TLF/BLF/Lumintop FW3A review (18650, 3x XP-L HI cool white)

I’m still wondering why they put lens over the optic other than to “protect” it.
Does the bezel hole slightly larger than the optic’s diameter?

There are two purposes:

  • To protect the optic
  • To avoid blocking light from the edges of the optic

Most triples partially obscure the outer edge of the optic, which also blocks some of the light which would come out the front. The FW3A doesn’t do that.

For example, the FW3A (left, 10508 optic) next to a Rey Triple Ti (right, 10511 optic):

… and a Rey Dawn (left) next to a FW3A (right), both with 10507 optics:

The entire optic is exposed, which is a nice change from the usual.

Thanks TK, well explained.

I like the 10507 optic beam.

Have you tried one in person, with XP-L HI? It generally has a yellow center, almost no spill, and a bunch of fairly visible artifacts around the edges. It’s still quite popular, but I generally replace mine with other optics to get a nicer beam at the cost of some throw.

I have not.
I just liked the beam shape in the photo.

Would it act the same with the LH351D emitter?

XP-L HI in 10507 makes a nice photo, though the yellow center is still slightly visible.

LH351D in 10507 looks totally different. It makes a big wide circle with pretty much no spill and no artifacts, aside from some coloration at the very edge. It’s a lot like a zoomie on wide mode. Here’s a LH351D 5000K in a 10507 optic, on the right, next to a ROT66-219B on the left. White balance is set to “daylight” 5000K.

Ah.
Thanks for the comparison.

Very nice review Maukka!

Beam angle comparisons between three Carclo optics,
10508 (Medium Spot Frosted) - This was installed in my light when I got it
10511 (Narrow Spot Frosted) - Default optics in the production light
10507 (Narrow Spot Plain) - Clear optics with throwiest beam but more artifacts

Throw comparison (edit: 2019-02-12, fixed wrong cd for 10507 and 10511)

Color temperature shift within the beam. Limited to 2% output, that’s why 10511 and 10507 only cover up to 31°

Duv comparison. (Green-magenta axis)

Tint deviation (deltaxy). How much does the tint change within the beam. This illustrates the 10507 color artifacts the best as it has a big shift right in the bright part of the beam. The further from the hotspot the shift is, the less noticeable it is.

1 Thank

I love your data - even if I cannot read all of it.

How do you think the above data will change when it comes to using the production xpl-hi tint? Concerning the last 3 charts.

The 1st chart should not be effected by tint.

Is it worth your time to test these particular LEDs when the production light is going to use different ones?

The data will be applicable to the NW version of the XP-L HI. It is the same optically even if absolute values are different. Needs another round of testing with LH351D though.

Another way of looking at the same tint vs. beam angle data

Swapped in Nichia 219b sw40 R9080s. No need to modify firmware for lower output at least with a NCR18650GA. I think the 10508 optic looks best. With 10511 there’s a yellowish spot in the middle of the beam.

There’s hardly any tint shift between modes when under the 8x7135 level. Just gets a bit rosier when FET is active.

With increasing output levels starting with a low one between moon and 1x7135

This is some of the most useful data I’ve ever seen on BLF. I feel like this should be stickied or something, placed at an easy-to-find spot to answer common questions. It’s certainly a lot better than my lame attempts to explain the effects of various optics.

I wonder if there’s a way to produce a “beam ugliness factor” similar to the “PWM snob factor” used in other measurements. Like, maybe a sum of the total deltaxy tint deviation distance travelled, or perhaps difference from a straight line, or something like that. Adding up the total vertical travel in that last graph to produce a single number. It’d be nice to have a number to quantify how good or how bad a beam looks.

The deviation should also be weighted by the relative output compared to the hotspot. It get’s kinda subjective when trying to come up with a formula. For me it’s enough to look at the graphs. Any sudden large movements back and forth especially near the hotspot are bad :slight_smile:

All of those are still miles better than an XP-G3 though:

Could you possibly get a 10510 elliptical and test that too? I’m extremely curious about that one and its one of the main reasons I’ve been looking at this light…

The elliptical one doesn’t get much attention, mostly because it doesn’t make a circular beam. But I have one in the mail because I was curious if it might work as a bike headlight… wide but not tall.

Here’s a post from 2014 which shows how the beam looks with XP-E emitters:

Thanks TK. I don’t have the 10510 to test at the moment.