A useful comment from the main LEP threads: https://budgetlightforum.com/t/-/63612/521
I was wondering what terms we could use for the older LEP modules with the mirror,
and with the translucent phosphor.
Would Transmission LEP and Reflected LEP be good terms.
Or do you have any other suggestions?
Principally a good idea to make a structural difference between the two main LEP types. But I am not thrilled by the two abbreviations you proposed. As former civil servant I have a some experience in translating solutions into potential problems. TLEP and RLEP can lead to a bit of a diaspora when using an alphabetical search engine.
So my suggestion would be: LEP-T and LEP-R (or LEP-M).
Since the laser is only partly transmitted in the first case and only partly reflected in the second (most light is absorbed by the phosfor and the energy released in the form of new longer wavelength photons going in all directions), I believe this is an inaccurate description.
Front-illuminated LEP and back-illuminated LEP would be a more accurate description.
LEPa = old one
LEPb = newer one
LEPc = the next one to be invented
LEPd = the one after the next one
Whatever the nomenclature agreed on, if it is said enough times in enough places be many experts, it will become the standard, and you can’t go back. I think keeping it simple has merit. Designers will know what “a” means and consumers will have to figure it out no matter what you call it.
Thank you Henk4U2, Djozz, and fourbyfive.
Appreciate your ideas. Let's see if there are more suggestions.
fourbyfive beat me to it,
although mine was:
LEP.1
LEP.2
……
Djozz’s suggestion is good.
Pass-through LEP and mirror LEP works for me.
Since mirror style is older and the pass-through style is newer, you could simply refer to them as gen 1 and gen 2. The issue with this is that people will assume gen 2 is better, which it isn’t necessarily. But it’s still accurate in that it is the second generation of LEP tech.
I’m not sure if differentiating the two is super important? Of course more clarity is always good so this is a good discussion to have, but the two styles don’t seem to have significant differences in actual use. I suppose the pass-through is better because it’s newer, but I don’t think there’s any massive differences in efficiency or tint that can be nailed down specifically to pass-through vs mirror.
Like there are other factors that make a bigger difference. If I was interested in the Thor 1, for example, the fact that it’s pass-through or mirror doesn’t really matter, because I’m buying it for the form factor anyway, and it still throws about as well as other LEPs with similar bezel sizes/form factor, such as the (I believe mirror-style) Weltool W3 pro.
Whether you choose the new pass-through Weltool W5 vs the older mirror-style W4, as you mention in your review, would have more to do with preferred battery config or switch position.
Pass through also seems to be both newer AND less expensive (or at least coincided with the technology in general taking a price jump down, with the lumintop and astrolux/mateminco LEPs) so it seems likely to take over, even though mirror style may have higher performance.
Haha I didn’t think a thread would be made from my post 
I don’t think ‘generation’ convention is good as it’s different implementation rather than product improvement… Seems odd to me if gen 1 outperforms gen 2. You’d also then limited by the naming convention for significant improvement to mirror or shine through techniques… “Gen 2.2”…? Instead of (more sensibly): “shine through gen2”
I’m hopeful additional designs will appear on the market, I’d like to see warmer CCT for starters!
Is reflectored LEP flashlight available nowadays?