Again, it seems that both you and Texas_ace refuse to accept I don’t try to test, calibrate or expect lights to get a manufacturer’s lumen claims no matter how many times I state I don’t. Making up stuff to defend a flawed integrating tube is pretty low.
I calibrated my ceiling bounce app to a Maukka’s, Advanced knife bro, Vinh’s and a couple of guys off a German forum’s near identical reading of both the same low power lights and high power lights.
For the billionth time I’m not even interested in the ANSI of the lights let alone believing a manufacturer figure. I only test @ turn on now due to heat, stepdown and lights starting to be rated at turn on.
And again, I’d have a house full of 50,000 lumen T6 Zoomies if I trusted the makers claims.
Basically Maukka and I get circa 13000 & 14000 for the DT70 & X45 but because I get 9000 & 10000 on your tube both Maukka and I are wrong…and now you’re saying calibrating a light with Maukka is ideal. Bizarre!!!
So what is it? Maukka, Vinh others and I have bad examples of a light, have used lights that dropped efficiency through overuse or have bad system of measuring?
Are Olight ditching their 50 grand planet sized calibrating sphere in favour of your budget drain pipe and 12 quid light meter?
Really not sure why your lights are measuring the way it is. Maybe you can take some pics of how you measure, because so far all of us who used it found it to be pretty good and we get measurements close to some of the reputable manufacturers. Some readings as reported by myself and others are pretty spot on. I used to use ceiling bounce like yourself and calibrated my lights based on Maukka’s reviews and thought my measurements were spot on but that wasn’t the case because beam pattern greatly affects readings. Like I explained in my post earlier, using ceiling bounce, DC-fix can knock off 20+ % of the lumens whereas with TA’s tube, applying DC-fix only knocks off about 7% lumens, which is inline with what people get with their spheres. Also Advanced Knife Bro said in one of his videos that his method of getting lumens is very rough (ceiling/wall bounce maybe?). He also said he consults with Maukka too, who is one of the very few if not the only one with a truly ANSI certified integrated lumen sphere on these forums. TA’s tubes are calibrated to Maukka’s sphere readings. It could be possible that there is a problem somewhere with your specific unit that’s causing your readings to be off or it could be how you are using it. Is the aluminum foil side of the disk facing down when you measure? With a video or pic of how you measure would allow TA to better understand what might be the problem.
Maukka and TA produce significantly different results. TA’s tube only matches a 1000 lumen Fenix.
I know NW can be occasionally brighter than CW (and arguably throw further) the Olight H2R was well known for the “above spec” NW output.
Many testing got close to Hank Wang’s @ turn on specs for the Emisar D4, the TA tube was massively down. Approx 800 lumens down on the Nichia version and 1300 down on the XP-L HI diffused optic variant.
Both Maukka and I measured well above the manufacturer’s claim. Unsurprisingly the TA tube gave a reading far below the manufacturer’s claim.
The manufacturer’s claim as per usual can’t be met but like on every other flashlight the TA tube measures well short on other’s measurements.
People have two option’s, get an average from every online test or buy TA’s tube and face false disappointment or fear that you have a defective light.
There’s no way on earth my BLF Q8 is brighter than my Noctigon Meteor M43!!!
If I calibrate my app to read 4800 for the Q8 my M43 reads 7000!!!
TA’s tube has the Q8 at 4800 and the Noctigon Meteor M43 at 4550, utterly insane!!!
Whenever I compare 2 similar lights on TA’s tube (like D4 XP-L versus D4 XP-L diffused) the thrower has a huge advantage. It will throw more light centrally down the tube further without as much spill hitting the sidewalls before the 1st tube diffuser.
TA has stated many many many times that my lights are measuring correctly on his tube. He can’t explain the low X45 reading but is happy to believe I have a dud.
His and his fanboy’s main argument is that I should deal with the disappointment that manufacturers’s lie.
My TA tube read roughly 4,500 lumens at startup on both my Emisar D4 with XP-L2 v4 4000k 80CRI emitters and XP-L HD v6 3A 70CRI emitters, which is pretty reasonable. Unfortunately I don’t have a good stock Emisar D4 to measure because the XP-L HI 5D tint that I have lost a whole lot of lumens since I first got it per my ceiling bounce measurements due to frequent turbo usage. By time I got a TA tube, it only measures about 2,500 startup lumens. But it is actually noticeably dimmer than my other two D4 so it’s a reasonable measurement. My M43 xpg2 S4 5D tint measures 6,950 startup lumens with my TA tube so not sure why yours measure 4,550 lumens. Again, you are the only one so far that seems to have such inconsistent measurements with the TA tube. So we need your pics or videos to diagnose the problem, whether it is a problem with your specific unit or the way you are using it, or maybe there’s no problem at all but just your lights are really that bright or dim (not very likely but possible).
TA is happy with my measurements and we both got near identcal readings for the Italia Cometa.
I’ve sent him pics on how I’m using it.
People on here need to decide in their argument if my tube/meter has a problem or that my lights are all massively overrated by the manufacturer.
Also I have 2 DQG Tinys, 2 Italia Cometas, 2 Nitecore Tip cw, 3 Olight S1Rs, 2 Olight H2Rs, 3 D4 XP-L HI and they all measure pretty close to their “twins” some of the measurements coming from you guys compared to my tube are unbelievably far apart, 1000’s of lumens in some cases. So either TA is wrong and my tube/meter does have an issue or his tubes aren’t consistent.
I’m addressing teacher’s lies mate, and that because I’m British I shouldn’t have a voice on here.
Seems people want to jump on TA’s erroneous belief that I think a light should measure the same as the manufacturer’s claim.
I never have, never will or my house would be full of 50,000 lumen Amazon.com T6 Zoomies.
Lights are generally lower than claimed by the maker but all lights tested on the TA tube are too low, with some being significantly lower. (compared to Maukka/vinh/AKB/ myself etc etc) A few people are getting closer readings which points to notable different readings between tubes as well.
The BLF X5 for example, rated at 1400, by the makers I presume, tested by every man and his dog at circa 1200…,
…The Texas_Ace calibrating tube: 920 Lumens
The BLF Q8 was tested by many on release at over 5000 lumens, the TA tube got me 4800 and someone else on here 4200, again, too low and too inconsistent between readings.
Don’t forget my test results “look reasonable” to TA and come close to others on here who have the same lights.
Forget I’m British, forget my tea stained wonky teeth, forget the manufacturer’s inflated claims, this tube under-reads, people.
Out of the tube the HS1010A is reading my torches at a higher lux than my meter, inside the HS1010A is reading my torches at a lower lux than my meter. There’s too much diffusing and too much light getting through the 1st diffuser centrally and cleanly from the throwers. (flooders have their spill hitting the tube at angles before TA’s first diffuser bouncing/wasting light all over the place) I understand how only a sphere can work.
I got around it by lifting my flooders/throwers against an app calibrated with another flooder/thrower until the spill area matched. It meant lights with big spill got that spill closer to the sensor (and off the walls.) It got me extremely close to Maukka’s test results.
Shortening the tube and sitting lights directly on the diffuser has got me a lot closer. My 6700 lumen Noctigon Meteor now measures 6750 lumens but the shorter length is playing havoc at over 14,000 lumens
