KG_Tuning…… I am still waiting, & would appreciate an answer; to the question I have asked you twice before concerning the Convoy S2+ 6500k you mentioned.
Texas_Ace BLF Calibrated Lumen tube / Sphere No math skills needed - Several spheres still available
Just presumed Maukka chose them for being universally close to specs.
I have 2 Convoy S2+ lights and tbh they are f garbage, I will not be ordering one of Maukka’s, not least as it means tuning a measuring device to 1 light which is complete folly. Ideally the TA tube should be calibrated to an Aspheric light and a pure flooder to iron out any beam pattern inconsistencies, even then the reflectors are part of the sphere on TA’s design, take the optics and lens out of the D4 when using TA’s tube and the output reading drops, wtf!!! I’m not a physicist or engineer but f* me.
As for the negative feedback I left TA on ebay, a few of my Ebay flashlight listings have been removed since for containing a link to my youtube review of them, wonder why?
He choose them because the driver put out a decent well regulated output. It had nothing to do with how much light they put out. Hence the need for calibration. Once calibrated it should pretty well stay that lumen no matter battery type or level of battery charge to a certain extent.
That is not why this light was chosen. It was picked for it’s relatively stable output.
Oh my…… :person_facepalming: … Keep talking by all means. :+1:
You are truly removing every speck of doubt.
Would really appreciated an answer on the history of your S2+ also.
Nope, I’ve not got a 1301 ANSI lumen S2+ light off him. I have a couple of 650 lumen @ turn on Banggood S2+ lights.
Yeah the Convoys were chosen because they’re pretty low-cost, so its easy to offer this service without folks having to spend a lot, plus as everyone else already said they’re tightly regulated so the output is stable and doesn’t fall off a cliff 30 seconds after turning it on. Makes it good for testing. I can’t imagine Maukka cares how close to factory spec the light is, he’s going to print a sheet that shows the actual output of each person’s individual light. It’ll be interesting to compare them all though, and see if they all fall within that 14% window, but it won’t really change anything when it comes to using one to verify our own testing rigs. Tested and verified data matters, claims do not.
Maukka 1301 lumens
TA Tube 650 lumens
14%?
OK…… if maukka tested that S2+ at 1301 ANSI lumens, what does it show on the ’TA Tube’??
As far as the other two that came from Banggood…. you really have no idea if they are reading low or not.
.
EDIT: I read his reply wrong. He DOES NOT have a “1301 ANSI lumen S2+” from maukka.
Where did those numbers come from? I was under the impression Maukka hasn’t started shipping out his tested and “certified” light sets yet. I mean, I’m the first name on his interest list and he hasn’t even contacted me for payment yet.
Yup
Factory: 1067
Maukka: 1301
TA tube: 650
The 1301 is just his designation for that particular S2. A label. Lower down it shows the lumen output at 0, 30, and 60 seconds. And that is for that ONE particular S2…
That would be 270 lumens not 1301 - and he is using mid mode
Oh I think I see now. Your S2+ that reads 650 lm in the TA tube IS NOT the same exact physical light that reads 1301 in Maukka’s Lisun sphere. Correct? So you’re not exactly comparing apples to apples here, they’re different lights. So then the question becomes HOW different are they? Is your light the same exact emitter and bin as Maukka’s? Is it the same driver with the same firmware? Did you use similar cells of similar charge? Were they in the same mode, etc, etc. In other words, what was different? If that answer is literally “nothing”, everything was the same, just a different example of the same thing, then yeah they should’ve been within 14% (give or take, because all electronics parts have tolerances that could add some more difference).
But to REALLY know how your tube compares with Maukka’s sphere, you should buy one of his tested and certified lights. Which is all the rest of this crew has been trying to tell you for the last half-dozen pages or so….
EDIT: Wait, reading back through Maukka’s comment you linked, I don’t see a 1301 lumen S2+ tested output. Look again.
Not trying to be rude to KG, but I also cannot understand his logic of giving TA negative feedback on his Ebay account. TA went above and beyond what any typical manufacturer/seller would do to right a wrong. In the past, when we all noticed TA tube read too high, TA did not try to defend his product and worked hard to fix it for us. He’s trying to do the same for KG in a very professional manner.
It almost seems like the negative feedback was given to spite the few members that were rude to KG (but I also tried explained in my previous posts why). This is completely unfair to TA though as he cannot control what others post.
KG_Tuning, please take it down a notch.
I tried slightly angling my throwy D4S and the changes were about 1, which is hardly significant, which is surprisingly good in my book. With my old ceiling bounce, the same angling would result in probably 20-30 difference.
Also my super wide flooder MT03 (similar flood to X80) measures about the same lumens as the much more throwy deep reflector MT09R. Both lights uses the same TA driver, identical binned 4000k emitters, and tested on the same set of fully charged Sony VTC6. Therefore your concern that TA tube favors throw over floody lights is not true from my experience.
Also I want to repeat, TA tube measures about 7% loss with DC-Fix applied whereas ceiling bounce measurements exceeds 20% lumen lost. I believe Maukka also tested DC-Fix to be about the same as the TA tube (correct me if I’m wrong). Frosted optics would reduce lumen output by probably 20+. I’ve seen reports here that even changing clear optics to another clear optics can improve lumens by I think it was 30 or so.