Ok, additive for the BLF Special edition SP70ā¦ I have changed the factory MOSFET to an Vishay-Dale SIR404DP and replaced the leads with 16ga Turnigy. With spring bypasses made by using 20ga Turnigy wires inside the dual springs and by using Samsung 30T 21700ās I am seeing a start value of 10,500 lumens and a 30 second reading of 8700 lumens. I am pretty sure a good AR coated lens would enable more lumens out the front, need to check without the lens to see what may be happening with this clear glassā¦
Right, and I reckon we all pretty much know thatā¦ I tend to stumble on stuff like that because I take things literally, that fine line between black and white, right and wrong. I have never been good at reading between the lines. I got it, after looking at it a few times, so I guess everyone else will too.
If Lux Perpetua ever asks me to build him a light Iāll try to source 4.885 Kelvin emittersā¦.
This lights OP reflector measures 74.3mm opening diameter and 48.4mm deep. This depth to width ratio certainly needs some improvement if a mirror finished reflector is going to be implemented for the BLF light.
Ok, I finally got a reading without the glassā¦ the light with glass lens is making 10,500 lumens at startā¦ without the glass it can do 11,220 lumens. so there is some 720 lumens being lost to the glass. I donāt think this is a huge deal and the glass is pretty good, I would like to see the 1.8mm thickness increase to 3mm though, at these diameters the glass can get broken easier so a thicker glass is warranted, or the use of a really good Acryclic with AR coating.
Talking about the āgood influenceā, thereās only 19 days to go for Le Grand K before it is replaced by a measurement based on the Planck constant.
Funny enough, a brit (actually a Scot, Maxwell) was at the base of getting rid of all the artifacts and get the metric system really right.
So how do they interpret whether 4,885 (four thousand eight hundred eighty-five), which is read as 4.885, is actually 4.885 (four and eight hundred eighty-five thousandths)?
Sorry Jos, I was not aware of this issue. I moved everything from post #2 and #3 to the OP. Hopefully, this will resolve any future problems with new posts.
Sorry Dale, I didnāt expect to cause that much confusion when talking about CCT and Kelvin as the base unit. However, I do agree with you that using points and commas as decimal separator can sometimes be confusing. ;-)
Thatās exactly the root cause. Iām used to separate the decimals by a point, not by a comma. That reminds me asking the cocky question what the internationally agreed standard is. Point or comma? :-D
Haha...Iād love to get a DB Custom 'one of a kind' with 4,885...sorry, 4.885K. :-P
I just wonder if my eyes would even notice a CCT that low. :-D
Dale, from this day forward I promise to keep in mind using no decimal separator anymore. Result: No confusion for anyone. Howās that? :-D