)_


----------



## preetlove

I will only believe after experience the product. And it seems like just an advertisement which is only post for promotion purpose.


----------



## Mr Floppy

jak said:


> I'm thinking that it's not a typo, and that it _will_ be using the XM-L2. Here's what the notes say:
> 
> *"ndividually measured OTF chromaticity to be within an area that's less than half of the LUXEON T we use, to achieve the industry's smallest tint variations."*_
> 
> The notes are contrasting it (the XM-L2) with the Luxeon. Furthermore, the spreadsheet indicates the runtimes for these c and d versions... which are identical to the normal SC5. A Luxeon would have different runtimes for sure.
> 
> That makes me think the frosted lenses will also be color-treated in some fashion to produce the desired tint... (It'd be cool if it wasn't actually frosted, but merely tinted for virtually perfect color correction -It would eliminate the tint lottery problem.)_


_

Hmm, I read that as they are picking leds to ensure that the tint is within half the area of the cie 1931 chromaticity chart for the luxeon T. That is, they are measuring each led they plan to use with the otf output and plotting the output cct to fall within a smaller area of what a normal 5000K luxeon T would be categorised under. 

High CRI xm-l2, that is 85 min CRI, are very warm. Incandescent like you could say. I have not come across a 5000K xm-l2 that is 85 min CRI.

It has also been the case that zebra light just copies the row in the spreadsheet and doesn't update the run time._


----------



## jak

Mr Floppy said:


> Hmm, I read that as they are picking leds to ensure that the tint is within half the area of the cie 1931 chromaticity chart for the luxeon T. That is, they are measuring each led they plan to use with the otf output and plotting the output cct to fall within a smaller area of what a normal 5000K luxeon T would be categorised under.



I could get on board with that. But then why start of with a _Frosted_ version? That can't be as hot of a seller as non-frosted (in flashlight factor, opposed to headlight factor).



Mr Floppy said:


> It has also been the case that zebra light just copies the row in the spreadsheet and doesn't update the run time.


Perhaps, but they did take the time to delete brightness, while leaving the runtime. I'd assume every cell has been addressed. And if it's using that XM-L2, then the runtimes listed are valid. (I was viewing the spreadsheet as George was making changes to it, he was in there for quite a while. I love Google Docs BTW, live updates are so cool.)


----------



## more_vampires

jak said:


> I'm thinking that it's not a typo, and that it _will_ be using the XM-L2. Here's what the notes say:
> 
> *"ndividually measured OTF chromaticity to be within an area that's less than half of the LUXEON T we use, to achieve the industry's smallest tint variations."*_
> 
> The notes are contrasting it (the XM-L2) with the Luxeon. Furthermore, the spreadsheet indicates the runtimes for these c and d versions... which are identical to the normal SC5. A Luxeon would have different runtimes for sure.
> 
> That makes me think the frosted lenses will also be color-treated in some fashion to produce the desired tint... (It'd be cool if it wasn't actually frosted, but merely tinted for virtually perfect color correction -It would eliminate the tint lottery problem.)_


_
Wow, troll bait!  Color correction by tint film is an old trick, here on CPF.

To get nerdraged on exact emitters is non-friendly. So you fix a thrower, so you fix the tint, so you can't fix both! Thrower and diffusion film are opposite forces. Only when you understand do opposites attract!

*STOP IT OTHERWISE!* Btw, love cpf.

lovecpf

_


----------



## Badbeams3

AVService said:


> Neither of those are Neutral aside from the SC5 but I also have another SC52 that is,an SC600w and a Headlamp that is.
> For the type of work I do the w is really helpful especially at close range.
> 
> The SC80 is really just pure White but the SC52 pictured from the early days is pretty putrid as far as color goes but I love it anyway.
> 
> I hope I can get outside Tonight too,something has come up and now I am not so sure?
> 
> And it is killing me too!



Still waiting for your comparison opinion....


----------



## more_vampires

I think we need a "real" SC5 thread, to put it through its paces. If the old ZL models are obsolete, then show that.

If the SC5 is a real kick-butt killer, why has no thread emerged that shows this? Just sayin' perhaps it's SC5 versus the rest of the flashlight world if it's really all that and a bag of crisps.

Otherwise: just another Zebralight and some here are prejudiced against black and white stripes as much as Elven Jedi. 

Me? Just an Elven Jedi who loves Zebralight. I got banned from Slashdot for having a low 5 digit user id.


----------



## Badbeams3

more_vampires said:


> I think we need a "real" SC5 thread, to put it through its paces. If the old ZL models are obsolete, then show that.
> 
> If the SC5 is a real kick-butt killer, why has no thread emerged that shows this? Just sayin' perhaps it's SC5 versus the rest of the flashlight world if it's really all that and a bag of crisps.
> 
> Otherwise: just another Zebralight and some here are prejudiced against black and white stripes as much as Elven Jedi.
> 
> Me? Just an Elven Jedi who loves Zebralight. I got banned from Slashdot for having a low 5 digit user id.



Start a thread. The SC5...the top dog AA light!


----------



## more_vampires

I must admit, it's looking pretty bada55 as a top-dog AAx1 light with an Eneloop in there.


----------



## Badbeams3

more_vampires said:


> I must admit, it's looking pretty bada55 as a top-dog AAx1 light with an Eneloop in there.



Well the debate between the SC5 and the SC25 has been going on for some time. Both have there selling points. But if I was going to get only one, for me, it would be the SC5...if for no other reason than top lumen performance for an AA battery. Nothing can touch, no other AA light...14500 of course is a different story, and involves many brands that could out perform it...but they all seem to loose to the SC5 when run time is looked at.


----------



## Wrecked

AVService said:


> Well alas the SC5 has arrived!
> It is a interesting style fusion sort of between the SC80 and SC52 and seems as nicely done as every other ZL I have had so far.
> 
> I like the tint and it is just like the S52w really which is what I was hoping and it is clearly one bright little light too!
> 
> Yes I stuck an Eneloop in it first to get the idea and will try to get it outside a little tonight to see what it can really do.
> 
> The reflector is smooth but the hotspot against a close wall is about the same as the SC52 too although it does at first seem to have a slight corona or rings in the hotspot where my SC52 does not.
> 
> Too soon to make any judgements just yet though and of course I have fresh Alkalines just standing by too!



Thanks for the picture. That really helped me decide against getting the SC5 (I've been on the fence). I had the SC80 and while I liked just about everything about it, I didn't like the form factor. It was just too fat. While I had it sitting on my desk, I always reached for something else because it felt like I was holding a big sausage in my hand.  It does look a bit thinner but still much fatter than the SC52.


----------



## Mr Floppy

Badbeams3 said:


> But if I was going to get only one, for me, it would be the SC5...if for no other reason than top lumen performance for an AA battery.



For me, it is because 14500 cells are hard to get and expensive. 



Wrecked said:


> it felt like I was holding a big sausage in my hand.



Prefer a smaller sausage in your hand then?


----------



## uofaengr

If it wasn't for the size, I'd probably have this light too and ditch the 14500s. The appeal of a small light to me is pocketability and a larger diameter (not to mention increased weight) does not do well in my pockets. The SC62 and even 52 pushes the limit for me comfort-wise.


----------



## markr6

uofaengr said:


> If it wasn't for the size, I'd probably have this light too and ditch the 14500s. The appeal of a small light to me is pocketability and a larger diameter (not to mention increased weight) does not do well in my pockets. The SC62 and even 52 pushes the limit for me comfort-wise.



Same here. I'm not married to the 14500, but the SC52 size and weight is much more comfortable. I know it's not a big difference, but when you're talking about a light already this small, EVERY LITTLE BIT HELPS. It's different when you're comparing big lights like a Nitecore TM16 and Acebeam K60...they're already bigass heavy lights and you expect that. Shaving off an ounce or 1/2" off the length there doesn't really matter.


----------



## amaretto

who needs 14500?


----------



## more_vampires

Wrecked said:


> Thanks for the picture. That really helped me decide against getting the SC5 (I've been on the fence). I had the SC80 and while I liked just about everything about it, I didn't like the form factor. It was just too fat. While I had it sitting on my desk, I always reached for something else because it felt like I was holding a big sausage in my hand.  It does look a bit thinner but still much fatter than the SC52.



The fence is hurting my butt.


----------



## Mr Floppy

uofaengr said:


> The appeal of a small light to me is pocketability and a larger diameter (not to mention increased weight) does not do well in my pockets. The SC62 and even 52 pushes the limit for me comfort-wise.



Guess some aren't so used to carrying something bigger down there. Innuendo aside, I used to carry 2xAA and the issue was driving. Carrying a smallish 18650 in xeno s3a fixed that problem.

We are talking millimetres and grams here though. Those pictures of the three lights above really makes statements about the size seem rather over stated


----------



## AVService

Mr Floppy said:


> Guess some aren't so used to carrying something bigger down there. Innuendo aside, I used to carry 2xAA and the issue was driving. Carrying a smallish 18650 in xeno s3a fixed that problem.
> 
> We are talking millimetres and grams here though. Those pictures of the three lights above really makes statements about the size seem rather over stated


Its funny but I have been pocket carrying the SC5 just this morning in place of the SC52 and I will be damned maybe but it does fell noticeably bigger in a not that subtle way!

I have not been aboe to put it through its paces yet and compare them which is why I have not been back here yet but the size is a difference and I guess the less streamlined or skinny stature along with the extra weight are not too appealing to me right now.

Also worth mentioning is that I also carry a Fenix LD12 in the same pocket but the ZL get clipped to the top of the pocket.

I also am not that interested in the difference in max output as I am carry comfort and lower level run times so I plan to find out this week how I really feel about both of them.


----------



## uofaengr

Mr Floppy said:


> Guess some aren't so used to carrying something bigger down there. Innuendo aside, I used to carry 2xAA and the issue was driving. Carrying a smallish 18650 in xeno s3a fixed that problem.
> 
> We are talking millimetres and grams here though. Those pictures of the three lights above really makes statements about the size seem rather over stated


Some of us also squat heavy and don't have bird legs. A few millimeters in diameter to people like us and who don't care to wear MC Hammer pants can be the difference in being comfortable on a long, hot day.

I'd also prefer ribbed for her pleasure.


----------



## AVService

uofaengr said:


> I'd also prefer ribbed for her pleasure.


Now why couldn't I think of that?


----------



## uofaengr

AVService said:


> Its funny but I have been pocket carrying the SC5 just this morning in place of the SC52 and I will be damned maybe but it does fell noticeably bigger in a not that subtle way!
> 
> I have not been aboe to put it through its paces yet and compare them which is why I have not been back here yet but the size is a difference and I guess the less streamlined or skinny stature along with the extra weight are not too appealing to me right now.
> 
> Also worth mentioning is that I also carry a Fenix LD12 in the same pocket but the ZL get clipped to the top of the pocket.
> 
> I also am not that interested in the difference in max output as I am carry comfort and lower level run times so I plan to find out this week how I really feel about both of them.


Eager to hear your thoughts.


----------



## Wrecked

more_vampires said:


> The fence is hurting my butt.



You could always sell it or and send it back..... Some places have pretty liberal return policies.


----------



## more_vampires

AVService said:


> Now why couldn't I think of that?



My girlfriend prefers ZL SC52d versus SC600 series.


----------



## Wrecked

more_vampires said:


> My girlfriend prefers ZL SC52d versus SC600 series.






[/URL][/IMG]


----------



## burntoshine

For NiMH chemistry (eneloops), isn't it suggested to run the battery until it's empty before recharging? That's what I always understood about NiMH, and that's why I don't like using them in flashlights. Please correct me if I am wrong. I like lithium-ion because you can top off the battery often and basically always have a full cell.


----------



## more_vampires

burntoshine said:


> For NiMH chemistry (eneloops), isn't it suggested to run the battery until it's empty before recharging?



No problem, cousin. That's NiCad you're talking about, charge memory. NiMH doesn't have that problem. I don't miss nicad one tiny tiny little bit, nimh is so much better.


----------



## StorminMatt

burntoshine said:


> For NiMH chemistry (eneloops), isn't it suggested to run the battery until it's empty before recharging? That's what I always understood about NiMH, and that's why I don't like using them in flashlights. Please correct me if I am wrong. I like lithium-ion because you can top off the battery often and basically always have a full cell.



Actually, unlike Nicads, NiMH can be damaged by a complete discharge. You generally don't want to discharge NiMH beyond .9V anyway. But regardless, NiMH doesn't suffer from memory effect. So you CAN safely charge a partially discharged NiMH battery.


----------



## Badbeams3

amaretto said:


> who needs 14500?




I'm surprised. I thought they would be a lot closer than that...


----------



## hatman

amaretto said:


> who needs 14500?



Impressive -- and no wonder ZL is replacing the SC52s.


----------



## WalkIntoTheLight

StorminMatt said:


> Actually, unlike Nicads, NiMH can be damaged by a complete discharge. You generally don't want to discharge NiMH beyond .9V anyway.



Only if it's reverse-charged, in a multi-cell light. The SC5 only takes one cell, so you won't harm it by draining it completely. I do it all the time in my SC52's. I'm more careful in multi-cell lights, though Eneloops are pretty consistent in their capacity and I've yet to see any mismatches in my lights. I just make sure to use cells manufactured on the same date.

The lights generally give out at about 0.8v-0.9v, so you can't really drain the cells much below that anyway.


----------



## scs

WalkIntoTheLight said:


> ...The lights generally give out at about 0.8v-0.9v, so you can't really drain the cells much below that anyway.



Per specs, when the low battery signal on my H52Fw kicks in, the battery voltage is below 1.06v. On my sample, once that happens, none of the high modes are accessible; M1 and M2 are accessible but have very noticeable PWM; the low modes appear PWM free.


----------



## KeepingItLight

Above, Amaretto posted beams shots comparing the SC52w and SC5w. I suspect that one reason they look so different is because the ground is wet in one and dry in the other.


----------



## Amelia

KeepingItLight said:


> Above, Amaretto posted beams shots comparing the SC52w and SC5w. I suspect that one reason they look so different is because the ground is wet in one and dry in the other.



Yes. I also suspect that the SC52w photo was taken after the 1 Min. stepdown. Both lights are rated the exact same (500 Lum.) for "turbo" before the stepdown, but the difference in output in those photos looks very dramatic. I'm thinking 500Lum on the. SC5w, and 280Lum on the SC52w (the level that it "steps down" to.). If so, this was probably not intentional, 1 minute probably goes pretty fast when you're setting up a light for a photo.


----------



## AVService

Amelia said:


> Yes. I also suspect that the SC52w photo was taken after the 1 Min. stepdown. Both lights are rated the exact same (500 Lum.) for "turbo" before the stepdown, but the difference in output in those photos looks very dramatic. I'm thinking 500Lum on the. SC5w, and 280Lum on the SC52w (the level that it "steps down" to.). If so, this was probably not intentional, 1 minute probably goes pretty fast when you're setting up a light for a photo.


In my informal testing so far the two lights are impossible to discern on high during that first minute.
I simply could not pick them from the other if I tried.

Against a wall the SC5 has a beam that easily distinguishes itself(and not in a good way)from the SC52 which has a pretty artifact free smooth beam.

Likewise once at lower levels they are almost identical looking to me.
The thing I have not determined just yet is how long each will run and the details of that performance.

So I too was surprised and somewhat doubtful of what those pics appear to show,my experience is not that dramatic at all.


----------



## Mr Floppy

uofaengr said:


> Some of us also squat heavy and don't have bird legs.



I see. Fair enough.



> I'd also prefer ribbed for her pleasure.



Be sure to remove the clip


----------



## rickyro

amaretto said:


> who needs 14500?



Note the strong yellowish tint in the hot spot in comparison with the white tint in the spill. This is why I dislike XM-L2 and like Nichia 219 so much.


----------



## WalkIntoTheLight

rickyro said:


> Note the strong yellowish tint in the hot spot in comparison with the white tint in the spill. This is why I dislike XM-L2 and like Nichia 219 so much.



Yes, Nichia 219 is far better, but you just can't get 500 lumens out of it. So, until either Nichia improves brightness or Cree improves tint, we're stuck with making an imperfect choice.


----------



## recDNA

AVService said:


> In my informal testing so far the two lights are impossible to discern on high during that first minute.
> I simply could not pick them from the other if I tried.
> 
> Against a wall the SC5 has a beam that easily distinguishes itself(and not in a good way)from the SC52 which has a pretty artifact free smooth beam.
> 
> Likewise once at lower levels they are almost identical looking to me.
> The thing I have not determined just yet is how long each will run and the details of that performance.
> 
> So I too was surprised and somewhat doubtful of what those pics appear to show,my experience is not that dramatic at all.


Doesn't the sc5 throw further with the smooth reflector as opposed to the artifact free op reflector?


----------



## WalkIntoTheLight

recDNA said:


> Doesn't the sc5 throw further with the smooth reflector as opposed to the artifact free op reflector?



Yes, if you look at Selfbuilt's numbers, the SC5 throws a bit further at the same lumen output. It's not a huge difference, though.


----------



## more_vampires

WalkIntoTheLight said:


> Only if it's reverse-charged, in a multi-cell light. The SC5 only takes one cell, so you won't harm it by draining it completely. I do it all the time in my SC52's. I'm more careful in multi-cell lights, though Eneloops are pretty consistent in their capacity and I've yet to see any mismatches in my lights. I just make sure to use cells manufactured on the same date.
> 
> The lights generally give out at about 0.8v-0.9v, so you can't really drain the cells much below that anyway.



Excellent point, safety first. For some reason Eneloop went with single channel in the later designs of the Eneloop charger. The earlier one that I have is 2 channel, meaning it balances two cells. Unfortunately, it only charges 2 at a time.

I think I prefer the balance charger version, so no upgrade for me. Sticking with the old model.


----------



## burntoshine

more_vampires said:


> No problem, cousin. That's NiCad you're talking about, charge memory. NiMH doesn't have that problem. I don't miss nicad one tiny tiny little bit, nimh is so much better.



Oh, heck; that changes everything! I've been using eneloops for many years and never knew it was okay to charge at any point. lol! Now I want to get an SC5w.



StorminMatt said:


> Actually, unlike Nicads, NiMH can be damaged by a complete discharge. You generally don't want to discharge NiMH beyond .9V anyway. But regardless, NiMH doesn't suffer from memory effect. So you CAN safely charge a partially discharged NiMH battery.





WalkIntoTheLight said:


> Only if it's reverse-charged, in a multi-cell light. The SC5 only takes one cell, so you won't harm it by draining it completely. I do it all the time in my SC52's. I'm more careful in multi-cell lights, though Eneloops are pretty consistent in their capacity and I've yet to see any mismatches in my lights. I just make sure to use cells manufactured on the same date.
> 
> The lights generally give out at about 0.8v-0.9v, so you can't really drain the cells much below that anyway.



Thanks for the responses!!

Long live Zebralight!


----------



## Precise

Today I received an SC5Fw. It's my first Zebra and my first flood light.

The uniformity of the flood is *superb*. But spreading the light over the (claimed) 90 degrees results in considerably less brightness than I expected. I tried holding a large magnifying lens in front of the light to narrow the beam to something more like a conventional LED flashlight. The bright center was more like I expected from over 900 lumens. I'm using an Energizer lithium. And the built in battery test said full power.

I wanted to try a flood, thinking that it might be more practical than conventional beams with a hot center. But I'll have to live with it for a few weeks or months to see if I like that.

The "w" (warm) tint is also new to me. My other high-end LED lights are colder and actually seem more like _natural_ light to me. This "w" seems yellower than natural. I'll see how that plays out with more use.

Alan


----------



## magellan

Mr Floppy said:


> For me, it is because 14500 cells are hard to get and expensive.
> 
> 
> 
> Prefer a smaller sausage in your hand then?



LOL


----------



## magellan

recDNA said:


> I wish someone put an sc5w in a sphere to test actual lumens



That would be nice.

But in the absence of such a test, in checking the specs on the website, I note that the cool white is only 35 lumens brighter than the neutral white for the throw model, and it's about the same for the flood model. This probably wouldn't even be detectable by the human eye, which is enough for me to prefer the NW.

It seems the only real drawback for me of this light compared to comparable lithium ion lights is the short run time on turbo, but then I wouldn't need or be using that most of the time. For me this light puts the AA NiMH format back on the map.


----------



## magellan

_Quote Originally Posted by StorminMatt View Post

Actually, unlike Nicads, NiMH can be damaged by a complete discharge. You generally don't want to discharge NiMH beyond .9V anyway. But regardless, NiMH doesn't suffer from memory effect. So you CAN safely charge a partially discharged NiMH battery._



One good thing about NiCd was they were more tolerant of overcharge than NiMH, so they did better being left on dumb chargers. Other than that I don't miss them.


----------



## WalkIntoTheLight

Precise said:


> Today I received an SC5Fw. It's my first Zebra and my first flood light.
> 
> The uniformity of the flood is *superb*. But spreading the light over the (claimed) 90 degrees results in considerably less brightness than I expected. I tried holding a large magnifying lens in front of the light to narrow the beam to something more like a conventional LED flashlight. The bright center was more like I expected from over 900 lumens. I'm using an Energizer lithium. And the built in battery test said full power.



According to Selfbuilt's review testing, you will not get maximum brightness using an Energizer lithium. The most you'll get is the second-brightest mode, and even that's not guaranteed. The Energizer lithium, while a great battery for moderate drain devices, just can't handle the very high drain needed by this light on turbo. You'll need to use an Eneloop to get the full brightness.


----------



## Precise

The instructions packed with the SC5Fw say, 

_"this light draws a very high current from just one battery. For this reason we highly recommend using Sanyo Eneloop or Energizer Lithium batteries to realize full potential of this light."_


----------



## Mr Floppy

The energizer lithium has a max discharge of 3A. That is not to say it can't do more I think. At 3A, there is a funny thing with discharge in that it will dip and after a while, it will pick back up.
http://www.candlepowerforums.com/vb...-Test-Review-of-Energizer-Ultimate-Lithium-AA

With the higher voltage, it probably doesn't draw 6A like NiMH but it would still be pretty high I imagine


----------



## WalkIntoTheLight

Mr Floppy said:


> The energizer lithium has a max discharge of 3A. That is not to say it can't do more I think. At 3A, there is a funny thing with discharge in that it will dip and after a while, it will pick back up.
> http://www.candlepowerforums.com/vb...-Test-Review-of-Energizer-Ultimate-Lithium-AA
> 
> With the higher voltage, it probably doesn't draw 6A like NiMH but it would still be pretty high I imagine



According to Selfbuilt:

http://www.candlepowerforums.com/vb...EO-and-more!&p=4685281&viewfull=1#post4685281

To quote:

_Yes, the circuit seems to have trouble knowing what to make of the lower voltage L91 energizer lithium. Basically, with a fresh cell at least, you lose H1, and have a delay before the light will provide the highest H2A (i.e., it seems to come on in H2B instead of H1, then eventually jumps up to H2A).


_So, despite what Zebralight claims, I wouldn't run it on an Energizer lithium AA unless you don't care about the highest mode or two. Still, it's far better than alkaline performance, if you really want to use primaries.


----------



## Precise

I have a few dozen NiMH batteries that I used for cameras. But I've had many go dead and _*all*_ have such poor shelf life that I've completely stopped using them. Even if the lithiums don't deliver max brightness, I can't face going back to the pains of NiMH.

Alan


----------



## WalkIntoTheLight

Precise said:


> I have a few dozen NiMH batteries that I used for cameras. But I've had many go dead and _*all*_ have such poor shelf life that I've completely stopped using them. Even if the lithiums don't deliver max brightness, I can't face going back to the pains of NiMH.



Yes, that used to be a problem with NiMH batteries, and still is with many brands. But Panasonic Eneloops changed all that. They really are great batteries that deliver high current, very long life, and don't self-discharge if they're not being used. And, they're rated down to -20C, so unless it's _really _cold, there's no advantage to using Energizer lithiums.

I have several 9-year old Eneloops, and they still perform over 90% compared to new ones, even at high-drain.

The Eneloop Pros are more expensive, but IMO not worth it for the extra capacity. If you need the extra capacity, Duracell Ion Core are rumored to be rebadged Eneloop Pros, and sell for much less money.

Stay away from anything else, if you need maximum performance (such as with the SC5).


----------



## Mr Floppy

WalkIntoTheLight said:


> According to Selfbuilt:
> 
> http://www.candlepowerforums.com/vb...EO-and-more!&p=4685281&viewfull=1#post4685281
> 
> To quote:
> 
> _Yes, the circuit seems to have trouble knowing what to make of the lower voltage L91 energizer lithium. Basically, with a fresh cell at least, you lose H1, and have a delay before the light will provide the highest H2A (i.e., it seems to come on in H2B instead of H1, then eventually jumps up to H2A).
> _


_

I wonder what he means by lower voltage because open circuit voltage of a L91 is 1.8V. The L91 can do 5A pulsed, no idea of what the duty cycle it needs._


----------



## WalkIntoTheLight

Mr Floppy said:


> I wonder what he means by lower voltage because open circuit voltage of a L91 is 1.8V. The L91 can do 5A pulsed, no idea of what the duty cycle it needs.



It may have just been a mistype by Selfbuilt, perhaps he meant higher voltage. The Energizer Lithium can be 3A sustained, but it's not as good a discharge curve as an Eneloop at that current. I don't think the Energizer can take much more. It has an odd discharge curve: it drops voltage very quickly and fairly low, then rebounds for awhile (I presume because it heats up), then it drops off steadily until it dies.

I think the strange discharge curve is what makes the SC5 first drop down 2 levels, then bounce up 1 level for awhile. Due to the required current on maximum (up to 6 amps), it just can't deliver the necessary power.

Looks like a decent battery for H2b and lower modes. But for the highest modes, stick with Eneloops.


----------



## Precise

WalkIntoTheLight said:


> Yes, that used to be a problem with NiMH batteries, and still is with many brands. But Panasonic Eneloops changed all that. They really are great batteries that deliver high current, very long life, and don't self-discharge if they're not being used. And, they're rated down to -20C, so unless it's _really _cold, there's no advantage to using Energizer lithiums.
> 
> I have several 9-year old Eneloops, and they still perform over 90% compared to new ones, even at high-drain.
> 
> The Eneloop Pros are more expensive, but IMO not worth it for the extra capacity. If you need the extra capacity, Duracell Ion Core are rumored to be rebadged Eneloop Pros, and sell for much less money.
> 
> Stay away from anything else, if you need maximum performance (such as with the SC5).



Most of the eneloops listed at amazon are Panasonic. Are they ok?


----------



## more_vampires

Unless counterfeit, yes. Sanyo, Panasonic. Eneloops.  Think there's even a duracell rebadge of Eneloops.


----------



## AVService

Panasonic bought the Sanyo Battery division last year to get the Eneloop Battery.

They are the same.


----------



## snowlover91

You'll see a little better results with the Eneloop batteries. I've used them for several years and they are the only rechargeable NIMH that actually works very well and holds capacity long term. Other brands like energizer and many others lose capacity within a few weeks or months even without use. The Eneloops will hold 85-90% of its capacity even after a year without using it. I use it in all my electronics requiring AA or AAA batteries and it saves money while preventing issues like leaking (alkalines) or the danger of venting like lithiums have. Would love to see some beam shots of the new SC5fw, sounds like an excellent light!


----------



## KeepingItLight

There is a difference between Eneloops made in Japan and those made in China.

Panasonic got the Eneloop brand when it purchased the Sanyo battery division, but it did not get the factory where Eneloops are manufactured. That factory—and the patents behind Eneloop batteries—are owned by Fujitsu. Eneloops made in China are not manufactured by Fujitsu, and do not give the same performance as the ones made in Japan.

CPF member Power Me Up wrote about the problem here. Results of an important long-term study that compares the two were recently posted in message #114 of a thread entitled "China made Panasonic eneloop first tests" at BLF.


----------



## hatman

KeepingItLight said:


> There is a difference between Eneloops made in Japan and those made in China.
> 
> Panasonic got the Eneloop brand when it purchased the Sanyo battery division, but it did not get the factory where Eneloops are manufactured. That factory—and the patents behind Eneloop batteries—are owned by Fujitsu. Eneloops made in China are not manufactured by Fujitsu, and do not give the same performance as the ones made in Japan.
> 
> CPF member Power Me Up wrote about the problem here. Results of an important long-term study that compares the two were recently posted in message #114 of a thread entitled "China made Panasonic eneloop first tests" at BLF.



Very interesting - thanks for posting.

Just checked and my brand new AAA Panasonic Eneloops from Amazon are from Japan.

Last year's AA's, also Panasonic Eneloops, are from China. 

No issues with either.


----------



## Precise

I was asked to show a beam shot of my new Zebralight SC5Fw. Here it is compared to a Jetbeam DDA20. I need more practice at this because these shots don't show the warmer tint of the Zebra. Perhaps that's because the camera was set for auto white balance. 

The exposures were the same ISO 100 f2.8 1/5 second. The camera and flashlight were about ten feet from my garage door. As mentioned in yesterday's post, the Zebra flood is very uniform.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/aq753whcwluiezu/Zebralight.jpg?dl=0
https://www.dropbox.com/s/8tfeiwhx3ag3t5h/Jetbeam.jpg?dl=0


----------



## marinemaster

I will order a FW when they are back in stock [emoji3]


----------



## StorminMatt

WalkIntoTheLight said:


> The Eneloop Pros are more expensive, but IMO not worth it for the extra capacity. If you need the extra capacity, Duracell Ion Core are rumored to be rebadged Eneloop Pros, and sell for much less money.
> 
> Stay away from anything else, if you need maximum performance (such as with the SC5).



Ion Cores work REALLY well in this light, as do the older Japanese white top Duraloop 2000s. But I can't even get 500 lumens out of the light with Powerex 2700s. And they even drop out of 304 lumens relatively quickly. They are a couple of years old, but so are some of my Ion Cores. The older Duracell 2450s don't work so well with this light, either. So Ion Cores are a good low cost option, especially if ypu want more capacity than Eneloop/Duraloop 2000s. But save those Powerex 2700s and Duracell 2450s for situations where you want maximum runtime from multicell lights.


----------



## more_vampires

ZL specifically says to use Eneloop. Maker suggestion.


----------



## holygeez03

marinemaster said:


> I will order a FW when they are back in stock [emoji3]



I'm not going to tell you what to get for your needs... but you may want to at least consider getting a standard SC5w and putting diffuser material on it... That way, you can always remove the diffuser and revert back to a standard beam profile if you need the range. 

A long time ago I ordered a SC51Fw and sent it back because it didn't appear to be much different than my SC51w with scotch tape on the lens... There is plenty of info on this forum regarding diffuser material, but in my experience, scotch tape is cheap and easy for an almost completely diffused beam and DC-fix is good for a slightly diffused beam with a softer transition from hotspot to spill.

That being said... I love my H52Fw and it is my EDC... but I often bring my SC52w or SC62w as well.


----------



## recDNA

For 10000 lux it would be worth rings. At 5000 cd I would prefer a nicer beam profile. An optional tir lens could be great in a zebralight.


----------



## markr6

Not sure if it was already mentioned, but I just noticed the lowest mode:

SC5: 0.1lm
SC52: 0.01lm

Could be a pretty big deal for ultra low loving vampires like me!


----------



## WalkIntoTheLight

markr6 said:


> Not sure if it was already mentioned, but I just noticed the lowest mode:
> 
> SC5: 0.1lm
> SC52: 0.01lm
> 
> Could be a pretty big deal for ultra low loving vampires like me!




I finally received my SC5w. Here are my first impressions:

1. The high modes really do live up to the hype. Amazingly bright for a 1xAA light. Very close to 500 lumens for the SC5w, well within my error-margin when I measure it.

2. I like the mode selection better than the SC52. You get an extra high mode, the medium modes are more spread out, and the low modes are lower. To give you an idea of how the low modes compare to the SC52, here is what I find:

Low1: SC5 is about half as bright as the SC52.
Low2a: SC5 is brighter than the SC52. It's a bright moonlight mode, which is nice to have when your eyes aren't dark-adapted.
Low2b: The SC5 is similar in brightness to the Low2a on the SC52. A good general-purpose moonlight mode.
Low2c: The SC5 is similar in brightness to the Low2b on the SC52. Good for middle-of-the-night in a very dark area. Note that there is no "uselessly dim" moonlight mode on the SC5, like there is on the SC52's Low2c. Which is good!

3. Despite claims of needing an Eneloop Pro, the SC5 works well on my oldest Eneloops: over 9 years old! But I wouldn't try it on any kind of battery that isn't based on Eneloop tech.

4. Tint is nice. It's about 200K cooler than my SC52w-L2, which probably puts it around 4400K or so. No green from what I can see (which is an improvement from my SC52w), but I'll try more white-wall testing later. The spill is cooler than the hot spot, typical of Cree LEDs.

5. Beam profile isn't bad for a smooth-wall reflector. There are some faint rings, and the very center is a little darker than the outer hot-spot, but there's no "purple eye" or anything like that. The hot-spot is smaller than the SC52, so it throws better. Overall, if I get another, I'll try the orange-peel next time. But again, this is white-wall testing. I can't notice anything in real use.

6. It gets warm after 3 minutes on the highest level, but not as much as I thought it would. You could easily start it up again for 6 minutes total, without it getting too hot. The larger size of the SC5 absorbs more heat than the SC52.

7. It really sucks the juice out of batteries when playing around with it. Definitely not something to run on high if you need run-time.


----------



## markr6

Thanks for the info. Even though I returned my SC5w due to the purple dot in the beam, I'll give it another shot when the come out with the "OP" version. That should give a very nice beam. I thought the standard SC5 was nice too, though.


----------



## recDNA

I wish we could set H2 as medium.


----------



## WalkIntoTheLight

recDNA said:


> I wish we could set H2 as medium.



It would be nice if Zebralight allowed any mode to be placed in any of the 6 slots, but I suppose that would get confusing for a lot of people that aren't into programming their lights. But the way it is now is pretty good. You have 6 mode levels you can program, and each is only a couple of clicks away. The low/medium/high ranges are good for a small light. High is around 100+ lumens, Medium is around 10-50. Low is less than 3. I only need a couple of modes in each range. IMO, 100+ lumens for a medium mode is too high for a small light. (It makes sense on a larger light.)

So far, I'm programming my H2 mode as as H2b. ~187 lumens. That seems bright enough for most purposes, and is different enough from 500 lumens that going to H1 is a big jump. I'm going to test the run-time on a regular Eneloop. According to Selfbuilt, it's about 80 minutes on a regular Eneloop, but I've noticed that times vary across my SC52's, so it might be a bit more or less.


----------



## StorminMatt

WalkIntoTheLight said:


> I finally received my SC5w. Here are my first impressions:
> 
> 1. The high modes really do live up to the hype. Amazingly bright for a 1xAA light. Very close to 500 lumens for the SC5w, well within my error-margin when I measure it.
> 
> 2. I like the mode selection better than the SC52. You get an extra high mode, the medium modes are more spread out, and the low modes are lower. To give you an idea of how the low modes compare to the SC52, here is what I find:
> 
> Low1: SC5 is about half as bright as the SC52.
> Low2a: SC5 is brighter than the SC52. It's a bright moonlight mode, which is nice to have when your eyes aren't dark-adapted.
> Low2b: The SC5 is similar in brightness to the Low2a on the SC52. A good general-purpose moonlight mode.
> Low2c: The SC5 is similar in brightness to the Low2b on the SC52. Good for middle-of-the-night in a very dark area. Note that there is no "uselessly dim" moonlight mode on the SC5, like there is on the SC52's Low2c. Which is good!
> 
> 3. Despite claims of needing an Eneloop Pro, the SC5 works well on my oldest Eneloops: over 9 years old! But I wouldn't try it on any kind of battery that isn't based on Eneloop tech.
> 
> 4. Tint is nice. It's about 200K cooler than my SC52w-L2, which probably puts it around 4400K or so. No green from what I can see (which is an improvement from my SC52w), but I'll try more white-wall testing later. The spill is cooler than the hot spot, typical of Cree LEDs.
> 
> 5. Beam profile isn't bad for a smooth-wall reflector. There are some faint rings, and the very center is a little darker than the outer hot-spot, but there's no "purple eye" or anything like that. The hot-spot is smaller than the SC52, so it throws better. Overall, if I get another, I'll try the orange-peel next time. But again, this is white-wall testing. I can't notice anything in real use.
> 
> 6. It gets warm after 3 minutes on the highest level, but not as much as I thought it would. You could easily start it up again for 6 minutes total, without it getting too hot. The larger size of the SC5 absorbs more heat than the SC52.
> 
> 7. It really sucks the juice out of batteries when playing around with it. Definitely not something to run on high if you need run-time.



I agree with most of these things, as I seem to have gotten a pretty good sample. But, as I have said in other threads, I feel like the 500 lumen mode is mostly hype. It only works with some types of batteries. It won't work with L91s or even most types of NiMH batteries. Batteries must be fairly new. For instance, year old Ion Cores work fine. But two year old Ion Cores are marginal. And the light does not like repeated uses of the burst mode OR going into burst mode after some time of use in the higher brightness modes. Or, if it can go into burst mode, it fails to last the full three minutes in burst mode. In other words, the battery must be in a decently high state of charge to go into (and especially stay in) burst mode. Although burst mode is shorter with the SC52, there are no such problems with the SC52 with a 14500. Because of this, I think that Selfbuilt's statement that 14500s are 'obsolete' is rather premature. To me at least, the whole idea of 500 lumens on 1xAA seems like it's just not ready for prime time, and seems like it was just a move made to 'one up' Thrunite.


----------



## gunga

You guys are not helping my wallet. I was going to hold out, now want a SC5W OP. Ugh...


----------



## more_vampires

gunga said:


> You guys are not helping my wallet. I was going to hold out, now want a SC5W OP. Ugh...


Just get it over with and get one each of ZL's current line up. Then, check back next year.


----------



## gunga

Ha! Yeah. When the new ones with programmable levels (all levels) come, then I'll have to start all over...


----------



## Badbeams3

StorminMatt said:


> I agree with most of these things, as I seem to have gotten a pretty good sample. But, as I have said in other threads, I feel like the 500 lumen mode is mostly hype. It only works with some types of batteries. It won't work with L91s or even most types of NiMH batteries. Batteries must be fairly new. For instance, year old Ion Cores work fine. But two year old Ion Cores are marginal. And the light does not like repeated uses of the burst mode OR going into burst mode after some time of use in the higher brightness modes. Or, if it can go into burst mode, it fails to last the full three minutes in burst mode. In other words, the battery must be in a decently high state of charge to go into (and especially stay in) burst mode. Although burst mode is shorter with the SC52, there are no such problems with the SC52 with a 14500. Because of this, I think that Selfbuilt's statement that 14500s are 'obsolete' is rather premature. To me at least, the whole idea of 500 lumens on 1xAA seems like it's just not ready for prime time, and seems like it was just a move made to 'one up' Thrunite.



Mine seems to have no trouble with a very old Rayovac nimh, 2400 mah rating. But the battery has seen very little use. Will not go into the 500 lumen setting on alkaline. But I would be using those only in a pinch, if ever.


----------



## snowlover91

StorminMatt said:


> I agree with most of these things, as I seem to have gotten a pretty good sample. But, as I have said in other threads, I feel like the 500 lumen mode is mostly hype. It only works with some types of batteries. It won't work with L91s or even most types of NiMH batteries. Batteries must be fairly new. For instance, year old Ion Cores work fine. But two year old Ion Cores are marginal. And the light does not like repeated uses of the burst mode OR going into burst mode after some time of use in the higher brightness modes. Or, if it can go into burst mode, it fails to last the full three minutes in burst mode. In other words, the battery must be in a decently high state of charge to go into (and especially stay in) burst mode. Although burst mode is shorter with the SC52, there are no such problems with the SC52 with a 14500. Because of this, I think that Selfbuilt's statement that 14500s are 'obsolete' is rather premature. To me at least, the whole idea of 500 lumens on 1xAA seems like it's just not ready for prime time, and seems like it was just a move made to 'one up' Thrunite.



Hmmm my results and others seem a little different. My 5 year old Eneloops at around 40-50% were able to give a full 3 minute turbo no problem. I think someone else posted how they tested 9 year old Eneloops and achieved similar results. The SC5 was designed around Eneloop and Eneloop pro batteries so I don't think it's a fair comparison to say it won't work with other rechargeables at 500 lumens because they specifically state and recommend to use Eneloops for it. It's like putting a lithium AA in a 14500 light, you just won't get the same results because it wasn't designed for that battery on max brightness. A good example is the Nitecore EA11 which achieves 900 lumens only with IMR 14500 batteries while regular 14500 batteries won't produce the full brightness. 

I also wouldnt call the 500 lumen mode "hype" since it does work exactly as designed and advertised. Comparing a light with a 1 minute burst and a 3 minute burst isn't exactly fair either since the light running for 1 minute has much less time to run therefore making it easier to achieve the shorter burst. A better comparison would be to see how long a SC5 can last before it no longer is able to get 1 minute on burst mode. Both are great lights but for me if I don't have to use 14500 batteries I try to avoid them and welcome lights like the SC5w. I plan on ordering the SC5 orange peel version it should be the perfect blend of brightness and a nice beam.


----------



## markr6

snowlover91 said:


> I also wouldnt call the 500 lumen mode "hype" since it does work exactly as designed and advertised.



I agree. While I usually don't like battery-killer modes, this is still reasonable IMO. 3 minutes is a lot when you consider the small 1xAA format. If you need 500lm continuously for a specific application, you're obviously not going to reach for the SC5 first.

Selfbuilt's review shows it with cooling, w/o cooling, and restarts. He doesn't recommend the restarts, but if you want to abuse the cell, go for it! Eneloops and fairly inexpensive and safer to full drain than Li-Ion, so I wouldn't be afraid to do it on occasion.


----------



## snowlover91

Yep it's called turbo or burst mode for a reason. Three minutes is plenty for what this light is designed to do, I have yet to use the burst mode for more than 30 seconds probably but it's nice to have extra time if needed. If I need 500+ lumens I'll be grabbing a 18650 light anyways like the SC62 since it can handle 600 lumens for a few hours and has an extra 500 lumens.


----------



## WarRaven

I find, I need the brightest light, during the day. When I don't carry big lights.
High brightness that can be used multiple times is paramount.
A couple of uses, is a wash.
YMMV.


----------



## Badbeams3

I use mine on high quite a bit...but probably for less than 30 seconds at a time...for real world things. Looking under the couch for my cell phone...looking in the attic to spot an old ceiling fan stored up there...taking out the trash and collecting mail (just cause, for the hell of it and to impress myself). Battery seems to be holding up very well. But I have other 18650 lights that are way brighter and last far longer...it's just that this one is so small...lust a cool little light. For some reason it seems more fun to grab it instead.


----------



## WalkIntoTheLight

I was a little skeptical of Selfbuilt's runtimes for the regular Eneloops, since they all seem to indicate less capacity than they should have compared to the Pro's he tested with. Perhaps he's using a weak regular Eneloop?

Anyway, I'm doing my own run-time tests, and here are my initial results for the SC5w. I used freshly charged generation 4 regular Eneloops, manufactured a year ago. They have only a couple of cycles on them, so I would consider them brand new (removed from package last week).

High 1 (500 lumens): 21 minutes
High 2a (304 lumens): 42 minutes
High 2b (187 lumens): 97 minutes

High 2a and 2b were continuous discharges. High 1 was achieved by turning the light on max for 3 minute intervals, followed by a rest of a few minutes in-between. I didn't want to overheat the light. Perhaps that's a bit easier on the battery than forcing it to run on max for the entire time like Selfbuilt did.

I called the run-time over as soon as the output dropped a level.

The runtimes are approximately what my SC52w does on an Eneloop, at comparable outputs. A little bit better, since the output of the SC5w is a bit higher than the SC52w.

Next, I want to test the H2c mode, as well as the medium levels. That will take a little more time.


----------



## KeepingItLight

WalkIntoTheLight said:


> Anyway, I'm doing my own run-time tests, and here are my initial results for the SC5w...



Thanks for the data!


----------



## snowlover91

Great info thanks for testing that for us! With Eneloop Pro batteries you would probably get 10-20% longer runtimes at those levels so you'd be looking at about 26 mins at 500 lumens, 50 mins at 300 lumens and around 118 mins at 187 lumens which is very solid. 

I find myself using the 187 high mode for most tasks and using the burst for brief moments as needed. Now just waiting for the OP version to be released. Was it worth the wait for this light, walkintothelight?


----------



## recDNA

I wish I could set 500 as high and 187 as medium


----------



## snowlover91

I customized mine to have H1 at 187 and then a quick double tap changes it to 500 if needed. That way when I turn it on high its not jumping straight into turbo and is the brightness level I use most frequently. I find at night around the house that the medium brightness is sufficient for every task especially when your eyes are adjusted to the dark it is more than enough.


----------



## markr6

snowlover91 said:


> I customized mine to have H1 at 187 and then a quick double tap changes it to 500 if needed. That way when I turn it on high its not jumping straight into turbo and is the brightness level I use most frequently. I find at night around the house that the medium brightness is sufficient for every task especially when your eyes are adjusted to the dark it is more than enough.



That seems like the best setup. Setting it at 304lm only runs 0.9hr and can catch you by surprise with a dead battery. 187lm gets you 1.8hr which is fine.


----------



## recDNA

Runtime is not a big issue for me but that does sound like a good idea just because M1 isn't bright enough for me. I may occasionally use L1 but rarely use M. The 187 now becomes medium. Double click to get high. Not bad.


----------



## markr6

SC5Fc and Fd now available for sale! 375 lumens max for both. H1 375 Lm (3min, then 228lm, total 0.8 hr)

8/21 estimated shipping

XM-L2 EasyWhite LEDs


----------



## WalkIntoTheLight

markr6 said:


> SC5Fc and Fd now available for sale! 375 lumens max for both. H1 375 Lm (3min, then 228lm, total 0.8 hr)
> 
> 8/21 estimated shipping
> 
> XM-L2 EasyWhite LEDs



Interesting. I guess the lower efficiency is because the boost driver has to go from 1.2v to 6v, instead of just 3v with the regular XM-L2's.


----------



## recDNA

markr6 said:


> SC5Fc and Fd now available for sale! 375 lumens max for both. H1 375 Lm (3min, then 228lm, total 0.8 hr)
> 
> 8/21 estimated shipping
> 
> XM-L2 EasyWhite LEDs


Are they hi cri?


----------



## markr6

recDNA said:


> Are they hi cri?



Kind of...83-85CRI. Good, not great. Definitely not worth the 500 vs. 375lm hit IMO.


----------



## Amelia

markr6 said:


> SC5Fc and Fd now available for sale! 375 lumens max for both. H1 375 Lm (3min, then 228lm, total 0.8 hr)
> 
> 8/21 estimated shipping
> 
> XM-L2 EasyWhite LEDs



XM-L2 eh? Looks like they're dropping support for the Luxeon Rebel emitters for future lights. I wonder how they compare? I'll probably have to buy a SC5d to find out! 




markr6 said:


> Kind of...83-85CRI. Good, not great. Definitely not worth the 500 vs. 375lm hit IMO.



For some people, it's DEFINITELY worth taking the hit... lumens aren't everything. Bright is nice occasionally, but beam tint and CRI are something you have to live with ALL THE TIME that the light is on! In my opinion, 125 Lumens stacked on top of an already bright 375 is not all that much brighter perceptually, and is WELL worth giving up in trade for a more pleasant all-around light quality. In fact, I give up nearly 600 Lum. going from the SC62w to the SC62d... a VASTLY greater lumens loss, and I still find the tradeoff worth it. I own several of both lights, and I can't remember the last time I picked up and used a SC62w... I find that the SC62d is that much more pleasant to use!


----------



## markr6

Amelia said:


> XM-L2 eh? Looks like they're dropping support for the Luxeon Rebel emitters for future lights. I wonder how they compare? I'll probably have to buy a SC5d to find out!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> For some people, it's DEFINITELY worth taking the hit... lumens aren't everything. Bright is nice occasionally, but beam tint and CRI are something you have to deal with ALL THE TIME that the light is on! In my opinion, 125 Lumens stacked on top of an already bright 375 is not all that much brighter perceptually, and is WELL worth giving up in trade for a more pleasant all-around light quality. In fact, I give up nearly 600 Lum. going from the SC62w to the SC62d... a VASTLY greater lumens loss, and I still find the tradeoff worth it.



I would agree with a 90CRI of course, but anything less doesn't really matter. My SC52w is only 75, but it's GREAT! So a slight bump doesn't do it for me. All or nothing! But it's nice they're giving the option. LOTS of options lately once these OP models come out.


----------



## WalkIntoTheLight

I just think it's great that Zebralight is bringing out new lights in all kinds of different LEDs and tints. Not many flashlight manufacturers do that. Most only provide a crappy cool white version!

Most of ZL's options aren't for me, but it's fantastic to have the choice.


----------



## Amelia

WalkIntoTheLight said:


> I just think it's great that Zebralight is bringing out new lights in all kinds of different LEDs and tints. Not many flashlight manufacturers do that. Most only provide a crappy cool white version!
> 
> Most of ZL's options aren't for me, but it's fantastic to have the choice.



My thoughts exactly! Thanks, Zebralight.
Now... how about a 18650 high-CRI "F" series headlamp sometime this year?


----------



## 18650

I can't believe people still get so hung up over 5 CRI. The 5000K MT-G2 (which is a personal fav) used in most lights is probably only rated 70-75 CRI yet I can find no fault with it.


----------



## markr6

18650 said:


> I can't believe people still get so hung up over 5 CRI. The 5000K MT-G2 (which is a personal fav) used in most lights is probably only rated 70-75 CRI yet I can find no fault with it.



I agree. Unless it's 90CRI+ and I "feel" like I'm getting something special (and I believe I am), then anything with a good tint is fine. Whether that is 75, 80 or 85 I don't care so much. Give me something around 5000K without the dingy yellow/green and I'm happy.


----------



## WalkIntoTheLight

markr6 said:


> I agree. Unless it's 90CRI+ and I "feel" like I'm getting something special (and I believe I am), then anything with a good tint is fine. Whether that is 75, 80 or 85 I don't care so much. Give me something around 5000K without the dingy yellow/green and I'm happy.



Maybe I got lucky with the tint lottery, but the SC5w is the best Cree LED light I've got so far. Probably around 4500K, but I don't see any green in the corona, which is unusual. Maybe the smaller corona with the smooth reflector helps? It's a bit bluish in the spill (compared to the centre), but that's normal for Cree.

I think Zebralight has improved the tints a lot in the past couple of years. Even my cool white SC52 isn't that bad. A small bit of green, but my 4sevens Quarks look absolutely ghoulish compared to Zebralight (and the Quarks really aren't bad either).

Or perhaps Cree is getting better at making LEDs with less green in the tint.


----------



## markr6

I'm willing to roll the dice again and see what another SC5w would look like. The only thing holding me back now is the orange peel models. I never had a problem with the SC5/52 beam, but I'm thinking the OP may be worth trying. Possibly a little better for my tastes. I won't know for sure though unless I wait and try it.


----------



## WalkIntoTheLight

markr6 said:


> I'm willing to roll the dice again and see what another SC5w would look like. The only thing holding me back now is the orange peel models. I never had a problem with the SC5/52 beam, but I'm thinking the OP may be worth trying. Possibly a little better for my tastes. I won't know for sure though unless I wait and try it.



The smooth version doesn't have much noticeable artifacts. A couple of faint rings, but only noticeable when white-wall testing. It definitely has much more throw than the OP SC52's I have, though that may be partly due to the slightly larger diameter reflector.

If I get another, I'd get the OP, mostly just so I have something different. At first I thought I'd prefer the OP, but after playing with the SC5w for awhile, having a bit more throw in the smooth reflector comes in handy, since these are such floody lights with the OP.

Nice that Zebralight is going to give a choice. If I had to choose just one type of reflector, it would be a toss-up.


----------



## markr6

Oh yeah I forgot the SC52 had a slight OP. I never noticed a difference between the SC5w and SC52w, though. I didn't keep it long, so maybe I didn't do a fair comparison.


----------



## recDNA

If u want to see colors accurately for whatever reason...


----------



## Amelia

markr6 said:


> I agree. Unless it's 90CRI+ and I "feel" like I'm getting something special (and I believe I am), then anything with a good tint is fine. Whether that is 75, 80 or 85 I don't care so much. Give me something around 5000K without the dingy yellow/green and I'm happy.



OK, on the subject of "being hung up on 5 CRI points" and related posts.

Is 90CRI better than 80? 80CRI better than 60? 10 CRI anybody? Setting some arbitrary point and saying that once you reach (for example) 90CRI it's suddenly "golden" and really offers something that lower CRI lights don't just doesn't make sense. If CRI has any meaning at all, and a higher CRI light offers ANYTHING more to the user than a lower CRI spec'ed emitter, then for SOME PEOPLE it will have a level of value worth striving for. I mentioned earlier in this thread that I own multiple SC62w and SC62d lights... and that I rarely ever use the SC62w lights any more. What's the actual CRI value difference between them? I couldn't tell you without looking it up. What I DO know is that the SC62d just looks and feels a LOT more pleasant in real-world use (particularly outdoors), and is a far more enjoyable light to carry around and look at the world with for long periods of time. Do I miss the extra 600 Lumens of the SC62w? Maybe once in a great while... but I don't typically use the high modes on my Zebras (headlamps or handhelds) so for me the "higher high" just not much of a deciding factor. However, EVERY TIME I turn on the light, no matter what mode it is in, I have to live with the tint and how the light reveals colors and subtle shades of color that make all the difference between stark, washed out LED lighting and bright, beautiful, vivid scenery that only high CRI emitters can reveal.

For me, it's not a matter of "only 5 CRI", it's a matter of finding and using the most pleasing and full spectrum light source that I can obtain... whatever the actual CRI spec might be. 

P.S. For CCT, I personally also feel that 5000K is the ideal... this seems to be the color temp. (at least in the present state of LED emitter technology) where there is the least amount of "coloration" on the beam tint... the closest to "true pure white" that has yet been achieved. I completely ADORE the 5000K MT-G2 emitters for this reason.


----------



## markr6

Amelia said:


> Is 90CRI better than 80? 80CRI better than 60? 10 CRI anybody? Setting some arbitrary point and saying that once you reach (for example) 90CRI it's suddenly "golden" and really offers something that lower CRI lights don't just doesn't make sense.


We're not pulling it out of thin air. It's pretty much limited by technology, physics and what is cost efficient.


----------



## Amelia

markr6 said:


> We're not pulling it out of thin air. It's pretty much limited by technology, physics and what is cost efficient.



I think you might have misunderstood what I was saying. Please re-read it, and put any numbers you'd like in place of the arbitrary ones I chose. It's not about the numbers, it's about the nature of CRI and whether or not high CRI emitters are desireable... and why.


----------



## twistedraven

So that's what their 6v drivers are for. Interesting to see how much lumens they'd be putting out with an 18650?


----------



## uofaengr

twistedraven said:


> So that's what their 6v drivers are for. Interesting to see how much lumens they'd be putting out with an 18650?


Maybe we'll find out with the SC63d.


----------



## Mr Floppy

uofaengr said:


> Maybe we'll find out with the SC63d.



But from 1.2V... Unbelievable... I can only think some sort of pwm


----------



## KeepingItLight

twistedraven said:


> [The MT-G2...] So that's what their 6v drivers are for. Interesting to see how much lumens they'd be putting out with an 18650?



In one of these Zebralight threads, someone recently reported an email exchange with Zebralight in which it stated that it had no plans for the MT-G2. If true, and if not too much has changed since, then the 6v drivers might be for other, newer LEDs than the MT-G2. The XHP70, for instance, comes to mind. 

This, however, is pure speculation on my part, so let's not start any rumors. 



Mr Floppy said:


> But from 1.2V... Unbelievable... I can only think some sort of pwm



I believe the 6v drivers are for 18650 models, but, once again, I have no actual facts!


----------



## twistedraven

I never mentioned MT-G2 in my post; I was commenting on these new lights' usage of the 6v XML2 Easy White.


----------



## Mr Floppy

KeepingItLight said:


> I believe the 6v drivers are for 18650 models, but, once again, I have no actual facts!



It was for the SC5 c and d models that the easy white xm-l2 was quoted. In the other thread about the sc600 mk3 using an xp-l hi. Guess we'll have to wait and see


----------



## KeepingItLight

twistedraven said:


> I never mentioned MT-G2 in my post; I was commenting on these new lights' usage of the 6v XML2 Easy White.




Sorry 'bout that. Didn't mean to put words in your mouth.

I thought you were responding to Amelia's post three above yours:



Amelia said:


> <snip> ... I completely ADORE the 5000K MT-G2 emitters for this reason.


----------



## recDNA

twistedraven said:


> So that's what their 6v drivers are for. Interesting to see how much lumens they'd be putting out with an 18650?



6 volt drivers?


----------



## WalkIntoTheLight

recDNA said:


> 6 volt drivers?



The XM-L2 EasyWhite LED requires a 6v forward voltage, not 3v like the regular XM-L2 they're using now.

IMO, I don't think it's worth going from 1.2v to 6v on an SC5, just for the EasyWhite LED. But, good to have choice, if they pull it off. I think it would make more sense on an 18650 light, from an efficiency perspective.


----------



## WalkIntoTheLight

Amelia said:


> Is 90CRI better than 80? 80CRI better than 60? 10 CRI anybody? Setting some arbitrary point and saying that once you reach (for example) 90CRI it's suddenly "golden" and really offers something that lower CRI lights don't just doesn't make sense. If CRI has any meaning at all, and a higher CRI light offers ANYTHING more to the user than a lower CRI spec'ed emitter, then for SOME PEOPLE it will have a level of value worth striving for.



Is it CRI you're really striving for, or a good clean tint?

Why I compare a nice-tinted XM-L2 neutral white 4300K 75CRI LED, against a Nichia 219A 4300K 92CRI LED, I find it really hard to tell the difference. They both are a huge improvement over 65CRI cool whites, but I think that's more to do with the warmer tint than it is with the higher CRI. Reds, yellows, oranges really pop under a neutral white, compared to the washed-out stark look of cool white.

Sure, the 92CRI does look a little better than the 75CRI, but it's nowhere near the improvement that changing to a warmer tint (from cool white) makes.

All else equal, sure, I'll take a higher CRI. But not all else is equal. The higher CRI is always less efficient than a lower CRI, at the same CCT temperature. It's a trade-off.


----------



## recDNA

WalkIntoTheLight said:


> The XM-L2 EasyWhite LED requires a 6v forward voltage, not 3v like the regular XM-L2 they're using now.
> 
> IMO, I don't think it's worth going from 1.2v to 6v on an SC5, just for the EasyWhite LED. But, good to have choice, if they pull it off. I think it would make more sense on an 18650 light, from an efficiency perspective.


Heck I would love a 2 x CR123A version! That's why I got excited. I prefer to use primaries.

When I am illuminating a specimen for students (the lab has cheap fluorescent lighting) I like colors to look correct. When using Hi CRI I trust that colors will be accurate.


----------



## KDM

I love the new email they just sent out. Well played ZL!


----------



## WalkIntoTheLight

Yes, love the email. I think must be directed at markr6:

_ZebraLight: A Cure for Tint Snobbery_

_Each flashlight's output is individually tested to lie ON the Planckian Black Body Line - no more annoying hues (green, purple, pink, etc)._

_Each flashlight's OTF chromaticity is individually measured to be within an area that's less than half (on the CIE 1931 curve) of the Luxeon T we use. This results in a tint consistency between flashlights that has never been done before._

_We have tried out best to cure tint snobbery and feel that, overall, this offers the best combination of purity, tint, and CRI currently available at this brightness with one AA Eneloop._


----------



## KDM

I realize everyone has different wants and expectations and obviously ZL does too. So they're now offering a light with constant tint and uniform beam for white wall hunting. If you want maximum output and throw you may have to deal with some imperfections. Seems reasonable to me.


----------



## twistedraven

Lol! That's great. Of course the frosted lens would help mitigate any ting variation because of how it blurs the beam as well. I can't wait for the 18650 headlamp variant of this, it would be just in time for mountain hiking in a couple weeks.


----------



## markr6

WalkIntoTheLight said:


> Yes, love the email. I think must be directed at markr6:



LOL that's exactly what I thought!! I opened my e-mail this morning and I felt like they were talking one-on-one with me. I could see them now: "we'll show that son of a ***** markr6 a good tint...this will shut him up"

Now, I was talking 325 vs 500lm recently...but they may have sold me on this. _Maybe. _I just have too much of a tendency to run on H1, so a 0.8hr runtime scares me a bit.


----------



## snowlover91

It's actually 375 lumens for 3 minutes which isn't bad and then a step down to 230 lumens for the remaining runtime. I like the mode spacing for this light... I want an OP SC5w and now one of these... Choices!


----------



## WalkIntoTheLight

I've done some current-measuring on the SC5w, and I've noticed that they've really improved the efficiency of the moonlight modes, compared to the various SC52 models.

For example, here are the current measurements for the SC5w:

Low 1 : 13.7mA
Low 2a : 6.2mA
Low 2b : 2.0mA
Low 2c : 0.78mA
Off : 2.4uA


And here are the measurements for the SC52w-L2:

Low 1 : 28 mA
Low 2a : 5.2 mA
Low 2b : 2.4 mA
Low 2c : 2.0 mA
Off : 21 uA



Now, keep in mind that the brightness levels don't line up with the moonlight modes; the SC5w moonlight levels are all 1 step up in brightness from the SC52w. So, if we line up the brightness level approximately, we have the following:



Approx lumensSC5w currentSC52w-L2 current0.12.0 mA5.2 mA0.010.78 mA2.4 mA


Note that I estimated the lumens myself, and did not use the published ZL lumens which IMO are not correct for the moonlight levels. I had to throw out the SC5 Low2a mode, because it's brighter than any of the SC52 moonlights. And, I threw out the SC52 Low2c mode, because it's far dimmer than any of the SC5 moonlights. I'm left with two moonlight modes that compare in brightness pretty well.

The SC5 is about 3 times as efficient on moonlight modes!

The parasitic drain is hugely improved as well, though the old SC52 drain was tiny anyway.


----------



## moozooh

Very nice, thanks for testing! Pity that c/d models won't be nearly as effective due to the 6v forward voltage requirement. (There go my hopes of replacing H502d with an imaginary H5Fd.)


----------



## snowlover91

moozooh said:


> Very nice, thanks for testing! Pity that c/d models won't be nearly as effective due to the 6v forward voltage requirement. (There go my hopes of replacing H502d with an imaginary H5Fd.)



Actually judging by their published specs for the upcoming c/d frosted models the moonlight mode is very similar getting 4 days at 2.2 lumens and 16 days at the sub 1 lumen level. This is very similar in performance to the SC5 series just slightly dimmer at these settings due to the led used and slightly less efficiency. However judging by their raw numbers it looks quite similar to the SC5 and SC52 as well.


----------



## Swede74

Would someone who has received Zebralight's latest newsletter be kind enough to post it here? I have made several unsuccessful attempts to subscribe to their newsletter using two different Yahoo email addresses. Just now I tried a disposable Mailinator address and that worked like a charm - I instantly got an auto-generated confirmation email. That address will be hard to monitor though.


----------



## marinemaster

Here you go


----------



## jhc37013

Sarlix said:


> I swear the tint of the r2 led in my Nitecore d10 is the purest white I have seen, it makes swans look dirty! I've never tried an other r2 led light so don't know if they're all like that, or just my sample.



Funny you mention an older Nitecore and white tint my Nitecore IFE2 XP-G R2 from 2011 is the purest white light I' have ever owned in a flashlight and it is my favorite light of all time for many different reasons the tint being one of them.

The reason I mention this is you seem maybe not to like white tint but I absolutely love a pure white tint with no orange, blue, green or brown some manufacts sometimes call neutral. I believe a pure white tint is what I would really call nuetral


----------



## Swede74

marinemaster said:


> Here you go


:thanks:






There, I fixed it for you!


----------



## marinemaster

37013 pure white is not neutral. I did not know that until I had a light with Nichia 219. [emoji2]


----------



## twistedraven

Nichia 219 is not purely neutral either. It has a tannish cast to it.


----------



## recDNA

Zebralight should give cri numbers in that ad.


----------



## marinemaster

The SC5 OP version is now on the spreadsheet. [emoji2] 
Looks like is going to be release this month.


----------



## WalkIntoTheLight

marinemaster said:


> The SC5 OP version is now on the spreadsheet.
> Looks like is going to be release this month.



The more I play with my SC5w, the more I wonder if they really need a OP version. Any rings I see are very subtle, and not at all noticeable on anything other than a white wall. The only thing I think the OP will do is slightly fuzzy the hot spot, to give more of a corona. But it's not like the SC5 has a well-defined hot spot as it is.

Oh, and tint... after trying really hard to find any green in mine, I can't see any! This is my first Cree LED that doesn't show any green anywhere, even in the corona. :twothumbs I used to think my SC52w-L2 was pretty good, but it looks pretty green/yellow in comparison. I hope this is a normal trend with the new Zebralights, if so, they really seem to be picking better tints now. (Mine came directly from China, if it makes any difference.)


----------



## markr6

WalkIntoTheLight said:


> The more I play with my SC5w, the more I wonder if they really need a OP version. Any rings I see are very subtle, and not at all noticeable on anything other than a white wall. The only thing I think the OP will do is slightly fuzzy the hot spot, to give more of a corona. But it's not like the SC5 has a well-defined hot spot as it is.



I'm not sure either. The SC5w seems to have a nice large hotspot but balanced beam overall. How much different could it be between that and the F version?

The OP version have been on the spreadsheet for some time now. I'm just wondering if it will really be this month. I hope so!


----------



## snowlover91

WalkIntoTheLight said:


> The more I play with my SC5w, the more I wonder if they really need a OP version. Any rings I see are very subtle, and not at all noticeable on anything other than a white wall. The only thing I think the OP will do is slightly fuzzy the hot spot, to give more of a corona. But it's not like the SC5 has a well-defined hot spot as it is.
> 
> Oh, and tint... after trying really hard to find any green in mine, I can't see any! This is my first Cree LED that doesn't show any green anywhere, even in the corona. :twothumbs I used to think my SC52w-L2 was pretty good, but it looks pretty green/yellow in comparison. I hope this is a normal trend with the new Zebralights, if so, they really seem to be picking better tints now. (Mine came directly from China, if it makes any difference.)



My copy is the purest neutral tint of any light I've ever seen. I had similar results with no evidence of a yellow or green tint at all, it's definitely my favorite and I'm quite impressed. Judging by their new lights they seem to be focusing on improving tint and QC as well for what emitters they use. After the first batch of the "monster eyeball" it seems that issue was fairly isolated and has been resolved. Waiting for markr6 to give it a try again


----------



## marinemaster

Perfect tint on my new SC5FW broad beam lights up the whole back yard.


----------



## markr6

OK here's my dilemma. You probably know me as a tint snob. However, I've recently started to give up a "perfect" tint for a "decent" tint as long as the output is substantially greater. For example, a SC62w blows away the SC62d in output, so I go with the SC62w even though the SC62d tint is better. But not ENOUGH to make me give up the output.

But when looking at the *SC5w and SC5Fd*:

SC5w: H1 *500* Lm (3min, then 304lm, total 0.8 hr) or H2 *304* Lm (0.9 hr) / *187* Lm (1.8 hrs)
SC5Fd: H1 *375* Lm (3min, then 228lm, total 0.8 hr) or H2 *228* Lm (0.9 hr) / *140* Lm (1.8 hrs)

A few points:
1. 500lm vs 375lm - both are "battery killers" and something I would try not to use so much anyway
2. 500lm vs 375lm - when I DO use H1 mode, there's not a huge difference anyway
3. So I would probably program and use *H2b *most often - 187lm or 140lm.
4. 187lm vs 140lm - again, not a huge difference and same runtime
5. I liked the SC5w tint on my sample, but I don't trust them to always be that good. Tints are all over the place.

So I may be leaning towards the *SC5Fd*, BUT...I really don't feel the frosted lens is necessary. Will there be a *SC5d*?

CAN'T WIN! Honestly, I try not to complain all the time


----------



## Mr Floppy

markr6 said:


> Will there be a *SC5d*?
> 
> CAN'T WIN! Honestly, I try not to complain all the time



It may have a reason as to why it is frosted. The easy white xm-l2 led is a quad die so it may not have the best beam especially in a small reflector. So it may be necessary to smooth that out otherwise they'll get complainers complaining about the cross in the middle


----------



## markr6

Mr Floppy said:


> It may have a reason as to why it is frosted. The easy white xm-l2 led is a quad die so it may not have the best beam especially in a small reflector. So it may be necessary to smooth that out otherwise they'll get complainers complaining about the cross in the middle



I was kind of thinking that myself. The frosted version was always a second option, if at all, on previous models so it surprised me they started off with it.

If it were Amazon or Zappos, I would buy every single model, try them, then return  But I won't do that to ZL...I would feel bad about customers not getting a "new" light later on. I've returned them in the past, but for appropriate reasons IMO.


----------



## WalkIntoTheLight

Try another SC5w. I think ZL has really improved their tint game, lately. Not sure why you returned your last one (did you say you got a "purple eye"?), but the tint I have on mine is the best yet. Absolutely no green or yellow at all!

Or wait for the OP version, if you want the hot spot a bit more smoothed out.


----------



## markr6

WalkIntoTheLight said:


> Try another SC5w. I think ZL has really improved their tint game, lately. Not sure why you returned your last one (did you say you got a "purple eye"?), but the tint I have on mine is the best yet. Absolutely no green or yellow at all!
> 
> Or wait for the OP version, if you want the hot spot a bit more smoothed out.



Yes it was the purple spot. Other than that, the tint was great. It doesn't seem like there would be enough gap between SC5, SC5 OP and SC5F to make it worth producing all 3, but of course I can't say for sure until I see them. I'm thinking the SC5 OP would be a nice balance. We'll see how patient I can be...


----------



## WalkIntoTheLight

markr6 said:


> Yes it was the purple spot. Other than that, the tint was great. It doesn't seem like there would be enough gap between SC5, SC5 OP and SC5F to make it worth producing all 3, but of course I can't say for sure until I see them. I'm thinking the SC5 OP would be a nice balance. We'll see how patient I can be...



Either the smooth reflector or orange peel would be good. A frosted lens is too niche for me. Great for close-up work, but otherwise not too practical.


----------



## twistedraven

90 degree beam spread isn't too much of a compromise I think. I've used some diffusers that diffuse the beam out to around 110-120 degrees, and that's a little too much loss of throw. I'd have to see it in person though.


----------



## marinemaster

A floody beam is way more useful. My SC52FW has an awesome beam. The spot type beams are over rated and most times they are specialized. To get useable light from the spill or bounced back of a powerful beam is a waste to me. Movies have put a bad twist on spot lights trying to see "something" 500 yards away. No that is not really how I see it. The powerful spot light or search light is the same as I want 5000 lumens threads. 50 to 100 lumens is plenty when one needs to see. Add a floody beam and great tint like the SC5w has, that is all that is needed for 90% of the time. The icing on the cake is the tried and true Eneloop. To me these 3 criteria are met plus the Eneloop as a bonus. We have come a long way since Maglite incandescent. With the perfect EDC of ZL compared to 3D Maglite the ZL platform is as close to perfect as you can get.


----------



## markr6

marinemaster said:


> A floody beam is way more useful. My SC52FW has an awesome beam. The spot type beams are over rated and most times they are specialized. To get useable light from the spill or bounced back of a powerful beam is a waste to me. Movies have put a bad twist on spot lights trying to see "something" 500 yards away. No that is not really how I see it. The powerful spot light or search light is the same as I want 5000 lumens threads. 50 to 100 lumens is plenty when one needs to see. Add a floody beam and great tint like the SC5w has, that is all that is needed for 90% of the time. The icing on the cake is the tried and true Eneloop. To me these 3 criteria are met plus the Eneloop as a bonus. We have come a long way since Maglite incandescent. With the perfect EDC of ZL compared to 3D Maglite the ZL platform is as close to perfect as you can get.



Do you like the SC52Fw or SC5w better? (because of battery, beam or both)


----------



## keithallenlaw

Just got my SC5w and for the life of me I cant program the medium setting.
Are there only two auxiliaries for medium verse the low and high having 
three auxiliaries? 

And when do you start the 6 clicks, in one of the main settings or the 
secondary setting. Thanks. -keith


----------



## WalkIntoTheLight

keithallenlaw said:


> Just got my SC5w and for the life of me I cant program the medium setting.
> Are there only two auxiliaries for medium verse the low and high having
> three auxiliaries?



Yes.



> And when do you start the 6 clicks, in one of the main settings or the
> secondary setting. Thanks. -keith



Either one.


----------



## marinemaster

SC5FW both beam and battery, especially Eneloop.


----------



## keithallenlaw

Thank you so much for helping. Great little light btw. Like it a lot. 



WalkIntoTheLight said:


> Yes.
> Either one.


----------



## WalkIntoTheLight

Two more data points for SC5w run-time.

Using freshly charged, 4th gen regular Eneloop (not the Pro version):

High 1 : measured at total 21min, using rests between each 3min run
High 2a : measured at 42min
High 2b : measured at 97min
High 2c : measured at 3h 30min
Medium 1: measured at 6h 30min

I'm impressed at how long the H2c mode lasted (107 lumens). 3.5 hours is what Zebralight lists as the run-time on a Eneloop Pro, and I'm getting 3.5 hours on a regular Eneloop. This blows away my SC52's lowest H2 run-times (2h15min for SC52w-L2 and 2h50min for original SC52 cool white).

Even the medium mode of the SC5w is significantly longer than the SC52's (6h 0min for SC52w-L2 and 5h 50min for SC52).

That said, the brightness levels are not all identical, but they're close.



WalkIntoTheLight said:


> I was a little skeptical of Selfbuilt's runtimes for the regular Eneloops, since they all seem to indicate less capacity than they should have compared to the Pro's he tested with. Perhaps he's using a weak regular Eneloop?
> 
> Anyway, I'm doing my own run-time tests, and here are my initial results for the SC5w. I used freshly charged generation 4 regular Eneloops, manufactured a year ago. They have only a couple of cycles on them, so I would consider them brand new (removed from package last week).
> 
> High 1 (500 lumens): 21 minutes
> High 2a (304 lumens): 42 minutes
> High 2b (187 lumens): 97 minutes
> 
> High 2a and 2b were continuous discharges. High 1 was achieved by turning the light on max for 3 minute intervals, followed by a rest of a few minutes in-between. I didn't want to overheat the light. Perhaps that's a bit easier on the battery than forcing it to run on max for the entire time like Selfbuilt did.
> 
> I called the run-time over as soon as the output dropped a level.
> 
> The runtimes are approximately what my SC52w does on an Eneloop, at comparable outputs. A little bit better, since the output of the SC5w is a bit higher than the SC52w.
> 
> Next, I want to test the H2c mode, as well as the medium levels. That will take a little more time.


----------



## uofaengr

WalkIntoTheLight said:


> Two more data points for SC5w run-time.
> 
> Using freshly charged, 4th gen regular Eneloop (not the Pro version):
> 
> High 1 : measured at total 21min, using rests between each 3min run
> High 2a : measured at 42min
> High 2b : measured at 97min
> High 2c : measured at 3h 30min
> Medium 1: measured at 6h 30min
> 
> I'm impressed at how long the H2c mode lasted (107 lumens). 3.5 hours is what Zebralight lists as the run-time on a Eneloop Pro, and I'm getting 3.5 hours on a regular Eneloop. This blows away my SC52's lowest H2 run-times (2h15min for SC52w-L2 and 2h50min for original SC52 cool white).
> 
> Even the medium mode of the SC5w is significantly longer than the SC52's (6h 0min for SC52w-L2 and 5h 50min for SC52).
> 
> That said, the brightness levels are not all identical, but they're close.


Thanks for this test. Are these runtimes until the battery dies or until it noticeably drops in output?


----------



## WalkIntoTheLight

uofaengr said:


> Thanks for this test. Are these runtimes until the battery dies or until it noticeably drops in output?



They're done until the output drops. The SC5w drops output in large steps, so it's easy to tell. When I check the battery after the test, it's down to less than 0.9v, so it's pretty-much depleted. It does recover after some rest, but only up to about 1.15v, which means it's almost empty. The light still works on low for quite awhile, so it won't leave you in the dark.


----------



## uofaengr

WalkIntoTheLight said:


> They're done until the output drops. The SC5w drops output in large steps, so it's easy to tell. When I check the battery after the test, it's down to less than 0.9v, so it's pretty-much depleted. It does recover after some rest, but only up to about 1.15v, which means it's almost empty. The light still works on low for quite awhile, so it won't leave you in the dark.


Nice, I'm impressed. I don't know how I'll feel about the extra bulk of the light, but the SC5w OP will be hard to pass up. Not sure though since I'm afraid it'd end up just being an around the house light, and my SC52w L2 and SC62w (already a near perfect light) already do a pretty good job of that...


----------



## markr6

uofaengr said:


> Nice, I'm impressed. I don't know how I'll feel about the extra bulk of the light, but the SC5w OP will be hard to pass up. Not sure though since I'm afraid it'd end up just being an around the house light, and my SC52w L2 and SC62w (already a near perfect light) already do a pretty good job of that...



My exact thoughts!! But I think I will get the OP version anyway. I just don't have enough AA lights. I really like them smaller body on the SC52, but ZL seems committed to this new style.


----------



## Diffuser

I picked up the SC5 and the SC5F and really like them. I also have SC52W L2 but I do like the size of the SC5 better. Great little lights.


----------



## snowlover91

Diffuser said:


> I picked up the SC5 and the SC5F and really like them. I also have SC52W L2 but I do like the size of the SC5 better. Great little lights.



Between the SC5 and SC5f which do you like better and why? I'm thinking about preordering their new one in the daylight color but was wondering what the flood would be like compared with the regular reflector.


----------



## snowlover91

Preordered the SC5fd and will post a short review when it arrives. Pretty excited about it and I think the floody beam will be very useful for most applications I use AA lights for anyways.


----------



## Diffuser

snowlover91 said:


> Between the SC5 and SC5f which do you like better and why? I'm thinking about preordering their new one in the daylight color but was wondering what the flood would be like compared with the regular reflector.


They both have their place but I like the flood better. There doesn't seem to be a whole lot of difference with flow between the two at least to me anyway. I use it around camp when I'm not using a headband.


----------



## newbie66

Damn, Zebralight has been outstanding lately.


----------



## markr6

newbie66 said:


> Damn, Zebralight has been outstanding lately.



Hell yeah! 535lm on 1xAA, 3 different beam types on SC5 models (smooth, orange peel, frosted lens), high CRI EasyWhite LEDs, incoming MKIII models, almost everything in stock all the time.


----------



## WalkIntoTheLight

markr6 said:


> Hell yeah! 535lm on 1xAA, 3 different beam types on SC5 models (smooth, orange peel, frosted lens), high CRI EasyWhite LEDs, incoming MKIII models, almost everything in stock all the time.



Sure, but by Christmas, I'll be saying, "What have they done for me lately?!"


----------



## markr6

WalkIntoTheLight said:


> Sure, but by Christmas, I'll be saying, "What have they done for me lately?!"



HAHA and I'll be complaining about another "tint issue"  No not really, I'm thrilled about everything going on! I also want to get back into the 1xAA game and think the *SC5w OP* is the ticket.


----------



## marinemaster

Agree, they have done great lately. Mark, the OP version is on my list also.


----------



## 18650

Mr Floppy said:


> It may have a reason as to why it is frosted. The easy white xm-l2 led is a quad die so it may not have the best beam especially in a small reflector. So it may be necessary to smooth that out otherwise they'll get complainers complaining about the cross in the middle


 That's all the more reason to keep requesting the MT-G2. Too much light is lost with a frosted lens. Sure they say they have no plans for it now but they also said the same thing about shoving the XM-L2 into the SC62 body.


----------



## WalkIntoTheLight

18650 said:


> That's all the more reason to keep requesting the MT-G2. Too much light is lost with a frosted lens. Sure they say they have no plans for it now but they also said the same thing about shoving the XM-L2 into the SC62 body.



Yeah, if they can handle the 6v requirement of the EasyWhite, I don't see why they can't handle a 6v MT-G2.


----------



## markr6

I was looking at the *Supfire M5* on the mountain electronics website. It actually has a bit of a ZL look to it.

Zebralight needs to get in on something like this with an MT-G2. PLEASE!!!


----------



## more_vampires

markr6 said:


> I was looking at the *Supfire M5* on the mountain electronics website. It actually has a bit of a ZL look to it.
> 
> Zebralight needs to get in on something like this with an MT-G2. PLEASE!!!


...or SC5 triple XPL 4000k...


----------



## markr6

SC5/w *OP *IS HERE!! Pre-order available, shipping September 4 

HELLS YEAH!


----------



## uofaengr

markr6 said:


> SC5/w *OP *IS HERE!! Pre-order available, shipping September 4
> 
> HELLS YEAH!


Ahh this is the light I'm going to go back and forth agonizing whether I should get it or not. Don't need it at all since the SC52w doesn't get much carry as it is and the 62w is currently serving as bedside light. The wider fuel voltage range of the 52 (up to 4.2v) has me leaning towards just sticking with it.


----------



## markr6

uofaengr said:


> Ahh this is the light I'm going to go back and forth agonizing whether I should get it or not. Don't need it at all since the SC52w doesn't get much carry as it is and the 62w is currently serving as bedside light. The wider fuel voltage range of the 52 (up to 4.2v) has me leaning towards just sticking with it.



Similar situation here.

SC52w on my nightstand since I feel everything is annoying/too large to EDC. Works well for random in-house use.
SC62w - sold since I like my SC600w tint better and since I don't EDC, size doesn't matter and might as well go with the better heat-sinking light.
SC600w - as mentioned, I love this light and carry it in a briefcase to work, duffel bag, whatever when out and about
SC5w OP - too tempting to resist! I don't have many AA lights so I feel I need this. Will be nice to get so much out of an eneloop. Sounds like a good car light!


----------



## uofaengr

markr6 said:


> Similar situation here.
> 
> SC52w on my nightstand since I feel everything is annoying/too large to EDC. Works well for random in-house use.
> SC62w - sold since I like my SC600w tint better and since I don't EDC, size doesn't matter and might as well go with the better heat-sinking light.
> SC600w - as mentioned, I love this light and carry it in a briefcase to work, duffel bag, whatever when out and about
> SC5w OP - too tempting to resist! I don't have many AA lights so I feel I need this. Will be nice to get so much out of an eneloop. Sounds like a good car light!


Yeah I sometimes feel like AA lights are the direction I should stay in because I only have two and my last three lights I've ordered are 18650. However, I just couldn't see myself buying something so nice and with that price tag just to keep in the car. I do need to get a dedicated car light for me and the wife, but I see myself limiting that to maybe $20 apiece.


----------



## WalkIntoTheLight

I like AA lights, because you can get AA batteries (NIMH, lithium primary, and alkalines) everywhere. And, I know that long after I'm dead, AA batteries will still be sold everywhere.

While I think 18650 lithium-ion will be around for awhile, it doesn't have the broad range of applications that AA does. And, it doesn't last as long, and it's more expensive and much more difficult to acquire (especially with paranoia about shipping lithium-ion). Plus, much more potential for danger. Oh, and I hate the differences in length. 

I just don't find 18650 benefits (lighter and smaller) to outweigh the problems with it. Until it becomes really, really safe, it's always going to be hard to buy them off-the-shelf everywhere that batteries are sold.


----------



## markr6

AA and 18650 are both great, especially Zebralights which are about as small as possible for each format (OK not the SC5, but wouldn't call it large either). I'm not worried about 18650 safety or acquiring them because I feel like they're just as available as AA, in a sense...the INTERNET! You can buy them online from anywhere and have them within 48 hours. I know you won't get them easily (grocery store, around the home) in a disaster/doomsday scenario...but I'm betting I won't run into one of those (trying to be an optimist). Besides, I now have several AA lights to fall back on if the world does end.


----------



## markr6

WOAH!! My SC5w OP just shipped! Sounds too good to be true. Hopefully they didn't mix it up with a non-OP version.


----------



## uofaengr

Yeah I need to pick up a good 2xAA light. And the car lights I decide on will likely be 2xAA stuffed with lithium primaries. I hate having to keep up with so many different types batteries, but I guess it's good to have the variety if needed. Some 18650 lights can take two CR123s which is good in an emergency if you have a stash.


----------



## insanefred

WalkIntoTheLight said:


> I like AA lights, because you can get AA batteries (NIMH, lithium primary, and alkalines) everywhere. And, I know that long after I'm dead, AA batteries will still be sold everywhere.
> 
> While I think 18650 lithium-ion will be around for awhile, it doesn't have the broad range of applications that AA does. And, it doesn't last as long, and it's more expensive and much more difficult to acquire (especially with paranoia about shipping lithium-ion). Plus, much more potential for danger. Oh, and I hate the differences in length.
> 
> I just don't find 18650 benefits (lighter and smaller) to outweigh the problems with it. Until it becomes really, really safe, it's always going to be hard to buy them off-the-shelf everywhere that batteries are sold.




Just do not depend on that if a large natural disaster ever happens, or even a small one. I am not sure how Canadians act but here in the United States, we get a _"boil water call out"_ you will quickly see the water/beverage section of grocery stored get raided like there is no tomorrow (nothing left within a couple of hours). Same goes for power outages, people will buy up every single flashlight and batteries last minute, with hurricane season all food disappears from the shelves.

The point I am getting at, always be prepared* before *you need them! When someone has several 18650s and some kind of alternate way of charging them (solar, gas generator) they are just as good, if not better off than anyone with any amount of AA batteries. Because those AA batteries will be the first to go!


----------



## WalkIntoTheLight

insanefred said:


> Just do not depend on that if a large natural disaster ever happens, or even a small one. I am not sure how Canadians act but here in the United States, we get a _"boil water call out"_ you will quickly see the water/beverage section of grocery stored get raided like there is no tomorrow (nothing left within a couple of hours). Same goes for power outages, people will buy up every single flashlight and batteries last minute, with hurricane season all food disappears from the shelves.
> 
> The point I am getting at, always be prepared* before *you need them! When someone has several 18650s and some kind of alternate way of charging them (solar, gas generator) they are just as good, if not better off than anyone with any amount of AA batteries. Because those AA batteries will be the first to go!



No problems. I have more Eneloops than I know what to do with (so plenty of spares), and 2 chargers with a cigarette lighter plug that I could charge in the car if I had to. (Or from my inverter, but I think I'd save the 12v SLA deep-cycles for something more serious.)

Low modes on most decent lights will keep the lights on for longer than I'd survive in a total collapse.


----------



## snowlover91

markr6 said:


> WOAH!! My SC5w OP just shipped! Sounds too good to be true. Hopefully they didn't mix it up with a non-OP version.



Wow already? Maybe you should try emailing them to ask them why it shipped so soon?


----------



## markr6

snowlover91 said:


> Wow already? Maybe you should try emailing them to ask them why it shipped so soon?



I'm tempted to do that. Of course I'm not complaining, but since they gave the Sept. 4 estimate, I'm really questioning this.

Or they're thinking "oh god it's him...he's just going to send it back anyway so send him one of the prototypes"


----------



## insanefred

snowlover91 said:


> Wow already? Maybe you should try emailing them to ask them why it shipped so soon?



:huh:


----------



## snowlover91

markr6 said:


> I'm tempted to do that. Of course I'm not complaining, but since they gave the Sept. 4 estimate, I'm really questioning this.
> 
> Or they're thinking "oh god it's him...he's just going to send it back anyway so send him one of the prototypes"



You should email them to find out at least, I'm really curious how it could be shipped so soon when they put up a date of September 4th? Still waiting for notification for my SC5fd and the wait is killing me!


----------



## OnlyownEnergizer250lumen

I have no variety of flashlights in my life, and its quite a tough decision to choose between the SC5 and the Nitecore MH20. I've been beating myself with bruises all over trying to figure out which one is better for me. I love the AA aspect of the SC5 for B.O.B. situations, since I don't plan on buying an expensive light in the future, so it could be quite useful in some emergency situation, plus its a bit smaller than the MH20... 

Help, someone give me a reason to get the SC5 instead!


----------



## markr6

I emailed them about my OP model. Hopefully it wasn't a fluke and it actually shipped!! I paid the extra $3.95 shipping to get it in 2 days instead of 3 :shakehead

SC5w OP...*you down wit OPP?*


----------



## markr6

OnlyownEnergizer250lumen said:


> I have no variety of flashlights in my life, and its quite a tough decision to choose between the SC5 and the Nitecore MH20. I've been beating myself with bruises all over trying to figure out which one is better for me. I love the AA aspect of the SC5 for B.O.B. situations, since I don't plan on buying an expensive light in the future, so it could be quite useful in some emergency situation, plus its a bit smaller than the MH20...
> 
> Help, someone give me a reason to get the SC5 instead!



I think the MH20 is freaking perfect! Other than the cool white LED. 18650 or 2x123 for backup, nice UI, good quality feel, USB charging (I don't really care about that though). I like the ZL UI better, but really can't compare the two since the output is a lot different 18650 vs AA. The SC5 0.8hr on high can get you caught with a dead battery before you know it! This is more of a "get both" situation 

Now the SC600 vs MH20 can be tough. I say ZL because of the UI and neutral white option. But they're both great.


----------



## Parrot Quack

OnlyownEnergizer250lumen said:


> Help, someone give me a reason to get the SC5 instead!



No can do but I've seen some killer beam shots for the MH20 that makes the MH20 look like a mighty good choice.

My little "Precious" is a JETBeam RRT0SE. And our daily household light is a NiteCore EC4.

To be fair, why should you get a SC5? Because you know you want to.


----------



## WarRaven

Another situation where both is only viable answer, it feels familiar.


----------



## more_vampires

markr6 said:


> I emailed them about my OP model. Hopefully it wasn't a fluke and it actually shipped!! I paid the extra $3.95 shipping to get it in 2 days instead of 3 :shakehead
> 
> SC5w OP...*you down wit OPP?*


Naw playah, I be down with ENTROPY!



> Entropy, how can I explain it? I'll take it frame by frame it,
> To have you all jumping, shouting saying it.
> Let's just say that it's a measure of disorder,
> In a system that is closed, like with a border.
> It's sorta, like a, well a measurement of randomness,
> Proposed in 1850 by a German, but wait I digress
> 
> That's entropy or E-N-T-R-O to the P to the Y,
> The reason why the sun will one day all burn out and die.
> Order from disorder is a scientific rarity,
> Allow me to explain it with a little bit more clarity.
> Did I say rarity? I meant impossibility,
> At least in a closed system there will always be more entropy.
> That's entropy and I hope that you're all down with it,
> If you are here's your membership.


.

You down with ENTRO-PY? Yeah, you know me!

I vampire alkalines.


----------



## markr6

Tracking now works for my SC5w OP; it will be here Monday! Fingers corssed! I feel it will be a winner.


----------



## WalkIntoTheLight

markr6 said:


> Tracking now works for my SC5w OP; it will be here Monday! Fingers corssed! I feel it will be a winner.



Are you sure it's a OP? The ZL email spam I received today still says shipping Sept 4.


----------



## markr6

WalkIntoTheLight said:


> Are you sure it's a OP? The ZL email spam I received today still says shipping Sept 4.



I asked them yesterday evening but didn't hear back yet. Typos and incorrect information on their site (some for years), so I don't really trust anything there. But Sept 4 is a long enough time away to get me thinking.

And like my post on the previous page:



markr6 said:


> I'm tempted to do that. Of course I'm not complaining, but since they gave the Sept. 4 estimate, I'm really questioning this.
> 
> Or they're thinking "oh god it's him...he's just going to send it back anyway so send him one of the prototypes"


----------



## markr6

I just heard back. Yes, they shipped the correct model (OP version)! Getting excited!!!


----------



## gunga

Woah. Very interested in your impressions.


----------



## WalkIntoTheLight

markr6 said:


> I just heard back. Yes, they shipped the correct model (OP version)! Getting excited!!!



Wow... 2 weeks early? They must either love you, or hate you.


----------



## snowlover91

markr6 said:


> I just heard back. Yes, they shipped the correct model (OP version)! Getting excited!!!



Did they explain why they shipped it so early? I'll still be waiting another 7-10 days for my SC5fd to ship


----------



## PandaLight

Has anyone tried a 14500 in the SC5 yet?


----------



## WalkIntoTheLight

PandaLight said:


> Has anyone tried a 14500 in the SC5 yet?



Unless you're thinking you'll get more than 500 lumens out of it, why would you want to? Energy is the same as NiMH, so you won't get more run-time.

I suspect that you might get a little more output out of it (probably not noticeable), assuming you use a 14500 that can deliver a lot of current (like a IMR cell), but at great risk of killing the driver.


----------



## PandaLight

WalkIntoTheLight said:


> Unless you're thinking you'll get more than 500 lumens out of it, why would you want to? Energy is the same as NiMH, so you won't get more run-time.
> 
> I suspect that you might get a little more output out of it (probably not noticeable), assuming you use a 14500 that can deliver a lot of current (like a IMR cell), but at great risk of killing the driver.



I accidentally bought this light thinking it was something else. I thought, through quick reading of selfbuilt's review and recommendations, that this light had decent output and unparalleled runtime for its output. Now I've realized that this isn't true, its only the case for comparisons with lights powered by NiMH and low lumen efficiency with 14500 lights. Energy density for NiMH AA is around the same as 14500 but with 14500's, near double the lumens can be achieved and far better runtimes for high output, which I find much more important. For example another light I just bought that's similar in price can run 900 lumens for 30 mins while the SC5 can only do 500 for 3 mins. Constant restarting gives 15 mins. Both need special batteries to achieve this.

If the SC5 could run on 14500, it might make the purchase more worth while. For now, I like my Thrunite Archer 1A/1C more. The 1C is rated at 500 lumens for 40mins, as oppose to 500 lumens for 3 mins and it's less than half the price. I suspect the 1A to be along those lines with a 14500.


----------



## WalkIntoTheLight

PandaLight said:


> I accidentally bought this light thinking it was something else. I thought, through quick reading of selfbuilt's review and recommendations, that this light had decent output and unparalleled runtime for its output. Now I've realized that this isn't true, its only the case for comparisons with lights powered by NiMH and low lumen efficiency with 14500 lights. Energy density for NiMH AA is around the same as 14500 but with 14500's, near double the lumens can be achieved and far better runtimes for high output, which I find much more important. For example another light I just bought that's similar in price can run 900 lumens for 30 mins while the SC5 can only do 500 for 3 mins. Constant restarting gives 15 mins. Both need special batteries to achieve this.



Actually, I measured 21 total minutes on my SC5w with restarting to keep it at 500 lumens. That was on a regular gen 4 Eneloop (1900mAh). I'm sure an Eneloop Pro (2450mAh) would do 25% longer.

Granted, run-time on maximum is not going to be long on any 1xAA light or 14500 light. I really doubt you're getting 900 lumens for 30 minutes on a single 14500. It probably steps down, like the SC5, in order to prevent overheating.



> If the SC5 could run on 14500, it might make the purchase more worth while. For now, I like my Thrunite Archer 1A/1C more. The 1C is rated at 500 lumens for 40mins, as oppose to 500 lumens for 3 mins and it's less than half the price. I suspect the 1A to be along those lines with a 14500.



40 minutes at 500 lumens, yes, it might do that. I'd like to see the run-time graphs, though. I'm not sure how big the light is, but I'd be concerned about overheating if it doesn't step-down after awhile.

If you really want a Zebralight that runs on a 14500, get the SC52 instead. You only get 1 minute without restarting, though. I sure wouldn't want to try constant restarts for 30 minutes on a light the size of an SC52.


----------



## mactavish

Isn't that Trunite model a TWO AA flashlight?


----------



## markr6

WalkIntoTheLight said:


> Wow... 2 weeks early? They must either love you, or hate you.



HAHA sometimes I think it's both.



snowlover91 said:


> Did they explain why they shipped it so early? I'll still be waiting another 7-10 days for my SC5fd to ship



No explanation, but I'm glad it's almost here. I have no patience! I'm looking forward to do a beam comparison with my SC52w. I thinking the OP won't do much, but just enough to make it a great general use light.


----------



## PandaLight

WalkIntoTheLight said:


> If you really want a Zebralight that runs on a 14500, get the SC52 instead. You only get 1 minute without restarting, though. I sure wouldn't want to try constant restarts for 30 minutes on a light the size of an SC52.



Exactly, even restarting once is a nuisance I'd rather not deal with. Usually, If I need decent continuous runtimes on high lumens with a pocket flashlight, its to light up a room or something similar and in that case I usually just drop the light in a glass of cold water to negate overheating. A timed step down is a bit of an annoyance. I don't really care about which brand the light is as long as it functions well and is reliable. I can see how this is an excellent niche light that preforms well for what it's designed for, a 1x AA NiMH flashlight capable of standing up to a 14500 light; but for its pricetag, I could have gotten a light more suitable to my needs. NiMH cells also seem to charge a considerable amount slower than Li-ion. If it can run off a 14500, it may have different specs more aligned to what I'm looking for. Just waiting for someone to try it out first. 





mactavish said:


> Isn't that Trunite model a TWO AA flashlight?



That's the 2A. The 1A runs off 1xAA or 1x14500


----------



## snowlover91

PandaLight said:


> I accidentally bought this light thinking it was something else. I thought, through quick reading of selfbuilt's review and recommendations, that this light had decent output and unparalleled runtime for its output. Now I've realized that this isn't true, its only the case for comparisons with lights powered by NiMH and low lumen efficiency with 14500 lights. Energy density for NiMH AA is around the same as 14500 but with 14500's, near double the lumens can be achieved and far better runtimes for high output, which I find much more important. For example another light I just bought that's similar in price can run 900 lumens for 30 mins while the SC5 can only do 500 for 3 mins. Constant restarting gives 15 mins. Both need special batteries to achieve this.
> 
> If the SC5 could run on 14500, it might make the purchase more worth while. For now, I like my Thrunite Archer 1A/1C more. The 1C is rated at 500 lumens for 40mins, as oppose to 500 lumens for 3 mins and it's less than half the price. I suspect the 1A to be along those lines with a 14500.



I don't think the comparison here is fair or valid for several reasons. First of all the SC5 is never marketed as a 14500 light so one should not purchase it expecting to use this battery type. It is essentially designed to offer output similar to a 14500 battery without the need for one.

I'm assuming the light you reference as getting 900 lumens for 30 minutes is probably the Nitecore EA11 which is marketed as a 14500 light designed to achieve very high lumen levels on 14500 and has terrible efficiency outside of the highest turbo mode. The runtime has been tested at around 10-13 minutes at the turbo mode if you turn it off and back down after step down which has been measured at 6 minutes. The runtime tests show it will get about 20 minutes total; 6 minutes at 800-900 lumens then stepping down significantly to about half the output for the remaining time. If you cycle it off at 6 minutes and back on you get about 10-12 minutes and that's it. That's absolutely abysmal runtime and if you need 900+ lumens an 18650 based light is a far better choice. If you use AA batteries for this light you get about 40-45 minutes on an Eneloop as tested by users whereas the SC5 gets 200 lumens for almost 2 hours per my tests. Moonlight efficiency is even worse, a mere 10 hours at 1 lumen versus about 16 days for Zebralight. Part of what makes a great EDC light isn't just the output but how long it lasts at different levels.

Lastly, to compare a rcr123 light to an AA Eneloop only light is not a fair or valid comparison. A better comparison would be the SC32 which achieves 480 lumens for 1.4 hours versus about .7 hours for the similar Thrunite version; double he runtime and a smaller size as well. The 1A Thrunite has been tested at 450-480 lumens on a 14500 with around 50 minutes of runtime versus 30 minutes or so on the SC5 with 500+ lumens. The SC5 does exactly what it says and is designed for. If a person needs 900 lumens from an AA/14500 light then there is no need to look at one not designed to do this. Furthermore from an efficiency standpoint a person needing 900+ lumens would be better off with an 18650 light that would provide superior runtimes in a similar sized package, such as the SC62 or similar 18650 light. The SC5 does exactly what it was designed to do and that is put out 500 lumens from an Eneloop while providing decent runtimes at this level without the need to use a 14500 battery to achieve this.


----------



## snowlover91

PandaLight said:


> Exactly, even restarting once is a nuisance I'd rather not deal with. Usually, If I need decent continuous runtimes on high lumens with a pocket flashlight, its to light up a room or something similar and in that case I usually just drop the light in a glass of cold water to negate overheating. A timed step down is a bit of an annoyance. I don't really care about which brand the light is as long as it functions well and is reliable. I can see how this is an excellent niche light that preforms well for what it's designed for, a 1x AA NiMH flashlight capable of standing up to a 14500 light; but for its pricetag, I could have gotten a light more suitable to my needs. NiMH cells also seem to charge a considerable amount slower than Li-ion. If it can run off a 14500, it may have different specs more aligned to what I'm looking for. Just waiting for someone to try it out first.
> 
> That's the 2A. The 1A runs off 1xAA or 1x14500



Im not sure the reasoning on buying a light exclusively designed for Eneloops and hoping to use 14500 batteries with it. If you needed 14500 compatibility why not go with the Thrunite or the ZL SC52? They are both designed to use it like you wanted and if you needed a cheaper model you could get the Thrunite. The build quality and UI of the Zebralight is superior IMO and is worth the extra money invested. You should be the first to try it out on the 14500 and let us know the results!


----------



## WalkIntoTheLight

snowlover91 said:


> Im not sure the reasoning on buying a light exclusively designed for Eneloops and hoping to use 14500 batteries with it. If you needed 14500 compatibility why not go with the Thrunite or the ZL SC52? They are both designed to use it like you wanted and if you needed a cheaper model you could get the Thrunite. The build quality and UI of the Zebralight is superior IMO and is worth the extra money invested. You should be the first to try it out on the 14500 and let us know the results!



I don't think he'd be happy with the SC52, due to the 1 minute step-down. He says he drops his lights in water to deal with heat. If that's the case, then get something like the SC62, which has PID thermal control, so it won't ramp down if cooled in something like water. Plus, if he needs 900 lumens in a single-cell light, it's silly to go with anything less than an 18650 in capacity. Armytek's lights also have thermal control, so won't step down in water. Probably several other brands too, but I'm not familiar with those.


----------



## fnj

WalkIntoTheLight said:


> I don't think he'd be happy with the SC52, due to the 1 minute step-down. He says he drops his lights in water to deal with heat. If that's the case, then get something like the SC62, which has PID thermal control, so it won't ramp down if cooled in something like water. Plus, if he needs 900 lumens in a single-cell light, it's silly to go with anything less than an 18650 in capacity. Armytek's lights also have thermal control, so won't step down in water. Probably several other brands too, but I'm not familiar with those.


 Bingo. Rather than everybody else making excuses for the SC5 and 1AA lights in general, you have put your finger on it in a constructive manner. For "lighting up a room" while sticking it in a glass of water, all I can imagine is we're talking about using it at home. As such, who cares if it's an extra fraction of an inch or less than an ounce extra in weight going from a 14500 to an 18650? Your SC62 is an excellent option, and I would add, heck, why not an SC600 as another option? You wouldn't have to go find a glass and run some water. Either way you could have >500 lumens for close to an hour without horsing around or straining the poor battery to within an inch of its life. Simple physics is against you with the 14500.


----------



## markr6

Some people are simply expecting too much. Here is Zebralight, creating a great 1xAA light that can do 535lm on a NiMH cell and people still complain. Sometimes I feel like all I do is complain too, but I have to sit back and look at this for a minute...535lm on an Eneloop! Crazy. I feel like everyone looks at the MAX setting and judges a light on that. While I don't like "battery killer" modes, the SC5 gets a pass this time since it also has plenty of low and medium modes. It's just an OPTION; there if you need it.

Then we have people praising other 1XAA lights that do maybe 150lm on an Eneloop and it's the best thing since sliced bread. I don't get that. Maybe they like the form factor or UI better, fine. But to make one of the greatest aspects of this light (535lm on AA) a negative, is just bizarre.

They make the SC52w, which is a nice 14500 option. Something for everyone. Maybe they'll update this in the future to run longer on max? Regardless, SC5 and SC52 are two great options and I don't see much to complain about...other than tint, of course  but that's changing too.

p.s. I will say, the Nitecore MT10A is pretty impressive, but that's a pretty big light in comparison.


----------



## snowlover91

fnj said:


> Bingo. Rather than everybody else making excuses for the SC5 and 1AA lights in general, you have put your finger on it in a constructive manner. For "lighting up a room" while sticking it in a glass of water, all I can imagine is we're talking about using it at home. As such, who cares if it's an extra fraction of an inch or less than an ounce extra in weight going from a 14500 to an 18650? Your SC62 is an excellent option, and I would add, heck, why not an SC600 as another option? You wouldn't have to go find a glass and run some water. Either way you could have >500 lumens for close to an hour without horsing around or straining the poor battery to within an inch of its life. Simple physics is against you with the 14500.



Since he was comparing this to other AA/14500 lights my point was simply not to buy a light designed only for Eneloops and expect to use 14500 batteries in it. I did mention the SC62 also as an option that would provide far better performance than any 14500 light with better runtime and superior battery capacity. Simply put the SC5 does exactly what it's designed and advertised as and to complain about it not producing 900 lumens or being compatible with 14500 batteries is unfair since it was never marketed or designed to do those things.


----------



## snowlover91

Aright markr6, don't keep us in suspense too long about your SC5w OP! We are eagerly awaiting the results!


----------



## markr6

snowlover91 said:


> Aright markr6, don't keep us in suspense too long about your SC5w OP! We are eagerly awaiting the results!



I'll try not to! Definitely need to get the lawn mowed tonight along with some other tasks around the house, but I'll try this light in the basement right away. Then a more thorough outdoor test later on.


----------



## snowlover91

Come on you know the grass can wait just a few minutes to check out your new flashlight  Hey I have an idea you can strap it to your mower and cut grass in the dark then give us some more updated thoughts!


----------



## markr6

OOOH! Zebralight brought their A GAME on this one! Damn! I had a SC5w when it came out, but returned it because of the "purple eye" in the middle of beam. Not this one!

+ Perfect anodizing
+ Gooey-soft, quiet threads
+ Knurling is just amazing; grippy even though it doesn't look like it
+ Clip too tight, but a simple bend will help that
+ Switch is not too soft or quiet, not too hard or loud
+ Tint....oh the tint  Basically the SAME as my L10 Nichia without the high CRI. You can tell, but only against obvious things like skin, wood furniture, carpet, etc. No big deal. WHITE!!!
+ Beam is perfect. Actually, I can't tell any difference between my SC52w, but then I realized that had a slight orange peel as well. I think it's PERFECT.
+ Output is insane for an Eneloop. I can't tell the difference between my Eneloop 3rd gen or my Eneloop XX from 2012. A little brighter than SC52w on 14500 

- NOTHING

The only different thing I noticed is the battery check. The first flash is normal, like all other ZL I have. The next 3 blinks are quicker and a little shorter. Doesn't matter.

I'll do some runtime tests between my SC52w and SC5w OP in the future. Also an Eneloop vs Eneloop XX.


----------



## insanefred

I hate you markr6, so much! :duh2:


----------



## PandaLight

snowlover91 said:


> Im not sure the reasoning on buying a light exclusively designed for Eneloops and hoping to use 14500 batteries with it. If you needed 14500 compatibility why not go with the Thrunite or the ZL SC52? They are both designed to use it like you wanted and if you needed a cheaper model you could get the Thrunite. The build quality and UI of the Zebralight is superior IMO and is worth the extra money invested. You should be the first to try it out on the 14500 and let us know the results!



I simply bought the light thinking it was a superior AA form factor light. It turns out to only be a superior NiMH AA light which matches some 14500 specs. Running on NiMH or 14500 is irrelevant, except for the faster charging speed of a 14500. I was led to believe that its efficiency was considerably better than all other AA sized lights due to not enough research, not anyone's fault but mine. It turns out, it's efficiency is only considerably better(say >2x runtime) in low lumen outputs which isn't very important to me. I use the lower lumen settings most but still use high lumens often and since the runtime is dramatically reduced using high lumens, the increased low lumen efficiency becomes negligible. In fact its high lumen output is significantly lower than 14500 lights which is a definite drawback. Again running on NiMH or 14500 is absolutely irrelevant. If it could do that on alkaline's but only use alkaline's, it makes no difference. It's still an excellent light that I will use so I don't want to risk destroying it but, if someone has already taken that risk, I would want to benefit from knowing the result. 



WalkIntoTheLight said:


> I don't think he'd be happy with the SC52, due to the 1 minute step-down. He says he drops his lights in water to deal with heat. If that's the case, then get something like the SC62, which has PID thermal control, so it won't ramp down if cooled in something like water. Plus, if he needs 900 lumens in a single-cell light, it's silly to go with anything less than an 18650 in capacity. Armytek's lights also have thermal control, so won't step down in water. Probably several other brands too, but I'm not familiar with those.



Very true about the SC52. I don't need 900 in an AA sized light but I like having the option. I'm going with an AA sized light for it overall smaller size. I have 18650 lights.



fnj said:


> Bingo. Rather than everybody else making excuses for the SC5 and 1AA lights in general, you have put your finger on it in a constructive manner. For "lighting up a room" while sticking it in a glass of water, all I can imagine is we're talking about using it at home. As such, who cares if it's an extra fraction of an inch or less than an ounce extra in weight going from a 14500 to an 18650? Your SC62 is an excellent option, and I would add, heck, why not an SC600 as another option? You wouldn't have to go find a glass and run some water. Either way you could have >500 lumens for close to an hour without horsing around or straining the poor battery to within an inch of its life. Simple physics is against you with the 14500.



Lighting up a room is not the main purpose of the light. It's only an example for when I've used a similar light at max lumens for longer than 3 mins. It's not about using the light at home or a larger light being suitable for a specific task.



markr6 said:


> Some people are simply expecting too much. Here is Zebralight, creating a great 1xAA light that can do 535lm on a NiMH cell and people still complain. Sometimes I feel like all I do is complain too, but I have to sit back and look at this for a minute...535lm on an Eneloop! Crazy. I feel like everyone looks at the MAX setting and judges a light on that. While I don't like "battery killer" modes, the SC5 gets a pass this time since it also has plenty of low and medium modes. It's just an OPTION; there if you need it.
> 
> Then we have people praising other 1XAA lights that do maybe 150lm on an Eneloop and it's the best thing since sliced bread. I don't get that. Maybe they like the form factor or UI better, fine. But to make one of the greatest aspects of this light (535lm on AA) a negative, is just bizarre.
> 
> They make the SC52w, which is a nice 14500 option. Something for everyone. Maybe they'll update this in the future to run longer on max? Regardless, SC5 and SC52 are two great options and I don't see much to complain about...other than tint, of course  but that's changing too.
> 
> p.s. I will say, the Nitecore MT10A is pretty impressive, but that's a pretty big light in comparison.



It is a great light compared to other 1xAA NiMH lights but, I don't care whether it uses NiMH or Li-ion. It makes little difference the chemistry with Li-ion being slightly more preferred due to faster charging. I care about the overall size of the light, overall efficiency/runtime(esp. for high lumen output since that's where the charge gets eaten up), brightness and UI. The SC52 only runs max for 1 min, it's not an option.



snowlover91 said:


> Since he was comparing this to other AA/14500 lights my point was simply not to buy a light designed only for Eneloops and expect to use 14500 batteries in it. I did mention the SC62 also as an option that would provide far better performance than any 14500 light with better runtime and superior battery capacity. Simply put the SC5 does exactly what it's designed and advertised as and to complain about it not producing 900 lumens or being compatible with 14500 batteries is unfair since it was never marketed or designed to do those things.



I didn't buy a light designed for eneloops and expect to use 14500. I had accidentally bought a light in 1xAA form factor which I thought was superior(besides max lumens) but ended up only being superior compared to 1x AA NiMH lights. Again, the battery chemistry is irrelevant. 

I hope everyone understands why this wasn't the correct light for me to buy. There's nothing wrong with the light, it's excellent for what it is. Just not what I was looking for.


----------



## PandaLight

snowlover91 said:


> I don't think the comparison here is fair or valid for several reasons. First of all the SC5 is never marketed as a 14500 light so one should not purchase it expecting to use this battery type. It is essentially designed to offer output similar to a 14500 battery without the need for one.
> 
> I'm assuming the light you reference as getting 900 lumens for 30 minutes is probably the Nitecore EA11 which is marketed as a 14500 light designed to achieve very high lumen levels on 14500 and has terrible efficiency outside of the highest turbo mode. The runtime has been tested at around 10-13 minutes at the turbo mode if you turn it off and back down after step down which has been measured at 6 minutes. The runtime tests show it will get about 20 minutes total; 6 minutes at 800-900 lumens then stepping down significantly to about half the output for the remaining time. If you cycle it off at 6 minutes and back on you get about 10-12 minutes and that's it. That's absolutely abysmal runtime and if you need 900+ lumens an 18650 based light is a far better choice. If you use AA batteries for this light you get about 40-45 minutes on an Eneloop as tested by users whereas the SC5 gets 200 lumens for almost 2 hours per my tests. Moonlight efficiency is even worse, a mere 10 hours at 1 lumen versus about 16 days for Zebralight. Part of what makes a great EDC light isn't just the output but how long it lasts at different levels.
> 
> Lastly, to compare a rcr123 light to an AA Eneloop only light is not a fair or valid comparison. A better comparison would be the SC32 which achieves 480 lumens for 1.4 hours versus about .7 hours for the similar Thrunite version; double he runtime and a smaller size as well. The 1A Thrunite has been tested at 450-480 lumens on a 14500 with around 50 minutes of runtime versus 30 minutes or so on the SC5 with 500+ lumens. The SC5 does exactly what it says and is designed for. If a person needs 900 lumens from an AA/14500 light then there is no need to look at one not designed to do this. Furthermore from an efficiency standpoint a person needing 900+ lumens would be better off with an 18650 light that would provide superior runtimes in a similar sized package, such as the SC62 or similar 18650 light. The SC5 does exactly what it was designed to do and that is put out 500 lumens from an Eneloop while providing decent runtimes at this level without the need to use a 14500 battery to achieve this.



I didn't see your reply, shoulda replied to you first. The previous reply with multi quotes addresses a few of your points. The battery chemistry is irrelevant. Say for example the Thrunite 1A does 500 lumens for 50 mins, that is quite a bit better than the SC5 doing 500 lumen SC5 for 30 mins(though it's really 3 mins). Comparing 1x16340 with 1xAA is valid because the AA size has more volume than 16340. Regarding the example with the EA11, 6min at 800 lumens is still better than 3 mins at 500. On the rest of the higher lumen settings, efficiency is similar(SC5 on eneloop and EA11 on 14500). Efficiency in moonlight is irrelevant to me because I will periodically use higher lumen modes and the drain in high lumens overwhelms any increased efficiency in moonlight.

For example light A exclusively uses an eneloop and produces 1000 lumens for 30 mins, light B exclusively uses a 14500 and produces 1000 lumens for 31 mins; all other specs are absolutely identical. Light A may be more technologically impressive but, I would purchase light B and consider it better.


----------



## WalkIntoTheLight

markr6 said:


>



The orange peel makes more of a difference than I thought it would. My SC5w has a noticeably tighter hot-spot than my SC52w-L2. Your two lights are about the same.


----------



## markr6

WalkIntoTheLight said:


> The orange peel makes more of a difference than I thought it would. My SC5w has a noticeably tighter hot-spot than my SC52w-L2. Your two lights are about the same.



Here's my first SC5w and SC52w back in May. 






I think the SC5w is brighter in both, but not much.

Again, the new SC5w OP. I really can't tell much a difference with the OP. It's there, but impossible to tell off of the wall.






And a tint comp. Sure glad I didn't go with the SC5Fd!! It was tempting, but this tint is SOO good I'll take the extra brightness any day.





I wonder if the OP version is damage control for the purple eye defect? Clear out existing SC5 stock and keep the OP? The difference is negligible. Time will tell.

HOME RUN ON THIS OP :twothumbs:twothumbs I'm down wit OP...Period!


----------



## marinemaster

Thanks for the comparing shots.


----------



## uofaengr

Nice tint there. Looks like what I got in my recent SC62w and congrats. That shot of the emitters makes the SC5 look considerably larger than the SC52w.


----------



## markr6

marinemaster said:


> Thanks for the comparing shots.


No problem. I won't even bother putting up the ~30' beamshots I did since they're pretty much identical.


----------



## gunga

Markr6. How long did yours take to get to Canada? Did you pay for faster shipping? My Sc62w took 2 months...


----------



## markr6

gunga said:


> Markr6. How long did yours take to get to Canada? Did you pay for faster shipping? My Sc62w took 2 months...



I'm located in Indiana, so it only took two days (US orders come from TX.) Usually it takes three days, but I'm impatient so I spent the extra four dollars to save a day!


----------



## gunga

Oh. Someone told me you were in Canada. Never mind.


----------



## snowlover91

PandaLight said:


> I didn't see your reply, shoulda replied to you first. The previous reply with multi quotes addresses a few of your points. The battery chemistry is irrelevant. Say for example the Thrunite 1A does 500 lumens for 50 mins, that is quite a bit better than the SC5 doing 500 lumen SC5 for 30 mins(though it's really 3 mins). Comparing 1x16340 with 1xAA is valid because the AA size has more volume than 16340. Regarding the example with the EA11, 6min at 800 lumens is still better than 3 mins at 500. On the rest of the higher lumen settings, efficiency is similar(SC5 on eneloop and EA11 on 14500). Efficiency in moonlight is irrelevant to me because I will periodically use higher lumen modes and the drain in high lumens overwhelms any increased efficiency in moonlight.
> 
> For example light A exclusively uses an eneloop and produces 1000 lumens for 30 mins, light B exclusively uses a 14500 and produces 1000 lumens for 31 mins; all other specs are absolutely identical. Light A may be more technologically impressive but, I would purchase light B and consider it better.



Although I don't own it some quick research shows that the Thrunite 1A steps down on 14500 batteries after a few minutes, I couldn't find exact figures but it seems to be in the range of 4-6 minutes before step down. I guess if you need 800-900 lumens and don't mind getting only 10-12 minutes before having an empty battery then the EA11 is what you'd want. However I would certainly prefer to get an 18650 light like the SC62 or similar which gives better output for more than 1 hour. In my opinion 14500 batteries just don't have the capacity to support decent runtimes once they're pushed past 700 lumens and if a person needs more than 600 lumens they're better off with an 18650 light due to better capacity and performance. My point being that if a person needs more than 600 lumens they're better off going with 18650 rather than AA/14500 format. I think Selfbuilts review summarized this light quite well; output previously achievable by only 14500 is now possible through AA format and will perform similar with the exception of slightly less runtime. The exception is a light like the EA11 you mentioned but if I need more than 600 lumens I'll go with the superior 18650 format lights instead and think they meet that need better. Maybe you can test the SC5 out on a 14500 and let us know, I'd personally love to know if it would work also and the results 


Mark, with the new SC5w OP do you think you'll use it more than your SC52w? What do you think of the bulkier form factor?


----------



## stephenk

I'm interested in seeing a beam shot of the 4000k CCT beam in the SC5Fc when anyone gets their hands on one.


----------



## WalkIntoTheLight

gunga said:


> Markr6. How long did yours take to get to Canada? Did you pay for faster shipping? My Sc62w took 2 months...



My SC5w took a month. Regular (free) shipping from Zebralight China.

2 months? Wow, you must have got seriously delayed somewhere. 3-4 weeks is what I consider normal from China.


----------



## markr6

It was already mentioned, possibly even by me way back at the beginning, but man does the thing SHRED pants. I won't be EDCing it so I'm not real disappointed. But for anyone that does it's just not very friendly to the pocket with a firm clip against a cheese grater (edge of the last cooling fin). I have a feeling they'll be redesigning this in the future to have a flat spot like the SC52.

Someone said charging 14500 is quicker. When I charge my ZL brand 14500 for my SC52w, I select 500mA or 700mA. I don't really feel safe beyond that. So you're looking at an hour+ to fully charge. With my Eneloops, I usually charge around 1A, but 2A is safe. So again, an hour.

I'm pretty sure I stuck up for the SC52 in the past, but I'm starting to realize the benefits of this SC5 over the SC52.


----------



## snowlover91

markr6 said:


> It was already mentioned, possibly even by me way back at the beginning, but man does the thing SHRED pants. I won't be EDCing it so I'm not real disappointed. But for anyone that does it's just not very friendly to the pocket with a firm clip against a cheese grater (edge of the last cooling fin). I have a feeling they'll be redesigning this in the future to have a flat spot like the SC52.
> 
> Someone said charging 14500 is quicker. When I charge my ZL brand 14500 for my SC52w, I select 500mA or 700mA. I don't really feel safe beyond that. So you're looking at an hour+ to fully charge. With my Eneloops, I usually charge around 1A, but 2A is safe. So again, an hour.
> 
> I'm pretty sure I stuck up for the SC52 in the past, but I'm starting to realize the benefits of this SC5 over the SC52.



I posted a thread about an aftermarket clip I bought for the SC5 and it works with all Zebralights. It's about $7 and it will work with any Zebralight but works great on the SC5 especially. You may want to look into it as it makes the clip so much better; it's not too stiff and not too loose a great balance and it looks pretty cool too.


----------



## marinemaster

Can you post the link if you allowed please ?


----------



## markr6

snowlover91 said:


> I posted a thread about an aftermarket clip I bought for the SC5 and it works with all Zebralights. It's about $7 and it will work with any Zebralight but works great on the SC5 especially. You may want to look into it as it makes the clip so much better; it's not too stiff and not too loose a great balance and it looks pretty cool too.



I think I remember seeing that clip. Sorry I missed you question earlier about the bulkier form and if I'll use it more than my SC52. I like the form better in general, only because I do not plan on carrying it. It feels better in the hand and I like how it looks like a mini SC600. I'll probably leave the SC52w on my nightstand and use the SC5w a lot more for general use. Just not an EDC since it's surprisingly about as thick as my SC600 except for the head.


----------



## snowlover91

marinemaster said:


> Can you post the link if you allowed please ?



Not sure if I'm allowed to post or not but it's sold on banggood.com it's labeled under "titanium alloy clip." It says it's designed for jetbeam but I find it works for the Nitecore PD lights like EX11.2 as well as the Zebralights. The clip is slightly curved so it doesn't mount 100% flat without some modification but it's a great clip and what I would recommend for the Zebralights like the SC5. 

Mark, glad you finally got a good one and won the tint lottery! What I'm trying to figure out is how you managed to get one scheduled for release on September 4 two weeks early while mine scheduled for shipping release won't be shipping until about that same time!


----------



## markr6

snowlover91 said:


> Mark, glad you finally got a good one and won the tint lottery! What I'm trying to figure out is how you managed to get one scheduled for release on September 4 two weeks early while mine scheduled for shipping release won't be shipping until about that same time!



I'm still wondering how that happened. But didn't you order the SC5Fd? Maybe they did a short run of the OP version to test and had some to ship early? It's anyone's guess.


----------



## markr6

Just a thought. Isn't it strange that the SC5 gets an "OP" version when it seems like all other lights are OP? From what I can tell the H600, H52, H32, SC600, SC62, SC52 and SC32 are OP. (OK I should have just said the model that WASN'T OP ) I wonder why they went with a smooth reflector to begin with in the SC5?


----------



## GeoBruin

It's a little larger and deeper reflector than the H and SC models of comparable size isn't it? Maybe they were trying to squeeze a little more throw out of it.


----------



## marinemaster

I'm glad they offer many versions to chose from.


----------



## markr6

marinemaster said:


> I'm glad they offer many versions to chose from.



I love it. Everything always in stock too (a year+ ago was a lot differnet)


----------



## chuckhov

Maybe they went to Shark Tank?

-Chuck


----------



## insanefred

marinemaster said:


> I'm glad they offer many versions to chose from.




This is one of the reasons why I like Zebralight so much. They have options, neutral white/ high cri versions of all their lights, all them have a sub-lumen mode, good UI, overall great quality and have not given in to appeal to the mass market with the _tactical BS. _


----------



## Mr Floppy

markr6 said:


> I love it. Everything always in stock too (a year+ ago was a lot differnet)



Maybe George gave up on the idea of trying to do everything in the USA.


----------



## WalkIntoTheLight

GeoBruin said:


> It's a little larger and deeper reflector than the H and SC models of comparable size isn't it? Maybe they were trying to squeeze a little more throw out of it.



I believe that's the reason. If you look at Selfbuilt's throw comparisons, the SC5 has about 25% more lux than the SC52 (on a 14500). Part of that is the slightly larger reflector, but I'm sure part of it is the smooth reflector too. I think Zebralight wanted to distinguish the two lines, and make the SC5 have more throw.


----------



## markr6

I don't know if it was this thread or an SC52 thread, but I remember someone mentioning an extension tube. In the past, I never gave that a second thought because I would never use that. But thinking about it more, I think it would be nice for the SC5. That would put it over the voltage limit, though. I'm not looking for more output, but twice the runtime would be great and it probably wouldn't cost much at all.

Forgive the sloppy Photoshop; that knurling was tough! And I guess the clip wouldn't be on the end, unless they put one on the tube and you removed it from the body.


----------



## WalkIntoTheLight

markr6 said:


> I don't know if it was this thread or an SC52 thread, but I remember someone mentioning an extension tube. In the past, I never gave that a second thought because I would never use that. But thinking about it more, I think it would be nice for the SC5. That would put it over the voltage limit, though. I'm not looking for more output, but twice the runtime would be great and it probably wouldn't cost much at all.



Yeah, but that kind of defeats the whole Zebralight niche: ultra-compact single-cell lights. If you make it a 2xAA light, it then becomes much larger. I've already got Quarks and Armyteks that fill my 2xAA needs, and plenty of other options. Zebralights are the best single-cell designs I've found.

I suppose a 2xAA option wouldn't hurt, but I'd rather just carry a spare cell.


----------



## markr6

WalkIntoTheLight said:


> Yeah, but that kind of defeats the whole Zebralight niche: ultra-compact single-cell lights. If you make it a 2xAA light, it then becomes much larger. I've already got Quarks and Armyteks that fill my 2xAA needs, and plenty of other options. Zebralights are the best single-cell designs I've found.
> 
> I suppose a 2xAA option wouldn't hurt, but I'd rather just carry a spare cell.



I agree, but it's really the UI I'm going after on any size light. On that note, bring back the S6330! But that's an entirely different thread.


----------



## Mr Floppy

markr6 said:


> Forgive the sloppy Photoshop; that knurling was tough! And I guess the clip wouldn't be on the end, unless they put one on the tube and you removed it from the body.



The only complaint I have with your photoshop job is that I think the extension is way too long. Cut half of it off and I think it would be better proportioned. 

I would like that though. For a start, could use PID as it wouldn't need to pull 6A from the battery. 3A and get 40 minutes with PID step down would be nice. Although, if they did make a 2xAA, they may just go for 900 lumen.


----------



## WalkIntoTheLight

Mr Floppy said:


> Although, if they did make a 2xAA, they may just go for 900 lumen.



That would be a useful reason to go with 2xAA. I'm not aware of any other 2xAA light that goes much more than 500 lumens. Zebralight is one company that could pull it off.

P.S. I recall maybe a Thrunite has a high output 2xAA. IIRC, the quality wasn't that great on them.


----------



## markr6

*w OP version in stock* now. I know I've had mine for over a week, but I guess it wasn't a fluke.

They beat the Sept. 4 ETA!!! They beat the ETA???






You know I'm just playing ZL, you rock :rock:


----------



## marinemaster

Mark, you need to post pics with your ZL OP and the great tint daily, you know you are a believer now [emoji1][emoji1][emoji1]


----------



## markr6

marinemaster said:


> Mark, you need to post pics with your ZL OP and the great tint daily, you know you are a believer now [emoji1][emoji1][emoji1]



HAHA I am! I always liked my Zebralights, but the last SC5w really upset me with the "purple eye" right in the center of the beam. Glad I gave it another chance. Honestly I don't think OP reflector is doing much, if anything, over the regular version but I'm really liking it.

The clip was SO strong so I bent it back a little. I ended up going too far and it was loose, so I just removed it and bent it back. It's fine now, but the fins really dig into my jeans pocket. I know I said I wouldn't EDC this, but I like it so much I may give it a shot. They really need to flatten that part like the SC52; no other complaints though.


----------



## snowlover91

Try the pocket clip I mentioned in a recent thread.. It works great and keeps it from shredding the pockets and only costs about $7. Looks great on the SC5 also and makes it great for EDC.


----------



## markr6

snowlover91 said:


> Try the pocket clip I mentioned in a recent thread.. It works great and keeps it from shredding the pockets and only costs about $7. Looks great on the SC5 also and makes it great for EDC.



Thanks, I think I'll try that. (in case anyone is wondering what we're talking bout: http://www.candlepowerforums.com/vb/showthread.php?401561-Zebralight-Pocket-Clip-Fix)


----------



## insanefred

Has anyone received their SC5F c/d yet?


----------



## snowlover91

insanefred said:


> Has anyone received their SC5F c/d yet?


Not yet still waiting for the shipment notification. I heard international orders should be beginning to ship though, I live in the US so it'll take a bit longer.


----------



## KeepingItLight

markr6 said:


> *w OP version in stock* now. I know I've had mine for over a week, but I guess it wasn't a fluke.
> 
> They beat the Sept. 4 ETA!!! They beat the ETA???
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You know I'm just playing ZL, you rock :rock:




I don't see any population figures on the sign. I hope folks aren't moving out due to the change in weather.


----------



## Woods Walker

Well this is on my want list.


----------



## Woods Walker

Almost ready to pull the trigger. Are the electronics potted. Has anyone had any issues with water leaking etc etc etc? I don't buy too many lights so it's gotta be right.


----------



## snowlover91

Woods Walker said:


> Almost ready to pull the trigger. Are the electronics potted. Has anyone had any issues with water leaking etc etc etc? I don't buy too many lights so it's gotta be right.



The electronics are potted and the tint is the best in my collection, even better than my Nichia lights. It's the purest, most neutral white tint I own and it's perfect. No issues with water, I test mine underwater and in a steamy environment for days and not a single issue. Switch is excellent as well and the anodizing is top notch. Really a must own light if you like using NIMH AA batteries, which I prefer over lithium due to them being safer.


----------



## Woods Walker

snowlover91 said:


> The electronics are potted and the tint is the best in my collection, even better than my Nichia lights. It's the purest, most neutral white tint I own and it's perfect. No issues with water, I test mine underwater and in a steamy environment for days and not a single issue. Switch is excellent as well and the anodizing is top notch. Really a must own light if you like using NIMH AA batteries, which I prefer over lithium due to them being safer.



You're not making resisting easy. LOL! Yea NW is my pic.

Edit. Also my mind is having a hard time believing 500 lumens out of an AA. Granted it must be short lived but dang.. Really...


----------



## markr6

Woods Walker said:


> You're not making resisting easy. LOL! Yea NW is my pic.



If the tint is anything like mine (snowlover91's sounds good too), you sure are going to love it out there in the woods!


----------



## snowlover91

Woods Walker said:


> You're not making resisting easy. LOL! Yea NW is my pic.
> 
> Edit. Also my mind is having a hard time believing 500 lumens out of an AA. Granted it must be short lived but dang.. Really...



It is a legit 500 lumens, Selfbuilt actually had slightly higher output from this versus the SC52 on a 14500. He measured around 540 on that one and 560 on the SC5 and users who have both lights have confirmed it is indeed brighter. If you use turbo exclusively you'll get around 25-30 minutes total but if you use it and let it step down and keep running you'll get 45-50 minutes with Eneloop or Eneloop pro. An awesome light imo and worth getting!


----------



## Woods Walker

You are all pushers. That's what you are. I ordered the 5SCw and should get it in a 6 or so days. Haven't ordered a ZL in years so hope for the best.


----------



## insanefred

Woods Walker said:


> You are all pushers. That's what you are. I ordered the 5SCw and should get it in a 6 or so days. Haven't ordered a ZL in years so hope for the best.





Did you get the OP version or the smooth?


----------



## Woods Walker

insanefred said:


> Did you get the OP version or the smooth?



Smooth. Somehow I feel that might give a bit more throw but odds are ultimately it probably doesn't matter either way in actual EDC or field use.


----------



## snowlover91

Woods Walker said:


> Smooth. Somehow I feel that might give a bit more throw but odds are ultimately it probably doesn't matter either way in actual EDC or field use.



It should be a little better throw compared to the OP version although it won't be a huge difference. The throw is superior to both my SC32w and SC62w if that helps. Looking forward to seeing some pics after you get it and try it out! The turbo mode will surprise you when you realize you're getting 500+ lumens from an Eneloop.


----------



## Woods Walker

snowlover91 said:


> It should be a little better throw compared to the OP version although it won't be a huge difference. The throw is superior to both my SC32w and SC62w if that helps. Looking forward to seeing some pics after you get it and try it out! The turbo mode will surprise you when you realize you're getting 500+ lumens from an Eneloop.



Honestly if not for confirmation from people here I wouldn't believe the numbers. LOL! I like a bit of throw with my pocket lights incase they're pressed into service during bushwhacking or looking for trail markers. Anyone try lithium primary aka 1.7 volts. Guessing 14500 are a not go if the voltage is tweaked for NiMH not that it's needed given the crazy numbers. Hope the tint is good.


----------



## WalkIntoTheLight

Woods Walker said:


> Honestly if not for confirmation from people here I wouldn't believe the numbers. LOL! I like a bit of throw with my pocket lights incase they're pressed into service during bushwhacking or looking for trail markers. Anyone try lithium primary aka 1.7 volts.



Selfbuilt tested lithium primaries, and you won't get maximum with them. They just can't deliver the high current necessary. Stick with Eneloops.

BTW, the tint on my SC5w is also the best tint I've seen on a Cree LED. Absolutely no hint of green anywhere!


----------



## Woods Walker

WalkIntoTheLight said:


> Selfbuilt tested lithium primaries, and you won't get maximum with them. They just can't deliver the high current necessary. Stick with Eneloops.
> 
> BTW, the tint on my SC5w is also the best tint I've seen on a Cree LED. Absolutely no hint of green anywhere!



I am thinking about winter hikes. Last year temps during some of my night hikes temps dipped below -10 F not to mention wind chill. Camping trips even colder. Granted I have other lights for that but one never knows when a gear item might be called into service. No question for EDC it would be Eneloops. So long as Lithium primaries work for occasional use then good enough however didn't they would not produce maximum results. Thanks for the info. I despise green tint so hope for the best.

On a side note is anyone using Eneloops pro or just standard. I think Selfbuilt used one but I don't have any of those though do have the standard 2000ish ones.


----------



## snowlover91

Eneloop and Eneloop pro should work the same, main difference will be slightly better runtime with the Eneloop pro.


----------



## fnj

snowlover91 said:


> Eneloop and Eneloop pro should work the same, main difference will be slightly better runtime with the Eneloop pro.



Selfbuilt battery duration data shows the Pros greatly outperforming the Plains on H1. H1 is 44 vs 30 min, H2 is 54 vs 38 min, H3 is 106 vs 79 min, M1 is 8h35m vs 5h53m (all data to 50%). Definitely a lot more than slightly on H1, and pretty substantial on H2 through M1.

Note: the Plains are not useless at all, but there is plenty of difference.


----------



## gunga

Hmmm. Not sure where to put this picture, but here is one of the few places to put a trit on a zebralight. Note this does not work with the stock clip as it crushes the trit (ask me how I know. )


----------



## fnj

WalkIntoTheLight said:


> Selfbuilt tested lithium primaries, and you won't get maximum with them. They just can't deliver the high current necessary. Stick with Eneloops.



It looks like he only tested H1, and there is a weird "initial warm up" period where with a fresh battery it starts out dim and after a couple of minutes gets brighter, but there is no burst at the beginning. He got 23 min to 50% in this mode, compared to 44 min for Eneloop Pros and 30 min for Eneloop Plain. What I can't tell for sure looking at his graphs is the actual lumen values for the E2 lithium in this pseudo-H1 mode.

Unfortunately he didn't do any further testing with the E2 lithium. My guess would be that it would be a respectable performer in H3 mode (nominal 200 lumen). I suspect it would come close to 200 lumens, and be quite decent on runtime.


----------



## Woods Walker

fnj said:


> Selfbuilt battery duration data shows the Pros greatly outperforming the Plains on H1. H1 is 44 vs 30 min, H2 is 54 vs 38 min, H3 is 106 vs 79 min, M1 is 8h35m vs 5h53m (all data to 50%). Definitely a lot more than slightly on H1, and pretty substantial on H2 through M1. Note: the Plains are not useless at all, but there is plenty of difference.



Well in that case I will buy some. On a side note just did a 5.25 mile night trail run. It will be nice to test out a new light in the woods. Used the Fenix HL50 and 4/7 1xCR123 XPG-2. 

4/7 TQLC 1XCR123


BRIGHTNESS LEVELSMoonlight: 0.2 lumens, 15 days, 1ma / Low: 6 lumens, 2.5 days, 10ma / Medium: 26 lumens, 13 hrs, 50ma / High: 102 lumens, 2.7 hrs, 250ma / Maximum: 246 lumens, 0.8 hrs, 700ma
With 1XAA body.


BRIGHTNESS LEVELSMoonlight: 0.2 lumens, 10 days, 1ma / Low: 5 lumens, 2 days, 10ma / Medium: 26 lumens, 6 hrs, 50ma / High: 102 lumens, 1.5 hrs, 250ma / Maximum: 130 lumens, 1.2 hrs, 350ma

ZL SC5w



Light Output (runtimes)
High: H1 *500* Lm (3min, then 304lm, total 0.8 hr) or H2 *304* Lm (0.9 hr) / *187* Lm (1.8 hrs) / *107*Lm (3.5 hrs)
Medium: M1 *45* Lm (8.5 hrs) or M2 *19 *Lm (16.5 hrs) / *7.5* Lm (42 hrs)
Low: L1 *3.0 *Lm (4 days) or L2 *1.0* Lm (16 days) / *0.28 *Lm (50 days) / *0.1 *Lm (4 months)
Beacon Strobe Mode: 4Hz Strobe at H1 / 19Hz Strobe at H1
Light output are ANSI out the front (OTF) values. Runtimes tested (and parasitic drain estimated) using Panasonic Eneloop Pro AA batteries. Remaining battery power, about 10-20%, after step-down are not counted towards the runtimes.


Sorry that didn't copy and paste like I hoped it would. Is it me or is the lower modes on the SCW5 so that much longer running at similar output. 1XCR123 4/7 for 0.2 is 360 hours and 1xAA is 240 at 0.2 but the SCW5 is 0.28 for 1200 hours. This using a single 1XAA. Can there really be that BIG of a disparity or am I misreading something. Even medium 50ish lumens which is my run of the mill hiking standard. ZL M1 45 lumens 8.5 hours. 4/7 1XAA is 26 Lumens at 6 hours, 1XCR123 is 26 lumens at 13 hours. Granted the low voltage 4/7 head has a wider voltage range and they tend to appear to me as brighter than rated but still? Maybe the 4/7 numbers for 1XAA are based on alkys however even in 1XCR123 there is a big difference on the moonlight.

Fenix HL50.

Seems more comparable in 1XCR123. Low 3 lumens 150 hours, 60 lumens 9:45 hours and 170 3 hours. Burst 365. In 1XAA 3/110, 55/6:20 and 150/2. Burst 285. Looks like the SC5w is about the same though has an edge. On a side note I rather like both the 4/7 and HL50 as they can take CR123 and 1XAA but still seems like the SC5w outperforms on all grounds.


----------



## Woods Walker

fnj said:


> It looks like he only tested H1, and there is a weird "initial warm up" period where with a fresh battery it starts out dim and after a couple of minutes gets brighter, but there is no burst at the beginning. He got 23 min to 50% in this mode, compared to 44 min for Eneloop Pros and 30 min for Eneloop Plain. What I can't tell for sure looking at his graphs is the actual lumen values for the E2 lithium in this pseudo-H1 mode.
> 
> Unfortunately he didn't do any further testing with the E2 lithium. My guess would be that it would be a respectable performer in H3 mode (nominal 200 lumen). I suspect it would come close to 200 lumens, and be quite decent on runtime.



It's also possible that extreme cold will negate any Eneloop advantage. That's the only time I would use Lithium primaries.


----------



## snowlover91

Yep the Zebralights are known for their efficient low and medium modes while still providing excellent runtime at the higher levels. Is this your first Zebralight? If so you'd better start saving for another one because you'll be hooked just like the rest of us are


----------



## Woods Walker

snowlover91 said:


> Yep the Zebralights are known for their efficient low and medium modes while still providing excellent runtime at the higher levels. Is this your first Zebralight? If so you'd better start saving for another one because you'll be hooked just like the rest of us are



No I have a ZL H50, H502 and H502w. I still use the H502w at times because the tint and 80 degree flood are nice. The H50 is inside my E&E for the zombie apocalypse which is still after years of waiting a no show and the cool white H502 is someplace in a box hardly used from day one. Nice vanilla white tint for a cool white light but just keep it in case the H502w dies. I don't have any ZL flashlights due to earlier reliability and durability concerns which I hope have been addressed.


----------



## WalkIntoTheLight

fnj said:


> Selfbuilt battery duration data shows the Pros greatly outperforming the Plains on H1. H1 is 44 vs 30 min, H2 is 54 vs 38 min, H3 is 106 vs 79 min, M1 is 8h35m vs 5h53m (all data to 50%). Definitely a lot more than slightly on H1, and pretty substantial on H2 through M1.
> 
> Note: the Plains are not useless at all, but there is plenty of difference.



I did my own tests, and got significantly better run times than Selfbuilt did on regular Eneloops. I think his Eneloop may be old or not fully charged or something. I used new gen 4 regular Eneloops.

High 1 : measured at a total of 21min, using rests between each 2-3min run (Note: NO STEP-DOWN, so this is the full 500 lumens all the time)

High 2a : measured at 42-43min

High 2b : measured at 97-98min

High 2c : measured at 3h 30min

Medium 1: measured at 6h 30min


----------



## fnj

WalkIntoTheLight said:


> I did my own tests, and got significantly better run times than Selfbuilt did on regular Eneloops. I think his Eneloop may be old or not fully charged or something. I used new gen 4 regular Eneloops.
> 
> High 1 : measured at a total of 21min, using rests between each 2-3min run (Note: NO STEP-DOWN, so this is the full 500 lumens all the time)
> 
> High 2a : measured at 42-43min
> 
> High 2b : measured at 97-98min
> 
> High 2c : measured at 3h 30min
> 
> Medium 1: measured at 6h 30min



Thanks for the added input! Those figures strike me as somewhat "too good", based on a simple numeric comparison of 2450 mAh to 1900 mAh, but taken at face value the figures are very encouraging. Possibly you've got some "hot" Regulars, and Selfbuilt used some fairly worn or "dud" Pros.

Because I don't ever expect to invest in any Pros. Cycle life reduced to 500 from 2100, plus almost double the price, do not strike me as acceptable tradeoffs.


----------



## snowlover91

fnj said:


> Thanks for the added input! Those figures strike me as somewhat "too good", based on a simple numeric comparison of 2450 mAh to 1900 mAh, but taken at face value the figures are very encouraging. Possibly you've got some "hot" Regulars, and Selfbuilt used some fairly worn or "dud" Pros.
> 
> Because I don't ever expect to invest in any Pros. Cycle life reduced to 500 from 2100, plus almost double the price, do not strike me as acceptable tradeoffs.



I have both the pros and the regular Eneloops. While there is a small increase in runtime it's not very significant at the higher levels. It is noticeable at the medium and low levels where I can get a few extra hours on medium settings and a few extra days on low. My Eneloops tested around 2000-2050 mAh while my Eneloop Pro batteries are between 2400-2450. I use the pro most of the time but occasionally will use the regular Eneloops. If you already have the Eneloop pro it's worth using for the extra capacity but if not then it's not a "must have" for this light.


----------



## uofaengr

I'm not an Eneloop expert as most of the battery behavior I've tested is lithium ion, but is the SC5 capable of hitting that 500 lumen turbo with an Eneloop fresh out of the pack at roughly 1.33V, same for a fully charged Eneloop that has been sitting in the SC5 for a couple weeks and voltage has rested to 1.33V? 

Reason I ask is because I've been playing around with a lux meter that after calibration and some math is able to guesstimate relative lumens pretty dang close to manufacturer specs. Boring and old hat to many of you but new and cool to me for light testing. Anyway, my lithium ion tests of my SC52w were pretty much spot on with ZL specs, but I took an Eneloop that was fully charged 11 days prior, unused, and it registered just below 200 lumens on H1 rather than the 280 lumen spec. Everything H2 and below was spot on with the lithium ion tests. Even if the <200 lumen number isn't exactly correct, the brightness was still only 67-70% of the spec'd 280 lumens. 

So is it that the SC5 is pulling much more current even at lower voltages on H1 to achieve 500 lumens? I'd hate to have this light sitting around for occasional use and not get full potential out of it. Lithium ions after fully charged seem to hold their full voltage a lot better than Eneloops, and I've found I can get full turbo usage on the SC52w all the way below 3.7V.


----------



## WalkIntoTheLight

WalkIntoTheLight said:


> I did my own tests, and got significantly better run times than Selfbuilt did on regular Eneloops.
> 
> 
> High 1 : measured at a total of 21min, using rests between each 2-3min run (Note: NO STEP-DOWN, so this is the full 500 lumens all the time)
> 
> 
> High 2a : measured at 42-43min
> 
> 
> High 2b : measured at 97-98min
> 
> 
> High 2c : measured at 3h 30min
> 
> 
> Medium 1: measured at 6h 30min








fnj said:


> Thanks for the added input! Those figures strike me as somewhat "too good", based on a simple numeric comparison of 2450 mAh to 1900 mAh, but taken at face value the figures are very encouraging. Possibly you've got some "hot" Regulars, and Selfbuilt used some fairly worn or "dud" Pros.



I think that's very possible. Besides my (regular) Eneloops being fairly new and the latest generation, I started each test with a freshly charged cell. So, it might be closer to 2000mAh than 1900mAh. But that's just a guess.

Sample variation of the light is also a possibility.










uofaengr said:


> I'm not an Eneloop expert as most of the battery behavior I've tested is lithium ion, but is the SC5 capable of hitting that 500 lumen turbo with an Eneloop fresh out of the pack at roughly 1.33V, same for a fully charged Eneloop that has been sitting in the SC5 for a couple weeks and voltage has rested to 1.33V?
> 
> 
> Reason I ask is because I've been playing around with a lux meter that after calibration and some math is able to guesstimate relative lumens pretty dang close to manufacturer specs. Boring and old hat to many of you but new and cool to me for light testing. Anyway, my lithium ion tests of my SC52w were pretty much spot on with ZL specs, but I took an Eneloop that was fully charged 11 days prior, unused, and it registered just below 200 lumens on H1 rather than the 280 lumen spec. Everything H2 and below was spot on with the lithium ion tests. Even if the <200 lumen number isn't exactly correct, the brightness was still only 67-70% of the spec'd 280 lumens.
> 
> 
> So is it that the SC5 is pulling much more current even at lower voltages on H1 to achieve 500 lumens? I'd hate to have this light sitting around for occasional use and not get full potential out of it. Lithium ions after fully charged seem to hold their full voltage a lot better than Eneloops, and I've found I can get full turbo usage on the SC52w all the way below 3.7V.



The SC5 is much better at maintaining a steady output on maximum than the SC52 is, using an Eneloop. My Sc52's really only achieve 280 lumens (and probably not quite that high) when the cell is freshly charged. Within a few minutes, the output drops quite a bit. You don't notice it with your eye, but it's obvious when switching between H1 and H2a.

The SC5 doesn't drop nearly as much as the battery depletes. It does drop some, but much less than the SC52 does. Strange, I know, as I thought it would really take a hit, since it's so demanding on the battery. The driver of the SC5 is clearly better, perhaps because it only has to worry about boosting voltage, and not bucking a 4.2v input.


----------



## markr6

WalkIntoTheLight said:


> The SC5 is much better at maintaining a steady output on maximum than the SC52 is, using an Eneloop. My Sc52's really only achieve 280 lumens (and probably not quite that high) when the cell is freshly charged. Within a few minutes, the output drops quite a bit. You don't notice it with your eye, but it's obvious when switching between H1 and H2a.
> 
> The SC5 doesn't drop nearly as much as the battery depletes. It does drop some, but much less than the SC52 does. Strange, I know, as I thought it would really take a hit, since it's so demanding on the battery. The driver of the SC5 is clearly better, perhaps because it only has to worry about boosting voltage, and not bucking a 4.2v input.



This is what I am seeing. I really don't like my SC52w so much anymore, but I'm keeping it.


----------



## more_vampires

Love my ZL SC52d, but darn it if ZL didn't come out with the SC52L2 with more lumens. It's like I can't buy something without Zebralight obsoleting it!

I'm torn between liking new models released and the upgrade treadmill...


----------



## uofaengr

WalkIntoTheLight said:


> The SC5 is much better at maintaining a steady output on maximum than the SC52 is, using an Eneloop. My Sc52's really only achieve 280 lumens (and probably not quite that high) when the cell is freshly charged. Within a few minutes, the output drops quite a bit. You don't notice it with your eye, but it's obvious when switching between H1 and H2a.
> 
> The SC5 doesn't drop nearly as much as the battery depletes. It does drop some, but much less than the SC52 does. Strange, I know, as I thought it would really take a hit, since it's so demanding on the battery. The driver of the SC5 is clearly better, perhaps because it only has to worry about boosting voltage, and not bucking a 4.2v input.



Very informative. Maybe it's more efficient since the operating voltage range is only to 2.0V. I'm sure they took this into consideration knowing that Eneloops quickly fall to and maintain about 1.3V. In any case, it's impressive what they're getting out of an Eneloop. I just keep trying to convince myself that I don't need this light due to the battery versatility of the 52w and its more EDC friendly size.


----------



## snowlover91

My best guess would be that since they cut out the 14500 support they were able to optimize it for Eneloops. The driver is probably more efficient and able to maintain the required power for much longer. I've taken 40-50% depleted Eneloops and still get close to the 500 lumens which is very impressive. If the output drops any it's very slight, say 30-60 lumens at most and would mainly be when the battery is almost depleted. I'm still waiting for my SC5fd and the wait is getting difficult!


----------



## KeepingItLight

WalkIntoTheLight said:


> NO STEP-DOWN, so this is the full 500 lumens all the time.



Were you able to verify that output was 500 lumens on regular Eneloop? I thought it took the high-draw capability of Eneloop Pro to pull the necessary amps for that.


----------



## markr6

KeepingItLight said:


> Were you able to verify that output was 500 lumens on regular Eneloop? I thought it took the high-draw capability of Eneloop Pro to pull the necessary amps for that.



I honestly cannot tell a difference. I only have a cell phone app to test, though. The only reason I'm using regular eneloops is because I don't want to split my 4-pack of Eneloop XX "matched" in my EA4w.


----------



## insanefred

Geez, guys, just go find some Duraloop pros (ion core) at your local drugstore for $12 a 4-pack.


----------



## WarRaven

insanefred said:


> Geez, guys, just go find some Duraloop pros (ion core) at your local drugstore for $12 a 4-pack.


Lmao
Glad you said it, I was like, bunch of cheap skates.
+1

So tight can't pack a spare cell.☺🔋


----------



## markr6

LOL but I don't have use for the other 3 cells! Really, I don't 

By the way, the SC5 is a pretty big guy now that I received a used SC62w!! I forgot how great the SC62w was


----------



## WarRaven

markr6 said:


> LOL but I don't have use for the other 3 cells! Really, I don't
> 
> By the way, the SC5 is a pretty big guy now that I received a used SC62w!! I forgot how great the SC62w was


Are them power switch boots out of alignment on the two on the right?

If so, I'll buy the middle one at a reasonable cost just so you know. ☺


----------



## uofaengr

markr6 said:


> LOL but I don't have use for the other 3 cells! Really, I don't
> 
> By the way, the SC5 is a pretty big guy now that I received a used SC62w!! I forgot how great the SC62w was


That's a fat little joker there lol... 

You haven't told us how the tint is on your new SC62w. That one holds king of the EDC mountain for me...though I'm EDCing the 52w all week so far lol.


----------



## markr6

WarRaven said:


> Are them power switch boots out of alignment on the two on the right?



I'm not sure what you mean. They're what Zebralights have always been, at least all the lights I've had. I will say, my iPhone was playing tricks on me. I actually had to turn the outside lights towards the center a bit to make it square. Very strange. Must be something with the camera lens at close range?



uofaengr said:


> That's a fat little joker there lol...
> 
> You haven't told us how the tint is on your new SC62w. That one holds king of the EDC mountain for me...though I'm EDCing the 52w all week so far lol.



How could I forget that? It's GREAT!! If my SC5w OP is a 10, I would call this a 9. Almost the same, but the slightest bit warmer/yellow. Hardly worth mentioning.


----------



## WarRaven

Mark, the up marker portion looks like its tilted to left.
It's a visual thing only I'm sure, just being a jerk I was. ☺


----------



## snowlover91

Probably the camera angle making it appear slanted like that. Nice comparison shots! The SC62 is an amazing EDC and if they incorporated the small pins in the tail cap like the SC5 they could probably shorten it another .25 or so. I hope they release a SC63 this year would love to see an updated model.. And the tail cap switch light they have listed in their spreadsheet has me intrigued. I emailed them about it but they were purposely vague stating only that they had no new information for it at this time.


----------



## Woods Walker

fnj said:


> Thanks for the added input! Those figures strike me as somewhat "too good", based on a simple numeric comparison of 2450 mAh to 1900 mAh, but taken at face value the figures are very encouraging. Possibly you've got some "hot" Regulars, and Selfbuilt used some fairly worn or "dud" Pros.
> 
> Because I don't ever expect to invest in any Pros. Cycle life reduced to 500 from 2100, plus almost double the price, do not strike me as acceptable tradeoffs.



Oh.... 500 cycles. No in that case I will stick with regular ones. 

On a side note has anyone ever verified the moonlight runtime numbers?


----------



## insanefred

Woods Walker said:


> Oh.... 500 cycles. No in that case I will stick with regular ones.



I will assume you are kidding.


----------



## Overclocker

what does SC5 draw again? 5 to 6 amps? you won't get very good cycle life from that kind of draw


----------



## WalkIntoTheLight

Woods Walker said:


> On a side note has anyone ever verified the moonlight runtime numbers?



I haven't done real run-time tests on it, but here are my tailcap current measurements for the low modes. You can do the math to calculate approximate run times.

Low 1 : 13.7 mA
Low 2a : 6.2 mA
Low 2b : 2.0 mA
Low 2c : 0.78 mA
Off : 2.4 μA


Based on my real moonlight run time tests with my SC52's, the current measurements give pretty good estimates for run time.




Overclocker said:


> what does SC5 draw again? 5 to 6 amps? you won't get very good cycle life from that kind of draw



Yeah, we don't know for sure how such high drain will affect the cycle life of Eneloops. Based on cycle tests in the battery forum, they can handle 2 amps charge and discharge just fine. But 5-6 amps discharge might be tough of them. However, it's not like you're running the light on maximum all the time. I'd still expect to get several hundred cycles out of regular Eneloops, even if I ran it on max all the time.

Pro's... not so much. They're not built to last; they're built to give you high capacity.


----------



## markr6

Yeah I'm not worried. $3 per Eneloop. Heck, I can by a 4-pack for $12. Even IF an eneloop only lasted 1 year (talk about HEAVY USE), this setup would last me 4 years! In that time, I'm sure ZL will have someone completely new out anyway.


----------



## uofaengr

markr6 said:


> Yeah I'm not worried. $3 per Eneloop. Heck, I can by a 4-pack for $12. Even IF an eneloop only lasted 1 year (talk about HEAVY USE), this setup would last me 4 years! In that time, I'm sure ZL will have someone completely new out anyway.


Yeah especially for the price of the Duracell Ion Core you sometimes find, it's still worth it to me if you only got a couple years out of one with heavy use. Guilt free lumens are fun.


----------



## Mr Floppy

WalkIntoTheLight said:


> Yeah, we don't know for sure how such high drain will affect the cycle life of Eneloops. Based on cycle tests in the battery forum, they can handle 2 amps charge and discharge just fine. But 5-6 amps discharge might be tough of them.



Somewhere, in the eneloop specifications that Sanyo produced, I recall seeing 3C as discharge rating. So 6A is not beyond it.


> Pro's... not so much. They're not built to last; they're built to give you high capacity.



I think you are underselling the pro. I recall seeing 5C as the discharge rating for the XX. Not sure where, but it was in comparison to elite 2000 batteries which have a 10C rating.


----------



## WalkIntoTheLight

Mr Floppy said:


> I think you are underselling the pro. I recall seeing 5C as the discharge rating for the XX. Not sure where, but it was in comparison to elite 2000 batteries which have a 10C rating.



I'm sure they can handle high discharge rates. But I'm referring to the Eneloop Pro cycle testing in the battery forum. It only lasted about 150 cycles, IIRC. They were full cycles, but it's only a small fraction of what you get from the regular Eneloop full cycles.


----------



## markr6

I like the better LSD characteristic of the regular Eneloops as well. Not that I'm actually storing batteries for years and using them without charging, but it's still a pro to consider. *Price *is still my biggest motivator. But I may eventually pick up some of the Amazon basics (same price as regular Eneloops) which come close to the Eneloop Pros.


----------



## Mr Floppy

WalkIntoTheLight said:


> . But I'm referring to the Eneloop Pro cycle testing in the battery forum. It only lasted about 150 cycles



Yes but it was the statement that sounded like they are only good for the capacity. High discharge rating makes it possible for lights like the sc5 to function.


----------



## more_vampires

After about 3 years of EDC, a pair of AAA eneloops is finally starting to die on me. When one light would dim, I'd top up both.

I'd say I got my money's worth.


----------



## WalkIntoTheLight

Mr Floppy said:


> Yes but it was the statement that sounded like they are only good for the capacity. High discharge rating makes it possible for lights like the sc5 to function.



Yes, but regular Eneloops do fine in the SC5 as well. The Pros have only very slightly better discharge characteristics at high current. (Plus the higher capacity, of course.) We're only talking about a couple of hundreds of a volt better, under heavy load.


----------



## Woods Walker

insanefred said:


> I will assume you are kidding.



For EDC yes, for preps no.


----------



## fnj

insanefred said:


> I will assume you are kidding.


You know what they say about what you get when you assume.


----------



## Woods Walker

fnj said:


> You know what they say about what you get when you assume.



It's all good. I am excited about getting this light. Heck ordered a 600 dollar DSLR camera around the same time and was disappointed to get that first. LOL!


----------



## Woods Walker

Well I got it! First thing the tint is fantastic which is always a pro but not always a deciding factor on a kit item for me. The UI took a bit of getting used to. Seems a little tricky to access medium mode without a high flash from the high mode. It's just easier for me to ramp to medium. I like the two options for each of the three modes. Will work more with the UI but seems intuitive enough. The crazy brightness isn't mass hysteria. It's real! Dang if someone told me years ago 1xAA could be this bright I would have asked if they were on methamphetamines. Just compared by eye to several lights.

2XAA 4/7 XML G1.....SC5w appears brighter!
1xCR123 4/7 XP-G2 ..... SC5w appears brighter!
2XCR123 2/7 XM-L G2 ..... Has an edge on the SC5w but it's within the ballpark.

For max brightness this 1XAA can play ball with the others for sure. The low modes seem comparable to the Quarks in terms of brightness. That said I won't be taking my quarks out of service as still really like them. The weight of the SC5w give it a solid feeling. I hope that's more than just a feeling. LOL!



I will take some outside pics after playing around with the light some more.


----------



## snowlover91

Awesome we look forward to seeing some beam shots


----------



## Woods Walker

snowlover91 said:


> Awesome we look forward to seeing some beam shots



The sun is up so it's going to be some time. LOL! Interestingly enough the tint is very very very near my HL50 though maybe a little nicer. Guessing them having the same LED with the same classification probably helps. Also the runtimes are similar

HL50.

Low 3 lumens (accurate) 110 hours. CR123 4/150

Med 55 lumens 6:20 hours. CR123 60/9:45

High 150 lumens 2 hours. CR123 170/3

Burst 1xAA 285 CR123 385

SCR5

L1 3/120
M1 45/8.5
H1 187/1.8

All of this makes me appreacate the tint and runtimes of the HL50 more yet it doesn't seem to get the love on might expect. On a side note anyone know what does this mean......

H2 *304* Lm (0.9 hr) / *187* Lm (1.8 hrs) / *107*Lm (3.5 hrs)
M2 *19 *Lm (16.5 hrs) / *7.5* Lm (42 hrs)
L2 *1.0* Lm (16 days) / *0.28 *Lm (50 days) / *0.1 *Lm (4 months)

I am not seeing 2 H2, 3 M2 or 3 H2 modes?


----------



## reppans

Woods Walker said:


> .... The low modes seem comparable to the Quarks in terms of brightness....



Would you mind posting side-by-side beam shots of the Quark 2AA XML 0.3 and 3 lm modes with the SC5's 0.28 and 3 lm modes... I've become a low lumen mode spacing snob and 0.3/3 is prefect for 90% of my usage (I'm night vision junkie). My SC52 claimed the same outputs, but with 3x and 2x the runtime. However, my sample actually came in at at less than 1/4 and 1/2 the output -CLICKY . Just wonder if it's the same with the SC5?



Woods Walker said:


> On a side note anyone know what does this mean......
> ......I am not seeing 2 H2, 3 M2 or 3 H2 modes?



You need to double click 7 times to enter the _2 programming mode, double click to scroll through the sub-levels, stop on the selection you want for the _2 sub-level, and then turn the light off to memorize. _1 modes are locked by the factory. Could you have been comparing the Quark's moonlight to the ZLs 1 lm mode?


----------



## WalkIntoTheLight

reppans said:


> Would you mind posting side-by-side beam shots of the Quark 2AA XML 0.3 and 3 lm modes with the SC5's 0.28 and 3 lm modes... I've become a low lumen mode spacing snob and 0.3/3 is prefect for 90% of my usage (I'm night vision junkie). My SC52 claimed the same outputs, but with 3x and 2x the runtime. However, my sample actually came in at at less than 1/4 and 1/2 the output -CLICKY . Just wonder if it's the same with the SC5?



They've really improved the moonlight efficiency of the SC5. To give you some idea of comparative output, the highest SC5w moonlight (what they claim as 1.0 lumens), is very close to the brightness of my Quark QP2A-X (XML2). The SC5w may be a touch brighter, but it's close. So, 0.3 or 0.4 lumens, if you assume the Quark is 0.3 lumens.

Tailcap current measurement of the SC5w on the highest moonlight is 6.2 mA. The Quark measures 3.9 mA, but it has twice the batteries, so the SC5w is actually the more efficient, by a little bit.

The lower two moonlight modes of the SC5w are close in brightness to the highest two moonlights of the SC52w-L2 (probably around 0.1 and 0.01 lumens). However, again, the SC5w beats the SC52 efficiency by a factor of 3x. (SC5w measures 2.0 mA, and 0.78 mA.)

I'm not sure why the SC5 is so much better on moonlight modes, but must have something to do with the new driver. No need for buck circuitry?


----------



## reppans

WalkIntoTheLight said:


> They've really improved the moonlight efficiency of the SC5. To give you some idea of comparative output, the highest SC5w moonlight (what they claim as 1.0 lumens), is very close to the brightness of my Quark QP2A-X (XML2). The SC5w may be a touch brighter, but it's close. So, 0.3 or 0.4 lumens, if you assume the Quark is 0.3 lumens.
> 
> Tailcap current measurement of the SC5w on the highest moonlight is 6.2 mA. The Quark measures 3.9 mA, but it has twice the batteries, so the SC5w is actually the more efficient, by a little bit.
> 
> The lower two moonlight modes of the SC5w are close in brightness to the highest two moonlights of the SC52w-L2 (probably around 0.1 and 0.01 lumens). However, again, the SC5w beats the SC52 efficiency by a factor of 3x. (SC5w measures 2.0 mA, and 0.78 mA.)
> 
> I'm not sure why the SC5 is so much better on moonlight modes, but must have something to do with the new driver. No need for buck circuitry?



Thanks WITL, once again we share similar tailcap and lumen estimates, and of course, also had similar ZL moonlight runtime results in the past - it's a good double check, and confirmation we have "normal" samples. 

What are your thoughts on the "3 lm" L1 mode? My SC52 2.7lm L1 mode is testing at ~1.3lms/17.5ma which is consistently efficient with the 3lm modes on my D25As and QPA-Xs or ~ 3lms/36ma. I did see you got 13.7ma for the SC5, do you think it matches the output of your 3lm QP2A-X? 

I think you are right about single boost/buck driver.... I have a QP2L-X burst mode (buck only) that's has about the same moonlight output as the QP2A-X (boost/buck) but it's using about 25% less ma on a 14500 or ~3ma vs 4ma.


----------



## WalkIntoTheLight

reppans said:


> What are your thoughts on the "3 lm" L1 mode? My SC52 2.7lm L1 mode is testing at ~1.3lms/17.5ma which is consistently efficient with the 3lm modes on my D25As and QPA-Xs or ~ 3lms/36ma. I did see you got 13.7ma for the SC5, do you think it matches the output of your 3lm QP2A-X?
> 
> .



The low1 mode is certainly not as bright as claimed. It's dimmer than the low1 mode of the sc52, and the quark. If I had to guess, I'd estimate about 1 to 1.5 lumens. Probably closer to 1.


----------



## KeepingItLight

reppans said:


> You need to double click 7 times to enter the _2 programming mode, ...



This explanation is right, except you only have to double-click 6 times.


Select lo, med, or hi.
Double-click 6 times to enter program mode.
Double click to see the next choice for the mode selected in step 1. Keep double-clicking until you see the choice you like.
Turn off the flashlight (i.e., click once).
The choice you made is now programmed to be the alternate for whatever level (lo, med, hi) you were programming.


----------



## reppans

WalkIntoTheLight said:


> The low1 mode is certainly not as bright as claimed. It's dimmer than the low1 mode of the sc52, and the quark. If I had to guess, I'd estimate about 1 to 1.5 lumens. Probably closer to 1.



Thanks, that ties in with your/my current readings. I think you've also mentioned this before, but all ZLs L-mode outputs still seem off by multiple factors, and hence why all its L-mode efficiency claims seem so much higher than competitors. Their M and H modes are more reasonable, at least close to Selfbuilt's lumen scale.


----------



## reppans

KeepingItLight said:


> This explanation is right, except you only have to double-click 6 times.



Yes, true... I always give it a 7th round, though, since that's when you notice L1 disappear, confirming you are into the programming mode.


----------



## WalkIntoTheLight

reppans said:


> Thanks, that ties in with your/my current readings. I think you've also mentioned this before, but all ZLs L-mode outputs still seem off by multiple factors, and hence why all its L-mode efficiency claims seem so much higher than competitors. Their M and H modes are more reasonable, at least close to Selfbuilt's lumen scale.



Yes, I find the medium and high modes fairly accurate (except for the SC52 highest mode on NiMH). But for some reason, they overstate the brightness of the low modes by quite a bit, and there doesn't seem to be any marketing reason to do so (unlike for high modes).

If you like moonlight modes, the SC5 is great for that. Four usable modes around 1 lumen and under. The dimmest being good for a dark middle-of-night. The second lowest for an average night if you want to light things up a bit better. The highest two I don't find as much use for, but if you like brighter moonlight modes, they're good. I never found a use for the dimmest SC52 moonlight mode, since it was so incredibly dim, so it's good they ditched that in the SC5.

I would have preferred that the low1 on the SC5 be brighter, around 3 (real) lumens. But the lowest medium mode is pretty good for a low output as well, so I tend to use that when outside and I need just enough light to see things close by. Low1 is just too dim to be much use outdoors, unless you've manged to fully preserve your night vision. But all it takes is one car to ruin night vision.


----------



## reppans

WalkIntoTheLight said:


> Yes, I find the medium and high modes fairly accurate..
> 
> If you like moonlight modes, the SC5 is great for that...
> 
> I would have preferred that the low1 on the SC5 be brighter, around 3 (real) lumens...



The SC5s moonlight spacing now sounds very nice, and efficient, qualifying as "free" usable light (for me). I also like 3 lms for an outdoors walking minimum (eg, dog walking) - 1 lm just doesn't cut it. I have used the lowest Med. on the SC52 instead, but now the runtime impact (vs a good 3) is significant and is cut in half. These are really just our own petty personal preferences though, overall spacing fine - it's not like a Thunite jumping from 0.05 to 20 lms . 

I think I'll stick with "more reasonable" [less egregious] instead of your "fairly accurate" though - I'm sure you recall THIS independent review where ZL claims ~73% greater efficiency (lumen-hrs) for a marginal difference - I get the same result. Then again, if you include certain other competitors like AT an TN, perhaps your "fairly accurate" is correct after all .


----------



## WalkIntoTheLight

I always do my own run-time tests on lights I use a lot, so I know exactly how long they'll run on the high and medium modes.

For the SC5w, on a regular new Eneloop (1900mAh, gen 4), I get:

High 1 : measured at a total of 21min, using rests between each 2-3min run
High 2a : measured at 42-43min
High 2b : measured at 97-98min
High 2c : measured at 3h 30min
Medium 1: measured at 6h 30min

Those are better than the SC52 and SC52w-L2 I have. But I have no idea how they compared to the Zebralight published numbers, since they use an Eneloop Pro (and I don't trust their numbers to be very accurate anyway).


----------



## Woods Walker

reppans said:


> Would you mind posting side-by-side beam shots of the Quark 2AA XML 0.3 and 3 lm modes with the SC5's 0.28 and 3 lm modes... I've become a low lumen mode spacing snob and 0.3/3 is prefect for 90% of my usage (I'm night vision junkie). My SC52 claimed the same outputs, but with 3x and 2x the runtime. However, my sample actually came in at at less than 1/4 and 1/2 the output -CLICKY . Just wonder if it's the same with the SC5?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You need to double click 7 times to enter the _2 programming mode, double click to scroll through the sub-levels, stop on the selection you want for the _2 sub-level, and then turn the light off to memorize. _1 modes are locked by the factory. Could you have been comparing the Quark's moonlight to the ZLs 1 lm mode?



Sorry to say I don't have my 2AAX-XML within reach as it's in my preps at another location but do have my PSK with 1XCR123 Quark on hand. I hardly know anything about the ZL so the low modes I am showing are what it came with on L1/L2. I have not entered programming (knowingly) modes yet but going to do so ASAP.





ZL on the left Quark on the right in the low low as set from the factory. Whatever the setting it appears about the same with the Quark moonlight.





ZL on the left quark on the right in the high low mode as set from the factory. 





Somehow the Quark's low seems brighter on this level. Now naturally I could be wrong on the modes as need to play with the ZL more. On a side note the Quark's tint is actually better in the XPG 2 version than either of the XML or XML 2. It just looks cooler when directly compared to the NW.


----------



## Woods Walker

Oh now I see....... Quark Pro QPLC......

*Low: 6 lumens, 2.5 days

*So that's why it's brighter. Hold on a second.....


----------



## Woods Walker

On the left ZL SC5w on the right Fenix HL50.





Notice how they both look cooler. Oddly my eyes do the same thing. A warmer tint next to a cooler one highlights the difference more than when the same quantity or just alone is being viewed. :shrug:

HL50 on 1xAA NiMH battery is listed at 3 lumens for 110 hours.

SC5w on 1XAA NiMH battery is listed a 3 lumens for 4 days or 96 hours. 

I might have mixed up some numbers on the HL50 in an earlier post. However both have the same LED. Hard to totally compare as the HL50's reflector is so much smaller than the SC5w's giving the illusion of a brighter light because of the increased throw outside (just the yard 10 minutes ago. LOL) however I think they're both 3 lumens. I will compare to the 2XAA XML Quark in a day or so on low mode. I have actually night jogged with the 3 lumen mode on my HL50 but dang I don't recomend it. The SCWw's throw seems like it would make for nice walking light using the lower modes on well traveled roads or paths though I tend to use more light when on the move and less in camp but to each their own.


----------



## snowlover91

How many lumens do you typically use when hiking or walking at night? Was the SC5w as good as you were expecting? The tint sounds like a nice warm tint and very pleasing to the eyes. Looks like ZL has definitely been upping their game as tint issues have been few and far between the past year or so.


----------



## Alba

I lost my EDC flashlight sometime in the past week.  It was a Quark AA with a 14500 battery. Despite the deep pocket clip, it went walky-walky, maybe during my daily commute from an outside backpack pocket. It was my camping light from California to Massachusetts to Florida, and also went with me to the Caribbean and Europe. I'll miss it.

Anyhow, after marveling how AA flashlights have improved over the past six years, I'm looking to get a Zebralight SC5w, either smooth reflector or orange peel. I'm excited to try a neutral tint light. As you can tell, I don't buy often, but I try to buy something that will last me a very long time -- so I have some questions:

1) I bought the Quark directly from FourSevens. Are there dealers that I should consider, with good pricing and reputation, or should I just buy directly from Zebralight? (I'm planning on getting an Eneloop Pro setup too, in case someone sells packages.)

2) I find a cone-like diffuser handy when crossing dark streets or reading in bed. Is there one that fits the SC5 well?

3) Is there a headband that fits the SC5?

4) Smooth reflector or orange peel?

Thanks and I hope I'm posting in the right place --


----------



## reppans

Woods Walker said:


> Somehow the Quark's low seems brighter on this level. Now naturally I could be wrong on the modes as need to play with the ZL more. On a side note the Quark's tint is actually better in the XPG 2 version than either of the XML or XML 2. It just looks cooler when directly compared to the NW.





Woods Walker said:


> Oh now I see....... Quark Pro QPLC......
> 
> *Low: 6 lumens, 2.5 days
> 
> *So that's why it's brighter. Hold on a second.....





Woods Walker said:


> Notice how they both look cooler. Oddly my eyes do the same thing. A warmer tint next to a cooler one highlights the difference more than when the same quantity or just alone is being viewed. :shrug:.



Appreciate the pics, thank you very much. Yeah, my guess is that you are comparing the Quark's moonlight to the ZLs 1 lm L2A mode. The QPLC 6 lm spec is a typo, all the low voltage XPG2s should read the same 0.2/5/26/102... they're all the same head with stone flat regulation on any batt config. Even still, the 5 lm low is overstated - I have the same QPLC (from the recent $27 Holiday sale perhaps? ) and it meters ~3 lms in my light box or the same as my LV XMLs. 

The pics are also over exposed (hotspots look pure white) so it's harder to tell the difference - best way is to lock exposure on the brightest hotspot, or manually reduce exposure, until you can see full detail in at least one hotspot. But if you notice a difference, it's probably ~ 2x, tying into WITL's and my conversation.

Agree on the tint on the QPLC XPG2 - it one of the nicest CWs I've ever seen, but auto white balance, on both cameras and our own eyes, tend to exacerbate the difference when used side-by-side, or one right after another. I'll still always prefer a good NW, but I use my lights for long periods of time, during which my eyes "auto white balance" make CWs (even greenish ones) seem perfectly acceptable.


----------



## markr6

I just now noticed the contacts inside the tailcap have a slight spring to them. I figured they were solid chunks copper but they're not. Nice design!


----------



## WalkIntoTheLight

markr6 said:


> I just now noticed the contacts inside the tailcap have a slight spring to them. I figured they were solid chunks copper but they're not. Nice design!



Yeah, I think they did that to handle the greater current this light needs. Lots of short springy contacts vs. the usual single coil spring. It means there's almost no drop in voltage as a result of spring resistance.

Well, that's my guess. Perhaps a single long spring doesn't have much resistance to cause a significant voltage drop at 6 amps either.


----------



## markr6

WalkIntoTheLight said:


> Yeah, I think they did that to handle the greater current this light needs. Lots of short springy contacts vs. the usual single coil spring. It means there's almost no drop in voltage as a result of spring resistance.
> 
> Well, that's my guess. Perhaps a single long spring doesn't have much resistance to cause a significant voltage drop at 6 amps either.



I was thinking it was to shorten the light. But now that I think of it, that's a dumb thought since the spring compresses! So yeah, probably better current flow through those little nubs.


----------



## Woods Walker

reppans said:


> Appreciate the pics, thank you very much. Yeah, my guess is that you are comparing the Quark's moonlight to the ZLs 1 lm L2A mode. The QPLC 6 lm spec is a typo, all the low voltage XPG2s should read the same 0.2/5/26/102... they're all the same head with stone flat regulation on any batt config. Even still, the 5 lm low is overstated - I have the same QPLC (from the recent $27 Holiday sale perhaps? ) and it meters ~3 lms in my light box or the same as my LV XMLs.
> 
> The pics are also over exposed (hotspots look pure white) so it's harder to tell the difference - best way is to lock exposure on the brightest hotspot, or manually reduce exposure, until you can see full detail in at least one hotspot. But if you notice a difference, it's probably ~ 2x, tying into WITL's and my conversation.
> 
> Agree on the tint on the QPLC XPG2 - it one of the nicest CWs I've ever seen, but auto white balance, on both cameras and our own eyes, tend to exacerbate the difference when used side-by-side, or one right after another. I'll still always prefer a good NW, but I use my lights for long periods of time, during which my eyes "auto white balance" make CWs (even greenish ones) seem perfectly acceptable.



The output matched my comparison with the HL50 ( but hard to tell for pre stated reasons) so I think it's 3 lumens but will play around more with it tonight in programing mode and get back to you. The low mode spacing seems good. I just did my first knowingly programing attempt and wow that very very low is really low. Last time I seen a similar low was on my ill fated Viking.


----------



## Woods Walker

snowlover91 said:


> How many lumens do you typically use when hiking or walking at night? Was the SC5w as good as you were expecting? The tint sounds like a nice warm tint and very pleasing to the eyes. Looks like ZL has definitely been upping their game as tint issues have been few and far between the past year or so.



Depends on activity and headlight. I tend to use flashlights as backups or spotlights but modern headlamps are negating the spotlighting requirement. For a night run I like 10-150 lumens. That's a wide range but conditions vary so much. For hiking 3-150 lumens with an overall preference for 30-50. A light's medium mode should hold for at least 5 hours which is a reasonable amount of time to get to my destination safely. There are times when I don't mess around. If I am working with a knife or axe will error on the brighter side aka 50 lumens. If I am hiking through rattler country brighter the better. Yea the snakes are really understanding and have given me a pass during some very near almost trampling but step on one directly it's going to be ugly and I don't wear tall boots. They're also inclined not to rattle. I don't mess around when night rock scampering either. Gravity can suck.

Edit.

Forgot to answer one question. So far it seems good though the UI feels slower than my Quark or Fenix 1xAA flashlights. It did pass my initial inspection. I look for overall fit and finish. How is the anodizing? Is the LED reasonable centered. Does it look water resistant, o-rings right etc ec? Is there dust inside the reflector/window. Is the reflector centered. How is the tint? It came through with flying colors. For example there is a thread with another new light which I am no longer really interested in and the O-ring is messed up, LED off centered. There are issues with flickering and mode changing. Often gear items with a low attention to detail don't get better with use. Visibly bad often means bad period. So I am not buying that light unless the reports improve. Basically money put aside for that gear items found it's way to Zebralight. I give the same type of overall inspection to packs, guns, knives etc etc etc. Nice job on ZL for getting that right and maybe this lesson could be relearned by other manufactures. Hope the long term use supports my short term impressions. I like the mode spacing and overall feel of the SC5w but need to work more on adjusting to the UI in terms of programing and smoother mode changing.


----------



## markr6

I like around 100lm as well. I use the 150lm (11 hours) on my H600w quite a bit too. Rarely the 1020lm mode for those "oh s##t I'm lost!" moments. On boring terrain, 30lm is fine. Usually no need to light up the entire woods.


----------



## Woods Walker

markr6 said:


> I just now noticed the contacts inside the tailcap have a slight spring to them. I figured they were solid chunks copper but they're not. Nice design!



Maybe for durability as well? I did notice it too and was surprised.


----------



## Woods Walker

Ok did some more low mode 4/7 comparisons to the ZL.





All three of the 4/7 have different LEDs and appeared to have different brightnesses at the low mode with the high voltage head running off a 16650 being the brightest using a XM-L-g2. The XP-G g2 running either 1xAA or 1XCR123 a very near second with either battery. Lastly the 2XAA XM-L g1. However that said they were very very near and differences in tint and flood/spot could make my impressions wrong. I spent an hour mastering the SC5w's UI. Programming is easy. I still wish for a better way to get to the middle mode than two clicks which results in a flash from high or ramping which is slower. A minor complaint as I really like all the options. I really really like all the low mode options including the lowest M2 mode which is rather low in it's own right. The 1 lumen mode appeals to the prepper in me as it can do 90% of the jobs the 3 lumen mode can but for a longer run time. I like lowest high mode for similar reasons. 100+ lumens for the most part can do everything 180+ lumens but with a longer runtime. 

Ok I made no errors in my previous evaluations in terms of using the 3 lumen mode on the ZL. I didn't use the 1 lumen as never entered programing mode in my initial evaluation. All 4/7 flashlights appeared brighter to my eye than the ZL on a similar low mode 3 lumens. Probably only an OCD gear addict could discern any real differences between the 4/7 2AA and ZL on the sub one lumen and 3ish lumen modes though as stated the 4/7 is a bit brighter. Also the SC5w's .1 is a hoot!

Kinda off topic but I feel 4/7s underrates their higher modes. The ZL IMHO sets a new standard for 1XAA high mode but I swear the 1XAA XP-G g2 is brighter than the rating compared to other lights of similar ratings but I digress as this is a ZL thread.


----------



## Woods Walker

Got my first outing with the SC5w. It actually wasn't planned but happened anyways. I took a late afternoon 3 mile jog which became a 12 miler after 6 miles as still needed to run back. It was a mix of trail and roads. I really wasn't planning on this but was thinking about other things and just kept jogging. To make a long story story short it got very dark so jogged the last few miles holding the SC5w. Not expecting a night outing meant I didn't pack a headlamp however EDC this so it was on hand along with a water bottle, altoids PSK and personal effects such as cell phone etc. No pics during the impromptu adventure but did snap this one back at the truck.





So what did I find. The M1 level, 45 lumens worked great for jogging however if planning on this type of thing I would have packed a headlamp. Used the M2 7-8 lumens during the cool down walk. The beam seemed to share some of the same characteristics of my M61's. Floody with some punch. The tint was pleasing in the woods and street. I find a lanyard great but dislike attaching them to clips however it is what it is. Sure tail stands well inside the truck. Maybe during a night hike in the future I will take some outside beamshots.


----------



## snowlover91

Glad to see it getting some good use! Sure is a great light and I hope this pushes other companies to up their game with AA lights both in the tint department as well as output. Looks like it's working well for you. I enjoy the outdoor pics as well, one of my favorite places to be is outdoors whether it's working outside, landscaping or hiking/camping.


----------



## WalkIntoTheLight

Woods Walker said:


> I find a lanyard great but dislike attaching them to clips however it is what it is.



Yes, but the clips are so tight on Zebralights that it's really unlikely a lanyard will ever slip out of them.


----------



## recDNA

WalkIntoTheLight said:


> Yes, but the clips are so tight on Zebralights that it's really unlikely a lanyard will ever slip out of them.


Never lose tension either. I folder up some cardboard and slipped it in between clip and body bending it way back. Left it that way for 3 days. When I took out the cardboard the darn thing was just as tight!


----------



## Woods Walker

WalkIntoTheLight said:


> Yes, but the clips are so tight on Zebralights that it's really unlikely a lanyard will ever slip out of them.



Clips just aren't comfortable in my hand using single battery lights during harder activity. I am sure it's a fine clip but have the same complaint about my 4/7 Preon. I prefer the lanyard attachment of my Quark and Olight T15/10. Feels better in the hand and still allows tail standing. But that said there is no real fault towards the light. No one kit item ever has everything any single individual desires as personal preferences vary so much. The clip aside so far it's really a fantastic gear item.

Edit. Forgot to add I strung a gutted paracord stand though the hole gap in lanyard so it's impossible to slip out. Did the same on my Preon. Entropy rules in the woods.


----------



## Woods Walker

Anyone try the Duracell long life ioncore (whatever that means) precharged NiMH in their SC5w. The stats look similar to the higher capacity Eneloops. Also made in Japan. Had great luck with the white top Duraloops so got a pack of these. Listed as 2500 (edit typo 2400) mAh.


----------



## snowlover91

Woods Walker said:


> Anyone try the Duracell long life ioncore (whatever that means) precharged NiMH in their SC5w. The stats look similar to the higher capacity Eneloops. Also made in Japan. Had great luck with the white top Duraloops so got a pack of these. Listed as 2500 mAh.



Thats what I use in mine and from what I can tell they are that battery just rebranded. Gives me the advertised runtimes or slightly more usually.


----------



## Woods Walker

snowlover91 said:


> Thats what I use in mine and from what I can tell they are that battery just rebranded. Gives me the advertised runtimes or slightly more usually.



Great to know. Thank you.


----------



## snowlover91

Main thing to make sure of is that they say "Made in Japan." If you get the Duracells look for that label and if you see it then it's rebranded Eneloop Pro. If made in China or anywhere else don't get them.


----------



## Woods Walker

snowlover91 said:


> Main thing to make sure of is that they say "Made in Japan." If you get the Duracells look for that label and if you see it then it's rebranded Eneloop Pro. If made in China or anywhere else don't get them.



Yup made in Japan. Got an extra pack which says the same for a trip today.


----------



## Illumination

AVService said:


> Panasonic bought the Sanyo Battery division last year to get the Eneloop Battery.
> 
> They are the same.



Actually Panasonic bought the whole company -- owns 100% of Sanyo and has been phasing out the Sanyo brand.


----------



## Sarlix

Just brought an SC5, I thought it would have a smooth reflector but it has OP. I'm thinking of sending it back but not sure if it's worth it ?? Do you think there is a significant difference between the two? Does anyone have both or is knowledgeable about such things ? thanks


----------



## marinemaster

Don't. Orange peel is always better. Smooth reflectors tend to have ringy beams. Is not really the case of the SC5 but OP is the better option. For 1xAA light I recommend OP.


----------



## insanefred

Sarlix said:


> Just brought an SC5, I thought it would have a smooth reflector but it has OP. I'm thinking of sending it back but not sure if it's worth it ?? Do you think there is a significant difference between the two? Does anyone have both or is knowledgeable about such things ? thanks




Personally, I prefer OP reflectors unless I am buying a light specifically for throw.


----------



## snowlover91

Sarlix said:


> Just brought an SC5, I thought it would have a smooth reflector but it has OP. I'm thinking of sending it back but not sure if it's worth it ?? Do you think there is a significant difference between the two? Does anyone have both or is knowledgeable about such things ? thanks



Having the SC5 and seeing others who have both it and the OP version there isn't much difference. You'll notice a small increase in throw when shining it on a wall but most situations and outdoors it really isn't noticeable. If you got a good tint and like the OP I would stick with it personally.


----------



## Woods Walker

marinemaster said:


> Don't. Orange peel is always better. Smooth reflectors tend to have ringy beams. Is not really the case of the SC5 but OP is the better option. For 1xAA light I recommend OP.



The beam on my smooth reflector looks good to me but would probably have been just as happy with OP.


----------



## Sarlix

Thanks for the above replies^^^^. I'm pretty pleased with the light overall, the tint has some green but it's 100% better than my SC52, which makes everything look like it's under the sea. I did want to get max possible throw out of this so that's why I'm thinking of sending it back, but from the above and what I've read elsewhere the difference isn't that much. I did email Zebralight and ask them what the difference in throw would be between the two but no response as of yet.


----------



## marinemaster

Throw difference won't be much. Besides is a one inch diameter light. Nobody should expect a throw monster. Not only that but this a 1xAA light meaning 1.5 volts, not a 12 volts rechargeable Streamlight with a 3 inch head and 10 inch long. Is designed as a EDC, practical light, not a throw light or a search light. Enjoy it for what it is.


----------



## Sarlix

Sure I get that, but nothing wrong with trying to maximise throw is there? since this is my preference. I prefer a more defined hot spot, this reflector doesn't really produce one and it made me wonder how much throw I'm loosing.


----------



## snowlover91

Hope this will help some, while I don't have both versions to compare I do have my SC62w versus the SC5w. The SC62w is on the right while the SC5w on the left.


----------



## marinemaster

Throw difference would be minimal. Really OP pretty much just takes the rings out compared to smooth reflector. Given the same diameter, format, etc. which is what we have here the difference is likely negligible. 

Question is how FAR you need to see ? what do you need to see ?

Your needs may be better served by the SC62 or the SC600 but that is different battery format, longer, heavier, 18650 specific charger, etc. You are in a different territory then.
1xAA can only do so much.


----------



## Sarlix

snowlover91 said:


> Hope this will help some, while I don't have both versions to compare I do have my SC62w versus the SC5w. The SC62w is on the right while the SC5w on the left.



Thanks!, that is some help. 



marinemaster said:


> Your needs may be better served by the SC62 or the SC600 but that is different battery format, longer, heavier, 18650 specific charger, etc. You are in a different territory then.
> 1xAA can only do so much.



I'm not looking for a pocket thrower :shakehead sorry if I've given the wrong impression. I was sent the wrong SC5 version, I wasn't sure if it's worth sending back or not, if I'm going to loose 20% throw over the smooth version then I probably would, 10% or less and I probably wouldn't. That's really all I was trying to ascertain. From what you and others have said, and reading the rest of this thread it looks like the difference is minimal. thanks for the input everyone.

UPDATE: I received an email from Zebralight - they said that if they were to estimate the loss of throw, it'd be much less than 10%.. So now we know


----------



## marinemaster

Cool
Time to buy some Eneloop Pro


----------



## recDNA

Will Duracell ion core work as well as Eneloop pro?


----------



## snowlover91

recDNA said:


> Will Duracell ion core work as well as Eneloop pro?



I believe it is the same battery just rebranded. I can't tell any difference and capacity is the same. 

Sarlix, hope you enjoy your SC5w its a nice and powerful light for just 1AA.


----------



## markr6

Out of curiosity, I tried two different cheap alkalines in my SC5w. I mean CHEAP...the stuff that comes with tv remotes. They were about dead so I just wanted to see what they would do. Nothing...since they didn't fit. A good 2mm too short! I figured all AAs were the exact same length.


----------



## WalkIntoTheLight

markr6 said:


> Out of curiosity, I tried two different cheap alkalines in my SC5w. I mean CHEAP...the stuff that comes with tv remotes. They were about dead so I just wanted to see what they would do. Nothing...since they didn't fit. A good 2mm too short! I figured all AAs were the exact same length.



No, not all AA's are the same length or width. Eneloops are fatter (and I guess longer) than most alkaline AAs. Interesting about the SC5 fit. I guess using those little tailcap bumps instead of a spring, makes it more specific to using only NiMH cells and larger alkalines (it does work with Duracell alkalines). No loss, as far as I'm concerned, since it's not a light you'd want to run on alkalines anyway.

I suppose if you had to, you could stuff some tinfoil in the end to make it fit.


----------



## recDNA

Or to get a short circuit!


----------



## markr6

Yeah this thing was MADE for Eneloops  Something to watch in case you ever need to use alkalines as a backup or during emergencies. I'm betting it was just these cheapo cells I had.


----------



## Sarlix

I just tried some generic looking alkalines 'GP Ultra' They fit and the light works but the battery rattles about a lot


----------



## WalkIntoTheLight

recDNA said:


> Or to get a short circuit!



No, tinfoil shouldn't short-circuit it in any harmful way. If it touches the insides, it just has the same effect as putting a paper clip across the end of the light, or DMM leads when you're measuring current.

AFAIK, the tailcap just provides the exact same function. There's no switch in the tailcap. It just creates a circuit path between the negative terminal of the battery and the body tube.

The only downside with using tinfoil, if it shorted against the body, is that a slight loosening of the tailcap wouldn't lock-out the light.


----------



## Big_Sam

Definitely recommend Eneloop Pro, I use them in SC5w, great run times. Fit well, very slight rattle.


----------



## recDNA

WalkIntoTheLight said:


> No, tinfoil shouldn't short-circuit it in any harmful way. If it touches the insides, it just has the same effect as putting a paper clip across the end of the light, or DMM leads when you're measuring current.
> 
> AFAIK, the tailcap just provides the exact same function. There's no switch in the tailcap. It just creates a circuit path between the negative terminal of the battery and the body tube.
> 
> The only downside with using tinfoil, if it shorted against the body, is that a slight loosening of the tailcap wouldn't lock-out the light.


Or it shorts in your coat pocket in the closet and burns your house down.


----------



## turkeylord

recDNA said:


> Or it shorts in your coat pocket in the closet and burns your house down.


I don't think you're picking up what he's putting down...

Tinfoil in the tail cap could only connect the negative terminal to the flashlight body. That's exactly what the tail cap does.

Like he said, the only potential downside would be the possible loss of lockout. For that to even happen, the foil would have to touch the small bare aluminum lip on the end of the body.


----------



## WalkIntoTheLight

recDNA said:


> Or it shorts in your coat pocket in the closet and burns your house down.



How do you sleep at night, knowing that every battery-powered device in your house is a potential bomb waiting to kill you at any moment?


----------



## recDNA

turkeylord said:


> I don't think you're picking up what he's putting down...
> 
> Tinfoil in the tail cap could only connect the negative terminal to the flashlight body. That's exactly what the tail cap does.
> 
> Like he said, the only potential downside would be the possible loss of lockout. For that to even happen, the foil would have to touch the small bare aluminum lip on the end of the body.


Why couldn't it hit the side wall turning on the flashlight? Does the electronic switch prevent that?


----------



## fnsooner

recDNA said:


> Does the electronic switch prevent that?



Yes.

As long as the aluminum foil doesn't make contact with the positive end of the battery, you could pack aluminum foil all around the battery with no ill affect.


Without the aluminum foil, as soon as the tail cap is tightened and the bare part of the body tube contacts the inside ring of the tail cap, the entire flashlight body and the negative end of the battery are the same point electrically. The negative path to the electronics(driver and/or switch) is the body of the flashlight. 


The anodizing is not electrically conductive but even if there was no anodizing on inside of tube, it would make no difference.


----------



## fnj

WalkIntoTheLight said:


> How do you sleep at night, knowing that every battery-powered device in your house is a potential bomb waiting to kill you at any moment?



It would be unforgiveably ignorant and stupid of me not to have an awareness that each of my five 18650 flashlights is a possible disaster origin. In mitigation they are all products of extremely reliable manufacturers: three Zebralight and two ArmyTek. Additionally, I would not consider for an instant a multi-LiIon-cell light, or any *Fire or other no-name piece of junk. My five cells are all top of the line Panasonics, and none of them are ever allowed to be overdischarged - if that were to happen I would discard them. I recharge them in my precious ultra-well-engineered discontinued Pila IBC charger - either inside the oven (turned off of course) or on a cold burner on the top of the stove.

The only other light that I have that is even remotely a (distant) concern is an old one that takes two CR123A's, that I hardly ever use. Every other light is either a quality single cell CR123A or quality single cell Eneloop or L91 AA. I categorically won't ever put a LiIon light on my head as a headlight.

The danger of a CR123A (not RCR LiIon junk), Eneloop, L91, or for that matter an alkaline, is as close to statistically zero as makes no difference.


----------



## markr6

18650 crazy talk. It's the LEAST of my worries. I thought by now we would be past all the hype and over-exaggeration of 18650 pipe bombs. Use em, enjoy em...you'll be fine.








OK back onto the SC5, one badass (non-18650) light


----------



## Big_Sam

markr6 said:


> Out of curiosity, I tried two different cheap alkalines in my SC5w. I mean CHEAP...the stuff that comes with tv remotes. They were about dead so I just wanted to see what they would do. Nothing...since they didn't fit. A good 2mm too short! I figured all AAs were the exact same length.



My SC5 came with a GP alkaline, but it could not supply enough current to put out full lumens, swapped to an eneloop pro and all was fine. 

Really would avoid alkalines in this light.


----------



## markr6

Big_Sam said:


> Really would avoid alkalines in this light.



I'm pretty sure everyone does. It was just a curious test for me.


----------



## markr6

Not sure if it has been mentioned, but does this blink several times when the battery is almost dead? I just did a runtime test on mine and now that it's almost dead, it's running on a lower mode. But when I turn it off, I get 5 quick, dim flashes. Some type of low battery indicator?


----------



## WalkIntoTheLight

markr6 said:


> Not sure if it has been mentioned, but does this blink several times when the battery is almost dead? I just did a runtime test on mine and now that it's almost dead, it's running on a lower mode. But when I turn it off, I get 5 quick, dim flashes. Some type of low battery indicator?



I believe that's how Zebralights are supposed to work, and I _think _I've seen that behaviour on some of mine. I don't usually run them completely empty, so I'm not positive. I'll try it on my SC5w and SC52w tonight, so see how they work.


----------



## Overclocker

markr6 said:


> Not sure if it has been mentioned, but does this blink several times when the battery is almost dead? I just did a runtime test on mine and now that it's almost dead, it's running on a lower mode. But when I turn it off, I get 5 quick, dim flashes. Some type of low battery indicator?



alkaleak leak warning


----------



## markr6

Overclocker said:


> alkaleak leak warning



Haha, pass on that junk! This was an Eneloop (3rd gen white). Only seemed to do it turning off from high.


----------



## Overclocker

markr6 said:


> Haha, pass on that junk! This was an Eneloop (3rd gen white). Only seemed to do it turning off from high.



exactly. voltage depression from high. recovers. then flash stops.

only does it at 0.9v and below. or was that 1.04v? not sure. it's on ZL's website


----------



## markr6

Overclocker said:


> exactly. voltage depression from high. recovers. then flash stops.
> 
> only does it at 0.9v and below. or was that 1.04v? not sure. it's on ZL's website



I'm not seeing anything like that on their site. I wish I had my DMM with me to check that cell, so I have no idea where it was at. It was weird - sometimes 4, 5 or 6 quick blinks after turning off.


----------



## snowlover91

I believe it's some type of low battery warning as my SC5fd does the same thing when it steps down on a depleted battery.


----------



## WalkIntoTheLight

markr6 said:


> I'm not seeing anything like that on their site. I wish I had my DMM with me to check that cell, so I have no idea where it was at. It was weird - sometimes 4, 5 or 6 quick blinks after turning off.



Yeah, they don't seem to list it under the SC5 description, but do under the SC52 description:

_"Low battery alert when the light is switched Off (LED flashes if the battery voltage is below 1.06V)"_

I don't see why they'd use a different warning between the two versions, perhaps they just forgot to add it to the SC5 description.


----------



## markr6

WalkIntoTheLight said:


> Yeah, they don't seem to list it under the SC5 description, but do under the SC52 description:
> 
> _"Low battery alert when the light is switched Off (LED flashes if the battery voltage is below 1.06V)"_
> 
> I don't see why they'd use a different warning between the two versions, perhaps they just forgot to add it to the SC5 description.



Got it! Thanks. I guess it doesn't matter though. If someone didn't realize their battery was low after the thing steps down 3 or 4 modes, there's no help in the world for them 

I love this light!!!


----------



## geokite

fnsooner said:


> Yes.
> 
> As long as the aluminum foil doesn't make contact with the positive end of the battery, you could pack aluminum foil all around the battery with no ill affect.
> 
> 
> Without the aluminum foil, as soon as the tail cap is tightened and the bare part of the body tube contacts the inside ring of the tail cap, the entire flashlight body and the negative end of the battery are the same point electrically. The negative path to the electronics(driver and/or switch) is the body of the flashlight.
> 
> 
> The anodizing is not electrically conductive but even if there was no anodizing on inside of tube, it would make no difference.



So if (when) the anodizing wears off the threads of any of my ZLs the tail cap lock out will not work. Correct?

Steve


----------



## fnsooner

geokite said:


> So if (when) the anodizing wears off the threads of any of my ZLs the tail cap lock out will not work. Correct?
> 
> Steve



On Zebralight, no. I just took an ohm meter and I can read continuity from the tailcap spring to the contact ring of the tailcap, but no continuity from the spring to the tailcap itself. The contact ring seems to be insulated from the tailcap body itself. As far as I can tell the tailcap body itself is never part of the negative path to the head.

The answer to your question is that the lockout function will still work even if the anodizing on the threads wears off.


----------



## WalkIntoTheLight

WalkIntoTheLight said:


> I believe that's how Zebralights are supposed to work, and I _think _I've seen that behaviour on some of mine. I don't usually run them completely empty, so I'm not positive. I'll try it on my SC5w and SC52w tonight, so see how they work.



So, I tried it, but I didn't get the flashing. However, when I took the batteries out, they measured 1.15v and 1.17v, so they were still above the 1.06v threshold. I think I didn't get them below 1.06v, because I was testing the draining from medium, and then let them run awhile after they dropped down to low. I thought that would drain the batteries more, but instead I think it just allowed the voltage to rebound.

I think you have to run it on at least H2, preferrably H1, and then turn it off right after step-down. That way, the battery should still have a significant voltage sag, probably putting it under the 1.06v threshold needed.


----------



## Woods Walker

Been using it now for a little over a month. So far so good. It's actually a little bit heavier than I prefer for EDC 1xAA but still acceptable. I scuffed up the window some. Suspect that happened during a group camping trip. Packed the SC5w plus Fenix HL50. Someone brought rum, beer and grain alcohol. Not really a drinker but went overboard. Did my first and hopefully last crazy drunk friction fire to light the campfire. Somehow I tossed the light into my jacket pocket which was full of tent stakes. Oh well the scuffing on the glass doesn't harm the beam or output one bit near as I could tell. Have not dropped it on rocks yet but that will probably happen sooner or later. Heck I just replaced the glass on my iPhone. Gravity hates me. The UI is more second nature now and despite initial concerns it grew on me. I still haven't decided what modes to set it at but again it's so easy to program. The low mode spacing is really impressive as it gives me a 3rd low option unlike my Quarks (which still rocks). I also like the medium high mode. It will eat batteries when used on high often but that's rather obvious.


----------



## snowlover91

The UI of these lights is addicting once you get used to it providing multiple options and easy programmability as well. I remember when first researching a good 18650 light on here everyone kept recommending the SC62w and I couldn't figure out why. Now that I have one I know  The small size combined with great brightness, good runtime and the programming options and UI make this an excellent light. I use my SC5fd almost all the time now and find the tint to be the best I own, it's now my go to light after having used it several weeks.


----------



## markr6

I keep trying different lights. I don't know why; boredom/addiction I guess

But this UI always makes me come back to my Zebralights. It's perfect for me. Still loving my SC5w OP. The tint is amazing - the only one I can remember being better than my Nichia 219s. I would say it's closer to 5000K, making my 4500K Nichias look a bit yellow. My other NW Zebras are good, but not like this.


----------



## Woods Walker

So more time has past using the SC5w. I still wish it came with a holster like so many other little lights. No holster means I just can't toss it into my pack or jacket pocket during outings as the window is liable to get scratched up more. EDC doesn't seem to have the same problem as there isn't so much stuff in my pockets compared to what sometimes gets tossed in when bushcrafting etc. I guess a 1XCR123 flashlight sheath might work as it seems too fat for many 1xAA generic sheaths. Then again if it were included I would not be wondering about this. The UI got more intuitive but just feels slow. There seems to be a lag in the electronic switch when turning the light off. I have noticed lags with other electronic flashlight/headlamp switches as well still the ZL just seems slower than some. I can easily put my finger to the back of the light and let it rest there for a micro second after turning off before it actually goes off. Then again that might just be the world's most ridiculous first world problem. 

Somehow the reflector looks a bit cloudy like a patchwork. More cloudy than clear/shiny areas. Hard to explain. I don't think it was always like that and there is a bit too much dust or something compared to some other lights I own. Didn't notice that till I seen the cloudy reflector. Then again I noticed no reduction in performance. 

I really like the tail cap over a standard spring setup. Not sure if there is a price to be had for that in terms of drop durability (though the little posts have some give) but who knows. In any case I like it. As stated the window got some scratches (no holster/sheath) but the anodizing is ok. I haven't dropped it enough to know but so far so good. I like the button and so far never got accidentally turned on. Being so recessed into the head helps. I remember how easily the H501 would get accidentally activated. The lock out is easy and works but can't remember everything.

It's still my EDC. I did add a small lanyard to the clip.


----------



## mico

Woods Walker said:


> There seems to be a lag in the electronic switch when turning the light off.


It's waiting to see if you are going to do a double click. It doesn't have much choice, given how the UI works.


----------



## Crazyeddiethefirst

Hi WW,
I find the Olight or Foursevens holster works well.
Re: cloudiness:
I had fogging in my first Zebra, bad enough to influence the beam a little-customer service explained that where the light is assembled(Shanghi?), the factory is on the river and on days with high humidity, moisture is trapped inside. I was calling CS because of a torn switch cover(in my earlier days before I gained the courage to rip apart any lights). The said to send it to Texas & they would fix both problems-they did and I now have a small Zoo of Zebras...I recommend calling CS and asking about it.


----------



## Woods Walker

mico said:


> It's waiting to see if you are going to do a double click. It doesn't have much choice, given how the UI works.



Not understanding your post as the double click is not for turning off the light if my memory is correct. Welcome to CPF!


----------



## Woods Walker

Crazyeddiethefirst said:


> Hi WW,
> I find the Olight or Foursevens holster works well.
> Re: cloudiness:
> I had fogging in my first Zebra, bad enough to influence the beam a little-customer service explained that where the light is assembled(Shanghi?), the factory is on the river and on days with high humidity, moisture is trapped inside. I was calling CS because of a torn switch cover(in my earlier days before I gained the courage to rip apart any lights). The said to send it to Texas & they would fix both problems-they did and I now have a small Zoo of Zebras...I recommend calling CS and asking about it.



Thanks for the info. If it gets worse to the point of harming the output I will give them a call. The beam and output look the same or rather to my perception. It was just annoying such an expensive little light would develop a clouded reflector as by their very nature of a reflector shouldn't get cloudy. It needs to reflect. Gosh sound simple enough? LOL. I own really cheap budget lights that are ok after years.


----------



## mico

Woods Walker said:


> Not understanding your post as the double click is not for turning off the light if my memory is correct. Welcome to CPF!


Thanks!

If the light turns off as soon as you clicked once, then it would do that also whenever you double clicked (and it would need a new way of deciding whether a second click was part of a double click or an attempt to turn the torch back on).

Sorry if that's not any clearer.


----------



## wolfgaze

What have owners' experiences been like with the factory pocket clip? I was reading some SC5 threads last night and there was some negative feedback / criticism about the pocket clip... This model light interests me but if there are going to be issues with using the pocket clip that may be a dealbreaker for me... 

Thanks...


----------



## vadimax

This light attracted my attention as well... till I notice it does not accept 14500 batteries (I have a useless one after S15R => S10R II replacement).


----------



## tops2

wolfgaze said:


> What have owners' experiences been like with the factory pocket clip? I was reading some SC5 threads last night and there was some negative feedback / criticism about the pocket clip... This model light interests me but if there are going to be issues with using the pocket clip that may be a dealbreaker for me...
> 
> Thanks...



The only thing I didn't like is that it was too tight..and impossible to put on with one hand. I swapped it with a 3rd party clip and it was much easier to put on but felt like I was going to lose the light. One day playing in the park with my son, the 3rd party clip caught on the slide and broke off so I put the original clip back on but didn't screw on the light as tight as when it came from the factory and it feels much less tight to put on.


----------



## snowlover91

wolfgaze said:


> What have owners' experiences been like with the factory pocket clip? I was reading some SC5 threads last night and there was some negative feedback / criticism about the pocket clip... This model light interests me but if there are going to be issues with using the pocket clip that may be a dealbreaker for me...
> 
> Thanks...



The clip works quite well it's just a little tight sometimes and can cause the "shredded pocket" scenario with time. However it's easy to fix. I bent the clip a little on one of my lights and it works perfect now. On another one I experimented with a different 3rd party clip which also worked quite well. Those are the two best solutions I've found with great results, it's a capable little AA light and definitely puts out 500+ lumens.


----------



## mico

To me the SC5w OP is the cute AA EDC version of my SC600 MkIII, with relatively similarly impressive performance and run-times (and with a better tint, and a less clearly defined hot spot, which I like).

So far the clip is only a problem in that it generally needs two hands to use. I'll feel worse about it once it wears through my Jeans, but so far so good.


----------



## Vothelo

Woods Walker said:


> So more time has past using the SC5w. I still wish it came with a holster like so many other little lights. No holster means I just can't toss it into my pack or jacket pocket during outings as the window is liable to get scratched up more. EDC doesn't seem to have the same problem as there isn't so much stuff in my pockets compared to what sometimes gets tossed in when bushcrafting etc. I guess a 1XCR123 flashlight sheath might work as it seems too fat for many 1xAA generic sheaths. Then again if it were included I would not be wondering about this. The UI got more intuitive but just feels slow. There seems to be a lag in the electronic switch when turning the light off. I have noticed lags with other electronic flashlight/headlamp switches as well still the ZL just seems slower than some. I can easily put my finger to the back of the light and let it rest there for a micro second after turning off before it actually goes off. Then again that might just be the world's most ridiculous first world problem.
> 
> Somehow the reflector looks a bit cloudy like a patchwork. More cloudy than clear/shiny areas. Hard to explain. I don't think it was always like that and there is a bit too much dust or something compared to some other lights I own. Didn't notice that till I seen the cloudy reflector. Then again I noticed no reduction in performance.
> 
> I really like the tail cap over a standard spring setup. Not sure if there is a price to be had for that in terms of drop durability (though the little posts have some give) but who knows. In any case I like it. As stated the window got some scratches (no holster/sheath) but the anodizing is ok. I haven't dropped it enough to know but so far so good. I like the button and so far never got accidentally turned on. Being so recessed into the head helps. I remember how easily the H501 would get accidentally activated. The lock out is easy and works but can't remember everything.
> 
> It's still my EDC. I did add a small lanyard to the clip.



The Eagletac D25c holster is a perfect fit for the SC5. When I sent my D25c to Vihn to get modded, I tried putting my SC5 into the empty holster on the pure chance that it would work...and it did! My SC52 fits perfectly as well...the SC5 was a little snug but after a little bit of use its now perfect. I use it all the time and carry the Eagletac clipped to my pocket. You can pick up the holster for around $8 at the Eagletac us store. I've actually bought a few extra to have in case they realize what a great deal it is! It's simply the best stock holster on the market for the price. Hope that helps.


----------



## wolfgaze

snowlover91 said:


> The clip works quite well it's just a little tight sometimes and can cause the "shredded pocket" scenario with time. However it's easy to fix. I bent the clip a little on one of my lights and it works perfect now. On another one I experimented with a different 3rd party clip which also worked quite well. Those are the two best solutions I've found with great results, it's a capable little AA light and definitely puts out 500+ lumens.



Snowlover... Can you tell me more about how you went about bending the pocket clip on yours? Did you do it by hand, or will tools perhaps? Did you bend it towards the very top near the screw holes, or elsewhere?


----------



## wolfgaze

Have individuals who have recently ordered this light had issues with a purple artifact in the hot spot as reported by certain owners? 

Was wondering if this was something that Zebralight could have addressed or if perhaps it was a batch issue....


----------



## snowlover91

wolfgaze said:


> Snowlover... Can you tell me more about how you went about bending the pocket clip on yours? Did you do it by hand, or will tools perhaps? Did you bend it towards the very top near the screw holes, or elsewhere?



Sure! I left the clip on the light exactly as it was and at the bottom of the clip I pulled on it by hand. I pulled it back a little at a time until it got to the point where it was loose enough not to shred my jeans but still plenty firm. That method worked quite well and doesn't damage the clip at all! 

Regarding the purple spot in the beam, that issue was from an initial preorder batch of the smooth reflector version which is no longer made. The OP versions are great and as long as you get a good tint, which I've had good luck with, then you will have a nice beam profile and a great little AA light. I love mine and have 3 lol. The SC5fd, SC5w and then the SC5w with smooth reflector that I have to a friend.


----------



## wolfgaze

snowlover91 said:


> Sure! I left the clip on the light exactly as it was and at the bottom of the clip I pulled on it by hand. I pulled it back a little at a time until it got to the point where it was loose enough not to shred my jeans but still plenty firm. That method worked quite well and doesn't damage the clip at all!



Thanks a lot for the info and response... Appreciated....



snowlover91 said:


> Regarding the purple spot in the beam, that issue was from an initial preorder batch of the smooth reflector version which is no longer made. The OP versions are great and as long as you get a good tint, which I've had good luck with, then you will have a nice beam profile and a great little AA light. I love mine and have 3 lol. The SC5fd, SC5w and then the SC5w with smooth reflector that I have to a friend.



I want to purchase the *SC5w Neutral White OP*... How does the Orange Peel reflector affect the beam profile? Also, when you say "*as long as you get a good tint*", do you mean to imply there's been some variation in the beam tint among the same models? Anymore info on that?


----------



## snowlover91

wolfgaze said:


> Thanks a lot for the info and response... Appreciated....
> 
> I want to purchase the *SC5w Neutral White OP*... How does the Orange Peel reflector affect the beam profile? Also, when you say "*as long as you get a good tint*", do you mean to imply there's been some variation in the beam tint among the same models? Anymore info on that?



The orange peel reflector gives the beam a nice smooth transition and doesn't really affect throw when compared with the original smooth reflector version. The difference was practically imperceptible to the eye. Regarding tint, sometimes with neutral tints there can be variability. I've had good results with ZL but some have ended up with a yellow or green tint and returned it to get a better sample. They seem to be much better with tint consistency recently so I don't think it would be a problem!


----------



## wolfgaze

snowlover91 said:


> The orange peel reflector gives the beam a nice smooth transition and doesn't really affect throw when compared with the original smooth reflector version. The difference was practically imperceptible to the eye. Regarding tint, sometimes with neutral tints there can be variability. I've had good results with ZL but some have ended up with a yellow or green tint and returned it to get a better sample. They seem to be much better with tint consistency recently so I don't think it would be a problem!



Thanks!


----------



## cmd

mico said:


> To me the SC5w OP is the cute AA EDC version of my SC600 MkIII, with relatively similarly impressive performance and run-times (and with a better tint, and a less clearly defined hot spot, which I like).
> 
> So far the clip is only a problem in that it generally needs two hands to use. I'll feel worse about it once it wears through my Jeans, but so far so good.



The clip was a bit tight on mine too so I just put a chop-stick between it and the body to bend it out a tad then pressed the tip down a little to touch the body of the light - worked like a charm, smooth and secure now. It is steel and can be bent a little without worry to adjust to personal preferences pretty easily.

However it has been replaced by my SC63w for EDC (lighter, slimmer, brighter, longer runtimes, just a bit longer). They have the same clip so I did the same thing. The thing is though, that I like deep pocket clips for small lights so recently purchased some aftermarket titanium deep carry clips for them. When they arrive I'll let folks know how they work.


----------



## cmd

vadimax said:


> This light attracted my attention as well... till I notice it does not accept 14500 batteries (I have a useless one after S15R => S10R II replacement).



The truly ground-breaking thing about the SC5 is that it has the performance of a light using a 14500 with just an Enloop.


----------



## gunga

Deep carry clips. Like this?





Get at usa knifemakers. $8 or so


----------



## wolfgaze

cmd said:


> The clip was a bit tight on mine too so I just put a chop-stick between it and the body to bend it out a tad then pressed the tip down a little to touch the body of the light - worked like a charm, smooth and secure now. It is steel and can be bent a little without worry to adjust to personal preferences pretty easily.



Great idea... Thanks!

I think I will place an order for this light once it's back in stock...


----------



## Woods Walker

For a second time after not using my SC5W for a few weeks found the battery unexpectedly stone dead? Maybe I need to trouble shoot this. Will toss in a Lithium Primary then put the light away for a while.


----------



## newbie66

Woods Walker said:


> For a second time after not using my SC5W for a few weeks found the battery unexpectedly stone dead? Maybe I need to trouble shoot this. Will toss in a Lithium Primary then put the light away for a while.



That is odd indeed. I think I will test mine as well (SC5 cool white).


----------



## chillinn

Woods Walker said:


> For a second time after not using my SC5W for a few weeks found the battery unexpectedly stone dead? Maybe I need to trouble shoot this. Will toss in a Lithium Primary then put the light away for a while.



What brand/kind of cell? How old/used is the cell? ZebraLight's electronic switch has a parasitic drain; twisting the tail cap slightly will disengage the battery. The parasitic drain is tiny, should be less than the self discharge of any cell, but I wonder if even a small constant drain on an LSD rechargeable could prevent the cell from charge recovery seen if the cell is allowed to rest between uses.


----------



## wolfgaze

I'm very close to placing an order for the SC5Fc (Floody, High CRI, 4000K CCT)


----------



## Woods Walker

chillinn said:


> What brand/kind of cell? How old/used is the cell? ZebraLight's electronic switch has a parasitic drain; twisting the tail cap slightly will disengage the battery. The parasitic drain is tiny, should be less than the self discharge of any cell, but I wonder if even a small constant drain on an LSD rechargeable could prevent the cell from charge recovery seen if the cell is allowed to rest between uses.



A newer Duraloop pro made in Japan. I haven't rule out anything yet even accidental activation. I will try a normal Eneloop if the test lithium primary gives me problems. If it fails will return the light to ZL as know the normal drain is negligible.


----------



## snowlover91

Woods Walker said:


> For a second time after not using my SC5W for a few weeks found the battery unexpectedly stone dead? Maybe I need to trouble shoot this. Will toss in a Lithium Primary then put the light away for a while.



Strange behavior indeed. Perhaps it was left on a moonlight mode or accidentally activated which drained the battery within that time? I've kept batteries in mine for months with no issues, if it wasn't accidentally activated or left on that leaves either a defective light or battery as the other options.


----------



## wolfgaze

So I placed an order for the SC5Fc (floody, 4000k, HCRI) last night... Looking forward to getting my hands on it....


----------



## PB Wilson

I really love the warm halo of light a frosted Zebralight offers. Enjoy that new light!


----------



## snowlover91

wolfgaze said:


> So I placed an order for the SC5Fc (floody, 4000k, HCRI) last night... Looking forward to getting my hands on it....



Be sure to post some beam shots for us and let us know what you think!


----------



## wolfgaze

snowlover91 said:


> Be sure to post some beam shots for us and let us know what you think!



I will post my written feedback for sure - however I don't really have a means to post accurate beamshots as I don't own a camera other than a several year old Blackberry smartphone....


----------



## recDNA

On a regular eneloop H1 will be 300 lumens or not work at all?


----------



## Woods Walker

snowlover91 said:


> Strange behavior indeed. Perhaps it was left on a moonlight mode or accidentally activated which drained the battery within that time? I've kept batteries in mine for months with no issues, if it wasn't accidentally activated or left on that leaves either a defective light or battery as the other options.



So far so good. 4 flashes which I think means full battery though not sure how accurate that is.


----------



## newbie66

Woods Walker said:


> So far so good. 4 flashes which I think means full battery though not sure how accurate that is.



Mine although full does once in a while flash only once. Retightening the tailcap sometimes fixes this.


----------



## markr6

newbie66 said:


> Mine although full does once in a while flash only once. Retightening the tailcap sometimes fixes this.



Yeah. I find the battery check to be very inaccurate with NiMH. But I guess it's better than nothing.


----------



## Woods Walker

markr6 said:


> Yeah. I find the battery check to be very inaccurate with NiMH. But I guess it's better than nothing.



Maybe that's part of the problem. Always put it away with 4 flashes assuming the NiMH was full. But then again never remembering using the battery up. Still ok as of now.


----------



## roger-roger

Regretted to see my SC5 OP go. Bought it principally for its impressive numbers, but eventually decided to switch over to an SC52w L2. The more compact shape of the latter turned out to be more useful for my needs.


----------



## ktsl

I love everything about this light except maybe two minor things. 
1. I'd prefer single click bring me to moonlight. Reason: this way, if I needed high output and didn't click long enough so it gets to moonlight instead, I'll need to click a few more times to get there, this is a delay, which is acceptable to me. But right now, if I needed moonlight (which means I need to preserve night vision, e.g. in the middle of the night in the tent, needed water or something) and didn't press long enough, the high output will flash my eyes blind and destroy my night vision.
2. I'd love a 0.2 Hz or even 0.5 Hz beacon mode found in 18650 and cr123 ZL's. This mode is so useful in marking the camp location and signaling your whereabout.


----------



## tops2

wolfgaze said:


> So I placed an order for the SC5Fc (floody, 4000k, HCRI) last night... Looking forward to getting my hands on it....



Enjoy!

I'll be curious how the tint of the 4000k of the Fc compares to you're standard "w" version.

I received my H600Fd version and love the tint. When used by itself, it has that creamy neutral tint that I like. But depending on ambient light or when comparing to my other neutral lights, sometimes it seems to have a slight green tint.

The hotspot of my SC5w appears more "white" so when comparing to the flood of my H600Fd. But the spill of my SC5w is more yellow compared to my H600Fd. My H600Fd has much more smooth and even "neutral" tint. In some ways, the hotspot makes it a bit difficult to compare the tints to my eyes. My SC5w seems to give objects a bit more of a vibrant yellow looks, while the H600Fd makes things look less warm.

At the H1/H2.x levels, my H600Fd looks more white/neutral than my SC5w. At levels M1/M2.x levels, sometimes my H600Fd looks yellow/green compared to my SC5w because the hotspot throws my eyes off. I didn't try comparing tints at the L levels though. But its a bit hard for me to pick which one I prefer as it also depends on the level I'm comparing to.

One thing I noticed is the lowest levels on my H600Fd (L3.C 0.01 Lm) for some reason looks brighter than my SC5w (L3.C 0.1 Lm) unless I accidentally set the wrong sublevel.

But especially around the home, I love the floody nature of the "F" version much more as it lights up a larger area and the evenness of the beam. The only other thing I notice though is it seems like need to set a higher lumen level on my H600Fd to get the same brightness as my SC5w, but probably cause the beam is so diffused vs the bright hotspot.

But enough about my lights..yeah..I'm just curious of how you compare your SC5Fc's tint vs your SC5w. 




ktsl said:


> 1. I'd prefer single click bring me to moonlight. Reason: this way, if I needed high output and didn't click long enough so it gets to moonlight instead, I'll need to click a few more times to get there, this is a delay, which is acceptable to me. But right now, if I needed moonlight (which means I need to preserve night vision, e.g. in the middle of the night in the tent, needed water or something) and didn't press long enough, the high output will flash my eyes blind and destroy my night vision.



Lol.. I usually cup my hand over most of the head to see if I get moonlight level in the middle of the night. I press for that second and if I don't see anything in my hand, I assume I got moonlight (and not cause the battery is dead). But this depends on how sleepy I am when I wake up. :nana:


----------



## wolfgaze

ktsl said:


> I love everything about this light except maybe two minor things.



I don't care much for the finish on the pocket clip... Would love to have a clip with either a stonewashed finish or dark/black anodizing... On some of Fenix's flashlights their clips had like a dark grey/gunmetal coloration - and I think that would look really good against the finish of the ZL's...


----------



## markr6

wolfgaze said:


> I don't care much for the finish on the pocket clip... Would love to have a clip with either a stonewashed finish or dark/black anodizing... On some of Fenix's flashlights their clips had like a dark grey/gunmetal coloration - and I think that would look really good against the finish of the ZL's...



The SC600xx models are black and look pretty nice. I'm not sure why Zebralight makes some silver and some black.


----------



## recDNA

roger-roger said:


> Regretted to see my SC5 OP go. Bought it principally for its impressive numbers, but eventually decided to switch over to an SC52w L2. The more compact shape of the latter turned out to be more useful for my needs.


I hope to pick up an sc52 here some time too. I don't intend to carry the sc5 so it isn't an issue for me. With PID there really isn't a need for such a heavy head on the sc5 but ZL must have had a reason. I wish they made a 2 x AA as well!


----------



## wolfgaze

markr6 said:


> The SC600xx models are black and look pretty nice. I'm not sure why Zebralight makes some silver and some black.



It was so hard for me to tell in the photos if they were black/dark or not... One minute they looked that way, another I thought they might have been that silver finish... 

I recently shot an email to ZL asking them if they ever considered selling the SC pocket clip in an anodized/black finish as an optional accessory - no response back yet, lol...


----------



## roger-roger

recDNA said:


> I hope to pick up an sc52 here some time too. I don't intend to carry the sc5 so it isn't an issue for me. With PID there really isn't a need for such a heavy head on the sc5 but ZL must have had a reason. I wish they made a 2 x AA as well!




With an SC600w MKIII HI due to arrive in a few days, and in trying to keep my working collection economized in terms of function and size, I ended up choosing between the SC5 and SC62w.


----------



## recDNA

I wouldn't part with my sc62w either.


----------



## tops2

recDNA said:


> I hope to pick up an sc52 here some time too. I don't intend to carry the sc5 so it isn't an issue for me. With PID there really isn't a need for such a heavy head on the sc5 but ZL must have had a reason. I wish they made a 2 x AA as well!



Is there PID on the SC5? I thought it just had the 3 minute timer then steps down?


----------



## recDNA

tops2 said:


> Is there PID on the SC5? I thought it just had the 3 minute timer then steps down?


Good question


----------



## tops2

recDNA said:


> Good question



I think only the 18650 and CR123 lights have PID. SC5w has 3 min timer. SC52w has 1 min timer.


----------



## recDNA

tops2 said:


> I think only the 18650 and CR123 lights have PID. SC5w has 3 min timer. SC52w has 1 min timer.


Too bad. I prefer PID


----------



## tops2

Yeah, not sure if its cause the AA voltage isn't high enough to power a PID circuit or another reason? But if Zebralight can make a 2AA or 3AA light, maybe that can support PID...


----------



## markr6

I don't think they would get hot enough to need PID. Sort of like putting a speed limiter on a scooter; if it maxes out at 35mph on it's own, no need to add a governor to limit it to 50mph.


----------



## Woods Walker

For fun going to do a video review of the SC5w. Heading out now for the field use part. Will do the usual test which includes stream dunk, trail running and rock climbing. A bit concerned about the local bears which have been getting sporty for lack of better words. Taking down feeders, trash cans and even bird nesting boxes. Will pack the pepper stray and small .22 mag. Wish I had a larger gun at this location. LOL!


----------



## Woods Walker

And he survived. Did spook some Does and a family of foxes. The SC5w also survived......... the stream dunk test. :thumbsup: Got pics and video of that among other things. Also anyone ever notice the firefly flashing low battery warning. I always put in another battery once it stepped down but ran it for most of the hike on the 304 lumen lower hi. I rarely do this as it eats up the battery but figured why not. More light the better. So when it finally really really stepped down noticed that low battery flashing once it was turned off. First time seeing that despite owning the light for some time.


----------



## snowlover91

I've noticed the same light flashing when the battery gets extremely low, it's a nice feature and something I haven't noticed with any of my other Zebralights. Glad to hear it survived the test, did you end up getting a video of everything?


----------



## Woods Walker

snowlover91 said:


> I've noticed the same light flashing when the battery gets extremely low, it's a nice feature and something I haven't noticed with any of my other Zebralights. Glad to hear it survived the test, did you end up getting a video of everything?



Yup. Got it all on video. Working on that now. I didn't see the low battery warning on the ZL features list so never actually looked for it but dang it's there. I will put that in the video explanation of the gear item as well but won't make it into the field use part as discovered it by mistake on the truck ride mode. I was also surprised it didn't get warmer. it was toasty but not nearly what I was expecting. Never ran it on the upper modes that long. Did once during an unexpected night run some time ago but that wasn't as long compared this. It's a single AA after all and never wished to run down the power all that fast in the woods and during normal life only use it for intermittent applications aka walk to the car, using the keys etc etc. All of which use the lower modes for a short period of time.


----------



## recDNA

markr6 said:


> I don't think they would get hot enough to need PID. Sort of like putting a speed limiter on a scooter; if it maxes out at 35mph on it's own, no need to add a governor to limit it to 50mph.


Yes. I think you're right. I just got my SC5 today and it doesn't get very hot. I noticed it does get a little hotter on lithium primary than Eneloop Pro. Amazing how much brighter it is than my other AA lights.


----------



## Woods Walker

recDNA said:


> Yes. I think you're right. I just got my SC5 today and it doesn't get very hot. I noticed it does get a little hotter on lithium primary than Eneloop Pro. Amazing how much brighter it is than my other AA lights.



Yup, it doesn't get very very hot. Maybe good heatsinking into the larger mass? It gets warm for sure but nothing crazy. It is stupid bright though to be honest not overly more so compared to the turbo modes on my Armytek A1 Prime and Tiara Pro. Also compared to the turbo on my Fenix HL50. All based on human observation which isn't an exact measure by a long short. Don't get me wrong, it's amazingly bright and the brightest 1XAA using 1.2 to 1.7 volts in my kit but seems so much advancement has gone into the newest crop of 1XAA lights I wouldn't have believed it possible. All are wonders, at least to me anyways.


----------



## wolfgaze

recDNA said:


> Yes. I think you're right. I just got my SC5 today



Looking forward to when the darkness falls and you can test the light outside?

My SC5Fc should arrive tomorrow...

I love to hold this light (my SC5w) with my arm in the upright position, with a closed fist around the light (switch facing down) the same way you would hold a tail clicky light... I operate the side-switch when I need to by just maneuvering my thumb from the rear of the light towards the front...


----------



## recDNA

My laboratory has no windows. I just shut off the lights and tried it out in the pitch dark. This is not a light that I would probably use much Outdoors. I usually carry my sc62w Outdoors.


----------



## snowlover91

The reason it doesn't get all that hot is likely due to the amount of heat sinking in the head. It's pretty beefy, more so than the 62/63 series and more like a mini MK3 as far as heat sinking goes. I use mine as an EDC in a warehouse and its held up for 1+ years and still going strong.


----------



## wolfgaze

So I tested the SC5Fc out briefly... It's a nice little light and was actually quite pleasant to walk with outside... However given the other lights in my rotation, I didn't feel like the SC5Fc would see enough usage to justify keeping it (especially when considering the price point). So for now I will stick with my SC5w and return the SC5Fc for a refund. The other factor weighing into my decision is that I contacted Vinh and I'm going to have him modify my Fenix LD12 by installing a Nichia 219b emitter and also apply some diffuser film to the lens to produce a floody beam. I had really liked the feel of the Fenix LD12, but I disliked the factory beam profile (small, very focused hotspot) and I've since moved away from cool-white LED's... So now this modification will allow me to resurrect this light and end up with a nice little high CRI flooder out of it...

FWIW, if hypothetically I had to own one of the SC5 HCRI floody variants, I probably would opt for the 5000k (SC5Fd) instead...


----------



## jon_slider

wolfgaze said:


> modify my Fenix LD12 by installing a Nichia 219b emitter



note that the nichia will lower the brightness to about 90 lumens… you could buy an L11c with Nichia for less than the cost of the modification, and its high is 140 lumens

also some LD12 have PWM, the L11c does not

SC5 is brighter, but its CRI is lower than Nichia


----------



## wolfgaze

jon_slider said:


> note that the nichia will lower the brightness to about 90 lumens… you could buy an L11c with Nichia for less than the cost of the modification, and its high is 140 lumens
> 
> also some LD12 have PWM, the L11c does not
> 
> SC5 is brighter, but its CRI is lower than Nichia



Thanks for the feedback... I already own the L11C (great beam profile & tint)... I also own the SC5w too and enjoy that light... 

I am aware that the new emitter (N219b) in the LD12 will lower the brightness & efficiency... I'm okay with that... I have no use for this light otherwise and wouldn't be able to sell it for much anyway (several years old)... I do like the form factor and build quality - but don't like the factory tint & beam profile... So I'm willing to spend the money to have this light modified so that I can make use of it again....


----------



## tops2

wolfgaze said:


> However given the other lights in my rotation, I didn't feel like the SC5Fc would see enough usage to justify keeping it (especially when considering the price point). So for now I will stick with my SC5w and return the SC5Fc for a refund.



Just curious why you won't use the SC5Fc that much. Is it that you can't see as far as you'd like? Or was it too warm? Or some other reason? If you had the SC5Fd, do you think you'd keep the light?

I'm finding my H600Fd is a bit lacking when walking outside in terms of throw...but I expected that. It's my go to light when inside..but I'm torn about it when using it outside.


----------



## Woods Walker

Working in a field use review of this light. Got some cool photos of the light underwater in a stream. Anyone know why there is a lag in the electronic switch during turn off?


----------



## markr6

Woods Walker said:


> Working in a field use review of this light. Got some cool photos of the light underwater in a stream. Anyone know why there is a lag in the electronic switch during turn off?



I think it's because of the UI. It's basically waiting to see if you do another quick click, as a double click, to select a sub mode. Same thing when triple clicking from off; it won't go into strobe immediately because it's waiting to see if you intend to do 4 clicks for the voltage check.


----------



## Woods Walker

markr6 said:


> I think it's because of the UI. It's basically waiting to see if you do another quick click, as a double click, to select a sub mode. Same thing when triple clicking from off; it won't go into strobe immediately because it's waiting to see if you intend to do 4 clicks for the voltage check.



Maybe. Going to mention it in the review. Not a big problem.


----------



## AussieRanga

Woods Walker said:


> Maybe. Going to mention it in the review. Not a big problem.



Definitely. It happens on all of my 10+ Zebras and has been reported by several members and also confirmed by ZL themselves..


----------



## Swedpat

markr6 said:


> I think it's because of the UI. It's basically waiting to see if you do another quick click, as a double click, to select a sub mode. Same thing when triple clicking from off; it won't go into strobe immediately because it's waiting to see if you intend to do 4 clicks for the voltage check.



That's a very logical explanation!


----------



## markr6

Here's another example. 3 clicks would always take you to strobe, but by triple clicking and PAUSING on the third click, it stays in low instead of strobe. Of course this isn't practical; who would want to go thru high mode to get to low? But shows you how the UI can be "tricked". By pausing, you sort of tell the UI to cancel the strobe and that no 4th click will be coming for a voltage check.


----------



## liteboy

Trying to decide between the sc5w and sc52. From Vihn's video review I'm gathering that the 52 can produce equal output with a lion AA? But that the sc5 cannot use Lion for even more output? Can both use eneloops?


----------



## Lex Icon

liteboy said:


> Trying to decide between the sc5w and sc52. From Vihn's video review I'm gathering that the 52 can produce equal output with a lion AA? But that the sc5 cannot use Lion for even more output? Can both use eneloops?


In fact, the SC52 has greater output from a li-ion than AA initially, then steps down, whereas the SC5 driver gets more lumen output from AAs than the SC52 is able.
Both can use eneloops.


----------



## Woods Walker

I don't think the SC5 inability to use lithium ion is a bad thing given the performance on Eneloops. That said some prefer the SC52 because of the shape etc.


----------



## ZMZ67

Woods Walker said:


> I don't think the SC5 inability to use lithium ion is a bad thing given the performance on Eneloops. That said some prefer the SC52 because of the shape etc.



The appeal of the SC5 is the fact that you don't need to use li-ion as far as I am concerned.It doesn't seem like most 1XAA lights using 14500 offer much better performance anyway.


----------



## jon_slider

Lex Icon said:


> In fact, the SC52 has greater output from a li-ion than AA initially, then steps down, whereas the SC5 driver gets more lumen output from AAs than the SC52 is able.
> Both can use eneloops.



actually both have the same High.
The SC5 goes 2 minutes longer before step down, it is also 45% heavier, empty, (36% heavier with Eneloop in the SC5, compared to an SC52 with LiIon inside)

http://www.zebralight.com/SC52-L2-AA-Flashlight-Cool-White_p_136.html
"Light output with 14500 batteries… H1 is 535Lm for the first minute and then step down to 300Lm…. weight 40 grams"

http://www.zebralight.com/SC5-AA-Flashlight-Cool-White-OP_p_170.html
"H1 *535* Lm (3min, then 325lm)… weight 58 grams"

fwiw, an Eneloop AA weighs 24 grams, 14500 is 20 grams

imho, there is no brightness benefit to LiIon, and I suspect Zebralight is happy to avoid the added risks, while providing superior performance in the SC5.

The SC52 is only better in that it weighs less, imho


----------



## tops2

Whenever I use my SC5w at H1 level, I'm still blown away at the output from an AA light. Especially after slowing getting more li-ion lights, I have even more respect for the SC5w!


----------



## markr6

If they can put all the SC5 goodness into the SC52w body, I'd buy two.


----------



## jon_slider

tops2 said:


> I'm still blown away at the output from an AA light.



Yup, uncontested winner in the AA Brightness Race, (and highest body weight) 

otoh the AAA size ToolVN on 10440 is brighter and lighter, but both use pulsed power
and, Neither can touch the 90+ CRI of my L11c (just dont drop it) :devil:


----------



## roger-roger

I read an older post recently about ZL informally mentioning the possibility of an SC53 release. Might this light continue to use the XML, or is the XHP35 a potential option for an AA light?


----------



## PoliceScannerMan

roger-roger said:


> I read an older post recently about ZL informally mentioning the possibility of an SC53 release. Might this light continue to use the XML, or is the XHP35 a potential option for an AA light?



Give me a SC53 with the same SC600mkiii HI emitter. That would be nice!


----------



## ktsl

markr6 said:


> If they can put all the SC5 goodness into the SC52w body, I'd buy two.


To me missing the compatability with Li-ion is not a big deal. Ni-Mh is safer imo anyway.

The real dealbreaker for me is the lack of PID and beacon mode on SC5.


----------



## wolfgaze

ktsl said:


> The real dealbreaker for me is the lack of PID and beacon mode on SC5.



SC5 has a beacon mode... 3 clicks from off-position and then a doucle-click will toggle back and forth between selecting Beacon or Strobe mode...


----------



## Warp

ktsl said:


> To me missing the compatability with Li-ion is not a big deal. Ni-Mh is safer imo anyway.
> 
> The real dealbreaker for me is the lack of PID and beacon mode on SC5.



http://www.zebralight.com/SC5w-AA-Flashlight-Neutral-White-OP_p_169.html

"

Beacon Strobe Mode: 4Hz Strobe at H1 / 19Hz Strobe at H1 "


----------



## ktsl

wolfgaze said:


> SC5 has a beacon mode... 3 clicks from off-position and then a doucle-click will toggle back and forth between selecting Beacon or Strobe mode...





Warp said:


> http://www.zebralight.com/SC5w-AA-Flashlight-Neutral-White-OP_p_169.html
> 
> "
> 
> Beacon Strobe Mode: 4Hz Strobe at H1 / 19Hz Strobe at H1 "



I was talking about the 0.2 Hz Hi/Low beacon mode in cr123A or 18650 zebralights. 4Hz and 19Hz hardly serve as beacon, they are strobe. You won't leave your light on a 4Hz mode at your camp to mark its location, will you?


----------



## Warp

ktsl said:


> I was talking about the 0.2 Hz Hi/Low beacon mode in cr123A or 18650 zebralights. 4Hz and 19Hz hardly serve as beacon, they are strobe. *You won't leave your light on a 4Hz mode at your camp to mark its location, will you?*



Why not? 

I have never used a light for that so I don't know what I would prefer, but how is one flash every 15 seconds a strobe?


----------



## scs

Warp said:


> Why not?
> 
> I have never used a light for that so I don't know what I would prefer, but how is one flash every 15 seconds a strobe?



That's 4 flashes per second.


----------



## jon_slider

For further entertainment
Here is the Vinh spin on the SC5 and SC52:


----------



## Warp

scs said:


> That's 4 flashes per second.



Oh dammit. Stupid.

A 4 Hz strobe is indeed a joke to call a beacon lol


----------



## ktsl

Warp said:


> Oh dammit. Stupid.
> 
> A 4 Hz strobe is indeed a joke to call a beacon lol



Exactly! 

A good beacon is so useful. It could save you life (rescue looks for any signal, not just SOS - I learned this on CPF).


----------



## markr6

ktsl said:


> To me missing the compatability with Li-ion is not a big deal. Ni-Mh is safer imo anyway.
> 
> The real dealbreaker for me is the lack of PID and beacon mode on SC5.



Yeah I couldn't care less about the chemistry. It's the size. After switching between the two often, it's amazing how much smaller/lighter the SC52 is. Even if it doesn't look it. That narrower body really makes it more comfortable.

I do like that the li-ion gives a much more accurate readout when using the battery check feature.


----------



## liteboy

markr6 said:


> Yeah I couldn't care less about the chemistry. It's the size. After switching between the two often, it's amazing how much smaller/lighter the SC52 is. Even if it doesn't look it. That narrower body really makes it more comfortable.
> 
> I do like that the li-ion gives a much more accurate readout when using the battery check feature.



So, for flashaholics where use of Li on cells is not an issue, do you all think the 52 is a better light, given its better form factor?


----------



## markr6

liteboy said:


> So, for flashaholics where use of Li on cells is not an issue, do you all think the 52 is a better light, given its better form factor?



I can't really say. It's just a personal preference. I like the 3 minute on high with an eneloop of the SC5 better than 1 minute with li-ion on the SC52. But I keep coming back to the size of the SC52; that won it for me and sold my SC5.

But when you consider these high modes to be battery killers (not even 1hr runtime), the timed step-down may not matter so much. Run the SC5 on high for 3 minutes here and there, you'll be with a dead battery before you know it.

Just another one of those situations where you wish you could combine the advantages of two lights. No matter the manufacturer, 1xAA lights seem to always have one little thing wrong with them, keeping them from being 100% perfect. One of these days....


----------



## Warp

markr6 said:


> I can't really say. It's just a personal preference. I like the 3 minute on high with an eneloop of the SC5 better than 1 minute with li-ion on the SC52. But I keep coming back to the size of the SC52; that won it for me and sold my SC5.
> 
> But when you consider these high modes to be battery killers (not even 1hr runtime), the timed step-down may not matter so much. Run the SC5 on high for 3 minutes here and there, you'll be with a dead battery before you know it.
> 
> Just another one of those situations where you wish you could combine the advantages of two lights. No matter the manufacturer, 1xAA lights seem to always have one little thing wrong with them, keeping them from being 100% perfect. One of these days....



That one thing being they aren't powered by an 18650...oo:


----------



## markr6

Warp said:


> That one thing being they aren't powered by an 18650...oo:



HAHA yes! I'm pretty much an exclusively 18650 user. I do like to keep a few 1xAA lights though. SC52 is one of them.


----------



## Lex Icon

liteboy said:


> So, for flashaholics where use of Li on cells is not an issue, do you all think the 52 is a better light, given its better form factor?



When considering the identical 3.06 watt hour capacity of an enelooop pro (1.2volt x 2550 mah) with a Sanyo 14500 (3.6 volt x 850mah), remember the li-ion is lighter, easier and faster to charge, easier to find, and cost only slightly more, depending on where you purchase them. The ZL SC600 mkIII is merely 6 grams heavier, and 15 mm longer. It could be the best reason to choose a higher energy density 18650 light over the SC5 if you don't plan on a lighter, smaller, very edc-able SC52. If I had to trust any mfg. with building a safe circuit for a 14500, I would choose ZL.


----------



## ZMZ67

liteboy said:


> So, for flashaholics where use of Li on cells is not an issue, do you all think the 52 is a better light, given its better form factor?



As a flashoholic I've resisted the trend towards li-ion and that is probably one of the reasons I chose the SC5 over the SC52. I like small lights as EDCs but for that I can go to my SC32 that performs like my SC5 or the even smaller Olight S1 when it suites my needs.16340s are available if I want to use li-ion instead of primary CR123s.Usually for any light I can get in AA there is a smaller version in CR123. I consider alkalines a poor choice for lights since they leak so frequently,it is NiMH that sets AA apart and offers a real advantage over CR123 size lights for me. 18650 seems to be the way to go anyway judging from what li-ion fans here post.


----------



## jon_slider

Lex Icon said:


> The ZL SC600 mkIII is merely 6 grams heavier



not really… 18650 batteries are more than double the weight of 14500

You could carry an SC52 with 14500 battery installed, plus 2 spare 14500 batteries, and still weigh less than one SC600 w 18650 battery installed.

Or you could carry an SC5 w Eneloop AA installed, plus a spare Eneloop AA, and still weigh less than one SC600 w 18650 installed.

*60 grams*: SC52 (40 grams empty) w 14500 (20 grams) 
*82 grams*: SC5 (58 grams empty) w Eneloop AA (24 grams), 22 grams heavier than SC52 (37% heavier)
*111 grams*: SC6000MK3 (66 grams empty) w 18650 (45 grams), 51 grams heavier than the SC52 (85% heavier than SC52), and 29 grams more than SC5 (35% heavier than SC5)




liteboy said:


> So, for flashaholics where use of Li on cells is not an issue, do you all think the 52 is a better light, given its better form factor?



Yes, the SC52 is the smallest and lowest weight. It also works with Eneloops (if 300 lumens is sufficient for your needs)

The SC5 is for people that want 500+ lumens and prefer Eneloop over LiIon

there is no Eneloop option for the SC32 or Olight S1.. they require disposable batteries, or LiIon


----------



## tops2

liteboy said:


> So, for flashaholics where use of Li on cells is not an issue, do you all think the 52 is a better light, given its better form factor?



Lol..I'll chime in too.

If you care about pocket comfort, I'd totally recommend the SC52(w). If you don't use max brightness, then the SC52(w) pretty much equal in all other modes with the bonus of the smaller size. If you want same brightness, you have the option of using li-ion (but with only 1 minute H1 vs 3 minutes on the SC5(w)).

If you don't care about size and weight, and want the brightest AA light, and don't want li-ion batteries, then totally get the SC5(w).

If you don't mind 18650 battery and am ok with the SC5(w) size and weight, maybe consider the SC62(w)/SC63(w) as the weight of the SC63w with battery is about the same. With the Keeppower 18650 battery I have, the SC63w is actually about a gram lighter than the SC5w (with Eneloop Pro) but you get even more output and much longer runtime. If you do go 18650 (not sure if you have any yet) and are comfortable with it, then maybe go with the unprotected battery so you can use them in the newer SC600w MKIII and SC63w. If you get protected 18650, you can't use them in these 2 newer series of lights.


When I got into flashlights last year, I was hesitant on moving to li-ion so I ended up getting the SC5w for the output and thought I'll live with the weight and size after much much internal debate. But very quickly after I found the SC5w to be an uncomfortable EDC (to me). There was a group buy for the Olight S1 last year so after receiving that, it was like night and day between these 2. The S1 is about half the weight, much shorter, and smaller in diameter (slimmer) so I stopped pocket carrying the SC5w. I still use it all the time after I get home. But then a few weeks ago I got my first Zebralight 18650 headlamp a few weeks ago, and now I've stopped using using the SC5w. The headlamp can get much brighter and have much longer running time. Now my SC5w has become a "shelf queen" and just sits there on my keyrack at home but is basically unused. I have no regrets and love it still, but I guess I could have saved the money I spent on it.


----------



## eraursls1984

jon_slider said:


> not really… 18650 batteries are more than double the weight of 14500
> 
> You could carry an SC52 with 14500 battery installed, plus 2 spare 14500 batteries, and still weigh less than one SC600 w 18650 battery installed.
> 
> Or you could carry an SC5 w Eneloop AA installed, plus a spare Eneloop AA, and still weigh less than one SC600 w 18650 installed.


With either of those scenarios you still get a fraction of the power of an 18650. At best, you get 60% of the power, and a larger overall package for the same weight an 18650 light that has the potential for more than double the output and a lot more throw. Or you could compare the SC63 and there is even more advantage of weight vs. power. 

*86 grams *SC63 (38 g) + 18650 (48 g) all in one small package you have almost 5 times the energy as the AA's. The SC52 with a spare is still at only 43% of the power of the SC63.

The AA lights are great, and probably work well for EDC for some. For me it's either a single 18650 light, or a 2xAAA penlight. If an SC62 is too big, then my SC52 seems too big as well and I grab the Foursevens Preon. My SC52 Is my most used light at home, just never for EDC.


----------



## recDNA

I like my sc5 but wish it took li ion too. I find eneloops get hot when changing.


----------



## markr6

recDNA said:


> I like my sc5 but wish it took li ion too. I find eneloops get hot when changing.



I'm guessing it's your charger or the batteries are old with a high internal resistance. 1A is pretty much the default for 2000mAh eneloops IMO. 2A is even fine, and they don't even get hot at that rate on my Maha 801D.


----------



## roger-roger

We're in our hurricane season right now, and just had a cool tropical storm pass through a few days ago. Other than the convenience of size, I choose AA lights for their capability to run store bought alkalines in the event of extended power outages. Chances are my stash of L91 (and CR123A) with suffice, but better to be prepared. 

CR123A lights are a good alternative with slightly longer run times, and a different form factor, usually thicker in girth but a bit shorter.


----------



## liteboy

thanks everyone for their input on these two AA light versions. I am collecting as much info as possible to try to predict which one will eventually sit on the shelf or in the drawer, as most lights do eventually. I don't like to keep lights that I don't use, but don't love the hassle of selling. I had hoped not to continue expanding the Li On cell types I'm accumulating, which are so far:

10180
10280
CR123
16430
18650
17500

the three I'm holding out on are:
26650
18350
14500 - but the following lights calling out to me will soon add this cell: ZL SC52 and Tain Thud 18500 light that can take 14500 cell


----------



## ZMZ67

"there is no Eneloop option for the SC32 or Olight S1.. they require disposable batteries, or LiIon"

That is definitely true but you don't have the drop off in performance with CR123s in the SC32 and S1 that you would with L91AA lithiums or NiMH when used in the SC52. I did see at least one offering that was available for a lithium primary 3V AA so that may be another point in favor for the SC52 fans.I know that when size is a factor I will go to CR123 over AA if it is at all possible.


----------



## recDNA

markr6 said:


> I'm guessing it's your charger or the batteries are old with a high internal resistance. 1A is pretty much the default for 2000mAh eneloops IMO. 2A is even fine, and they don't even get hot at that rate on my Maha 801D.


I have 2 chargers. Both are rated highly. Fairly new batteries. When the batteries are in the last hour of charging they get hot on both chargers. One is a Panasonic charger. The other is Xtar. My older batteries get hotter sooner but all of them get hot toward the end of charging cycle. Li ion don't do that and I have some 5 years old with many cycles.


----------



## eraursls1984

markr6 said:


> I'm guessing it's your charger or the batteries are old with a high internal resistance. 1A is pretty much the default for 2000mAh eneloops IMO. 2A is even fine, and they don't even get hot at that rate on my Maha 801D.


All of my batteries, Eneloop and Li-Ion, get hot at the end of the charge cycle @ 750 mAh. That's on my Nitecore D4. It's been like this since I bought my first Li-Ion and Eneloops.


----------



## markr6

SC5c up for preorder! Check out that black clip! Looks pretty cool!

May be a little sleeker than the SC5, but it's hard to tell from just the photos. I resized the SC5 image a bit since it was a larger pic. I think I got pretty close using photoshop and layering them, using the reflectors as a guide. Even then, they're at different angles so it's not a great comparison, making the new on look longer. I would take any reduction in heft; not sure we're getting that here. But I think I like it!


----------



## gunga

Yep. Same dimensions, pretty much. Looks sleeker though.


----------



## markr6

Oh I'm a sucker...SOLD! :twothumbs


----------



## jon_slider

markr6 said:


> I would take any reduction in heft


you win, SC5 MkII has a 9 gram drop (-15%!) in weight from the SC5

each of these lights is 9 grams heavier than the one before on the list:
L11c 31 grams
SC52 40 grams
SC5 MkII 49 grams
SC5 58 grams


----------



## markr6

jon_slider said:


> you win, SC5 MkII has a 9 gram drop (-15%!) in weight from the SC5
> 
> each of these lights is 9 grams heavier than the one before on the list:
> L11c 31 grams
> SC52 40 grams
> SC5 MkII 49 grams
> SC5 58 grams



For me, the weight has very little to do with it. Within reason of course. I should have been more clear when I said "heft". I was referring to the size. I really like the SC52 style with the narrow tube and overall smaller dimensions. But 9g less, heck yeah I'll take it! The high cri really got me. 2-step MacAdam yessir!!


----------



## jon_slider

markr6 said:


> I was referring to the size.


the SC5 and SC5mk2 are both the same size: (if the specs dont lie)

SC5
Dimensions


Head Diameter: *1.0 *inch
Length: *3.2 *inch


SC5 mk2
Dimensions


Head Diameter: *1.0 *inch
Length: *3.2 *inch


----------



## markr6

jon_slider said:


> the SC5 and SC5mk2 are both the same size: (if the specs dont lie)
> 
> SC5
> Dimensions
> 
> 
> Head Diameter: *1.0 *inch
> Length: *3.2 *inch
> 
> 
> SC5 mk2
> Dimensions
> 
> 
> Head Diameter: *1.0 *inch
> Length: *3.2 *inch



Those number don't mean much to me. Just a general size. I'm not really looking at the copy and paste specs they likely used. They're simply measuring end to end, and at the widest part. When dealing with these small AA lights, the slightest curves, angles, bulges matter. The little changes can make a big difference. The bulge around the switch for example. Two measurements on paper just don't give you a good enough idea of how it will feel and ride in your pocket. The SC52 says a head diameter of .93", but the body is much narrower. Simply going by that number doesn't do much for me.

Look at the L10. It's basically an AA battery with a LED on it. Nice and sleek. This light will never be that, but any step in the right direction is welcome.


----------



## ginaz

i've been waiting for this for a long time! my last ZL was the sc60 or the h50 lol! sc5c on the way


----------



## jon_slider

markr6 said:


> number don't mean much



the _shape_ of the head changed, 
they rounded the previously square section around the switch:






the bodies are identical, the switch is identical, the number of fins is identical


----------



## markr6

jon_slider said:


> the _shape_ of the head changed,
> they rounded the previously square section around the switch:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> the bodies are identical, the switch is identical, the number of fins is identical



We'll know for sure when it comes out. I'm not going to sit here and argue because the same thing happened in the past; subtle changes make a world of difference. Photos and assumptions don't tell the whole story.


----------



## jon_slider

> I'm not going to sit here and argue

was not trying to argue, I actually agree with you 

was just trying to help
the new model weighs less, has a more rounded switch surround, and is High CRI.. all good things


----------



## wolfgaze

Need some input please... If one were re-selling an SC5w that's in excellent condition and has barely been used - what would be a reasonable asking price?


----------



## snowlover91

wolfgaze said:


> Need some input please... If one were re-selling an SC5w that's in excellent condition and has barely been used - what would be a reasonable asking price?



I would say around $50-55. They regularly go for full price or within a few dollars of it on eBay too.


----------



## Ozythemandias

wolfgaze said:


> Need some input please... If one were re-selling an SC5w that's in excellent condition and has barely been used - what would be a reasonable asking price?



I paid $50 for a user a couple months ago, felt like I got a good deal.


----------



## vadimax

I am going to wait for first reviews and till it appears @ eu.nkon.nl. That might be my first Zebralight if everything is OK


----------



## wolfgaze

Thanks for the feedback fellas! I think I will attempt to sell my SC5w for $50 with pre-paid shipping...


----------



## aginthelaw

wolfgaze said:


> Thanks for the feedback fellas! I think I will attempt to sell my SC5w for $50 with pre-paid shipping...



Maybe I should rephrase it: what's the Paypal address


----------



## wolfgaze

aginthelaw said:


> Maybe I should rephrase it: what's the Paypal address



I sent you a PM...


----------



## wolfgaze

markr6 said:


>



Mark, the new SC5 variant with the black clip is the one on the LEFT?


----------



## eraursls1984

wolfgaze said:


> Mark, the new SC5 variant with the black clip is the one on the LEFT?


Yes.


----------

