yeah
really, this might work on some other forum. but that`s hard to find newbies here at BLF. there is no chances to sell nonexistent advantages of proprietary charger to anyone here.
looks like really biased opinion. especially strange when it is against brand, that is really respected here.
I am Imalent fan? Check my post please. I criticized all brand of flashlights. Don’t see any Imalent fan attacking me.
Besides greasy USB-C charging, Acebeam boasted in this flashlight. It doesn’t hit 80k lumens, that needs each LED to output at least 7500lumens.
And when you use it outdoor or even indoor, either as powerbank or charging it, dust will sticks on those threads.
If you really want to contribute, then give the X75 a proper review. Include pros and cons.
He got 77K lumens in his test which is pretty darn close. No one is going to lose it over a 3% difference.
What is your point? To prove that dust won’t stick on the greasy thread? You can open all your flashlights and expose their threads, you can easily review it yourself.
He used to time a factor of something 0.70 to 0.75, but to make X75 looks really good, this time he doesn’t times that factor. That’s why even his older Imalent MS18 hit 111k lumens, in the past, his MS18 OTF lumens didn’t hit that high. Flashlight output will only degrade year over year.
Use a bit of isopropyl alcohol to wipe the lubricant off the threads. Problem solved. 
I wonder if the X75 could be used as a 20K calibration light for spheres and tubes to measure big flooders… 
For me, PD charging is a great feature. I like my Imalent lights but not the chargers
If you watch afterwards Matt uses his Maukka calibration and only gets 57.9K, this is what he uses for all other previous measurements.
I’m looking into getting my Maukka calibration light tested for verification in a proper lab.
No please, the custom battery pack is bad, and I have to use the custom MS18 charging cable again? At least any USB-C cable can charge the X75.
I also have a 20,000 mah graphene power bank with a 100 watt usb-c port and a 90 watt car Charger. I just have to decide how important 5000K is or if I should just get the 6500 one
Why would you not use the conversion factor if your meter / lumens tube requires a conversion factor, then proceed to call the non converted measurements “lumens?”
The lumen output at 30 seconds from the calibration lights is relatively low (e.g. 270 lumens) and I doubt the accuracy of a DIY lumen tube when it comes to integrating light from these big flooders with 50,000+ lumens. A sphere may be needed.
Did he use the lux values for comparing big flooders rather than lumens?
Matt used his tube without Maukka’s calibration for 77,200. If he uses his Maukka calibration it’s only 57,900.
My Astrolux EC06 peaked at 26K and the X75 at 54K, but people say you need 3-4x the lumens for something to appear twice as bright, and the X75 in my photos looks at least twice as bright, so who knows. Marco at 1Lumen measured the EC06 at 16K with his sphere, so maybe these tubes are just not able to measured higher output very well. We will see what his numbers are when he finishes his review Correction: it was owen that measured close to 18K in a tube, so I really don’t know then
He used a custom built sphere. Maybe it’s more accurate. :weary:
I need to change the sensor in my tube because it’s not accurate over 1500 lumens.
Thank you for this review Matt. As usual it was very Instructive and enlightening!
Your reviews are a good mix of facts and visible impression. Apart from being fun to look at, they help me a lot when choosing a new flashlight.
Yes. I also got greasy fingers the first time I used it, but the second time I just kept my hand on the body when I plugged in the charger. Hands down I prefer not having to carry a charger with me. I can take the cable from my phone or anything else and charge it even if the brick is at home.
Glad you asked 
For the video I was trying to keep it simple and not get the general public bogged down in too many details. Here I’m happy to go full blown rabbit hole.
.
What I did was actually more like “calibrating” off the acebeam X75 5000k which is 75000 lumens. Saying that IF acebeam is correct about their numbers Then these are the numbers I get from Imalent. Doing this brings the numbers for both companies very close to being in line with the claims they make on paper. I thought it made for a simpler A to B to C comparison.
.
Here at BLF the general consensus is that we’re right and they’re wrong, and everybody gets all dug in on both sides. I still want to acknowledge that I’m using a PVC pipe and most of the big manufactures in China are likely using a $15k integrating sphere. Clearly they have financial motive to keep the numbers high, but I also like to remember that this entire forum including myself calibrated off one guy. My core belief is that Maukka is right and therefore our numbers are closer to being correct.
.
I’ve had backlash from different companies in the past over this, and a number of other things, and I’ve always stuck to my guns (unless some actual mistake was pointed out). I feel confident about the integrity of my reviews for this reason (I didn’t take anything here as “questioning” that.) I try to deliver the most digestible content to my audience a large % of that on youtube are not forum members, hence the deviation from tradition.
Hey Matt,
I just heard from Marco at 1Lumen, who has a sphere, he measured close to the Acebeam rating. He hasn’t mentioned exactly what he got, but said it was much closer than what he expected.
Everyone using a tube is getting a low result which brings me to the conclusion that Maukka’s calibration, in a tube, is only accurate to a certain point. I think we should be building a sphere, I just don’t know where to get a Styrofoam ball at 50cm in NZ to make one.
Large balloon + wood crate + mold making liquid latex? Anchor balloon to crate somehow, pour liquid latex, let cure, remove and shave off excess?