Them reading too low is not the sphere being wrong in most cases, it is simply the lights putting out less lumens then they should.
Excluding the X45 and X80, all the other numbers we saw you post were well within reason and matched up with other members tests here.
I am still confused why you think the lights should read what they are rated at. If you compare the lights to their ratings you will see a wide range of variance, it is not possible for the sphere to be reading them all differently.
It is quite possible, logical and known that most lights are simply overrated and to differing degrees.
Without some trustworthy lights like a Fenix though, it is impossible to know for sure. If you could test a fenix it would give us some comparable numbers that would be very helpful.
Short of some Fenix measurements there is just not much else that can be done other then to say the X45 and X80 are mysteries and the rest of the lights are reading within tolerances.
You’re lying now. I’ve never once said a light should be measuring what the manufacturer claims. My house isn’t full of 50,000 lumen T6 Zoomies.
I’ve made it clear I test @ turn on and not ANSI and why. Your tube isn’t getting close to the figures the lights should be getting against any other reliable source.
Basically you’re saying all my sub 7000 lights are reading correctly albeit modestly but my 7000-32000 lights must be faulty or have really exaggerated lumen claims as nobody else has tested them on your tube.
Don’t forget the DT70, M43, MF01, and DX80 were also way out. People got 7000 for the Nichia MF01 but mine is the cw version, it should be circa 10,000, that’s 2000 down from the manufacturer’s claim btw.
You numbers matched up very well with other members here.
I will simply leave this comparison for people to judge for themselves with lights ranging from 2400 lumens up to 7800 lumens matching up very well considering they are not Fenix and in some cases FET (such as the Q8 and D4 which is really a horrible comparison).
The last 24 hours in a ‘nutshell’…. :person_facepalming:
Starring Jack Nicholson as TA
. There are none so blind as those who will not see….
KG_Tuning, you have made it plain that you have zero interest in knowing the true lumen output of your lights.
You believe that your “lumen monsters” are all rated correctly by the factory that sold them it appears.
Then when you find out that is not correct you try to kill the messenger, which is in this case the TA Lumen Tube.
Did it burst your bubble so bad to find out your lights are overrated that your common sense shut down?? It appears it did.
You apparently bought this from eBay… have you even read this thread?? Many of the things you have spoke of have already been addressed & sorted out.
Do you even know that “Chineese Lumens” are not based on reality.
Do you even have a light, any light; that has a certified & tested lumen output…… besides an arbitrary number some factory pasted to it?? Do you???
Your arguments hold no water at all…… Basically everything you have said has been flawed from the very start…… because you seem to base it all on what you think your “lumen monsters” are doing. When the sad reality is… they are not.
If you can’t accept that…… fine. But don’t blame it on the Lumen Tube that told you much closer the truth of the matter.
Lets not get harsh with him. He has a right to his own opinion.
I was actually genuinely worried there might be an issue with the tube at first. Which is why I kept asking for some numbers that could be better compared to others.
The way to properly test something is to remove as many variables as possible from the equation and then average the results that remain and see is the result makes sense.
In this case a Fenix measurement would be a massive step to get some comparable numbers.
Since that does not seem possible, we just have to go on the numbers we can compare.
Not planning on getting harsh at all. Just added a video for comic relief, restated what had already been said , & added a few thoughts of my own.
It may not be sugar coated, but it is far from “harsh”. Just my .02 about the last 24 hours of this thread.
Ok so we get the two test lights from Maukka and then how do we go about figuring out the conversion factor?
Will there be instructions posted here cause I don’t have a clue on correct figuring. I Fear Factor Figuring Fellas!
lol, once you get the lights from Maukka then simply take a measurement and divide the reading you get by the reading Maukka says it should have and that should be your correction factor.
So for example if mukkas light is supposed to be 170 lumens but it reads 165 lumens then:
170 / 165 = 1.03
Then simply multiply your future measurements by 1.03.
Although keep in mind, these are not exactly precise down to the single digits, so don’t get too caught up on exact digits.
Personally for a 1.03 correction factor I would just round the numbers up and call it good but that is me (well, actually I would still round them down as I like under-stating my numbers but that is not for everyone lol).
You can also try flipping the correction discs around in different combos to see if you can get it matched up exact or at least close enough just by adjusting the way the discs are facing.
Yes, calibrating it with a Maukka light is ideal since I did not have it when yours was built.
I am curious what the numbers are as it sits now, I really don’t know what to expect to be honest since it was built around a completely false calibration initially.
Just want to point out that CW is not always brighter than NW. CW is available in higher bins so they are usually brighter. However, if they are of the same bin, there’s no reason CW should be brighter than NW or WW unless the meter favors CW. I measured Acebeam NW to produce more lumen output than CW and a few other examples I can’t remember off the top of my head. The Haikelite MT09R NW version is also much brighter than the CW version. Regarding MF01, my stock 219c nichia measures 7900 startup lumen and the modded 219c, which I sent over to Germany for Lexel to swap in his driver, produces about 10,000 lumens startup. Lexel said others reported similar lumen output with his driver. If you read the MF01 GB thread you will see many people testing the MF01 stock at 7k-9k lumens and not the manufacturer rated 12k lumens. I originally measured a little over 9k lumens with my “calibrated” ceiling bounce method but that method is flawed as it heavily favors throw over flood. For example, putting on DC-Fix, I see lumen losses over 20% with ceiling bounce, but with TA’s lumen sphere, I see around 7%. TA’s lumen sphere does not favor flood over throw. Also you’re not supposed to place the light directly over the diffuser for measurement. TA didn’t calibrate the sphere to be used that way.
Also I’m not sure what your “reliable sources” are that you use to compare with TA’s lumen tube but I bet the majority of them measure on the high side because they are most likely calibrated using lights with known manufacturers’ ratings, whereas TA’s lumen tube is calibrated to Maukka’s $10,000 professional sphere with ANSI certification (TA’s tube is not calibrated to Fenix lights). Many manufacturers just rate their lights based on theoretical light output based on calculated current/voltage and corresponding lumens from the emitter spec sheet, which does not reflect real OTF lumens. Some manufacturers might even create lumen numbers out of thin air.
It’s unfair that you are bashing TA for this product based on many of your points that we all found to be flawed. You really should spend some time reading through this entire thread from start to finish to understand and appreciate the immense effort TA put into this and the heavy input and feedback provided by many BLF veterans that helped shape this product. That way you will understand how and why it’s measuring the way it is and why the readings are more trustworthy than manufacturer’s ratings or other DIY lumen spheres.
Cool white of the MF01 produces more lumens than the neutral white version, I’m pretty sure of that. CW was favoured because of higher output and staying cooler at the same time. Further more there are two types of drivers for the MF01. V1 has got a buck driver, and V2 a boost driver. V1 of the 219C emitters produces roughly 1000 lumens more than V2 219. I don’t know about the XP-G3 variant.
Hey what’s up man? I deny! Not my videos! Haha, which videos are you referring to? Please link, I’m curious! If you mention the person who has all the new lights, I’m thinking about member steel_1024… :sunglasses:
If you mention the person who has all the new lights, I’m thinking about member steel_1024… :sunglasses: