Ok, here one is with it cropped so it is just the hotspot. Mouse over for before, mouse off for after.
So which one is better lit up?
First time poster here. I just had to join up after seeing this. This is a great thread guys! I’m sure glad I found this place. It’s really interesting! 
Look at my shots, these were taken on full manual mounted on a tripod. I know these are accurate.
Even the hotspot is not brighter.. also, I clearly see a donut hole.
The pics of DayLighter are misleading, different exposure and aperture (hope thats the right vocabular)..
And, NZ Shooter, please watch your language. I noticed that quite often recently.
scaru… are you using the same light as i have?.. there’s no way that trustfire WF 502b have a hotspot like that.
unless it was shot within 10” away
try shooting it farther… like my distance around 80’
by then you’ll see Trustfire wf 502b will no longer have hotspot anymore.
all of you that think otherwise… judge it by yourself… take a simple test,get a magnifying glass and point the light to the middle of it… depending the size of the flashlight… hold it between 8” to 13” and see it for yourself.
and feel free to take it outside and see for yourself… please note this mod won’t work well with multiple LEDs
then come back over here on this thread and let’s compare shots 
i’m pretty sure it can throw farther than that 80’ distance 
same point and shoot camera… just resize it to upload it better…take the challenge for yourself before you accuse someone of misleading 
It's a TK35 clone, but the concept is the same. I did exactly as you suggested and got some quite clear cut results. I'll add these were taken at approximately 50 feet.
Daylight, a point and shoot does not have the same exposure settings each time. It has a computer chip that decides how to set the exposures. On my camera I set the exposures to the same standard Brad, trooplewis, and Rick use and both shots were from the same exact position.
And I have taken the challenge myself, now that I have done it and got conclusive results it is proven. One can easily disprove a theory (like I did) but it is extremely hard to prove it.
Wouldn’t it settle this once and for all if these shots were taken from a lot further than 80 feet since both versions can reach that distance easily?
I think if this were taken at 300 yards instead of only 80 feet and then measured with a camera that should clearly show which way throws further.
No matter what this light won't throw 300 yards, my STL-V2 couldn't do that. If you guys would like I will get out and take some at 100 yards tomorrow night. (Its 1 am here)
I dont accuse, I state a fact.
A proven fact.
I just threw out 300 yards. But 100 yards come to think of it makes a lot more sense. I can’t wait to see the results!
What’s making this thread so confusing, not blaming you for it, is that the OP has two sets of experiments.
Set 1. Long EFL magnifier lens or fresnel lens to project spot to the wall near focal point,
that’s where my elephant story for, it does not increase flashlight throw.
Set 2. Sticking a telescope in front of a flashlight. This is a totally different optical system.
I am guessing that’s probably what the OP did in his latest 80 feet beam shot.
Telescope works similar to dual aspheric lens set-up, it’ll increase throw, which is dependent on the largest lens, 6” diameter front lens used by the OP? I never said telescope doesn’t work. I made no comments to telescope as it’s not not a flashlight mod, just fun play…
My elephant story has nothing to do with telescope set-up, it’s strictly for applying magnifier glass & fresnel lens in front of flashlight for a mod. My point was illustrated well by Scaru image, it’ll be even more obvious if he increase the distance further.
NZ shooter, look at my f*cking mouse over!!! It throws further without it, what is so hard to get about that? I swear the air in NZ makes you guys make exorbitant claims about throw.
I'll throw out a basic explanation of the scientific process for you, it might help you understand...
Since no one has said it yet, Welcome to BLF! As you can tell we sometimes get into heated discussions on this type of thing. ;)
Ok, so let's ignore the validated beamshots that are standardized! Who needs logic. :P Can you explain why you would want to ignore them? Because they disagree with you? 
What you are not realizing is that there are two threads here. One thread says “with my eyes it looks brighter” The answer is Yes it looks brighter, so if that is all you want, you are completely happy.
The other side is fact and proven science. There is NO optic that will make More Light from LED. It is Not Possible. Therefore, the scientific part says, even though your eyes deceive you, there is not as much luminance by adding optics in the path of the led.
For those of you who don't give a rats butt about science and only live by your senses, be happy! The light is brighter! For those of you who live to dispute by science, congratulations, you can prove the truth, But be forewarned, laymen are a Much Larger part of the population and we don't really want to accept something that says our eyes, ears or nose deceives us. If it looks like light, sounds like light and smells like light, it must be light.
What OL sed.
I’m learning little by little!