S1- like it?

Gather App
Candle Power Forums

Help Support Candle Power:

I love my S1, but am glad to hear that I'm not the only one who dislikes the clip. That is my only complaint so far. I've not had any battery problems (using the Nitecore rcr123 with a Nitecore charger). Always enough light. Best of all is that buttery smooth beam pattern from the TIR on the front. I can see how someone with larger hand might like the s10r or s10r II a little bit better but with medium hands it feels great to me.
 
NoNotAgain said:
wolfgaze,

Well worth purchasing. If Olight stick to the original statement that they are only building 5000 of each configuration, then time is of the essence.
Click to expand...

does that 5,000 units of each configuration include the black model? (I would think not as that appear to be the factory default unit)....
 
wolfgaze said:
does that 5,000 units of each configuration include the black model? (I would think not as that appear to be the factory default unit)....
Click to expand...

From what I've read, the copper and titanium lights which were listed as limited edition lights had the 5000 piece limit.

I don't know how many of the brass lights that Going Gear are having built.

I also don't know if the aluminum lights are serialized on the tail cap like the copper and ti lights are.

Just looked at Illumn's site, and the S1 in aluminum have 500lumens and the side of the body is engraved with an alpha and numeric serial number. So I guess that means the aluminum lights will be produced in very large quantities.
 
Last edited:
NoNotAgain said:
Just looked at Illumn's site, and the S1 in aluminum only have 400 lumens and the side of the body is engraved with an alpha and numeric serial number. So I guess that means the aluminum lights will be produced in very large quantities.
Click to expand...

Just to clarify all cool white S1 models including the aluminium are rated at 500 lumens, the neutral white are 480 lumens.
 
jdhermit said:
Am I the only one less than thrilled with my S1?
Not bad mouthing it or Olight at all...
Just doesn't thrill me.

Carried my S10 for over 2 years, completely happy, despite the greenish tint.
But this S1, I find myself not using it. When I need a light more than a second, I dig out my bag light Fenix PD32UE.

CAN'T put my finger on the WHY though.
If I hadn't given my S10 to my 12 year old, I'd just use that one.

:(

JD
Click to expand...

My guess is the TIR optic's beam pattern isn't to your liking. You're probably more used the beam pattern of a conventional reflector: relatively narrow spot surrounded by generous spill. You're not used to a TIR optic's beam pattern of very wide spot with virtually no spill.
 
flashtastic said:
I love my S1, but am glad to hear that I'm not the only one who dislikes the clip. That is my only complaint so far. I've not had any battery problems (using the Nitecore rcr123 with a Nitecore charger). Always enough light. Best of all is that buttery smooth beam pattern from the TIR on the front. I can see how someone with larger hand might like the s10r or s10r II a little bit better but with medium hands it feels great to me.
Click to expand...

Yeh not a fan of the clip. I tried to straighten the tip of it out and it snapped off. :banghead:
Not a fan of how tight it is further down as well. Makes it tough to clip on my jeans.
All that said I do like it overall
 
I personally find a number of things less then desirable about the S1 including...

1. The UI change mid way through production(no moonlight mode memory and will not memorize high past 10min)
2. The poor "snaggy" clip design
3. The fact that the clip is bezel up biased(almost every other light on the market is bezel down for good reason)
4. The lack of electronic lockout(lack of mechanical lockout on non-aluminum models as well)
5. The lack of a glass lens to protect the acrylic T.I.R.(acrylic is relatively easy to scratch and will cause beam artifacts when it happens, acrylic is also a dust magnet)
6. The pressed in bezel and switch ring that prevents maintenance and parts change as apposed to a standard threaded one
7. Relatively low light transmission at 90% compared to 98%+ on most glass lenses
8. The square beam shape caused by the collimator
9. The lack of a NW option on the standard(aluminum) model
10. The shortcut to moonlight takes a bit too long imo it should be a shorter sustained press like Nitecore's(0.5-1.0sec)

It has some nice qualities too but far too many poor ones to be a great EDC imo.
 
Last edited:
Tachead said:
...
5. The lack of a glass lens to protect the acrylic T.I.R.(acrylic is relatively easy to scratch and will cause beam artifacts when it happens, acrylic is also a dust magnet)...
Click to expand...

While not as hard as glass, Optical acrylic is still incredibly tough stuff. I've been using optical acrylic lenses for years and never had any of them scratch even when my light is carried in my pocket loose with my keys.

There's a reason why when modders make small triples, most do not put a lens in front of the acrylic triple-TIR optic. It's that tough... no extra lens is needed.

Also my understanding is some of the toughest lights on the market use acrylic lenses instead of glass, because unlike glass the acrylic won't shatter.
 
Fireclaw18 said:
While not as hard as glass, Optical acrylic is still incredibly tough stuff. I've been using optical acrylic lenses for years and never had any of them scratch even when my light is carried in my pocket loose with my keys.

There's a reason why when modders make small triples, most do not put a lens in front of the acrylic triple-TIR optic. It's that tough... no extra lens is needed.

Also my understanding is some of the toughest lights on the market use acrylic lenses instead of glass, because unlike glass the acrylic won't shatter.
Click to expand...

True enough but, I still prefer glass/reflector designs myself. Although optical acrylic is relatively strong, it still can be scratched a lot easier then hardened/coated glass. It also is quite inefficient in light transmission when compared to a quality coated optical glass which results in lower output and more heat. I would rather see a fogged glass or faceted glass design like on Zebralights or Armyteks or an optical glass collimator if a diffused output is desired. Then there is the pressed in bezel. At least on a mod, you can quickly change the collimator if it is damaged.
 
Last edited:
Actually, an optical acrylic TIR is more efficient in transmitting lumens than a conventional aluminum PVD-coated reflector with an AR-coated glass lens. You won't be able to tell the difference without a light meter though.
 
Fireclaw18 said:
Actually, an optical acrylic TIR is more efficient in transmitting lumens than a conventional aluminum PVD-coated reflector with an AR-coated glass lens. You won't be able to tell the difference without a light meter though.
Click to expand...

A glass collimator maybe if designed right. Even on the S1 its specs state 90% light transmission while good quality coated optical glass can hit 99%+. The reflector needs to be taken into account too however but they dont list specs for that. A coated optical glass collimator would be the best I would think but, would probably be costly.

Sorry, just not a fan of acrylic when it comes to optics myself. There is a reason why they use glass on high end cameras, rifle scopes, surveying equipment, astronomical equipment, exc. as apposed to acrylic. If I ever see Zeiss or Swarovski start to use it I may re-evaluate my opinion lol.
 
Last edited:
Tachead said:
A glass collimator maybe if designed right. Even on the S1 its specs state 90% light transmission while good quality coated optical glass can hit 99%+. The reflector needs to be taken into account too however but they dont list specs for that. A coated optical glass collimator would be the best I would think but, would probably be costly.

Sorry, just not a fan of acrylic when it comes to optics myself. There is a reason why they use glass on high end cameras, rifle scopes, surveying equipment, astronomical equipment, exc. as apposed to acrylic. If I ever see Zeiss or Swarovski start to use it I may re-evaluate my opinion lol.
Click to expand...

You are correct that if you just compare a glass lens to an acrylic lens, the glass is more efficient.

What makes an acrylic TIR optic more efficient is that a TIR reflector is considerably more efficient than a coated aluminum reflector.
 
It's just a beautiful looking pocket light. Can't wait for my Copper version to develop that patina :0)
 
Fireclaw18 said:
You are correct that if you just compare a glass lens to an acrylic lens, the glass is more efficient.

What makes an acrylic TIR optic more efficient is that a TIR reflector is considerably more efficient than a coated aluminum reflector.
Click to expand...

Yeah I realize a collimator is generally going to be more efficient then a reflector(hense my comment about taking the reflector into consideration) but, I often wonder how an acrylic collimator effects that efficiency. Acrylic is considerably less efficient then glass so does that cancel out the efficiency benefit of a collimator? I would like to see some tests. Most high end collimators and optics in general are made of glass not acrylic because of acylics poor optical efficiency. Like I said, I'm not a fan of acrylic in optical applications. It is ok if you are, to each their own.

Anyway, this is not the place for this discussion. Sorry for the derail OP.
 
Aldiggi said:
It's just a beautiful looking pocket light.
Click to expand...

Agree, I just love the design/aesthetics of the Baton series and that's what drew me to the S2 when I first laid eyes on it... Then when I received mine I discovered that I really liked the fload-style beam profile and tint. The user interface works well for me as well and I'm partial to the mode spacing.

I don't own the S1 yet but when I first saw that model I thought it looked awesome... I didn't consider it an option because I was unfamiliar with the 16340 batteries and didn't own a compatible charger at the time. But now that I got my hands on the Nitecore D4 charger with expanded charging capabilities, I'm exploring flashlights options that I had never previously considered...
 
I've had mine for about a week and really like it. Yes, it's a bit on the small side and harder for big hands to hold it, but that's what makes it such a good light. I can carry it in my pocket and not even know it's there. And when you need it it it has a great spot and good throw for such a tiny light. I keep mine in the car for emergency use, it doesn't hardly take up any room at all in the glovebox. The magnetic tail is priceless for unplanned away-from-home car repairs.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Back
Top