I believe the electronics works differently in the 4S config - it's a buck driver in this state, and he said 4S has current regulation, so I'd expect the runtime curve to be flat, or flatter, therefore more power (I * V) used during the cycle resulting in shorter runtimes.
Updated the turbo mode discharge curve in the OP. here it is:
This is now scaled in time properly, and the temperatures were taken with a IR thermometer at the hosttest section of the surface, which is just above the switch.
Yes the 4S batteries can sustain the Turbo output constantly and it consumes more power overall, I agree on this.
The problem is we don’t really have a standard to define the runtime of a light can offer (i.e. until it drops to how many % of initial output), this is why some manufacturers have this “Turbo mode can last for a few hours” kind of claim lol, which is quite misleading I know.
Well, 4s setup is preferred from the vantage point of future compatibility with 12v led emitters. If an idealistic future 12v xhp90 Hi is produced then this host can be taken to a whole new level with just a emitter swap. Just need to confirm if this driver is 12v led capable in the 4s version which is highly likely . Anyway xhp70 is no longer young and a new Cree emitter might be already in the works, the xhp50 /70 Hi version ought to be the next rollout after xhp35Hi.
Hhmm, I agree - not too crazy bout how the pics came out. Meter and outdoor testings shows the MT07 throws further though. Sorry - @work, can't recall details - have to re-check, but I think the camera showed a surrounding corona as part of the hotspot, so the true hotspot is smaller. Seen this before - I'm not a camera hobbyist, so just trial&error with camera settings.
On my compact Lumix, used Manual mode - F6.3 1/8 sec, auto WB, auto ISO. Could not get any available white balance setting to look like what I was seeing - AWB looked the best. Realized after should have used a fixed ISO setting though. Lights were 4' 8" from wall, camera was 5' 6.5" from the wall.
Thanks for this review. With all the heat sinking in this light my main use would be with it mounted on a tripod as a work light running at about 1k lumens (500 would provably suffice). I would think in this configuration you would be able to get relatively good runtimes being as how you can get 7 minutes from it at almost 5k lumens before it steps down. Still waiting on reviews of the MT03 before I decide on which model to get though.
Yep, this light is built like a tank. GA's are the best for this light, fit with no issues, so would have 14 amp-hours. The $5 price per GA is a good deal, being offered in the group buy for this light here: https://budgetlightforum.com/t/-/42727.
Thanks for the review! Look’s like I’ll be picking this one up too, can’t even stop myself lol
Have you thought about doing a runtime test on the high mode?
Hey guys I’ve been slow getting around to this one. Got some numbers last night… Umm… anyone else test theirs? I’m getting near L6 readings- better, but not by a whole lot. I have them side by side and just looking at them on a wall- well they look about the same- numbers aside. You know other than the HaikeLite having a more Neutral tint. My GAs are on the charger after finishing a runtime test, I was testing with 3000 mah HG2s.