What about the CRI hype (color rendering index)

Me too, I’m thankful I can see all the colors.

Also, choosing a low CRI light over a high CRI light for walking around the woods at night is kind of like choosing to eat spaghetti with just a spoon. You may not realize it, but you’re just making more work for your eyes.

I dealt with Pantone color printing using high-end CYMK printing devices in my career.

People often didn't calibrate their (RGB) monitors; it's time consuming and the equipment is somewhat expensive. Then they whined about "the print doesn't match my monitor". Well... duh! This, under low CRI, cool white fluorescent lighting no less. Walk them outside into daylight & see how the colors on the same print change; the look on their faces was priceless.

I find low CRI/cool white acceptable for long distance throwers. I prefer warm-ish high CRI on my floody lights for closer use and will happily pay extra for it.

slmjim

Acceptable doesn’t mean good. Warmer light actually punches better through not so clean air.

Low cri and cool LEDs are useless even harmful. They should be restricted by law. Proper search lights should be warm for better fog and dust penetration

I’d say lower CRI reduces the contrast, it also flattens the perspective. There are no upsides of low CRI high CCT light, it should be used for decorational purposes only.

I know this is only anecdotal, but when I walk the wooded paths or the dirt and gravel roads around us I found that the lights with the higher CRI leds seemed to make discerning objects off in the dark easier. Plus the foliage appeared more realistic. Much of what is said about the subject of CRI centers around red, the R9. But I first noticed that the greens of the grasses, leafy planys as well as the evergreens were easier to differentiate with 90+ CRI.

Inside our home the woodwork, the wood doors and trim, the cabinetry, etc. all reveal their true colors under 90+ CRI lighting. I must admit that it takes more effort for me to discern the differences between my 90 CRI flashlights and the couple I have with 98+ Optisolis leds. But the difference is there, though not as important.

I don’t even like the lower CRI cold, flourescent lighting in the barn any more. The tractor was not the right (correct) color at night. :wink:
Most of those are now 80+ CRI led’s now. Cost can be a factor.

That may be one reason I find higher CRI lights better for walking trails at night.

Is there a “warm” competitor for an Osram CSLNM1.TG?

CRI has its place, but isn’t the be-all-and-end-all when it comes to flashlights, at least for most people.

Advantages of low-CRI compared to high-CRI in flashlights:

  • Available at higher outputs. SST-40 is only available in low-CRI
  • Available in higher intensities. Oslon White 1, White 2, and SFT-40 are only available in low-CRI (and only in cool white for that matter). Yet flashaholics still love these leds because they are the throw-kings. Sure, what they illuminate off in the distance may look horrible, but at least you see something. The best-looking high-CRI light in the world is useless if it doesn’t put enough light on the target to actually see it.
  • Cheaper
  • Larger selection, not just of LEDS, but in manufactured flashlights. This can be especially useful for people who are not modders and aren’t interested in or capable of emitter swapping to a high-CRI LED.

My personal experience: at first I was not a CRI fan. Available high-CRI leds like Nichia 219B had enormously lower output than low-CRI options like XPL-HI. The advantage in lumens, intensity, and in some cases tint seemed to vastly outweigh the marginal benefit from high-CRI. My preferred LED for years was XPL HI 5D.

However, today’s high-CRI leds like Nichia 219C, LH351D and SST-20 have dramatically narrowed the gap. An Emisar D4 with 95 CRI SST-20s in it looks to punch a similar distance to XPL HI. And despite the SST-20s putting out 2/3 the lumens, things illuminated are actually easier to see due to the extra contrast from high CRI.

Like many other flashaholics on these forums, my preferences have gradually evolved to prefer high-CRI.

  • Nowadays, if I get a new EDC light I either buy it in high-CRI or with a plan to swap the LEDs to high-CRI.
  • I have gone so far as to actually swap out almost all my XPL HI leds and replace them with high-CRI SST-20s.
  • Unfortunately, I couldn’t replace them all as Kaidomain finished off their reel of good FD2 bin emitters, and their new reel of supposed FD2 emitters all have the much more common greenish tint typical of SST-20s. I don’t think their new reel is actually FD2 bin. GRRR.

I respect that others who are not flashlight connoisseurs may not care about CRI. My other family members who are not flashaholics couldn’t care less about CRI … they just want a flashlight to produce white light.

NOTE: When people are talking about preferring high or low-CRI on these forums, they’re really talking about white light flashlights. I think it’s a bit ludicrous to assume that someone who prefers low-CRI white cares so little about color rendition that they would actually be better off with a monochromatic red, green or amber flashlight.

Lh351d is a very floody LED, so it will appear less bright if you compare it to a different LED like xpl2,CRI aside. The brain perceives brightness by the amount of light intensity on what we are looking it, which is not the same as the lumen output of the LED. For a fair comparison, you would have to use two identical LEDs in the exact same setup to truly guage if the drop in output/efficiency is worth the compromise for high CRI. The difference is usually about 25% less from 70 CRI to 90 CRI, which is not a significant difference but a noticeable one nonetheless.

I think it’s fine to favour brighter and low CRI if that’s what you prefer.

Tint, CCT, beam intensity, etc all aside, all else equal but CRI, will personally gladly take high CRI over low CRI as I find the difference in color rendering far outweighs the slight drop in output for me personally.

The other thing is that lights have gotten so bright, that in most cases even a high CRI has more than enough output. Example, a Fireflies E12r with 219b is ridiculously bright, and the tint, CCT, and color rendering is jaw droppingly good. Yes, an XPL Hi 70 CRI in the same light will shine a little further at the highest setting, but that’s not what the light is best suited for, so not important to me. In the most practical and typical scenario of how I will use the light illuminating short to medium distances, I don’t feel like I am compromising anything with the 219b E12r. In a Thrower where ultimate reach is the goal, then it may make more sense to go lower CRI.

And as it has been mentioned in many other discussions, tint, CCT, beam profile are all equally important compositions of light quality.

For my EDC lights, CCT and beam pattern are the most important, but CRI is a very close third. It’s not about right or wrong, it’s your usage and preference.

And, maybe you’ll never run into a situation where the angry blue emitter some manufacture chose to get a few extra lumens in their specifications frustrates you, endangers you, or just doesn’t work as well. But some of us already have, and if I need expensive gear to measure the difference between the output of the ugly blue vs. the warm high CRI (it’s frequently not easily discernible to the human eye), I’ll take the one that works best for me.

  1. I do have a neutral white flashlight with low CRI (Nitecore MH20 nw) and I agree with the green, I disagree with the brown. With low CRI/R9 brown looks pale, at higher brightness/intensoty it even turns slightly towards brown-grey mix.
    Cool white light does not increase contrast, it decreases the contrast because the abundance of blue light and low CRI are making colors flatter.

2. CCT is nothing but a calculated number. It is NOT a physical attribute.

3. Blue light is irritating to our eyes, some poeple confuse it with “refreshing and alerting”. Or in other words - it’s alerting through irritation.

Everybody has their preference, their use cases. I for one am after great light, as natural as possible, as pleasant as possible and I’m willing to trade sheer power for it. If OP is after a great amount of light, that’s fine too. It’s not about the numbers and I don’t think it’s fair to suggest that a single parameter could define a light generating device as generally better or worse. It makes it better or worse suited to one’s needs.

Low cri = bad and awful
High cri = good and nice

Case closed :disguised_face:

I have noticed that when looking at things outside in the dark (bricks, plants, wood, foliage, buildings, etc.):

  • SST-20 4000K 95 CRI only produces 2/3 the lumens of XPL HI 4000K 5D.
  • However, despite the lower lumens, it is actually quite a bit easier to SEE things with the SST-20. Everything comes out sharp and clear, with well-defined colors and good contrast. The colors don’t appear washed out or mixed together like with the XPL-HI.

This is why I prefer high-CRI. It just makes it easier to see things. It also doesn’t hurt, that things are more pleasant to look at.

But

Colors

Of course it matters. I’m not colorblind in the slightest so color rentidion makes a difference to me.

8% of the male population is to some degree colour blind to red-green. Some say that percentage is even higher. I fall into that category and i have noticed the colours that i’m perceiving largely depend on the surrounding light and colours. So whilst i might think i’m seeing the colours perfectly…. how would i know?? Well unless there is a huge shift in my perception of a given colour, i wouldn’t know. I’m still seeing green, just a different shade of green.

Which brings us back to there is no correct single thing. It is all a matter of personal perception and likes/dislikes…

… some people…?? I think that’s a given for everyone