# Aspheric Mag, holy cow this is cool!



## KingGlamis (Jul 16, 2007)

Just got my Aspheric lens from Surplus Shed today and holy cow this lens is cool. I got the 50x35mm lens, which fit right in my 4D Mag, although the bezel will not screw down all the way. But that doesn't seem to be an issue.

Unfortunately it's not dark here yet, so it will be a bit before I can do an outside throw test, but my inside tests indicate that the throw will be great (which is why I bought this lens). However, I never read anyone mention that an Aspheric lens can improve flood. I had no idea! Below is a pic of the flood output. The color may not be the best, but damn, that's a BIG flood area! Much more usable than the typical Mag "rings" that we all hate.

More pics later.


----------



## LukeA (Jul 16, 2007)

That lens will fit in the Mag head, it just takes a little force. When it's seated, there's a 2mm gap between the lens and the bezel. Then you may want to put a thick O-ring between the two.

Anyway, my aspheric using that same lens throws a spot over 600ft (6ft circle @300ft). If I adjust the head to as tight as possible, then I have a medium flood beam that reaches over 300 ft(40ft circle).


----------



## KingGlamis (Jul 16, 2007)

So right before I went out to test the new lens in the dark we got hit with a storm. Light rain, high winds, lightning, etc. But I still got a few shots (thankfully my camera is water proof).

In this first shot of the spot beam I inadvertantly caught a little bit of lightning in the shot (sorry, but my camera sucks at night, and the blowing dust and rain made it worse).






This is the throw to some really tall palm trees. Not that bright, but with the stock lens the light barely reaches this high at all. And remember, this is with a stock Mag LED insert. I'll be looking into a better emitter for sure.






Lighting up the entrance to our house. I love the flood of this lens!






The flood on the grass. My camera really doesn't do this light justice. I think it has the most usable light of any light I have ever owned.


----------



## LukeA (Jul 17, 2007)

The aspheric mag has benefits nobody ever mentions.


----------



## scott.cr (Jul 17, 2007)

LukeA said:


> When it's seated, there's a 2mm gap between the lens and the bezel.



It would be easy to fix that with a lathe! Or even a file, and you wouldn't even have to be careful for a good result. (File the head, where the lens is seating, by the ~2mm needed to close the gap.)


----------



## KingGlamis (Jul 17, 2007)

LukeA said:


> The aspheric mag has benefits nobody ever mentions.


 
I have never been more impressed by a light than I have been tonight with this Aspheric Mag. I'm surprised everyone on this board doesn't own an Aspheric-lensed light of some sort (I'm sure an appropriately sized lens would work great on just about any light). I just wish my camera could better show what my eyes are seeing. It's amazing.


----------



## davenlei (Jul 17, 2007)

How much did the lens cost?


----------



## KingGlamis (Jul 17, 2007)

davenlei said:


> How much did the lens cost?


 
It was $8 plus $5 shipping. Absolutely the BEST money I have ever spent. And I really do mean that, I am impressed!


----------



## KingGlamis (Jul 17, 2007)

A shot from across the house to the front door. That is a lot of light!


----------



## Tessaiga (Jul 17, 2007)

Would the effect be the same if it was an incan cos I don't see anyone talking about an incan aspheric??


----------



## greenlight (Jul 17, 2007)

OP keeps mentioning flood, is that correct?


----------



## LukeA (Jul 17, 2007)

Tessaiga said:


> Would the effect be the same if it was an incan cos I don't see anyone talking about an incan aspheric??



You could use an aspheric for flood with an incan, but not throw, as the lens projects the image of the light source. In an LED, this is an even square, which is much more useful than the squiggle filament of an incan.


----------



## KingGlamis (Jul 17, 2007)

greenlight said:


> OP keeps mentioning flood, is that correct?


 
Am I saying it incorrectly? Maybe I should say spill? Either way, it has tons of both, which I never knew was a feature of aspherical lenses until I got this one.


----------



## RustyKnee (Jul 17, 2007)

I got mine last week that Ledean made for me (I have one on order from RcatR too ...greedy). It is pretty cool. I haven't had chance to try it outside yet. 

Flood is a relative term. but when focused to be floody the beam is almost even in intensity without a hotspot like a reflectored cree...it has a blue edge to the beam in flood mode.

when focues the intesity of the light is nice. Its hard to say for sure with out light meters.....but its not far off the peak of my wolfeyes boxer 24W hid......obviously for a very small area in comparison...impressive though.

Stu


----------



## Mad1 (Jul 17, 2007)

Could you post a picture of the lense please.


----------



## greenlight (Jul 17, 2007)

Please correct me if I'm totally mistaken, but the beam appears to have NO flood aspect at all. This is why the original inova x1 was so unpopular. The beam looks to me like a 'moon' type spotlight. If you mean that there is no hotspot within the beam projection, well that's what you get with aspherical lenses. No stray rays are bounced off the reflector or emitted at an angle; everything that hits the lens is focused into one tight spot.

Try taking the bezel off your maglight and you will see the flood/spill. With the aspherical lens on, you are treated to the flashlight's increased throw.


----------



## KingGlamis (Jul 17, 2007)

Mad1 said:


> Could you post a picture of the lense please.


----------



## Mad1 (Jul 17, 2007)

Wow that really is something else.

Would it work with a ROP?


----------



## luigi (Jul 17, 2007)

Mad1 said:


> Wow that really is something else.
> 
> Would it work with a ROP?



Terrific question what would happen if you use this Lens with a ROP ? Nuclear meltdown ? Stratosphere illumination ?

Luigi


----------



## Mad1 (Jul 17, 2007)

luigi said:


> Nuclear meltdown ? Stratosphere illumination ?
> 
> Luigi




Cooooool.


----------



## habibi (Jul 17, 2007)

Hi!

You can use it with ROP but you would be disappointed....I have tried this lense with an W/A 1111 and the lense shows the filament of the bulb for a really long distance without any sidespill. As LukeA has mentioned it before the filament is very squiggle...I prefer for long range illumination with incans one of the deep reflectors from Fivemega.....

Cheers


----------



## LukeA (Jul 17, 2007)

greenlight said:


> Please correct me if I'm totally mistaken, but the beam appears to have NO flood aspect at all. This is why the original inova x1 was so unpopular. The beam looks to me like a 'moon' type spotlight. If you mean that there is no hotspot within the beam projection, well that's what you get with aspherical lenses. No stray rays are bounced off the reflector or emitted at an angle; everything that hits the lens is focused into one tight spot.
> 
> Try taking the bezel off your maglight and you will see the flood/spill. With the aspherical lens on, you are treated to the flashlight's increased throw.



But if you move the light source closer to the lens, you get this fantastic wide focus that gives you up to about 15˚ of bright, even light.


----------



## sysadmn (Jul 17, 2007)

KingGlamis said:


> It was $8 plus $5 shipping. Absolutely the BEST money I have ever spent. And I really do mean that, I am impressed!


 
+1
Mine came 7/13. I'm cheap and watch for closeouts and clearances. I have $13 in the lens, $12.40 in a 4D Mag, a $1 Xenon 4D Magstar, and $5 in alkaline batteries. Should we be allowed to have this much fun for $32? Maybe I'll spring for the o-ring - .89c at the hardware store. :laughing: I have a 4D Magled, but that'll make it a $50 light.

Sooner or later I will graduate to Wolf Eyes, then Surefire, then McGoodies. Might as well enjoy the cheap thrills while I can.


----------



## f22shift (Jul 17, 2007)

i'm sold.


what oring would fill the gap?

when you use this lens, do you have to use the stock lens or it replaces it entirely while retain somewhat of a weather seal?


----------



## sysadmn (Jul 17, 2007)

f22shift said:


> i'm sold.
> what oring would fill the gap?


 
From this thread:


LukeA said:


> I just measured a fresh o-ring. It's 53mm dia., or 2 1/8in., and 3mm or 1/8in. thick. Trust me it fits.


----------



## greenlight (Jul 17, 2007)

Is the lens flat on one side? What's the weight? I've seen a few of these mods on CPF. I'm wondering why people aren't using a less spherical aspherical lens like the inova x1 or other cheap lights like RR or dorcy?


----------



## LukeA (Jul 17, 2007)

greenlight said:


> Is the lens flat on one side? What's the weight?



It is flat on the other side. It's pretty massive.


----------



## sysadmn (Jul 17, 2007)

greenlight said:


> Is the lens flat on one side?


 
Slightly concave, if I remember correctly. The one I have has clearance for the bulb even when the head is screwed all the way down. I checked this before I put the retaining bezel back on to ensure I didn't crunch the bulb playing with focus.

I bought:
SKU: PL1028 PRECISION PCX ASPHERIC LENS 50MM DIA, 35MM FL 8.00 

PS - I also got
SKU: L3035 52MM DIA SPOTTING SCOPE OBJECTIVE, 220MM FL 

Don't bother; it's double convex, but easily 3/4" thick at the edges. It kind of fits, but doesn't do anything interesting. I guess I should learn Optics 101 before I spend much more.


----------



## LukeA (Jul 17, 2007)

sysadmn said:


> PS - I also got
> SKU: L3035 52MM DIA SPOTTING SCOPE OBJECTIVE, 220MM FL
> 
> Don't bother; it's double convex, but easily 3/4" thick at the edges. It kind of fits, but doesn't do anything interesting.



Of course it doesn't. The focal length is 220mm, the better part of the length of the Mag.


----------



## enLIGHTenment (Jul 17, 2007)

sysadmn said:


> Slightly concave, if I remember correctly.
> 
> ...
> 
> SKU: PL1028 PRECISION PCX ASPHERIC LENS 50MM DIA, 35MM FL 8.00



By definition, PCX (plano-convex) lenses are flat on one side and convex on the other. Of course, the part description could be wrong...


----------



## enLIGHTenment (Jul 17, 2007)

habibi said:


> I have tried this lense with an W/A 1111 and the lense shows the filament of the bulb for a really long distance without any sidespill. As LukeA has mentioned it before the filament is very squiggle...



You must have an elliptical diffuser between an incan bulb and a lens to get passable results. This is how it's done in projectors.

Edmund optics has a good demonstration.


(I should say, this is how it's done in projectors that don't use short arc HID bulbs. Those don't need diffusers.)


----------



## IsaacHayes (Jul 17, 2007)

Yeah its adjustable from narrow to wide beam. LED is perfect because it fires all it's light forward for the most part. Hotwires don't.

Now imagine if you had a high binned Cree XR-E in there. The cree in addition to putting out more lumens, also has a narrow beam which helps put more light into the optic.


----------



## R11GS (Jul 17, 2007)

greenlight said:


> ....I'm wondering why people aren't using a less spherical aspherical lens...



The lens will need to be *very* thick in order to get the short focal length and good numerical aperture (f-stop).


----------



## 2xTrinity (Jul 17, 2007)

> You must have an elliptical diffuser between an incan bulb and a lens to get passable results. This is how it's done in projectors.
> 
> Edmund optics has a good demonstration.
> 
> ...


Additionally, when using an omnidirectional light source like a filament or arc lamp, an elliptical reflector with the light source at one focus, and the lens at the other is necessary as well (this is how it's done in most projectors, as well).



R11GS said:


> The lens will need to be *very* thick in order to get the short focal length and good numerical aperture (f-stop).


Another possiblity would be to use a fresnel lens -- those were explicitly desigend to have short focal lengths with minimum thickness.


----------



## KingGlamis (Jul 17, 2007)

greenlight said:


> Please correct me if I'm totally mistaken, but the beam appears to have NO flood aspect at all. This is why the original inova x1 was so unpopular. The beam looks to me like a 'moon' type spotlight. If you mean that there is no hotspot within the beam projection, well that's what you get with aspherical lenses. No stray rays are bounced off the reflector or emitted at an angle; everything that hits the lens is focused into one tight spot.
> 
> Try taking the bezel off your maglight and you will see the flood/spill. With the aspherical lens on, you are treated to the flashlight's increased throw.


 
You are correct, I was using the word flood incorrectly. What I meant to describe is the huge circle of light it puts out. Much larger than most normal flashlights, even those with good flood.


----------



## KingGlamis (Jul 17, 2007)

IsaacHayes said:


> Yeah its adjustable from narrow to wide beam. LED is perfect because it fires all it's light forward for the most part. Hotwires don't.
> 
> Now imagine if you had a high binned Cree XR-E in there. The cree in addition to putting out more lumens, also has a narrow beam which helps put more light into the optic.


 
That will be my next upgrade. Anyone have suggestions on what to get?


----------



## sysadmn (Jul 18, 2007)

enLIGHTenment said:


> By definition, PCX (plano-convex) lenses are flat on one side and convex on the other. Of course, the part description could be wrong...



Yes, I checked last night. The obverse is flat; it is an optical illusion. When you look at that side of the lens, it appears concave. Should have guessed that that is what the "PCX" on the invoice meant.


----------



## sysadmn (Jul 18, 2007)

LukeA said:


> Of course it doesn't. The focal length is 220mm, the better part of the length of the Mag.



Yes, I knew just enough optics to understand FL - I was hoping for a nice flood effect.


----------



## sysadmn (Jul 18, 2007)

2xTrinity said:


> Another possiblity would be to use a fresnel lens -- those were explicitly desigend to have short focal lengths with minimum thickness.



I tried a wallet-sized "read the fine print on menus" fresnel, but the focal length appeared to be 3-4 inches. At 1-2 inches, it was still a diffuse flood, so I did not bother to cut it to shape. That focal length makes sense for the intended use. An interesting experiment for $1.


----------



## R11GS (Jul 18, 2007)

2xTrinity said:


> Another possiblity would be to use a fresnel lens -- those were explicitly desigend to have short focal lengths with minimum thickness.



Perhaps. But there are limitations on the n/a that you can get with a fresnel and you may not be able to match close enough to an aspheric's light gathering and focusing potential.


----------



## Jackal112203 (Jul 18, 2007)

Is that using the MAG LED?


----------



## R11GS (Jul 18, 2007)

OTOH, if someone finds a good fresnel for this, hopefully they'll let us know!


----------



## sysadmn (Jul 18, 2007)

Jackal112203 said:


> Is that using the MAG LED?



I played with mine last night - a 4D magstar (Xenon) in a 5D mag with fresh Duracell alkalines. At best focus, you could see the individual coils in the filament when the light was 20 feet from the wall.

I assume everyone knows this -
When you put the bulb in, you can "index" the filament. With the switch on top, put the bulb in with the filament either horizontal or vertical. Hold the bulb in place while tightening the collar. Likewise, you can "index" the reflector - tighten the head all the way down, remove the bezel and lens, and rotate the lens until best focus is achieved. Put the lens and bezel in place, and carefully tighten, trying not to move the reflector.

With the bulb & reflector indexed, I get a filament image about 4'x10' at ~330 ft (according to Google Maps).


----------



## Kraid (Jul 18, 2007)

Is this the lens? http://www.surplusshed.com/pages/item/pl1028.html


----------



## LukeA (Jul 18, 2007)

Kraid said:


> Is this the lens? http://www.surplusshed.com/pages/item/pl1028.html



That is the lens.


----------



## jtice (Jul 18, 2007)

Yea, I think I am going to have to try this.

I have a few mags I could test this out on.
I typically dont like beams like this, with no spill, but it does look like a killer thrower.
Might be fun 

Have those lens been determined to be the best/only ones to use?

~John


----------



## greenlight (Jul 18, 2007)

Even if it isn't, it's only 8$ and looks pretty intimidating.


----------



## Ironhog81 (Jul 18, 2007)

Really worked great on a Magcharger.
Just can't re-charge with lens in.
Trying in others.


----------



## LukeA (Jul 18, 2007)

Ironhog81 said:


> Really worked great on a Magcharger.
> Just can't re-charge with lens in.
> Trying in others.



You could cut the flat lid of the charger off.


----------



## Kraid (Jul 18, 2007)

Thanks! Gonna give it a try!


----------



## garageguy (Jul 18, 2007)

I just ordered one, gonna give it a try. I can't let you guys have all the fun.


----------



## lctorana (Jul 18, 2007)

sysadmn said:


> I played with mine last night - a 4D magstar (Xenon) in a 5D mag with fresh Duracell alkalines. At best focus, you could see the individual coils in the filament when the light was 20 feet from the wall.
> 
> I assume everyone knows this -
> When you put the bulb in, you can "index" the filament. With the switch on top, put the bulb in with the filament either horizontal or vertical. Hold the bulb in place while tightening the collar. Likewise, you can "index" the reflector - tighten the head all the way down, remove the bezel and lens, and rotate the lens until best focus is achieved. Put the lens and bezel in place, and carefully tighten, trying not to move the reflector.
> ...


This is the most exciting post I've ever read on this forum.


----------



## LukeA (Jul 18, 2007)

lctorana said:


> This is the most exciting post I've ever read on this forum.



.....why?


----------



## Burgess (Jul 19, 2007)

Sounds really cool !


Thank you for bringing this item to our attention.


CPF rocks !


:twothumbs


----------



## KingGlamis (Jul 19, 2007)

The more I use this Aspheric Mag the more I love it. What makes it so great is the Mag's ability to focus from wide to spot, which a lot of lights don't do. On a medium focus it still has great throw with a wide beam. I can light up all the neighbor's trees just awesome. I can't wait to take this thing camping.


----------



## sysadmn (Jul 19, 2007)

lctorana said:


> This is the most exciting post I've ever read on this forum.


 

I certainly didn't invent it - if I remember who mentioned first, I'd credit them.

I like to index bulb because it makes the beam pattern prettier.
I index the reflector because it seems "optimal" to have tightest collimation when the head is all the way down.


----------



## jtice (Jul 19, 2007)

Well, I couldnt help myself, I order two of each of those optics 
This should be fun.

I will test it with a Cree, LuxIII and maybe my ROP :green:

~John


----------



## sysadmn (Jul 19, 2007)

KingGlamis said:


> The more I use this Aspheric Mag the more I love it. What makes it so great is the Mag's ability to focus from wide to spot, which a lot of lights don't do. On a medium focus it still has great throw with a wide beam. I can light up all the neighbor's trees just awesome. I can't wait to take this thing camping.


 

Could you describe your setup? I get a really bright rectangle (the filament image), then some fairly bright rings. I'm sure I'm losing substantial light in the rings.

My "stack" is bezel -> 2 1/8" O ring -> lens -> stock reflector, illuminated by a 4D Magstar (Xenon) on 5D. I tried it without the reflector, and couldn't get a good focus; I also tried the O ring between lens and reflector, and the bezel threads would not engage.

The LED beamshots are much smoother - is that because the LED throws more light directly into the lens? Is the reflector (and backscatter from the lens) the source of the rings?

I'll try to get beamshots. Is there a manual setting I should look for on the digital camera, or just let the auto mode fix things? I'm a PHD in photography, as in Push Here Dummy.


----------



## KingGlamis (Jul 19, 2007)

sysadmn said:


> Could you describe your setup? I get a really bright rectangle (the filament image), then some fairly bright rings. I'm sure I'm losing substantial light in the rings.
> 
> My "stack" is bezel -> 2 1/8" O ring -> lens -> stock reflector, illuminated by a 4D Magstar (Xenon) on 5D. I tried it without the reflector, and couldn't get a good focus; I also tried the O ring between lens and reflector, and the bezel threads would not engage.
> 
> ...


 
I'm no expert (yet  ), but I'm pretty sure from what I read on here that your problem is the Xenon bulb. The filiment is supposed to be what messes up the light output of the aspheric lens.

My setup is using the Mag-brand LED insert. I didn't use any O-rings, I just inserted the lens and the bezel won't screw down all the way. There is an 1/8" gap from the bezel to the head. But this doesn't seem to be an issue as long as I'm not getting the light wet.

Hope that helps.

Edit: Also, putting the O-ring inbetween the lens and the reflector "should" help your Fb (if I did my calculations correctly). I may try that next, but I will need to clearance the bezel first so that the lens seats fully in it.


----------



## Nitroz (Jul 19, 2007)

I created another thread before I realized that their already is a thread. Here's some pictures I took tonight of the aspherical lens and a Q2 XR-E.

Tonight I went outside with my Nikon d70s to see if I could capture the insane grid that the apherical lens creates with a XR-E. I am truly impressed with this light, it has the best of both worlds. It has insane throw for an LED and can be defocused without the annoying donut hole creating a huge blob of light. 

It reminds me of the X1 Invoa beam, only much larger and extremely bright! Now for the pictures of the grid.


----------



## cryhavok (Jul 20, 2007)

I believe NewBie gets the honor of first using Aspheric lenses matched with LEDs (using a Luxeon back then!).

Here is the first Cree XR-E/ Aspheric lens build in a maglite followed by the first regulated aspheric lens maglite and finally the newest host to my Cree XR-E Q2/GD1500 combo (which will soon be upgraded with a Cree XR-E Q5). I'm hoping to see a bit of a jump in my [email protected] meter readings 

As to the reason why the XR-E LED is the best for use in the aspheric application, remember that the XR-E has a viewing angle of approximately 75º. This means that when mated to the correct diameter and f.l. lens, you could potentially focus "all" the light into the lens and therefore make quite a thrower. Every other LED (Seoul P4, Luxeons) has a 180º beam distribution, so you will have inherent losses and therefore lose some of the throw capability. I believe the new Luxeon Rebel falls in between the XR-E and the Seoul P4 beam distribution (much closer to the P4's side). 

The incandescent and HID bulbs are the worst when trying to focus the light with a lens. With approximately 360º light distribution, only a fraction of the light is actually able to be focused by the lens into the spot.


----------



## greenlight (Jul 20, 2007)

now you need a porcupine bezel to protect the lens.


----------



## LukeA (Jul 20, 2007)

cryhavok said:


> I believe NewBie gets the honor of first using Aspheric lenses matched with LEDs (using a Luxeon back then!).
> 
> Here is the first Cree XR-E/ Aspheric lens build in a maglite followed by the first regulated aspheric lens maglite and finally the newest host to my Cree XR-E Q2/GD1500 combo (which will soon be upgraded with a Cree XR-E Q5). I'm hoping to see a bit of a jump in my [email protected] meter readings
> 
> ...



The Rebel's Lambertian emission pattern lends itself to this application, as the vast majority of the light is emitted at an angle that passes through the lens. 

I figured this out today by taking the reflector off of my Rebel'ed B3 and looking at it from different angles.


----------



## KingGlamis (Jul 20, 2007)

Beam shot of my Aspheric Mag LED during a major dust storm here tonight.


----------



## KingGlamis (Jul 20, 2007)

One more beam shot.


----------



## mrmike (Jul 23, 2007)

The PL 1028 is terrible in my ROP. It turns the light into a distorted, prismatic mess... it's hideous. 

Now this lens works like a champ in the ROP:
http://www.surplusshed.com/pages/item/pl1062.html

It won't turn it into a light saber, but it really tightens up the spill and gives you a nice/useful working circle of light.


----------



## LukeA (Jul 23, 2007)

mrmike said:


> The PL 1028 is terrible in my ROP. It turns the light into a distorted, prismatic mess... it's hideous.
> 
> Now this lens works like a champ in the ROP:
> http://www.surplusshed.com/pages/item/pl1062.html
> ...



That's because the light source is behind the fp of the 1028 and in front of the fp of the other lens. If you move the ROP bulb up, the 1028 should work better.


----------



## f22shift (Jul 23, 2007)

got my aspherical lens today.
beamshots!
*Magled aspherical focused tight vs. River Rock 2aa aspherical*
Riverrock is not bad, if size was an issue it would be the choice



*Magled aspherical focused wide vs. RR*
in my opinion this is the best part of the aspherical. i think someone said it best when they said mag has 2 focuses, tight and useless. this makes the mag more versatile. it's already a decent thrower but now it's a very decent flood.



*Magled aspherical vs. DX X.V high*



*Magled aspherical vs. Fenix L0D high*


----------



## LukeA (Jul 23, 2007)

A favorite focus of mine is about halfway between tight and flood. It gives a nice beam for close-up while still being able to completely and usefully illuminate a 80-ft tree from 300ft out.


----------



## KingGlamis (Jul 24, 2007)

A few more pics from tonight. This is shining at my neighbors tree about 25 feet away. This is HUGE tree. And I've been using the same batteries every night for 5-6 weeks now, anywhere from 10-30 minutes per night, plus one weekend camping trip where I used it a lot, and no noticeable dimming yet.

First pic, on wide focus. It shows most of this huge tree (although my camera sucks at night, it is MUCH more impressive in person).






This pic is medium focus, good throw and a decent ring of light.






This is on tight focus.


----------



## gearbox (Jul 29, 2007)

Is this the one? What happens to the beam with a 30mm?


----------



## BlackDecker (Jul 29, 2007)

KingGlamis said:


> I have never been more impressed by a light than I have been tonight with this Aspheric Mag. I'm surprised everyone on this board doesn't own an Aspheric-lensed light of some sort (I'm sure an appropriately sized lens would work great on just about any light). I just wish my camera could better show what my eyes are seeing. It's amazing.



Maybe I can't tell from the pics, but the beamshots look to me like the 2AA River Rock Jupiter. That light is all spot and no spill. Never liked it.


----------



## LukeA (Jul 29, 2007)

BlackDecker said:


> Maybe I can't tell from the pics, but the beamshots look to me like the 2AA River Rock Jupiter. That light is all spot and no spill. Never liked it.


Did the River Rock 2AA Jupiter put out over 50k [email protected]?


----------



## f22shift (Jul 29, 2007)

BlackDecker said:


> Maybe I can't tell from the pics, but the beamshots look to me like the 2AA River Rock Jupiter. That light is all spot and no spill. Never liked it.


 
look a couple posts above. i compare it to a river rock jupiter(ce mod). yes it can focus tighter than the river rock but also do a flood that the river rock lacks..


----------



## cliff (Jul 31, 2007)

Last week I tried to order one of these lenses but something got goofed up. Either I ordered the wrong one or they sent the wrong one, but I ended up with a 52mm DIA 100mm FL. This fit fine into the Mag, but did not produce the results described in this thread. So, I re-ordered a 50mm DIA 35mm FL today and will hope for the best.

The 100mm FL is not all bad though. With the reflector removed, this puts out a very interesting close-range flood. With a drop-in a bit more powerful than the stock Mag emitter this may be a very useful combination.


----------



## half-watt (Jul 31, 2007)

cliff said:


> Last week I tried to order one of these lenses but something got goofed up. Either I ordered the wrong one or they sent the wrong one, but I ended up with a 52mm DIA 100mm FL. This fit fine into the Mag, but did not produce the results described in this thread. So, I re-ordered a 50mm DIA 35mm FL today and will hope for the best.
> 
> The 100mm FL is not all bad though. With the reflector removed, this puts out a very interesting close-range flood. With a drop-in a bit more powerful than the stock Mag emitter this may be a very useful combination.





the 50mm D 35mm FL PCX lens is the one you want (PL1028 from SurplusShed for $8)


----------



## WadeF (Jul 31, 2007)

f22shift said:


> *Magled aspherical focused tight vs. River Rock 2aa aspherical*[/quote=f22shift;2090689]
> 
> What aspherical lens are you using in the River Rock?


----------



## f22shift (Jul 31, 2007)

WadeF said:


> f22shift said:
> 
> 
> > *Magled aspherical focused tight vs. River Rock 2aa aspherical*[/quote=f22shift;2090689]
> ...


----------



## smokelaw1 (Jul 31, 2007)

SO, I am curious as to the use of the this lens. Does one simply place it in the head under the bezel? How is it tightened in? Do you remove the reflector.
Where does one get the great bezes that will protect it? 

Many thanks to anyone who can answer these in the most idiot-proof ways possible (I'm testing out a new idiot....LOL). I want to try it out with a mag with the Malkoff drop-in just for fun.


----------



## Beer (Jul 31, 2007)

I was wondering............

Has anyone tried this mod with a blacked out reflector?

No rings while retaining the ability to focus....


----------



## WadeF (Jul 31, 2007)

smokelaw1 said:


> SO, I am curious as to the use of the this lens. Does one simply place it in the head under the bezel? How is it tightened in? Do you remove the reflector.


 
I just popped out the stock Mag lens and replace it with the aspheric lens. I kept the reflector since it holds the lens in place. I was tickled with how easy it was to do.


----------



## KingGlamis (Aug 1, 2007)

I heard a few people mention using the aspheric lens without the reflector so I just tried it. Big difference. First of all, you loose any ability to focus the beam at all, which means no long-throw spot-beam. But what it does give is a gigantic, and I do mean GIGANTIC beam area. From only 15 feet away it lights up a huge tree completely (not super-bright, but still bright). From 6 feet away from the end of my pool, it lights up the entire pool and then some (the beam "circle" must be 25 feet in diameter). But, as fun as this was to try, the overall usefullness is MUCH better with the reflector in place.

Unfortunately I can't post beam shots because my laptop computer died today and this computer doesn't have a card reader.


----------



## LukeA (Aug 1, 2007)

KingGlamis said:


> I heard a few people mention using the aspheric lens without the reflector so I just tried it. Big difference. First of all, you loose any ability to focus the beam at all, which means no long-throw spot-beam. But what it does give is a gigantic, and I do mean GIGANTIC beam area. From only 15 feet away it lights up a huge tree completely (not super-bright, but still bright). From 6 feet away from the end of my pool, it lights up the entire pool and then some (the beam "circle" must be 25 feet in diameter). But, as fun as this was to try, the overall usefullness is MUCH better with the reflector in place.
> 
> Unfortunately I can't post beam shots because my laptop computer died today and this computer doesn't have a card reader.



I took out the reflector and kept the focusing ability. I mounted the emitter on some aluminum that rests on the black plastic of the bulb holder. I use the screw action of the head on the body. It's a 'fine focus' to the cammed reflector's 'coarse focus'.


----------



## smokelaw1 (Aug 1, 2007)

WadeF said:


> I just popped out the stock Mag lens and replace it with the aspheric lens. I kept the reflector since it holds the lens in place. I was tickled with how easy it was to do.


 
Thanks! Wow. If I knew it was that easy I would have ordered the lens a while ago! Edit: Just placed my order!
So, any input on the bezel that would 1) protect the lens and 2) allow it to stand face-down on the table?


----------



## cliff (Aug 1, 2007)

KingGlamis said:


> But, as fun as this was to try, the overall usefullness is MUCH better with the reflector in place.


 
I came to the same conclusion, but this was with the stock Magled emitter which is only about 50 lumens or so. With one of the more powerful drop-ins this could be the worklight of all time, especially if some means were devised to attach magnet(s) to it so it would stick under the hood of a car.


----------



## sysadmn (Aug 1, 2007)

smokelaw1 said:


> Thanks! Wow. If I knew it was that easy I would have ordered the lens a while ago! Edit: Just placed my order!
> So, any input on the bezel that would 1) protect the lens and 2) allow it to stand face-down on the table?


 
https://www.candlepowerforums.com/threads/166544

Or search for "kiu bezel"; might also look for "maglite strike bezel".
You'll have to watch the B/S/T forums, I think.


----------



## habibi (Aug 1, 2007)

HI!

For protecting the aspherical lens i use one o-ring (3mm thick) between bezel and head and the stock mag lensholder for those coloured lenses. Works great....
Cheers


----------



## BobbyRS (Aug 2, 2007)

Got mine setup last night. Outstanding results! Here are a couple of pics:









I may try to post some beamshots later.


----------



## smokelaw1 (Aug 2, 2007)

Lookin good, bobby. Hope it works out well, adn that you'll come and tell us all about it. I look forward to getting mine set up!


----------



## BobbyRS (Aug 2, 2007)

smokelaw1 said:


> Lookin good, bobby. Hope it works out well, adn that you'll come and tell us all about it. I look forward to getting mine set up!


 
Thank you! So far, I'm lovin' it. Good luck with yours. I'm sure you'll love it too.


----------



## Kraid (Aug 3, 2007)

Got mine last night too and haven't stopped playing with it since. I was kinda drunk while assembling and got the epiphany to simply cut the very top ring on the reflector with my EDC Benchmade Gaucho. It allows you to fully tighten the top down with no compromise to the light! I'll try to post pics later. Really want to score a Malkoff. And combined with a strike bezel, this could be the ultimate light in its size! Currently using the Terralux.


----------



## smokelaw1 (Aug 4, 2007)

Put mine in just now, and was experimenting in the basement. 

Very odd, it does not seem as bright as the Malkoff. I do not think it works as well as we expect because the Malkoff does not use the standard assembly/reflector. To the naked eye, the Malkoff in a 3d seems much brighter. Then, I took beamshots, and the aspheric SEEMs to be brighter/tighter. 
I'll have to try outside tonight. THese are in the basement, far wall is roughly 40 feet. 

Ti-PD-S for reference:






Malkoff normal:





Malkoff with Aspheric:





Workbench pics:











The lens:


----------



## LukeA (Aug 4, 2007)

After destroying the Cree I put in my Aspheric Mag by running it direct drive on 3 AA NiMHs, today I put in a Rebel and a pair of .47Ohm resistors, because A) I already have Rebels and didn't want to wait for a new Cree star from DX which I wasn't happy with anyway, and B) according to the datasheet, the Rebel puts out more light that hits the lens than the Cree.


----------



## Kraid (Aug 4, 2007)

smokelaw1, I can't see pics at work, but I'm confused by what you're saying. Do you mean the Malkoff doesn't seem as bright with the aspheric lens as it does with the normal lens?


----------



## ZMZ67 (Aug 6, 2007)

Kraid,just want to thank you for the cut down reflector idea, did mine tonight.I am not a modder and am always interested in the simple upgrades.Now I just have to find something to protect the lens and I'll be set.BTW if you use the lens without the reflector it makes a nice even flood,kind of like the original X1 but the spot is giant and brighter.I may have to order more of these aspheric lenses.Much thanks to King Glamis for the first post !


----------



## LukeA (Aug 6, 2007)

We're having a thunderstorm here, so I took the opportunity to go out under the roof of my back porch and light up some raindrops with my aspheric mag :twothumbs

(Flood focus, the 'hotspot' on the tree is about 160ft away)





I know it's blurry, I guess that's what I get for not using a tripod and holding the light and camera in different hands (for a 1sec exposure).


----------



## smokelaw1 (Aug 6, 2007)

Kraid said:


> smokelaw1, I can't see pics at work, but I'm confused by what you're saying. Do you mean the Malkoff doesn't seem as bright with the aspheric lens as it does with the normal lens?


 
Exactly. THe aspheric does NOT benefir a light with the Malkoff drop-in. Now, this is really OK with me, as the Malkoff is fantastic just as it is, and allows the light to still look pretty stock. 

I went outside at night, and confirmed with some long distance tests. Aspheric with Malkoff is NOT as good a thrower as the Malkoff by itself. 

I am thinking of putting one of the other (cheaper/potted) drop-ins in my 2D, running it off 3Cs, and using the Aspheric in that. I think I can go 2D-3Cs...right?


----------



## lctorana (Aug 6, 2007)

They won't drop straight in - 2xD is about 120mm and 3xC is about 150mm.

I have read some forum members have recessed a smaller cell into the tailcap after removing anodizing and altering the spring, but I would also point out that 3xSubC is about 126mm, which does drop straght in - it only requires some radial padding of some sort.


----------



## smokelaw1 (Aug 7, 2007)

lctorana said:


> They won't drop straight in - 2xD is about 120mm and 3xC is about 150mm.
> 
> I have read some forum members have recessed a smaller cell into the tailcap after removing anodizing and altering the spring, but I would also point out that 3xSubC is about 126mm, which does drop straght in - it only requires some radial padding of some sort.


 
3XSubC, eh....that's something I haven't needed to buy yet...OK, you've convinced me!


----------



## lctorana (Aug 9, 2007)

Just got my Aspheric lens from SS last night.

Popped it into my 6D Mag clone (which is currently running a 6D MagXenon bulb with rechargables), and can project an image of the filament coil at any distance the torch can shine.

Very amusing.


----------



## kanarie (Aug 10, 2007)

> *Re: Aspheric Mag, holy cow this is cool!*
> After destroying the Cree I put in my Aspheric Mag by running it direct drive on 3 AA NiMHs, today I put in a Rebel and a pair of .47Ohm resistors, because A) I already have Rebels and didn't want to wait for a new Cree star from DX which I wasn't happy with anyway, and B) according to the datasheet, the Rebel puts out more light that hits the lens than the Cree.


you can also try the Edison KLC8 ;I run one in a 3D (4,5v) in direct drive with succes!!
The Seoul I tried as a replacement turned angry blue in seconds


----------



## easilyled (Aug 14, 2007)

LukeA said:


> The Rebel's Lambertian emission pattern lends itself to this application, as the vast majority of the light is emitted at an angle that passes through the lens.
> 
> I figured this out today by taking the reflector off of my Rebel'ed B3 and looking at it from different angles.



Actually, more light comes out of the front with a Cree-XRE than with
leds with lambertian emitters. 

The Cree has a narrower beam. With Lambertian emission, more light hits
the sides than with the Cree.

This is why Newbie, Mac, Ledean specifically use the Cree in combination with Aspheric lens.


----------



## LED61 (Aug 14, 2007)

Guys, sorry if this has been asked before, but what happens if you combine this lens with a Mag85 and one of Fivemega's reflectors ?


----------



## LukeA (Aug 14, 2007)

easilyled said:


> Actually, more light comes out of the front with a Cree-XRE than with
> leds with lambertian emitters.
> 
> The Cree has a narrower beam. With Lambertian emission, more light hits
> ...



Then explain why my Rebel aspheric mag throws just as far now, running at 900mA, as it did when it was running a Cree at 3A.


----------



## LukeA (Aug 14, 2007)

LED61 said:


> Guys, sorry if this has been asked before, but what happens if you combine this lens with a Mag85 and one of Fivemega's reflectors ?



You don't really need the reflector with the lens. With an incandescent light source, the focused throw beam will be pretty ugly and will have artifacts from the bulb. The light will project a tiny image of the filament. 

On flood focus it would probably be very nice.


----------



## easilyled (Aug 14, 2007)

LukeA said:


> Then explain why my Rebel aspheric mag throws just as far now, running at 900mA, as it did when it was running a Cree at 3A.



If you ran the Cree at 3A, you would have damaged it severely for starters.

Somehow when Newbie, Don, cryhavok all say that the emission pattern
for the Cree is more suitable for an Aspheric lens than a lambertian
emission pattern, I tend to believe them, not you when you claim the
opposite.


----------



## LukeA (Aug 14, 2007)

easilyled said:


> If you ran the Cree at 3A, you would have damaged it severely for starters.
> 
> Somehow when Newbie, Don, cryhavok all say that the emission pattern
> for the Cree is more suitable for an Aspheric lens than a lambertian
> ...



You're entitled to whatever opinion you damn well please. Just don't tell me that I don't know what I'm talking about when I do.


----------



## easilyled (Aug 14, 2007)

LukeA said:


> You're entitled to whatever opinion you damn well please. Just don't tell me that I don't know what I'm talking about when I do.



I will challenge any information that I consider to be factually incorrect,
both for my sake and for the sake of others.

Too bad if you don't like it.


----------



## gearbox (Aug 14, 2007)

OK, we have establish that two people contend opposing views with each offering their reasoning. For the sake of those who search through and read these threads for informative purposes, this should be enough, right?

Please, lets not let the thread drift toward the negative.


----------



## LukeA (Aug 14, 2007)

gearbox said:


> OK, we have establish that two people contend opposing views with each offering their reasoning. For the sake of those who search through and read these threads for informative purposes, this should be enough, right?
> 
> Please, lets not let the thread drift toward the negative.



That's fine by me.


----------



## IMSabbel (Aug 14, 2007)

gearbox said:


> OK, we have establish that two people contend opposing views with each offering their reasoning. For the sake of those who search through and read these threads for informative purposes, this should be enough, right?
> 
> Please, lets not let the thread drift toward the negative.



But its also a disservice to future readers to let LukeAs statement unchallenged, as he is wrong.


----------



## LukeA (Aug 14, 2007)

IMSabbel said:


> But its also a disservice to future readers to let LukeAs statement unchallenged, as he is wrong.



And you know this how?


----------



## cryhavok (Aug 19, 2007)

Taken from evan9162's thread on the technical evaluation of the Cree XR-E Q4 bin done on 8/17/07.







> In the central 35 degrees, the XR-E delivers more lumens, while in the part of the beam outside 35 degrees, the rebel delivers more lumens. Thus, the rebel could create a brighter focused beam with a reflector, but the XR-E would produce a brighter beam with optics (such as an aspherical lens). The lack of side-emitted light makes the XR-E less than ideal for reflectors. An especially deep reflector would be needed to be optimal with the XR-E.


----------



## easilyled (Aug 20, 2007)

cryhavok said:


> Taken from evan9162's thread on the technical evaluation of the Cree XR-E Q4 bin done on 8/17/07.



Thanks for providing that.

Well I think that pretty much confirms that the Cree-XRE is a far better
choice than the rebel led for use in an Aspheric lens.

Unless LukeA, (16 years old, join date June 2007) can prove that he knows more about this than evan9162, of course.


----------



## lctorana (Aug 29, 2007)

Another aspheric story.

I have been gradually modding my 4C mag.

First step was more batteries - 6 x 4/5 SubC fitted nicely, overdriving a KPR113.

Second step was a HPR71 - more than double the brightness.

Third step was *download*'s MagCTower.

Fourth step was *FiveMega*'s cammed reflector, bored out to 9mm for the HPR71.

(Borofloat and RoP bulb still in the post. Can't wait!)

Very nice result. I'm pleased as is.

Just for a laugh, I thought I'd pop the Aspheric in.

Result? A huge magnification of the orange-peel stippling. In sharp focus. Amusing, but makes me feel decidedly queasy to look at it.


----------



## sysadmn (Aug 29, 2007)

lctorana said:


> Result? A huge magnification of the orange-peel stippling. In sharp focus. Amusing, but makes me feel decidedly queasy to look at it.



Yes, my take was - great defense light, if your attacker is on acid. Oooh the colors, they move!


----------



## outersquare (Aug 29, 2007)

is there a way to get the bezel to seal? 
Maybe by grinding down the inside of the lip of the bezel?


----------



## sysadmn (Aug 30, 2007)

outersquare said:


> is there a way to get the bezel to seal?
> Maybe by grinding down the inside of the lip of the bezel?



I thought there was, but it was by taking the body down. I can't find the thread, and I could be remembering incorrectly. If you don't get an answer here, ask in the custom/modder forum - several of the regulars build these all the time.


----------



## f22shift (Aug 30, 2007)

you can cut off the lip of the reflector and it'll seal


----------



## Ra (Aug 31, 2007)

LukeA said:


> You don't really need the reflector with the lens. With an incandescent light source, the focused throw beam will be pretty ugly and will have artifacts from the bulb. The light will project a tiny image of the filament.
> 
> On flood focus it would probably be very nice.



In fact, a parabolic reflector tries to do exactly the same thing as an aspherical lens: Create a parallel beam, collimate as much light as possible towards a point at infinnity (with the source placed in focus)

However, when you place an aspherical lens of any kind in front of a parabolic reflector, you'll defenitely destroy the workings of the reflector! Even on flood, the rays comming from the reflector will be all over the place, but nowhere near the main beam of the aspheric lens!
It propably will give a few rings of faint flood around the main beam created by the aspherical lens..Ok, so you gain a few extra torchlumens...




Regards,


Ra.


----------



## LuxLuthor (Sep 19, 2007)

Some really great images and information in this thread. Thanks!


----------



## rala (Sep 21, 2007)

dont know if this has been answered before, but how would the lens work with a frosted bulb?


----------



## lctorana (Sep 21, 2007)

Good question!


----------



## Ra (Sep 21, 2007)

rala said:


> dont know if this has been answered before, but how would the lens work with a frosted bulb?



You will get a very nice flood !!


Regards,

Ra.


----------



## Austin curtis (May 26, 2009)

HI WHAT WEB SITE DID YOU USE AND WHAT WERE ALL THE DEMENSIONS OF THIS LENS


----------



## KingGlamis (May 27, 2009)

Austin curtis said:


> HI WHAT WEB SITE DID YOU USE AND WHAT WERE ALL THE DEMENSIONS OF THIS LENS



Check out the first page of this thread.


----------



## The Dane (May 28, 2009)

Unfortunatly the lens is no longer avaliable :mecry:

Just been there and searched for almost 30 min.


----------



## DM51 (May 28, 2009)

This is quite an old thread, and things have moved on. 

If you use the search function and enter "aspheric" as a keyword, then specify "Search Titles Only", you'll come up with numerous other threads, among which is this sale thread for aspheric lenses.


----------



## saabluster (May 29, 2009)

DM51 said:


> among which is this sale thread for aspheric lenses.


Unfortunately he is out of those lenses. But maybe if people post interest over there he will have some more made.


----------

