# Zebralight SC53c and SC53w



## eraursls1984 (Jul 20, 2017)

The list was updated. The SC53c and SC53w were added with a release date of 7/17. It looks like it has the H53c/w driver.


----------



## Tixx (Jul 20, 2017)

A 200 cut in lumens on H1? And no 3.7v option to make up for it? Oh man! Good thing I made sure to check. I want everything in the SC5 MkII, but in this form factor. Darn!


----------



## Tixx (Jul 20, 2017)

Thanks for the heads up!


----------



## markr6 (Jul 20, 2017)

Tixx said:


> A 200 cut in lumens on H1? And no 3.7v option to make up for it? Oh man! Good thing I made sure to check. I want everything in the SC5 MkII, but in this form factor. Darn!



Looks like the same thing but only lighter and smaller. Unless I'm missing something. Now I need to get the 53!


----------



## AVService (Jul 20, 2017)

I am a little confused?
Did they just do away completely with the ability to use 14500 cells?


----------



## emarkd (Jul 20, 2017)

Surely these are typo's right? Its a new listing, maybe someone just copied and pasted too much of the text from the SC5 listings. The SC5x-series lights have always been wider voltage range, so AA or 14500, but they give up some max punch and efficiency for it. While the SC5-series lights are much more limited, only Eneloops, but more efficient for the trade-off. I highly doubt anything has changed with this release, because otherwise these new lights are not good releases.


----------



## eraursls1984 (Jul 20, 2017)

There were about 15 edits this morning, this is what I noticed different after all of the edits.


----------



## Tixx (Jul 20, 2017)

Ok, so a 220 lumen difference on H1. Below are the specs.

SC5w Mk II AA Flashlight Neutral White
High: H1 *550* Lm
Operating Voltage Range: 0.7V - 2.0V

SC53w AA Neutral White Flashlight
High: H1 *330* Lm
Operating Voltage Range: 0.7V - 2.0V


----------



## eraursls1984 (Jul 20, 2017)

markr6 said:


> Looks like the same thing but only lighter and smaller. Unless I'm missing something. Now I need to get the 53!


This is showing a lower max than the SC5. It's showing the same max as the H53. They said the reason that it (H53) had a lower high than the SC5 is because they didn't have the time to fit more components in the tight space for the boosted max output of the SC5.


----------



## Tixx (Jul 20, 2017)

markr6 said:


> Looks like the same thing but only lighter and smaller. Unless I'm missing something. Now I need to get the 53!



Missing 220 lumens on H1.


----------



## emarkd (Jul 20, 2017)

eraursls1984 said:


> There were about 15 edits this morning, this is what I noticed different after all of the edits.



Yeah I see it too, its all there. I just won't believe its not a typo until Zebralight says "No really, the SC53 lights are now AA only." or someone from here buys one and has it in their hands to check. It just makes no sense to me at all...


----------



## eraursls1984 (Jul 20, 2017)

emarkd said:


> Yeah I see it too, its all there. I just won't believe its not a typo until Zebralight says "No really, the SC53 lights are now AA only." or someone from here buys one and has it in their hands to check. It just makes no sense to me at all...


Yeah, it doesn't make sense to me that the only difference is smaller slightly smaller size and less output unless it is much cheaper. I doubt that since it's not one of the new budget lights. I would prefer better efficiency on Ni-MH, Lithium primaries, and Alkaline over lower efficiency and 14500 support though.


----------



## cyclesport (Jul 20, 2017)

Huge disappointment for me. Had really hoped for a Hi-CRI light with 14500 support to avoid the battery sag issue on high w/NiMH 1.5v cells. Maybe I can snag another SC52w before they disappear forever? Damn it!


----------



## AVService (Jul 20, 2017)

cyclesport said:


> Huge disappointment for me. Had really hoped for a Hi-CRI light with 14500 support to avoid the battery sag issue on high w/NiMH 1.5v cells. Maybe I can snag another SC52w before they disappear forever? Damn it!




Lucky for me I did get a spare when I thought I had lost mine a few months ago!
Of course I found it in the car the next day?

But yeah if this is correct it is baffling why they would make a move like this.

On the other hand studying the website a little more these new versions do seem to offer the new G5,6,7 mode drivers too.
Maybe the driver is just a narrow voltage range model and this is the reason for the Voltage range change?


----------



## cyclesport (Jul 20, 2017)

AVService said:


> Lucky for me I did get a spare when I thought I had lost mine a few months ago!
> Of course I found it in the car the next day?
> 
> But yeah if this is correct it is baffling why they would make a move like this.


 Good move...now you've got a back-up. This has been my favorite 1 X AA platform for years and the only reason I can speculate for moving away from 14500 support is the liability fear of Li-ion's...at least in formats other than 18650's? Just a guess.


----------



## TCY (Jul 20, 2017)

I'm convinced that the 330lm output is not a typo given the MSRP. Fellow CPFers have discussed in length on the H53 thread that the lack of 14500 support is because ZL is implementing the new programmable UI and there is not enough physical/software space for both features, and it seems like the SC53 line is no different. I'll pass and wait for the 18650 MK4 since I already have the H53Fc.


----------



## cyclesport (Jul 20, 2017)

TCY said:


> CPFers have discussed in length on the H53 thread that the lack of 14500 support is because ZL is implementing the new programmable UI and there is not enough physical/software space for both features, and it seems like the SC53 line is no different.


Thanks for the info, didn't know. Still kinda sucky for those of us who prefer the oompf of 3.7v.


----------



## emarkd (Jul 20, 2017)

TCY said:


> I'm convinced that the 330lm output is not a typo given the MSRP. Fellow CPFers have discussed in length on the H53 thread that the lack of 14500 support is because ZL is implementing the new programmable UI and there is not enough physical/software space for both features, and it seems like the SC53 line is no different. I'll pass and wait for the 18650 MK4 since I already have the H53Fc.



I never thought the lower lumen count was a typo. The SC52 made less lumens than the original SC5 too. That's a physical constraint - boost drivers with wide voltage ranges are less efficient, so by focusing on just the one chemistry with the narrow voltage input in the SC5, they were able to really improve efficiency at the hardware level, not even a software issue (aside from maybe some smarter low voltage detection). I think the typo is in the voltage range. _SURELY_ the SC53w will support both AA and 14500 chemistries. 

But of course I could be wrong....


----------



## cyclesport (Jul 20, 2017)

At least I hope the 4-flash "battery meter" of the SC53w is better calibrated than the 1st gen SC5w. I rarely get more than one or two flashes w/the SC5w, even on a freshly charged Eneloop Pro...kind of renders the battery status function useless. It's a feature I really find useful using 14500's in the SC52w, H52w, etc.


----------



## iamlucky13 (Jul 20, 2017)

It's not really fair to compare the compact version (SC53w/c) to the full-size version (SC5w/c). As was explained in the thread for the similarly tiny H53c, they just couldn't fit as capable of a boost driver in the H53 as the SC5:
http://www.candlepowerforums.com/vb...te-High-CRI!&p=5093190&viewfull=1#post5093190

Between the SC52 and the SC53, the difference is the loss of 14500 support. I suspect that was a matter of sharing some components between the SC5 II and SC53 drivers, and possibly also minor efficiency considerations related to the ability to deal with a wider range of input voltages, as emarkd suggested. If my speculation is true, then continuing 14500 support in the new generation while also providing the improved NiMH performance and multiple mode groups the new driver brings would have meant more development cost and longer time to market.

So they had to make a choice which compromise to accept.

It seems they decided the loss of 1 minute at 500 lumens on one of their two AA model lines wasn't likely to cost them many customers.

Besides, it seems like the opinion is split on CPF of whether turbo modes belong on most flashlights in the first place. I like the option, but others seem to feel the step-down takes away most of the utility of option and borders on deceptive marketing. 

The debate about the value of turbo is particularly relevant when we're talking about a difference of only 300 lumens vs 500 lumens (1.7X). One my current lights has a 70 lumen and a 175 lumen mode (2.5X). When I switch between them, sometimes I do a doubletake trying to decide if it actually changed modes, because the perceptual difference between those ratios is so comparatively small.


----------



## TCY (Jul 20, 2017)

emarkd said:


> I never thought the lower lumen count was a typo. The SC52 made less lumens than the original SC5 too. That's a physical constraint - boost drivers with wide voltage ranges are less efficient, so by focusing on just the one chemistry with the narrow voltage input in the SC5, they were able to really improve efficiency at the hardware level, not even a software issue (aside from maybe some smarter low voltage detection). I think the typo is in the voltage range. _SURELY_ the SC53w will support both AA and 14500 chemistries.
> 
> But of course I could be wrong....



ZL's official reply on the whole driver/14500 debate:

""_The H53/SC53/H503 driver is a slightly improved version of the H52/SC52/H502 driver. Again, if we were to put the same (bin) XM-L2 LED in the H53, we'd see some improvements there (in output and efficiency). On top of that, the new UI requires more memory space. Dropping off the 14500 support is among the very few options we had." 

_You can also find this quote on the H53 thread, page 6, #180:http://www.candlepowerforums.com/vb...53c-AA-Headlamp-Neutral-White-High-CRI!/page6

Since the *53 line doesn't provide enough memory space for 14500 support after the implementation of the new programmable UI, my guess is that ZL dropped the related hardware as well (hence the lower price), as evidenced by another ZL reply: "_14500 support is dropped in the H53 series, compared to the H52, in order to lower the cost (and the price) a bit. High output from Eneloop/NiMH batteries in the SC5 series requires a much more sophisticated and expensive driver." _(page 5, #128)


----------



## emarkd (Jul 20, 2017)

TCY said:


> ZL's official reply on the whole driver/14500 debate:
> 
> ""_The H53/SC53/H503 driver is a slightly improved version of the H52/SC52/H502 driver. Again, if we were to put the same (bin) XM-L2 LED in the H53, we'd see some improvements there (in output and efficiency). On top of that, the new UI requires more memory space. Dropping off the 14500 support is among the very few options we had."
> 
> ...



Ah, I see. Since I didn't follow the H53 thread that's all news to me. Guess its not a typo then. Thanks for clearing that up.


----------



## jon_slider (Jul 21, 2017)

pics always help me visualize differences 
Note: I scaled the pic of the SC53 down a bit, since it is .2" shorter and the head is not as fat as the SC5. Hopefully someone will post actual side by side pics.. but Imo this is approximately correct:
SC53 on left, SC5 on right


----------



## Trevilux (Jul 21, 2017)

I am waiting now for the ECO series, but they seems not hightly interested in launch the F series....oh!!! they have deleted F3 of the spreadsheet!


----------



## iamlucky13 (Jul 21, 2017)

Trevilux said:


> I am waiting now for the ECO series, but they seems not hightly interested in launch the F series....oh!!! they have deleted F3 of the spreadsheet!



They must have added it to the spreadsheet very early in the development process.

Presumably this is a completely new driver, so I'd expect it to take a while to prototype, test, possibly reiterate, and finalize the design.

Didn't there also used to be comments on the spreadsheet about the basic features of the eco line?


----------



## eraursls1984 (Jul 21, 2017)

Trevilux said:


> I am waiting now for the ECO series, but they seems not hightly interested in launch the F series....oh!!! they have deleted F3 of the spreadsheet!


I can understand this a little. The AA are cheap and have fairly inexpensive rechargeables and both readily available. The 18650 is relatively inexpensive and common while offering very long runtimes. The CR123 however is expensive. Rechargeables are available, but not as common and they don't offer much in terms of runtime over AA's.


----------



## Tixx (Jul 21, 2017)

TCY said:


> ZL's official reply on the whole driver/14500 debate:
> 
> ""_The H53/SC53/H503 driver is a slightly improved version of the H52/SC52/H502 driver. Again, if we were to put the same (bin) XM-L2 LED in the H53, we'd see some improvements there (in output and efficiency). On top of that, the new UI requires more memory space. Dropping off the 14500 support is among the very few options we had."
> 
> ...



Cool, thanks for the info. Kind of a double loss. Lost the 14500 support for a good high mode and then lost the high of the new driver. Did gain the custom modes though of course which I like a great deal.
g


----------



## StorminMatt (Jul 21, 2017)

iamlucky13 said:


> It seems they decided the loss of 1 minute at 500 lumens on one of their two AA model lines wasn't likely to cost them many customers.
> 
> Besides, it seems like the opinion is split on CPF of whether turbo modes belong on most flashlights in the first place. I like the option, but others seem to feel the step-down takes away most of the utility of option and borders on deceptive marketing.



The loss of turbo mode is of minor concern when it comes to losing 14500 support. Of much greater concern is the generally more poor, saggy performance of AA vs 14500 at higher brightness levels. Simply put, a AA battery just can't maintain brightness as well on H1 as a 14500. While brightness stays constant with a 14500 until protection kicks in, the light visibly dims with a AA battery.

Another concern is battery charging on the go. Li-Ion uses a simple charge algorithm compared to NiMH, and charges better from variable power sources like solar. In addition, the lower coulombic capacity combined with higher voltage of a 14500 vs AA means that you can actually add energy (which translates to runtime) MUCH more quickly to a 14500 than a AA with small, simple, low current chargers. This makes 14500 a better choice than AA even when you have a reliable power source, but don't want to carry around a full-sized charger (think car charging or using a small charger at the office). 

Finally, dumping 14500 means one less battery option. Most folks here like options when it comes to batteries 'just in case'. You never know if you might one day NEED a light, but not have any charged AA batteries on hand. Or, as stated above, you may not have the ability to charge AA batteries. In this case, it might be useful to be able to hse 14500s if this is what you DO have on hand.


----------



## iamlucky13 (Jul 23, 2017)

StorminMatt said:


> The loss of turbo mode is of minor concern when it comes to losing 14500 support. Of much greater concern is the generally more poor, saggy performance of AA vs 14500 at higher brightness levels. Simply put, a AA battery just can't maintain brightness as well on H1 as a 14500. While brightness stays constant with a 14500 until protection kicks in, the light visibly dims with a AA battery.



Are you describing your experience with the SC5 II, or just the usual performance?

I've been hoping somebody will take measurements on an SC5 specifically to see how well they were able to cope with this. Based on HKJ's battery tests, an Eneloop theoretically can provide the power necessary to get the rated lumens for most of the battery life, but that's in theory. Actually sustaining nearly 5 Amps when the voltage the boost circuit is receiving gradually declines is certainly a challenge.


----------



## jon_slider (Jul 23, 2017)

iamlucky13 said:


> I've been hoping somebody will take measurements on an SC5


click pic to read whole review:


maukka said:


>


----------



## iamlucky13 (Jul 23, 2017)

Thank jon. I had actually seen Maukka's test before, but it's of the prior generation. It does show a nice consistent output graph, but the specs for the SC5c II and SC53 suggest they're driven harder than the older lights.

A related matter I'd be curious about is other lumen measurements that might help determine whether Zebralight exaggerated their output, or if Maukka's test setup does not work well for lumen measurements of floody lights.


----------



## Sulik (Jul 24, 2017)

IPX-*8* hmm... Unusual for ZL.


----------



## mightysparrow (Jul 24, 2017)

The loss of support for the Li-ion chemistry and lower H1 output don't bother me when it comes to the SC53-series lights. With a 1xAA light, I am happy to stick with NiMH cells, and I always set my High level on all my Zebralights at the lowest possible setting. I might use a higher output on High occasionally, but it wouldn't be at the highest output settings. I happen to like the security of a longer runtime on the High level, for my purposes.

I don't use a 1xAA light for >2xx lumen output, and I am using my Zebralight SC52 (original version) as my one light for Eneloops, rather than Li-ion cells, so I am not terribly bothered by the limitations of this particular light. I will hope to own a SC53w eventually.


----------



## gunga (Jul 24, 2017)

While I feel the same, there doesn't seem to be much of a size advantage vs the sc5c II. What is the point?


----------



## markr6 (Jul 24, 2017)

gunga said:


> While I feel the same, there doesn't seem to be much of a size advantage vs the sc5c II. What is the point?



After comparing them a bit more, I'm asking myself the same question.


----------



## iamlucky13 (Jul 24, 2017)

That's a fair point. They aren't very different. You basically end up choosing between a modest increase in max output, or a small decrease in size, weight, and price.

But the dimensions for each are nearly identical to their predecessors.

SC52 - 0.93" x 3.08" / 1.4 oz
SC53 - 0.96" x 3" / 1.4 oz

SC5 - 1.0" x 3.2" / 2.0 oz
SC5 II - 1.0" x 3.2" / 1.8 oz

I assume the 0.96" is the maximum dimension across the head, but the narrower side of the head might still make it look more appreciably smaller if viewed straight on, and slip into a pocket notably easier than the SC5. Here's a previous gen comparison I found (3rd image):
http://www.candlepowerforums.com/vb...ght-SC5-MKII&p=5048617&viewfull=1#post5048617


----------



## gunga (Jul 24, 2017)

I might get one anyway but I'm unsure it's different enough to justify.


----------



## iamlucky13 (Jul 24, 2017)

I agree. It seems like most users are best served by picking one or the other depending whether output or size is more important to them. A person with an SC5 isn't gaining much by also getting an SC53...unless they needed another light anyways, but how many of us actually *need* an extra light. That's just what we tell ourselves.


----------



## eraursls1984 (Jul 25, 2017)

iamlucky13 said:


> I agree. It seems like most users are best served by picking one or the other depending whether output or size is more important to them. A person with an SC5 isn't gaining much by also getting an SC53...unless they needed another light anyways, but how many of us actually *need* an extra light. That's just what we tell ourselves.


I "need" a 53 to compliment my 52. I love the SC5c because of the UI, CRI and tint, but I still prefer the 52 for the in hand feel. The 53 will probably give me the best of both worlds.


----------



## mightysparrow (Jul 25, 2017)

iamlucky13 said:


> That's a fair point. They aren't very different. You basically end up choosing between a modest increase in max output, or a small decrease in size, weight, and price.
> 
> But the dimensions for each are nearly identical to their predecessors.
> 
> ...



That's helpful information - thanks. I don't own a SC5, and I thought the choice would be an easy one, but I will have to give it some thought.


----------



## emarkd (Jul 25, 2017)

iamlucky13 said:


> But the dimensions for each are nearly identical to their predecessors.
> 
> SC5 - 1.0" x 3.2" / 2.0 oz
> SC5 II - 1.0" x 3.2" / 1.8 oz



Maybe not very relevant to this conversation, but the raw numbers on paper don't always tell the whole story. Here's my 1st gen SC5 compared with my new SC5c II. The difference in size is quite a bit more than the numbers would indicate:


----------



## markr6 (Jul 25, 2017)

Good comparison. Every little bit helps!


----------



## marinemaster (Jul 27, 2017)

For the 14500 battery, the reply from ZL was clear it was designed around low voltage. As they said a more sophisticated and expensive driver is used. This is specialized light which requires special battery, so Eneloop is your answer for the SC53.
It will complement my SC52 perfectly.


----------



## ven (Oct 22, 2017)

Only been using the sc53w for a day/night/early morning and i am liking it. Its certainly more compact in size/feel over the sc5c mkII i have. The 4500k (80+)is not as towards yellow as the 4000k (93-95). 





Few random pics
























As i tend to prefer the 16340 format, the sc5c mkII i do like being a little chunky, just kind of feels more natural or comfy in hand. The more compact sc53w does feel tiny for me, not only is it a little shorter but even more noticeable in the thinner body. Both lights i like, the 4000k is better used outdoors i am finding(presume a combination of house lighting and wall paper colour makes the "tint" worse than it actually is. This is a variable and does change from not pleasant to nice depending on room! Its sounds crazy and probably is, just from findings over time. Now the 4500k seems a little more house friendly so far, looks ok to nice in and around the house. I will EDC the sc53w in my coat (when i dig it out)and keep the sc5c mkII for now in my fleece jacket. 

As with all potential EDC rotation candidates, i like to use them pretty much around the clock to get use to them and see if suitable!. Both ZL's are ample bright enough, both H1's on mine are set bellow their max levels(guess around 100-150lm type levels). Press hold for low and these are set at single figure lumens(not sub) for in the night/early morning stair descending ...............i need to see the stairs well enough with tired eyes. 






Some AA lights...................who would have thought they are all fed on an AA cell(eneloop other than the lumapower which is 14500)





The ZL are my fav AA by far! and AA fuel is not really my preferred fuel................but i like options/variety


----------



## Swedpat (Oct 22, 2017)

Thanks for nice photos! I have several of Zebralight 1AA lights and I am considering to get another more. I just wish all of them had the knurling of MC5.


----------



## ven (Oct 22, 2017)

Thanks Swedpat, there is certainly a big difference in grip between the sc5 and sc53. The sc5 is better suited for environments with oils or anything wet! The sc53 does feel slippy as it is, before any potential contamination. Something to certainly ponder ,depending on the application in mind.


----------



## Cobraman502 (Oct 22, 2017)

ven said:


> Only been using the sc53w for a day/night/early morning and i am liking it. Its certainly more compact in size/feel over the sc5c mkII i have. The 4500k (80+)is not as towards yellow as the 4000k (93-95).
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Ven,

Think you could do a beam comparison between the sc63w and the sc53c or any other hi cri Zebralight lights you have. I’m trying to decide if I should go with the sc64C or w when it comes out. The c is supposed to have the easy white XP-L2 of the 53c

Thanks


----------



## ven (Oct 22, 2017)

Cobraman502 said:


> Ven,
> 
> Think you could do a beam comparison between the sc63w and the sc53c or any other hi cri Zebralight lights you have. I’m trying to decide if I should go with the sc64C or w when it comes out. The c is supposed to have the easy white XP-L2 of the 53c
> 
> Thanks




Yes no probs, will have a go when dark later on. The sc63w is the 4500k xhp35 which is definitely floody bias. The sc53w also 4500k, but xp-l2 easywhite. There is a sufficient brightness difference as well(800lm difference). The sc5c mkII has the 4000k xp-l2 easywhite, this is quite yellow(varies depending on ambient lighting i have found, sometimes it looks very yellow............other times not so bad). 

My fav still is the sc62d, its only 320lm(dont care tbh as i dont need crazy outputs for EDC uses), the 5000k from the luxeon T is very nice! Next would be the sc63w, its a real nice 4500k to my eyes from the xhp35, the 4500k xp-l2 next and finally the 4000k xp-l2 in the sc5c mkII . The latter colours do look good, and it is better outside where walls dont pick up the tint. So its a user , just not up there with my preferred flavours.

So far from my limited experience with xp-l2 easywhite(2 lights), its not something i would have a 3rd of. I do prefer the 4500k xhp35(iirc both show 80 cri) given the choice.


----------



## ven (Oct 22, 2017)

Not the best, here are 4 quick pics cobraman

sc62d 5000k




sc53w 4500k




sc5c mkII 4000k





sc63w 4500k


----------



## Cobraman502 (Oct 22, 2017)

Wow that was fast thank you Ven. Between the sc5c and the sc63w which do you prefer for?

Tint
Beam profile
Cri (looks similar to me)


----------



## jon_slider (Oct 22, 2017)

Cobraman502 said:


> Between the sc5c and the sc63w
> ...
> Cri (looks similar to me)



specs here

cri on the 63w is 80, CCT is 4500, and it uses 18650. Carry weight is 82 grams.
cri on the 5c is 93, CCT is 4000, and it uses AA. Carry weight is 75 grams

your need to decide your priorities
1. which battery chemistry do you want?
2. do you want low CRI or high CRI
3. decide what color temperature you prefer...

fwiw, pictures of grass do very little to inform about CRI, which has to do with RED Rendering, not Green Rendering.


----------



## Cobraman502 (Oct 22, 2017)

jon_slider said:


> specs here
> 
> cri on the 63w is 80, CCT is 4500, and it uses 18650. Carry weight is 82 grams.
> cri on the 5c is 93, CCT is 4000, and it uses AA. Carry weight is 75 grams
> ...



Very true. I’m trying to see if the high cri option of the sc64C is worth the lumen drop or do I go with the sc64w.


----------



## ven (Oct 22, 2017)

Cobraman502 said:


> Wow that was fast thank you Ven. Between the sc5c and the sc63w which do you prefer for?
> 
> Tint
> Beam profile
> Cri (looks similar to me)



I prefer the sc63w, the 4500k xhp35 . Funnily, i have misplaced(lost) the sc5c mkII :laughing:


----------



## Cobraman502 (Oct 22, 2017)

ven said:


> I prefer the sc63w, the 4500k xhp35 . Funnily, i have misplaced(lost) the sc5c mkII :laughing:



I was leaning toward the sc64w as well and for my needs I think 80 cri is fine.


----------



## ven (Oct 22, 2017)

Cobraman502 said:


> I was leaning toward the sc64w as well and for my needs I think 80 cri is fine.



This is subjective, i obv like cri, hi cri=great..................but i need to like the tint, i need to see other colours than red look good. I dont want cream or beige instead of white for example. Depending on use, its less important for me with lighter colours(whites), like in a woods for one example. 80cri, 90cri............its just a part of the beam puzzle for me. Colour temp and tint,brightness (depending on application).

The sc62d is 85 cri iirc and only 320lm, yet i love the beam/ct and tint. The xhp35 is either 80 or 85 cri(cant remember where i read it) ,but the "tint" so to speak is quite nice. Neutral with a very small hint of warmth to my eyes which works well for me in the day and evening(happy medium i guess). I do prefer the xhp35 4500k to the xp-l2 4000k hi cri, all subjective anyway.


----------



## ven (Oct 22, 2017)

jon_slider said:


> specs here
> 
> cri on the 63w is 80, CCT is 4500, and it uses 18650. Carry weight is 82 grams.
> cri on the 5c is 93, CCT is 4000, and it uses AA. Carry weight is 75 grams
> ...




Yes quite a few differences, choices out of these two lights, the sc63w wins for me hands down. Even though i do prefer the UI of the sc5c light, the sc63w for my eyes is a little easier. Also the 18650 fuel tank gives many benefits for me, 3-4 times the energy for one. Then brighter output, and its not actually much longer, and the head is more compact with a slightly smaller reflector. Both are floody bias beams.......


----------



## Tachead (Oct 22, 2017)

jon_slider said:


> specs here
> 
> cri on the 63w is 80, CCT is 4500, and it uses 18650. Carry weight is 82 grams.
> cri on the 5c is 93, CCT is 4000, and it uses AA. Carry weight is 75 grams
> ...



This information is not entirely accurate Jon.

The 63w is 80CRI *minimum* and can possibly be higher(as much as 89). It's CCT is 4500K nominal and will range between about 4750 - 4275K depending on the sample you receive. There will be a very large variation in tint and CCT between samples of this light due to it using a 5-step binned emitter(Cree's highest variation bin).

The SC5c/SC64c are 93-95CRI(by ZL's specs) and the CCT is 4000K nominal and will range between about 4060 - 3935K. There will be a much smaller variation in tint and CCT with this light due to its 2-step binning(the tightest bin Cree offers). 

CRI does not only have to do with red rendering. Although red(R9) is one of the colours that generally increases the most with higher CRI LED's, CRI is based on 8 different colour samples and higher CRI LED's will generally render many different colours more accurately including green. 

So Cobraman502, CRI and output are not the only things to consider when deciding between the "w" and "c" models. The tint and CCT lottery will be much larger with the "w" models then with the "c" ones. Meaning, you have a much higher chance of getting an "extreme" sample with the "w". These are just some more things to keep in mind.


----------



## ven (Oct 22, 2017)

Good points with the tint deviation


----------



## Tachead (Oct 22, 2017)

ven said:


> This is subjective, i obv like cri, hi cri=great..................but i need to like the tint, i need to see other colours than red look good. I dont want cream or beige instead of white for example. Depending on use, its less important for me with lighter colours(whites), like in a woods for one example. 80cri, 90cri............its just a part of the beam puzzle for me. Colour temp and tint,brightness (depending on application).
> 
> The sc62d is 85 cri iirc and only 320lm, yet i love the beam/ct and tint. The xhp35 is either 80 or 85 cri(cant remember where i read it) ,but the "tint" so to speak is quite nice. Neutral with a very small hint of warmth to my eyes which works well for me in the day and evening(happy medium i guess). I do prefer the xhp35 4500k to the xp-l2 4000k hi cri, all subjective anyway.



Good points ven. CRI is only one part of the puzzle so to speak. CCT, tint, and binning specs are all important things to consider as well. As is the desired use for the light as this might effect your decision too. For instance, I find warmer CCT's are much better for night time and outdoor use.


----------



## Cobraman502 (Oct 22, 2017)

Ugh information over load. All good to know I’ll just will have to bite the bullet and pic one.


----------



## Tachead (Oct 22, 2017)

Cobraman502 said:


> Ugh information over load. All good to know I’ll just will have to bite the bullet and pic one.



Or, get both. I am getting one of the two for sure as well but, can't help contemplating getting both the "c" and "w":devil:


----------



## ven (Oct 22, 2017)

+1 :laughing:

What would help me choose(other than maybe wait and see/read reports of peoples opinions 1st), would be what LED choice i did not have. Something different! If the c is only available in the sc64, i would save the w choice for the 600 series as another example. Or get a similar colour temp in the plus version if available. If it has to be one or the other, i would wait and see for pics and impressions or even youtube vid/s. I know easier said than done(waiting), but its better than spending near $100 and wanting the other choice.


----------



## Cobraman502 (Oct 22, 2017)

ven said:


> +1 :laughing:
> 
> What would help me choose(other than maybe wait and see/read reports of peoples opinions 1st), would be what LED choice i did not have. Something different! If the c is only available in the sc64, i would save the w choice for the 600 series as another example. Or get a similar colour temp in the plus version if available. If it has to be one or the other, i would wait and see for pics and impressions or even youtube vid/s. I know easier said than done(waiting), but its better than spending near $100 and wanting the other choice.



Yep I agree 100% but the tint lottery will get ya when you least expect it. I was just trying to see if the high cri is worth the cut in lumens. I have the SC52w which is 4500k and it’s perfect just looking for an 18650 variant with new UI


----------



## gurdygurds (Nov 15, 2017)

Just ordered the SC53C. It will be my first ever experience with Zebralight. Is it possible to use this light with the Zebralight headband and just spin it so the light is on the side of your head?


----------



## Strintguy (Nov 15, 2017)

gurdygurds said:


> Just ordered the SC53C. It will be my first ever experience with Zebralight. Is it possible to use this light with the Zebralight headband and just spin it so the light is on the side of your head?



You'd have to check and see if it will hold the light securely. Malkoff makes a headstrap that might work for your needs...


----------



## gurdygurds (Nov 18, 2017)

Very pleased with the SC53C i received. Very easy to program it to my preferred settings and outputs and I love the small size. Feels like a solid little chunk o' metal and the surface has enough grooves and "features" that I don't miss the lack of knurling at all. Good tint.....great beam......it's awesome.


----------



## Swedpat (Nov 18, 2017)

I really like my SC53c. Didn't know it's programmable. Anyway I don't feel any need to change anything, the standard setting works good.


----------



## gurdygurds (Nov 18, 2017)

This guy has two videos that explain the new UI and how to program it. Very helpful if anyone wants to play around with it. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PkGJtcaa8W0


Swedpat said:


> I really like my SC53c. Didn't know it's programmable. Anyway I don't feel any need to change anything, the standard setting works good.


----------



## terryoregon (Feb 16, 2018)

I don't suppose Zebralight somehow takes custom orders? The SC53c has the newer G6/G7 firmware, but would like to get it with the frosted lens.


----------



## Strintguy (Feb 16, 2018)

terryoregon said:


> I don't suppose Zebralight somehow takes custom orders? The SC53c has the newer G6/G7 firmware, but would like to get it with the frosted lens.



Have you tried the diffusion film? It is very inexpensive and works very well.


----------



## terryoregon (Feb 16, 2018)

Strintguy said:


> Have you tried the diffusion film? It is very inexpensive and works very well.



Maybe, if someone gave me a specific link to a diffusion film they actually used on the SC53, and how they applied it, and what the results were. I want to avoid a lab experiment.


----------



## Tachead (Feb 16, 2018)

terryoregon said:


> I don't suppose Zebralight somehow takes custom orders? The SC53c has the newer G6/G7 firmware, but would like to get it with the frosted lens.


Yes, they generally will do that and have done it for others as long as the lens fits. Just shoot them an email and/or put that you would like a frosted lens in the comments section when you order.


----------



## terryoregon (Feb 16, 2018)

> Yes, they generally will do that and have done it for others as long as the lens fits. Just shoot them an email and/or put that you would like a frosted lens in the comments section when you order.



Thanks, sent a message to sales, will see what they say.


----------



## Dio (Feb 16, 2018)

terryoregon said:


> Thanks, sent a message to sales, will see what they say.



I've got a SC53Fc and had a SC53Fw too before it got lost in long grass when it fell out of my pocket at my mates farm. I really miss the SC53Fw it was the perfect night time round the house light due to its low low and very comfortable size - the SC53Fc is just as comfortable and the low low is actually slightly lower but the tint on the SC53Fw at higher output levels was nicer to use around other light sources.

Moral of the story: ZL will happily produce you a SC53Fc - mine even came engraved "SC53Fc"..the SC53Fw came as "SC53Fw" too btw..


----------



## terryoregon (Feb 16, 2018)

> ZL will happily produce you a SC53Fc



Thanks, sounds promising.


----------



## terryoregon (Feb 16, 2018)

Response from Zebralight on my custom order question . . .



> You can leave a note, 'My actual order is one SC53Fc, refer to CRM 32**02.'
> 
> It may *take a few weeks longer than* usual.







Cool, just ordered a SC53*F*c, but as you can see, looks like it's going to take while.





UPDATE (Feb 19th): Well, forget waiting_* a few weeks*_, I just got shipment/tracking today, a mere *one* business day later.


----------



## ven (Feb 17, 2018)

Awesome Terry, i am sure it will be worth the wait.


----------



## terryoregon (Feb 24, 2018)

Well, this is not going well.  Received my custom order from ZL today, but it was just a normal SC53c, WITHOUT frosted lens. My order clearly states it's an approved custom order. I suspect someone on the production floor was in a hurry and didn't check the order carefully. So, just requested an RMA, will be sending back to have the correct light built/re-sent.

In a follow-up email from Zebralight, they admitted their mistake.


----------



## terryoregon (Apr 5, 2018)

.
Well Zebralight said the custom order would take a few weeks. A little over one month, it arrived today with no prior shipment notification.

Finally, my custom SC53*F*c has arrived (with custom printing on the side). Now I want to do a run-time graph with an Energizer Ultimate Lithium.
.





.


----------



## jflip (Apr 5, 2018)

terryoregon said:


> .
> Well Zebralight said the custom order would take a few weeks. A little over one month, it arrived today with no prior shipment notification.
> 
> Finally, my custom SC53*F*c has arrived (with custom printing on the side). Now I want to do a run-time graph with an Energizer Ultimate Lithium.
> ...



Looks awesome. Did they charge you extra? The custom printing is a really nice touch.


----------



## terryoregon (Apr 6, 2018)

> Did they charge you extra?



No, same price. Just make sure you request it first, and get a CRM number, which I think stands for *C*ustomer *R*relationship *M*anagement.


----------



## chillinn (Sep 15, 2020)

After two weeks of loving the SC5c II, ordered the SC53c two weeks ago. Arrived today. After carrying SC5c II for a month and a day, this thing feels _small_. Love the size. Tail stands with less wobble tha the SC5c II. I did not realize the anodizing would be a deeper grey, that's a nice touch. No one in the thread mentioned there's no pogo pins, just a spring. Too much complaining about lack of 14500 support, but there's a sale on perhaps several left of the SC52F L2, $45, have at it, and let's never speak of it again. Tint seems to be about the same in both lights, which I expected. Love it. Has the same hideous clip, no problemo: custom Ti clip in the works. I was unsure if I would like the host style, but seems ok. This one is a keeper for me. My biggest problem is which light to carry, but the difference in mode levels should determine that, SC5c II definitely during the day, and at night if I need the 475Lm. SC53c will be an option for when it is very dark and turbo lumens unnecessary, or if I need the smaller size. I got it for the 0.01Lm firefly L2 and the programmable G6 mode group. Don't need G7 in this, and G6 is already programmed for one click to low, two clicks to high. Should be a very dark night, will put it through some paces. Thank you, Zebralight.

Edit: I don't care for the certificate of compliance CE mark on the badge, forced the rest on there to be smaller. SC5c II doesn't have that. I guess I can live with it, I don't spend too much time reading the label badge.


----------



## this_is_nascar (Sep 16, 2020)

chillinn said:


> After two weeks of loving the SC5c II, ordered the SC53c two weeks ago. Arrived today. After carrying SC5c II for a month and a day, this thing feels _small_. Love the size. Tail stands with less wobble tha the SC5c II. I did not realize the anodizing would be a deeper grey, that's a nice touch. No one in the thread mentioned there's no pogo pins, just a spring. Too much complaining about lack of 14500 support, but there's a sale on perhaps several left of the SC52F L2, $45, have at it, and let's never speak of it again. Tint seems to be about the same in both lights, which I expected. Love it. Has the same hideous clip, no problemo: custom Ti clip in the works. I was unsure if I would like the host style, but seems ok. This one is a keeper for me. My biggest problem is which light to carry, but the difference in mode levels should determine that, SC5c II definitely during the day, and at night if I need the 475Lm. SC53c will be an option for when it is very dark and turbo lumens unnecessary, or if I need the smaller size. I got it for the 0.01Lm firefly L2 and the programmable G6 mode group. Don't need G7 in this, and G6 is already programmed for one click to low, two clicks to high. Should be a very dark night, will put it through some paces. Thank you, Zebralight.
> 
> Edit: I don't care for the certificate of compliance CE mark on the badge, forced the rest on there to be smaller. SC5c II doesn't have that. I guess I can live with it, I don't spend too much time reading the label badge.


I recently got an SC53c and SC53w. Now going thru a process to decide which to EDC, one of these or my SC64w HI that I've been toting around with me.


Sent from my moto g(7) power using Tapatalk


----------



## chillinn (Sep 16, 2020)

this_is_nascar said:


> I recently got an SC53c and SC53w. Now going thru a process to decide which to EDC, one of these or my SC64w HI that I've been toting around with me.



This is more of a problem than I thought. I had prepared to make a few gifts of SC5c II. One is sent, arrived, and was appreciated. There's two more to go. Now I am not sure I should instead gift SC53c... especially for my girlfriend, who has these adorable little carny hands. I always considered myself unequivocal and decisive. Now I find I am a leaf in the wind and can't decide anything, and I am left wondering if there is some deep psychological cause to my indecision. 

Used my new SC53c all night, mostly indoors. The mode levels are really quite different than SC5c II. Between the two, several brightness levels are close, within 0.02Lm, but they only share a single one, which is 1Lm. These lights are not redundant. They are complementary.


----------



## chillinn (Sep 19, 2020)

I am missing the pogo pins on the tail cap. Working with the spring requires a little more care to prevent the tail cap shooting across the room, makes it a little more difficult to get back on straight.

But I am giving the SC53 my seal of approval and a full thumbs up. Bravo, Zebralight.


----------



## Fireclaw18 (Aug 30, 2021)

I know the SC53 is rated only to 2.0 volts. It appears they dropped support for lithium ion cells.

*That said... has anyone actually tried running their SC53 on a 14500 lithium ion cell?*

I wonder if this is a case where the components are the same as the SC52 and the driver might actually support 3.7v with higher output, but rather the company has just chosen not to do so.

Just got my SC53w and the output is underwhelming. My old 200 lumen Zebralight SC80 has a brighter hotspot.


----------



## this_is_nascar (Aug 31, 2021)

You could always try it and let us know.


----------

