# *new* Fenix LD60: max 2800 lumens



## kj75 (Sep 17, 2014)

On Fenix website now!

http://fenixlight.com/ProductMore.aspx?id=147&tid=10&cid=1#.VBl3Zvl_s3k



















Nice design! :thumbsup:


----------



## markr6 (Sep 17, 2014)

I LIKE IT! Could be my first cool blue purchase in a long time. But if they offer a neutral white I'm all over this.

No info on how the UI works...why mention the "Intuitive one-button operation" without any idea how it works?!?! Soon enough of course...


----------



## sbbsga (Sep 17, 2014)

markr6 said:


> No info on how the UI works...why mention the "Intuitive one-button operation" without any idea how it works?!?! Soon enough of course...



I think the UI is the same as LD50's.


----------



## subwoofer (Sep 17, 2014)

sbbsga said:


> I think the UI is the same as LD50's.



That is exactly what I would think. With the number of LEDs lit dependant on the number of cells loaded this looks like a triple version of the double LD50 design.

By the way, the LD50 I have on test has the lowest parasitic drain I have ever measured, so hopefully the LD60 will be as good.


----------



## kj2 (Sep 17, 2014)

Going straight on the to-buy list


----------



## ven (Sep 17, 2014)

Like!!! sort of an srmini and an sr52 in one without the usb charge..........

On my list for a maybe later purchase


----------



## markr6 (Sep 17, 2014)

Guessing somewhere around $120-$140?


----------



## kj2 (Sep 17, 2014)

markr6 said:


> Guessing somewhere around $120-$140?



Think so


----------



## martinaee (Sep 17, 2014)

Times are good peeps. Now we have TK75 output (with less throw of course) in a tiny package from Fenix.

I can't describe how happy I am this light has a thread mount. Pretty much the only other thing I'd like it to have is a slick usb charging port, but I guess you can't have everything.


----------



## Capolini (Sep 17, 2014)

markr6 said:


> Guessing somewhere around $120-$140?



Listed as $149.95 on Fenix Outfitters website. If they have another coupon code it should be 10% off.that would make it $135.00! * *


----------



## galveston22 (Sep 17, 2014)

Was wanting a SR-Mini but I think I may give Fenix a shot...my collection is starting to grow.


----------



## kj2 (Sep 17, 2014)

Capolini said:


> Listed as $149.95 on Fenix Outfitters website. If they have another coupon code it should be 10% off.that would make it $135.00! * *



Good price when you use that coupon 
To bad my Fenix dealer here doesn't use free coupon-codes.


----------



## ven (Sep 18, 2014)

Wonder what vinh could do


----------



## stienke (Sep 18, 2014)

I love the new power design from Fenix , you never need matching cells! , makes flashlights safer, good work and if this one works like my LD50 it's a winner.
My Dutch dealer sell the LD50 for 99,95 euro so I hope he will make a good price for the LD60 too.


----------



## markr6 (Sep 18, 2014)

ven said:


> Wonder what vinh could do



Actually, I just want him to throw in a nice neutral white LED. I will consider this, depending on the cost.


----------



## SimulatedZero (Sep 18, 2014)

That's what I was thinking. Although a nice premium tint dedome would suit this light perfectly. It would be nice if just dedoming the LED's would push the intensity to anywhere from 80,000 to 120,000 cd.


----------



## Capolini (Sep 18, 2014)

Capolini said:


> Listed as $149.95 on Fenix Outfitters website. If they have another coupon code it should be 10% off.that would make it $135.00! * *



I just spoke to Fenix Outfitters. They just activated the coupon code for this New light. It did not work yesterday when I tried!

It is now $134.95 w/code.


----------



## Overclocker (Sep 18, 2014)

3 separate circuits, which means cells aren't in series ergo crappy regulation

it's just like the regulation of a single-XML2 single-18650 flashlight i.e. continuously declining output based on cell voltage

what's with fenix these days? their TK35ue probably has the crappiest regulation ever seen on a flashlight, i mean it really takes a nosedive!

http://www.candlepowerforums.com/vb/showthread.php?383721


----------



## 18650 (Sep 18, 2014)

Overclocker said:


> 3 separate circuits, which means cells aren't in series ergo crappy regulation it's just like the regulation of a single-XML2 single-18650 flashlight i.e. continuously declining output based on cell voltage what's with fenix these days? their TK35ue probably has the crappiest regulation ever seen on a flashlight, i mean it really takes a nosedive! http://www.candlepowerforums.com/vb/showthread.php?383721


 It looks regulated on turbo: http://www.candlepowerforums.com/vb/showthread.php?385510 It's the low capacity 2200mah cells. You seemed to ignore that the last time this came up though.


----------



## SimulatedZero (Sep 18, 2014)

I was going to address this before, but I let it slide. That graph shows a constant resetting to turbo instead of letting the programming kick the light down a mode and stay regulated at the lower output. The direct drive pattern you're seeing in that graph is the limitation of the cell, not the light. No single cell setup is going to be able to sustain that high draw for any extended period in a regulated manor and no 2 cell setup is going to be able to sustain an MT-G2 on turbo for any extended period of time either. Even Thrunite and Eagletac lights drop modes with their 3 cell setup because it's too high of a thermal demand, even disregarding the power requirements, for a light that size. 

Sorry to say that any light from any manufacturer is going to be limited by the same rules. Look at the severe lumen drops on Thrunite or Nitecore. That's why I don't like lights that push for the highest output they sacrifice everything and play word games with run times just to achieve 1000+ lumens or just to achieve 100 or so lumens over their competition. That's not even going to be noticed at those light levels.


----------



## BanditoPete (Sep 18, 2014)

kj2 said:


> Going straight on the to-buy list



Same here. Probably will be a popular light.


----------



## Overclocker (Sep 19, 2014)

SimulatedZero said:


> I was going to address this before, but I let it slide. That graph shows a constant resetting to turbo instead of letting the programming kick the light down a mode and stay regulated at the lower output. The direct drive pattern you're seeing in that graph is the limitation of the cell, not the light. No single cell setup is going to be able to sustain that high draw for any extended period in a regulated manor and no 2 cell setup is going to be able to sustain an MT-G2 on turbo for any extended period of time either. Even Thrunite and Eagletac lights drop modes with their 3 cell setup because it's too high of a thermal demand, even disregarding the power requirements, for a light that size.
> 
> Sorry to say that any light from any manufacturer is going to be limited by the same rules. Look at the severe lumen drops on Thrunite or Nitecore. That's why I don't like lights that push for the highest output they sacrifice everything and play word games with run times just to achieve 1000+ lumens or just to achieve 100 or so lumens over their competition. That's not even going to be noticed at those light levels.





exactly! 2-cell setup is a poor choice for the high-Vf MT-G2. when you put them together you get the crappiest regulation in the flashlight industry

but my point is this. once the battery voltage goes down a bit on this LD60 you wouldn't get 2800 lumens anymore, even if you let it rest to cool down, because the individual voltages on them 18650's wouldn't be high enough. but if they were in series the driver would have enough voltage to drive the LEDs to maximum power. just look at the many fine examples of 3x 18650 in series out there


----------



## Overclocker (Sep 19, 2014)

18650 said:


> It looks regulated on turbo: http://www.candlepowerforums.com/vb/showthread.php?385510 It's the low capacity 2200mah cells. You seemed to ignore that the last time this came up though.



you're kidding, right?

2200, granted, are pretty crappy cells. but even LG D1 will just flatten out the red curve a bit. still DD. still crappy regulation


----------



## Jeffg330 (Sep 19, 2014)

I keep hoping to see Fenix offer a moonlight mode....


----------



## subwoofer (Sep 19, 2014)

Overclocker said:


> you're kidding, right?
> 
> 2200, granted, are pretty crappy cells. but even LG D1 will just flatten out the red curve a bit. still DD. still crappy regulation



Did you check the graph in my review where I use 3400mAh cells?


----------



## newbie66 (Sep 19, 2014)

WOW! :wow:

Finally, a pretty compact light with more than 2000 lumens that might just be within my budget. This is on my to-buy list.

Thanks for enlightening us kj75!


----------



## newbie66 (Sep 19, 2014)

Overclocker said:


> exactly! 2-cell setup is a poor choice for the high-Vf MT-G2. when you put them together you get the crappiest regulation in the flashlight industry
> 
> but my point is this. once the battery voltage goes down a bit on this LD60 you wouldn't get 2800 lumens anymore, even if you let it rest to cool down, because the individual voltages on them 18650's wouldn't be high enough. but if they were in series the driver would have enough voltage to drive the LEDs to maximum power. just look at the many fine examples of 3x 18650 in series out there




Unless one uses IMR cells!


----------



## SimulatedZero (Sep 19, 2014)

Overclocker said:


> exactly! 2-cell setup is a poor choice for the high-Vf MT-G2. when you put them together you get the crappiest regulation in the flashlight industry
> 
> but my point is this. once the battery voltage goes down a bit on this LD60 you wouldn't get 2800 lumens anymore, even if you let it rest to cool down, because the individual voltages on them 18650's wouldn't be high enough. but if they were in series the driver would have enough voltage to drive the LEDs to maximum power. just look at the many fine examples of 3x 18650 in series out there



Really? Crappiest regulation you say? Then why does the blue line look perfectly flat on the graph you provide? The direct drive pattern you're seeing the result of constantly resetting the light to Turbo. There are very, very few lights that can sustain that high of a light output with out dropping down to a next mode. And the result of preventing the light from dropping down modes results in a direct drive like pattern. My point here is that you are slamming Fenix for not being able to sustain a flat line on Turbo when every single high output light on the market, with the exception of a select few, do the exact same thing. The big difference that you keep referencing with a graph, that ironically enough provides evidence that contradicts your point, is that the TK35-UE allows you to override the stepdown and constantly bump the light back to max output. 

As an example, one of the only lights I know of to sustain a perfectly flat regulation at 1000+ lumens is the Fenix TK60. That's because it has the cell support and the infrastructure support to sustain that output. Another good example is the Olight SR92. I can't remember if it is perfectly flat off of the top of my head, but I know that it is pretty damn close. Again, that light has the proper supporting cell structure and infrastructure to properly regulate that high of an energy flux. 

And to make my position perfectly clear here, I'm not defending Fenix in regards to their drop in light output. I'm saying that this is a common trend among ALL flashlight manufacturers, not just the ones you don't like. 

Now, as far as running cells in series vs parallel, I couldn't tell you. I am not that well versed in batteries to know. We'll just wait for reviews on that front.


----------



## StriderSMF (Sep 19, 2014)

oohh i like this one cant wait for the reviews


----------



## eff (Sep 19, 2014)

SimulatedZero said:


> As an example, one of the only lights I know of to sustain a perfectly flat regulation at 1000+ lumens is the Fenix TK60. That's because it has the cell support and the infrastructure support to sustain that output. Another good example is the Olight SR92. I can't remember if it is perfectly flat off of the top of my head, but I know that it is pretty damn close. Again, that light has the proper supporting cell structure and infrastructure to properly regulate that high of an energy flux.


If I remember correctly, the fenix Tk70 turbo mode is also well regulated until it drops to high mode http://lygte-info.dk/review/Review Fenix TK70 UK.html


----------



## Swedpat (Sep 19, 2014)

Regarding the bad regulation of newer lights it's a result of the lumen race; lumens sells. Therefore many manufacturers offer flashlights with a maximum output higher than the batteries are able to sustain. It would be enough to lower the max output with ~30% or so for getting a flat regulation for an hour.
I am looking forward to see runtime graph of LD60!


----------



## Labrador72 (Sep 19, 2014)

I though the LD series included only AA or AAA lights. I guess not anymore?


----------



## SimulatedZero (Sep 19, 2014)

Swedpat said:


> Regarding the bad regulation of newer lights it's a result of the lumen race; lumens sells. Therefore many manufacturers offer flashlights with a maximum output higher than the batteries are able to sustain. It would be enough to lower the max output with ~30% or so for getting a flat regulation for an hour.
> I am looking forward to see runtime graph of LD60!



+1





Labrador72 said:


> I though the LD series included only AA or AAA lights. I guess not anymore?



For some reason Fenix started throwing Li-Ion lights into the LD mix with the new LD50 that just came out. I'm not entirely sure why either. I have a feeling that there has been some behind the scenes restructuring at Fenix and I'm still on the fence about it.


----------



## recDNA (Sep 20, 2014)

I'd like to see more throw. 2800 lumens could provide throw and flood easily. Just need to redesign the head. I love that you can get full power output on 6 primaries.


----------



## martinaee (Sep 24, 2014)

Seems like it will provide quite a lot of throw. Heck that SR mini provides a decent amount of throw through sheer output. This will do the same and it does have reflectors to really get it out there. They are pretty shallow though so you still will get nice flood. I can't wait to see reviews on this light.


----------



## SimulatedZero (Sep 24, 2014)

Well, that's not really the point of this light now is it. They have the tk75, which is the same design as the ld60, that throws for 110,000 cd. The ld60 is still respectable at 53,000 cd. This light is all about compact form with high output more than anything.


----------



## magicstone12 (Sep 24, 2014)

SimulatedZero said:


> Well, that's not really the point of this light now is it. They have the tk75, which is the same design as the ld60, that throws for 110,000 cd. The ld60 is still respectable at 53,000 cd. This light is all about compact form with high output more than anything.



It seems that the circuit design is different from TK75,LD60 can use only one 18650 battery and light up one LED.


----------



## SimulatedZero (Sep 24, 2014)

The lights are more than similar enough for the comparison I made.


----------



## martinaee (Sep 24, 2014)

Throw is overrated... unless you are going for a light specifically to throw. Then get a TK61 

But again, I guess you can compare it to the TK75 for sure, but the point is a more compact light that is lighter and still has tremendous output.


----------



## AirmanV (Sep 24, 2014)

I'm really liking the design and aesthetics of this light. The regulation issue, if you want to call it that, doesn't seem to bother me. I really only use the Highest lumen mode for short bursts, when looking over very dark areas. I think I'll be adding this to my Fenix collection. I also agree with a few people on this thread. The reflector looks pretty deep so I am seeing some throwing potential with this one. As long as the spill has some light, I'm good.


----------



## newbie66 (Sep 25, 2014)

The spill should not be an issue since it has a smaller reflector than the tk75. Smaller reflector = less throw which would make it floodier.


----------



## 18650 (Sep 25, 2014)

AirmanV said:


> I'm really liking the design and aesthetics of this light. The regulation issue, if you want to call it that, doesn't seem to bother me. I really only use the Highest lumen mode for short bursts, when looking over very dark areas. I think I'll be adding this to my Fenix collection. I also agree with a few people on this thread. The reflector looks pretty deep so I am seeing some throwing potential with this one. As long as the spill has some light, I'm good.


 This thing is rated at 2800 lumens, 460m/53000cd while the TK41 (XM-L2) is rated at 900 lumens, 510m/65050cd so not really.


----------



## easilyled (Sep 25, 2014)

18650 said:


> This thing is rated at 2800 lumens, 460m/53000cd while the TK41 (XM-L2) is rated at 900 lumens, 510m/65050cd so not really.



I think the caveat is that *for a triple-led, the throw is good*. 2800 lumens lights up a much larger area, so if this can still throw almost as well as a single led light where the hot-spot is much smaller, then its quite impressive.


----------



## bladesmith3 (Sep 26, 2014)

does anyone know the 10% discount code?


----------



## Richwouldnt (Sep 26, 2014)

IMO any light that can throw almost half a kilometer by ANSI test is going to throw a lot further than 99% of buyers actually NEED. Think back 20 years and virtually no reasonably compact flashlight could reach out much distance at all. Throw in a "portable" light took large and heavy spotlights running high wattage automotive type bulbs and the throw was still a lot less than many hand held lights can do today.


----------



## martinaee (Sep 27, 2014)

Richwouldnt said:


> IMO any light that can throw almost half a kilometer by ANSI test is going to throw a lot further than 99% of buyers actually NEED. Think back 20 years and virtually no reasonably compact flashlight could reach out much distance at all. Throw in a "portable" light took large and heavy spotlights running high wattage automotive type bulbs and the throw was still a lot less than many hand held lights can do today.



ROFL I know right? How spoiled have we become that we have easily rechargeable lights barely bigger than a pop-can putting out nearly 3k lumens... THREE THOUSAND LUMENS... and we label them as not having much throw. This isn't a criticism of anyone as I know everything is meant in a relative way, but we have to keep everything in perspective. The "non-throwers" of today are doing nearly as well as some true thrower lights were doing 5 years ago.

Coincidentally this IS basically the reason I give to people who just think I'm weird for being so into LED flashlights and just LED stuff in general. What other techs have advanced as much as LED tech and especially LED flashlights have in the past few years. Literally it was impressive to find small 2 cr123 sized flashlights that could put out over 100 lumens in 2005 or so. Now suddenly we have lights that big putting out over 1000 lumens? WHAT?


----------



## StriderSMF (Sep 27, 2014)

martinaee said:


> ROFL I know right? How spoiled have we become that we have easily rechargeable lights barely bigger than a pop-can putting out nearly 3k lumens... THREE THOUSAND LUMENS... and we label them as not having much throw. This isn't a criticism of anyone as I know everything is meant in a relative way, but we have to keep everything in perspective. The "non-throwers" of today are doing nearly as well as some true thrower lights were doing 5 years ago.
> 
> Coincidentally this IS basically the reason I give to people who just think I'm weird for being so into LED flashlights and just LED stuff in general. What other techs have advanced as much as LED tech and especially LED flashlights have in the past few years. Literally it was impressive to find small 2 cr123 sized flashlights that could put out over 100 lumens in 2005 or so. Now suddenly we have lights that big putting out over 1000 lumens? WHAT?



I know what do you want a light that melts face's off and 5000 yards ? YES


----------



## Richwouldnt (Sep 27, 2014)

Just as a comparison with early LED technology I have a 128 LED Shower head LED light that takes six D size batteries and puts out a couple of hundred Lumens. A HUGE light by modern standards with a pretty pathetic unfocused output light blob. I picked it up recently from a surplus site, brand new. At their price of under $10 + shipping I could not pass it up as an example of what used to be a high technology LED flashlight. Absolutely outrageous by current standards. Quite a club though if needed. No idea though of what it would have originally cost. Probably highly dependent on when made and no indication of that on the packaging.


----------



## martinaee (Sep 27, 2014)

Richwouldnt said:


> Just as a comparison with early LED technology I have a 128 LED Shower head LED light that takes six D size batteries and puts out a couple of hundred Lumens. A HUGE light by modern standards with a pretty pathetic unfocused output light blob. I picked it up recently from a surplus site, brand new. At their price of under $10 + shipping I could not pass it up as an example of what used to be a high technology LED flashlight. Absolutely outrageous by current standards. Quite a club though if needed. No idea though of what it would have originally cost. Probably highly dependent on when made and no indication of that on the packaging.



For a second I thought you were talking about those literal shower head led color changing lights. I've always wanted to try one of those lol. That looks awesome to have colored rainbow water splashing over your face but I don't know how well they work in reality. Anyone ever use those?


----------



## martinaee (Sep 28, 2014)

StriderSMF said:


> I know what do you want a light that melts face's off and 5000 yards ? YES













Sorry I couldn't resist. Halloween is coming up. BTW that scene scarred me as little kid


----------



## StriderSMF (Sep 29, 2014)

^hahaha awesome^


----------



## martinaee (Sep 29, 2014)

I just looked at the beamshots for the various lumen outputs on the Fenix page. They look "uneven" on wallshots of the higher modes.

Since the light has three independent power sources and can operate without one or more of the chambers being filled with batteries does this mean there is no way to get power from one or two filled battery chambers evenly spread to all three emitters? AKA does that mean you will only get a full even 3-led light pattern using 3 18650's or other cells?

The idea of having basically lights like this that are in essence three flashlights strapped together gives the light a bit of extra safety and also flexibility, but does it take away anything else that a more traditional design that requires power from all the cell-spots at once offers?

I know in practice the beams will collate pretty well even with only two led's being powered (like the LD50), but I want to know how much difference it actually would make.


----------



## Jagged77 (Oct 2, 2014)

LD60 has just arrived along with an E41 plus various others. On initial inspection and the obligatory 'playing' with it inside the house, it seems to easily tick all the boxes for a professional use search light. (Mine will be used for Mountain Rescue). I intend to put it through it's paces this weekend all being well. If anyone wants any specific info I'll do my best to answer.


----------



## Nestor (Oct 2, 2014)

Jagged77 said:


> LD60 has just arrived along with an E41 plus various others. On initial inspection and the obligatory 'playing' with it inside the house, it seems to easily tick all the boxes for a professional use search light. (Mine will be used for Mountain Rescue). I intend to put it through it's paces this weekend all being well. If anyone wants any specific info I'll do my best to answer.



I just received my LD60 and everything look good except is has visible PWM in eco mode. I can see the flickering. In the other modes, except turbo, I can also see PWM if I move my hand quickly in front of the light. I am quite surprised Fenix uses PWM in this light. Did you notice the same or I am having problems with mine?


----------



## Nestor (Oct 2, 2014)

Nestor said:


> I just received my LD60 and everything look good except is has visible PWM in eco mode. I can see the flickering. In the other modes, except turbo, I can also see PWM if I move my hand quickly in front of the light. I am quite surprised Fenix uses PWM in this light. Did you notice the same or I am having problems with mine?



Correction: after checking the conection in the tail, I can't see the flickering by naked eye. However, I can see the PWM effect when I move my hand in front of the light and when I use a camera whose subject is illuminated by this light.


----------



## SimulatedZero (Oct 2, 2014)

That could potentially be a complication of using multiple circuits in a light. I know that was the issue with the dual switches in the Klarus lights.


----------



## TroyG (Oct 2, 2014)

Is the LD 60 supposed to be a flood and throw light?


----------



## Nestor (Oct 2, 2014)

TroyG said:


> Is the LD 60 supposed to be a flood and throw light?



It is something in between. Maybe a little more on the thrower side. The hotspot is about 5ft diameter at 30 ft distance. The specs say 53,000 cd, which is more than twice as much as the Eagletac G25C2 (I have it). Based on what I see, it should be right.


----------



## easilyled (Oct 3, 2014)

Only a few years ago 53,000 lux per metre would have exceeded nearly all non-custom lights for throw, including the dedicated throwers.

Its throw is similar in lux to my Olight SR51. The "SR" denotes Search & Rescue category. The SR51 is a larger light and produces nothing like the overall output of this light with a much narrower field of view lit up.

The combination of lux (throw) and lumens (overall output) for this light should be more than enough for just about anyone, save a few specialist professional search and rescue personnel who would have to use much larger lights than this for their needs.

The main problem most everyday users would have when employing this light on the highest level would be the continual number of complaints regarding its excessive brightness from their walking companions and people coming from the opposite direction.

This light could therefore be defined as producing a "wall of light" which is blasted out at the distance of many "thrower" lights. A kind of mini version of the TK75.


----------



## martinaee (Oct 3, 2014)

Nestor said:


> It is something in between. Maybe a little more on the thrower side. The hotspot is about 5ft diameter at 30 ft distance. The specs say 53,000 cd, which is more than twice as much as the Eagletac G25C2 (I have it). Based on what I see, it should be right.



I think lights like this are "kind of" throwers even if they aren't meant to be. I think most of us on CPF have been here a few years at least so what a thrower meant in 2008 is sort of intersected by "wall of light" lights in 2014.

The only thing that is bad about non-dedicated throwers is possible loss of night vision more than with true throwers.


----------



## easilyled (Oct 3, 2014)

martinaee said:


> I think lights like this are "kind of" throwers even if they aren't meant to be.



Yes, exactly, this is the trouble with trying to label a light absolutely based on its throw when it really can only be applied in relative terms.

There are no led lights that can compare with Short-Arc lights in terms of beam distance so in this comparison led lights would not be described as "throwers".

On the other hand, compared to tiny pocket led-lights, all larger led lights with secondary optics are "throwers" purely by virtue of having relatively larger optics which therfore project the light rays further.

We tend to call lights with narrow pencil-like beams "throwers" more often than lights with beam profiles that are more diffuse yet there are lights in the latter category, like this one, that can outthrow some of the aforementioned lights with pencil beams.

Therefore in my opinion its not particularly helpful to become too embroiled with the labelling. 

The most important function of a light is to perform the task required. I can't imagine that there will be many casual users needing a light to illuminate a further distance than this one and with the added bonus of there being a very wide field being illuminated at the same time.


----------



## Nestor (Oct 3, 2014)

Yesterday I tried it in an open area and I really like it. It out-throws my G25C2 and Xeno G42 (dedicated thrower) easily. Since the hot spot/spill is way brighter, you don't get the sense it is a thrower. Large threes get completely illuminated, not just a section of them. What I like the most is its power/size ratio. It is way smaller than the TK75 and it has almost the same output. Yes, the TK75 is a proper thrower but I returned it because I didn't see myself using it that much given its size. I have already a K40 for proper throwing but I don't use it that much because the tunnel effect. Anyway, all that power in such as small package made me forget the PWM. I am keeping this one!:thumbsup:


----------



## skoor (Oct 4, 2014)

Got my LD60 yesterday and overall first impression are very good. I too had initially tried a Tk75, but just too big for my practical use. I did not know that the LD60 was going to have the PWM vs current of TK75. Also, I did try it with just one cell and still could detect PWM strobe effect.

So, if one can not see the flicker at lower outputs (and can live with the strobe effect on moving subjects) is there any other trade-offs of PWM? Either good or bad? Right now leaning to make it a keeper, but just wondering, if overtime, I would notice other issues and then be beyond the return period window and regret it later. Thanks


----------



## SimulatedZero (Oct 4, 2014)

Um, there is a fair amount of debate on properly integrated PWM vs current control. Basically, current control is more efficient and less bothersome and PWM prevents tint shift at lower light output. 

The argument is that if manufacturers implemented PWM properly then you wouldn't be able to detect it, it would be as efficient, and it would still prevent tint shift. I think there are a couple of details in there I'm missing, but that's the jist of it

The thing here is, since you can already detect it, it wasn't done properly. Then again, it may be a limit of the design and not an intentional function on this light.


----------



## ven (Oct 4, 2014)

Thanks nestor and skoor for your reports i do love my tk75vn so thats a keeper for me but regarding the 60,i dont need it,well i could say for 90% of my lights that i dont actually need them..............but i really do want this light. Form factor,output,design,just everything is saying get one.

I have found my go to lights are always on the medium or smaller size,this would be perfect

Once i have other light priorities sorted i will be definitely investing in an ld60,right now,standard and excluding modded/custom this is my most wanted light:devil:


----------



## kj2 (Oct 4, 2014)

Hmm, PWM.. doesn't sound that good to me. Have Klarus lights that use PWM, but I don't notice it with those.
With these reports, I hold-off for the moment and will wait for some reviews to pop-up.


----------



## Richwouldnt (Oct 4, 2014)

I like it but it is so similar to the Nitecore TM15 and TM26, which I have, that it would be hard to justify. For high output I also have Supfire L1 and M6 lights modified by Richard at Mountain Electronics which are similar size lights with amazing outputs in their Turbo mode. The modified Supfires use PWM but very high frequency, in the multiple KiloHertz range, so not noticeable. Normal low frequency PWM is very visible to me when looking at fan blades for PWM checking purposes.

I also have the Niteye Eye 40 which uses the multiple LEDs sequentially lit to adjust output levels and has a magnetic ring user interface. LEDs not on individual batteries though and it uses a series/parallel battery carrier. A rare arrangement for soup can format lights. The whole design is unusual.


----------



## ven (Oct 4, 2014)

Same here Rich,similar to my tm15,could say a mini tk75,i have an x3vn too which is even smaller than the ld60. But i still want one :laughing: and you know what..............its perfectly fine,why? because i am a flashaholic and its allowed :laughing: 

tbh $160 is a tad too much imho,however a ld60vn would swing it at a later date for sure:devil:


----------



## Jeffg330 (Oct 4, 2014)

Can someone who has this possibly take a photo next to another "known" light please? I'd like to get some kind of size comparison

ty


----------



## AirmanV (Oct 4, 2014)

18650 said:


> This thing is rated at 2800 lumens, 460m/53000cd while the TK41 (XM-L2) is rated at 900 lumens, 510m/65050cd so not really.



As easilyled mentioned, I'm speaking in relative terms when I say "throwing potential". It seems to have good throw in relation to other triple-led lights.


----------



## newbie66 (Oct 4, 2014)

Additional pictures of the light on a taiwanese website. No beamshots though.


----------



## skoor (Oct 5, 2014)

Just to be clear on the PWM effects, I only see it while viewing something like a spinning fan. I don't see any flicker by doing a static bean test wall test or any normal use, so far. It still seems like a keeper.

Not sure why they did PWM instead of current. I assume the cost/complexity of the three circuits. It also seems to be missing the low voltage cutoff feature like the PD35. Would have liked it, but since I always use protected cells, it was just a backup system.

I have a very healthy respect for the dangers of 18650 cells and really like the separate circuits with one 18650 per circuit even it the light does not have the low voltage cutoff feature. FWIW, I do use a XTAR VP1 for its readouts. Just wish it was a 3 or 4 bay charger.


----------



## Jagged77 (Oct 5, 2014)

Here's a size comparison shot pictured with a PD35, H600 Mk2 and E15. Carry wise it is very comfortable and well balanced. It's also extremely well built and sturdy - it inspires belief that it will stand up to the task.

ive really not had much opportunity to get out and field test it too much, other than a short run out last night. It'll throw light about as far as you can make out the object in question while providing considerable spill to light up the foreground. As an area searching tool I might just have stumbled onto the holy grail (As a option Fenix could maybe consider issuing a model with integrated charging and battery meter). The ability to only run one 18650 or mix and match battery types is very handy.


----------



## ven (Oct 5, 2014)

Thanks for the comp pic it is sort of an sr52 size,just with a little more weight :laughing:

I love the tk75,this to me is a mini tk75,looks great,i need one


----------



## kj2 (Oct 5, 2014)

ven said:


> Thanks for the comp pic it is sort of an sr52 size,just with a little more weight :laughing:
> 
> I love the tk75,this to me is a mini tk75,looks great,i need one



You need?


----------



## ven (Oct 5, 2014)

kj2 said:


> You need?



Your right


----------



## kj2 (Oct 5, 2014)

ven said:


> Your right



After some thought, and the fact I've bought plenty of lights this year  I think I won't buy this one. Yes, it's a small TK75, which is a superb light, but don't use it that often. Sure the LD60 is smaller so that a positive, but when you have that much choice like I do, you end-up using a light for one month a lot and than it goes back in the box. 
Plus, the Nexus 6 should be released soon, and I want a new Nexus phone


----------



## ven (Oct 5, 2014)

kj2 said:


> After some thought, and the fact I've bought plenty of lights this year  I think I won't buy this one. Yes, it's a small TK75, which is a superb light, but don't use it that often. Sure the LD60 is smaller so that a positive, but when you have that much choice like I do, you end-up using a light for one month a lot and than it goes back in the box.
> Plus, the Nexus 6 should be released soon, and I want a new Nexus phone



I like the ld50 too.............a lot but what you have said means the same as me saying " not going to buy any more flashlights for a long time as i have enough" :laughing:

Once i get my special purchase out of the way  i will be back to looking at the fenix lights

New iphone 6 for me 5.5" iirc,but out of stock,bend or not i want it :laughing:

:thumbsup:


----------



## kj75 (Oct 7, 2014)

Some videos...have a look at the PWM....

In German



and English


----------



## martinaee (Oct 7, 2014)

Depending on the speed of the recording and camera it can be made way more prominent on video. I'd like to see it in person. Hmm...


----------



## ven (Oct 7, 2014)

martinaee said:


> Depending on the speed of the recording and camera it can be made way more prominent on video. I'd like to see it in person. Hmm...



+1 and although i would not use low much, if at all, i would not be happy if it is like that in real life,surely faulty if it is...........


----------



## martinaee (Oct 7, 2014)

Nestor said:


> Correction: after checking the connection in the tail, I can't see the flickering by naked eye. However, I can see the PWM effect when I move my hand in front of the light and when I use a camera whose subject is illuminated by this light.



Yeah. Like Nestor says it's not a big deal unless you plan on recording video using setting lower than the max output. My LD05 penlight has this same thing. You can definitely see the PWM on the lower settings and has a "strobe" effect if you wave your hand in front of it (sort of the Eadweard Muybridge running horse look). Not a big deal, but definitely noticeable in certain situations. I just don't want people to think lights using this necessarily just look like constant strobes on walls.

EDIT: I just pulled my LD05 out of the Maxpedition pack it always stays in. It's sort of an emergency pack so I rarely use it. I wanted to refresh myself to what PWM looks like. On the medium mode the LD05 comes on in it's not really noticeable unless you are trying to find things that are moving quickly right in front of it. If the LD60 has about the same PWM I'd not worry about it too much. I want to see a good full review from someone who has played with it for a while though still.


----------



## ven (Oct 7, 2014)

Yes agree,

too me it is too obvious PWM hence why i think a fault issue(if not vid),at around $150 its just not good enough,i expect pretty much a perfect light for that kind of investment.


----------



## kj2 (Oct 7, 2014)

ven said:


> Yes agree,
> 
> too me it is too obvious PWM hence why i think a fault issue(if not vid),at around $150 its just not good enough,i expect pretty much a perfect light for that kind of investment.



True. No room of error for that price, IMO. Fenix should and can do better than this.


----------



## ven (Oct 7, 2014)

kj2 said:


> . No room of error for that price, IMO. Fenix should and can do better than this.




+1 to that 

I am liking my +1s tonight,must be in an agreeable mood :laughing:

Other than that,and if it is sorted,i defo want one though,its the size and output ,style that appeals so much,admittedly i do think it is on the expensive side still............


----------



## kj2 (Oct 7, 2014)

ven said:


> +1 to that
> 
> I am liking my +1s tonight,must be in an agreeable mood :laughing:
> 
> Other than that,and if it is sorted,i defo want one though,its the size and output ,style that appeals so much,admittedly i do think it is on the expensive side still............



Still on my watchlist too, but want to read reviews first. Lights released by Fenix, last half year, are higher in price than I expected. Not all of them, but the higher-end lights are. Or they should've include more 'gadgets' in the light. For example: an led-indicator underneath the switch. ... Or trits


----------



## ven (Oct 7, 2014)

kj2 said:


> Still on my watchlist too, but want to read reviews first. Lights released by Fenix, last half year, are higher in price than I expected. Not all of them, but the higher-end lights are. Or they should've include more 'gadgets' in the light. For example: an led-indicator underneath the switch. ... Or trits




Your doing this on purpose now...............+1 :laughing: i do agree ,trits would be a nice touch for sure or an option at least for peeps who may want or not.


----------



## ChrisGarrett (Oct 7, 2014)

Not to step on any toes, or sound like a broken record, but I just picked up one of these and it compares favorably to many of the lights in this category.

Modified SupFire M6 and you get to choose for 3-4 different tints.

At $82 before shipping, it's a lot cheaper, as well.

http://www.mtnelectronics.com/opencart/index.php?route=product/product&product_id=250

Chris


----------



## kj2 (Oct 7, 2014)

ChrisGarrett said:


> Not to step on any toes, or sound like a broken record, but I just picked up one of these and it compares favorably to many of the lights in this category.
> 
> Modified SupFire M6 and you get to choose for 3-4 different tints.
> 
> ...



No XX-fire will enter my house.. 
Do wonder if Fenix used a OEM-design? Since a XX-fire brandend light-copy is already available.


----------



## ChrisGarrett (Oct 7, 2014)

kj2 said:


> No XX-fire will enter my house..
> Do wonder if Fenix used a OEM-design? Since a XX-fire brandend light-copy is already available.



You should read some of the comments about the SupFire lights, since much like Convoy and Roche, they get really high marks for workmanship and make great hosts, like SolarForce.

I got mine with the Level 2 mods that Richard at Mountain Electronics does and he seems to use top tier parts and he seems to do really good mods.

Apart from the body, head, reflector and switch, there's a lot to set it apart from the stock M6, which still gets pretty high marks on BLF and here.

Hey...you can see my lights in my signature and I'm a Fenix fan, no doubt, but at $82 and a blistering 4kLM, it's a competitive light.

I don't know if SupFire is an XX-Fire light, but the fit and finish on mine is pretty slick.

Chris


----------



## SimulatedZero (Oct 7, 2014)

Just to put some perspective back into play here on PWM, any light that Klarus produces with a dual electronic switch in the tailcap has PWM. This is an effect of using multiple circuits. Granted, I don't hear too much about them any more, but those lights were incredibly popular with LEO and whatnot a couple of years ago. Now, I think that Fenix should have gone another route than PWM, but I still think that it's a result of them designing an incredibly flexible light in terms of power requirements. If they could keep that aspect of the design and minimize or eliminate the PWM they would set another bench mark in circuit and electronic design. Keep in mind that they managed to bypass any PWM effects in their dual electronic tailswitch TK32 by using a separate conducting tube inside the light.


----------



## martinaee (Oct 8, 2014)

Good points. Let's not forget how cool this is that suddenly Fenix came out with lights putting out thousands of lumens and have the ability to run on few cells if need be. Just like in the real world most things come at a cost.

Also if you are looking for JUST one high output light right now to use and be a potential emergency light this might still be the one to get. Sure they might figure this minor pwm issue with this flexible style light in the future, but if you don't have that future light when an emergency has already happened it won't matter much now will it. This light will have the outstanding quality Fenix lights always have and unless coming reviews tell me otherwise I'm still very impressed with it.


----------



## ven (Oct 8, 2014)

Yes ,it is still a very wanted light,size/style/output/brand etc is all fantastic to me. I am sure it will be addressed later if it is an issue for buyers.

Side note and this goes for pretty much all brands be it fenix,olight,NiWalker etc,sometimes buying a light straight off(very hard to resist i know)you do get niggles and usually(especially NiWalker) seem to listen and address. So i have started to hold back from immediate new releases a bit more. Thats me of course and after a couple of recent-ish purchases and updates (mm15 with modes,sr52 with update for flat tops are just 2 examples).

Back to the ld60..............right now,standard,i cant think of a more wanted light for me, if the pwm is here to stay and is not addressed ,and as mentioned from using multiple circuits............i still would invest in this light  just at a later date .


----------



## newbie66 (Oct 8, 2014)

Can't stand pwm since it will affect video quality. Was planning to get this but pwm changed my mind. Would be nice if they could design it without pwm like the Zebralight S6330 where you can also mix and match cells with different capacity.


----------



## Nestor (Oct 8, 2014)

SimulatedZero said:


> Just to put some perspective back into play here on PWM, any light that Klarus produces with a dual electronic switch in the tailcap has PWM. This is an effect of using multiple circuits. Granted, I don't hear too much about them any more, but those lights were incredibly popular with LEO and whatnot a couple of years ago. Now, I think that Fenix should have gone another route than PWM, but I still think that it's a result of them designing an incredibly flexible light in terms of power requirements. If they could keep that aspect of the design and minimize or eliminate the PWM they would set another bench mark in circuit and electronic design. Keep in mind that they managed to bypass any PWM effects in their dual electronic tailswitch TK32 by using a separate conducting tube inside the light.



Correct me if I am wrong but the LD50 has independent circuits (you can use one battery and one LED) and it does't use PWM for regulation.
How can't they do the same for the LD60? What bothers me is that, with the tripod mount, this light was ideal for lighting videos... but the PWM ruins all that:shakehead


----------



## SimulatedZero (Oct 8, 2014)

Nestor said:


> Correct me if I am wrong but the LD50 has independent circuits (you can use one battery and one LED) and it does't use PWM for regulation.
> How can't they do the same for the LD60? What bothers me is that, with the tripod mount, this light was ideal for lighting videos... but the PWM ruins all that:shakehead



Very valid point. I wonder if it has anything to do with how the cells are arranged in the lights. The LD50 is basically two different flashlights strapped together. Each cell is probably directly connected to the LED its powering. The LD60 looks like all of the cells are connected to the same circuit inside the light and then routed to the individual LEDs. Though, a flashaholic with a novice understanding on engineering I am, a circuit or light engineer I am not. If that's not what's causing it then you got me. 

Also, I very much agree on the tri-pod use for filming issue. Seems like someone didn't really think that one through very well.


----------



## kj75 (Oct 8, 2014)

> Also, I very much agree on the tri-pod use for filming issue. Seems like someone didn't really think that one through very well.



Isn't it to "throwy" for that?


----------



## martinaee (Oct 8, 2014)

ven said:


> Yes ,it is still a very wanted light,size/style/output/brand etc is all fantastic to me. I am sure it will be addressed later if it is an issue for buyers.
> 
> Side note and this goes for pretty much all brands be it fenix,olight,NiWalker etc,sometimes buying a light straight off(very hard to resist i know)you do get niggles and usually(especially NiWalker) seem to listen and address. So i have started to hold back from immediate new releases a bit more. Thats me of course and after a couple of recent-ish purchases and updates (mm15 with modes,sr52 with update for flat tops are just 2 examples).
> 
> Back to the ld60..............right now,standard,i cant think of a more wanted light for me, if the pwm is here to stay and is not addressed ,and as mentioned from using multiple circuits............i still would invest in this light  just at a later date .



That's a good point. This is something that could be fixed in assembly without changing anything externally about the light perhaps. So who wants to buy it first to review?


----------



## martinaee (Oct 8, 2014)

newbie66 said:


> Can't stand pwm since it will affect video quality. Was planning to get this but pwm changed my mind. Would be nice if they could design it without pwm like the Zebralight S6330 where you can also mix and match cells with different capacity.



Well remember you can still use it with no pwm on max output in the apparent current version.


----------



## martinaee (Oct 8, 2014)

kj75 said:


> Isn't it to "throwy" for that?



LOL I'm just laughing because earlier in the thread we were discussing how it's not "throwy" enough. Looks like us CPFers have Goldilocks Syndrome.


----------



## skoor (Oct 8, 2014)

Since I have the LD60, I have been thinking about the PWM issue some more. Still in a return window, so good now rather then later.

If PWM to its credit has better tint control over the entire power range, who can disagree over this?

On the less efficient issue of PWM, one might argue so what? At near to max power, the difference between current and PWM is so little, if any, what does it matter and you don't see much, if any, strobe effect- essentially a tie. Al lower power levels, can I really get to excited about not having 170+ hours vs 150 hours? Maybe on a desert island, yes, or a week+ power failure, yes, but realistically- no. 

So what is left? It seems to be the strobe effect. But is that really bad either? One might argue that a moving image that is sharper, even if it has multiple images, is better then the blur of viewing that constant power delivers. Yes, it is more natural looking, but the Hubble pictures are so enhanced and that one would not see nothing like this with the naked eyes even in space. So is the strobe effect really taking much away from the purpose of a flashlight- i.e. to view something well?

So if this really a bad trade off today with the tens if not hundreds of hours of runtime already at lower power level, how much efficiency do we really need today? And is not a sharper image better than a blur? And constant color is not bad either.

Just thinking before I overreact and send it back. Any comments welcome. Thanks


----------



## ven (Oct 8, 2014)

Skoor- Is your PWM as bad as the video posted on previous page or is it exaggerated?

Have you contacted fenix in case all are the same and if they are going to do something about it?

If you can live with it everyone is different tbh,if its not a deal breaker keep it,simple as that,its only a decision you can make there 

Either way contact with fenix imo is a must,hopefully someone with knowledge . Thats the way i would go(sorry if i have missed a post if contacted them already)

Best regards ven


----------



## kj75 (Oct 9, 2014)

martinaee said:


> LOL I'm just laughing because earlier in the thread we were discussing how it's not "throwy" enough. Looks like us CPFers have Goldilocks Syndrome.



Now we're talking about filming with this light. And because PS03 and SR Mini have almost half the max beam distance, IMO that would be a better choice...Or Klarus SD80..


----------



## martinaee (Oct 9, 2014)

skoor said:


> Since I have the LD60, I have been thinking about the PWM issue some more. Still in a return window, so good now rather then later.
> 
> If PWM to its credit has better tint control over the entire power range, who can disagree over this?
> 
> ...



Very good points. Yes in a weird way pwm aka the "strobe effect" can make what you are looking at "sharper". In a weird way it makes things more crystalline if that's a way to describe it and still framed if they are moving relatively fast across the beam. This could be bad if you are somehow really sensitive to it, but I suspect for most people it's a non-issue. Again think of the Muybridge early photography experiment with movement-- but much faster than that. Not nearly that choppy.

I went for a long walk tonight in a clearing with zero artificial light. The moon was super bright but that's it. I had several lights including my LD05. On the medium mode of 30-50 lumens (not sure without looking) it has pwm but I couldn't really tell using it on the ground to find my way. On the brightest setting of 100 lumens there is no pwm and it was also good.


----------



## Jagged77 (Oct 9, 2014)

I can only detect PWM using a camera, in normal use I'd never know its there. If you're not filming with this light then don't let it put you off.


----------



## newbie66 (Oct 9, 2014)

I do not own any lights that exceed 1000 lumens, so I want my first to be one that I can own without any regrets. Especially when it will be the most expensive for me. It will be difficult for me to get another light at such price due to budget constraints. But that is just me. If anyone does not mind pwm please do not let my comments dissuade you from buying.


----------



## Nestor (Oct 9, 2014)

newbie66 said:


> I do not own any lights that exceed 1000 lumens, so I want my first to be one that I can own without any regrets. Especially when it will be the most expensive for me. It will be difficult for me to get another light at such price due to budget constraints. But that is just me. If anyone does not mind pwm please do not let my comments dissuade you from buying.



I contacted Fenix and they agree the PWM will be visible in a video but not by naked eye. I agree. 
I think the main issue is to pay $150 for a light and get the type of regulation you get with a ~$40 SkyRay King. Now, you may argue that the Fenix has independent power sources so you can use different batteries or fewer batteries and still get a workable light...OK. I don'tt think I will ever use fewer than 3 batteries. That is why I have single battery lights. In the end it is a matter of psycho-effect:am I getting what I deserve for $150? If you forget the PWM, I would say Yes. The power/size ratio is great! and that single fact is worth to consider. I don't have the instruments for measuring actual output and how the regulation is. I am waiting for that.


----------



## Bomo (Oct 9, 2014)

I just received my LD60 yesterday, tried it out last night. This thing is impressively bright. The beam pattern is just what I wanted - lots of flood but still with a decent throw. The only thing I would have liked - since in turbo, the light lowers the power level after 3 minutes, I would prefer no strobe (I have no use for it in this light) and use the button press to engage turbo only while the button is depressed, going back to the previous selected level when released. As it is, I have to cycle through too many levels to get to turbo, then back to the level I was at.


----------



## skoor (Oct 9, 2014)

ven said:


> Skoor- Is your PWM as bad as the video posted on previous page or is it exaggerated?
> 
> .....
> 
> Best regards ven



Def exaggerated by the video shutter and PWM interaction. Much like watching an old CRT raster TV with video cameras that have similar hz, if you are old enough to have seen this. LOL I am guessing the LD60 pulse is in 50-70 hz range. It is likely below most folks threshold, like most TVs today, but some can still see ficker on their sets. I just barley can see it on my plasma and only on solid colors. So far I can only see it on the LD60 by running a synthetic test. Noting so far in normal use.

I think the issue as some one brought up, should I just buy on of those cheaper three SRs LCD lights and save a few bucks. I paid $135 including no tax no shipping, so not cheap, but not outrageous either. I guess one could say the TK75 for a few dollars more is both a better light and value, but I just don't think I would really use it much due to the size, since I did have one for a few days already.


----------



## ven (Oct 9, 2014)

Thanks for feedback skoor:thumbsup:

Side note- guess mr TY wont be doing a tube vid of this light on low :nana:

:laughing:

Other feedback is confidence building too Bomo thank you


----------



## espresso (Oct 9, 2014)

So is there a big enough difference to SR mini to justify the purchase? 

I already have SR mini but I think the spill is far too big, which affects the beam distance. And also, I don't want to shine in people's faces sometimes. So I'm looking for something with a less but still decent spill.


----------



## martinaee (Oct 10, 2014)

From everything I've seen the SR Mini has basically no hotspot. I'm sure it *is* more intense in the center, but it projects more of a wall of light so it will still put off a big glare in people's eyes if they aren't still in the 2 degree or more hotspot most lights usually have. The LD60 has reflectors so probably won't be quite as floody, but they aren't that deep so they probably will still put off a lot of spill from them and the leds themselves.


----------



## skoor (Oct 10, 2014)

Looked at a few SK lights reviews and forums comments. It seems like really a luck of the draw how good a light you might received. And the place that does the SR mods get pretty pricy and just not sure the SR basic light if that good a foundation to build on for quality light. Guess it getting to looks like either keep this or go back to Tk75.


----------



## skoor (Oct 13, 2014)

Got this via one of the NA Fenix distributors from a Fenix engineer regarding the LDS60 PWM. It seems to contradict what some of us have observed of its PWM. Might just be a Chinese to English translation issue, but if you read the quote below, it seems to say the LD60, like other Fenix lights, does NOT have PWM. I initiated a RMA just to be safe within my return window. My sample clearly has PWM effects, so something is amiss, if it is suppose to have current regulation.

Darn, except for its PWM (or whatever it has), it is really a nice light. Maybe next rev or an updated model in the future hopefully.

"Regarding the question from this customer, below is the answer from our engineer.

Currently most Fenix flashlights don't have the PWM to control the direct output but to control the luminance signal, because the PWM direct output will lead to strobe when it is at low output setting also the lower efficiency, that is why most Fenix products are not PWM direct output but luminance signal control. 

As for the LD60, like most Fenix flashlights as mentioned above, it also doesn't have the PWM to control its direct output."​


----------



## kj2 (Oct 13, 2014)

And now in English...


----------



## martinaee (Oct 13, 2014)

So what is this implying? It's technically not supposed to have visible pwm?


----------



## skoor (Oct 13, 2014)

martinaee said:


> So what is this implying? It's technically not supposed to have visible pwm?



I really don't know, not an EE. But the Fenix engineer says it is current like most other Fenix lights. I don't see how or why it could be anything other then PWM or current- i.e. some new hybrid variation. Guess pay $5 for return and let the dust settle later. It can always be bought again. But who wants a first rev that is fixed later in the run.

But it is clearly some from of PWM or a least has similar artifacts of a PWM light. One just has to shine at any moving object vs the same with my PD35 "current" and the LD60's "strobe" is obliviously there.


----------



## SimulatedZero (Oct 13, 2014)

Hm, not buying it. There's the slim possibility that there's "no PWM" in each individual driver, but obviously somewhere down the line a fair amount of noise introduced into the circuit.


----------



## Labrador72 (Oct 13, 2014)

It would be much easier if Fenix would explain what the PWM-like effect is caused by and what it is. It may not be PWM but a lot of people are detecting something that looks like across several ligths: obviously there is something unless we want to believe in contagious mass PWM hysteria!


----------



## kj75 (Oct 15, 2014)

Mine arrived today..
Visible PWM only at eco mode, just like my E35UE. Personally, I don't mind


----------



## kj2 (Oct 15, 2014)

kj75 said:


> Mine arrived today..
> Visible PWM only at eco mode, just like my E35UE. Personally, I don't mind


For what I have seen, I don't like it. Saw it popping-up at knives&tools today 
Not going to buy it.


----------



## martinaee (Oct 15, 2014)

#PWMgate2014


----------



## kj75 (Oct 16, 2014)

kj2 said:


> For what I have seen, I don't like it. Saw it popping-up at knives&tools today
> Not going to buy it.



It's my first Fenix after the TK70 that real impresses me....
So I think you gonna buy it after you've seen it...


----------



## kj2 (Oct 16, 2014)

kj75 said:


> So I think you gonna buy it after you've seen it...



Highly doubt it 
No pwm for me.


----------



## ven (Oct 16, 2014)

I have to admit kj2,this ld60 ride is an up/down one.................

Its not cheap,has pretty much everything i would want in a light,compact,power house,good mix of flood/throw like a mini tk75 just to name some.
Then pwm frustrations................

I feel its so close............but then so far i am quite annoyed at Fenix right now!!!


----------



## kj2 (Oct 16, 2014)

ven said:


> I have to admit kj2,this ld60 ride is an up/down one.................
> 
> Its not cheap,has pretty much everything i would want in a light,compact,power house,good mix of flood/throw like a mini tk75 just to name some.
> Then pwm frustrations................
> ...



I hope they get it right with the PD22ue.


----------



## kj75 (Oct 16, 2014)

ven said:


> I have to admit kj2,this ld60 ride is an up/down one.................
> 
> Its not cheap,has pretty much everything i would want in a light,compact,power house,good mix of flood/throw like a mini tk75 just to name some.
> Then pwm frustrations................
> ...



It's only visible on low/eco. But it can be a frustration for a flashaholic.

But maybe you'll think: how many times will I use such a light on eco-mode?


----------



## ven (Oct 16, 2014)

Excellent point and in honesty..............probably never Vinh has mentioned detectable in all modes other than turbo or high iirc but i know some can detect it easier than others.

PWM is actually an eco mode when you think about it,it does allow longer run times(eco) iirc as well as keeps tint..............flip sides too.

But there is an overwhelming feeling against PWM and sure Fenix are aware,thats where my frustration does lie..............and its quite an expensive gamble for me! 

Jury out still and i would swing towards a vn version anyway..........

Regards ven


----------



## selfbuilt (Oct 16, 2014)

My review of this light is now up:

Fenix LD60 (3xXM-L2 - 3x18650, 6xCR123A) review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, SCOPE + more!

Given the concerns expressed in this thread, I have done comparison testing of repeated Turbo restarts (on NCR18650A 3100mAh cells),  and detailed oscilloscope testing. 

On this later point, the LD60 is NOT using pulse-width-modulation (PWM), but it does show a reoccurring signal pattern in a potentially visible range for amplitude and frequency. I am personally sensitive to flicker, and I don't find it noticeable on anything but the Eco mode on my sample. While present on the other non-max modes, it is certainly less noticeable than actual PWM would be at equivalent frequencies and pulse widths. I have taken greater pains to test and report on this in the full review - happy to answer any questions there. :wave:


----------



## SimulatedZero (Oct 16, 2014)

That's what I was wondering when Fenix stated there was no PWM. Technically, there's not. However, there is obviously a complication from their independent curcuits being wired together.


----------



## skoor (Oct 16, 2014)

selfbuilt said:


> My review of this light is now up:
> 
> Fenix LD60 (3xXM-L2 - 3x18650, 6xCR123A) review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, SCOPE + more!
> 
> ...



Oh, thank you! Very timely and looking forward to your review, since I have the RMA for the LD60 right in front of me just waiting to be filled out or discarded. LOL

Interesting that there is no PWM. However, it does makes me wonder how bad it would be if it had true PWM. ....Ah, just read your review and see you addressed this question. LOL Thanks


----------



## ven (Oct 20, 2014)

http://www.candlepowerforums.com/vb/showthread.php?391605-LD60vn-The-Real-Deal!


----------



## BellyUpFish (Nov 10, 2014)

As a newb, what is PWM?


----------



## GunnarGG (Nov 11, 2014)

BellyUpFish said:


> As a newb, what is PWM?



http://www.candlepowerforums.com/vb...t-is-it-How-does-it-work-and-how-to-detect-it


----------



## torchflux (Nov 11, 2014)

BellyUpFish said:


> As a newb, what is PWM?





GunnarGG said:


> http://www.candlepowerforums.com/vb...t-is-it-How-does-it-work-and-how-to-detect-it




and, selfbuilt had an explanatory post regarding PWM in his review of the Fenix LD12 (apparently has a similar UI-circuit issue as the LD60, neither of which he interprets as PWM).


OTOH, selfbuilt's Xtar R30 review detects and explains (actual) PWM as part of that light's operation.


----------



## thinkFlashlights01 (Dec 21, 2014)

That tripod feature could be useful... Maybe a light-helper for dark places where i need to work, or a Bat-Signal.


----------



## Taz80 (Dec 21, 2014)

I bought this light to use as a work light with a tripod and filter, for when I don't have the room for a bigger light or I don't have power. So far it has worked out well for that. I've also been using it for dog walks. The PWM like effects don't bother me at all, the only time I notice them is when it's raining or snowing. I'm liking this light, it's a nice combination of size, flood and throw. And I haven't accidentally strobed myself or anyone else yet.


----------



## magicstone12 (Dec 25, 2014)

thinkFlashlights01 said:


> That tripod feature could be useful... Maybe a light-helper for dark places where i need to work, or a Bat-Signal.



photographer may need the Camera Tripod feature


----------

