# 4Sevens Quark AA-R5 Comparison Review



## UnknownVT (Jan 9, 2010)

Yes, I have already done a 4Sevens Quark AA Comparison Review - 
but that was the original version with the Cree XP-E R2 - recently 4Sevens upgraded the Quark series using the Cree XP-G R5 - this ups the maximum output from the original 90 lumens to 109 lumens in the R5 edition for the single AA light.

Is there any noticeable increase in brightness?

Sizes






Heads -





vs. 4Sevens Quark AA R2 edition - both max and NiMH







answer: yes - noticeably, when compared side-by-side.
well the upgrade does seem worthwhile - although I note the XP-G R5 seems to be bluer/cooler in tint - this of course could well be due to simple sample variations - but I notice that the more the output is pushed the cooler the light - at least in the earlier batches..... (but that could just be me).

The Quark's nearest rivals are the Fenix series - the LD10 in this case - I do not have an actual LD10 at hand - but do have the PD20 head and L1D body - this basically makes up a Frankenstein "LD10" - since the heads on the LD10, LD20 and PD20 are the same/interchangeable - last time the Fenix was brighter than the R2 Quark AA - how does it fare this time in its R5 form?

vs. Fenix LD10 - Q5 both on Max ("Turbo") and NiMH -







I would say the R5 Quark AA is brighter - I do know the beam intensities seem in the same ball park - but the Quark has a noticeably wider beam and its hotspot is brighter and larger......

But what is going on? the Fenix LD10 is rated at 120 lumens but the Quark AA-R5 is only 109 lumens.

Well 4Sevens explains it - 4Sevens flashlights are rated actual OTF (Out The Front) lumens whereas other manufacturers often just quote the spec'd lumens at whatever drive current they are using - so those are potenial LED lumens - and there are always some losses due to the reflector and front glass etc.....

Best is to read the blurb on the 4Sevens website about OTF lumens


----------



## JaguarDave-in-Oz (Jan 9, 2010)

Thanks for that important (to me) review. I have a couple of Quark R2's (AA2 and 123-2) and I've already ordered an R5 AA turbo but have been holding off on one of the smaller R5 ones until I see how people react to the R5 in them. A fair bit brighter you say? You might have just tipped me over the edge.......


----------



## Swordforthelord (Jan 9, 2010)

How significant is the loss in throw with the XP-G model?


----------



## 1anrm (Jan 9, 2010)

Nice comparison, I like the tint on the LD10.


----------



## swrdply400mrelay (Jan 10, 2010)

An advantage of the Quark AA over the Fenix is the compatibility with 14500's. With the Quark AA, a 14500 increases the turbo mode even more to about what the 123 version puts out, BUT all the other modes are retained. 

With the Fenix, you lose your low modes


----------



## UnknownVT (Jan 10, 2010)

swrdply400mrelay said:


> An advantage of the Quark AA over the Fenix is the compatibility with 14500's. With the Quark AA, a 14500 increases the turbo mode even more to about what the 123 version puts out, BUT all the other modes are retained.
> With the Fenix, you lose your low modes



This is quite correct - 
but actually with a 14500 in the Fenix LD10 it will crank out more than the single 123 version......

Why? 
in the Fenix is a Boost circuit - to boost the 1.5-3V up to the Vf (forward voltage) of the LED - however when the battery or source voltage exceeds the Vf - the circuit is in effect by passed - so the light becomes directly driven from the battery.

Ah, one might think - ah-ha free lunch!
Not so fast read the bit about why the regulation circuit is by-passed - so by definition the direct battery voltage supplied to the LED is higher than the Vf......

We mostly get away with this because the voltage of the Li-Ion rechargeable like the 14500 is only relatively slightly above that of the Vf and a load will drop the voltage somewhat -

However the evidence is that while all the lower modes are basically high the battery voltage must be exceeding the Vf.

This should be a warning - electronic devices are sensitive and if they don't die suddenly they can still suffer and be degraded over time.....
evidence? I have a Fenix L1D-Q5 that eventually turned a very obvious violet/blue tint - enough that I could no longer use it for my comparisons and had to get another - please look at Look at Post #*17* (link) in Fenix LD10 Comparison Review.

Now the 3V Quarks (ie: AA AA2 and 123) are different in that they have a Buck/Boost circuit - pretty rare for now - Boost we already understand - but Buck? it bucks or regulate/lowers the voltage _DOWN_ to the Vf - why buck when we are dealing with 1.5V in single AA, 3V in 2x AA and 1x CR123? - why just for people like you and me who'd put a 3.7V rechargeable Li-Ion 14500 into the Quark AA (or a Li-Ion RCR123 into the Quark 123) to boost the output.

So in a Quark we can kind of have our cake and eat it too.....
although the higher output "only" reaches the same level as the 1x123 or 2xAA max outputs - but I feel it's better than playing dice and having the light eventually go bad.......


----------



## timbo114 (Jan 10, 2010)

UnknownVT said:


> ...
> 
> Now the 3V Quarks (ie: AA AA2 and 123) are different in that they have a Buck/Boost circuit - pretty rare for now - Boost we already understand - but Buck? it bucks or regulate/lowers the voltage _DOWN_ to the Vf - why buck when we are dealing with 1.5V in single AA, 3V in 2x AA and 1x CR123? - why just for people like you and me who'd put a 3.7V rechargeable Li-Ion 14500 into the Quark AA (or a Li-Ion RCR123 into the Quark 123) to boost the output.
> 
> ...



THIS is a great explanation!
I just learned my 'something new' for today.

Thank you UnknownVT


----------



## DM51 (Jan 10, 2010)

Very useful update - many thanks! It is particularly interesting to see the actual difference between the R2 and R5. Excellent explanatory follow-up post also (#6)

I'm moving this to the Reviews section.


----------



## I Know Nothing (Jan 11, 2010)

Trying to judge it from those pics, the "LD10" seems to have a brighter spill area in the beam with less difference to the hotspot which makes it more pleasant to my eyes and more useful. Is that noticeable in real world outdoor use?


----------



## kts (Jan 11, 2010)

I Know Nothing said:


> Trying to judge it from those pics, the "LD10" seems to have a brighter spill area in the beam with less difference to the hotspot which makes it more pleasant to my eyes and more useful. Is that noticeable in real world outdoor use?


 
+1
The LD10 looks brighter to me too, with a much better tint.

But its not really a fair contest, Q5 Vs R5, wait until Fenix updates their lights to R5 and then compare them


----------



## Haz (Jan 11, 2010)

Great explanation of the Buck/Boost vs a Boost circuit, i have just learnt something new today


----------



## PlayboyJoeShmoe (Jan 11, 2010)

Does NOTHING to curb my desire for a Quark AA!

Just gotta get employed first.....


----------



## LED_Thrift (Jan 11, 2010)

Thanks again for another review of an interesting light, and also the explanation of the different circuits used in the Quark and Fenix.


----------



## UnknownVT (Jan 11, 2010)

I Know Nothing said:


> Trying to judge it from those pics, the "LD10" seems to have a brighter spill area in the beam with less difference to the hotspot which makes it more pleasant to my eyes and more useful. Is that noticeable in real world outdoor use?





kts said:


> +1
> The LD10 looks brighter to me too, with a much better tint.



As for which is brighter - please re-read my comments under the relevant beamshot - the Quark covers a lot more area and its hotspot is larger and brighter - a silly example- a laser beam is very intense in a minute spot - is it brighter, or even useful as a general flashlight?

Dunno about outdoors it's bright outside right now.

But indoors the Quark's larger hotspot is much more useful to me - I tend to use the hotspot for actually looking at things - whereas the side-spill is more for periphery vision so wider the better - can't explain it better than that.

Another point that bears repeating is how good/smooth the Quark beam is due to the self-centering mechanism in all 4Sevens flashlights.

It may seem minor and I also used to dismiss the notorious Cree dark halo - well in comparison if one moves the light from the hotspot to cover with the side-spill that Cree dark halo is definitely noticed (and Fenix is actually very good a minimizing the dark halo) - it's not just the transition from bright to less bright - whereas on the Quark there isn't a dark halo - and there is only the transition from bright to less bright - if you get what I mean - 

However let's put all this in context - in the dark _ANY_ light is better then no light (even patchy/lumpy beam like an AA MiniMag is "good") 

BUT like I have said before - any incremental improvement is always welcome and close to flawless beam is about as good as one can get for now.......



kts said:


> But its not really a fair contest, Q5 Vs R5, wait until Fenix updates their lights to R5 and then compare them



What contest?

Sure.... when? 
and I certainly will compare.

However I have also said this in this thread - the 3V Quarks have Buck/Boost circuit - whereas the Fenix only boost - so in Fenix the use of 3.7v Li-Ion rechargeables loses all the lower levels (and eventually the emitter *will* be damaged - see above for an explanation) 

Whereas the Quarks are actually designed to use Li-Ion. 

Buck/Boost circuit due to their extra duties are intrinsically less efficient than pure boost - so when Fenix use the XP-G R5 they probably will be brighter - 
\unless of course they also start using Buck/Boost (to protect ourselves from ourselves )


----------



## I Know Nothing (Jan 12, 2010)

UnknownVT said:


> But indoors the Quark's larger hotspot is much more useful to me - I tend to use the hotspot for actually looking at things - whereas the side-spill is more for periphery vision so wider the better - can't explain it better than that.)



Using a light for looking at specific things like roof leaks in a dark loft it doesn't really matter much what the beam pattern is like to me so long as it's bright enough for the job. But if I'm using a light for walking, biking or running with I'm more picky. I want to be able to shine it up the trail some distance ahead and still have enough light just in front of my feet/wheels. That's where the brightness of the spill in relation to the hotspot is important. And it's that more than ultimate central spot brightness that determines whether I can get away with a lower mode for a longer run time. 

Just looked up some figures on Light Reviews.com which seems to bear out what my eyes were getting from interpreting your beamshots. Fenix brighter spill... Quark not so bright but larger area. Take your pick.

Quark AA XPE Spot 2041 lux Fenix L1D XRE Spot 1960 lux
Quark AA XPE Spill 36 lux Fenix L1D XRE Spill 69 lux


----------



## UnknownVT (Jan 12, 2010)

I Know Nothing said:


> But if I'm using a light for walking, biking or running with I'm more picky. I want to be able to shine it up the trail some distance ahead and still have enough light just in front of my feet/wheels. That's where the brightness of the spill in relation to the hotspot is important. And it's that more than ultimate central spot brightness that determines whether I can get away with a lower mode for a longer run time.
> Just looked up some figures on Light Reviews.com
> Quark AA XPE Spot 2041 lux Fenix L1D XRE Spot 1960 lux
> Quark AA XPE Spill 36 lux Fenix L1D XRE Spill 69 lux



Thanks for your input - very useful to know what people look for in their lights

However not to take anything away from anyone - especially any other review (always worthwhile to me to see another point of view).

There is one intrinsic problem with figures which somehow always look more quantitative and objective....

Please look back at the comparison beamshots between the Quark AA-R5 and then LD10 - an intensity Lux reading has to be at a spot in the beam somewhere - now on the Quark it seems fairly easy since its side-spill looks pretty even - 
whereas where would the Lux reading be taken on the LD10? 
Notice it's patchy (relatively speaking of course) - 
was the meter moved around and an average taken (if so, how many readings and where?) 
or just found a peak and took that, or just a random point?

OK now look at the -2 Stop underexposed beamshot - I'll paste it in here -




look at the lower edges of the beams - they look close, maybe even about the same intensity to me - which means the Quark AA-R5's hotspot can be further ahead while maintaining the same brightness intensity by your wheels/feet 
- does that seem about right?


----------



## think2x (Jan 16, 2010)

I currently carry a Quark AA2 R2 regular everyday on my belt. It's my first "real" multi-mode light. I really like this light alot but sometimes I need less than turbo but more than moonlight and would like not cycling though the modes. (also dislike strobes)
I was thinking of ordering a Quark 1-AA tactical R5 so I can trade barrels between the two. I would then have the tactical R5 (two modes would be great) on my belt and the R2 regular in my pocket. My question is with the bigger hot spot not shining as far. How reduced is the throw? It is used mostly on construction sites and around the house (feeding/walking the dogs)

Any help would be GREATLY appreciated.

Thanks in advance, Jamie


----------



## UnknownVT (Jan 16, 2010)

think2x said:


> My question is with the bigger hot spot not shining as far. How reduced is the throw? It is used mostly on construction sites and around the house (feeding/walking the dogs)



Good idea having both the tactical and regular heads and the AA and 2AA bodies - so in effect you can have 4 flashlights.......

OK the beauty of having the R5 is that the hotspot is larger (to me a good thing - as I tend to look at things in the hotspot) but its intensity in the the hotspot is at least as bright as the smaller spot of the Q5 of the Fenix LD10 - so in theory it ought to throw as far as the Fenix _and_ cover more area?

You have the Quark AA2-R5 - do you really find the throw inadequate? 
compared to what? -

The Quark AA2-R5 is 206 _OTF_ lumens - 
that is almost _TWICE_ as bright as the one time monster SureFire 9P - 3x CR123 xenon light - 
(which in turn was almost twice as bright as the SureFire 6P and G2, and Streamlight Scorpions of this world....) 
and people used to think that SureFire 9P was ridiculously bright.....


----------



## think2x (Jan 16, 2010)

My AA2 is the original R2 not the R5. I am concerned with the R5 nor throwing as far as the R2 I currently have. Thanks for the quick reply.


----------



## UnknownVT (Jan 16, 2010)

think2x said:


> My AA2 is the original R2 not the R5. I am concerned with the R5 nor throwing as far as the R2 I currently have. Thanks for the quick reply.



That one is easy - the R5 is brighter so in a comparison beamshot its hotspot shows larger in the photo (since it is brighter) - 
so the basically the R5 has a brighter hotspot - 
hopefully that answers your question?


----------



## think2x (Jan 16, 2010)

Just ordered the AA tactical R5. Thanks for all the help.


----------



## Midnight Oil (Jan 17, 2010)

Vicent, does the R5 have a green tint that some people have mentioned? Is it a sample thing or is it common with the R5?


----------



## UnknownVT (Jan 17, 2010)

Midnight Oil said:


> does the R5 have a green tint that some people have mentioned? Is it a sample thing or is it common with the R5?



I'm not too sure it's green - but as I mentioned in the review since the R5 is pushing the the envelope of output (for now) there is to my eyes a tendency toward cool/blue.

The green that people may see could be at lower levels -
where just about _ALL_ cool white LEDs will do that 
when driven with lower currents.


----------



## JaguarDave-in-Oz (Jan 17, 2010)

UnknownVT said:


> but as I mentioned in the review since the R5 is pushing the the envelope of output (for now) there is to my eyes a tendency toward cool/blue..


if it's of any assistance, that's the tint I see in my newly acquired R5 Turbo AA2 too (and it's beautiful, I love cool).


----------



## Midnight Oil (Jan 17, 2010)

Thank you, Vincent and JD-in-Oz. I'm gonna go with the warmer Fenix light(s) with the more intense spill.


----------



## pm_wob (Jan 20, 2010)

Today my Quark AA arrived! 
Outstanding brightness, and I would love the moonmode also, if only... its so greenish.

Yes, it shows a very noticeable green tint. Not only in low modes. 

Compared to my other flashlights, its the most greenish tint. Have to get accustomed to that, or... 

But it works so nice with 14500!


----------



## UnknownVT (Jan 21, 2010)

pm_wob said:


> Yes, it shows a very noticeable green tint. Not only in low modes.
> Compared to my other flashlights, its the most greenish tint. Have to get accustomed to that, or...



LEDs being electronic components usually have pretty reasonable tolerances when it comes to binning. 

However this just goes to show how sensitive our eyes are - very slight variances in tint are quite easily detected if one is actually looking for, or are aware of it. 

As I said my sample is mostly cool/blue'ish when on Max as the beamshots show - but in lower modes (because the Quarks use current regulation) it does tend toward green - but that is for any cool white LED at lower currents.

Might want to contact 4Sevens.com and let them know if the the green really bothers you.


----------



## pm_wob (Jan 21, 2010)

Ok I will contact 4sevens, perhaps its possible for them to trade in a little amount of lumens for less greenish tint in the future. 
But I think I will keep the flashlight anyway (or might sell it if a less greenish binning is available).

At the weekend I will try to provide some informative photos of my Quark AA in comparison with other flashlights. So everybody can judge about it


----------



## JaguarDave-in-Oz (Jan 21, 2010)

It's not just the R5's that have variances. I have AA2 and 123-2 R2 Quarks and one has a greenish cast, the other doesn't. The differences are very noticeable when side by side but as long as they look as far down my paddock as each other I'm happy using either.


----------



## bfksc (Jan 27, 2010)

pm_wob said:


> But I think I will keep the flashlight anyway (or might sell it if a less greenish binning is available).
> At the weekend I will try to provide some informative photos of my Quark AA in comparison with other flashlights. So everybody can judge about it


I just received a Quark AAx2 Tactical and I too noticed the green tint when compared to three other LED lights which are all very close in colour (Luxeon III, Luxeon Rebel, and 1w LumiLeds?). I was a bit disappointed with it at first, but using it indoors and out yesterday it works just fine and I don't really notice the tint until another LED light is beside it. That's about the only bad thing I have to say about the Quark.
:shrug:


----------



## IlluminatedOne (Jan 27, 2010)

Just got myself a Quark AA2 R5 and i love it great light and i am very happy with it.


----------



## Wiggle (Jan 28, 2010)

I've had a Quark AA Tactical R5 for a month now and thought I'd leave my impressions here if they are welcome:
-Great build quality
-Knurling is good, sometimes collects debris from my pockets
-Love the tactical interface (usually have mine set to Med/Max)
-Clip is strong and effective
-Forward click is decent, perhaps a little too tight for a light this small though

Performance
-Max output is very respectable on AA and outright impressive on 14500
-Tint is white if a little cool on high output, slightly green on moonlight and low.
-Beam is very useful, broad hotspot suitable for most EDC needs but still tight enough that throw is acceptable (esp. if you compensate with higher output). Beam is also smooth and even.

Here is a comparison of max mode against an L2D on both Duraloops and 14500:
Fenix L2D Turbo 2 x Duraloop






Quark AA on 1 x Duraloop





Quark AA on 14500 Li-Ion





And a size reference pic:


----------



## PlayboyJoeShmoe (Jan 28, 2010)

Golly but I want a Quark AA!!!

Selling off stuff to Stay Alive until I get in a truck and on the road.

MAYBE in several months.....


----------



## K31th (May 8, 2010)

pm_wob said:


> Today my Quark AA arrived!
> Outstanding brightness, and I would love the moonmode also, if only... its so greenish.
> 
> Yes, it shows a very noticeable green tint. Not only in low modes.
> ...


 


pm_wob said:


> Ok I will contact 4sevens, perhaps its possible for them to trade in a little amount of lumens for less greenish tint in the future.
> But I think I will keep the flashlight anyway (or might sell it if a less greenish binning is available).
> 
> At the weekend I will try to provide some informative photos of my Quark AA in comparison with other flashlights. So everybody can judge about it


 


bfksc said:


> I just received a Quark AAx2 Tactical and I too noticed the green tint when compared to three other LED lights which are all very close in colour (Luxeon III, Luxeon Rebel, and 1w LumiLeds?). I was a bit disappointed with it at first, but using it indoors and out yesterday it works just fine and I don't really notice the tint until another LED light is beside it. That's about the only bad thing I have to say about the Quark.
> :shrug:


 
I have had my Quark AA2 Tactical for nearly 2 weeks now and aside from playing about testing it out when I first got it , I am now using it on a daily basis when working.
I have not noticed any green tint on any of the settings.
It is a great bit of kit............I love it !


----------



## NoFair (May 8, 2010)

Nice review:thumbsup: 

Anyone tried a Quark AA head with 2 cr123s? I use one of mine with an 18650 body and was wondering if this could use 2 cr123s in a pinch:candle:


----------



## Rexlion (May 8, 2010)

NoFair said:


> Nice review:thumbsup:
> 
> Anyone tried a Quark AA head with 2 cr123s? I use one of mine with an 18650 body and was wondering if this could use 2 cr123s in a pinch:candle:


 For a pinch, if you plan ahead you can have a dummy 123 on hand so you can run a single 123 in your 18650 tube. Two 123s could conceivably make the LED go  , although you might get lucky for a while.


----------



## 4sevens (May 8, 2010)

NoFair said:


> Nice review:thumbsup:
> Anyone tried a Quark AA head with 2 cr123s? I use one of mine with an 18650 body and was wondering if this could use 2 cr123s in a pinch:candle:


two cr123a with a quark aa head will definitely destroy the circuit. The voltage range is 0.9v to 4.2v.


----------



## NoFair (May 9, 2010)

4sevens said:


> two cr123a with a quark aa head will definitely destroy the circuit. The voltage range is 0.9v to 4.2v.



Thanks for the quick reply David. :thumbsup:

Sverre


----------



## subwoofer (May 10, 2010)

Not sure if I missed it, but have you compared the low level modes. I was wondering if the R5 moonlight mode is now brighter (which for me would not be good) or if it has stayed the same?


----------



## UnknownVT (May 13, 2010)

subwoofer said:


> Not sure if I missed it, but have you compared the low level modes. I was wondering if the R5 moonlight mode is now brighter (which for me would not be good) or if it has stayed the same?



I just did a comparison pics below -
if anything the R5 version may be slightly lower!

R5 vs. 4Sevens Quark AA-R2 - Minimum Moonlight mode both NiMH -








For grins I also wanted to check how well behaved the buck-boost current regulating circuit was - so I put a 3.7V rechargeable Li-Ion 14500 into the R5 version while keeping the 1.2V NiMH in the R2 version -

R5 with *Li-Ion* vs. 4Sevens Quark AA-R2 with NiMH - both onMinimum Moonlight mode 







this pair of photos look about the same as the pair where both were using NiMH.
again the R5 version still looks lower - despite having a 3.7V Li-Ion battery driving it -
I would say the current buck-boost regulation is very well behaved.


----------



## tcr03 (May 26, 2010)

if you have the tactical version and you program say max output for the tight cap and just leave it so you can cycle through the modes in loose cap. or do you have to assign a mode for loose and tight cap.


----------



## UnknownVT (May 27, 2010)

tcr03 said:


> if you have the tactical version and you program say max output for the tight cap and just leave it so you can cycle through the modes in loose cap. or do you have to assign a mode for loose and tight cap.



The tactical is a two mode flashlight - 
each of the modes can be programed.

Neither of the settings can be left to cycle through the levels.


----------



## ky70 (Jun 5, 2010)

Thank you Vincent for the is thread. Thanks to your detailed explanations, I think I finally understand the way the buck/boost circuits work In these Quarks. Let me know if my thoughts below are correct with regard to the boost/buck:
- the quark 123 light will be the same brightness using either a primary cr123 or a rcr123 because of the buck circuitry.
- the quark AA max output on a 14500 would be the same brightness as the quark 123 on max and quark AA2 on max (206 lumens).
- the quark minis using 3.7v li-ons are brighter than the quark AA, quark AA2 and Quark 123 because the minis don't have buck circuitry.

Thanks!!


----------



## UnknownVT (Jun 6, 2010)

ky70 said:


> Thank you Vincent for the is thread. Thanks to your detailed explanations, I think I finally understand the way the buck/boost circuits work In these Quarks. Let me know if my thoughts below are correct with regard to the boost/buck:
> - the quark 123 light will be the same brightness using either a primary cr123 or a rcr123 because of the buck circuitry.
> - the quark AA max output on a 14500 would be the same brightness as the quark 123 on max and quark AA2 on max (206 lumens).
> - the quark minis using 3.7v li-ons are brighter than the quark AA, quark AA2 and Quark 123 because the minis don't have buck circuitry.



You got it....

However a word of caution for others on the use of 3.7V Li-Ion rechargeable batteries with non-Buck regulating circuits - 
when the battery voltage is above Vf the regulating circuit is basically by-passed - so in effect the LED is directly driven by the battery.

Mostly one can get away with this - there are very few sudden deaths.
BUT long term is _*not*_ so good for the LED - not only is the driving voltage above the spec'd Vf - 
the higher brightness is very likely to cause heat issues - 
both of which are _NOT_ good the for the LED -
for example I had a Fenix L1D-Q5 which I used as one of the lights for comparison - I only used Li-Ion 14500 occasionally for comparisons - but eventually that light developed a very obvious violet-blue tint - so much so that I could no longer use it for comparison and had to have it replaced.

So unless a circuit is specifically designed to use Li-Ion (eg: like a Buck circuit) one probably should not use Li-Ion - and if one must, then very sparingly.......


----------



## Pilot (Apr 25, 2011)

Found answer, sorry!


----------



## princeza (Jan 7, 2013)

Sorry for posting in this old title. I am haveing trouble and i am insane this few days for not knowing what to do. I have quark aa tactical flashlight. I bought it after reading yours reviews. And problem is when programing it i am going thru modes. Moonlight is OK, low is OK, medium is OK, high(NOT OK!!) it is same as medium! Maximum(NOT OK) same as medium! So I dont have high and max! Medium is around 20_30lumens compared to my fenix ld20. I dont know what to do. I tried duracell that came with flashlight, NiMh, lithium AA primaries. Never used 14500. What is the problem? Please help:mecry: I have contacted customer service still no reply:thumbsdow What is the problem? Anybody knows?


----------

