Unpopular Flashlight Opinion Thread

I’m not sure this counts as an unpopular opinion, but I don’t like smartphones. Or non-smart phones either. The hardware is okay, but the software is pretty bad… and they have largely become just another way to receive spam.

Here is what I use a smartphone for:

  • Text messages (SMS)
  • Voice calls (infrequently)
  • Reading books
  • As a clock when I’m not at home
  • Measuring flashlight runtimes with zak.wilson’s “ceilingbounce” app
  • Guitar tuner (infrequently)
  • Navigating on roads (very infrequently)
  • Alarm clock while travelling (very infrequently)

… and things I don’t use a smartphone for:

  • Flashlight
  • Music player
  • Video player
  • Social media
  • Chat client
  • Web browser
  • Calendar
  • Todo list
  • Grocery list
  • Taking notes
  • Taking pictures

… because it’s bad at all of these things and I’d rather use something less-bad.

Many of these are things I would like to use it for, but smart phone OSes really hold back the potential of the hardware. My old Linux PDA from 2001 was a more capable device than an average smartphone, despite its primitive hardware, because the OS didn’t get in the way of what I wanted it to do.

I’ve been involved in portable device OS development several times, and can say from first-hand experience that many of the problems with smart phones are caused by corporate businessmen making high-level decisions which are not in the user’s interests. It’s (mostly) not bad for technological reasons; it’s for profit.

But in the case of phone flashlights, those are bad for tech reasons. It’s only there so people can take pictures indoors and at night. It’s not even trying to be good as a flashlight; it’s trying to be a camera flash.

I think the problem with the original statement is the author’s projection of his personal justification for indulging in this “hobby”. Its arrogant to claim enthusiasts are in denial, and to do it with such a blanket statement is dismissive and rude. It’s not an unpopular opinion, its someone wrestling with their own psychological determinations about these expenditures. Its far too negative, using terms like “toys”, “fixation” and “impractical ”. To some, these lights demonstrate craftsmanship, to others they can be art. You have to ask, why so belittling?

This thread invites people to make bold statements and that is the fun of this thread. So sounding a bit arrogant about your opinion is specifically in this thread, welcome and invites counter-opinion.

IMO of course :slight_smile:

To be fair, if I could drive a supercar to work every day, I’d do it. What’s the fun in keeping it in a garage? It’s bad enough I can’t respect the local speed limits.

.

I find that a phone is useless 99% of the time when I need a light

Wellp, this is about unpopular opinions, so in that sense I guess it fits, if everyone’s getting their undies all in a twist. :laughing:

Thing is, I’ve seen phone “flashlights” in 3 different varieties: screen goes full white, lit by the backlight; camera-flash LED doing double-duty as a “flashlight”, and a dedicated teeny 5mm LED or so being used as an actual flashlight. They’re all kinda silly, just as pliers on a SAK. They might be better’n nothing, but not by much.

I’ve got key doodads that slip onto the key itself and have a built-in coin-cell and LED. I’ve also got dedicated blanks to serve that function (available at your friendly neighborhood locksmith). Squeeze to light it up, and it lights up the keyhole perfectly right where the key’s going. Limited lifespan of the cell, usually nonreplaceable, so not quite suited for general-purpose lighting.

In any case, when something rolls under the couch, or falls under a car-seat, or drops down sewer-grates, using a cellphone for lighting would be either useless or retarded (unless you don’t mind the phone falling down the sewer, in a toilet, between cabinet and wall, etc.).

So even an AAA light would be better. Some twisties being barely bigger’n the cell itself, they could be put to good use by quite many people.

But hey, we have our choice of AAA/10440, AA/14500, 16340, 18650, whatever. You wanna carry a Q8 strapped to your belt, hey, go crazy.

So… can’t we all just get alooooong? [snark]

@Lightbringer, using the full screen backlight doesn’t seem very efficient, since intensity is absolute crap at that point.

And yes, we can get along, no problem.

It’s just that with flashlights, we have every choice imaginable in terms of size that phone lights should only be used as a high CRI camera flash, and nothing else.

I mean, we have tiny rechargeable button cell lights, AAA lights, 18650 lights, lights for every size!

We even have lights for women’s pockets… which don’t exist for some reason on some women’s pants.

Was beginning to wonder, being that people are getting so “invested” in an opinion…

I still don’t get that. Sounds like a manufacturing defect, but it’s by “design”.

It’s not a bug, it’s a feature

Sure, desk jockeys may never need much more that a cell phone light…

but plenty of people don’t work at a desk all day or live in the city where there is a ton of street lighting/light pollution.

I tried going back to keychain light only (~80 lumens) for a while and was wishing several times throughout both the day and night I had a bigger light with me.

I don’t buy pants1 without pockets.

Then again, I usually don’t buy pants1 at all.

Pants1 are pants2.


——

  1. American meaning.
  2. British meaning.

Cellphones suck.

Agreed with the first part. Trousers and shorts with no pockets are worth very little to me, even as loungewear, exactly because I can’t carry a light on them.

Mixed emitter lights, i.e. a D4 with two 3000K and two 5000K, look like a manufacturing defect or a bizarre EOL light. Mixed emitters don’t consistently yield a BBL tint. You are still at the mercy of the tint lottery, but now you’re spreading yourself further out. Lee Minus-Green filters are a superior method that works consistently at producing “rosier” tints from green-biased emitters, yet no one seems to be talking about those? Oh yes, I wanted to add that the Lee filters, when applied to green or above BBL emitters have been shown by Maukka to improve R9 and even CRI values while emitter mixing worsens these values. The Lee filters also enhance the objective saturation values— R (g), and make colors pop.

So maybe there’s hope for my Quarks and Jetbeams?

They might help, assuming they have a lot of green, but you’re working with emitters that don’t push much red. You’ll be loosing out on output, the main reason one might go such an emitter in the first place. Still might be interesting if someone maybe does some spectral analysis tests?? You’re probably better off going high-CRI then objectively filtering to your hearts content in a manner that offers greater control and immediate flexibility. It’s trivial to swap filters, but it’s over an hour’s work to swap emitters back and forth.

The Quarks might as well be welded shut, and I hear (haven’t really tried it myself, other than hand-cranking) the Jetbeams are little better.

Would be nice to breathe a little life into ’em.

The LED light on my cellphone (HTC 10) is excellent. It has 2 emitters, one cool and one warm. Together they get a nice “averaged” neutral tint that to my eye leans a little warm. The only thing that sucks is that the hardware seems incapable of supporting a dimming function (not on OEM app & 3rd party can’t seem to do it).

I don’t use my cellphone flashlight much, because I usually keep a small AAA EDC light in my pocket. Or use the rechargeable Olight i1R on my car keychain. Those are far brighter and easier to wield. But, sometimes the cellphone light comes in handy. Easy to prop up and lean against something. Plus, the floody beam is very useful.

I really don’t get why people will go out of their way to say one particular kind of light is the best and diss all the rest. There are so many uses for the different form factors available.