# litho123 vs M2 MOP reflectors with beam shots



## Yooper (Mar 26, 2006)

This is a comparison between the Medium Orange Peel (MOP) M2 reflectors being sold by modamag and the "Carley 1940mod" reflectors being sold by litho123. I will be doing a comparison of the High Stipple reflectors of each design as well, as soon as I receive the M2 version.

The M2 is a new reflector design, and an attempt to improve on the traditional parabolic shape of the Mag reflector for more overall output and better throw. Modamag states that it has 7.3% more throw and puts 17.2% more light than the Mag reflector. I don't know if these numbers are theoretical or measured. The differences are in the shape of the parabola - it is deeper and tighter, and the hole in the rear of the reflector is as small as possible. Here are some stats that modamag and litho123 separately put together about which bulbs will fit through the holes:



modamag said:


> *=== Typical Bulbs Size ===*
> Welch Allen Lamps (S-Config) = 0.287" / 7.29mm *(Compatible!)*
> - WA1111 / 1160 / 1166 / 1183 / 1185 / 1274 / 1331 ... etc
> - Most high power lamps CPF uses
> ...





litho123 said:


> The M2 . . . . vs. . . . . . Camless 1940mod
> .300” ream . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .377” ream
> YES . . WelchAllyn T2.25 sized bulbs . . YES
> NO* . . Carley T2.5 sized bulbs . . . YES
> ...



There is one minor error in litho's table - the ROP low bulb will fit the .300" hole, but the ROP high bulb will not. When I first got my M2 reflector I posted in modamag's sale thread that the ROP high bulb didn't fit, and he immediately offered to ream out reflectors on request to anyone who asks, at no additional charge. :goodjob: I can't comment on bulbs other than the ROP bulbs and the WA1185, as those are all I have.

On to the comparisons. Both of these reflectors are camless and both are very nicely machined from aluminum. The most noticeable difference is that the inside diameter of the M2 reflector at the bezel is significantly smaller, at about 39.5 mm, than the litho reflector, which is about 46mm. The M2 reflector has a slightly more textured surface as well. Here are some photos, taken with a Canon SD550:

The M2 reflector is on the left and the litho123 on the right. This first photo comparison was an effort to illustrate the texture differences. The image in the reflector is the camera lens. In both cases the photograph exaggerates the texture, but the comparison between the two reflectors is valid:






The outside dimensions are very similar, the height (depth?) is identical, and both are very nicely made. The reflector finish is a carried around to the rear of the M2 reflector unevenly, but this affects its function not at all and of course is hidden when in the flashlight, so it's really a trivial thing:





In the flashlight, the M2's front plate is easily visible. I don't like the way it looks, but this is a minor complaint. These photos illustrate the texture differences again, as well as some shape differences which can be seen with the image of the camera in the reflector:





An inadvertent test: I was handling these reflectors more than I typically do, and they both somehow had a few fingerprints on them, which I wanted to remove before the comparison. I cleaned the fingerprints off with a microfiber towel, the same one I use to clean my plastic monitor screen and my eyeglasses, purposely choosing it because it never does damage. Unfortunately, I discovered that the litho123 reflector has a somewhat fragile coating, and I actually flaked some of the coating off with the microfiber towel.  I then went back to the m2 reflector and rubbed much harder with the cloth, but was unable to damage its surface at all. So, the M2 coating is more durable, at least with my two samples. Here is a photo of the damage to the litho123 reflector  :





Next, some beamshots. I started with some close range white wall hunting to try to illustrate the quality of the beams. I chose an off white folding closet door for some size cues. This is a Mag85 with 9 charged but one week old CBP1650 batteries in a Mag3D body with a modamag battery holder, a kiu socket and a UCL. I used the same light for all the beam shots, switching only the reflectors. I prewarmed the light for one minute before the test and total runtime for these first four beamshots was less than a minute. I focused the beams for each reflector by turning the Mag head, adjusting for the "best" hotspot. The flashlight is 4 feet from the wall in each photo. The camera is a Nikon D70 set on manual exposure but autofocus and auto color balance. 

The first photos are at 1/200 and f3.5. M2 first, then litho123:










Next, 1/250 and f4.5. M2 first, then litho123:









My subjective impressions: The photos minimize the differences between the lights. In both cases the spill beams are perfectly smooth. The M2 spill beam is slightly smaller. The M2's corona is much smoother, actually being almost unnoticeable, while the litho123 reflector produces a noticeable corona with a fairly sharp edge. The M2 reflector's hot spot was easier to focus and was larger and rounder and smoother and MAYBE slightly brighter. The litho123 reflector's hotspot was a more focused picture of the filament of the 1185 bulb, with wider batwings. It was more difficult to find the best focus, as I had to choose between a tighter, slightly brighter, but much less round hotspot and a larger, slightly dimmer, but rounder one. I chose the rounder one because it was closer to the M2's.

Most of the differences can be attributed to the M2's slightly more textured surface. Both of these reflectors are sold as MOP, Medium Orange Peel. Keep this mind when choosing your level of texture from either vendor. The only M2 reflectors I have are MOPs, so I can't comment on whether the full range of M2s are more textured than the full range of litho123's. 

UPDATE 3/28/06: I found out today that the M2 MOP reflectors were coated by a different manufacturer, but all the other M2's, and I believe all of litho's as well, are coated by Carley, so the should be comparable. The Carley coatings are proving to be somewhat delicate, so be very careful cleaning them...

The smaller spill and subjectively slightly brighter hotspot of the M2 to some extent validate its design goals.

My next step will be some outdoor throw beamshots and maybe some longer distance white wall shots, to try to illustrate the differences in the hotspot quality.


----------



## Yooper (Mar 26, 2006)

Here are the outdoor long distance beamshots. Again, I went through a lot of effort to make sure this was an even handed comparison. The camera is a Nikon D70 set on manual exposure. Other than cropping, shrinking image size, and .jpg compression, these photos are unaltered and the settings were identical for each. Both the camera and the flashlight were on tripods.

The flashlight is the same Mag85 as in the first post, but today running on Titanium 2600 NiMH batteries freshly charged and then rested an hour. I focused the reflector for the smallest, brightest hotspot in each case. For the M2 reflector this was 5.25 turns out from fully tight, and for the litho123 it was 6 turns out from tight. In every case I oriented the "bat wings" of the hotspot horizontally. The only thing changed between photos were the reflectors. I did the shed pictures and the throw pictures in opposite order to minimize battery fade differences. The shed was shot in the order litho123/M2/SMO and the throw shots were shot in the order SMO/M2/litho123. (they are both presented in "shed" order here) Total runtime was maybe 10 seconds for each photo, with about a minute in between to change reflectors.

I added an FM2 SMO reflector just for fun and because I was curious.

First, shots at my garden shed. The shed is about 50 feet away here. ISO 1000, 1/15 sec, F4.5.

litho123 MOP / M2 MOP / FM2 SMO







Next, our play structure. It's about 200 feet away here. ISO 1000, 10/13 sec, F4.5. The second photo is a crop of the first.

litho123 MOP / M2 MOP / FM2 SMO









My impression: SMO rules for throw, I like the M2 beam better, the litho123 reflector throws a little better than the M2 because it makes a slightly tighter hot spot.

Do I believe that the M2 puts out more total light? Yes I do. Look at the spill beam in the photos above and you can see this.

Remember that these two MOP reflectors were coated by different companies, and the M2 MOP is a little more textured than the litho MOP. This may be why the litho has better throw.

These are all really nice reflectors and you can't go wrong with any of them.

I am awaiting the arrival of my M2 High Stipple reflector and will post a comparison of High Stipples when that happens. It MIGHT be a better comparison of the two reflector designs...SMO would be best, but I don't have any besides the FM2...


----------



## cyberhobo (Mar 26, 2006)

Nice review.


----------



## Lips (Mar 26, 2006)

Very nice review... :goodjob:


----------



## DreamScape (Mar 26, 2006)

Very nice review Yooper. I look forward to the outdoor beam shots.
Many Thanks for doing this.


----------



## Cliffnopus (Mar 26, 2006)

Nice review thank you. :goodjob: Cliff


----------



## PlayboyJoeShmoe (Mar 26, 2006)

I feel (perhaps wrongly!) that I must comment here...

I only have two OP reflectors, one LOP by FiveMega and one MOP M2.

I have played around with my different lights and reflectors. I have been running my M*g85 with the LOP. And I have liked it a LOT. I tried the M2 in that light and it just didn't light my fire. 

I have one 2D with a Modam*g 6AA adapter and I was running a frosted M*gcharger bulb for decent beam and brightness. I was using a Carley 1940 reflector from an earlier time. I changed to an Unfrosted MC and the M2 and that light stands at #3 after M85 and ROP HI as bright and nice!

It must be said, my ROP HI really responds well to the FM LOP! But since I only have the one, the M*g85 gets it!

The M2 seems somewhat of a niche article, but it does work well with an overdriven MC bulb!


----------



## Yooper (Mar 26, 2006)

Not wrongly at all, PJS. This beam quality stuff is very subjective and there's a lot of personal preference as to what is nice.

It's probably a pretty big leap in texture from an FM2 LOP to an M2 MOP and this would be expected to kill throw a bit. Was this what you didn't like about the switch?

My impression with different bulbs: The ROP bulb has a nicer, rounder hot spot than the 1185 does, with less "batwinging". It's a little happier with a LOP or even a SMO reflector, while the 1185 needs some help to smooth out its hotspot...one reason I chose the Mag85 for this comparison...

I will TRY to do some outdoor shots tonight, but I got a lot going on today so it might not happen....


----------



## thezman (Mar 26, 2006)

Great review.

Can't wait to see more beamshots.


Thanks


----------



## missionaryman (Mar 26, 2006)

great review - would like to see some beamshots at distance to validate the claim of more throw.


----------



## PlayboyJoeShmoe (Mar 26, 2006)

It IS all very subjective!

I don't have but a 1.3MP older Sony Floppy Disk camera, so someone else has to do the beamshots.

The M*g85 with the M2 MOP lost the intensity of spot to the ROP in the LOP. I never took it outside, but I REALLY dig my M85 with the LOP.

The MC bulbed 2D (runs outside to test something) is PLENTY good with the MOP. It puts at least some light everywhere the M*g85 does. It's MIGHTY bright for at least 75 yds, and will light up a house over 120yds.

(just for jollies, outside goes the M*g85)

M*G85 is STILL the King of my lights, but a M*gcharger bulb on 6AA is NO slouch! Even "handicapped" by the M2 (which gives it a NICE beam!)

Truth be told, outside in quality dark, the MC on 6AA in an M2 MOP has a very similar beam and not all THAT less brightness than my M*g85 in a FM LOP.

None of this is to say with authority ANYTHING. My batteries may not be all there, and I only have consumer grade NimH anyhow.

But I say a stock MC bulb in an M2 MOP driven by 6AA is a damn decent light and worth the trouble...


----------



## Delvance (Mar 27, 2006)

Thanks Yooper! I've been looking forward to this comparison since i got a refund on my M2 order (i wanted cammed). Good review and looking forward to the outdoor shots. From what i can see so far, i actually prefer the Litho reflector more...maybe the refund i got was for the better heh.


----------



## CLHC (Mar 27, 2006)

Way to go on this write up Yooper!

I have both sets of reflectors from said members, Litho123 and ModaMag. The ones I'm using now are the Stippled Reflectors #6 and #7.

Enjoy!


----------



## Flakey (Mar 27, 2006)

what an absolutely splendid writeup yooper !!! i would be very curious about the difference with a BIG filiment like the ones in 100W lights. any chance of that happening?


----------



## Yooper (Mar 27, 2006)

No 100W lights here. I am thinking of building a Mag35-8, but the Ace Hardware where I THOUGHT I saw the bulb doesn't have them now, and all the mail order places want to much for shipping...

Outdoor beamshots tonight I think...


----------



## CLHC (Mar 27, 2006)

Yooper said:


> Outdoor beamshots tonight I think. . .


 :huh:


----------



## Delvance (Mar 27, 2006)

Those big filaments lamps won't fit through the reflector opening unlesss you drill them out etc. 62138 is T3 i think, 64623 is T4!


----------



## Flakey (Mar 27, 2006)

Yeah im aware of the drilling/grinding issue. i wish someone would make a magreflector for BIG filimented lamps. IE usl mag138 mag623 mag625 ... there is a demand if anyone is listening.... until then my bored out medium stipple will have to do. Awaiting outdoor beamshots.


----------



## Yooper (Mar 27, 2006)

OK, just spent an hour and a half taking and processing beamshots, and I'm not happy with my results. The Mag85 died 75% of the way through due to the batteries shifting in the battery holder. I found that the voltage varied as much as 1.5 volts if I moved the batteries around in the holder. This means that every time I manipulated the light to change out the reflectors I may have changed the voltage.  

I used two separate targets for the beamshots, and in processing the photos for upload to my server, I found that with one target the M2 reflector was better and for the other the litho. This doesn't make sense, so I am invalidating tonight's results. :thumbsdow 

I must say I'm not very happy with the CBP1650/modamag battery holder combination. With 9 batteries I have to use 9 magnets to keep it all in contact, and it's still not reliable.  I'm going to charge them up and then try to find a way to stabilize the batteries somehow. I think in the long run I might sell this battery holder and get a fivemega - it seems to be a better match to these batteries.

I might do the outdoor beamshots with a different light, like my 7C ROP low.

I have to get up early to do surgery, so I'm done for tonight...maybe tomorrow if I can figure out a stable platform for testing...


----------



## CLHC (Mar 27, 2006)

That's too bad, and I was looking forward to seeing your beamshots. Oh well. . .Will look forward to it when you do.

Steady hands now, steady! ! !

Enjoy!


----------



## jefft (Mar 27, 2006)

Yooper, definitely get the FM 9AA-3D holder. No problems whatsoever with the un-nippled CBPs. You'd probably want to take advantage of the group buy right now. 
Hmmm, while you eye guys get to sleep tonight, us fleas will be spending the night in the ER.


----------



## PlayboyJoeShmoe (Mar 28, 2006)

I don't have any CBPs but I CAN say the FM battery holders are FINE specimans!

I wish I could afford more!


----------



## Yooper (Mar 28, 2006)

Spent two hours messing with the flashlight, couldn't get it to work reliably at all with the modamag adapter and CBP 1650's with magnets - no matter what I did it would vary between 6 and 12.6 volts just by looking at it funny. So, I put the light together with Titanium 2600's and it's working fine and reliably, if not as bright. Batteries are charging now....it should be dark in a couple hours.....found my fivemega SMO reflector and will throw it in for fun...

I repeated the close range white wall testing and got the same results as above...

modamag adapter is sold, fivemega adapter already ordered, along with a 2" deep SMO reflector


----------



## catmouse (Mar 28, 2006)

Looking forward to your 2" deep SMO reflector beam comparsion


----------



## Yooper (Mar 28, 2006)

Outdoor long distance beamshots posted above, post #2


----------



## PlayboyJoeShmoe (Mar 28, 2006)

I just did a quick and dirty test of a SMO deep reflector from a Dorcy 3D 1W. I can't hold it very steady, and I can't leave the light on for long as it's plastic.

It does seem that a very tight spot could be gotten from it....


----------



## nemul (Mar 29, 2006)

thanks for the shots, cant wait for more!


----------



## thezman (Mar 29, 2006)

Again, great review.

The outdoor shots tell a good story. 

I can't wait for my M2 LS.

:thanks: 
Z


----------



## Delvance (Mar 29, 2006)

Great review Yooper! :goodjob: 

Yeah the M2 is definitely putting out more light than the litho123 one, but the FM2 reflector's sidespill seems even stronger (by a whee little bit maybe)...would be interesting to know if it's due to the SMO or the design of the reflector. I'm glad i've got the FM2s installed in my ROPS now!


----------

