Before doing something like this I would expect others with the same result. From what I know there are others who ordered one and have a “real” Ullbricht device… even though I do not really expect big differences…
Actually I am the only one who has a GB and a retail version in hands to compare it.
“From what I know there are others who ordered one and have a “real” Ullbricht device”
Really? who/where? I have not heard of a single XHP35 that came close to spec.
You got me wrong - I also do not know a single 35 close to the spex.
But until today just a handfull of MT09R from the GB have been delivered…
In my Lumenbox I get with thrower LEDs mostly lower readings as with floodie LEDs.
Perhaps this could be an issue in your reading. But it does not explain that big difference. Did you had the luxmeter at the opposite “surface” to the Hotspot?
I am waiting for my MT09R and will share my measurement.
This is really dissapointing…im still waiting for mine, but at least its already in germany. Im gonna take a look at the beam pattern and the output compared to my current flashlight…but right now i dont think i can reach 1000m with 2500-3000 lumens less than advertised. Feeling a but fooled now and thinking about further steps.
I also think we should wait for further measurements, but if they dont go very well, we can at least see how good Haikelites new customer service is. :cry:
My problems start with flooders above 20.000 lm - with an X80 or an DX80 my values are not usable…
That’s why I said I would expect others…
My Luxmeter is aside the flashlight - so: yes.
This would be highly appreciated!
Anyone can sell me a complete light meter? I am talking about the one with the tube and so. I am serious about it.
Ok, I found the time to make the beamshots - the pictures are indicated:
The - from my point of view - important comparison:
The 1.200 lm more between Retail & GB are clearly visible - but the difference is still far too small. This to show the difference between 3.500 lm and 6.000 lm:
But for me another point of view is more important: even though the MT09R 35 fails completely regarding the 7.500 lm (or even 7.000 lm), the point with the 1.000 m of distance seems not completely out of range. Both Tiny Monsters are measured with more than 700 m - when I see the difference between the TM28 and the Groupbuy I would say that the full distance is not completely out of range.
Before somebody asks: as written I do not have enough distance in our home to measure the lux-values - ok, I tried it on location, but my luxmeter did not survive my major fine motoric availabilities… does anybody have a good luxmeter he would recommend?
From comparing the beamshots of the TM28 and the MT09R 35 HI group buy, the Haikelite appears to have better throw and to be slightly brighter overall, despite the calculations which show otherwise. Just my perception. Thank you for sharing your efforts with these lights.
A Gif might show it better:
With a surrounding like this it’s a little bit hard to show - it can be seen much easier on a wall (which I do not like to shoot :person_facepalming: )
As the “Lumen” are a definition of the total of the light sent out by the flashlight, it’s always hard to compare flashlights with different characteristics. While the TM26GT or the TM28 are more in the “Allrounder” area, the MT09R 35 is more something like an “Allrounder with good Throw”.
Thus said, you can see that the spot of the GB is clearly stronger - but the spil is smaller and darker. And this is where the GB (4.500 lm) looses the power against the TM28 (6.000 lm).
But while my TM28 is measured with a little bit more than 700 m of throw, the GB gives clearly more distance. As I said: from my point of view 900 m do not seem to be impossible…
… and think of that babe if it would have real 7.500 lm…
Well hopefully not all the lights in the GB fail to live up to the claimed output. My light is being processed through NY right now, so hopefully it’ll arrive sometime next week.
Any idea approximately how far away the gate is? And how far away the tree just visble behind the gate is?
Really appreciate your effort and time for sharing your results. Your beamshots are very useful. The GB 35 version seems a lot brighter than your retail version.
I have a few questions.
1) Do you test for lumens at startup or at 30s?
2) Have you compared your lumen results with other reviewers for the same flashlights? That way we can see if there’s a potential that your testing aparatus may result in consistently lower lumen readings.
3) You said the XHP70.2 GB unit had warmer tint than yours. What CCT is yours? If the GB unit you tested is the 4000k, unit then your 13.76 lumen result is the same as my estimate.
I just double checked my lux readings for comparison,
Olight H2R Nova NW 308 at startup (Several reviews put this at about 2,360+ lumens at 30s)
Acebeam H15 NW 324 at startup
Astrolux MF01 219c 1,220 at startup (known to putout 9-10k lumens)
Manker MK34 219c 4000k 560 at startup (measured 4,914 lumens in Advanced Knife Bro’s youtube review)
Emisar D4 XPL v2 HI 4000k 420 at startup (known to produce 3,800-4,000 lumens)
MT09R XHP70.2 5000k 2,170 at startup
MT09R XHP70.2 4000k 1,640 at startup
From my data, the the XHP70.2 500k version should produce around 17k lumens and the 4000k version should produce 13k lumens.
Thank you for the update :+1:
The results are disappointing, but not unexpected. It’s going to be interesting to see some more measurements when more of the groupbuy lights arrive, but I expect they will be more or less the same.
Thank you for taking the time to do this.
Thank you!
That’s why we are here.
The lumens have been tested at startup - but based on Post #929 the decrease is continuously, so the difference between 0s and 30s can be neglected…
Actually it seems like I am the first one who tested a GB-version. My test of the retail-version is very similar to another one sold in Germany and also near to the values Terry measured for the prototype.
Regarding my general measurements I compared it inside the TLF and they are in general in the area of others - so it seems to be on the same level. Also the values I receive for other flashlights are on the level of what others measure with there Ullbricht sphere. My Luxmeter seemed to work quite well - another point why I am actually quite upset…
Actually they only have CW in retail - the CCT of the GB-version is not indicated. But especially for you I murdered my strict “no wall-shots”-policy:
From my point of view the GB must be the one with 5.000 K
As written above, the GB70 I have in hands seems to be the 5.000K - and as written it gives a good 6% more power than my 6.000 K. But from my point of view 17 klm are far away - see the comparison with the DT70
Another point discussed was the difference between the GB35 (4.500 lm) and the TM28 (6.000 lm). From my point of view, it can be explained best with the wallshot (again!). While the MT09R35 give its power to the Spot, the TM28 has a bigger and more powerfull Spill, together with a bigger Spot:
… its hard to show it with a photo…
Im anxious to get some actual lumen tests of the cool white version of xhp35… i really hope it not just max 5000 lumens that would really be a dissapointment…
I will make a new test as soon as I have my new luxmeter. It’s already ordered.
What manner of testing are you doing for these readings.
I am not trying ti argue or even trying to dispute your post. As of right now I still do not have a 35 high that I can actually test myself I only know that the calculations show it should easily do.
The 70.2 on the other hand I have proven on video not once but several times that the 70.2 will easily hit 15k lumen and most of the time closer to 16k.
The readings you are posting are about 3k lower than my own and factory testing of the 70,2 so I can easily believe that if however you are measuring the lights has you 3k lumen lower than my own testing and what you are posting on the 35 high version appears to be almost exactly 3k lumen short of what the expected output should be.
Actually that makes me feel pretty confident in the actual output of the 35 high before I even get to test it. If you are 3k lower than I can show right this moment on a 70.2 version and also show readings of many other well known lights that will show the correct output using the gear I have been suing for over 3 years now to be at least 15k lumen if not more then I should get a similar reading when I do get to test a 35 high. If your is 3k low then mine should be dead close to what is expected. Just judging by the numbers that you have posted.
I just tested a totally new untouched 70.2 and 15789 lumen on the first test. If you are 3k below that on both models then I feel better already without getting to test one yet.
I will still not pass judgment until I do have one in my hands that I can test though all 3 of my integrating spheres.
Any member here in the U.S. that may have already received your ordered MT09R 35 high in CW version if you do not halve the equipment to test the light I will pay for the shipping both ways to me and back if you will ship it to me for testing.
I have a very large shipment that is on the way but importing more than a single light is much harder and takes time and money so it takes much longer. I do not have a 35 high version that I can either sell or test.
I will pay for shipping both ways just to be able to test it. Contact me by PM if you happen to have one that has already arrived here in the U.S.
Just need to ask... How did you take the measurements that you posted if not with a lux meter?