But it’s click and hold to turn off. Not for me. I only have one light that does the same and it is always frustrating to remember that.
It really would’ve been nice if the color control was made as a menu shunt off of the main Anduril UI menu. Anduril is so rich… and sacrificing that for temperature control is too much of a disappointment. If it doesn’t sell well, maybe Lumintop will reconsider this for a replacement.
Unfortunately, that is probably one of the reason why it does not appeal to the general public.
It is a good to have feature but it is never a "must have" function when i shop for my flashlight.
Well, with primary Anduril 2, you get a light in Simple UI mode and the user can simply stay in Simple. It’s actually quite nice. But it would be nice to then add the 2 separate emitter cluster controls as another menu item. And also make that available in Advanced. So if a light is equipped with 3 emitters, it’ll be 2 groups where one has emitters #1 & #2, and second has just emitter #3. And with 4 emitters, two sets of 2 emitters. Doesn’t matter what tint. But if a light is designed with 2 sets of different temperature emitters, they’d be mounted in the predefined groups for independent control.
Please answer
FW4X's driver looks different to me.
So it would probably need its own version of Anduril, if it can run it. We would need to see the other side of the driver too, to see if it has an ATTiny85 chip or not. Would you be able to show that?
Also, do you know if there are plans for Ti / Cu?
Would be all over this if high cri through the range. 2700k/ 5000k lh351d or 2000k/ 5000k e21a as examples.
Interested freeme. Thanks
See first post link.
Long press for off. Fail.
Yeah, I take back my earlier comment. Leds can be swapped but this ui and heavy thermal step-down are big issues. A shame, as lumintop finally got 900lm sustained in the fw3x not long ago.
Which light is that?
I thought the FW3A could only do around 300 lumen sustained.
It can do a lot more than that--I'm thinking at least 900 lumens sustained.
900 sustained in an ice bath maybe. Take from the review below “Without any cooling or heatsinking (air, hand) the maximum sustained output is below 300 lumens if you want to keep the surface temperature below 50°C.”
That has not been my experience with the FW3A.
The FW3A can easily sustain 900 lumens without any cooling.
300lm is rather low even for warm climate countries.
Is that just your impression or have you tested it in an integrating sphere?
My recollection from reading reviews of people who did test their lights for runtime and output was that the FW3A sustains around 300 lumens (and that’s the cool white XPL HI version) and the Emisar D4 (also XPL HI version) only sustains around 500 lumens.
Sustaining high output is actually quite difficult for small single cell lights. Even a Zebralight SC700, which uses a 21700 cell and is much larger than an FW3A with vastly superior heatsinking and an XHP 70.2 led barely manages to sustain 1000 lumens.
I own several FW3As and I think the estimate of around 300 lumens sustained is about right. These are tiny pocket rockets with no real heatsinking. It’s not surprising they dim fast. My Zebralight SC64w and SC64w HI stabilize at a much higher output than an FW3A… not suprising considering how good Zebralight’s heatsinking is (unibody construction with lots of heat sink fins).
I do not have an integrating sphere, but I know what approximately 900 lumens looks like. 
That’s what I thought too until I took a closer look and read some reviews.
Try this:
- Get a light that you know turns on at 900 lumens on turbo on a fresh cell.
- Get your FW3A, turn it on and tailstand it. Let it run until the output stabilizes after temperature rampdown.
- Do the “integrating bathroom test”: Go into a bathroom with the FW3A (still on) in one hand and the 900 lumen light in the other. Do not turn off the FW3A since you want it to maintain its temperature stabilized output.
- Hold the 900 lumen light above your head and point it at the ceiling, while the FW3A (which is still on) is pressed against your shirt so its output is not visible.
- While looking at the floor near your feet, turn the 900 lumen light on max for a few second then turn it off.
- Then immediately raise the FW3A above your head and point it at the ceiling, again while looking at the floor.
- The goal of the test is to look at which light makes the floor look brighter. Since neither hotspot is in your field of view, all you can see is the diffuse reflected light. This is a bit like an integrating sphere in that it helps you compare overall lumens while compensating for differences in the hotspot.
- If the FW3A really stabilizes at 900 lumens, the floor should look the same brightness with both lights. Showing they are within approximately 20% output of each other (differences in output less than 20% are generally not noticeable to the naked eye).
- However, I think you’ll be surprised to discover that in this test the 900 lumen light makes the floor look considerably brighter than the FW3A, proving that the FW3A stabilized well below 900 lumens.