BLF LT1 Lantern (4x18650): Good but...

[jp9mm]

7:45 , not sure why people say things like this. I don’t think its hard to remember number of clicks to do things after the first couple times. Don’t need to know what blinkies / strobes are either. you see what they are - 2 clicks cycle through ….find what you want.

I think its funny we have advanced so far with tech that now we need to design things so simple a ape that was alive 1 million years ago could be transported to present day and learn how to use it.
‘I could hand this to an amoeba and they will easily use it’

[drewski]

@jp9mm

7:45 , not sure why people say things like this. I don’t think its hard to remember number of clicks to do things after the first couple times. Don’t need to know what blinkies / strobes are either. you see what they are - 2 clicks cycle through ….find what you want.

I think its funny we have advanced so far with tech that now we need to design things so simple a ape that was alive 1 million years ago could be transported to present day and learn how to use it.
‘I could hand this to an amoeba and they will easily use it’

I see your point. The ease of use (once you get used to it) given the complexity of Anduril is great—I love it. However, sometimes the simple things in life are nice too. I enjoy being able to hand a flashlight to someone without having to explain how it works. I have to remind myself that most people are not flashlight enthusiasts. Also a rotary knob allows you to control the speed of the ramp based on how fast you turn it. I wonder how feasible it would be to have a rotary knob that can also depress in (ie click) for all other Anduril functions.

[iamlucky13]

Could it be possible to make the LT1 better with Bluetooth control? Almost certainly, if it is well-implemented.

Is it really a shortcoming of the LT1 that it doesn’t feature Bluetooth control? I don’t think that is a reasonable criticism. If any Bluetooth light exists, I haven’t seen it yet.

Actually, I bet there’s more than one Bluetooth controlled light out there, somewhere, but if they don’t get the lighting features right, they will be inferior products. Most LT1 buyers are enthusiastic about it because it first and foremost gets the lighting features right. DBSAR invested a significant amount of time and effort testing and modifying a very wide variety of lanterns to determine what works well and what doesn’t to make sure it serves it’s primary purpose. The tint-shifting and highly advanced yet simple-to-use firmware add to its appeal.

Is it a dead-end? Absolutely not. The firmware is open source, and if the driver is not open source (I don’t recall), it at least is derived from designs fairly well-known in the flashlight community. Several individuals put a significant amount of their time, as far as I know with little or no pay, to give the LT1 its existing features. It’s absolutely an option for others to do the same to increase the feature-set of the LT1, such as by figuring out a way to integrate Bluetooth with the existing driver (maybe it could be as simple as piggy backing on the button input pin), or creating a new driver intended to work with a Bluetooth chip.

I’m glad you like the light overall, but it’s not fair to call it a dead-end on the basis that it doesn’t have a feature no other similar light has, on the assumption that it is simple to add. Even the features it has are not simple to create. Anduril has had a fairly long evolution of continuous improvement by Toykeeper, incorporating a lot of feedback from those of us who use it.

I want to end by emphasizing something you observed in your video: the basic functions of turning it on, or off, or changing the brightness are very easy to use. That’s what I think makes Anduril such a good user interface. It has a lot of other handy or novel features, but even though those are more complex to access, their inclusion does not make it hard to learn the main features.

[iamlucky13]

@drewski

I wonder how feasible it would be to have a rotary knob that can also depress in (ie click) for all other Anduril functions.

It should not be complex, but it would take some skill, and you’d want to make sure it is robust, and it might be more difficult to keep waterproof.

I’m pretty sure a potentiometer could be used to provide a varying voltage to one of the microcontroller pins that a modified version of the firmware could use to determine what the output should be. If I understand right, the Jetbeam RRT-01 rotary flashlight using a hall effect sensor rather than a potentiometer, so that’s another possible method.

It’s not a flashlight, but the popular Viltrox photography lights have something similar - a knob controls the brightness, or if you press the knob in, that triggers a button that switches the knob to controlling color temperature.

[Markus]

@iamlucky13

I meant no disrespect when I talk about a dead end. It is the observation that a large bulk of excellent functionality is squeezed through a UI based on a single button. It is done in the most clever way but still represents a dead end as from here on out you need a new interface to really improve the lantern. Wether you ad on a rotary switch, more buttons or a bluetooth function is not so important, but it all would represent a more drastic change in design.

[Rexlion]

A rotary pot switch would be mechanical, right? They tend to get ‘dirty’ and not work well over time unless maintained with a good cleaner.

[FollowspotDude]

@Markus

I talk about blutooth and a smartphone app in the video. Imagine: Having multiple lights under a single control, tie in proximity sensors, set timers and clock functions.

DO NOT WANT. Honestly. I plan on my LT1 being used for at least a decade.

Who is going to fund software development over that period of time? How many “smart” devices out there today are sitting in the bin because the software wasn’t updated / isn’t compatible with newer operating systems? Not to mention how buggy many smartphone apps are these days.

Chances are, if I’m using my LT1, there’s no power for miles. Burning up electrons to avoid getting out of the chair doesn’t sound appealing to me.

If you want that sort of stuff, go take a look at Mr Beams Netbeams thingy.

[agent80]

Great review. I guess you used a drone?

[Markus]

@agent80

Great review. I guess you used a drone?

Thank you, yes I used a drone. So I operated the drone and the lantern at the same time. This shows that the basic UI of the lantern is very good. My complaint is that the UI blocks the lantern from unleashing its full potential.

[Lightbringer]

@bmengineer

All I’m imagining is the standby drain associated with maintaining a Bluetooth connection.

Bluetooth Low Energy

[Lightbringer]

@jp9mm

I think its funny we have advanced so far with tech that now we need to design things so simple a ape that was alive 1 million years ago could be transported to present day and learn how to use it.

Maybe you’d like to give gramma a lantern. Maybe to keep on its lowest setting as a nightlight, crank it up slightly to be able to walk to the can without turning on all the lights along the way.

I can picture gramma being overwhelmed by having to control-alt-doubleclick’n’hold just to adjust the brightness.

“Oh, c’mon, gramma! Even an ape could use it! So who’s smarter, you or the ape?”

“Uhh, how big of an ape?”

[MtnDon (Don Miller)]

@Markus

I talk about blutooth and a smartphone app in the video. Imagine: Having multiple lights under a single control, tie in proximity sensors, set timers and clock functions.

I can imagine and imagine it unecessary.

[Markus]

@MtnDon

@Markus

I talk about blutooth and a smartphone app in the video. Imagine: Having multiple lights under a single control, tie in proximity sensors, set timers and clock functions.

I can imagine and imagine it unecessary.

Maybe. But If you look into the BLF LT1 half of the functions are not really necessary. And half of the functions are on top of it basically out of reach unless you have patience and the manual at hand. You have all that potential that is already there in a high tech fully electronic light that runs a software but the interface is just not there. It is like having a big engine but a weak transmission and flat tires.

[SIGShooter]

@Markus

@MtnDon

@Markus

I talk about blutooth and a smartphone app in the video. Imagine: Having multiple lights under a single control, tie in proximity sensors, set timers and clock functions.

I can imagine and imagine it unecessary.

Maybe. But If you look into the BLF LT1 half of the functions are not really necessary. And half of the functions are on top of it basically out of reach unless you have patience and the manual at hand. You have all that potential that is already there in a high tech fully electronic light that runs a software but the interface is just not there. It is like having a big engine but a weak transmission and flat tires.

The design of the LT and programming of the software were done for free by people who could have spent that time on other things, and clearly it was a substantial amount of time on top of that. It’s easy to ask for improvements/changes but who’s going to compensate people for their time and effort? Given that you feel these changes are must-haves are you willing to spent time/effort/money on making it happen?

[MtnDon (Don Miller)]

Right, I could and do without much of what is available with my LT1’s. But, they are hidden or far enough out of the way that they don’t bother me and having them there did not really increase the cost as Anduril was mature firmware by the time the LT1 was ready to be produced in prototype form.

I really do not see any advantage to using technology (Bluetooth) just because it is available. But then I do not have a Smart TV, nor any SmartHome devices other than a single Fugoo bluetooth speaker and a Ecobee thermostat. I do have a smartphone but only gave up my very dependable flip phone three years ago, and mainly because I wanted some map and GPS functions I didn’t have.

If one wants a tech filled item, one is welcome to purchase or design one. However, I prefer to have a choice of more simple devices as well. So, there is nothing wrong with LT1, version 1. Start a group to develop a more technically advanced LT and see how it goes. I would not want a device like a flashlight that required the use of a smartphone in order to operate more than the basic functions.

[gravelmonkey]

I’ve used my LT1 quite a lot, 99% of use has been at warmest CCT setting, I use sunset mode most nights, not much else.

I agree with other users who feel simple is better for the LT1,

I can see the market for a LT1+ or LT1 Smart, with Bluetooth, wireless charging, etc, but it’s not something I’d be interested in.

[iamlucky13]

@Markus

@iamlucky13

I meant no disrespect when I talk about a dead end. It is the observation that a large bulk of excellent functionality is squeezed through a UI based on a single button. It is done in the most clever way but still represents a dead end as from here on out you need a new interface to really improve the lantern. Wether you ad on a rotary switch, more buttons or a bluetooth function is not so important, but it all would represent a more drastic change in design.

No need to apologize. Courteous discussion is good even when we disagree. Personally, I think it’s worth emphasizing how much the light offers compared to anything else comparable.

[Markus]

@iamlucky13

@Markus

@iamlucky13

I meant no disrespect when I talk about a dead end. It is the observation that a large bulk of excellent functionality is squeezed through a UI based on a single button. It is done in the most clever way but still represents a dead end as from here on out you need a new interface to really improve the lantern. Wether you ad on a rotary switch, more buttons or a bluetooth function is not so important, but it all would represent a more drastic change in design.

No need to apologize. Courteous discussion is good even when we disagree. Personally, I think it’s worth emphasizing how much the light offers compared to anything else comparable.

Indeed, it is already a superior light that has no real competition. No I want to see Sofirn sell a million units with it being used everywhere by professional users and hobby folk alike

[FollowspotDude]

A few thoughts:

1. What the BLF LT1 needs at this point is marketing. Yes, it’s not a cheap product, BUT, just a quick flip through Bass Pro Shops’ lanterns and you can certainly get far less light for the same $. Considering what the Bass Pro crowd is willing to spend on things (Yeti coolers anyone?), I don’t see them scoffing at the price of the BLF LT1. If anything, I can see it becoming a viral product at that point. Lots of tech, solid feel/build. If someone went this route, they’d have to include batteries. Perhaps the limiting factor at that point would be Sofirn’s capacity to build them. I’d imagine Bass Pro would need ~1,000 of them at a time. It might sell well at some place like West Marine also.

2) For those wanting millennial-friendly features (Bluetooth, smart phone apps, etc.), maybe go start something up over at Kickstarter. I could see that crowd backing something like that easily. Isn’t Bluetooth and smart phone apps a requirement for anything over there to begin with? At that point you’d have plenty of cash to do the development needed.

[Zappaman]

The LT1 has a nice jump in the futerproof dept. compared to other offerings I’ve seen. Yes, it is the child of BLF… so it naturally has EVERYTHING that represents the wider ethos of this group. But it can be argued it’s as good as it gets in the current marketplace, and I’d absolutely agree.

It could have been simpler in design for a select group that isn’t so comfortable with technology … but I can hand this lantern to about anyone under 40 yrs. old today and it’s not even a challeng by today’s average user standards. The average user with a one minute debriefing can use its basic functions without issue.

So like an iPhone, the LT1 can be used many different ways albeit through one button. But with tactile DSP around the last 25 years or so… users today expect even “one button” features indeed! Then, as we all know… they (we?) buy the thing then use 10% (or 1% ?) of it after owning it a week. But it sold on the features. The LT1 came out with a UI that is still a puzzle in a way, but people often like puzzles… and most technology just keeps on rolling this way! (right past me lately too!)

My new car is very much like the LT1… I had a 2 hour overview after buying it because I probably would have not made it home otherwise. I was like, “ok, here’s the check, give me the keys and… later!” but no… it was absolutely smart that the dealer did this. I had no idea a car could do what this NEW car could do. But, hey I did my time, figured it out, and now that the “puzzle” was solved I literally enjoy driving more than ever. And that is because I learned the code, then moved forward more educated than before.

I’m a Colman lantern user of 48 years and JUST retired my 30-40 yr old set this year in exchange for the LT1s now taking their place. I will use these lanterns about 6-8 times in the next six months fall/spring fishing and hunting. They have enough output and runtime to NOW make them an obvious choice over the gas lanterns.

My LT1s were my change angents from gas to electric. Nothing existed like these in the past, and with the build quality from Sofirn, and a mega-field testing designer, these WILL endure the packs up several mountains and light our camps in 5 degree nights where in the past gas lanterns were too much to pack on some trips (a nice new feature: lightweight and small!).

The LT1 was kinda a surprise from BLF really, but really glad it happened. The LT1’s ARE a significantly more solid, over-all, “next step” solution to the lantern market since the Colman gas lanterns if you ask many people using them today. And future technology will benefit from this design in more than just the UI dept. for sure.