XP-L High Intensity vs XP-L vs XP-L DeDomed

Flashlight Modding and DIY Parts
4

Thanks! :beer: :beer:

5

Whoa. Nice setup!

Thanks for sharing the info!
No more dedomes!

6

Thanks for great review!

It’s very helpful.

7

We need to organise a get together, a few us distract pflexpro, while I steal the sphere.

8

Wow thanks for the comparison. Exactly what I have been waiting for.
The XPL HI 1A seems perfectly pure white, totally different from a dedomed XPL.
Now I will just wait for a nice thrower with REAL XPL HI cool white.
Thanks again! Cheers!

9

Wish you could do some outdoor beam shots to see tint difference. :slight_smile:

10

You know you’ve been robbed by a flashaholic when your integrating sphere is stolen, but the laptop sitting next to it is left behind.

11

Fixed that for you. :slight_smile:

12

come on…I just rebuilt that battery pack with 6 Panasonic 3400s.

13

HA! I was thinking the same thing…

On the other hand, Perhaps our OP has been the ultimate lurker…. ~73 posts and a member with an integrated sphere since 2013… someone has been holding out…

14

Very good news! Thanks for the comparisons.

15

I strategically did the test so the XPL HI would be left in the flashlight last. I intend on rerunning a similar test in the M1 -I want to see if an M1 with the high intensity will come close to the throw of a C8 with a standard XPL or XML2. I can do some real beam shots with that test.

I’ve also started offering the HI in the small Convoy S2 and S2+ -with such small reflectors, more throw will be a good thing and with no dedoming…why not?

16

Now that’s a sphere !!! Wonder if I can make one of those with my old Weber grill. LOL

17

I would say that your results fit into the CREE datasheets ratings, here I mean the percentage difference between the XP-L HD V5 and XP-L HI V2 is 14%
lower lumen output according to the datasheets (3A current), and you test shows 13% lower lumens at 0.5minutes mark. Yes, throw is another thing but I was only pointing out the lumen difference between those 2 bins.

18

1A is not totally pure white, in the shots you see the close-up hot spot at high current, and you can see the spill is blueish. But anyway I speak from personal experience saying that 2A or even 2B will be the pure white one and the 1A is still the classic slight blueish cool white. If you are after something that gives the impression of pure white I high recommend you try those tints.

19

I think everything is fairly close. The only variation may be the dedomed. I find that sealing the emitter after dedoming lowers the output some…depending on how many coats of sealer is used. I seem to remember finding that hot dedoming yields a little higher output than solvent. If dedoming is properly done (heat dedome and 2 coats of ‘led seal’), I think the the XPL HI would have had higher output and more throw…but again, it’s close enough for me.
All of this is water under the bridge…I don’t plan on intentionally dedoming an XPL or XML2 again. I may still dedome a few XPG2 emitters…but that will be very few.

Everything in the specs pointed to the results I got, but I always want to see it for myself.

20

Thanks for the test! No more dedoming for me as well.

Tint > output in most situations.

21

Threads like this make me happy. Someone is willing to go through all the trouble to test and compare, and then post the results so others don’t have to. Thanks :beer:

22

Great testing, well thought out and performed, as all of your tests, thanks!

So the HI indeed does not seem to perform any different than a dedomed XP-L, that is good news for dedoming/tintshift-haters, a bit disappointing for those (me) who still hoped for a new level of performance.

I was planning on an output test of the HI (I have two emitters from Mouser, U5 bin), but this will make it much less exciting, I think I will skip that until after my (two weeks) camping trip

I'd love to steal your integrating sphere too (one can not have too many integrating spheres ), it looks very neat. Did you make it yourself? (it looks so slick, it could be a commercial one). Would you elaborate on the features?

23

I see another (for me) interesting thing in your graph, I wonder how significant it is: the domed XP-L has a dead-contant output after 1 minute, while both dome-less XP-L's show a slow decrease of output throughout the three minutes test-run. Any idea's what reason there could be for that? (I don't btw).