I could be wrong here, but doesn't the output power have to be 4x to make a 2x perception in illumination?
So 750 Lumen to 3000 Lumen should come across as twice as bright. Which is pretty significant.
I went from a Fenix PD35 (2014 model) with 960 Lumen to an Acebeam EC50 Gen. 2 with 3000 Lumen as a work light when I got a new job back in the day, and for me that went from barely usable to definitely usable. My current worklight is a 10000 Lumen Fenix LR35R, and I don't need anything more powerful than that pretty much ever.
And oh yeah, I have tried chasing the Lumens. Too much money for not much improvement, I agree. That said though, I bought an 18000 Lumen Fenix LR80R on behalf of a friend of mine, and I have NOTHING that can match that.
Okay, I can easily match it for pure throw with my Fenix TK30 LEP, or even my 30 USD Convoy L21B, but when comes to throw AND flood, I don't have anything close. Closest I have in Lumen on paper paper is my 12000 Lumen Sofirn Q8+, but side-by-side, the LR80R teabags it.
Sure, but 750 lumens is really bright as a baseline, so "twice as bright" (unless we're talking wildly different candela ratings) just fills in a bit more light around the edges whenever I play around with this outside. I find candela differences are really easy to see, but at a certain point, jaw dropping differences require jaw dropping increases in lumens.
I've found reflectors are a lot more important that overall brightness, most of the time. Philosophically, I do think Henry at HDS is kind of on the money about brightness. That being said, 200 lumens vs. 2000 is clearly a large difference, and an impressive one at that. Perfectly like for like, with say, a Malkoff M61N (400) vs M61NL (200 lumens) is frustratingly hard to see a difference. I have a perennial aggravation using my Malkoff M361 in neutral because I RARELY am in a situation where I can tell if I'm at medium (200 lumens) versus high (500 lumens). I usually have to stop what I'm doing, cycle through while counting in order to figure out which is which. Unless I am staring at a wall, or something at the very edge of the illuminated area, I just cannot tell a difference.
I spent a bunch of money on this Acebeam E75, which was just over 3X (950 vs. 3000) as bright as my Wildcat, and...yeah, it's clearly brighter, but man...I was disappointed. It reminds me of the first time I got a 1000 lumen light, and turned it on. "I mean...yeah..." It's clearly brighter than my ~200-250 lumen lights, but it's not as much of a difference as the huge gulf between the numbers would lead you to believe. 80 lumens to 800 is "Wow!" I'm starting to come to terms with I need a factor of 10 increase to be "impressed" by one light being brighter than another. Otherwise, it's more of a, "Well, I can see that's brighter, and tell a difference, but..."
Of course, if you're talking about using a light at the EDGE of it's ability, and THEN increasing the brightness, that doubling IS significant.
For my environment, candela being the same, I find about 500-750 lumens is as bright as I use outside to light everyone up in my focus range. Additional brightness above that doesn't really add anything, as I can already see things clearly at the distance I can see things clearly with about 500-750 lumens.
Easy choice for me
I have not, and will not, purchase Olight flashlights
This reminded me why I think this is an interesting conversation.
Because, despite my argument for Olight being the better brand, I 100% agree with this. I REALLY hate Olight as a brand. They've just been so scummy in the past. I hold Fenix is much higher esteem, and I find their products to be MUCh better - but Olight gets aggressive on pricing.
So, despite me saying Olight is the "better" of the two, I'm still MORE LIKELY to buy a Fenix before an Olight (save for those $5 AAA lights).