In an emergency situation visible PWM would make me even more stressed and nervous… 
…and so would next memory mode with blinkies…
How about blinkies with low frequency PWM?
Aaarrgh!!! :confounded:
A dual-chemistry driver would happily keep draining a 14500 to sub-volt levels. You’d need a protected 14500 to keep that from happening.
I don’t know offhand any DC drivers/lights that can “remember” it’s got a 14500 and then cut out at 2.9V or so. Not saying it’s impossible, just that I don’t know of any.
You can actually see this with the naked eye? I’ve seen pictures of a few of the lights I have showing the same thing (no idea how you film it). I have never seen anything like that. Maybe I’m just lucky? It was actually a little joke as to my fried eyeball’s. I’m 60, don’t need glasses (except for working with resistors, or the small phone book). I am somewhat colorblind. Do you think eye color has anything to do with it? Honestly, I’m kind of fascinated with this.
I do have bad hearing though. I see my wife’s lips move all the time, but seldom hear her
it isn;t really a good question.
the thing is, i would place a higher priority on other features, besides “lack of pwm”
i would like a UI that makes sense and is not opposite my other EDC lights
i want 3-5 logarithmically evenly spaced light levels [ 1 3 11 36 121 400 would be great, or 1 10 25 63 151 400 or 1 10 34 117 400]
i do NOT want blinky modes, at least not where you accidentally blinkulate
i want instant access to turbo from any mode
small, under 85mm
side button switch
tailstand
if it had that, and was under $40 - i wouldn;t care if it had PWM
also - why would anyone NOT want dual chemistry, where is the drawback to that?
wle
I believe that dual chemistry drivers are less efficient than a specific chemistry driver so I’ll choose AA only. Also, I DISLIKE visible PWM. Most days just aggravating, on days when I’m exhausted, it’s nauseating. Manker 01 in AA form factor with a little more brightness would be awesome!!
I agree
No, the camera can see it. And the brain is processing the pulses, but it is not “visible” unless you wave the light, or take a photo
I agree it is very difficult to create a good poll
the issue is that the last choice, dual chemistry with NoPWM, at least in a Pineapple, is not available, even though it is the one most people would want
I can see people have lots of different tolerance levels of PWM, some get headaches even from PWM they cannot see, but it can be photographed, and it shows on a scope
here is an example of 3 lights with “noPWM”, and one with true PWM, the Malkoff… note the Zebra on the left causes at least one user to get headaches… The Zebra’s “circuit noise” is only barely visible in a photograph, and on a scope it does not drop to zero, so its not PWM by the strict definition…, originally posted by reppans:
left to right, Zebra, Quark, Eagletac, Malkoff
It’s just not that simple because we all have different levels of sensitivity to such things. We all know this poll is about the Pineapple, and I can’t see the pwm on the Pineapple so it’s fine with me. I mean if it can be made faster then by all means do it, but I have no complaints as it is.
I thought the Skyray King has 200Hz PWM on low. I can’t see anything… Should I feel lucky or should I feel old?
Thanks for all the comments.
Lucky to be Old 
fwiw, I asked Malkoff what speed PWM his 3 mode MDC uses, the reply:
“The PWM frequency is 310 Hertz. Most people can’t see it.”
I leave it to each individual to decide how they feel about PWM, the poll clearly shows a preference not to have PWM IF there was a choice, but I also see that people are happy to buy lights with PWM that they dont notice. Im guessing most of the people that do not notice, do not try waving the light, and do not take photos of the beam or LED up close.
As a wise man once said, if you dont notice PWM, don’t learn how to detect it or you may regret it. Similar to the High CRI experience, if you are happy with your Cool White Low CRI lights, don’t learn how to detect CRI, and steer clear of Neutral CCT, or you may regret that too. :smiling_imp:
When ReyLight came out with the High CRI, Neutral CCT, and NoPWM Tool, I thought I had entered Nirvana. Imagine my surprise when both the Maratac AA and the Pineapple, came out with PWM drivers…
Its all good… choices are fun… Merry New Year!
What's the excuse for any light having low frequency PWM? Is there some cost savings available using cheaper mcu's that only have low frequency capability? Low speed PWM is pretty unacceptable in fast motion situations. Maybe there's someone it won't bother, but I don't see any reason to do it. A light with low frequency PWM is just designed wrong, or cheap at best.
yeah, what is seen can’t be unseen
but actually, the CRI is not a big deal for me
i am having Astrolux A01 and olight I3s Cu CW, and i like the i3s Cu more(yeah, the price is much more higher)
and the last option is the best, but this is BUDGETlightforum, if i have to pay 10$ more for a 15$ flashlight just to get rid of PWM, i will deny it
i am happy to go with option 3, as long as it has HIGH Frequency PWM, for me, the ability to use many types of battery is more important
7135s have a certain capacitance associated with the input strobe pin. ×8, and that’s a fairly hefty capacitance to overcome with the somewhat anæmic output pin of a Tiny13. The signal is slowed and rises only gradually, so at low levels (especially moonlight/firefly modes) it “eats” a few counts of the PWM output, sometimes enough that the 7135s don’t even turn on. So a PWM of 8 counts might only “register” as a 6 (where 256 = 100%), and a PWM of 3 might register as a 1… if it turns on at all. (The difference of 130 vs 128 won’t be noticeable.)
At a lower PWM freq, each pulse is wider, so a PWM of 1 (longer pulse) would be long enough to get the 7135s to turn on; at a higher freq, 1 or 2 (shorter pulses) might not turn them on, but a 3 would (first 1-2 pulses “eaten” from the slow risetime).
Wait… what??
Not sure if you mean millihertz or megahertz, but either one is… uhh, wow.
310MHz is like VHF teevee channel frequency.
310mHz is 0.3Hz or a sloooooow turn-signal on a car.
9000mHz is 9Hz, and pretty much everyone can see that kind of flicker.
While I’m making an assumption, I’m pretty sure he meant 9KHz or 9000 Hz. Metric is not clear for everyone.
In any case, Jon, you are really taking this anti-PWM crusade to heart it seems!
I come from the old days, in 2006, 100Hz was common, the Jetbeam CL-E even came out with 80Hz in the first gen model (later improved to 300Hz). Conversely, the old Cree XRE with constant current designs tended to be very green at lower levels.
These days, with modern LEDS and much higher frequency designs (10KHz and above), I find PWM to be fine. My favourite drivers (eg. Dr. Jones H17F) are super powerful, flexible, and programmable. That would not be feasible with a constant current design. It would likely be too complicate, cost too much or be too big. Constant current is preferable to me, but if the PWM frequency is high enough, I don’t mind.
AA compatibility is a must for me. I much prefer the ability to use eneloops in my AA lights. 14500 compatibility is a nice to have for me, but not a requirement. Perhaps useful to make the light weigh less or provide higher max output. That said, a single voltage design is likely more efficient and easier to design (eg. Zebralight SC5).
I see you have mentioned the ReyLight Pineapple. I think it’s PWM was measured at around 2KHz. While I do detect it, I find it reasonable in use. especially since it is not found in the moonlight level. In any case, it’s disappointing but I don’t find it too noticeable. I’m pretty sensitive to PWM, but I’m sure others may find it annoying. I’m glad Rey is raising the frequency to 9Khz in the Ti design though.
On an unrelated note, has anyone tried the new 4Sevens Preon? I have heard it has very bad PWM…
Yeah … 9Khz
310Mhz is my garage door frequency
Dual, with or without PWM.
Thanks Lighbringer. I see.. ok.. This would be a problem on the opposite end also, not that anyone cares much there, but a 254 would not regesiter as 245/255 but more like 254.9/255.
So that creates a little non-linearity in the PWM response, maybe complicates unifying software across different configurations (different numbers of 7135's), but in the end you can still do a PWM of 3 though to get the equivilant of the 1, and if it's really only that bad, then that's not so bad at all. There might be some actual energy wasted in driving all that capacitance though, which might bug the survivalists who want 50 days of moonlight mode. Between the two issues, I'd rather have high frequency.