We should call it an homage right?
They really aren’t that similiar. I see more of a resemblance to the Skilhunt H02, which is not much at all.
Oops. I thought Skilhunt H02 is a copy of Sebralight already, except that it has a switch on the side while Zebralight has it at the end. It is also half the price of a comparable Zebralight 
I any case, I am curious how Acebeam’s HT10 headlamp is going to pan out. Pulling 2000 lumens out of this size headlamp seems like pulling a rabbit out of a hat. Pure magic.
Perhaps, they will produce an XH-P50-based C8 next since no other manufacturer seems to be thinking of it.
As a huge fan of the C8 form factor, I sure hope you’re right!
So when are these going to hit the market?
MT-G2 and or xhp50?
Are they waiting on us to tell them which emitter?
Started a thread on this back at the beginning of April when I first saw it on their site:
Acebeam MTG2 headllamp —— https://budgetlightforum.com/t/-/32802
Emailed them twice since then still no reply.
Looks interesting.Just saw this on their website.Wonder if it will step down in 1000lumen mode.
Also is Bella afraid of us? CPF gets a direct Acebeam post.
BLF? we will see?
BTW
30lm 60hours
200lm 4.5 hours
500lm 1.8hours
1000lm 0.9 hours
and I also wrote to Bella for more info specfially to my BLf address, so far no dice.
I want to know when are they sendingthem out for review?when will Mhalen get his?
What’s the point with a MT-G2 when a XML can achieve better runtimes at the same output? (compared to zebralight and armytek)
I concede that ZL and AT are good lights.
Also consider that lots of folks dont like the tint they end up with from the XML family, I know there are lots of choices but my point is if you like the tint of an MT-G2 then the one you get, will be what you want (basicly there is only one bin).
Also consider that the big difference is not seen on paper but in person. The ratio of emitter to reflector goes a long way on the flood-throw spectrum. Again if you want flood then it will be hard to be unhappy with a MT-G2 headlamp (the same is not true for non MT-G2 headlamps).
Yes is is not as efficient but again most headlamps are not run (WOT) to be as bright as possible because it simply is not typically needed or wanted.
So if you like non cool white tints, if you like more flood then throw, and if you dont actualy expect to use the Turbo (WOT) that much it will be hard to go wrong with an MT-G2 headlamp and that simplifies the research, which is one of the advantages to lots of folks.
At the end of the day, different strokes, for different folks or different horses for different courses.
Are you saying that the XM-L is more efficient than the MT-G2 in terms of brightness? Really?
Does this mean that an xml will produce more heat whilst outputting 1000lms than an mt-g2?
No what I’m saying is that runing both LEDs from a single 18650 the XML would be more efficent.
Ok now I see where you are coming from, and yes I think boost drivers are generally inefficient.
Just to be the devils advocate. If you run (both emitters, separately of course) from two 18650 2S I bet the MT-G2 is more efficient because you don’t need the buck driver.
I think we are back to, it depends on what you want.
Yes my point was that in this setup, a headlamp on a single 18650, it is more efficent to use a XML. But of course if you don’t care about the lower runtimes then it is no problem, I also love the MTG2 emitter, just not from a single battery where a buck driver is needed.
I have been very tempted to mod a spark sx5 to run an MT-G2.
I can just see the 4x18650 can set up as 2s2p
It should make the reflector very floody bumping it up from an XML2/XPL to the MT-G2 emitter.
It’s here guys
Really looking forward to some beamshots of this,and i wonder what “intelligent temperature controlled light output” means!