Armytek Wizard Pro vs Zebralight H600fc MKIV Measurements

28 posts / 0 new
Last post
SKV89
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 28 min ago
Joined: 12/10/2017 - 12:46
Posts: 3568
Location: US
Armytek Wizard Pro vs Zebralight H600fc MKIV Measurements

Took readings for a few Armytek Wizards and compared it with the Zebralight H600fc MKIV. Output taken at 2s after turn-on with the Texas Ace Lumen Tube calibrated with Maukka lights. Spectrometer used is a Sekonic C-800-U.

Armytek Wizard Pro XHP50 WW (2020) H2 1,521 lumens 3988K -0.0018 DUV 82.9 CRI Blue light relative amplitude 1.00 20.1 R9 65.4 R12 80 Rf 100 Rg included battery
Armytek Wizard Pro XHP50 WW (2020) H1 788 lumens 3898K -0.0008 DUV 83.8 CRI Blue light relative amplitude 1.00 23.0 R9 64.9 R12 82 Rf 100 Rg included battery
Armytek Wizard Pro XHP50 WW (2020) M2 147 lumens 3785K 0.0008 DUV 84.7 CRI Blue light relative amplitude 1.00 25.1 R9 63.4 R12 83 Rf 99 Rg included battery
Armytek Wizard Pro XHP50 WW (2020) M1 34 lumens 3739K 0.0010 DUV 84.9 CRI Blue light relative amplitude 0.97 25.5 R9 63.1 R12 84 Rf 99 Rg included battery
Armytek Wizard Pro XHP50 WW (2020) L3 4 lumens 3734K 0.0012 DUV 85.2 CRI Blue light relative amplitude 0.97 26.2 R9 63.0 R12 84 Rf 99 Rg included battery
Armytek Wizard Pro Nichia 144A 90CRI H2 1,388 lumens 4583K -0.0016 DUV 92.9 CRI Blue light relative amplitude 1.00 65.2 R9 73.9 R12 88 Rf 97 Rg included battery or VTC6A
Armytek Wizard Pro Nichia 144A 90CRI H1 684 lumens 4458K 0.0002 DUV 93.4 CRI Blue light relative amplitude 1.00 68.1 R9 72.8 R12 89 Rf 97 Rg included battery
Armytek Wizard Pro Nichia 144A 90CRI M2 128 lumens 4337K 0.0009 DUV 94.0 CRI Blue light relative amplitude 1.00 72.9 R9 71.4 R12 88 Rf 97 Rg included battery
Armytek Wizard Pro Nichia 144A 90CRI M1 29 lumens 4292K 0.0009 DUV 94.2 CRI Blue light relative amplitude 1.00 74.5 R9 71.3 R12 88 Rf 96 Rg included battery
Armytek Wizard Pro Nichia 144A 90CRI L3 3 lumens 4295K 0.0002 DUV 94.4 CRI Blue light relative amplitude 1.00 76.7 R9 71.4 R12 88 Rf 96 Rg included battery
Armytek Wizard Pro Nichia 144A 90CRI 2nd Unit H2 1,339 lumens 4583K -0.0012 DUV 92.5 CRI Blue light relative amplitude 1.00 63.5 R9 73.0 R12 88 Rf 96 Rg included battery
Armytek Wizard Pro v3 XP-L WW Turbo 954 lumens 3986K 0.0010 DUV 73.9 CRI Blue light relative amplitude 1.00 -12.5 R9 46.4 R12 71 Rf 98 Rg included battery
Armytek Wizard Pro v3 XP-L WW H3 342 lumens 3868K 0.0041 DUV 74.5 CRI Blue light relative amplitude 0.98 -12.5 R9 44.2 R12 73 Rf 97 Rg included battery
Armytek Wizard Pro v3 XP-L WW H2 149 lumens 3824K 0.0052 DUV 74.8 CRI Blue light relative amplitude 0.95 -13.0 R9 43.6 R12 74 Rf 97 Rg included battery
Armytek Wizard Pro v3 XP-L WW H1 50 lumens 3816K 0.0062 DUV 75.1 CRI Blue light relative amplitude 0.92 -12.9 R9 42.9 R12 75 Rf 96 Rg included battery
Armytek Wizard Pro v3 XP-L WW L3 5 lumens 3807K 0.0073 DUV 75.1 CRI Blue light relative amplitude 0.87 -14.3 R9 42.1 R12 76 Rf 95 Rg included battery
Armytek Wizard Pro v3 XP-L WW L2 1 lumens 3783K 0.0073 DUV 75.1 CRI Blue light relative amplitude 0.86 -14.2 R9 41.9 R12 76 Rf 95 Rg included battery
Armytek Wizard Pro v3 XP-L WW L1 0 lumens 3887K 0.0066 DUV 75.5 CRI Blue light relative amplitude 0.95 -12.6 R9 42.6 R12 76 Rf 96 Rg included battery
Armytek Wizard Magnet USB XP-L WW Turbo 1,010 lumens 4100K -0.0026 DUV 72.9 CRI Blue light relative amplitude 1.00 -17.0 R9 44.4 R12 69 Rf 98 Rg included battery
Armytek Wizard Magnet USB XP-L WW Mode 5 348 lumens 4013K 0.0001 DUV 72.9 CRI Blue light relative amplitude 1.00 -19.4 R9 42.2 R12 70 Rf 97 Rg included battery
Armytek Wizard Magnet USB XP-L WW Mode 4 155 lumens 3973K 0.0014 DUV 73.0 CRI Blue light relative amplitude 1.00 -20.3 R9 41.2 R12 71 Rf 96 Rg included battery
Armytek Wizard Magnet USB XP-L WW Mode 3 32 lumens 3934K 0.0028 DUV 72.9 CRI Blue light relative amplitude 1.00 -21.9 R9 39.7 R12 72 Rf 96 Rg included battery
Armytek Wizard Magnet USB XP-L WW Mode 2 2 lumens 3962K 0.0022 DUV 73.3 CRI Blue light relative amplitude 1.00 -20.9 R9 40.1 R12 72 Rf 96 Rg included battery
Armytek Wizard Magnet USB XP-L WW Mode 1 0 lumens 3935K 0.0025 DUV 73.3 CRI Blue light relative amplitude 1.00 -20.8 R9 39.8 R12 72 Rf 96 Rg included battery
Zebralight H600fc MKIV H1 1,398 lumens 4038K -0.0003 DUV 91.3 CRI Blue light relative amplitude 1.00 60.0 R9 72.2 R12 89 Rf 100 Rg NCR18650GA or VTC6A
Zebralight H600fc MKIV H2 502 lumens 3952K 0.0011 DUV 92.2 CRI Blue light relative amplitude 0.99 64.1 R9 70.5 R12 89 Rf 99 Rg NCR18650GA
Zebralight H600fc MKIV M1 112 lumens 3851K 0.0017 DUV 93.0 CRI Blue light relative amplitude 0.96 66.6 R9 69.8 R12 89 Rf 98 Rg NCR18650GA
Zebralight H600fc MKIV M2 22 lumens 3802K 0.0024 DUV 93.2 CRI Blue light relative amplitude 0.92 66.9 R9 69.8 R12 89 Rf 98 Rg NCR18650GA
Zebralight H600fc MKIV L1 3 lumens 3770K 0.0026 DUV 93.1 CRI Blue light relative amplitude 0.91 66.4 R9 69.7 R12 89 Rf 97 Rg NCR18650GA
Zebralight H600fc MKIV L2 0 lumens 3773K 0.0023 DUV 93.2 CRI Blue light relative amplitude 0.91 66.4 R9 69.7 R12 89 Rf 97 Rg NCR18650GA


Armytek very sneakily upgraded the Wizard Pro WW to a 4000k 80CRI emitter, which of course is to my delightful surprise. In the past it is said to use a 3500K 70CRI emitter. Nowhere on Armytek's website did they mention anything about an 80CRI emitter. Now I'm wondering if it is still an XHP50 or is it now an XHP50.2. The Wizard Pro WW also happens to be my favorite headlamp from the above because the CCT and tint looks the best and I find that more important than a 10 CRI difference. This unit was bought from Armytekstore.com and shipped from Canada.

I also like the ZL H600fc very much mainly for its super small size and supposedly better thermal regulation than most flashlights. The tint is actually not overly green unlike past Zebralights that I had to return. The tint could have been rosier but with Zebralight, and even Armytek to a certain extent, its a tint lottery and I'm glad at least this unit is on the BBL and not above when on max output. It lacks usb recharge and doesn't have a tail magnet like the Wizard Pros but the small size makes it so easy to pocket. The Wizards do look a lot better aesthetically though IMO.

The Wizard Pro Nichia 144A is nice too but after side by side comparison with the Pro WW 80CRI, I find that I like the 4000k more. Both Nichia units I bought have similar tint but one is 50 lumens brighter than the other. I haven't tested whether these units have LVP or retain driver problems reported in reviews of the prototype. The units were bought from Armytek.com, which originally indicated shipping from China but they later changed it to shipping from Canada I guess because of either CNY or the novelcorona virus.


Here is a comparison of the measured output vs rated max output:
Armytek Wizard Pro WW - 1521 lm vs 1675 lm (91% of rating)
Armytek Wizard Pro Nichia 144A 90CRI - 1388 lm vs 1400 lm (99% of rating)
Armytek Wizard Pro v3 XP-L WW (white button) - 954 lm vs 930 lm (103% of rating)
Armytek Wizard Pro v3 XP-L WW (yellow button) magnet usb - 1010 lm vs 930 lm (109% of rating)
Zebralight H600fc MKIV - 1398 lm vs 1568 lm (89% of rating)

I'm surprised Armytek's ratings are so honest with the Wizards. I think some of their other models didn't measure that close to rating but I'll check later. I'm also surprised the H600fc did not measure as far below spec as I expected because I remember past Zebralights I measured were more like 20% below spec. However keep in mind my lumens were measured 2s from turn-on instead of ANSI standard 30s.

Another thing of interest is that of all the Armytek's WW I tested, despite they are 70CRI, they are always close or below the BBL (negative DUV) so it seems like it is possible they are buying tint binned at 5A or 5D!  I hope they continue to buy tint binned emitters.

Edited by: SKV89 on 02/13/2020 - 12:06
dmsoule
Offline
Last seen: 6 hours 8 min ago
Joined: 08/27/2016 - 20:14
Posts: 206
Location: MN USA

Great round-up, thanks for doing this comparison.

ChibiM
ChibiM's picture
Offline
Last seen: 23 hours 50 min ago
Joined: 05/09/2011 - 10:25
Posts: 6212
Location: Holland

Just a quick question, how do you measure CRI? Via bounce on a white surface or directly into the spectrometer?

08CivicSi
Offline
Last seen: 13 hours 11 min ago
Joined: 09/25/2011 - 19:02
Posts: 348
Location: Greensboro, NC USA

Great job, thanks!

Watermanchris
Offline
Last seen: 3 hours 36 min ago
Joined: 08/06/2019 - 09:12
Posts: 314
Location: Deerfield Beach, FL

I like my Wizard Pro Nichia but I also prefer the 4000K of my H600Fc and I completely agree that the Zebra headlamps are amazing feats of engineering – small, efficient, and tough. I just wish they’d (Zebralight) offer some better emitter choices or that they would be easier to mod.

I ordered 5 Wizard pro headbands for my new E21a H04RCs. I think that’s going to be my go-to setup – Clemence H04 in an Armytek Wizard headband.

Once those come in, I will likely sell off most of my remaining 18650 headlamps.

Thanks for doing this testing!

SKV89
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 28 min ago
Joined: 12/10/2017 - 12:46
Posts: 3568
Location: US
Watermanchris wrote:
I completely agree that the Zebra headlamps are amazing feats of engineering – small, efficient, and tough.

The claims of Zebralights being super efficient are unsubstantiated. From Maukka’s testing, Zebralight’s efficiency is average at best.

http://budgetlightforum.com/comment/1343229#comment-1343229

Maukka tested the H600fc MKIV with an efficiency of 89lm/w whereas the 90CRI Wuben TO56R has an efficiency of 125lm/w. The Olight H2R 4000K 70CRI is 135lm/w and the new Olight Perun is even more efficient.
http://budgetlightforum.com/comment/1399927#comment-1399927

In terms of driver efficiency Zebralight is a far ways from the level of Olight and Fenix. Though with the latter two, you are stuck with ugly (IMO) CW Facepalm emitter options and no HI CRI.

maukka
maukka's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 day 47 min ago
Joined: 12/31/2015 - 04:15
Posts: 2050
Location: Finland

To be fair, Zebralight’s SC64c is amazingly efficient at 140 lm/W on its 80 lumen level

and 117 lm/W at 300 lumens

Pavlo
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 25 min ago
Joined: 12/13/2015 - 10:37
Posts: 631
Location: Canada

The Wuben TO50R got 125 L / W when it was tested at 248 Lumen setting.
The Zebralight H600FC MK4 got 89 L / W when it was tested at 410 Lumen setting.

You can’t compare these two figures, because the luminous efficacy of an LED is not linear. If the Zebralight was tested at 248 Lumens like the Wuben, then you can, all else being equal.

As for the Olight H2R getting 135 L / W, what setting was this tested under? I would expect it to be higher, as its a 70 CRI LED, and this does not mean the driver is more efficient.

Watermanchris
Offline
Last seen: 3 hours 36 min ago
Joined: 08/06/2019 - 09:12
Posts: 314
Location: Deerfield Beach, FL

Pavlo wrote:
The Wuben TO50R got 125 L / W when it was tested at 248 Lumen setting.
The Zebralight H600FC MK4 got 89 L / W when it was tested at 410 Lumen setting.

You can’t compare these two figures, because the luminous efficacy of an LED is not linear. If the Zebralight was tested at 248 Lumens like the Wuben, then you can, all else being equal.

As for the Olight H2R getting 135 L / W, what setting was this tested under? I would expect it to be higher, as its a 70 CRI LED, and this does not mean the driver is more efficient.


True. To test one driver’s efficiency against another, they would both have to be driving the same emitter at the same output.

I do know that a Zebralight SC62w has been running for over 400 days on its lowest moonlight setting powered by a single 18650 battery. That’s pretty efficent to me. https://www.reddit.com/r/flashlight/comments/f118×3/day_404_no_error_he...

SKV89
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 28 min ago
Joined: 12/10/2017 - 12:46
Posts: 3568
Location: US
ChibiM wrote:

Just a quick question, how do you measure CRI? Via bounce on a white surface or directly into the spectrometer?

Directly onto the spectrometer.

SKV89
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 28 min ago
Joined: 12/10/2017 - 12:46
Posts: 3568
Location: US

maukka wrote:
To be fair, Zebralight’s SC64c is amazingly efficient at 140 lm/W on its 80 lumen level

and 117 lm/W at 300 lumens

!https://i.imgur.com/FAaMxJb.png!

Do you have any idea why the SC64c with an XP-L2 emitter that is supposedly less efficient than an XHP50.2 can manage 106 lm/w at average 400 lumens whereas the H600Fc MK4 only manages 89 lm/w at 400 lumens? Is it because the XP-L2 is 3V and the 50.2 is 6V? If so, maybe ZL’s 3V driver is efficient but ZL’s boost driver efficiency is behind the competition. I wish ZL would send you every single model to test so we know what we are buying. Driver efficiency is an important factor to me at least.

I measured 1312 lumens for the H600fc MK4 at 30s compared to your 1124 lumens at 30s. Strange because most of the time my testing setup measures lower than yours for the same light. I’m wondering if ZL found a higher bin or is it just unit to unit variation. That’s quite a huge variation though considering all the identical Olights I measured have near identical output.

SKV89
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 28 min ago
Joined: 12/10/2017 - 12:46
Posts: 3568
Location: US

Pavlo wrote:

As for the Olight H2R getting 135 L / W, what setting was this tested under? I would expect it to be higher, as its a 70 CRI LED, and this does not mean the driver is more efficient.

A bit above 600 lumens according to the graph.

SKV89
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 28 min ago
Joined: 12/10/2017 - 12:46
Posts: 3568
Location: US
Watermanchris wrote:
I do know that a Zebralight SC62w has been running for over 400 days on its lowest moonlight setting powered by a single 18650 battery. That’s pretty efficent to me.

Efficiency is lm/w. Doesn’t matter how long it runs if the output is super low. Even my Armytek Tiara Pro 18350 w/ the E21A 2000K 9080, which is the most inefficient of the E21A series, has been on 24hrs/day for the past months on the lowest mode and still going. This doesn’t prove the driver is efficient just that it has a great firefly mode.

Pavlo
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 25 min ago
Joined: 12/13/2015 - 10:37
Posts: 631
Location: Canada

SKV89 wrote:
Pavlo wrote:

As for the Olight H2R getting 135 L / W, what setting was this tested under? I would expect it to be higher, as its a 70 CRI LED, and this does not mean the driver is more efficient.

A bit above 600 lumens according to the graph.

How are you calculating 135 L / W at that setting of just over 600 lumens?

clemence
clemence's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 days 17 min ago
Joined: 07/12/2015 - 02:58
Posts: 2414
Location: Bali - Indonesia

Watermanchris wrote:
I like my Wizard Pro Nichia but I also prefer the 4000K of my H600Fc and I completely agree that the Zebra headlamps are amazing feats of engineering – small, efficient, and tough. I just wish they’d (Zebralight) offer some better emitter choices or that they would be easier to mod.

I ordered 5 Wizard pro headbands for my new E21a H04RCs. I think that’s going to be my go-to setup – Clemence H04 in an Armytek Wizard headband.

Once those come in, I will likely sell off most of my remaining 18650 headlamps.

Thanks for doing this testing!

In my opinion, SH H04RC (don’t confuse with discounted H04) headband and bracket is much better than AT. The quick release bracket allows the pocket clip installed on headband and it’s very sturdy. also the anti slip strip is extremely useful in retaining your headband adjustment. But on the other hand, if you buy discounted H03/H04, you get the mushy silicone rubber headband which almost always requires the top strap to be used. Otherwise the light will bounce even when walking.

[Clemence]

Watermanchris
Offline
Last seen: 3 hours 36 min ago
Joined: 08/06/2019 - 09:12
Posts: 314
Location: Deerfield Beach, FL

clemence wrote:
Watermanchris wrote:
I like my Wizard Pro Nichia but I also prefer the 4000K of my H600Fc and I completely agree that the Zebra headlamps are amazing feats of engineering – small, efficient, and tough. I just wish they’d (Zebralight) offer some better emitter choices or that they would be easier to mod.

I ordered 5 Wizard pro headbands for my new E21a H04RCs. I think that’s going to be my go-to setup – Clemence H04 in an Armytek Wizard headband.

Once those come in, I will likely sell off most of my remaining 18650 headlamps.

Thanks for doing this testing!

In my opinion, SH H04RC (don’t confuse with discounted H04) headband and bracket is much better than AT. The quick release bracket allows the pocket clip installed on headband and it’s very sturdy. also the anti slip strip is extremely useful in retaining your headband adjustment. But on the other hand, if you buy discounted H03/H04, you get the mushy silicone rubber headband which almost always requires the top strap to be used. Otherwise the light will bounce even when walking.

[Clemence]


I haven’t seen the new H04 headband yet so I am looking forward to checking it out when my E21a H04s come. That is, of course assuming China ever gets back online.
Watermanchris
Offline
Last seen: 3 hours 36 min ago
Joined: 08/06/2019 - 09:12
Posts: 314
Location: Deerfield Beach, FL
SKV89 wrote:
Watermanchris wrote:
I do know that a Zebralight SC62w has been running for over 400 days on its lowest moonlight setting powered by a single 18650 battery. That’s pretty efficent to me.

Efficiency is lm/w. Doesn’t matter how long it runs if the output is super low. Even my Armytek Tiara Pro 18350 w/ the E21A 2000K 9080, which is the most inefficient of the E21A series, has been on 24hrs/day for the past months on the lowest mode and still going. This doesn’t prove the driver is efficient just that it has a great firefly mode.


Okay, but Lumens per watt at different output levels seems to be cherry picking. I feel like the correct way to test something like that would be to do it across all output levels and average the results.
clemence
clemence's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 days 17 min ago
Joined: 07/12/2015 - 02:58
Posts: 2414
Location: Bali - Indonesia
Watermanchris wrote:
SKV89 wrote:
Watermanchris wrote:
I do know that a Zebralight SC62w has been running for over 400 days on its lowest moonlight setting powered by a single 18650 battery. That’s pretty efficent to me.

Efficiency is lm/w. Doesn’t matter how long it runs if the output is super low. Even my Armytek Tiara Pro 18350 w/ the E21A 2000K 9080, which is the most inefficient of the E21A series, has been on 24hrs/day for the past months on the lowest mode and still going. This doesn’t prove the driver is efficient just that it has a great firefly mode.


Okay, but Lumens per watt at different output levels seems to be cherry picking. I feel like the correct way to test something like that would be to do it across all output levels and average the results.

No, IMO the correct way to measure it is by removing the driver and adjust the output so both drivers outputs the same. Every driver design has their own sweet spot.

[Clemence]

SKV89
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 28 min ago
Joined: 12/10/2017 - 12:46
Posts: 3568
Location: US
Watermanchris wrote:
SKV89 wrote:
Watermanchris wrote:
I do know that a Zebralight SC62w has been running for over 400 days on its lowest moonlight setting powered by a single 18650 battery. That’s pretty efficent to me.

Efficiency is lm/w. Doesn’t matter how long it runs if the output is super low. Even my Armytek Tiara Pro 18350 w/ the E21A 2000K 9080, which is the most inefficient of the E21A series, has been on 24hrs/day for the past months on the lowest mode and still going. This doesn’t prove the driver is efficient just that it has a great firefly mode.


Okay, but Lumens per watt at different output levels seems to be cherry picking. I feel like the correct way to test something like that would be to do it across all output levels and average the results.

Problem is the drivers between flashlights don’t have equal output modes to compare so we can only only rely on whatever graphs and efficiency measurements reviewers provide. Also we have VERY LIMITED flashlight efficiency data to use. Besides Maukka, I don’t think anyone else does efficiency measurements. Measuring efficiency is a huge undertaking as it requires a lot of time to run the battery down. I am grateful with whatever data we get from reviewers here. Therefore we can only get a rough comparison to get a general idea.

Maukka’s graph includes several lights overlaid over each other. The other flashlights were all running at higher output than the H600fc, so the comparison makes sense. Flashlights are less efficient on their higher brightness modes. Again these are not exact differences in efficiency. Even measuring two lights of the same model at the same output mode will result in different efficiency results. Just look at my output measurements for the two Wizard Nichia units or my H600fc measurements vs Makka’s H600fc measurements (but that is a rather extreme case).

Pavlo
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 25 min ago
Joined: 12/13/2015 - 10:37
Posts: 631
Location: Canada

The information we have on flashlight efficiency is indeed very limited, and I understand that we can only rely on any testing that has been done so far by generous forum members. This does not mean, on the other hand, that we can draw conclusions on driver efficiency if the limited data available is not comparable.

The H600fc MK4 effiency of 89L / W was tested at 410 lumens. The graph showing other lights only shows output and runtime of different lights with different emitters and different CRI levels. Where are you calculating or getting the Lumen/W at those higher levels? I still don’t see how you can conclude that a comparison can be drawn between different lights and where the lumens/ watt data is coming from. As per my previous question, how are you calculating 135 L / W at that setting of just over 600 lumens for the Olight?

To make matters more complicated, each driver will have optimal efficiency at a specific output. So Driver A may be more efficient at 3 amps, and Driver B might be more efficient at 1 amp. So driver A may be more efficient than driver B in one setting, and the opposite is true at another setting. As far as I am concerned, none of the data above dictates that one driver is more efficient than another or vice versa.

SKV89
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 28 min ago
Joined: 12/10/2017 - 12:46
Posts: 3568
Location: US

135 lm/w was calculated by Maukka. I dont know how it was calculated

Pavlo
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 25 min ago
Joined: 12/13/2015 - 10:37
Posts: 631
Location: Canada
SKV89 wrote:
135 lm/w was calculated by Maukka. I dont know how it was calculated

Do you have the link or reference? I’d like to see at what setting this was done on as I am curious myself Smile

Thanks

SKV89
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 28 min ago
Joined: 12/10/2017 - 12:46
Posts: 3568
Location: US

It’s in the link in my post above.

Pavlo
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 25 min ago
Joined: 12/13/2015 - 10:37
Posts: 631
Location: Canada

OK, so I did a little digging and this is what I see.

The Olight H2R tested 135 L / W at 600 lumens, which is impressive.
The Cree XHP50.2 4000K highest bin 70 CRI is rated at 1328 Lumens at 25C.
The Cree XHP50.2 4000K highest bin 90 CRI is rated at 1073 Lumens at 25C.

That makes the low CRI version about 24% more efficient than the High CRI. This can go up to 30% if the lower bin High CRI was used.
If we were to add 24% efficiency to the Zebralight at 89 L/W, it would translate to 110 L/W at the 410 Lumen level.
The math is oversimplified, but we can probably assume that the Olight is most likely more efficient than the Zebralight in the 400-600 lumen range.

From what I recall reading in old forum posts, the Zebralights are not as efficient in the higher settings, but are tuned to perform better in the lower and medium settings. Not sure how true that is, but it may be possible.

Great to see that Olight is releasing lights that are that efficient nonetheless.

SKV89
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 28 min ago
Joined: 12/10/2017 - 12:46
Posts: 3568
Location: US

Yea the H2R is really good. The unit I have has amazing 4000K tint to boot (-0.006 DUV at turbo and -0.003 at top of ramp) but that’s sadly the only Olight with good NW tint in existence.

Olight efficiency is getting even better now. The only 2 brands that provide runtime curves or specify step down points are Fenix and Olight so I’ve been studying their flashlight specs and comparing them with run time curves of other lights from flashlight reviewers. These two brands are really impressive in their super high efficiency compared to the rest. I just wish they provide better emitter options. Until then, there’s good reason to buy Zebralight and Armytek over Olight and Feix.

maukka
maukka's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 day 47 min ago
Joined: 12/31/2015 - 04:15
Posts: 2050
Location: Finland
SKV89 wrote:
135 lm/w was calculated by Maukka. I dont know how it was calculated

It was calculated by dividing the integral of lumens over time (lumen*hour) by the total battery energy (Wh).

lm/W = (lm*h)/(W*h)

Quadrupel
Quadrupel's picture
Online
Last seen: 10 min 23 sec ago
Joined: 12/03/2017 - 10:40
Posts: 158
Location: LT
Maukka compared just some flashlights with different LEDs and its just fact about run time in high mode , but not about efficiency.
SKV89
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 28 min ago
Joined: 12/10/2017 - 12:46
Posts: 3568
Location: US
Quadrupel wrote:
Maukka compared just some flashlights with different LEDs and its just fact about run time in high mode , but not about efficiency.

Lumens / watt = efficiency. Not sure how you can say it is not. Take a look at the links to Maukka’s posts. Also please take a look at Maukka’s comment just above yours on how he calculates efficiency.