Yes, this is what they are suggesting.
I showed them the lightly textured Acebeam K65 reflector to see what they think. Maybe this is an option.
I would be okay with them making a single version with OP reflector as long as we could buy the SMO reflector as an option.
Sofirn says their 21700 batteries make good contact head to tail stock, but they are a tight fit in the light due to their length. This should be expected since it has to handle battery lengths from 130mm (65mm x 2) to 142mm (71mm x 2).
Using them and the SMO reflector they measured about 750 meters throw or 140kcd.
Do you guys want the BLF group buy to use the SMO reflector even if it means we might have to either sand down the centering ring to lower the reflector or maybe add something under it, like layers of paper, to raise it up?
Hopefully they can tweak the centering ring height at the factory.
^ No, we must do nothing, Sofirn must make the focussing right. They are a flashlight company, focussing leds is at the core of what they do, or else they should learn that very fast, seems a useful art for them to master :weary:
^Agree!
Diameter (or actually front area) is directly lineair related to throw. Make the front area 10% larger, you get 10% more throw (in kcd). It is a huge effect and it is simple to predict.
Depth of the reflector however changes throw much less. Make the depth 10% deeper, the throw will not change 10% but way less (<1%?). The effect is small. I’m not saying there is no effect at all, the radiation pattern of the led plays a role in it, and I hear people say there is an optimal widt-depth ratio for the best beam with the best throw. And given that you find an optimum, the relation is not lineair.
So it gives the wrong idea to state that “Depth and diameter are the equation for throw”, when diameter (front area) plays the major role in throw, and the depth only plays a small secondary role.
If they are willing to send out a light knowing it needs focusing it says a lot about them and their lights. If the SMO is out of focus the OP probably is too and just hiding the problem. Just plain lazy
That is a lot of “if’s”.
In fact there are no “if’s” about it. Multiple people smarter than me, including you, says it seems out of focus and your post on their behalf is all “here’s a light, but it has this problem and this quirk” and “hopefully” they care enough to do something about it. It looks like they are doing just enough to get it out the door.
Don’t be too hard on Jason, he is doing the best he can.
Having experience in this area there is truly a “pick your battles” mentality you have to adopt when working with these china companies.
Getting them to improve the reflector is one of those things I have a lot of experience and a lot of trouble with as well. It is far far harder then it sounds to actually get worthwhile improvements and have even had them make it worse when trying to fix it.
While I am not following this very close, I do think that Jason is picking the right battles to fight so far.
That said, Sofrin could make improvements but that is Sofrins problem, not Jasons.
I get this is the norm for a lot of these companies which is too bad because Sofirn sometimes seems to want community input. I said nothing about incremental heat path improvements or most of the other wish list items. Jason should not take this personally, just give them the best advice you can and if they choose to ignore it or if it is not feasible that is up to them. However, if something like adjusting a 1 cent centering ring allows them to use a SMO reflector and accomplish the original goal of their light it should be explored and not left to the BLF community “because we can”.
I don’t want to have to mod the light after receiving it. I’m also ok with a OP reflector.
I understand what you are saying.
Although from my own experience I can completely understand why they don’t want to use an SMO reflector. I have yet to see an SMO reflector with an XHP70.2 LED that gives a good beam outside of the GT70 (and even it is not great if properly focused, you actually have to de-focus it to make it presentable).
Some are not as sensitive to the details as I am but a dark spot in the beam, egg yolk tint shift, ugly tint and things like this have a big effect on me.
All that said, of course they should test some different centering rings, they should also try some wild centering rings that are far too thick like the GT70 centering rings. This can defocus the beam enough to get rid of the ugly look at minor costs to throw (which can be corrected by the end user by sanding the centering ring if they chose).
Although the end result is generally about the same throw as an OP reflector but the beam does not look as nice.
Personally I really like OP reflectors on everything except dedicated throwers. I do not find the loss of throw to be worth worrying about in most cases but that is just me.
Agree with your points, the Acebeam one JasonWW sent them is a nicely polished subtle OP and would be a good compromise if necessary. I think Kawi hit the nail on the head that the finish shown in the photo isn’t so great and maybe too deep of texture. Whatever they come up with I simply hope they would take the time to focus it as best they can and not make us do it.
Maybe Sofrin should just make a host and leave it at that…
I agree with the majority here; if we are going to build a light, lets do it correctly. With such a huge head, there’s no reason to make it a floody light.
Same here.
Maybe a poll could be created to see what potential buyers of this particular light value most: throw, or a pretty beam pattern.
No, there are definitely 2 big “if’s” there.
For all we know the picture they showed is the best focus they could get. I can’t say for sure.
We also don’t know if they would send out the SMO version seperately. This was a suggestion Tracy made to please the BLF people who seem to prefer it greatly over the OP reflector.
It is still early for them to make adjustments and tweak things. They said they will be sending samples to some BLFer’s so maybe we can tweak things with the SMO reflector and find out if it’s a good reflector shape or not. Who knows. If ZozzV6 gets one he can 3D print different height rings and tell them exactly the thickness they need. Or maybe mail them a ring that they can copy. They may try a light OP reflector. This takes at least a week to make. So we will see what they come up with.
Remember that their goal was not to make a super thrower light. It is just to make an updated L6/S70 with better UI, more power and newer emitter. So far they have succeeded in these areas. Plus it looks good and should have better thermal handling than the L6/S70, which is a bonus.
Maybe a BLF version that comes with 2 reflectors, 2 centering rings of different height, and NO GLUE 
Can someone explain what OP and SMO, centering ring and how it affects output mean? I get ya are talking about the reflector. newbie here trying to follow the convo.
thanks!!!
Centering ring is the plastic bit that sits around the LED and is what the reflector sits on. Each LED/reflector will behave differently depending on where the light enters the reflector so this can help adjust that distance more or less.
SMO = Smooth mirror finish reflector
OP = Orange peel, referring to the bumpy surface finish on the reflector
Smooth reflectors will focus the light into much more of a spot and send it further “down range”, the down side is it is less forgiving if any artifacts, rings, colors show up in the beam
Orange peel will help smooth the beam so mostly eliminating any gaps or rings in the beam but at the expense of making the light more floody and not able to throw as far
Thanks for the explanation contactcr! Just trying to soak up as much as I can! . . . . With that being said, I am still not ready to be modifying my own lights so I would like one that’s 100%. I do however appreciate what a lot of y’all are doing working with these companies trying to get us some cool flashlights. For the longest I thought I was the only one that had a “obsession” until I found this forum 