Apologies if this has been discussed before. I am selling triple drop-ins elsewhere and I had someone ask me which emitter between the new XPG2 and XPE2 had the better throw. I nearly blindly responded with the XPE2 given the original version was a better thrower than the original XPG.
Instead I looked back over the datasheets and noted that while the original XPG had a beam angle of 125 degrees, the new emitter had cut this down to 115 degrees, while the XPE has gone from 115 degrees to 110 degrees. I figured being only 5 degrees in it, that the difference would be less noticeable. How wrong I was:
Please excuse my stuff up in the very bottom beam shot - the emitter is neutral, not cool white.
So yeah - the XPE2 is considerably tighter than the XPG2. I put this down to the reduced beam angle, but more likely the much smaller emitter area. The XPG2 to my knowledge can be driven harder which would make up for some of the shortfall in throw (when compared to the XPE2) with pure grunt, but at like for like conditions the XPE2 has it.
I find the triple optics so floody that even a 'thrower' like the XPE2 with the clear narrow lens provides more than enough spill to be usable as a general purpose light. I think the XPE2 has it for my preference....though my favorite emitter is still the Nichia 219. I'm a tint snob ;)
Haha no...but I guess I worded it wrong. At first I thought the XPE2 would be the better thrower, then changed my mind when I saw the new datasheets, and then came back to my initial thoughts after testing. So the testing was actually done off the back of my second impression, not my first.
Geez, what's so difficult to understand about that
The FWHM beam angle has no influence on throw. The XR-E doesn’t throw so well because of it’s low beam angle, but because of it’s small die size (EZ900).
Up until now I'd never played with emitters that are considered 'throwers' so the whole concept is alien to me. Gotta start learning at some point :)
No worries. My test was quick and dirty, I look forward to your results. That being said I'm about half way through the paper mache stage of my own integrating sphere. Never going hardcore though - I just want to know how bright the stuff I build is!
'Meathead' or not visual explanations are the best IMHO. Quick to read, easy to see and gets straight down to the point!
Both numbers are important. XP-E2 has both tighter beam angle and smaller emitting area, that’s why it’s throwier.
Only some XR-Es have EZ900 die, most (especially older ones) have EZ1000. It’s exactly the same as the one in “classic” XP-E. Optically the only difference between XR-E EZ1000 and XP-E EZ1000 (the same total and surface brightness) is beam angle (90 vs. 115 degrees). Beam angle has big influence on throw, with identical dies XR-E is much throwier than XP-E.
Actually I have the impression that most XR-Es are EZ900, since I have a couple of them in older lights and only one of them is EZ1000. Also with the same die in an XRE and in an XPE, both have the same luminance (surface brightness) and thus will yield the same throw. Actually in a reflector the XPE will throw a bit better, because the XRE’s collar blocks some light and leaves the center part of the reflector unused (the dead hole).
