Greenish SST20

Mixed Nichia E21A’s have a good tint on lower modes. Maukka’s measurements.

The only rosy WW emitters on low mode are mixed tint E21A, Oslon Square 2700k emitters if you have the right bins, and the XP-L2 V4 7D emitter from KD. Mixed tint E21A are the rosiest though and the best looking.

Do you think mixing 3000K and 4000K SST20’s in equal ratio’s will yield a noticeably lower DUV value than using either on their own?

The E21A is an excellent emitter, by itself. Looks like R9 values are actually worse with the tint mixing. I think this fascination for a below the black body tint is a bizzare perculairity, even at the expense of objective light quality, a preference of certain flashlight enthusiasts. R9 is worse and light color saturation, R (g), is not significantly higher then just the a single emitter. Give me single CCT light source as close to or on the BBL.

In my case, its not a fascination of below BBL, although I do prefer below instead of above. I just really dislike the green tint when its above.
I have a Nichia Tiara from Clemence and tint is perfect. I’m looking to put some xp-g2 replacements in an existing light and want to avoid green tint at low outputs. E21a unfortunately is not an option for this light. Has to be XP-G2 / XP-L footprint.

Thank you for explaining it. Now I understand the difference.

I should’ve gotten a 2700K, or FA1 FA4 bins
Should Simon make it more clear that the CRI95 doesn’t apply to the 5000k ?

But I agree, as you guys mentioned the high modes are not as bad.

I will start using it outdoors, maybe hook it up to the head strap, I actually like the narrow beam when biking at night.

That would certainly be helpful! I don’t really know how many people actually pull up the spec. sheets for individual emitters when flashlight shopping.

From what I’ve been hearing,so far, with the 2700K range other have, is that they are happy with the light qualities. I have that emitter myself in a quad, and the light is indeed good quality.

For what it’s worth, Kaidomain has the 3000K SST-20 with a below the black body tint. I have that emitter and its 3000K brethren from Mouser in another light, and I don’t see either one being noticeably greener or rosier.

Our perception of light is subjective, so the objective measurements might be treated as ideal from a theoretical standpoint, but still not be what naturally appeals most to a given person. And that subjective preference certainly does differ between users, so it’s completely fair of you to prefer on the BBL while another person prefers below BBL.

As for R9 values, if you had a 20 point difference in R9 values that are otherwise very good (above 70, for example), or a difference in DUV of 0.003, I’m pretty sure the DUV difference is a lot more noticeable.

Speaking for myself, I find CCT the most noticeable difference of all, so in most cases, my choice will probably be prioritized as CCT, then DUV, then R9, assuming typical values of these parameters. So if I want a 4000K light for a given application, but it’s DUV +0.003, and the R9 is 60, I’d take that versus a 3000K light where the DUV is 0 and the R9 is 80. I don’t approach that as a strtict, rule, however.

Different people have different preferences. For me, I’d rather have a rosy 70CRI emitter than a green 95CRI emitter. I think XP-L HI 5A looks much better than SST-20 4000K 95CRI.

Nichia 219B is also nice. I really like my 219B lights.

I’d like to try E21A too, but haven’t yet.

Same, I like hi CRI, but I really hate green in my lights. I just did my first mod with E21A and it’s really nice.

I recall your favourite CCT is somewhere between 4500K-5000K. So you could either go for non mixed 4500K/5000K, or mixed (2+2) 4750K or even 3+1 mixes with 4625K and 4875K, the possibilities are endless.

Btw the brighter D240 flux bin 4000K is above the BBL, the regular D220 bin should not, SKV98 described it as similar to the SW40. 1000K mixes are guaranteed below BBL and noticeably rosy. Clemence also managed to “copy” the SW45 but I can’t remember in what led configuration.

Toykeeper, would you describe the tint of the SW45 as rosy or rather as violet?

The E21A is a astonishing emitter in quad setup, but it’s pricey, it seems to work only with wide TIRs and the number of host is a bit limited due to ~9A max current. If only one could persuade Armytek to sell hosts or at least to use blue locklite instead of the red one.

Not violet. The camera thinks my 219B emitters are rosy, but to me it just looks pure white.

Here is a FF ROT66 219B (on the left) next to a LH351D 5000K (on the right), with the camera’s white balance set to its built-in 5000K “daylight” setting:

Here’s that same photo, but processed to show tint more clearly. Basically, blur the photo and then normalize the brightness of each pixel individually as far as possible without distorting the hue:

The only time I’ve seen emitters look violet was with XP-G2 3D. It’s a weird effect, especially since XP-L HI
3D doesn’t do that.

Funny how everybody sees it different. For me negative duv at 4500K looks violet and the light itself as a shade of grey, that’s why I stick to 3000-4000K. But if you like noticeable negative duv a 500K or 1000K difference mix could work out. Tintshots including mixes: [Reference] Nichia E17A/E21A (2000K - 6500K, R9050/R9080, color) CCT and tint shots

Is the SST40 green as well at lower levels?

Well since about 8% of men are color blind and 0.5% of women are color blind, and preferences vary, this topic shall always be spoken of differently by different people.

Kidding aside. I don’t like green either, and most say the SST-20 is greenish.

The main thing with this is that this preference for a below the black body body source over established color accuracy, doesn’t translate outside of the flashlight tint/CRI enthusiast white wall hunter group. Or, at least, I have not seen it yet. You might be fine looking at white walls comparing which light looks most below BBL, and might be content with low R9/color accuracy. Museums and art galleries, the main customers to these high CRI emitters are not; hence the attention being paid to high R9. Companies like Xicato aren’t selling their products with slogans like “guaranteed Below BBL tint”. They push for the tightest MacAddam bins on the the BBL, not below it. They publish their R9/CRI scores which push darn near perfection.

While some might be content with lower R9 and a distorted color of light, entities like the National Portrait Gallery are not. Further, while you say that it’s “all subjective and preference” there are those whose job it is to set forth standards, the Illuminating Engineering Society, to get it right and establish those high caliber standards, and they do as they are a highly qualified organization on this. I wish to stress that subjective lighting characteristics can be misleading. The IESs’ metric TM-30, includes saturation ratings, these tint mixed emitters that certain flashlight enthusiasts like don’t show any substantial improvement in that. What established metric do you know of that rewards points for looking the rosiest compared to a 219B? How does looking subjectively rosy sell fresh produce or enhance the experience of presidential portraits? It, this quirky preference for Below the BBL emitters just doesn’t translate well outside of a small community within a small community in very specific environments.

If you want an emitter that enhances those reds, greens, what have you focus on the gamut ratings—R (g).

They’re certainly not using flashlights to illuminate priceless artwork. For something like that, I’d want the most accurate lighting possible.

It seems a bit silly to judge someone for using bass-boosting headphones at home because they’re not suitable for professional audio engineers at recording studios. Pink emitters are the flashlight equivalent of turning the bass up on a stereo.

I started to feel conflicted reading a comparison of pink-tinted emitters to exaggerated bass, but I had to step back a second to figure out what my actual perspective for comparison is:

I’ve heard bass boosted on gear that keeps it tight, accurate, and with distinguishable tones. I’ve also listened to a pair of Beats headphones. I’d say the muddy bass I experienced on the Beats was analogous to what I’d expect from a full-stop minus green filter on a 219B driven at maximum rated current, behind an aspheric with tint shift comparable to an Atomic Beam.

In short, boosted bass does not mean the same thing as bad bass. Non-neutral tint does not mean the same thing as bad tint.

Good comparison me thinks.

Think of this;
Could the lead engineer mix Pink Floyd’s Dark Side of the Moon the same/as well 30 years after they did being that their ears would have suffered the unavoidable effects of human aging? No way.
Jet fighter pilots eyes will eventually lose their razor sharp focus, as such our eyes will change as we age and we will find different tints to our liking that many years prior would not look good to us.
So as such Tint is purely a personal and subjective thing, there is no universal right or wrong, it’s “What looks Good to YOU” that is the most important just as the way you mix your audio is what you need/like.

Finally, the old saying “Looking at Life through Rose Colored glasses” has new meaning to me now as I get closer to 60 years old. :slight_smile:

For the record, definitely prefer the tight crisp Bass of a good 10” long excursion woofer to the flub, flub of 15” subs with lots of 100hz boost.
Your Tint may/will vary.

Later,
Keith

That’s what I was thinking to myself the other night. I must’ve got a bit caught up in wanting to quantify this preference.