Emisar D1sV2 respectively Noctigon K1

179 posts / 0 new
Last post
JordanZHP
Online
Last seen: 1 min 40 sec ago
Joined: 03/25/2017 - 04:37
Posts: 321
Location: Petaluma, CA
maukka wrote:
And please make the crowd favorite, XHP35 HI 4500K CRI80 (XHP35A-H0-0000-0D0HC445E), an option.

Great tint for a thrower and decent CRI, nice!

What are the max lumens for this led? Do you think it would still throw fairly well?

Hank Wang
Offline
Last seen: 6 hours 6 min ago
Joined: 10/19/2011 - 10:28
Posts: 362
Location: China

maukka wrote:
And please make the crowd favorite, XHP35 HI 4500K CRI80 (XHP35A-H0-0000-0D0HC445E), an option.
Surely we will offer this option is this LED can be sourced.

https://intl-outdoor.com, Noctigon, Emisar, flashlight components.

SKV89
Offline
Last seen: 50 min 53 sec ago
Joined: 12/10/2017 - 12:46
Posts: 3160
Location: US

Hank, if you can source any A or D tint XHP35 HI 80CRI, that would be awesome. If you offer it with the good bins, I’m sure many people will buy multiple emitter versions of this light.

zak.wilson
Offline
Last seen: 3 hours 18 min ago
Joined: 09/29/2014 - 14:27
Posts: 888

The 45E is very nice, though for throwers, a little warmer is more to my liking, e.g. 40E. I have that one in an Acebeam L16.

Ceilingbounce – flashlight testing and runtime graphs for Android

justanotherguy
Offline
Last seen: 4 hours 46 min ago
Joined: 11/26/2012 - 22:11
Posts: 732
Location: ILLinois

Hank Wang wrote:
JordanZHP wrote:
Hank if you see this thread we would love an update on this project Smile

Yes, we are still working on it, here is the prototype photo, it’s not called D1SV2, it’s called Noctigon K1,
with fully regulated driver, it should reach 600+kcd with CSLNM1.TG LED, there will be green/red
beam version, as well as XP-L HI/HD LED with different color temperature.

Hank
How this this compare size wise to a GT mini?

anyone in NE ILLinois into get togethers?

CarpentryHero
CarpentryHero's picture
Offline
Last seen: 6 days 5 hours ago
Joined: 06/06/2012 - 14:31
Posts: 1497
Location: Edmonton Alberta Canada

That’s exciting for such a small package

I’m glad I’m not the only flashlight collector out there, I was beginning to think I was strange.
My name is Kendall and I’m a Flashaholic from western Canada

maukka
maukka's picture
Offline
Last seen: 21 min 34 sec ago
Joined: 12/31/2015 - 04:15
Posts: 1952
Location: Finland
zak.wilson wrote:
The 45E is very nice, though for throwers, a little warmer is more to my liking, e.g. 40E. I have that one in an Acebeam L16.

I wouldn’t mind this one either even though it’s a lower flux bin. Both are nice.

Th558
Th558's picture
Offline
Last seen: 6 hours 9 min ago
Joined: 01/30/2016 - 16:19
Posts: 451
Location: United Kingdom

justanotherguy wrote:

How this this compare size wise to a GT mini?

Head is 70mm. Dunno the length but I’m expecting around 16-17cm.
justanotherguy
Offline
Last seen: 4 hours 46 min ago
Joined: 11/26/2012 - 22:11
Posts: 732
Location: ILLinois

Th558 wrote:
justanotherguy wrote:

How this this compare size wise to a GT mini?

Head is 70mm. Dunno the length but I’m expecting around 16-17cm.

hmmm
A fair bit bigger than the GT mini…
Still pretty small… bigger reflector, more lumens and kcd than even my Vin’d GT mini… I’m excited… This will out punch my Varapower turbo 2.0!

anyone in NE ILLinois into get togethers?

withoutink
Offline
Last seen: 3 hours 26 min ago
Joined: 10/05/2019 - 19:27
Posts: 97
Location: Georgia

this is exciting, I am falling in love with the emisar d4sv2 I picked up recently… a super throwy one would be amazing.

Cheers-

Withoutink

My Flashlights

Instagram | YouTube

SKV89
Offline
Last seen: 50 min 53 sec ago
Joined: 12/10/2017 - 12:46
Posts: 3160
Location: US
maukka wrote:
zak.wilson wrote:
The 45E is very nice, though for throwers, a little warmer is more to my liking, e.g. 40E. I have that one in an Acebeam L16.

I wouldn’t mind this one either even though it’s a lower flux bin. Both are nice.

I wouldn’t mind a lower flux bin too but hope the tint is below the BBL. That’s what made the D1S and the GT Mini so nice because of the beautiful A or D tints. Also the Mateminco MT35 / Astrolux MF02 with the XHP35HI has one of the most beautiful thrower tints I’ve ever seen. The XHP35 HI in that light on turbo measures:

CCT: 4378K
DUV: -0.0025
Ra (CRI): 72.5
R9: -22.1
Rf: 70
Rg: 95

I don’t own the GT but I seen pics of it and the tint should be about the same. Any idea where to get these rosy tinted XHP35HI?

Edit: I just measured my MT09R modded by TA with w/ (1) 80cri C4 bin 4500k & (2) 80cri C2 bin 4000k
CCT: 4829K
DUV: -0.0003
Ra (CRI): 80.5
R9: 5.1
Rf: 79
Rg: 97

I’m thinking TA might have put in a 5000K in stead of the 4000K but who knows maybe the reflector increased the color temp. The tint is in this mixed tint light is pretty much exactly on the BBL, which is nice but I like the warmer and rosier tint in the MF02 better.

zak.wilson
Offline
Last seen: 3 hours 18 min ago
Joined: 09/29/2014 - 14:27
Posts: 888

The 45E and 40E emitters I’ve used have been quite neutral visually – pretty much on the blackbody line by my estimation.

Ceilingbounce – flashlight testing and runtime graphs for Android

joechina
Offline
Last seen: 1 day 6 hours ago
Joined: 03/05/2016 - 08:23
Posts: 1435
Location: Germany
Hank Wang wrote:
JordanZHP wrote:
Hank if you see this thread we would love an update on this project Smile
Yes, we are still working on it, here is the prototype photo, it’s not called D1SV2, it’s called Noctigon K1, with fully regulated driver, it should reach 600+kcd with CSLNM1.TG LED, there will be green/red beam version, as well as XP-L HI/HD LED with different color temperature.

That looks nice!

I wounder why it has not Emisar in its name.

Majoroverkill
Majoroverkill's picture
Offline
Last seen: 29 min 52 sec ago
Joined: 01/12/2017 - 17:13
Posts: 575
Location: Nevada

WOW! What a great looking flashlight. Will there be a 5700K tint? Most people like the warner tints and not sure why. Maybe its my eyes but anything below 5000K looks dull like my X7 Marauder I got last year and it’s been sitting in the safe since then. 6500K is to high and just to much glare. 5700k is perfect in my opinion. Maybe the 25+ years of welding has taken its tole on my old viewers. I accidently ordered a D4S V2 in 5000K last week, Thank you Hank! Hope it’s not like my D4 where everything has a yellow tint to it. I gave away my Imalent DN35 and DN70 flashlights because they had that same dull yellowish tint. Different strokes for different folks I guess.

Doug S.

BurningPlayd0h
BurningPlayd0h's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 hours 39 min ago
Joined: 06/22/2018 - 02:16
Posts: 828
Location: MN

joechina wrote:

That looks nice!

I wounder why it has not Emisar in its name.

Emisar brand is for direct-drive, Noctigon is for regulated/boost/CC

zak.wilson
Offline
Last seen: 3 hours 18 min ago
Joined: 09/29/2014 - 14:27
Posts: 888
Majoroverkill wrote:
Most people like the warner tints and not sure why.

I think most people tend to like about 4000K-5000K, which overlaps with the color temperature of direct sunlight for most of the day. Sometimes it’s lower at sunset, and in summer or in the tropics at midday, it can be a little higher. It’s mostly subjective preference.

For a thrower like this, there’s an objective reason to go warmer: backscatter. Warmer tints produce less visible backscatter, so you see more of what you’re illuminating and less of the beam.

Ceilingbounce – flashlight testing and runtime graphs for Android

Majoroverkill
Majoroverkill's picture
Offline
Last seen: 29 min 52 sec ago
Joined: 01/12/2017 - 17:13
Posts: 575
Location: Nevada

I have to agree with you and eat lots of words lol Facepalm My brand new Acebeam X45 came with the XHP70.2 P2 6500k emitters and it just ignites every particle in the air causing a white out affect if its not a clear clean night. I have to hold the flashlight above my head, those 18000 lumens are blinding.

Doug S.

Majoroverkill
Majoroverkill's picture
Offline
Last seen: 29 min 52 sec ago
Joined: 01/12/2017 - 17:13
Posts: 575
Location: Nevada

That really is a great looking flashlight! Can not wait to get my hands on one.

Doug S.

zak.wilson
Offline
Last seen: 3 hours 18 min ago
Joined: 09/29/2014 - 14:27
Posts: 888
Majoroverkill wrote:
those 18000 lumens are blinding.

Now consider that’s only 109 kcd. The K1 will be as much as 600 kcd.

The backscatter might not be as blinding with fewer lumens, but cool tints at that kind of intensity make beams that look almost solid. Good for looking cool; less good for seeing things.

Ceilingbounce – flashlight testing and runtime graphs for Android

DB Custom
DB Custom's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 hours 17 min ago
Joined: 01/13/2013 - 22:28
Posts: 20324
Location: Heart of Texas

Respectfully disagree about the tint difference, I have beam shots of two GT’s, one in warm white and one in cool white, illuminating a water tower in a light rain at 1.9 miles. The cool white is brighter and lights up the tower better in spite of the rain… and I had my wife shining the lights while I went closer to the tower for pictures of the illumination factor. With me 600 yds from the tower the cool white showed brighter and clearer and the pictures clearly showed it.

Fog lights work to undercut heavy fog because they have a flat beam that is focused close to the car. The Amber color is more to not distract oncoming drivers than anything… point them up for distance like your headlights and you will still see a wall of fog, just a different color wall.

The primary reason we see a difference between warm and cool is that the warm emitters are lower powered, thus they illuminate fog or smoke less than a higher powered cool white beam. This is my take on the ~1000 lights I’ve built. YMMV

This will always be an argument because we all see slightly differently, we all use lights to our own advantage as compared to how others use them, so just remember that any advise, including mine, is more relevant to that opinion than to what YOU might do with a flashlight. Wink

I personally would love the White Flat in the new K1 but it’s pencil beam is not as desirable as a broader more powerful beam so I will go with the XHP-35 HI. Of course I have a lot of lights so slotting a new one between what I have is becoming more difficult. Big Smile

BurningPlayd0h
BurningPlayd0h's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 hours 39 min ago
Joined: 06/22/2018 - 02:16
Posts: 828
Location: MN

Dale, take those pictures from right behind or barely to the side of the light and the visibility difference will be very obvious.

Rayleigh scattering and interaction of water with different wavelengths of light are things that exist.

Whether a warm white emitter gets more light downrange due to less scattering/absorption vs the higher output of cool white is one issue, but it’s undeniable that cool white lights cause WAY more backscatter than the usual 10-15% output advantage would suggest and we have the science that explains why.

Cameras don’t function exactly like human eye does in many ways either, so while those pictures might be accurately showing what the human eye would see, they also might not be.

Pavlo
Offline
Last seen: 3 hours 57 min ago
Joined: 12/13/2015 - 10:37
Posts: 501
Location: Canada

According to Raleigh Light scattering,shorter wavelength (bluelight) is directly proportional to the effect of light scattering.

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/atmos/blusky.html

As for my personal experience, yellow sunglasses and flashlights have always seemed to provide more contrast, less glare, and more clarity while being easier on the eyes.

BurningPlayd0h
BurningPlayd0h's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 hours 39 min ago
Joined: 06/22/2018 - 02:16
Posts: 828
Location: MN

Pavlo wrote:
According to Raleigh Light scattering,shorter wavelength (bluelight) is directly proportional to the effect of light scattering.

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/atmos/blusky.html

As for my personal experience, yellow sunglasses and flashlights have always seemed to provide more contrast, less glare, and more clarity while being easier on the eyes.

While I agree, that’s caused instead by the eyes sensitivity to blue light causing strain/constricting pupils more, and very likely due to the wavelength of blue light itself being harder to focus on. An easy demonstration of this is to set up a red light and blue light of equal size and relative brightness at night and look at them from a distance. The red light will be easy to focus on and “sharp”, while the blue light will appear “fuzzy” as with certain conditions (like pupil dilation) it is difficult for the human eye to physically get a good focus.

EasyB
Offline
Last seen: 5 hours 6 min ago
Joined: 03/09/2016 - 15:24
Posts: 1704
Location: Ohio

Raleigh scattering is for particles much smaller than the wavelength of the light and is stronger for shorter wavelengths. This is why the sky is blue; light scattering off air molecules.

But fog particles are several microns large, larger than the wavelength of light, and this scattering mechanism is called Mie scattering, which has little wavelength dependence. This is why clouds and fog look white and not blue.

We need some controlled experiments and photographs. I have seen photographs appearing to show both cases, cool light scattering more, and cool light scattering the same.

contactcr
Offline
Last seen: 7 hours 57 min ago
Joined: 05/19/2017 - 18:52
Posts: 2844
Location: US

In a nut shell this is why I told Hank to make an aspheric bezel/lens for this light.

You guys are worried about micro particles in the air? The white hull of the boat I was on was a much bigger obstacle to my vision than the horrible fog we were in. The spill from the light reflecting off the hull of the white boat I was riding seemed worse than the back scatter from fog. If you are truly interested in seeing long distances you don’t need your feet lit up and pupils constricting while you are trying to spot something far away.

BurningPlayd0h
BurningPlayd0h's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 hours 39 min ago
Joined: 06/22/2018 - 02:16
Posts: 828
Location: MN

EasyB wrote:
Raleigh scattering is for particles much smaller than the wavelength of the light and is stronger for shorter wavelengths. This is why the sky is blue; light scattering off air molecules.

But fog particles are several microns large, larger than the wavelength of light, and this scattering mechanism is called Mie scattering, which has little wavelength dependence. This is why clouds and fog look white and not blue.

We need some controlled experiments and photographs. I have seen photographs appearing to show both cases, cool light scattering more, and cool light scattering the same.

I wasn’t talking specifically about fog. A bright, cool white light (and even warmer temps) has an easily visible beam in even very clear air.

EasyB
Offline
Last seen: 5 hours 6 min ago
Joined: 03/09/2016 - 15:24
Posts: 1704
Location: Ohio

BurningPlayd0h wrote:
EasyB wrote:
Raleigh scattering is for particles much smaller than the wavelength of the light and is stronger for shorter wavelengths. This is why the sky is blue; light scattering off air molecules.

But fog particles are several microns large, larger than the wavelength of light, and this scattering mechanism is called Mie scattering, which has little wavelength dependence. This is why clouds and fog look white and not blue.

We need some controlled experiments and photographs. I have seen photographs appearing to show both cases, cool light scattering more, and cool light scattering the same.

I wasn’t talking specifically about fog. A bright, cool white light (and even warmer temps) has an easily visible beam in even very clear air.

Agreed. But I think scattering off particles in the air is usually significant if not dominant, and that source of scattering would not be wavelength dependent.

BurningPlayd0h
BurningPlayd0h's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 hours 39 min ago
Joined: 06/22/2018 - 02:16
Posts: 828
Location: MN

EasyB wrote:
BurningPlayd0h wrote:
EasyB wrote:
Raleigh scattering is for particles much smaller than the wavelength of the light and is stronger for shorter wavelengths. This is why the sky is blue; light scattering off air molecules.

But fog particles are several microns large, larger than the wavelength of light, and this scattering mechanism is called Mie scattering, which has little wavelength dependence. This is why clouds and fog look white and not blue.

We need some controlled experiments and photographs. I have seen photographs appearing to show both cases, cool light scattering more, and cool light scattering the same.

I wasn’t talking specifically about fog. A bright, cool white light (and even warmer temps) has an easily visible beam in even very clear air.

Agreed. But I think scattering off particles in the air is usually significant if not dominant, and that source of scattering would not be wavelength dependent.

All I can say is that in my experience and from many beamshots I’ve seen cooler light of the same focus and brightness has far more backscatter. I’m sure there are many variables to it though.

Rayoui
Rayoui's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 hours 12 min ago
Joined: 08/06/2019 - 00:38
Posts: 72
Location: Portland, OR
BurningPlayd0h wrote:
All I can say is that in my experience and from many beamshots I’ve seen cooler light of the same focus and brightness has far more backscatter. I’m sure there are many variables to it though.

I have had the same experience. I much prefer warmer tints in my bright, outdoor-use lights. When standing directly behind the light, the scattering from the beam of a cooler tinted light can sometimes completely obscure what you are trying to illuminate. The beam is still visible with warmer tints but the glare seems to be much less prominent.

This is the same reason many people complain about glare with newer HID and LED car headlights that tend to be in cooler tints than your standard halogens.

zak.wilson
Offline
Last seen: 3 hours 18 min ago
Joined: 09/29/2014 - 14:27
Posts: 888

For me, it’s definitely that the visible backscatter interferes with my ability to see, not that it seems like less light gets to the target. The effect is not significant if I’m looking from a position a couple degrees away from the light source, but that’s longer than my arms in situations that call for a thrower.

Ceilingbounce – flashlight testing and runtime graphs for Android

Pages