Sofirn SF13 2×AA - First Impressions

SIGShooter · 2019-02-24T05:45:05.000Z

The head of my SF13 appears to be glued on. And the SP10 V2 I bought this past December is also glued. What a pain

LEDlove · 2019-02-25T02:31:08.000Z

SIGShooter:

The head of my SF13 appears to be glued on. And the SP10 V2 I bought this past December is also glued. What a pain

The instructions of my SF13 says that it’s glued on and that opening up the head could void the warranty. Probably not worth taking a chance on messing anything up by opening it, although I notice while looking at the LED from the outside using a strong magnifier, there’s a speck of dirt on the LED dome that I wish I could wipe off.

Lightbringer · 2019-02-25T04:46:19.000Z

LEDlove:

The Sofirn SF13 reminds me most of the old Quark 2AA tactical that used to cost $78, and wasn’t anywhere near 420 lumens.

Ah, yes, the same Quarks I have 2 of but never use because of the green beam… :person_facepalming:

SIGShooter · 2019-02-25T06:47:50.000Z

LEDlove:

SIGShooter:

The head of my SF13 appears to be glued on. And the SP10 V2 I bought this past December is also glued. What a pain

The instructions of my SF13 says that it’s glued on and that opening up the head could void the warranty. Probably not worth taking a chance on messing anything up by opening it, although I notice while looking at the LED from the outside using a strong magnifier, there’s a speck of dirt on the LED dome that I wish I could wipe off.

I don’t think that voiding warranties bother many on BLF

The problem with gluing the head is that one can’t change the led, say for example to get rid of the green tint, or even replacing the lens if it cracks at some point. My SP10 has some sort of film on the inside of the lens but I can’t easily get to it because of the glue :cry:

Hellie112 · 2019-02-25T10:47:08.000Z

The second unit I received had more glue inside and was a lot harder to open. I changed the led but not because of green tint (I had ordered the 320lm version). Did you guys order the “420 lm” version?

Barkuti · 2019-02-25T12:52:56.000Z

I would tell Sofirn to stick the glue up their arses and nowhere else. I generally don't care about warranties, and much less when the potential ship back cost is a real hurdle.

Hellie112 · 2019-02-25T15:14:17.000Z

I only care about warranty when I light was more than 100€ . But then again I don’t own much expensive lights. I buy lights mostly for looks and other properties like (what size drivers/leds it takes). Most lights I buy gets the a led and driver change anyways. And this glue crap really sucks because there is a larger change I damage the body.

Barkuti · 2019-02-25T16:31:55.000Z

There are ways to remove glue: gasoline, turpentine, white spirit, etc. Unfortunately these spirits will also damage o-rings, for example. I know this by experience (ThorFire TA13). I later opened the head of its almost twin sister Sofirn SF30 (different head design) by submerging the head upside down the essential required height for the lens. Unfortunately once more, I have to admit the aspheric lens in my TA13 is all superficially cracked on its backside now, and I have not hammered it (my nephew gave it a few forceful pumping hits on the head's zooming mechanism, though). Not sure if this last mishap has something to do with the white spirit bath it once had (I bathed it for 2 or 3 days).

By the way, Sofirn has switched to the original ThorFire TA13 design:

https://www.aliexpress.com/item/Sofirn-SF30A-blablabla-bullshit-LoL/32829068272.html

The torch takes 21700 cells.

;-)

LEDlove · 2019-02-25T21:04:19.000Z

Hellie112:

The second unit I received had more glue inside and was a lot harder to open. I changed the led but not because of green tint (I had ordered the 320lm version). * Did you guys order the “420 lm” version?*

Yes, the one I received 2 days ago is the 420 lumen version.
I have no way to know for sure exactly how many lumens I’m getting, but the “high” level on mine is said to be 196 lumens, which look to me to be exactly the same as my Energizer with a Luxeon Rebel at 130 lumens. The “turbo” level is brighter, but I’m not sure it’s 420 lumens.

kikkoman · 2019-02-25T22:33:56.000Z

Can anyone confirm the manufacturer’s runtimes ? They just don’t seem right.

Do they really mean a “900mAh Alkaline AA”? Not 1900 (which would be expected out of a typical Alkaline)? Either they _did _test with 900mAh cells and runtime with normal cells or Eneloops should be twice as long (probably not on Turbo), or they really meant 1900mAh and the driver is horribly inefficient - something I don’t expect with a 2xAA light.

I’d really like to know, because that would mess up an otherwise pretty nice light.

LEDlove · 2019-02-25T22:40:26.000Z

kikkoman:

Can anyone confirm the manufacturer’s runtimes ? They just don’t seem right.

Do they really mean a “900mAh Alkaline AA”? Not 1900 (which would be expected out of a typical Alkaline)? Either they _did _test with 900mAh cells and runtime with normal cells or Eneloops should be twice as long (probably not on Turbo), or they really meant 1900mAh and the driver is horribly inefficient - something I don’t expect with a 2xAA light.

I’d really like to know, because that would mess up an otherwise pretty nice light.

I think there may be plenty of inaccuracies in their figures considering how their instruction manual reads. Lots of mistakes in translations makes the manual kind of amusing. In mine, it seems to state that the flashlight was used in a rainstorm when referring referring to the waterproofing. As for their runtime figures, it was noted earlier that the 8 lumen low level was probably closer to 15 or 20 lumens. For the record, I wondered about that 900mah figure as well. That’s more like what you’d get from a AAA battery.

All in all, for the price they are charging, it’s really nice. Far better than anything I’ve seen in stores for the same price, or even more. It’s what caused me to make my very first online purchase of a flashlight.

Barkuti · 2019-02-26T01:28:23.000Z

Remember they used protected AA alkaline battery. Protected and a single one LoL.

Jokes aside, alkaline cells are a really poor choice for anything remotely high drain. At 0.5A an AA alkaline will already deliver less than half of its peak capacity and if you go even higher they'll plummet in a flash. Maybe this is why they say “900mAh :-D alkaline”.

Cheers ^:)

peg_matite · 2019-02-26T01:54:05.000Z

Looks a good bit like the Zanflare F2.

LEDlove · 2019-02-27T19:51:54.000Z

peg matite:

Looks a good bit like the Zanflare F2.

I don’t think it’s all that much brighter either. I got mine last Saturday and have been doing some more comparisons at different distances and in different environments and I don’t think it’s as bright as they say. When I compare my 130 lumen energizer to the Sofirn SF13 in turbo mode, it’s about twice as bright, which would put it at 260 or maybe 280 lumens. Even if it was 320 lumens, it’s still 100 lumens lower than what the unit I have is advertised as. I think I either got the older version, or the 420 lumen figure is based on using 14500 cells instead of AA, even though they specify AA.

Serlite · 2019-02-27T20:00:33.000Z

LEDlove:

peg matite:

Looks a good bit like the Zanflare F2.

I don’t think it’s all that much brighter either. I got mine last Saturday and have been doing some more comparisons at different distances and in different environments and I don’t think it’s as bright as they say. When I compare my 130 lumen energizer to the Sofirn SF13 in turbo mode, it’s about twice as bright, which would put it at 260 or maybe 280 lumens. Even if it was 320 lumens, it’s still 100 lumens lower than what the unit I have is advertised as. I think I either got the older version, or the 420 lumen figure is based on using 14500 cells instead of AA, even though they specify AA.

I know I’ve read somewhere around these forums that perceived brightness doesn’t correspond consistently with actual lumen output. Stuff like how a light that’s technically twice as bright as another only appears 1.5x as bright, or something like that. So it could actually be outputting closer to 420lm, but only appearing twice as bright as 130lm rather than three times as bright.

SIGShooter · 2019-02-27T20:02:42.000Z

LEDlove:

peg matite:

Looks a good bit like the Zanflare F2.

I don’t think it’s all that much brighter either. I got mine last Saturday and have been doing some more comparisons at different distances and in different environments and I don’t think it’s as bright as they say. When I compare my 130 lumen energizer to the Sofirn SF13 in turbo mode, it’s about twice as bright, which would put it at 260 or maybe 280 lumens. Even if it was 320 lumens, it’s still 100 lumens lower than what the unit I have is advertised as. I think I either got the older version, or the 420 lumen figure is based on using 14500 cells instead of AA, even though they specify AA.

Using 14500’s in the SF13 will likely result in magic smoke since the driver is rated at 1.6 to 3.2v. Even a single 14500 with a dummy cell will be over the rated voltage so I highly doubt they used 14500’s in their rating.

LEDlove · 2019-02-27T20:09:28.000Z

Serlite:

LEDlove:

peg matite:

Looks a good bit like the Zanflare F2.

I don’t think it’s all that much brighter either. I got mine last Saturday and have been doing some more comparisons at different distances and in different environments and I don’t think it’s as bright as they say. When I compare my 130 lumen energizer to the Sofirn SF13 in turbo mode, it’s about twice as bright, which would put it at 260 or maybe 280 lumens. Even if it was 320 lumens, it’s still 100 lumens lower than what the unit I have is advertised as. I think I either got the older version, or the 420 lumen figure is based on using 14500 cells instead of AA, even though they specify AA.

I know I’ve read somewhere around these forums that perceived brightness doesn’t correspond consistently with actual lumen output. Stuff like how a light that’s technically twice as bright as another only appears 1.5x as bright, or something like that. So it could actually be outputting closer to 420lm, but only appearing twice as bright as 130lm rather than three times as bright.

You could be right.

LEDlove · 2019-02-27T20:11:47.000Z

SIGShooter:

LEDlove:

peg matite:

Looks a good bit like the Zanflare F2.

I don’t think it’s all that much brighter either. I got mine last Saturday and have been doing some more comparisons at different distances and in different environments and I don’t think it’s as bright as they say. When I compare my 130 lumen energizer to the Sofirn SF13 in turbo mode, it’s about twice as bright, which would put it at 260 or maybe 280 lumens. Even if it was 320 lumens, it’s still 100 lumens lower than what the unit I have is advertised as. I think I either got the older version, or the 420 lumen figure is based on using 14500 cells instead of AA, even though they specify AA.

Using 14500’s in the SF13 will likely result in magic smoke since the driver is rated at 1.6 to 3.2v. Even a single 14500 with a dummy cell will be over the rated voltage so I highly doubt they used 14500’s in their rating.

I guess I won’t be trying that then. I’m using 1.2V NiMH batteries instead of 1.5V alkalines. I haven’t tried alkalines yet, but maybe I should do it to compare if they’re a bit brighter due to the 2 alkalines having a combined increase of .6 volts over the NiMH.

BlueSwordM · 2019-02-27T20:17:56.000Z

They won’t be brighter, at all.

See, alkalines have very high internal resistance.

That means for anything over 50-100mA, they lose a ton of capacity and a lot of power.

Also, their discharge is more of a linear curve, as they fall very quickly down from 1,5V, while NiMH stays at 1,2V average voltage for the entirety of the discharge.

TLDR: LSD NiMH cells crush everything alkaline does, even matching it in long term self-discharge.

LEDlove · 2019-02-27T20:21:22.000Z

BlueSwordM:

They won’t be brighter, at all.

See, alkalines have very high internal resistance.

That means for anything over 50-100mA, they lose a ton of capacity and a lot of power.

Also, their discharge is more of a linear curve, as they fall very quickly down from 1,5V, while NiMH stays at 1,2V average voltage for the entirety of the discharge.

TLDR: LSD NiMH cells crush everything alkaline does, even matching it in long term self-discharge.

This explains why my digital camera actually works with NiMH batteries while alkalines won’t work for more than a couple minutes after putting fresh ones in the camera. The alkalines still test as very good, but my camera sees them as dead.