# Fenix LD10 Comparison Review



## UnknownVT (Oct 9, 2008)

Once again, hot off the press, through the kind courtesy of 4sevens , is this Fenix LD10 single AA light based on the Cree Q5.

_Commercial links removed - Empath_

I actually got all the new LD and PD series from 4sevens - but since I have a preference for single AA lights - the LD10 gets the quick once over first.

But it should be noted as with the previous series the LD10 head is the same as the LD20 and PD20 - so if one gets the spare bodies for LD20 and PD20 - one in fact gets 3 lights in one - 1xAA, 2xAA and 1xCR123 - very, very versatile. 

In fact the LD10 head does fit and work on the older "L" series bodies and the P2D body.

Size -






Head -





Comparison beamshots -

vs. L1D-Q5 both on Turbo and NiMH (Kodak Pre-Charged)







again my sample of one of the L1D-Q5 seems to show blue/violet - but in real-life it is more pink/violet. The new LD10 seems just a bit brighter - but it has a slightly narrower beam and this is probably within sample tolerances.

vs. L1D-RB100 (Rebel) both on Turbo and NiMH







the LD10 seems to just have it - but the RB100 tint and beam are just nicer - although the LD10 Q5 is pretty good already.

vs. NiteCore D10 (Q5) Max and NiMH







about par - my sample of one of the NiteCore D10 seems a bit of an over-achiever and it's rated at 130 torch lumens - so the LD10 is doing very well.....

*Index to follow up parts -*

Tint shift on low - Post #*6*

Comparisons using 3.7V rechargeable Li-Ion 14500 - Post #*15*

Comparison with another sample of the L1D-Q5 - Post #*17*

Standardized Stairway beamshot - Post #*19*


----------



## LG&M (Oct 9, 2008)

Thanks for the first look. I will have to look into this one more.


----------



## jupello (Oct 9, 2008)

Nice..looks like LD10 might have little bit brighter spill than L1D Q5 :thumbsup:


----------



## Mr Floppy (Oct 10, 2008)

Nice job. Can't wait for your 2AA or PD beam shots.

Those are really interesting beam shots. That L1D head looks really blue yet for me (L2D Q5), it doesnt seem as blue as that. Is that from less spill perhaps? 

You also mentioned that the LD10 has the narrower beam, do you mean the diameter of the spill? From you beam shots, it looks like the hot spot is slightly bigger?


----------



## TONY M (Oct 10, 2008)

Thanks for beamshots! I'd still prefer the D10 for EDC as it is a good bit smaller.


----------



## UnknownVT (Oct 10, 2008)

LED tint shift on Low levels is a fairly well known pheomena - earlier on with Luxeons people noted when underdriven they tended toward green.

This is actually observable with the low level on the Fenix LD10 - but what surprised me was when I used the NiteCore D10 at similar levels - there was little if any tint shift fpor the D10......

You need your good eyes to see this slight shift in tint - 
first let's repeat the Turbo/Max comparison beamshots to show that the LD10 and D10 had similar tints:








Now the comparison on Low/Min for the LD10, and I tried to match the level of perceived brightness with the D10 -







see the shift toward yellow-green of the LD10? 
Yet both the lights are using Cree Q5.

So what gives?

I think - my speculation - is that the Fenix LD10 is a true current regulated light so it is delivering lower constant current to the LED - hence the tint shift.

However the NiteCore D10 is using very fast PWM - which mean although it is probably delivering the same "average"/mean current to the LED by time-slicing - it is in reality delivering the Max current - but time-sliced - and because the LED is a solid state device having a fast response it delivers the brightness level (along with the cooler tint) - just time-sliced so we see the lower averaged/aggregated/mean brightness level - but the same tint.....

Hope that makes some sense?


----------



## I came to the light... (Oct 10, 2008)

Thanks for the comparison  The LD10 seems very nice, a good improvement on the L1D Q5. 

Your explanation makes perfect sense. Just one thing - I would call it a tint shift on high, not low, as the shift is due to the higher temperature/current through the LED, making the high current, not the low current, the abnormal one. No, I'm not crazy enough to think this really matters, but apparently picky enough to post it


----------



## Patriot (Oct 10, 2008)

Geeesh! Your D10 looks like it's supercharged. I can't believe it's hanging in there with the LD10. :thinking:

I really like the looks of the LD10 vs the L1D, including the small checkered portion. The block style look on the old lights annoyed me, not to mention that it didn't work.

Thanks for the comparisons. :thumbsup:


----------



## Sharpy_swe (Oct 14, 2008)

Thanks for the review


----------



## Marduke (Oct 14, 2008)

UnknownVT said:


> LED tint shift on Low levels is a fairly well known pheomena - earlier on with Luxeons people noted when underdriven they tended toward green.
> 
> This is actually observable with the low level on the Fenix LD10 - but what surprised me was when I used the NiteCore D10 at similar levels - there was little if any tint shift fpor the D10......
> 
> ...



If you wouldn't have posted that explanation, I would have. Sounds dead on to me.


----------



## santza (Oct 14, 2008)

How is it on 14500? all modes working correctly?


----------



## UnknownVT (Oct 14, 2008)

Marduke said:


> If you wouldn't have posted that explanation, I would have. Sounds dead on to me.


 
Thank you very much Marduke for that confirmation on the tint shift and PWM - much appreciated.



santza said:


> How is it on 14500? all modes working correctly?


 
The LD10 works on 3.7V rechargeable Li-Ion 14500 - but like its predecessor the L1D, all the brightness levels are high, until the battery's voltage drops low enough to go into regulation. 

Note: I say "High" instead of Turbo - to my eyes the Turbo mode on 14500 seems just a bit brighter than the levels in General mode - 
my easy way to see this - light with 14500 on Turbo - unscrew head - there is a drop in brightness - tap switch to change levels - very little, if any, change - at High screw in head - slight increase in brightness in Turbo.


----------



## Crenshaw (Oct 14, 2008)

li-ons still not fully supported? sigh...

maybe fenix circuits are just so well regulated, that to make them li-on capable, would make them less efficient all around...:shrug:

Crenshaw


----------



## UnknownVT (Oct 14, 2008)

Crenshaw said:


> li-ons still not fully supported? sigh...
> maybe fenix circuits are just so well regulated, that to make them li-on capable, would make them less efficient all around...:shrug:


 
I think the Fenix circuits are boost current regulated - to be able to handle Li-Ion with regulation means they have to be a buck circuit as well - more difficult/expensive?

Whereas on the NiteCore D10 which is also boost but said to be voltage regulated with PWM - on Li-Ion I think the boost voltage regulation is also by-passed - but the PWM can still manage to give the lower levels.


----------



## UnknownVT (Oct 15, 2008)

Comparisons using 3.7V Rechargeable Li-Ion 14500 -

vs. Fenix L1D-Q5 both on Turbo and Li-Ion 14500 -







the newer LD10 seems to be brighter than the L1D-Q5 - but caveat - I am beginning to suspect that my sample of the L1D-Q5 now may have some overheating damage - looking at the head/LED I see a patch of brown/amber color over the yellow (phosphor?) - this might be signs of burning.

vs. NiteCore D10 (Q5) on Max and Li-Ion 14500







pretty comparable - this is a really good performance from the LD10 as my sample of the NiteCore D10 (link to review) is somewhat of an over-achiever.

Remember from the opening post the LD10 and NiteCore D10 were very close on NiMH? 
- so if I compare the LD10 on 14500 to the NiteCore D10 on NiMH - this should give an idea of the increase in brightness using Li-Ion 14500 over NiMH....

vs. NiteCore D10 Max _but on *NiMH*_ -







not surprisingly the LD10 on Li-Ion 14500 is noticably brighter than the NiteCore D10 on NiMH - but the performance on NiMH is still pretty bright (this would apply for both the NiteCore D10 and the LD10 - since they were both so similar on NiMH).

OK - also remember I mentioned that LD10 on Li-Ion 14500 the General mode levels were all the same "High" - and that I could see the difference between Turbo and Low; and Turbo and High?

Again I used the NiteCore D10 on Li-Ion 14500 as control comparison -since it was so similar to the LD10 also on 14500 -

LD10 *Low* vs. NiteCore D10 Max, both on Li-Ion 14500 -







the NiteCore D10 is brighter - the difference can quite easily seen in a side-by-side comparison.

LD10 *High *vs. NiteCore D10 Max, both on Li-Ion 14500 -







again the NiteCore D10 is brighter - the difference can quite easily seen in a side-by-side comparison. 

Notice this set of comparison beamshots on High look very similar to the ones on Low - so there is very little difference, if any, between Low, Medium and High when using Li-Ion 14500 - but Turbo _*is*_ slightly brighter.

Since I have the LD20 on hand - I thought I'd compare the LD10 Li-Ion 14500 performance to the LD20 on NiMH -





vs. LD20 Turbo NiMH -







pretty comparable - 
before anyone else comments - 
I think the LD20 LED is out of the sweet spot of the reflector, 
causing it to have a beam that seems to exaggerate the dark halo - 
I think this is probably the exception rather than the rule...... (the samples of the LD10, PD20 and PD30 do not have this problem)


----------



## MatNeh (Oct 20, 2008)

My LD20 has the "dark halo" also.


----------



## UnknownVT (Oct 27, 2008)

UnknownVT said:


> vs. Fenix L1D-Q5 both on Turbo and Li-Ion 14500 -
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 
Because I supect that my sample of the Fenix L1D-Q5 may be going "bad" - I got hold of another through the kind courtesy of 4sevens, and re-did my comparisons using both NiMH and 3.7V rechargeable Li-Ion 14500 -














vs. L1D-Q5 (#2) both Turbo NiMH







close, hard call to make - but at least the L1D-Q5 is not showing that ugly blue/violet tint

vs. L1D-Q5 (#2) both Turbo & 3.7V rechargeable Li-Ion 14500







again close, the L1D-Q5 is not showing that ugly blue/violet tint

I also compared the two samples of the Fenix L1D-Q5 -

Control Comparison - Fenix L1D-Q5 #1 vs. #2 both Turbo NiMH








Fenix L1D-Q5 #1 vs. #2 both Turbo & 3.7V rechargeable Li-Ion 14500







I think the #2 may just be a tiny bit brighter - and obviously it has a much nicer tint than the #1 which is now blue/violet in the beamshots.


----------



## I came to the light... (Nov 3, 2008)

How does the runtime compare with the D10? (both on NiMh) Thanks.


----------



## UnknownVT (Nov 25, 2008)

Standardized Stairway beamshot -


----------



## Burgess (Nov 26, 2008)

Nice work, UnknownVT !

:twothumbs


Thank you for your time and effort.

:goodjob: :kewlpics:
_


----------



## berry580 (Dec 15, 2008)

so whats the runtime like?

thank you


----------



## LightObsession (Dec 15, 2008)

Thanks for the review. I already have an L1D, so probably no strong reason to put out the money for one of the other lights at this point.

If I were to buy one of these three for my wife, I'm not sure which I'd get. Maybe the D10 for it's adjustable levels.


----------



## armstrg3 (Dec 15, 2008)

The Nitecore D10 specifications state the following When the light is off, the microprocessor draws very, very little power - between 0.1-0.4ma (0.2ma typical). For example, one 2000mah cell would last about 416 days. Do all of these lights draw power when they are off??????:thinking:


----------



## UnknownVT (Dec 15, 2008)

armstrg3 said:


> The Nitecore D10 specifications state the following When the light is off, the microprocessor draws very, very little power - between 0.1-0.4ma (0.2ma typical). For example, one 2000mah cell would last about 416 days. Do all of these lights draw power when they are off??????:thinking:


 
As far as I know the answer is No, they do not - 
most lights when off, they are Off, and are not supposed to draw current.

The NiteCore D10 beacuse of its unique switching and program/modes needs to have a standby current.


----------



## armstrg3 (Dec 15, 2008)

As far as 1xAA is concerned for me I'm leaning towards Fenix LD10 or L1D or the Jet I Pro IBS. Is one of these a clear winner??


----------



## kaichu dento (Dec 15, 2008)

armstrg3 said:


> As far as 1xAA is concerned for me I'm leaning towards Fenix LD10 or L1D or the Jet I Pro IBS. Is one of these a clear winner??


No, unless you have some solid criteria that would eliminate one or the other. Having had and used both I like both and plan on having them again. If you want a real low, then the Jet is the only choice between the two, not to mention that it's programmable. The Fenix is the better light if you don't like the slightly larger head of the Jet and if you like the available settings. If you want to have it set for tactical style usage the Fenix will allow you to have a high>strobe setting, or with a twist of the head a low>med>high>sos setting choice.


----------



## nickcroft (Dec 17, 2008)

UnknownVT said:


> As far as I know the answer is No, they do not -
> most lights when off, they are Off, and are not supposed to draw current.
> 
> The NiteCore D10 beacuse of its unique switching and program/modes needs to have a standby current.


Also the saving of last "setting" will need standby-power.
I think that the simple off-setting of the Fenix LD10 e.g. is much more tough also after few years than the D10's standby-off.

But the D10 is soooooo nice! :huh:


----------



## HKJ (Dec 17, 2008)

nickcroft said:


> Also the saving of last "setting" will need standby-power.



There are ways around that, a capacitor can be used to store power for saving the setting, or the setting can be saved when selected, not when powered off (This will increase the wear on the EEPROM).


----------



## armstrg3 (Dec 22, 2008)

Textured or smooth reflector, which creates the cleanest longer throw beam?


----------



## UnknownVT (Dec 22, 2008)

armstrg3 said:


> Textured or smooth reflector, which creates the cleanest longer throw beam?


 
For the same reflector then smooth would generally give the better throw.
Textured (which scatters light) is usually for smoothing out the beam.

However the reflector design/focus is real important for throw - 
the tighter the collimation/"focus" the better the throw - 
again generally the bigger the reflector the better it can be collimated.


----------



## Egsise (Jan 28, 2009)

berry580 said:


> so whats the runtime like?
> 
> thank you


https://www.candlepowerforums.com/threads/219173#2


----------



## toby_pra (Jan 29, 2009)

Very nice review...!


----------



## subwoofer (Aug 24, 2010)

I can't see anywhere on Fenix's website or any other site selling the LD10 that 14500 is ok to use. Does the product information you get with the torch say 14500 is in the acceptable power sources?

It might work for a bit, but if you are over driving the torch with the higher voltage will it not last very long?


----------



## sed6 (Aug 24, 2010)

Holy thread necrophilia Subman! The 14500 is okay to use in the LD10. It'll run on turbo the whole time though and your lower levels will disappear. When the do finally reappear, your battery is discharged to a point where it should be recharged soon. As for is it safe, or will it hurt...lots of opinions on the subject, but many like myself have used that combo for a long time with no ill effects. Personally I LOVE 200+ lumens in AA light and if it burns up in a few years who cares.


----------



## Moonshadow (Aug 24, 2010)

Just realised that this is a really old thread. Reply deleted.


----------



## UnknownVT (Aug 31, 2010)

subwoofer said:


> I can't see anywhere on Fenix's website or any other site selling the LD10 that 14500 is ok to use. Does the product information you get with the torch say 14500 is in the acceptable power sources?





sed6 said:


> The 14500 is okay to use in the LD10.



For a lot of people the LD10 and its predecessor the L1D works with Li-Ion Rechargeable 14500.

BUT and it's a very BIG but/caveat - the Fenix LD10 and L1D are not designed with a buck component to its circuit -
so it does not/cannot reduce high voltages down to the correct Vf for the LED -
its regulating boost circuit is by-passed when the battery voltage exceeds the Vf of the LED 
so in effect the LED is directly driven by the 14500 -
- therefore by definition the driving voltage is higher than the rated Vf of the LED!
- that is why it gets brighter on 14500......

There might not be sudden death using a 14500 - 
but there may be damage over the long term - as evidence of this, and not over such a long term -
please look at post #*17* (link) earlier in this very thread to see a L1D-Q5 that had turned a very obvious shade of blue from using a 14500, and pretty sparingly at that.

Control Comparison - Fenix L1D-Q5 #1 vs. #2 both Turbo NiMH









Fenix L1D-Q5 #1 vs. #2 both Turbo & 3.7V rechargeable Li-Ion 14500


----------



## sbdmn (Apr 25, 2011)

Good job!!! the LD10 seems to be a fairly good model


----------



## igoman (Apr 29, 2011)

What do you think I should buy for the LD10, the diffuser tip, the AD401 diffuser lens or the camping lampshade?


----------



## ATF628 (May 15, 2011)

Thanks for the comparison. I've been looking for a good Fenix light to purchase.


----------

