Well my D25A Ti XM-L2 is definitely not sub-lumen. Just visually it looks like 3-5 lumens on low. It doesn’t take a calibrated measurement to say “one of these things is not like the others” for mine.
But then again mine only works with 14500s so maybe it would have a sub-lumen ML mode if it worked with a lower voltage battery. Mine is only about two weeks old so maybe they changed it. I also detect high frequency PWM on mine. I believe Selfbuilt calls it “noise” but this is noise my phone camera can “see” so I’m calling it PWM.
Yeah, my N219 measures 3 lumens as the lowest level on a 14500 so I suspect the XML will be a bit brighter. I’d definitely exchange the light if yours doesn’t work on ~1.5v. I personally don’t consider this light to be a 14500 light since it gets really hot and all lower mode shift up.
Quarks, S15, ZL 52s, El Caps, and IV mag ring lights are really the only ones I think that fully support (ie, retains lower modes at spec) the sub-lumen and AA > 14500 range, but I do like the D25As for tint and a “bright” moonlight mode.
It has the XM-L2 not XM-L and it’s the only seller I found who had the Ti version with the XM-L2. Since they went out of stock the instant I bought it, I decided not to return it and I’ve been on a 14500 buying spree. Maybe I’ll pay someone to mod it, and it wouldn’t be so terrible to keep since it’s such a beast with the 14500, and it’s so damn light. I believe it’s the lightest of all my 1xAA lights. Very pocket-able. I will probably buy the AL version. I did have the D25A mini in aluminum but my sister talked me out of it.
Right now it has an Olight 750 mAh 14500 in it from Illumination Supply.
reppans, I have two of the requested pics (ish) in the OP. All the pics used Eneloops. First, all lights on moonlight again:
Next, the D25A on moon (left) vs the L3 L10-219 on low (~3 lm, right):
This D25A is measurably about 19% brighter on “moon” than the L3 L10 is on “low”. My light box says 4.7 lm for “moon” (spec=0.5 lm) on the D25A and 3.95 lm for “low” (spec=3lm) on my L10-219. The same light box measures the ZL SC52 at 2.66 lm on “L1” mode (spec=2.7 lm).
So, my results are quite a bit different than yours. You seem to get a “moon” that is lower than the “low” on other lights (which is what I expected), while my “moon” is massively brighter than it’s supposed to be. I’ve heard similar reports from others, so I think something is wrong with this particular batch. The 2012/2013 models seem much nicer (and maybe even the early-2014 model too).
Thanks! I tried that, and it definitely loosened something up…
Unfortunately, it didn’t loosen up the pill. It’s still just as stuck as always. But the driver fell out, and is hanging freely now. That was a bit of a surprise. I hope to get some pics of the driver soon.
Whoever wrote the spec that this has a “user-replaceable lens” apparently has never actually tried it.
Edit: Okay, got it put back together… it still works, but the head-tight/head-loose sensor is a little easier to trigger now. It thinks it’s “tight” a little sooner now.
OK ToyKeeper, guess I have to concur with you on your D25A sample, we have previously compared SC52 vs L10 moonlight and low photos (your H52 review) and our examples of these lights seem consistent enough.
I am surprised by your D25A sample variation since I tend to buy multiple copies of lights I like (for others and gifts) and have been reasonably impressed the consistency between samples… but I guess your example shows otherwise.
I would personally have returned it for replacement, but I guess you’ve opened it now.
Eh, we’ll see. I only did what EagleTac support said to do. They might still be willing to adjust the output levels, though I’m not sure what’s involved in actually getting the item back to them. If I have to pay to ship it all the way to China and back (with months of waiting between), it probably won’t be worthwhile. But if it’s just a quick shipment to Washington and back, I’d like to get it fixed if possible.
Well, unfortunately you may be stuck now with the China/Repair route - sorry if that is the case.
As a “bright” moonlight mode collector, I bought an Olight S15 which also had “abnormal” output, but the reverse of your situation with the two lowest modes (my most important and often used) being a fraction of spec. Immediately disappointed me and went right back to the dealer - Selfbuilt later encountered the same thing with his 2nd [purchased] sample, and our dialog is documented in his review of that light. I almost returned the SC52 for the same reason, except that it has so many closely spaced mode options, that the next higher mode (also way below spec) still satisfied for my purposes.
Now reading further into your review and reasons for your “mod” - I’ll +1 on Chloe’s comment:
It is the secondary light bounce off the internal AR coating, and all my D25As have it - but it is really not an issue at all - it disappears in normal use and only catches my eye in the occasional reflection (which personally, I sort of like in that it’s a very cool neon-blue color). Your photos also reflect that well - you cannot see the blue in any of the normally exposed (ie, were you can distinguish hotspot from spill) photos. I was wondering why many of your photos look so odd (pure giant hotspots) and now realize that you have massively overexposed the beams - so hotspot and spill blend into one white giant white spot - to bring out that blue corona for the camera. The human eye, with it’s natural auto exposure, simply cannot do that.
The “X” of the emitter in the beam when inches from a wall is (from my understanding) what you get with smooth reflectors - orange peel smooths that out. Here’s an old photo with one smooth reflector thrower (far left) among a bunch of OP reflector lights:
Also not an issue in normal use, and having a smooth reflector helps with the throw and hotspot definition, from what would naturally be a very floody light (tiny head).
Your PWM points are well taken, I know how to visually detect PWM and now do see something on the same modes you specify, but it looks much faster than my 47s Mini and Malkoff MDC AA, which I understood to be high frequency. Not so sure it’s true PWM or some sort oscillation in the current regulation that the LD12 is known for. I don’t have any equipment to test it, other than to sweep the light across a DSLR on time exposure - three lights held together would be the most telling (D25, a true PWM, and true current regulated). Maybe I’ll get around to it.
My knurling on my ’14 Ti is clean and has a much nicer tactile feel than my ’12 Ti’s - it’s actually nice and smooth without being too slippery. I could file my finger nails most light’s knurling, but not this one.
I don’t have anything to measure color temp, but I have 4 Nichia N219A lights and, as usual, each has a slightly different tint. My ET version is the warmest, but I looks quite close to the others, and the L10 I posted in the pix above. I know ET states the N219B but someone at CPF pointed out that it is actually an N219A - at least my early model is. I can’t be sure what yours is with the light on in your pix, but here’s the post that identifies the difference.
Hey ToyKeeper, now that I think about it, perhaps your excess lumen problem stems from a transition from the N219A to the N219B! The later emitter is supposed to be more efficient, so if ET set the specs based upon the early versions with an N219A, then swapped to the more efficient emitter, without a corresponding driver re-program, it might very well produce the excess lumen outputs on your example. That would also mean, your light is NOT an anomaly, and all N219B emitters will have the problem until (and if) they decide to reprogram the driver (or revise the specs :D)
(Awaiting to hear your emitter version).
EDIT… Nah, thinking more about it, there’s no way a more efficient emitter swap is going to yield a 8x/4x lumen increase on ML/L for the same current draw - there has to be some re-program [error] in there. If it did, I’d glad take a AA light that could do 4 lumens for 150 hrs :bigsmile:
They said I’d need to return it via the store where I bought it… which I was hoping to avoid, since GoingGear has been great and I prefer not to burden them with someone else’s problem.
I find that Zebralight’s moon modes measure below spec even on their own scale, but I still find the output to be at a useful level. The highest moon mode on my Zebralights is actually what I’d consider the ideal level of output, even if it’s only 0.1 lm instead of 0.3 lm. I can’t complain about the runtime, either… one of mine gets used like 6-8 hours per night as a night light and only needs a recharge once every month or two.
The human eye has a much wider dynamic range than most cameras, so I usually take three exposures to show what the human eye can see in just one viewing.
As for the blue ring, I’ve found it distracting. While using the light indoors, I can see the blue ring as far as 5 meters away. This is generally the case when I’m looking down a long room; the walls next to me have a bright blue crescent on them.
The blue ring goes away if I add diffuser film though, which I intend to do once I have other issues sorted out. It seems to improve the tint a little too. I’d really like to see the beam without the lens though.
This is a light-orange-peel reflector. I don’t see the x-shaped beam pattern on any of my smooth-reflector lights, or on any of my other orange-peel lights. Actually, I don’t see it on any of my other lights regardless of the type. It’s not a big deal though; just a tiny quirk which makes the D25A unique. Its light cone has the narrowest point about 8cm in front of the lens, instead of at the lens itself like most lights.
This D25A has full-on PWM, not high-frequency noise or oscillations.
My ZL SC52 has high-frequency oscillations on its L1 mode, and my JB RRT01 has noise/oscillations on several of its levels. I can see it, but only when I’m specifically looking for it with my usual PWM test. Those two oscillate quickly back and forth between two nearby brightness levels in order to get an average output somewhere in-between. The D25A isn’t like that though. It strobes completely on and off in a manner which looks identical to the common, cheap nanjg driver at 4.5 kHz… and I see it even when I’m not looking for it.
FWIW, the reason I see the 4.5 kHz PWM is because my eyes are weird and don’t do “saccadic masking” very well. This video explains more, if you’re curious. Basically, the strobing catches my attention every time I move my eyes while using a PWM-based light to look at stuff. Instead of the usual blur I’d see while moving my eyes, I see a bunch of discrete frames, especially on reflections, and it’s distracting. Also annoying when I encounter PWM-based LED tail lights on the road.
My D25A definitely has a Nichia 219B in it. It looks different than my 219A lights, and identical to my 219B lights.
All my Nichia 219 lights are spec’d at 4500K 92CRI, but the 219B lights appear to be actually around 5000K. I looked for others with 219B emitters, and they mentioned having similar results; the 219B we’ve all gotten has been significantly cooler in tint. So, I figured the D25A would be around 5000K too, especially since that’s what EagleTac said in their spec. But it’s the warmest of all my 219s, roughly the same color temperature as my ZL H52Fw (spec’d at 4400K), warmer than my 219A lights (about 4500K), and cooler than my ZL H51w (spec’d at 4200K). I don’t have a lot of lights in that range to compare against though, because I prefer slighly cooler tints.
I don’t have a way to measure CRI, but visually the D25A 219 doesn’t make colors “pop” anywhere near as well as my other Nichia 219 lights. It looks roughly on par with the ZL H52Fw, except that it’s more yellow and the H52Fw is more pink. I prefer the pink hue since I don’t see red quite as well as green or blue and the tint corrects for the bias in my eyes.
That is actually quite possible. If I recall correctly, the N219B has a bin available with significantly lower Vf, and if they used that bin it might look quite a bit brighter at the same voltage. But others reported really bright moon/low modes with Cree emitters, so I kind of doubt it. Apparently the anomaly isn’t this unit… probably the entire mid-2014 batch.
How about 2.9 lm for 96 hours? That exists… it’s not quite as bright or quite as long, but it’s available today.
It’s gratifying to see that not everyone buys the PWM-is-just-circuit-noise story. If it was just noise, then my camera couldn’t see it.
Here’s a video I did for the D25A mini showing PWM, which on their web site they say is constant-current. I believe what happened is that at some point EagleTac stopped using constant current circuits to get better tint, which their customers were/are complaining about. And they neglected to update all of their spec sheets—best of both worlds amirite?
It’s really easy to see PWM. Just turn the light on and wave a thin, stiff white sheet through the beam really quickly. For this purpose, I’ve been using a pupil distance measurement ruler from Zenni Optical. It seems almost ideal — thinner and stiffer than a business card, long and narrow, and white.
Here’s what it looks like when checking PWM on my BST-wide on “low”. Its PWM runs at 188 Hz (measured via sound tuner plus the audible whine it makes sometimes), at a duty cycle of 11% (measured via pixel measurements of that photo, and verified against official spec):
The D25A looks similar except that the frames are thinner and much closer together. It’s difficult to get good pictures of it, but I could probably do so if necessary. The D25A’s frames are only about 1mm to 2mm apart, which is consistent with all my nanjg-based lights. The nanjg PWM runs at 4.5 kHz, so I’m assuming the D25A does too.
I know everyone has different moonlight mode preferences, but if ZL had been remotely accurate, I wouldn’t have wasted my time with the SC52. My H51w (0.18) was nice, and I was looking for brighter, but then rec’d something spec’d twice as bright (0.34) yet with less than half the output - go figure. It also doesn’t make any sense to me to have three ML options, but all of them below 0.1 lms.
We can agree to disagree on the blue and X, just offering another opinion - I can’t see either in normal use.
I’m the same with PWM, it catches my attention in reflections when moving my eyes quickly (the way I prefer testing for it) and I also find it distracting. I ran the time exposure sweep picture I mentioned before and now agree it does look like full on PWM, L > R, SC52, Quark AA, D25A, MDC AA, ~3 lms:
I thought it might have been some sort of oscillation since this is THE fastest PWM I’ve ever seen - I can barely detect it, with the reflection or pencil fanning method, and I’m sweeping those lights in the photo as fast as I can. I don’t know the Hz, but the MDC and 47s Mini are said to be HF PWM but can I easily detect those. Also THIS is an old photo of my ’12 D25A vs. a Quark on ML where the light goes “pseudo-PWM” on low voltage batts (cellphone detection method included)… it never really is fully “off” so is not truly PWM… the Hz is very slow though and quite annoying, and another reason I think the D25A has poor regulation on ML.
Toykeeper,
It was not my intention to be confrontational, but I felt compelled to question your review based upon your calibration to ZL lumens (sorry, but what I consider to be one of the most exaggerating and inaccurate starting points) and comparing that to what I found to be one of the most accurate (well, at least my samples). But you know, and have well stated, all the key points (ie, ZL scale 40-50% more liberal than ET scale, L2a ~0.1, ML below spec even by their own scale) and appear to have well accounted for them. So between that, the “B” emitter switch, and PWM points (news to me), I wave the white flag and say “Uncle!” I think you have done an excellent job on the review, and look forward to your future reviews.
My apologies for any troubles I may have caused.
Racer,
I used to use the cellphone camera method to detect PWM but have picked up some false readings, and in both directions. For example, HERE is an old pic of my MDC AA on the same mode. And I also don’t believe in the current regulated “tint shift” thing - THIS pic shows all lights at ~100 lumens on top and moonlight on bottom - can you tell which lights are current regulated and which are PWM?
That’s a really interesting picture. First time I’ve seen the SC52’s L1 oscillations captured on film. I haven’t tried to get an image of it because it seemed like it’d be very difficult. You must be very quick!
I’m also going to have a hard time capturing the Qlite driver’s PWM in an image, since it runs at 19 kHz instead of the usual 4.5 kHz. It’s fast enough that I don’t notice it during use, and can barely even see it with the card-waving method.
However, I just today discovered that I can build a spectrometer from inexpensive parts, and I’m really excited about it. I’ve been wanting to map the spectral output of lights for a long time, and sometime soon maybe I can. (especially interested in comparing a N219 against my BST-wide and the sun… but it’ll also be neat to see how the D25A 219 compares against a N219 without the AR coating)
First, on a light with a similar blue halo (Olight S10, 2012 edition), removing the lens gets rid of the halo and makes the beam like 500K cooler and much whiter in color. This mostly confirms that I should be able to fix the tint and CRI issues by swapping the D25A’s lens for a plain piece of glass. That is, assuming I can get it apart.
Second, I got a slightly older aluminum D25A today (it was on a really good sale), and it has some major differences. Its moon mode is only a fraction as bright as my titanium model’s moon mode. Also, the lens is actually user-replaceable like the specs say. The front bezel comes off easily to expose the lens and reflector and LED. The head and body threads also swapped gender, and the head is narrower than on the titanium model. It seems the titanium version has a completely different head design than the aluminum model.
The aluminum model still has PWM on some levels though, and its moon mode has an initial pre-flash before it steps down to the correct level. But overall it’s much closer to spec.
I updated the OP with “Regular D25A Measurements”. I measured another D25A, a cool white XM-L2 model that I think is from 2013. It’s much closer to spec.
Tint: Not sure, blue-ish white with a primary blue halo around the outside of the spill. So, definitely cool white.
Lumen specs are listed as OTF lm / emitter lm, since EagleTac lists both on their site.
D25A-XML2 low / “moon-mode enabled” group:
Low (spec=0.5lm/1lm): 0.43 lm, current-controlled
Med (spec=9lm/11lm): 12.1 lm, with PWM
High (spec=85lm/121lm): 121.9 lm, current-controlled
D25A-XML2 high / “moon-mode disabled” group:
Low (spec=6lm): 5.86 lm, with PWM
Med (spec=20lm): 23.62 lm, with PWM
High (spec=85lm/121lm): 121.9 lm, current-controlled
This was, mostly, pretty close to the “emitter lumens” values specified on EagleTac’s site. Their “OTF lumens” specs seem low though, compared to the ZL scale my light box is calibrated to.
I was actually a bit surprised at how closely the measured output resembled the specs. Sure, it mostly matches the “emitter lumens” instead of “OTF lumens”, but at least it matches some part of the spec. And apparently ET’s “emitter lumens” are about the same as ZL’s lumen specs. Just FWIW. I mean, the numbers match up really closely, if you ever need to convert from one to the other.
I’d love a D25A Ti-219 with the lumen levels of the XM-L2 aluminum model (maybe a bit lower on high/turbo though), the titanium body, and a plain piece of glass instead of the AR-coated lens. Sigh.
Hello, Toykeeper… glad you found a decent sample to test. Your results appear consistent with my tests between the two lights and also with your statement in your OP that ZL and ET differ by ~40-50% in lumen scale. As you know I consider ET’s specs to be more ANSI accurate for reasons I mention in post 21 above, and because the ET/47s scale matches most of my light collection. The D25A has been one of my preferred lightbox calibration lights.
- I think with moonlight mode off, Low and Med spec should be 3 lms and 18 lms since the ET footnote say “6x and 2x, the L and M with MM-on.”
- Curious what voltage cell you used to test the ML mode since I find the relatively poorly regulated ML to be quite volatile depending on V. ie, I get half the ML output on <1.3v NiMh as >1.6v Alks or L91s.
- Might be interesting to run a side-by-side output/runtime test of the D25A 85 lm/2.5 hr mode vs SC52 116/3 hr mode.
- Interestingly, I have not read of any other owners of an N219 D25As having massive out of spec low modes… on the other forum that is. Perhaps you really have received a bad sample?
ToyKeeper, you said in the the review that your 219B in D25A ti is a little bit warmer or yellowish than your other 219Bs. I just read from the datasheet (if I understand it right) that they have cool and warm tints too. I just bought a 219B from IOS and it has been described as “D220” in the specs. It does have a little bit of yellow but I don’t mind that because I’m used to warmer tint now. If you can see from the table lum. flux of D220 is min = 220 and max =240. So, I guess the higher “ranks” (like D260, D280 and D280) will have cooler tint almost to white and that’s why the lum. flux is higher too.
The specs say: “With moon-mode setting disabled, lowest output will increase by about 6 times, to 4 lumen, and the second lowest output will double, to around 20 lumen”.
Even though the multiplication doesn’t work out very well, I used the numbers from ET’s specs.
Fresh-off-the-charger Eneloop. I don’t have alkalines on lithium primaries to use for testing.
It might be, but I’m not doing runtime tests. I enjoy selfbuilt’s runtime graphs, but unfortunately he didn’t test SC52 vs D25A… he only tested SC52 vs the 2xAA version (D25A2).
Something is clearly wrong about the ET specs. It’s a 219B but they claim it’s from the “B11” bin which doesn’t exist. That’s not even the correct naming scheme. It should say D220, which is the brightest bin available for the 92-CRI emitter they claim to be using. Then again, it should probably also say it’s a 4500K tint instead of 5000K tint, but this particular bin of 219Bs seems to be noticeably colder than the equivalent bin of 219As, so I can understand claiming it as 5000K instead of 4500K.
In any case, the yellowish tint isn’t normal. Anything with 90+ CRI at 4500K should look white, not yellow. I have ten lights with Nichia 219s in them, and the EagleTac looks rather different than any of the others. I have three lights with too-strong AR lens coating, and I can remove the lens from the other two. All three make the beam warmer and color-tinted, and all three look quite a bit better when I take the lens off.
So, I’m pretty sure the tint issue is the lens, not the emitter.
It occurred to me just now that I can actually test it; no need to guess. I took the removable lens from my regular D25A and held it over another Nichia 219B light, with a third 219 shining next to it for reference. When I shine the white 219B through the D25A lens, the beam turns warmer and yellow and colors no longer look nice in it.
