GB 351D closed.

Well yes, the Lumen value should be a bit higher. That would be extremely inefficient for 12 4mm^2 LEDs at 2A each.

I highly doubt the M43 with 219B can produce 4400 lumens. The readings I posted earlier for all three of my M43s were measured with the TA lumen sphere, with reduction factor applied to match the Maukka calibration lights. You can read all about it in the TA lumen sphere thread and Maukka’s calibration lights thread.

This store has the lee filters on sale for the next few days, I just ordered an 804, 803 and 802

http://www.ebaystores.com/Knight-Sound-and-Lighting/\_i.html?\_nkw=lee&submit=Search&\_sid=181469459

840 or 804?

Opps 804

Thought so - Ordered the same - best price I have seen with $5.00 shipping.

Thanks, TA

Yep, same here which is why I ordered 3 sheets, the shipping remains $5 even if you order multiples which is nice.

This test from djozz proves that it’s possible.

The 4000K 219B-V1 R9050 does 470lm at 2A (the 5000K variant in the light should be the same or brighter). 12 of them 5640 led lm. After you subtract the usual transmission losses you get around 4600 otf lumen. They state 4400. Seems realistic.

This is much dimmer than some of the other M43 variants, some do 7000-8000lm.

I remember maukka test of some Zebra that showed way lower performance than stated by the manufacturer.

Same here. Zebralights and Armyteks are usually lower than manufacturer’s ratings if tested using ANSI calibrated standards. Fenix, Olight, Acebeam, and Thrunite numbers are usually closer to ANSI lumens.

Those are Djozz lumens. I’m not sure how he calibrated his sphere. Even the famous TA emitter tests show lumens much higher than ANSI levels because it was based off of his previous calibration, which is over 30% too high and most DIY lumen spheres are similarly high. Now all of TA’s lumen spheres sold are based on Maukka’s $10k+ certified lumen sphere calibration.

You could easily check this by comparing a value under 1.5A with those in the datasheet.

Djozz actually uses a calibrated lux meter which accuratelY measures different tints. He generally seems to go to the highest effort to ensure the best possible accuracy.

Maukkas lights with measurement certificate are nice, but they don’t make a cheap Luxmeter more accurate. It will still have-Problems with some tints.

Bah! vwpieces had all of this light measuring stuff mastered long ago. Check out his fine & handy light meter:

Source: **Featured Review** Probe Shiny Handy Light Zoomie Super Bright LED

^:)

But lux is not lumens. If your setup is not accurately calibrated, it doesn’t matter how accurate the lux meter is because you will not be able to accurately convert lux into lumens.

How’s the tint of the 5000K (RT) compared to the 4000K (T*) of the 90 CRI version?

Yes, but accurate calibration in the real world doesn’t just involve one value at one tint if you can’t be sure that the Luxmeter has the same accuracy at all tints (which all cheap meters don’t).

But why are we argueing here? The 4400lm of the M43 are a believable value for a light with 12 Nichia 219B-V1 LEDs driven together at around 80W. That’s actually quite inefficient.

The technology of the 219B has already been surpassed/improved, agree. However, quite inefficient versus what kind of emitters? If low CRI ones the comparison is completely unfair since our sensitivity to the visible spectral gamut frequencies is uneven:

Source: Light Measurement @ TutorVista.com

Cheers ^:)

It was meant as a general statement regarding led flashlights, but in this case also regarding other high-cri lights. The 219B-V1 is ineeficient at 2A.

Not sure why you think we’re arguing. Just pointing things. The Maukka calibration light set includes a 5000k and 6500k light and the difference I measured with the lux meter TA included with his lumen sphere is only 0.2% even if we go down to 4000k, I doubt the CCT difference will cause the lux meter in the TA lumen sphere to deviate more than 1%. To me, it just seems unlikely but not impossible that using 219B emitters in the M43 will result in more lumens than with the LH351D 4000k 90CRI, which I read is similar in performance to the 219C or better.

There is really no reason to argue. The 219B is a good looking LED but not something we should be using much going forward when we have better LED’s available.