Review: NEW-C56B flashlight - Beam shots added

I'm not a flashaholic so much as an outdoor enthusiast who needs light, and lots of it, to climb after the sun goes down. I also need light to bike at night. Recently I bought a kit from dealextreme that included a NEW-C56B flashlight, an ultrafire 2400 mAh battery and a charger for about $22. Seemed like a good entry into XM-L emitters which I believe are most likely to provide me with the high volume floody light I need while climbing, and will hopefully be able to double as a bike light.

I measured the current at the tail cap with the battery at about 3.9V. High - 2.3A, Med 1.1A, Low 0.5A. Measured with a quality multimeter. My cheap meter at home reported over 3A on high...

A few Diameters: Lens D=22.82 mm - Pill D=19.44 mm - Star D=16.0 mm - Driver D= 17.2 mm

I bought a pair of Trustfire Flames. Their added length was a little too much for this flashlight. Screwing the tail cap in all the way caused the flashlight to remain off. The little brass nipple was closing the clicky button. By removing the brass nipple, and only using the spring, Trustfire Flames are able to fit without problems. They have a significantly longer duration than the original battery suggesting that the 2400 mAh is an exaggeration.

I went with a zoom thinking it would let me dual purpose this light. After receiving the light I'm not so sure. But first here is the light:

The Kit seems like a good price for those of us without charger or battery already. The charger says it supplies a current of 650 mA, but I measured it and found it to be about 450 mA:

The light was relatively easy to disassemble. The anodizing was thin, the threads were a bit rough, but the fit was generally good. There wasn't any grease, and after applying some the threads ran smooth, and the zoom was much easier to use. Overall the quality was higher than the price led me to believe it might be.

The crown holding the lens is aluminum. The lens was plastic. The reflector is flat stainless held into an aluminum cap by a ring of hard plastic. The tail cap seemed like the worst part of the package. It is hard to see in the photo, but the brass nipple is held in place by plastic. The plastic is malformed, or maybe melted, and it looks like the nipple might eventually come out. As it happens the nipple needs to be removed for longer protected batteries anyway.

The pill is aluminum, and fits very well into the light. The soldering is decent, and although it lacks care it is at least relatively clean. Not sure about the driver, maybe someone here can help me out based on the photos. There doesn't really seem to be any thermal compound present. I added some between the pill and the body, but the light still overheats if left on high for too long.

The Pill slips in. The reflector screws in on top, and also acts as a hard stop for the zoom. The emitter is pretty decently centered, but it sits pretty far below the reflector. It seems like significant light might be lost into the gap between the star and the bottom of the reflector. This would only add to any heat problems. I am considering either forming the reflector into a bit of a cone, or bringing it closer to the top of the pill. I'd appreciate the opinions of others. Will this let more light out? Can I do something about this?

I took these in a clearing. The distance to the bench and rock is about 20-30 feet, and to the trees in the background about 40-50 feet. The only other powerful light I have is a bike light - Light & Motion Vega 200 - that the manufacturer claims is 200 lumen. Apparently L&M are relatively honest about the output of their lights so high should be close to 200 lumen.

I've noticed that on low the pulsing of the LED is noticeable. Pulsing can also be seen on medium when I use this as a light source while taking pictures with my compact camera. I can't see the pulsing with the naked eye on medium, only through the cameras lcd.

Control Shot:

New-C56B Flood High-Mid-Low:

Light & Motion Vega 200 High-Mid-Low:

New-C56B Zoom High-Mid-Low:

The closest comparison might be the New-C56B on Low to the L&M Vega 200 on high:

It is very easy to do if you have a camera that will let you use Manual mode.

Go to Manual (Usually an "M" on the dial)

Shutter: 1/2"

Aperture; wide open (lowest possible number, like f2.8 or f3.5)

ISO 400

Try to use a tripod if you can, or a good solid surface, or you will get fuzzy images if you hand-hold a 1/2" exposure.

If you can do custom white balance, set it for 5400 degrees. Then the tint will adjust in your photos for different flashlights, instead of the camera trying to make the tint all look the same.

Check a couple images. If the bright spots look "blown out" you can move your shutter speed down to 1/3" or increase your ISO to 200. Better camera's with wider Apertures will need this. With a DSLR, it would be rare that you would have to shoot slower than 1/3 second. With more inexpensive P&S cameras, you will probably need the full 1/2" or even .6" Shutter speed.

If you use those setting consistently, you will get good comparative beamshots on all your lights.

Is this a specific exposure value people aim for for cross-comparison? If so what is the specific aperture that people use? If not than I'll just aim for settings that best represent what I'm seeing.

Oh and thanks for pointing out the white balance setting. I don't think I would have thought to do that.

Nice review!

If you dont mind what size is the led star, driver and lens

I don't have calipers at home. I'll take some measurements tomorrow though.

If you look at Foy’s beamshots, he always uses f2.8 and 1/4" Shutter. I use 1/4" or 1/3" Shutter

Use the lowest aperture number (fstop) you have available on your camera.

I don't know that there is a "common" or accepted camera setting for beamshots. The most well-know beam shot site on the web (fonarik.com) uses 13-second exposures at f16 and 800 ISO. They have more beamshot comparisons than any site I know of, you can pick several different types of shots and flashlight modes for each of the torches they test. One of these days I want to try using the same settings, it is an interesting setup. Every one of their lights is tested at the exact same setting and in the same environment.

thanks N8

Aloha and welcome to BLF n8ben!

Nice review also.

where in canada are you from?

Welcom to BLF n8ben!

There is no need to mess with that "reflector", since it is in fact a screen designed to keep any stray rays reflected from the emitter star from reaching the lens and is therefore positioned correctly as is. Ideally, the lens should receive only the direct rays from the emitter - no reflections.

So it's actually the other way round: if you are getting light rings around the hotspot, painting the top surface of that screen and the aluminium around it matte black should clean the beam.

Wow! And he jumps right in with a review! Nice! I have wondered about that light.

Welcome, N8ben.

Lens D=22.82 mm - Pill D=19.44 mm - Star D=16.0 mm - Driver D= 17.2 mm

Ok, I guess I'll try and have a look at some beam shots before I try to take some to get a better feel of what other people do. Thanks, I'll check out that site also.

Nova Scotia

Thanks for the quick lesson. I just don't think I understood exactly how the zoom was going to work before I got it. I knew it was a focused beam, I just didn't realize it would sacrifice some light at the source. I am getting rings due to internal reflections, but they won't matter too much for climbing. I suppose they would annoy other bikers though so I'll consider painting.

It's good to have you here, n8ben!

Sweet first post - A top nice review. Super start :-) Glad you found us here. Hope you enjoy it as much as the rest of the gang.

Thanks n8ben

welcome to BLF n8ben

Thanks for the kind and welcoming words everyone, and thank you all for making so much information on lighting available on the internet.

Hi there n8ben, thanks very much for the review! Well done. Frontpage’d and Sticky’d.

Look at that, there is actually a sub forum for reviews!