LH351B 3000/2200K .GB Upd 4 October. 2018.

669 posts / 0 new
Last post
Agro
Offline
Last seen: 23 hours 17 min ago
Joined: 05/14/2017 - 11:16
Posts: 2731
Location: Ślōnsk

My LEDs are here. Thanks AEDe!

mrheosuper
Offline
Last seen: 3 hours 4 min ago
Joined: 09/30/2016 - 12:44
Posts: 1223
Location: Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam

Is there any chance we can get the Groupbuy reopen, i really love this led

Forgot my pen

The_Driver
The_Driver's picture
Offline
Last seen: 8 hours 26 min ago
Joined: 10/20/2016 - 05:51
Posts: 1176
Location: Germany

The M43 with 219B-V1 R9050 already does 4400lm. The 219C version should do maybe 20% more. Your Samsung LEDs should be more similar to the 219C.

MustSimon
MustSimon's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 months 1 week ago
Joined: 04/18/2012 - 11:08
Posts: 55
Location: Indonesia

Mine arrived. Thanks AEDe!

Barkuti
Barkuti's picture
Offline
Last seen: 19 min 24 sec ago
Joined: 02/19/2014 - 14:46
Posts: 2878
Location: Alhama de Murcia, Spain

The_Driver wrote:
The M43 with 219B-V1 R9050 already does 4400lm. The 219C version should do maybe 20% more. Your Samsung LEDs should be more similar to the 219C.

The Noctigon M43 is an unregulated flashlight. This means those LH351D emitters won't draw as much current as 219Cs in it, not even close! On the other hand, while the LH351Ds may output a comparable deal of light, they're going to do it at much lower current draw and heat.

 

Cheers Party

The_Driver
The_Driver's picture
Offline
Last seen: 8 hours 26 min ago
Joined: 10/20/2016 - 05:51
Posts: 1176
Location: Germany
Barkuti wrote:

The_Driver wrote:
The M43 with 219B-V1 R9050 already does 4400lm. The 219C version should do maybe 20% more. Your Samsung LEDs should be more similar to the 219C.

The Noctigon M43 is an unregulated flashlight. This means those LH351D emitters won’t draw as much current as 219Cs in it, not even close! On the other hand, while the LH351Ds may output a comparable deal of light, they’re going to do it at much lower current draw and heat.


 


Cheers Party

Your are mistaking it with the other, smaller Noctigon lights. The M43 is the big one with boost driver. It regulates perfectly in all modes. In the turbo mode each of the 12 LEDs is driven with 2A when the light is cool.

Barkuti
Barkuti's picture
Offline
Last seen: 19 min 24 sec ago
Joined: 02/19/2014 - 14:46
Posts: 2878
Location: Alhama de Murcia, Spain

The_Driver, by the time I shot my above reply I was in a deeply tipsy state, and guess that is the reason somehow I understood you were sort of complaining about low output with LH351Ds in an M43. Nothing more, nothing else. 

 

Cheers Smile

SKV89
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 6 min ago
Joined: 12/10/2017 - 12:46
Posts: 1513
Location: US
The_Driver wrote:
The M43 with 219B-V1 R9050 already does 4400lm. The 219C version should do maybe 20% more. Your Samsung LEDs should be more similar to the 219C.

I didn’t know there was a version of the M43 with the 219B. But do remember that most manufacturers do not measure their lights in an ANSI calibrated lumen sphere. I measure my lights in the TA lumen sphere with adjusted with Maukka’s ANSI calibration lights. The majority of lights produce much less lumens than the manufacturer’s ratings.

The_Driver
The_Driver's picture
Offline
Last seen: 8 hours 26 min ago
Joined: 10/20/2016 - 05:51
Posts: 1176
Location: Germany
SKV89 wrote:
The_Driver wrote:
The M43 with 219B-V1 R9050 already does 4400lm. The 219C version should do maybe 20% more. Your Samsung LEDs should be more similar to the 219C.

I didn’t know there was a version of the M43 with the 219B. But do remember that most manufacturers do not measure their lights in an ANSI calibrated lumen sphere. I measure my lights in the TA lumen sphere with adjusted with Maukka’s ANSI calibration lights. The majority of lights produce much less lumens than the manufacturer’s ratings.

Actually they do. At least 95% of them, most of them state it. Also, a sphere is not calibrated according to ANSI. The ANSI FL1 standard describes how a flashlight is to be measured using a calibrated sphere.

The only upper range manufacturer where I have heard of problems is Armytek.

The 219B-V1 variant of the light was only available for the first year or so and was dimmer than all the others while costing more. It also gets hotter more quickly. But back then it was the brightest high-cri flashlight available.

The_Driver
The_Driver's picture
Offline
Last seen: 8 hours 26 min ago
Joined: 10/20/2016 - 05:51
Posts: 1176
Location: Germany
Barkuti wrote:

The_Driver, by the time I shot my above reply I was in a deeply tipsy state, and guess that is the reason somehow I understood you were sort of complaining about low output with LH351Ds in an M43. Nothing more, nothing else.

Well yes, the Lumen value should be a bit higher. That would be extremely inefficient for 12 4mm^2 LEDs at 2A each.

SKV89
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 6 min ago
Joined: 12/10/2017 - 12:46
Posts: 1513
Location: US

I highly doubt the M43 with 219B can produce 4400 lumens. The readings I posted earlier for all three of my M43s were measured with the TA lumen sphere, with reduction factor applied to match the Maukka calibration lights. You can read all about it in the TA lumen sphere thread and Maukka’s calibration lights thread.

Texas_Ace
Texas_Ace's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 hours 4 min ago
Joined: 03/24/2016 - 07:44
Posts: 7725
Location: Everything is brighter in Texas

This store has the lee filters on sale for the next few days, I just ordered an 804, 803 and 802

http://www.ebaystores.com/Knight-Sound-and-Lighting/_i.html?_nkw=lee&sub...

shirnask
Offline
Last seen: 32 min 32 sec ago
Joined: 03/21/2016 - 23:58
Posts: 527
Location: Louisiana

Texas_Ace wrote:
This store has the lee filters on sale for the next few days, I just ordered an 840, 803 and 802

http://www.ebaystores.com/Knight-Sound-and-Lighting/_i.html?_nkw=lee&sub...

840 or 804?

Texas_Ace
Texas_Ace's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 hours 4 min ago
Joined: 03/24/2016 - 07:44
Posts: 7725
Location: Everything is brighter in Texas

shirnask wrote:
Texas_Ace wrote:
This store has the lee filters on sale for the next few days, I just ordered an 840, 803 and 802

http://www.ebaystores.com/Knight-Sound-and-Lighting/_i.html?_nkw=lee&sub...

840 or 804?

Opps 804

shirnask
Offline
Last seen: 32 min 32 sec ago
Joined: 03/21/2016 - 23:58
Posts: 527
Location: Louisiana

Thought so – Ordered the same – best price I have seen with $5.00 shipping.

Thanks, TA

Texas_Ace
Texas_Ace's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 hours 4 min ago
Joined: 03/24/2016 - 07:44
Posts: 7725
Location: Everything is brighter in Texas

shirnask wrote:
Thought so – Ordered the same – best price I have seen with $5.00 shipping.

Thanks, TA

Yep, same here which is why I ordered 3 sheets, the shipping remains $5 even if you order multiples which is nice.

The_Driver
The_Driver's picture
Offline
Last seen: 8 hours 26 min ago
Joined: 10/20/2016 - 05:51
Posts: 1176
Location: Germany
SKV89 wrote:
I highly doubt the M43 with 219B can produce 4400 lumens. The readings I posted earlier for all three of my M43s were measured with the TA lumen sphere, with reduction factor applied to match the Maukka calibration lights. You can read all about it in the TA lumen sphere thread and Maukka’s calibration lights thread.

This test from djozz proves that it’s possible.

The 4000K 219B-V1 R9050 does 470lm at 2A (the 5000K variant in the light should be the same or brighter). 12 of them 5640 led lm. After you subtract the usual transmission losses you get around 4600 otf lumen. They state 4400. Seems realistic.

This is much dimmer than some of the other M43 variants, some do 7000-8000lm.

Agro
Offline
Last seen: 23 hours 17 min ago
Joined: 05/14/2017 - 11:16
Posts: 2731
Location: Ślōnsk
The_Driver wrote:
SKV89 wrote:
The_Driver wrote:
The M43 with 219B-V1 R9050 already does 4400lm. The 219C version should do maybe 20% more. Your Samsung LEDs should be more similar to the 219C.

I didn’t know there was a version of the M43 with the 219B. But do remember that most manufacturers do not measure their lights in an ANSI calibrated lumen sphere. I measure my lights in the TA lumen sphere with adjusted with Maukka’s ANSI calibration lights. The majority of lights produce much less lumens than the manufacturer’s ratings.

Actually they do. At least 95% of them, most of them state it. Also, a sphere is not calibrated according to ANSI. The ANSI FL1 standard describes how a flashlight is to be measured using a calibrated sphere.

The only upper range manufacturer where I have heard of problems is Armytek.

The 219B-V1 variant of the light was only available for the first year or so and was dimmer than all the others while costing more. It also gets hotter more quickly. But back then it was the brightest high-cri flashlight available.


I remember maukka test of some Zebra that showed way lower performance than stated by the manufacturer.
SKV89
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 6 min ago
Joined: 12/10/2017 - 12:46
Posts: 1513
Location: US
Agro wrote:
I remember maukka test of some Zebra that showed way lower performance than stated by the manufacturer.

Same here. Zebralights and Armyteks are usually lower than manufacturer’s ratings if tested using ANSI calibrated standards. Fenix, Olight, Acebeam, and Thrunite numbers are usually closer to ANSI lumens.

SKV89
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 6 min ago
Joined: 12/10/2017 - 12:46
Posts: 1513
Location: US
The_Driver wrote:
SKV89 wrote:
I highly doubt the M43 with 219B can produce 4400 lumens. The readings I posted earlier for all three of my M43s were measured with the TA lumen sphere, with reduction factor applied to match the Maukka calibration lights. You can read all about it in the TA lumen sphere thread and Maukka’s calibration lights thread.

This test from djozz proves that it’s possible.

The 4000K 219B-V1 R9050 does 470lm at 2A (the 5000K variant in the light should be the same or brighter). 12 of them 5640 led lm. After you subtract the usual transmission losses you get around 4600 otf lumen. They state 4400. Seems realistic.

This is much dimmer than some of the other M43 variants, some do 7000-8000lm.

Those are Djozz lumens. I’m not sure how he calibrated his sphere. Even the famous TA emitter tests show lumens much higher than ANSI levels because it was based off of his previous calibration, which is over 30% too high and most DIY lumen spheres are similarly high. Now all of TA’s lumen spheres sold are based on Maukka’s $10k+ certified lumen sphere calibration.

The_Driver
The_Driver's picture
Offline
Last seen: 8 hours 26 min ago
Joined: 10/20/2016 - 05:51
Posts: 1176
Location: Germany
SKV89 wrote:
The_Driver wrote:
SKV89 wrote:
I highly doubt the M43 with 219B can produce 4400 lumens. The readings I posted earlier for all three of my M43s were measured with the TA lumen sphere, with reduction factor applied to match the Maukka calibration lights. You can read all about it in the TA lumen sphere thread and Maukka’s calibration lights thread.

This test from djozz proves that it’s possible.

The 4000K 219B-V1 R9050 does 470lm at 2A (the 5000K variant in the light should be the same or brighter). 12 of them 5640 led lm. After you subtract the usual transmission losses you get around 4600 otf lumen. They state 4400. Seems realistic.

This is much dimmer than some of the other M43 variants, some do 7000-8000lm.

Those are Djozz lumens. I’m not sure how he calibrated his sphere. Even the famous TA emitter tests show lumens much higher than ANSI levels because it was based off of his previous calibration, which is over 30% too high and most DIY lumen spheres are similarly high. Now all of TA’s lumen spheres sold are based on Maukka’s $10k+ certified lumen sphere calibration.

You could easily check this by comparing a value under 1.5A with those in the datasheet.

Djozz actually uses a calibrated lux meter which accuratelY measures different tints. He generally seems to go to the highest effort to ensure the best possible accuracy.

Maukkas lights with measurement certificate are nice, but they don’t make a cheap Luxmeter more accurate. It will still have-Problems with some tints.

Barkuti
Barkuti's picture
Offline
Last seen: 19 min 24 sec ago
Joined: 02/19/2014 - 14:46
Posts: 2878
Location: Alhama de Murcia, Spain

Bah! vwpieces had all of this light measuring stuff mastered long ago. Check out his fine & handy light meter:

 

Source: **Featured Review** Probe Shiny Handy Light Zoomie Super Bright LED

 

Party

SKV89
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 6 min ago
Joined: 12/10/2017 - 12:46
Posts: 1513
Location: US
The_Driver wrote:
SKV89 wrote:
The_Driver wrote:
SKV89 wrote:
I highly doubt the M43 with 219B can produce 4400 lumens. The readings I posted earlier for all three of my M43s were measured with the TA lumen sphere, with reduction factor applied to match the Maukka calibration lights. You can read all about it in the TA lumen sphere thread and Maukka’s calibration lights thread.

This test from djozz proves that it’s possible.

The 4000K 219B-V1 R9050 does 470lm at 2A (the 5000K variant in the light should be the same or brighter). 12 of them 5640 led lm. After you subtract the usual transmission losses you get around 4600 otf lumen. They state 4400. Seems realistic.

This is much dimmer than some of the other M43 variants, some do 7000-8000lm.

Those are Djozz lumens. I’m not sure how he calibrated his sphere. Even the famous TA emitter tests show lumens much higher than ANSI levels because it was based off of his previous calibration, which is over 30% too high and most DIY lumen spheres are similarly high. Now all of TA’s lumen spheres sold are based on Maukka’s $10k+ certified lumen sphere calibration.

You could easily check this by comparing a value under 1.5A with those in the datasheet.

Djozz actually uses a calibrated lux meter which accuratelY measures different tints. He generally seems to go to the highest effort to ensure the best possible accuracy.

Maukkas lights with measurement certificate are nice, but they don’t make a cheap Luxmeter more accurate. It will still have-Problems with some tints.

But lux is not lumens. If your setup is not accurately calibrated, it doesn’t matter how accurate the lux meter is because you will not be able to accurately convert lux into lumens.

Jaded
Jaded's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 week 5 days ago
Joined: 11/27/2017 - 08:02
Posts: 185

How’s the tint of the 5000K (RT) compared to the 4000K (T*) of the 90 CRI version?

The_Driver
The_Driver's picture
Offline
Last seen: 8 hours 26 min ago
Joined: 10/20/2016 - 05:51
Posts: 1176
Location: Germany
SKV89 wrote:
The_Driver wrote:
SKV89 wrote:
The_Driver wrote:
SKV89 wrote:
I highly doubt the M43 with 219B can produce 4400 lumens. The readings I posted earlier for all three of my M43s were measured with the TA lumen sphere, with reduction factor applied to match the Maukka calibration lights. You can read all about it in the TA lumen sphere thread and Maukka’s calibration lights thread.

This test from djozz proves that it’s possible.

The 4000K 219B-V1 R9050 does 470lm at 2A (the 5000K variant in the light should be the same or brighter). 12 of them 5640 led lm. After you subtract the usual transmission losses you get around 4600 otf lumen. They state 4400. Seems realistic.

This is much dimmer than some of the other M43 variants, some do 7000-8000lm.

Those are Djozz lumens. I’m not sure how he calibrated his sphere. Even the famous TA emitter tests show lumens much higher than ANSI levels because it was based off of his previous calibration, which is over 30% too high and most DIY lumen spheres are similarly high. Now all of TA’s lumen spheres sold are based on Maukka’s $10k+ certified lumen sphere calibration.

You could easily check this by comparing a value under 1.5A with those in the datasheet.

Djozz actually uses a calibrated lux meter which accuratelY measures different tints. He generally seems to go to the highest effort to ensure the best possible accuracy.

Maukkas lights with measurement certificate are nice, but they don’t make a cheap Luxmeter more accurate. It will still have-Problems with some tints.

But lux is not lumens. If your setup is not accurately calibrated, it doesn’t matter how accurate the lux meter is because you will not be able to accurately convert lux into lumens.

Yes, but accurate calibration in the real world doesn’t just involve one value at one tint if you can’t be sure that the Luxmeter has the same accuracy at all tints (which all cheap meters don’t).

But why are we argueing here? The 4400lm of the M43 are a believable value for a light with 12 Nichia 219B-V1 LEDs driven together at around 80W. That’s actually quite inefficient.

Barkuti
Barkuti's picture
Offline
Last seen: 19 min 24 sec ago
Joined: 02/19/2014 - 14:46
Posts: 2878
Location: Alhama de Murcia, Spain

The_Driver wrote:
… The 4400lm of the M43 are a believable value for a light with 12 Nichia 219B-V1 LEDs driven together at around 80W. That's actually quite inefficient.

The technology of the 219B has already been surpassed/improved, agree. However, quite inefficient versus what kind of emitters? If low CRI ones the comparison is completely unfair since our sensitivity to the visible spectral gamut frequencies is uneven:

 

Source: Light Measurement @ TutorVista.com

 

Cheers Party

The_Driver
The_Driver's picture
Offline
Last seen: 8 hours 26 min ago
Joined: 10/20/2016 - 05:51
Posts: 1176
Location: Germany
Barkuti wrote:

The_Driver wrote:
… The 4400lm of the M43 are a believable value for a light with 12 Nichia 219B-V1 LEDs driven together at around 80W. That’s actually quite inefficient.

The technology of the 219B has already been surpassed/improved, agree. However, quite inefficient versus what kind of emitters? If low CRI ones the comparison is completely unfair since our sensitivity to the visible spectral gamut frequencies is uneven:


 



Source: Light Measurement @ TutorVista.com


 


Cheers Party

It was meant as a general statement regarding led flashlights, but in this case also regarding other high-cri lights. The 219B-V1 is ineeficient at 2A.

SKV89
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 6 min ago
Joined: 12/10/2017 - 12:46
Posts: 1513
Location: US
The_Driver wrote:
SKV89 wrote:
The_Driver wrote:
SKV89 wrote:
The_Driver wrote:
SKV89 wrote:
I highly doubt the M43 with 219B can produce 4400 lumens. The readings I posted earlier for all three of my M43s were measured with the TA lumen sphere, with reduction factor applied to match the Maukka calibration lights. You can read all about it in the TA lumen sphere thread and Maukka’s calibration lights thread.

This test from djozz proves that it’s possible.

The 4000K 219B-V1 R9050 does 470lm at 2A (the 5000K variant in the light should be the same or brighter). 12 of them 5640 led lm. After you subtract the usual transmission losses you get around 4600 otf lumen. They state 4400. Seems realistic.

This is much dimmer than some of the other M43 variants, some do 7000-8000lm.

Those are Djozz lumens. I’m not sure how he calibrated his sphere. Even the famous TA emitter tests show lumens much higher than ANSI levels because it was based off of his previous calibration, which is over 30% too high and most DIY lumen spheres are similarly high. Now all of TA’s lumen spheres sold are based on Maukka’s $10k+ certified lumen sphere calibration.

You could easily check this by comparing a value under 1.5A with those in the datasheet.

Djozz actually uses a calibrated lux meter which accuratelY measures different tints. He generally seems to go to the highest effort to ensure the best possible accuracy.

Maukkas lights with measurement certificate are nice, but they don’t make a cheap Luxmeter more accurate. It will still have-Problems with some tints.

But lux is not lumens. If your setup is not accurately calibrated, it doesn’t matter how accurate the lux meter is because you will not be able to accurately convert lux into lumens.

Yes, but accurate calibration in the real world doesn’t just involve one value at one tint if you can’t be sure that the Luxmeter has the same accuracy at all tints (which all cheap meters don’t).

But why are we argueing here? The 4400lm of the M43 are a believable value for a light with 12 Nichia 219B-V1 LEDs driven together at around 80W. That’s actually quite inefficient.

Not sure why you think we’re arguing. Just pointing things. The Maukka calibration light set includes a 5000k and 6500k light and the difference I measured with the lux meter TA included with his lumen sphere is only 0.2% even if we go down to 4000k, I doubt the CCT difference will cause the lux meter in the TA lumen sphere to deviate more than 1%. To me, it just seems unlikely but not impossible that using 219B emitters in the M43 will result in more lumens than with the LH351D 4000k 90CRI, which I read is similar in performance to the 219C or better.

Texas_Ace
Texas_Ace's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 hours 4 min ago
Joined: 03/24/2016 - 07:44
Posts: 7725
Location: Everything is brighter in Texas

There is really no reason to argue. The 219B is a good looking LED but not something we should be using much going forward when we have better LED’s available.

djozz
djozz's picture
Offline
Last seen: 7 hours 52 min ago
Joined: 09/07/2012 - 17:04
Posts: 13328
Location: Amsterdam

About “my lumen”, I try my best to keep it consistent but it is not correct and I never claimed it to be correct. In fact, as I have mentioned here and there, comparisons with reliable sources (of which maukka’s calibration is one) suggest that it is somewhere between 7% and 11% high, probably depending on spectrum as well.

I’m not happy with that but it is not way off and I stick to my calibration to keep my measurements comparable over time.

link to djozz tests 

“I used to think that top environmental problems were biodiversity loss, ecosystem collapse and climate change. I thought that thirty years of good science could address these problems. I was wrong. The top environmental problems are selfishness, greed and apathy, and to deal with these we need a cultural and spiritual transformation. And we scientists don’t know how to do that.”   (Gus Speth)

Pages