yes but that moonlight is not an actual mode, its just the result of an exhausted battery. On a full battery, the Arc has no moonlight mode
I would rather get a light that produces a moonlight mode consistently, with a full battery too 
Here’s the reddit post about the SC62w runtime test that was mentioned by several folks.
It passed one year a few days ago! It’s running an LG cell measured at 3425 mAh.
My SC62w has been in my pocket for 4 years now. The 0.01 lumen mode is indeed usable in some cases.
For fun, I just took these photos of three ZebraLights on their lowest modes.
From left to right is the SC62w, SC64c LE, and SC64c with a Nichia 219B sw45k swap.
The 219B is clearly the dimmest, followed by the SC62w at 0.01 lumens, then the SC64c LE at 0.05 lumens.
I am looking at long runtime with a usable amount of light. My Armytek Tiara sits at .4 lumen for an advertised 60 days. The Elf C2 advertises .4 lumen for 200 days. Nice.
I suppose, if in darkness long enough, .1 lumens could seem pretty bright. I guess the litmus test for me is the amount of light I would need to be able to read or navigate in the dark.
I would take any “measurements” of moonlight mode brightness with a grain of salt. It can vary a lot from one instance of a light to another.
Yes, most of the MkIV models have around a 0.07 lumen minimum. That’s been around for the past couple of years. Before that, they used to do 0.01 lumens.
Of my 4 most recent Zebralights (all MkIV versions), the SC600w HI, SC600w Plus, and SC64w HI, all have the 0.07 lumen minimum. My H600Fc has a lower minimum moonlight. It’s not quite as low as the old 0.01 outputs, but it’s nice to see they haven’t completely given up on the really low modes.
IMO, the 0.01 outputs are just too low to be useful. Perhaps usable to some, but not me. Great for run-time contests, though!
Heres a comparison of an SC64 LE (left) vs H600c MkIV (right)
“0.05lm” vs “0.08lm” respectively; this shows that it’s hard to get solid numbers with output this low.
I would hazard a guess that actual runtimes vs advertised runtimes are also something that can vary greatly as well? I am pretty new to a lot of this so I am trying to learn all I can.
I still have original box with 10.14.2014 written on it. It is my favorite EDC.
All I know is that it is an SC62,I think “D” version but not positive. 0.01 Lumens as others have mentioned.
You can see a scratch on the lens in this picture.
No it is not hard. Get yourself a 16 dollar luxmeter that reads as low as 0.1 lux, a 4 dollar styrofoam ball, a small piece of alu-tape and some cellotape to close the ball and fix the luxmeter. Two holes with an exacto knife later, and a basic calibration with a known output light, you have a measuring device that measures fairly accurate and repeatable down to 0.005 lumen, and a bit coarser down to 0.002 lumen.
I just received an AAA Manker E02 (Red body) that has a programmable moonlight level with a range of 19!!! different sublumen levels
this is the lowest, it is lower than any light I own except my magnetic rotaries
The above lumen values come from my own tests, I do not rely on mfg specifications.
the E02 actually reads ZERO on my meter (my meter’s lowest reading capability is 0.01, which means the E02 is making less than 0.005 lumens, due to rounding)
When researching a light, I use google image search, to look for reviews with independent output and runtime charts. I especially like reviews by zeroair, he is very thorough, but I did not find an E02 review on his site…
Thrunite Ti, firefly mode is 0.04 lumen…
that is a specification, but not actually correct, mine is actually 0.07 lumens minimum
I suggest you find an independent review, or use your own meter to measure.
It is also likely that not every light achieves the specification. That is the point BurningPlayd0h made in post 26 above, about his Zebras…
what the manufaturer specs say is not necessarily true, neither for output, nor for runtime
Trust, But Verify!
Sorry, I was just referring to the specs. I have the orignal run Ti which I think many of us got for $5 
Its my most fav middle of the night bathroom use light!
Mine is also original, it was sold as a TiXmas
the Manker goes a LOT lower, though whether or not it is “too” low, depends on the application.
the brightness of the Manker can be raised to match the Ti3 if desired. imo the Manker w N219c produces a more pleasant color and CRI, than the Ti3
If something is 0.04lm still does not mean it is directly comparable to another light because of many reasons.
-Almost all the time all these ultra low lumen measurements are incorrect
-Not all LEDs have the same efficiency, one LED mode needs one current for the same lm value, another LED needs another current for the same lm value as the other LED model.
-Not all drivers have the same efficiency, actually ultra low currents are highly inefficient on pretty much all drivers, so extrapolated runtimes which all manufacturers offer are only that.
-Different cells types (chemistry, capacity, self-discharge, etc) offer differ runtimes.
So comparing flashlights based on manufacturer advertisements is as unrealistic as it gets.
I just measured the lowest moon setting of my Manker E02 with 4000K 219C at 0.002 lumen, right at the limit what I can measure. Unfortunately the current drain stays high at 5.56 mA because the MCU is kept awake, so in 6 days your battery is empty (could be 14 years if it was just the led that used current).
What is the actual accuracy of these sensors at levels that low though?
These luxmeters use silicon sensors that are as far as I know lineair in their whole range. At least I never noticed alinearity and I also know no sources that say otherwise (I did search for it)
King of the Lowest
My Red Manker E02 w N219c, is my new Firefly King.
No PWM, and it is High CRI.
I dont worry about runtime.
I use rechargeables, and turn my lights off when Im sleeping.
by my meter the 21 steps of available minimum modes goes from
<0.005 lumens, up to 0.6 lumens… hard to beat those options imo
AAA King of the Lowest
My Red Manker E02 w N219c, is my new AAA Firefly King.
No PWM, and it is High CRI.
I dont worry about runtime.
I use rechargeables, and turn my lights off when Im sleeping.
by my meter the 21 steps of available minimum modes goes from
<0.005 lumens, up to 0.6 lumens… hard to beat those options imo
Surprisingly good!
My meter is giving the same minimum lumen level as djozz, using totally different equipment, thousands of miles apart.
in any case, in the photos that show more than one light at the same time, it is pretty obvious that the E02 goes significantly lower than the Ti3, and even goes as ridiculously low as the Jetbeam Rotary in this post. (The rotary changes modes much more easily though)
At this point, the question is, how low do you want to go?
cause the E02 can go a LOT lower than most people would ever want, most of the time…
(and there is no AAA Zebra option, and zebras flicker, the Manker does not)
[QUOTE=maukka;5094246]Just an update on Zebralights since I got my faster sensor.
It’s not PWM as discussed previously, but don’t be surprised if you see flickering on camera.
I don’t remember the exact modes these were measured from, but it is similar on some L and M modes. The frequency changes depending on the mode.
In all the pictures horizontal center line is zero output. So it’s more than just a very low amplitude flicker especially on the SC5Fc.
H600Fd
SC600w Mk3 HI
SC5Fc
[/QUOTE]
imo zebras long runtime is due to the way the LED is being pulsed, very quickly, brighter and dimmer… most people dont notice in casual use … the pulsing is more a concern to me when the light is used as the only ambient light source, for long periods…
.
anyway, Manker Vs Zebra is another thread, forgive the hijack
The only thing I wish was different on the E02 is the weight. It is twice as heavy as my other AAA aluminium lights, and weighs the same as my Copper Tool (which lacks firefly though).
The heavy weight, is what is stopping me from buying the Ti version of the E02. (1/2 oz heavier than my Copper Tools). How long can someone that values programmable firefly resist?.. Not sure… I will get back to you on that…