If you used glass then that will require an adjustment on the calibration to compensate for it. I thought about using a + shape of wire. Like thin stainless wire. It might not effect the readings at all, I need to check that, though. All my lights seem to give the highest output when sunk down maybe 5 to 8 mm so depth should not be a big problem. Right now its no big deal to me holding the light.
Texas_Ace BLF Calibrated Lumen tube / Sphere No math skills needed - Several spheres still available
I got my manker ranger today… I tested the throw version and got 1470 lumen… manker listed 1500 lumen… just some information…
What reduction factor are you using?
Isn’t the Manker MK39 rated at 2,000 lumens? Vinh tested it at 2,000 lumens.
https://skylumen.com/collections/v54-lights/products/manker-rangervn-excellent-handle-light
My bad… I didn’t tighten the tailcap good… I tested it again and I got 1868 lumen… battery are not fully charged anymore and they were lg mj1 button top…
So yea… I will test it out with Sony vtc5a tonight…
Lg mj1 button top. 1868 lumen
So here we go… I tested out my manker ranger mk39 with the fully charged Sony vtc5a… it is very hard to test the two quad. I did my best…
1969 lumen for throw… manker rated 2000.
1903 lumen for each quad… manker rated 4000 for flood…
So this TA tube is pretty accurate… I am very positive manker use $10000-$20000 integration sphere to test out their lumen…
The result we are getting is good for The tube…
Manker is just as susceptible as any other company for exaggerating their lumen specs. Some of their lights are closer to accurate than others.
My conclusion from your test is not that the tube is good, but that Manker seems to have giving the MK39 some realistic specs. Good for them.
If you say so… i measured 20,400 lumen @ turn on for the mt09r… whats your opinion on it?
I don’t know what your asking.
Your specific MT09R is a custom built light. Factory specs do not apply.
I found where TA measured the factory 70.2 MT09R CW at 14k and NW at 15k lumen on his original lumen tube. We can now adjust his readings by .68 to get 9,500 and 10,200 lumen. This is way below the factory rated 15k lumen spec.
So your light is now double what it was factory. :+1:
Mine is not factory., it is modded with TA driver, upgrade xhp70.2 5700k, and bypass spring…
TA was being very conservative with his lumen ratings. The stock MT09R 5000k I measured 2,140 lux compared w/ TA modded 4000k 80CRI at 2,740 lux, which TA rated at 22-23k lumens. My stock TA tube measured the modded light at 27.5k lumens (coincidentally it was giving same number as my ceiling bounce lux). Therefore if I use a 0.68 calibration factor, I would be getting 18.7k lumens for the TA modded MT09R and 14.6k lumens with the stock MT09R 5000k. TA did say he thinks there might have been multiple emitter bins for the 5000k and I might have gotten a higher binned one but we don’t know for sure.
Haikelite mt09r is more powerful than olight x7vn. Both are modded with xhp70.2. First number is turn on and seconds number is 30 Seconds.
Mt09r TA 20000/ 18000
X7vn. 19000 / 17000
As a matter of fact, skylumen rated 21000 for the x7vn, and i got 19000 lumen…
The point i am trying to make is TA tube with two disc is reading about right…
I don’t think TA was being conservative with the stock light measurements. He has no reason to be.
I could only find a couple of his old factory measurements, though.
I’m sure he could tell us the range of measurements he got when testing stock MT09R’s. I have long forgotten that info.
My point was that regardless of the company or model of light, you always have to be skeptical of the factory specs. This is why we test stuff in reviews. We don’t just blindly accept what the manufacturer says.
Some things are easy to test like temperatures, amp draws and candela. Other things are much harder to test such as lumens, but that is a lot easier now.
I think you completely misunderstood what I was saying.
Moving on jason.
You still don’t get it?
From post #786:
My point was that regardless of the company or model of light, you always have to be skeptical of the factory specs. This is why we test stuff in reviews. We don’t just blindly accept what the manufacturer says.
Some things are easy to test like temperatures, amp draws and candela. Other things are much harder to test such as lumens, but that is a lot easier now (thanks to the TA Tube).
When did i ever believe manufacture lumen rating ?? You are trying to sound like i worship mauufacture number…
Post #779. You said the TA Tube was good because it matched Manker specs.
No biggie, maybe I am the one who misunderstood.
Yes… what i am trying to say is manker did a great job on the ranger mk39 rating.
if manker rated 2500 lumen. Then yes. I will be very concern…
TA was conservative with rating his modified lights. It would make sense for him to apply that same level of conservatism to the stock light readings inorder to compare the stock and modified lights on an equal basis.
Ok, everyone no reason to get up tight over some lumen readings.
With the stock lights I was not nearly as conservative as I was with the modded lights. I still round down but I don’t then take it down even further.
I saw everything from 13k to ~16k on the factory MT09R with most coming in around 14-15k on the old calibration (aka, around 10k real lumens).
After mods the gains were around 50% higher on average depending on the LED tint, bin and lottery ect.