This one slipped past me last month, but I couldn’t find anything about it on BLF so I thought it was worth sharing. Cree is discontinuing production of all XHP35 LEDs in favour of XHP35.2. They’re still accepting distributor orders until July 30, so I assume XHP35 will still be available from the usual sources for some time, but it might be worthwhile stocking up soon if you use them regularly.
If there is an XHP35.2 HI that would be the first domeless flip chip from Cree. Wonder if it will retain the same consistent angular tint as the other domeless emitters from them.
XHP35.2 is a severe downgrade over XHP35. And XHP35 HI could see improvements but is still a good LED. I’m afraid I will miss it.
I am curious about 35.2 HI…. I don’t expect much from it but maybe it will surprise me.
Since we’ve seen a 3V XHP50.2 (unfortunately in very limited temps) perhaps that is a possibility for 35.2 HI? I’m not sure if/what the actual limitations are for wiring the 4-die emitters for 3V but it’s obviously possible for some of the flip-chip versions.
I’m pleasantly surprised to see the XHP35.2 HI announced. In my experience with slicing XHP50.2s the tint shift common with this type of LED is made even worse by slicing. The main function of the dome is so more light can exit the die. When the dome is sliced off it seems like more light bounces around in the phosphor layer and reaches the phosphor to the side of the dies. This results in the side-phosphor being excited more, and this is the main source of the tint shift with these LEDs. If the side-phosphor is removed (sliced and diced) it reduces the tint shift. So I will be interested in seeing what, if anything, they do to reduce that side-phosphor tint shift.
As a side note you see some of this side bouncing effect in the XPL HI as well. Since it is domeless more light bounces and reaches the side areas, but there is no phosphor to the sides, it is just white silicone material so it is the same color as the main light exiting the die. The effect on the beam is that it adds a soft halo around the hotspot. If you compare a XML2 light with and XPL HI light the XML2 hotspot is more defined/has a sharper brightness cutoff.
I noticed that with the xhp70.2 I sliced. It turned really yellow and nasty. I removed the phosphor around the dies and that helped it a lot. The hotspot is smaller and it’s not as bright anymore though. I can’t tell a huge difference in throw either.
Any idea when XHP35.2 HI might start showing up at distributors? It’s still not in the datasheet, though Avnet has all the order codes up with MOQ 1000 and no ETA.
Interesting… It seems maybe there is a new hybrid approach with the newest of CREE emitters. The XM-L3 and 35.2 HI seem like they split some features between new and old CREE designs. It’s possible we may still get decent throw from them. Likely not class leading but might be respectable…
Welight, if you are able to source some early samples, would it be possible to send one or two to a member here for testing? Or would that be against the terms of agreement as a supplier?
None of this relates to leds failing?? Cree dont make leds that fail. This is an issue of a product that does not yield as well as other Cree products, which is why it had long leadtimes and resolving that with an improved product that is more readily available, Will it suit flashaholics, time will tell
Hey guys,
I’ve been out of the loop for a couple of years, but it seems there’s not much love for the XHP35.2 and i can’t find any tests or comparison with the old version on here either.
Was thinking of trying the XHP35.2 HI but is it just an uninteresting LED ?
Whoops.