LED Flashlights

[UnknownVT]

All in all it seemed that having any light was fine, whether it was white or blue, weak or strong, wide or narrow beam didn't matter as long as you could move around and see things. I have to say that I did find the headlight very handy.
Also, candles were very useful and I should make sure that my kerosene lamp has some fuel and is ready for the next time.

Don Luis is absolutely right when there is no light -
then any light is good enough.

I, like many flashaholics, tend to look for brighter and brighter lights -
but in a way that's what I was trying to point out -
LED flashlights have already surpassed most of the ultra-bright incandescent flashlights - some even matching a 1,000,000cp spotlight -
I mean how much brighter do we need it?

Honestly, I don't know of many people who do use a 1,000,000cp spotlight indoors on a regular basis.

In a way that's the beauty of modern LED flashlights they have multi-levels so one can select a suitable brightness level - eg: I use a Fenix L1D and a L0D often - and most of the time I am using the Low level indoors - but it's nice that they do have much higher/brighter levels for outdoors.

There is a huge difference between flashlight lighting and area lighting -
for power outages and indoors - area lighting much more desirable than the typical narrowly projected flashlights. Then a floody beam is more desirable than a narrow spot type beam.

That's why candles are very good - and those lights with a fluorescent strip are more suitable - as they tend to light up a room better than any flashlight. Flashlights need pointing - perhaps that's why a headlight worked better, as it is directed mostly at wherever you are looking.

--
Vincent
http://picasaweb.com/UnknownVincent
http://UnknownVincent.Shutterfly.com
http://UnknownVT.Shutterfly.com
http://clik.to/UnknownVincent

 

[Moodino]

You are more right than you realize. We did some research on all this and posted a paper on the subject...
http://flashlight-forums.com/index.php/topic,353.msg15630.html#msg15630
http://homepage.mac.com/rouses/RT4/PhotoAlbum278.html
:thumbup:

I know that there is a great difference to my eye between a bluish LED light and an incan outdoors - I can see more better because of the better colors. And to my eye my Surefire incan looks white (they get yellow when the batteries start to fade), with most of my LED's appearing blue and cold in comparison. I'm not trying to be contentious, but just want to point out that there is still a place for incans, especially for outdoor use when good color rendering and long throw are important to the user.

I have a great throwing LED light - a maglight with a malkoff drop-in, and it does have excellent throw, but to my eye the bluish cold tint of it does not render colors as well as a powerful long throwing incan.

While there are undoubtably reasons why this is, and it may be somewhat subjective, to my eye the weakness of LED's today is color rendering, and throw (a single LED cannot match a powerful incan lamp yet).

This is best decided for yourself - take the LED and that old Surefire outside, and point it at a tree or woods 60 yards away, and see for yourself which one you think is best. Some may prefer the LED, but I think most people would prefer the incan for that use.

Regardless of this issue, those shots are great, and thanks for posting them!

 

[UnknownVT]

You are more right than you realize. We did some research on all this and posted a paper on the subject...
http://flashlight-forums.com/index.php/topic,353.msg15630.html#msg15630
http://homepage.mac.com/rouses/RT4/PhotoAlbum278.html
:thumbup:

Ah-ha! very cool, it's Äten Imägo :thumbup:

By an ad-hoc way I had reached a sort of thought that -

CRI (Color Rendering Index) does NOT (necessarily) =
Color (rendition) Accuracy does NOT (necessaily) =
Better Vision

Please see this long thread over at CPF -

Puny LED flashlights (Not!) + COLOR RENDITION Comparison

where I try to illustrate this by taking photos of Macbeth color rendering chart
and even shining flashlight through a pair of vision enhancing (Serengeti Drivers) sunglasses -
my thoughts then were -

perhaps we see better with incands outdoors -
NOT necessarily because it is more color accurate -
but because its spectrum actually enhances our vision.

ie: seeing better does not necessarily mean more accurate colors -
hence perhaps some of the confusion?

....of course someone's going to comeback with incands have better CRI (Color Rendering Index).... and we'll go round again......

--
Vincent
http://picasaweb.com/UnknownVincent
http://UnknownVincent.Shutterfly.com
http://UnknownVT.Shutterfly.com
http://clik.to/UnknownVincent

 

[bladefixation2]

I dont believe that incandecent bulbs do have a better colour rendition. In the olden days when you took a photograph with film under incandecent light you had to use a blue filter or the whole image looked yellow. Incandecent bulbs give out a much warmer yellow light than daylight, which is much colder and bluer, hence the need for a blue filter to correct. You dont notice in day to day use because your brain interprets the image as normal and adjusts accordingly but effectively everything has a yellow hue under incandecent light.

 

[Moodino]

Actually the point of our white paper was not so much about the relationship between CRI and better (easier) vision but about how the CRI > Perception equation changes between day and night because of the different receptors being used by one's eyes AND that evolution (through environmental adaptation) nudged Scotopic vision into the warm/white corner. The dynamic of using flashlights, headlights, bike lights, weapons lights is so complex when human vision is taken into consideration, that simple pictures of static targets convey so little of what the total experience and process really are. This is important if you're designing lights for TASKS versus just for engineering performance. The environmental lighting industry knows this well, as huge strides have been made in ameliorating CRI of eco-lights to conform to what some of us know about the big picture. I'm still waiting for the flashlight community to stop chasing the brighter, smaller cylinder quarry and refocus on the road ahead.

 

[UnknownVT]

The dynamic of using flashlights, headlights, bike lights, weapons lights is so complex when human vision is taken into consideration, that simple pictures of static targets convey so little of what the total experience and process really are. This is important if you're designing lights for TASKS versus just for engineering performance. The environmental lighting industry knows this well, as huge strides have been made in ameliorating CRI of eco-lights to conform to what some of us know about the big picture. I'm still waiting for the flashlight community to stop chasing the brighter, smaller cylinder quarry and refocus on the road ahead.

You are not wrong -
but you are so far ahead of the curve
that you have left us mere mortals still standing here on the ground (earth? ).

I agree absolutely with you that brightness is not everything - I have long been vocal about this.

But let's take this a bit more in context -

It was not so long ago we had pretty pedestrian flashlights when they were AA or AAA battery based - think of the pretty popular MagLite Solitaire (AAA) - it did do its job and well for many people - but it was dim and didn't last that long on its battery.

Then came xenon lithium lights like the now legendary SureFire 6P (G2) - these were considered at one time to be "ultra" bright - and people were amazed that it surpassed the typical 2D flashlight and matched a 3D MagLite.....

CRI? Not a consideration (although any marketeer will then quote the typical close to 100/perfect for almost any incandescent) - we are lucky to get any light much less something so amazing bright for the size (at the time).

Better spectrum for the task?

Sorry most of us use old fashioned tungsten light bulbs at home - if more energy conscious then fluorescent bulbs......

Of course a lot of research has gone into making these household bulbs better in their spectrum - but they are still a 25cent item......

Then there are daylight like (designed for the task) light bulbs available - that claim scientific research - such as -

Solux Daylight bulbs

Ott-Lite

How many people (other than museums) are concerned enough to have these as their regular home bulbs?

Our eye/brain combination is so good we can tolerate a lot - and not only that human physiology and evolution gives us a natural bias favoring yellow biassed lights.

So any spectrum change/design has to be quite dramatically different to make any significant difference to our eyes - and then will everyone agree?

Not a chance - what could be more different than incands and LED flashlights? in almost any of the measurable quantities?

Yet we have lots arguing for incands - and lots for LEDs.

So who it right, and who is wrong?

Perhaps there isn't a right or wrong -
perhaps it's down to personal preference? -

Designing for personal preference might be on shaky grounds?........

So most of us see well under incandescent flashlights for outdoors and LEDs for mostly indoors - but today's LEDs - they are starting to match incands outdoors too just due to the sheer brightness
- like Don Luis said previously any light is better than no light.

Of course static pictures don't tell the whole story -
but they do illustrate the point being made -
unfortunately I find words alone are even more inadequate -
at least for my literacy abilities .

However now that we see LEDs surpassing most incands for sheer brightness - we may see a slow down in the pursuit of brightness (which I doubt - as a lot of the LED development is NOT for flashlights - but for commerical and domestic lighting)
which means there will be more research in color accuracy
and hopefully even deliberate color spectrum balance to enhance vision for specific tasks.......
that means we will probably eventually see these in flashlights and benefit.


--
Vincent
http://picasaweb.com/UnknownVincent
http://UnknownVincent.Shutterfly.com
http://UnknownVT.Shutterfly.com
http://clik.to/UnknownVincent

 

[tirod3]

Add in their form factor. I just bought an Inova X1 with the 2.0 Watt led and it does much better for my EDC tasks that the previous 1 gen Arc AAA. The old Arc is easier for me to carry, but the huge amount of illumination and spread of the Inova is just as good as any old 2 D cell incan light I grew up with.

Since any light is better, certainly a light you have on you is better than one in the kitchen drawer because it's too big to carry.

Maglite 6 C cell and D cell lights were great in the day for police work - and a handy persuader when necessary. But with the incremental increase in belt gear, something's had to give, and smaller G2 and LED's are more in line - plus add another force option short of contact. LED's with "non-breakable bulbs" are better, and I certainly expect advances in color rendering in the future.

For now the tradeoff is worth it - LED is the way to go.

 

[UnknownVT]

Add in their form factor.

I agree - for us "civilians" it's mostly anything that's pocketable - so single cell battery - like 1x AA, AAA (which was really almost undreamt of before the LED for anything that's reasonably bright or long running) and the lithium CR123A. I personally like the 1x AA where I can use plain old alkaline, lithium AA, and rechargeable NiMH.

BUT for most active duty it seems that 2x AA and 2x CR123 are more popular for handling size.

I was at the Fenix-Store and they told me that their biggest seller(s) were the L2D series - 2x AA and P3D series 2x CR123. For active duty - the single battery lights were too small.

Of course the next top seller was the dimunitive 1x AAA L0D series - which was liked by the ladies......

Here's a CPF thread discussing this topic -

Form-Factor, Size, Ergonomics

--
Vincent
http://picasaweb.com/UnknownVincent
http://UnknownVincent.Shutterfly.com
http://UnknownVT.Shutterfly.com
http://clik.to/UnknownVincent

 

[tirod3]

Yes, on deployment (just barely overseas) the G2 has a good size and works great. It's really not much different that the popular Mini Mag - which has long deserved better output.

With a gear belt, no problem toting that size, in jeans, I feel the Inova is almost too big. I'm waiting to get used to it. I carried a CMG Ultra for a year, but the Inova seems to carry thinner for me. Hard to give up the Arc AAA, tho.

Old eyes just need more light, it was available, and on sale, too, 15.99. Didn't even know til they rang it up.