Hello,
I’m looking for High CRI Led Bulbs (not spots) (Dimmable is not necessary), compatible with (some) European Union Standards (220V - E27 - 50Hz) at a correct price (don’t want to spend 50$ per bulb), warm white if possible (2700-3000K)
Do you have any suggestions ?
Best regards
I think, I’m quite jealous of Bulbs on US Market 
.
I look on amazon.us, I directly find :
PHILIPS LED White Dial Flicker-Free Frosted A19, Warm to Cool White Light, Dimmable, Eye Comfort Technology, 800 Lumen, 7W=60W, Title 20 Certified, E26 Base, CRI 90
4 pieces in a pack of 15$. Sounds reasonable.
First comment in Amazon :“it’s not cheap…” 
If you’re located in Europe:
Thanks.
I saw on the site Müller Licht HD95 led bulbs with a theoretical CRI of 95 and a very low price I think I’ll give it a try.
Thanks, do you know an available product with this Optisolis led ? (Even if it’s a flashlight)
I don’t find any led bulb not flashlight with it, and your link seems an old one (not sure it’s still available).
Thanks anyway 
I’ve never seen a CRI like this before (for a LED) ^^, it seems awesome
Did you already check this link?
By the way, 10 years ago the CRI 95 Philips L-Prize Bulb did cost only $15:
They rate energy efficiency using lumens per watt.
A 2700K high CRI LED is going to put out less lumens per watt than a cooler and/or a lower CRI LED. So any of the ones out I’d imagine are going to have a pretty low efficiency rating compared to other LEDs.
Which I think is kinda funny in a way. Like, a perfect high cri 2700k light is the normal incandescent light bulb we’ve had for 100 years. But they used too much electricity so we have LEDs. And then people said LEDs might be too blue and this could be damaging our eyes and messing with our sleep so they made them warmer, but to do that and especially to do that and have a high CRI, keeping lumens constant, uses more electricity. Not nearly as much as incandescent, but still more. And more is bad. So now we’re back to square one lmao
[quote=“Jeffgoldblum, post:8, topic:217647, full:true, username:Jeffgoldblum”]A 2700K high CRI LED is going to put out less lumens per watt than a cooler and/or a lower CRI LED.
So any of the ones out I’d imagine are going to have a pretty low efficiency rating compared to other LEDs.
And then people said LEDs might be too blue and this could be damaging our eyes and messing with our sleep so they made them warmer, but to do that and especially to do that and have a high CRI, keeping lumens constant, uses more electricity. Not nearly as much as incandescent, but still more. And more is bad. So now we’re back to square one lmao
[/quote]
Actually there are double as much high-efficent warmwhite LED lamps as cool/neutral white ones:
So there’s not even a difference with the very high efficent 211lm/W LED lamps in warm/neutral white:
Not sure if I’m seeing the page differently because it’s being translated from German for me or what…but when I open those links I see a total of 17 value brand consumer lights for sale, none of which are high CRI.
Once again, I’m not sure if that link is appearing differently to me or something, but none of the value brand lights in that link are above 80cri. Thats not considered high CRI. Not by a long shot.
You’re right, i focussed on high efficency
So high CRI and high eficency with warm white would be 140lm/W:
Right, and 140 lumens/watt would get a “D” efficiency grade using the EU’s energy rating scale.
Look, it’s just not physically possible for the most efficient warm LED to be more efficient than the most efficient cool LED. There’s an inverse relationship there.
The efficiency gap between them is getting narrower every year, but a warm LED won’t ever cross the gap. The LEDs we use emit blue wavelengths right? They appear white because they have a coating of different phosphors that convert some of that blue light to other colors to simulate white, correct? Obviously there is an efficiency loss in the conversion. To heat and other forms of radiation. More phosphor conversion is more efficiency losses generally. But pure blue wouldnt be the most efficient light either. A more green-blue would be.
The luminosity function has a peak at around 555nm- green. A warm and high CRI LED does not match well with the luminosity function of the human eye, The theoretical maximum efficiency possible for an LED based off this 555nm peak, it’s 683 lumens/watt. 5400K is the approximate CCT 555nm would correlate to.
This led though would be cooler than that though I think. It would still be a phosphor converted blue, just mostly converted to green so everything would just look green. Wouldn’t have a good CRI. To improve the CRI you would have to adjust the spectrum produced by adding more or different phosphor materials, again reducing the luminous efficacy and the efficiency.
There’s more warm LED bulbs for sale on the websites youre looking at because you’re looking at websites for household bulbs. That doesn’t mean warm is efficient. It just means nobody wants their house to be glowing green lol
Thanks for the info,
Personally, I don’t really worry about Today EU’s energy rating scale, at least here are some points to think about :
Today EU’s energy rating scale considers my Philips 4,5W led bulb 2700k 470lm CRI ~ 80 as an awfull grade F (on a scale from Grade A (good) to G (not good)).
.
fighting for saving 1W … I think you won’t ever notice on a year ; your others electric devices will use much more electric power (Oven, Fridge, electronic devices, charging your phones during nights …)
With a good (correct) CRI I could switch from a 800 lumen to a 470 lumen one. So from 7W => 4,5W
I’ve seen several people using a better grade little LED, and guess what ? They put severals LED on the ceiling , not sure it’s save more energy than a lone bulb
I think you can save energy if you use dimmable bulbs.
So I’ll take the 2700k color with a CRI as high as possible even if there are better-efficient-greenish-Led (at least for house lights.