Texas_Ace BLF Calibrated Lumen tube / Sphere No math skills needed - Several spheres still available
Oh I think I see now. Your S2+ that reads 650 lm in the TA tube IS NOT the same exact physical light that reads 1301 in Maukka’s Lisun sphere. Correct? So you’re not exactly comparing apples to apples here, they’re different lights. So then the question becomes HOW different are they? Is your light the same exact emitter and bin as Maukka’s? Is it the same driver with the same firmware? Did you use similar cells of similar charge? Were they in the same mode, etc, etc. In other words, what was different? If that answer is literally “nothing”, everything was the same, just a different example of the same thing, then yeah they should’ve been within 14% (give or take, because all electronics parts have tolerances that could add some more difference).
But to REALLY know how your tube compares with Maukka’s sphere, you should buy one of his tested and certified lights. Which is all the rest of this crew has been trying to tell you for the last half-dozen pages or so….
EDIT: Wait, reading back through Maukka’s comment you linked, I don’t see a 1301 lumen S2+ tested output. Look again.
Not trying to be rude to KG, but I also cannot understand his logic of giving TA negative feedback on his Ebay account. TA went above and beyond what any typical manufacturer/seller would do to right a wrong. In the past, when we all noticed TA tube read too high, TA did not try to defend his product and worked hard to fix it for us. He’s trying to do the same for KG in a very professional manner.
It almost seems like the negative feedback was given to spite the few members that were rude to KG (but I also tried explained in my previous posts why). This is completely unfair to TA though as he cannot control what others post.
KG_Tuning, please take it down a notch.
I tried slightly angling my throwy D4S and the changes were about 1, which is hardly significant, which is surprisingly good in my book. With my old ceiling bounce, the same angling would result in probably 20-30 difference.
Also my super wide flooder MT03 (similar flood to X80) measures about the same lumens as the much more throwy deep reflector MT09R. Both lights uses the same TA driver, identical binned 4000k emitters, and tested on the same set of fully charged Sony VTC6. Therefore your concern that TA tube favors throw over floody lights is not true from my experience.
Also I want to repeat, TA tube measures about 7% loss with DC-Fix applied whereas ceiling bounce measurements exceeds 20% lumen lost. I believe Maukka also tested DC-Fix to be about the same as the TA tube (correct me if I’m wrong). Frosted optics would reduce lumen output by probably 20+. I’ve seen reports here that even changing clear optics to another clear optics can improve lumens by I think it was 30 or so.
I read Maukka sold one set of calibrated lights already. Are you the lucky one that bought it? If so, I’m curious what is Maukka’s measurements for those calibrated lights and what measurements did you get from the TA tube? With the correction factor, there are ways to calibrate the tube to match those calibration lights.
If you didn’t get the Maukka calibrated lights, then we cannot use it for reference. Even the three Zebralight SC5W II bought at about the same time tested a whopping 40% difference in output. Maukka also posted that even two units of the same model light can vary more than 20% output
:person_facepalming: … Sorry, that sums it up for me. The lad does not even know what he has from maukka & from what he has written here, not much idea what he is talking about in general.
BUT…
…Much worse than any of that is he is to ’proud’ to even realize or admit it. 
The 1301 is a designation number for the specific light, not the lumen reading. The lumen reading on that light is 270 lumens at 30s.
Each of his calibration lights will have a different designation number with a corresponding report:
Maukka will test each individual light and provide detailed reports of his measurements
https://imgur.com/a/lTYsB7K
With the money TA refunded you, you can buy a Maukka calibration light for 64 € so we can scientifically resolve this issue.
Also TA asked if you have a Fenix light because Fenix lights are known to be consistent with ANSI standards. The same for Maukka’s calibration lights.
emarkd…. it appears he has already done that. He got set & light # 1301 was part of it
1301 was & is not a lumen rating as he posted. It was a light number in the set he got from maukka.
Remember a while back maukka said one set was ready out the door.
.
EDIT: KG_Turning Does Not have a calibrated light from maukka. I misread his reply above. My bad.
No… he doesn’t have any calibrated light from Maukka. His S2+ are just straight from banggood. See quote below
He just quickly glanced at Maukka’s thread and saw Calibrated light number: 1301 and assumed that it was 1301 lumens.
Let’s leave complex lumen measurement aside. Simply use Lux app & celing bounce Lux# to test which light is brighter.
Maukka has confirm SC600w HI Mk3 measured within 0.5% of Zebralight’s claim of 1126 lumens at 30 seconds.
If SC600w HI Mk3 measured celing bounce # = 70= 1126 lumens
BLF X5 measured celing bounce # = 56= ?? lumens
No way BLF X5 is 1400 lumens as Manufacturer claim, 1200 lumens is not even close. 920 Lumens you measured by TA tube just about right. This good example many manufacturers marking exceed lumen# for selling purpose! I rest my case!!
https://youtu.be/W71NY-InPLM](https://i.imgur.com/VXqj67p.jpg)
BTW, TA tube measured BLF Q8 for 4800 lumens is also match with Maukka’s #.
*Output on max
Samsung 25R button top
0 sec: 5177 lm
30 sec: 4897 lm
60 sec: 4767 lm
Intensity at 30 sec: 49850 cd
edit: new lumen numbers after cleaning and tightening contacts*
You are correct severide!! I misread what he said. :person_facepalming: My bad…. 
Either way… this is getting more & more bizzare.
Ok… kg got two convoy. One is 1067 lumen and other one is 840 lumen…
Beats me, your guess is as good as any. 
He posted the below quote above. But I think we eliminated the “1301 lumen model”. I shall put a line thru it in the quote.
My head hurts.
His point was to show how Maukka got higher than factory readings on the S2+ and how low the TA tube reading was and how it’s way more than 14% off… but yeah he used a wildly inaccurate figure as his control.
Hey kg, can you show us a video of measuring your acebeam x45 with the TA tube?
OH…. OK. :+1: …
As my ole’ granpappy would have said about the point GK was apparently trying to make…….
He really screwed the pooch on that one…… 
RIP Granpappy……
First off thanks everyone for the support. I really appreciate it.
Second, I think it is time to put this to rest and let everyone cool down. As most of you know, I am never a fan of things getting personal and tempers are flaring right now and when that happens nothing good ever comes out of it.
So I am not going to bother responding to the latest posts, there is enough information in this thread for people to make their own decisions.
KG has a right to his opinion, if he gets verifiable proof that the calibration is off, I will gladly work with him to correct it, even now.
At this point no such proof has been given much less data to try to figure out what the issue is so there is simply nothing I can do to fix the sphere should that be needed.
The $50 refund he agreed to I thought was enough to make him happy, all he had to do was say he wanted more or something else and I would of done everything possible to make it right.
From the data I have seen so far, the majority of the comparable data matches up well within reason with others measurements.
He showed that the sphere is indeed linear so if it reads correctly at low outputs, then it should read correctly at high outputs.
It matches up well with readings from both throwers and flooders, so the beam shape also does not appear to be a factor.
The only real problem is a few known under-preforming lights are getting readings that are too low (even for the under preforming levels).
Without more data there is simply no way to figure out why they are reading low. I would really like to figure out why they are reading how they are but that requires testing and data that have not been provided.
Unless that happens there is nothing more I can do about the matter.
So with that in mind, SB, could you please lock this thread and let it cool off?
I honestly do not see any mad…. it has just got to be ironically funny at this point.
We have been call liars, fanboys, accused of being dumb, accused of getting kickbacks on tube sales, etc., etc.
It is obvious what the problem is in this situation to any who reads through it.
And yet…. here we still are, all smiles & ready to help if he would but ask.
Edit for spelling correction. Do not want to appear a dumb “teacher”.