Which one would you recommend? Niwalker MF5SV1 vs BLF Q8

44 posts / 0 new
Last post

Pages

mattadores
mattadores's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 hours 20 min ago
Joined: 01/21/2019 - 18:45
Posts: 610
Location: Alberta
Which one would you recommend? Niwalker MF5SV1 vs BLF Q8

There’s a GB for 3 new Niwalker lights I found interesting. Not knowing much about Niwalker I decided to check them out here and found some very favorable reviews.

The issue is that the light I like seems like it actually ends up being very similar to the Q8 except for the price!

New Niwalker MF5SV1:
2x XHP70.2 + 1x XHP35 HI
15,000 luemns with Ansi rated 10,000 lumens* with 850m throw 440kcd
*WalkintoTheLight reiewed the nearly identical MM18JR and found that it produced 13,500 lumens even though it was rated 10,000 ansi

Thoughts:
I really like the Niwalker dual led design giving the ability to choose flood, throw or both (really like this solution compared to a zoomie!)
I know nothing about Niwalker but they seem to be very well reviewed here on BLF?
Can anyone see a difference between this MF5SV1 and the MM18JR?

Big question:
Sure the output is higher than the Q8 but they’re almost the same size and the throw is very similar which means is there any chance people would think it’s worth almost double what I can get a Q8 for?
MF5SV1 niwalker page
MM18JR niwalker page
MM18JR maukka review
MM18JR walkintothelight review
Freeme Niwalker GB

Edited by: mattadores on 03/12/2019 - 12:02
BlueSwordM
BlueSwordM's picture
Online
Last seen: 3 min 7 sec ago
Joined: 11/29/2017 - 12:34
Posts: 4570
Location: Canada

The MF5SV1 is in another completely different class than the Q8.

It has a boost driver, 2x XHP70.2s and an XHP35HI, much higher lumen output, better stock springs, a carrier strap, much higher lumen output.

The massive advantage of the Q8 though is that it uses the NarsilM UI, very easily moddable, easy to get high CRI LEDs.

My very own high current Beryllium Copper springs Gen 3:
http://budgetlightforum.com/node/67401
Liitokala Aliexpress Stores Battery Fraud: http://budgetlightforum.com/node/60547

BurningPlayd0h
BurningPlayd0h's picture
Offline
Last seen: 26 min 50 sec ago
Joined: 06/22/2018 - 02:16
Posts: 473
Location: MN

Other than what BlueSword mentioned already, the Q8 is: cheap, can run off only a single 18650 if needed, has an almost perfectly balanced beam between throw/flood but you can increase either with some XP-L HIs for throw or diffusion film for flood.

Just depends on how much performance you want/need and how much you’re willing to shell out for it.

mattadores
mattadores's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 hours 20 min ago
Joined: 01/21/2019 - 18:45
Posts: 610
Location: Alberta

Thank you for the replies!

Bluesword, I’ve read the following thread explaining the difference between drivers:
http://budgetlightforum.com/node/33820
Does the Q8 utilize a buck driver? If it’s powering 3x XHP70.2 wouldn’t that require 9v meaning it couldn’t run off a single 18650 unless heavily boosted? Or does that mean it’s using a buck driver and the leds are wired in parallel? lol more questions: can you run leds in parallel? does that just result in lower output than running in series?

Now that I have some knowledge of drivers I’d like to understand why a boost driver or a buck driver is actually preferred in multi led set-ups? I’m assuming a boost driver in a multi led set-up would allow you to drive the leds harder at max voltage which I’m assuming requires more current and thus diminishes runtimes?

BlueSwordM
BlueSwordM's picture
Online
Last seen: 3 min 7 sec ago
Joined: 11/29/2017 - 12:34
Posts: 4570
Location: Canada

@mattadores, let’s make it simple.

The BLF Q8 uses 3V LEDs, 3,6V average 18650s, and a FET driver. At max power, it is running directly off of the battery to the XP-L HDs.

Large Niwalker lights usually use buck/boost driver. That means it either bucks the voltage of the cells(14,4V—-12V/6V XHP70.2) or boosts the voltage(7,2V—-12V XHP70.2).

Yes you can run LEDs in parallel. If power to the LEDs is the same, lumen output will be the same as a series LEDs.

Boost drivers are usually used to power high forward voltage LEDs(6V+) from a lower voltage power source(3,6V).

Buck driver are usually used to power lower forward voltage LEDs from a high voltage source.

The advantage of boost/buck drivers are regulation.

If you have sufficient headroom, brightness can be regulated as long as the battery pack isn’t empty.

My very own high current Beryllium Copper springs Gen 3:
http://budgetlightforum.com/node/67401
Liitokala Aliexpress Stores Battery Fraud: http://budgetlightforum.com/node/60547

mattadores
mattadores's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 hours 20 min ago
Joined: 01/21/2019 - 18:45
Posts: 610
Location: Alberta

Thanks Bluesword

Does that mean when wiring leds, using them in parallel is most common as you can utilize a single driver to power all leds instead of requiring a different driver for each? or is that only the case with linear/direct drivers?

Interesting. I didn’t realize you can get a boost/buck driver. Sorry I’m such a newb but what is a FET driver? is there another driver category other than the four discussed in that other thread? direct/linear/buck/boost

Wow, I didn’t realize the XHP35 HI has a typical forward voltage of 11.3v (just looked at crees website). I’m assuming then that 6v regulated is a choice by mfg of a happy medium between runtime/output?

On a side note: a question for all you fellows with in depth knowledge, advanced equipment and building/modding skills out the wazoo. Are most of you engineers by trade and come across most this knowledge in your field? or did your fascinations with lights/electronics drive your need for knowledge?

BlueSwordM
BlueSwordM's picture
Online
Last seen: 3 min 7 sec ago
Joined: 11/29/2017 - 12:34
Posts: 4570
Location: Canada

When wiring in parallel, you are basically creating 1 large LED array running at say 3V.

For example, say you have 4x XP-L HDs being run at 3,4V 3A. In parallel, it acts like a giant 3,4V 12A LED :).

FET drive= direct drive.

The voltage doesn’t matter as much as total power. You could have a 12V LED running at lower power than a 6V LED. Say, a 6V 3A LED, and a 12V 1A LED. The 6V 3A LED will use 18W, while the 12V 1A LED will use 12W.

For that last question, I’ve mostly learned by doing a lot of math, a lot of research, and quite a bit of chemistry/physics learning.

My very own high current Beryllium Copper springs Gen 3:
http://budgetlightforum.com/node/67401
Liitokala Aliexpress Stores Battery Fraud: http://budgetlightforum.com/node/60547

BOMBAY
Offline
Last seen: 3 hours 4 min ago
Joined: 04/24/2016 - 10:07
Posts: 110
Location: Polska

I do not trust a manufacturer who does not know the basic parameters of his products like dimensions.

440kcd, 850m throw in what should I believe?

mattadores
mattadores's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 hours 20 min ago
Joined: 01/21/2019 - 18:45
Posts: 610
Location: Alberta

BlueSwordM wrote:
When wiring in parallel, you are basically creating 1 large LED array running at say 3V.

For example, say you have 4x XP-L HDs being run at 3,4V 3A. In parallel, it acts like a giant 3,4V 12A LED :).

FET drive= direct drive.

The voltage doesn’t matter as much as total power. You could have a 12V LED running at lower power than a 6V LED. Say, a 6V 3A LED, and a 12V 1A LED. The 6V 3A LED will use 18W, while the 12V 1A LED will use 12W.

For that last question, I’ve mostly learned by doing a lot of math, a lot of research, and quite a bit of chemistry/physics learning.

It seems the driver and battery configuration play huge roles but is there really any difference in running series vs parallel emitters? For example if you had a quad 18650 set up running 3 series 1 parallel you’re netting 10.8V 6000Mah likely boosted to 12V.
If you ran 4x series each emitter is drawing 3V 1.5A total 3V 6A
If you ran 4x parallel the series is drawing 3V 6A
If you run led in parallel is it the same as incandescent where an emitter failure breaks the circuit and the entire series fails until the bad emitter is replaced?

mattadores
mattadores's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 hours 20 min ago
Joined: 01/21/2019 - 18:45
Posts: 610
Location: Alberta

BOMBAY wrote:
I do not trust a manufacturer who does not know the basic parameters of his products like dimensions.

440kcd, 850m throw in what should I believe?

lol I agree that their throw specs make no sense but the consensus appears to be that this is a result of not double checking written information. The proof that they do stand behind their measurements is that when Maukka tested the MM18JR which has an ansi 10,000 lumens his tests showed 9,650 lumens.

lol compare that to a company like Imalent who tests up to 30% lower than claimed lumens

Spartan
Offline
Last seen: 1 day 15 hours ago
Joined: 01/12/2019 - 20:50
Posts: 617

I just checked the price and one is $200, the other $45. Case closed.

For me…..it’s nice hobby but ultimately, it’s a tool. If I have to worry about dropping it or losing it, or rolling on the gravel when changing a tire, it’s no longer a tool.

Besides, the Q8 is a slam dunk BARGAIN of a light.

Moses came from the mountaintop carrying a tablet. The Words were....WITH GREAT LUMENS COMES GREAT REPONSIBILITY.

BlueSwordM
BlueSwordM's picture
Online
Last seen: 3 min 7 sec ago
Joined: 11/29/2017 - 12:34
Posts: 4570
Location: Canada

Well, don’t forget you can also get a coupon for the Niwalker.

The reason, as I said before, that I’m eyeing the Niwalker, is for the throwy versions.

My very own high current Beryllium Copper springs Gen 3:
http://budgetlightforum.com/node/67401
Liitokala Aliexpress Stores Battery Fraud: http://budgetlightforum.com/node/60547

BurningPlayd0h
BurningPlayd0h's picture
Offline
Last seen: 26 min 50 sec ago
Joined: 06/22/2018 - 02:16
Posts: 473
Location: MN

BlueSwordM wrote:
Well, don’t forget you can also get a coupon for the Niwalker.

The reason, as I said before, that I’m eyeing the Niwalker, is for the throwy versions.

XP-L HIs in the Q8 makes for a very throwy light. The CW emitters Sofirn used are gross but some 3-5000Ks could make a serious thrower with way less backscatter.

BlueSwordM
BlueSwordM's picture
Online
Last seen: 3 min 7 sec ago
Joined: 11/29/2017 - 12:34
Posts: 4570
Location: Canada

I’m wanting TN42+ levels of throw.

My very own high current Beryllium Copper springs Gen 3:
http://budgetlightforum.com/node/67401
Liitokala Aliexpress Stores Battery Fraud: http://budgetlightforum.com/node/60547

BurningPlayd0h
BurningPlayd0h's picture
Offline
Last seen: 26 min 50 sec ago
Joined: 06/22/2018 - 02:16
Posts: 473
Location: MN

BOMBAY wrote:
I do not trust a manufacturer who does not know the basic parameters of his products like dimensions.

440kcd, 850m throw in what should I believe?

Their “rated throw” might be to higher than .25 lux. Candela converted to ANSI throw doesn’t factor in atmospheric conditions either.

BlueSwordM wrote:
I’m wanting TN42+ levels of throw.

You’re not going to get that with an XHP35 HI and a reflector that size to be frank.

BlueSwordM
BlueSwordM's picture
Online
Last seen: 3 min 7 sec ago
Joined: 11/29/2017 - 12:34
Posts: 4570
Location: Canada

Yeah, something must be wrong.

The BK-FA30S, their 1st thrower, was rated at 650,000cd, with a head diameter of 100mm.

Their second edition, the BK-LB11SV2, is rated at 900 000cd, with a head diameter of 91mm.

How does that work?

My very own high current Beryllium Copper springs Gen 3:
http://budgetlightforum.com/node/67401
Liitokala Aliexpress Stores Battery Fraud: http://budgetlightforum.com/node/60547

BOMBAY
Offline
Last seen: 3 hours 4 min ago
Joined: 04/24/2016 - 10:07
Posts: 110
Location: Polska

BK-FA30S this flashlight has a head diameter of 100mm but the manufacturer still gives the specification of 76mm

the length of the flashlight in the specification is also incorrect

mattadores
mattadores's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 hours 20 min ago
Joined: 01/21/2019 - 18:45
Posts: 610
Location: Alberta

BlueSwordM wrote:
Yeah, something must be wrong.

The BK-FA30S, their 1st thrower, was rated at 650,000cd, with a head diameter of 100mm.

Their second edition, the BK-LB11SV2, is rated at 900 000cd, with a head diameter of 91mm.

How does that work?

Niwalker be like

BlueSwordM
BlueSwordM's picture
Online
Last seen: 3 min 7 sec ago
Joined: 11/29/2017 - 12:34
Posts: 4570
Location: Canada

Yeah.

While their combination lights look great(other than the 73kcd actual throw number), their throwers are quite confusing.

My very own high current Beryllium Copper springs Gen 3:
http://budgetlightforum.com/node/67401
Liitokala Aliexpress Stores Battery Fraud: http://budgetlightforum.com/node/60547

CREEXHP70LED
CREEXHP70LED's picture
Offline
Last seen: 19 hours 26 min ago
Joined: 01/03/2019 - 13:16
Posts: 266

mattadores wrote:
BlueSwordM wrote:
Yeah, something must be wrong.

The BK-FA30S, their 1st thrower, was rated at 650,000cd, with a head diameter of 100mm.

Their second edition, the BK-LB11SV2, is rated at 900 000cd, with a head diameter of 91mm.

How does that work?

Niwalker be like
!http://66.media.tumblr.com/8cbaec1343c83149a8286eec5dee9027/tumblr_n2od7...!

Now that is funny. Big Smile

 

 

 

mattadores
mattadores's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 hours 20 min ago
Joined: 01/21/2019 - 18:45
Posts: 610
Location: Alberta

BlueSwordM wrote:
Yeah.

While their combination lights look great(other than the 73kcd actual throw number), their throwers are quite confusing.

Got the GB link and it takes you to their store.. Their store has all the product info unlike the main website..

Uhhhhh

The two throwers are apparently identical except the magnetic switch it the more expensive one. But somehow they suggest that they’re nearly as far throwing as the BLF GT

MF5SV1 440kcd 850m throw…
Maukka test on identical light 73kcd 494m throw

LR7SV1 & LB11SV2 903kcd 1900m throw
These both are listed at 91mm width.. BLF GT figures with the same battery set-up, same emitter and a reflector half the size???

BlueSwordM
BlueSwordM's picture
Online
Last seen: 3 min 7 sec ago
Joined: 11/29/2017 - 12:34
Posts: 4570
Location: Canada

I mean, they are driving the emitter 10% harder at 2200 lumens, and said they got much better focus out of the reflector.

I’m cautious. If it’s better than the BK-FA30S, it’s all good.

Otherwise, something seems off.

My very own high current Beryllium Copper springs Gen 3:
http://budgetlightforum.com/node/67401
Liitokala Aliexpress Stores Battery Fraud: http://budgetlightforum.com/node/60547

mattadores
mattadores's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 hours 20 min ago
Joined: 01/21/2019 - 18:45
Posts: 610
Location: Alberta

I dug everything up I could to try and estimate:

  lumen claimed lumen tested candela claimed candela tested throw claimed

throw tested

BK-FA30S 2200 2199 650 000 563 000 1600m 1501m
LR7SV1 2650   903 500   1900m  
LB11SV2 2650   903 500   1900m  
MF5SV1 10 000 9 350 440 000 61 000 850m 494m
MM18JR 15 000   440 000   850m  

so based on Maukkas reviews their lumen outputs appear to be bang on. to jump from 2200 in the BK-FA30S to 2600 in the two new ones is a 20.1% increase in output so it definitely looks like it's possible to achieve the additional throw.

Unfortunately the MM18JR didn't even come close to the throw specs but if they're indeed driving the leds 50% harder up to 15 000 lumens maybe they finally achieved the previous throw specs which were way over actual spec or they're only driving the 70.2s 50%+ harder to achieve the lumens and will have similar dismal throw specs lol I can't decide if I need them or if I should just save my pennies for the eventual MF03 or MF05 or GT4...

Tom E
Tom E's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 hours 26 min ago
Joined: 08/19/2012 - 08:23
Posts: 12176
Location: LI NY

Think you got the last 2 lines there reversed. Maukka reviewed the older MM18JR model. I'll be getting an MF5SV1 in, shipped, maybe a few days away, and I'll test and post.

For the lumens, I suppose they cranked up the amps in this new model - it's certainly possible to get 15K out of 2 XHP70.2's and a XHP35 HI, figure 6.5K each, then 2K more for the XHP35 HI...

 

I would expect the throw #'s to be about the same as what maukka got. What were they think'n??

Dimensions seem to be the same so I would think throw is unaffected if the reflectors stayed the same, maybe they got more amps goin on hte XHP35 HI but that wouldn't make much difference.

 

 

BlueSwordM
BlueSwordM's picture
Online
Last seen: 3 min 7 sec ago
Joined: 11/29/2017 - 12:34
Posts: 4570
Location: Canada

Niwalker said they got the focus better with the new reflectors.

That means the reflectors have been tweaked a bit to achieve the optimal distance to focal-point.

That means either a different centering ring or a tweaked reflector as mentioned above.

My very own high current Beryllium Copper springs Gen 3:
http://budgetlightforum.com/node/67401
Liitokala Aliexpress Stores Battery Fraud: http://budgetlightforum.com/node/60547

Tom E
Tom E's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 hours 26 min ago
Joined: 08/19/2012 - 08:23
Posts: 12176
Location: LI NY

Yeah but 61 kcd to 440 kcd? Or 494 m to 850 m? No way in something this size.

BlueSwordM
BlueSwordM's picture
Online
Last seen: 3 min 7 sec ago
Joined: 11/29/2017 - 12:34
Posts: 4570
Location: Canada

Of course.

Do they do any kind of.spell checking.on their.pages?

My very own high current Beryllium Copper springs Gen 3:
http://budgetlightforum.com/node/67401
Liitokala Aliexpress Stores Battery Fraud: http://budgetlightforum.com/node/60547

mattadores
mattadores's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 hours 20 min ago
Joined: 01/21/2019 - 18:45
Posts: 610
Location: Alberta
Tom E wrote:

Yeah but 61 kcd to 440 kcd? Or 494 m to 850 m? No way in something this size.

That was exactly why I ended up passing on this light. I love the idea of a selectable throw/flood combo light but this isn’t really a good throw light.

I have a handful of flooders/mild throwers that make 10 000+ lumens already so when this light can’t throw even as far as the BLF GT mini I don’t really consider it the best of both worlds. More like a great flooder with a focused beam that can throw a tiny bit

Tom E
Tom E's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 hours 26 min ago
Joined: 08/19/2012 - 08:23
Posts: 12176
Location: LI NY

Dunno how they can get candela and distance messed up, plus it's consistenly wrong in several places... ugh......

I left a message on their site to correct the specs on these lights. I'll see if they respond.

This is a bazaar light. With 3 separate buttons, you would think each would have it's own turbo, but that's not what maukka found. If they did have separate turbo, would be interesting to see how the 2 XHP70.2's compare to the XHP35 HI in throw - betta not much advantage to the HI. Think it's more about choosing what beam pattern you want. If they did it better, they would have made the reflector for the HI bigger than the others, at least.

mattadores
mattadores's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 hours 20 min ago
Joined: 01/21/2019 - 18:45
Posts: 610
Location: Alberta
Tom E wrote:

Dunno how they can get candela and distance messed up, plus it’s consistenly wrong in several places… ugh……


I left a message on their site to correct the specs on these lights. I’ll see if they respond.

lol incoming correction:

MF5SV1
lumens: 15 000
throw: really far

Tom E
Tom E's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 hours 26 min ago
Joined: 08/19/2012 - 08:23
Posts: 12176
Location: LI NY

The light arrived yesterday. I'm a bit under the weather and not up to doing much with it, but it's an impressive light, rock solid, 700g is certainly something significant in your hand.

Only way to get to max/turbo is thru momentary mode, but that's easy to get to - simply press&hold the button of choice. 3 buttons - 1 for the dual XHP70.2's, 1 for the XHP35 HI, and the 3rd button for both. The 70 reflectors are shallow and a heavy OP, and the XHP35 HI reflector is SMO and deep. The depth keeps the flood width small. The throw reflector though is just too small to get significant throw #'s from it. The XHP35 HI by itself really doesn't have much distance, but with all the LED's ON, it does much better, but still I would say in the range maukka tested.

Pages