Lumintop GT Mini (Thower) Beam shots and more!

151 posts / 0 new
Last post
JasonWW
JasonWW's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 27 min ago
Joined: 10/22/2016 - 11:41
Posts: 12891
Location: Houston Texas

sbslider wrote:
JasonWW wrote:
sbslider wrote:
How does the throw and such compare with a Thrunite TN4A? I know the TN4A is bigger/heavier, but I have it and wondering if the GT mini significantly out performs.

Which version, Xml2, xpl or xpl hi?

Xpl hi

In that case the difference is not going to be huge. It’s hard to find specs for it but I did find some for a neutral white version with the xpl hi. Peak Beam Intensity: 52,340cd.
Max beam distance: 457m. It’s got a 46mm head compared to the GT Mini’s 50mm.

So the Mini still beats it. Plus the mini has a few more hundred lumens. I measured around 1200, but others have measured around 1400. My guess is that it’s not going to be as big a difference as with my C8, but still pretty noticeable.

Texas Ace Lumen Tube and JoshK Sphere calibrated with Maukka lights

Click this to go to signature links. I'm still around, just not reading many new threads.

JasonWW
JasonWW's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 27 min ago
Joined: 10/22/2016 - 11:41
Posts: 12891
Location: Houston Texas

toobadorz wrote:
JasonWW wrote:
UPDATE TO MANUAL

After trying mode 4 and mode 10 it appears that the groups are reversed.

Modes 1-6 use full turbo as 100% (5A)

Modes 7-12 use the top of the ramp as 100% (2.5A)

We definitely need an updated manual to reflect this.

Edit: And here it is.
GT Mini User Manaual
.

Thanks. And more to be corrected:

Quote:
…If [temperature] is selected for auto step-down, the GTmini goes to 100% output. Leave the GT to heat to the desired limit, and then click to set that temperature as the trip point (the GTmini is huge, so this can take 20 minutes or longer, use fresh cells for this). Or click within 5 s to keep previous setting.

GTmini is not huge and it doesn’t take 20 mins to get hot. So this statement looks weird, probably caused by a simple replacement (GT to GTmini?)
Quote:
The strobes are deactivated by default.

Strobes are all enabled by default, at least on my GTmini.

Yeah, it also says it takes 16 seconds to enter the menu, but it only seems to take about 8 Seconds.

Another error is where it says it requires button top cells. Since the GT mini has a spring on the driver it will work fine with flat top as well.

I notice it says it’s using NarsilM v1.3 instead of v1.2. All previous reports showed it was using v1.2.

Texas Ace Lumen Tube and JoshK Sphere calibrated with Maukka lights

Click this to go to signature links. I'm still around, just not reading many new threads.

sbslider
sbslider's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 week 3 days ago
Joined: 01/22/2017 - 13:41
Posts: 1649
Location: United States

Thanks for the comparison, I appreciate it.

PocketSammich wrote: I don’t need this, but I want it. Please sign me up.

sbslider
sbslider's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 week 3 days ago
Joined: 01/22/2017 - 13:41
Posts: 1649
Location: United States

JasonWW wrote:
toobadorz wrote:
JasonWW wrote:
UPDATE TO MANUAL

After trying mode 4 and mode 10 it appears that the groups are reversed.

Modes 1-6 use full turbo as 100% (5A)

Modes 7-12 use the top of the ramp as 100% (2.5A)

We definitely need an updated manual to reflect this.

Edit: And here it is.
GT Mini User Manaual
.

Thanks. And more to be corrected:

Quote:
…If [temperature] is selected for auto step-down, the GTmini goes to 100% output. Leave the GT to heat to the desired limit, and then click to set that temperature as the trip point (the GTmini is huge, so this can take 20 minutes or longer, use fresh cells for this). Or click within 5 s to keep previous setting.

GTmini is not huge and it doesn’t take 20 mins to get hot. So this statement looks weird, probably caused by a simple replacement (GT to GTmini?)
Quote:
The strobes are deactivated by default.

Strobes are all enabled by default, at least on my GTmini.

Yeah, it also says it takes 16 seconds to enter the menu, but it only seems to take about 8 Seconds.

Another error is where it says it requires button top cells. Since the GT mini has a spring on the driver it will work fine with flat top as well.

I notice it says it’s using NarsilM v1.3 instead of v1.2. All previous reports showed it was using v1.2.


Thanks for the clarification about the cells, that was a reason imo for looking elsewhere. Not a huge deal, but I prefer flat top cells in general, and think double springs are a plus also.

PocketSammich wrote: I don’t need this, but I want it. Please sign me up.

Tom E
Tom E's picture
Offline
Last seen: 36 min 36 sec ago
Joined: 08/19/2012 - 08:23
Posts: 14994
Location: LI NY

The Mini does use V1.3 by virtue of it blinking out 1.3. Not sure where it came from, guessing TA. Dunno, maybe I provided it wayyy back?

 

toobadorz
toobadorz's picture
Offline
Last seen: 17 hours 34 min ago
Joined: 01/10/2017 - 09:04
Posts: 184

JasonWW wrote:

Yeah, it also says it takes 16 seconds to enter the menu, but it only seems to take about 8 Seconds.

Another error is where it says it requires button top cells. Since the GT mini has a spring on the driver it will work fine with flat top as well.

I notice it says it’s using NarsilM v1.3 instead of v1.2. All previous reports showed it was using v1.2.

Nice catch! Wink

joechina
Offline
Last seen: 4 months 3 weeks ago
Joined: 03/05/2016 - 08:23
Posts: 1459
Location: Germany

Tom
Texas Ace used a NarsilM 1.3 Beta
I think you did provide it.
Maybe to Dell?

Tom E
Tom E's picture
Offline
Last seen: 36 min 36 sec ago
Joined: 08/19/2012 - 08:23
Posts: 14994
Location: LI NY

joechina wrote:
Tom Texas Ace used a NarsilM 1.3 Beta I think you did provide it. Maybe to Dell?

Ok, probably posted the v1.3 BETA for him to use on Nov 16th, then on Jan 28th posted a v1.3 with the "new" S42 support, but nothing seemed to come out of that, least not so far.

joechina
Offline
Last seen: 4 months 3 weeks ago
Joined: 03/05/2016 - 08:23
Posts: 1459
Location: Germany

Tom E
you have a PM

Texas_Ace
Texas_Ace's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 days 22 hours ago
Joined: 03/24/2016 - 07:44
Posts: 9402
Location: Everything is brighter in Texas

JasonWW wrote:

Yeah, it also says it takes 16 seconds to enter the menu, but it only seems to take about 8 Seconds.

Another error is where it says it requires button top cells. Since the GT mini has a spring on the driver it will work fine with flat top as well.

I notice it says it’s using NarsilM v1.3 instead of v1.2. All previous reports showed it was using v1.2.

Ok, these issues I think are explained by them using a different firmware revision then I planned on. The final firmware I sent them should be as the manual states but I sent then an earlier version that is closer to what it sounds like ya’ll are seeing. They were supposed to of used the latest version but it looks like it didn’t make it into production.

IIRC these are about the limit of the changes + some minor changes to the ramp / mode spacing between the revisions.

Texas_Ace
Texas_Ace's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 days 22 hours ago
Joined: 03/24/2016 - 07:44
Posts: 9402
Location: Everything is brighter in Texas
Tom E wrote:

The Mini does use V1.3 by virtue of it blinking out 1.3. Not sure where it came from, guessing TA. Dunno, maybe I provided it wayyy back?


 

Yes, it was from me, although it looks like they used the prototype firmware I made for testing it instead of the final firmware with the refined ramp / mode groups and other settings. Not a big deal but the things mentioned above are a little different.

mulletbay1
Offline
Last seen: 3 years 3 months ago
Joined: 10/07/2016 - 23:14
Posts: 23

Hi, I hv a mod Acebeam l16, love it. How does the lumintop gt mini’s beam patter n throw compare?

d_t_a
Offline
Last seen: 1 day 17 hours ago
Joined: 08/04/2017 - 23:58
Posts: 2623
Location: Manila, Philippines

Texas_Ace wrote:
Tom E wrote:

The Mini does use V1.3 by virtue of it blinking out 1.3. Not sure where it came from, guessing TA. Dunno, maybe I provided it wayyy back?

 

Yes, it was from me, although it looks like they used the prototype firmware I made for testing it instead of the final firmware with the refined ramp / mode groups and other settings. Not a big deal but the things mentioned above are a little different.

 

Would it be alright to ask, what are the differences between the "proposed" final firmware you intended, compared to what is actually installed on the GT Mini?

 

Sharing a video beamshot of the GT Mini neutral-white:

(building on the other side is about 160 meters or 400 feet away from the flashlight)

 

 

compare to an Astrolux C8 (XPL-Hi 3A NW, 1300 lumens)

 

 

 

Texas_Ace
Texas_Ace's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 days 22 hours ago
Joined: 03/24/2016 - 07:44
Posts: 9402
Location: Everything is brighter in Texas
d_t_a wrote:
Texas_Ace wrote:
Tom E wrote:

The Mini does use V1.3 by virtue of it blinking out 1.3. Not sure where it came from, guessing TA. Dunno, maybe I provided it wayyy back?


 

Yes, it was from me, although it looks like they used the prototype firmware I made for testing it instead of the final firmware with the refined ramp / mode groups and other settings. Not a big deal but the things mentioned above are a little different.

Would it be OK to ask, what are the differences between the “proposed” final firmware you intended, compared to what is actually installed on the GT Mini?

Basically what I said in the quote, I don’t remember all the changes but the biggest change was an improved ramp that was smoother, better mode groups and a few minor tweaks to some other settings that were really just from my drive for the best I can do.

A few of those changes were noted earlier, the menu timing was extended to 16 seconds instead of 8 seconds ect.

Overall most will not notice the difference, the base firmware I used was basically the GT firmware so it still works fine, it was just not optimized for this driver and light.

toobadorz
toobadorz's picture
Offline
Last seen: 17 hours 34 min ago
Joined: 01/10/2017 - 09:04
Posts: 184
Texas_Ace wrote:
Overall most will not notice the difference, the base firmware I used was basically the GT firmware so it still works fine, it was just not optimized for this driver and light.

Yeah. So far the most noticeable part is, when stepping down from FET to 7135 due to low battery, the light is actually becoming brighter. This is because the firmware avoids activating two channels at once, and when the battery voltage is low, the FET can be darker than the 7135, thus “stepping-down to a brighter level” can happen. This can certainly be fixed by tuning the voltage that triggers this.

Texas_Ace
Texas_Ace's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 days 22 hours ago
Joined: 03/24/2016 - 07:44
Posts: 9402
Location: Everything is brighter in Texas
toobadorz wrote:
Texas_Ace wrote:
Overall most will not notice the difference, the base firmware I used was basically the GT firmware so it still works fine, it was just not optimized for this driver and light.

Yeah. So far the most noticeable part is, when stepping down from FET to 7135 due to low battery, the light is actually becoming brighter. This is because the firmware avoids activating two channels at once, and when the battery voltage is low, the FET can be darker than the 7135, thus “stepping-down to a brighter level” can happen. This can certainly be fixed by tuning the voltage that triggers this.

Yes, that is a possible issue with how it is setup now. A minor but notable issues.

This firmware was just meant for prototyping, it was never intended to be used in the final driver.

Niko
Offline
Last seen: 9 months 1 week ago
Joined: 02/08/2018 - 09:55
Posts: 166
Location: in der lampe

i have booth, gt is slighty longer but better lies in hand. emisar is more powerfull. booth are great

Newlumen
Newlumen's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 year 8 months ago
Joined: 05/27/2017 - 00:19
Posts: 2092
Location: United states

[quote=Niko]i have booth, gt is slighty longer but better lies in hand. emisar is more powerfull. booth are great

you might be right about the d1s. I dont have a mini gt or calibrated lights for the tube.. i measured d1s cool white @ 1400 lumen using Sony vtc6…

mortuus
mortuus's picture
Offline
Last seen: 14 hours 34 min ago
Joined: 12/16/2014 - 09:33
Posts: 3126
Location: Sweden

emisar is not more powerful, i think the beam on gt mini is slightly sharper.

...where Frugal meets with Flashlight!

              つ ◕_◕ ༽つ

Niko
Offline
Last seen: 9 months 1 week ago
Joined: 02/08/2018 - 09:55
Posts: 166
Location: in der lampe
mortuus wrote:
emisar is not more powerful, i think the beam on gt mini is slightly sharper.

i have booth light, have you too?
my emisar is more powerfull

JasonWW
JasonWW's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 27 min ago
Joined: 10/22/2016 - 11:41
Posts: 12891
Location: Houston Texas
Niko wrote:
mortuus wrote:
emisar is not more powerful, i think the beam on gt mini is slightly sharper.

I have both light, have you too?
My emisar is more powerful


Why is it?

They are both FET drivers and the same emitter. Maybe one has a better battery? Have you checked their amp draw?

Texas Ace Lumen Tube and JoshK Sphere calibrated with Maukka lights

Click this to go to signature links. I'm still around, just not reading many new threads.

mortuus
mortuus's picture
Offline
Last seen: 14 hours 34 min ago
Joined: 12/16/2014 - 09:33
Posts: 3126
Location: Sweden
Niko wrote:
mortuus wrote:
emisar is not more powerful, i think the beam on gt mini is slightly sharper.

i have booth light, have you too?
my emisar is more powerfull

well no but i want to believe so Smile

...where Frugal meets with Flashlight!

              つ ◕_◕ ༽つ

Newlumen
Newlumen's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 year 8 months ago
Joined: 05/27/2017 - 00:19
Posts: 2092
Location: United states

I have a d1s.. the beam is tight and intense.. can’t say about mini gt yet.. hopefully it will be good.

d_t_a
Offline
Last seen: 1 day 17 hours ago
Joined: 08/04/2017 - 23:58
Posts: 2623
Location: Manila, Philippines

Not an apples-to-apples comparison, but here I got some images of GT Mini CW vs GT Mini NW and also Emisar D1 V2-3A

 

GT Mini CW (left) vs GT Mini NW (right)

(building is about 125 meters or 400 feet distance)

The second pic has the D1S (3A) on the left and GT Mini (NW) on the right.

 

For some reason, the GT Mini (CW) looks a bit less bright or focused than the GT Mini NW or the D1S 3A. Maybe it's just the more neutral tints look better at night?

 

Distance according to Google maps: ~126 meters or ~400 feet (actual distance is a bit more, because that is ground-to-ground-distance, the actual is from a lower ground level pointing several stories upwards to the opposite building at a slight angle)

Texas_Ace
Texas_Ace's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 days 22 hours ago
Joined: 03/24/2016 - 07:44
Posts: 9402
Location: Everything is brighter in Texas

This is what should happen actually, given equal outputs the neutral white will throw better. The warmer wavelengths are less prone to refraction in the atmosphere and thus travel further.

Agro
Agro's picture
Online
Last seen: 1 min 35 sec ago
Joined: 05/14/2017 - 11:16
Posts: 6868
Location: Ślōnsk

Texas_Ace wrote:
This is what should happen actually, given equal outputs the neutral white will throw better. The warmer wavelengths are less prone to refraction in the atmosphere and thus travel further.

I think someone tested it at long distance with GT and the test result did not match that theory….
I guess we need more data to draw conclusions.
Texas_Ace
Texas_Ace's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 days 22 hours ago
Joined: 03/24/2016 - 07:44
Posts: 9402
Location: Everything is brighter in Texas
Agro wrote:
Texas_Ace wrote:
This is what should happen actually, given equal outputs the neutral white will throw better. The warmer wavelengths are less prone to refraction in the atmosphere and thus travel further.
I think someone tested it at long distance with GT and the test result did not match that theory…. I guess we need more data to draw conclusions.

That was because the CW LED was a higher bin and thus had more lumens then the NW LED.

Naturally higher output will throw further.

If they are the same output the warmer tint throws further. The same reason sunsets are orange and the sky is blue.

mortuus
mortuus's picture
Offline
Last seen: 14 hours 34 min ago
Joined: 12/16/2014 - 09:33
Posts: 3126
Location: Sweden

so warmer tint regardless how warm it is will always go further then cw light? wow i didnt know that..

...where Frugal meets with Flashlight!

              つ ◕_◕ ༽つ

Texas_Ace
Texas_Ace's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 days 22 hours ago
Joined: 03/24/2016 - 07:44
Posts: 9402
Location: Everything is brighter in Texas
mortuus wrote:
so warmer tint regardless how warm it is will always go further then cw light? wow i didnt know that..

If everything else is equal, yes, warmer wavelengths of light travel further.

This is the same reason NASA wanted a 2700k warm white LED in the GT they got.

komeko
komeko's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 month 2 weeks ago
Joined: 12/21/2017 - 14:26
Posts: 394
Location: Poland

Today I picked up my GTMini.
Charged to full 30Q and such results:
5.8A on the back of the cap
23 micro Amper drainage (backlight off)
1392 lumen
118kcd
color in turbo 4430K BBL 4D (almost identically as UT02)

Now I have virtually identical performance as my modified UT02 with 1510 lumens. The same range, color, beam … only in a smaller and lighter package. In conclusion, a very nice flashlight.

Click on:        ANSI WHITE

Click on:        MY COLLECTION

Click on:        Q8, D4, D4S, D18, K1, FW3A, SDmini, Mini AAA, TIP, M43, H1, H03, TC20, TN40S, TN42, V6, H600Fw, SC600w, SC64w

Pages