I don’t know if it’ll be possible to get Lumintop to make more than one flavor, but if so, it sounds like it’d be a good idea to do a throwy(ish) flavor with XP-L HI and an extra-floody flavor with LH351D.
I’ll let the poll run first though, along with a poll about color temperature. There are several communities interested now, and hopefully it’ll help to have more quantified preference data.
I suppose there is no way we would know how much less throwy the Samsungs would be?
Sorry for the off topic comment, but are those samsung LEDs available on triple boards anywhere?
Yeah I’m also confused as to why the XP-L HI is mentioned as having a smooth beam when it isn’t really meant for these optics and anything I’ve seen didn’t look good.
As Agro noted, LH351D 70 CRI would probably have the most lumens, similar to XP-L2. Probably also less heat than the 90 CRI version. Should that be an option? Usually flood and CRI preferences tend to cluster together, so I only listed the high CRI option.
Using a Carclo 10507 optic, even XP-G2 has kind of an ugly beam with obvious artifacts and rainbow effects. The 10511 optic mostly fixes that, and it can be reasonably throwy, especially after polishing the top surface a bit. However, it’ll likely still display a little bit of rainbow on XP-G3, and twelve very faint corona petals with some emitters… even 219b. Nothing like the original D4’s pinwheel pattern though.
Here’s XP-G2 in a 10507 optic, showing the rainbow effect:
It looks like the range here is very approximately 2 to 4 cd / lm. Maybe 1.5 to 4.5. The entire range is toward the floody end of the spectrum, but LH351D is the floodiest of the bunch and XP-L HI is the throwiest. Basically, at a distance of ~5 meters or more, the Samsung emitter would need to put out about twice as many lumens to light up objects as well as the Cree emitter.
Yup
Some people seem perfectly happy with negative R9, that makes Red look Brown.
Others prefer High CRI w High R9, that makes Red look Red
The poll will help sort out which group is larger, and for the others, an LED swap should be an option.
Because I’ve tried a variety of emitters in Carclo triple optics, and have found XP-L HI plus 10511 to be a good combination. Its domeless design mostly eliminates any rainbow effects. It has a significantly smoother beam than 219b + 10507, for example, though not quite as smooth as 219b + 10511. To completely eliminate artifacts though, a floodier optic is needed — like 10508 or 10509.
Feedback (like the past two pages or so) is why I put a poll preview online though, to make sure the data is accurate. Here’s the preview again:
Thanks, TK. That makes it very easy to understand. I was waffling, but now, I know I’d prefer XPL-HI’s.
I am simply going by THIS
At the time I said this the XPL HI was the only one with 5 stars in the “Beam” column. Now it seems to have dropped to 4.
OTOH, Samsung lights up a wider area, and reviews for it have been very positive. It’d be a great option indoors.
I agree, it sounds intriguing, which was causing the waffling. I think it may make for too much of an indoor use light though, and be a bit underwhelming as an indoor/outdoor edc.
Yep… the ONLY downside to me. And $6 is TINY in the big scheme of things, to me anyway; to get what I prefer.
And CRI means just about ZERO to me in this discussion.
XPL HI is my preference ATM, I like it. If it is not yours that is fine with me. :+1:
I feel the same way about the $6. This light is a screaming deal at that price. I also prefer a bit more throw. It really makes a difference on a dark night.
Agreed. Not a good choice for best “all around”…… for my money anyway.
I am sold on the XPL HI also cabfrank. :+1:
Some people are signed up for a bunch of lights, and an extra $6 for each adds up. People come from a wide variety of financial backgrounds. Some plan to buy the light as sort of a host and swap the emitters and/or optics, which would make any extra cost counterproductive.
Increasing the price isn’t a trivial matter.
I care about the $6 because I’m not just buying one of these, and it is a 20% difference in price. I’ll definitely be doing some emitter swaps in those no matter what the production emitter is.
I care quite a bit about CRI as well. It’s not the kind of difference that smacks you in the face like the XP-G3 rainbow or a few thousand K difference in CCT, but being used to it, I notice when it’s absent. It’s to the point that I’m rarely tempted to use my one light with an MT-G2 because its poor rendering of reds and browns annoys me. Object recognition is slower. My perception of fatigue is higher.
My first choice will be the 219C. It works well in FET triples even if it does throttle a bit sooner than the other options. My second choice will be the LH351D, because it’s the only other 90 CRI option. I don’t think giving up throw for heat/output relative to the 219C the right trade here, but it is worth it to me to gain CRI over the Cree options. Also, I wouldn’t mind having a bunch of them after swapping a two or three of the lights for 219Cs).
:+1: . :+1: . :+1:
I have emisar D4 Nicha 219C
Too hot … Fire
Vote for XP-L
Understood. I am FAR from having a lot of money. Very far.
Yep $6 more for this light is no biggie for what it is.
And as TK said HERE (copied & pasted below). This triple is not going to be a “thrower” anyway……
Throwiness is a rough measure of candelas per lumen. It’s the overall beam shape. Even the throwiest option is not a thrower, because compact triples are floody by nature.
So yeah…… the XPL HI makes the most sense for best overall choice to me.