I also look forward to someone doing an emitter swap to see if an SFT40 would increase the throw, and I would have done this myself if I had a copy of the light. You simply said you do not agree with my reasoning without pointing out what you think is wrong with it, which is useless toward a fruitful discussion.
The technology at hand is irrelevant–one could do the same comparison diffusing a C8 with Osram NM1 and SFT40, and the same conclusions would hold.
I agree that my conclusion is very counterintuitive, which is why I’m spending all this time and effort trying to explain how I got here.
I agree that the SG has been successful in its current form. I simply think it could be even more successful with a different optic OR emitter choice.
If you think about diffusion it makes sense. There’s two aspects you should think about, the radius of the projected beam, and the blur radius that the lens generates. A properly focused smooth TIR will produce a beam and blur radius with a diameter proportional to the emission surface size, but if you add pebbling/diffusion layer to the same lens you will get increased blur radius proportional to the roughness of the surface.
Here we have two examples to illustrate the beam diameter and blur diameter, on the left is the stock TS10, on the right is my modified single LED TS10.
Adding pebbling or a diffusion layer is the equivalent of making a gaussian blur, the diffusion radius will get larger, and it will get to a point where the diffusion radius is equal or larger than the original beam radius, so the diffusion will go all the way through the beam, resulting in reduced beam intensity. One way to gain intensity back is by enlarging the light emission surface, while keeping the same intensity, so the beam radius gets back to being larger than the blur radius. You can still regain some of the intensity by enlarging the emission surface at a reduced intensity, but only at some extent. If you go all the way and increase diffusion to the maximum the candela will depend only on the lumen output of the light source, no matter how intense or small the source is. Maybe swapping to a SFT40 will result in increased candela, maybe not, further testing is necessary, but it’s for sure a not ideal solution for this problem (too much heat, emitter will be underused on this host).
The best approach for gaining intensity in this case might be as simple as removing the pebbling, which is the whole point of the discussion. Going for an even smaller emission surface while keeping the pebbling will result in reduced candela, despite the increase in emission surface intensity. Unexpected beam artifacts might appear by removing the pebbling though.
Or, maybe, making the bezel longer to accommodate proper smooth optics, that won’t hurt either. To my eyes the increased length brings a new character for the device. A good one for sure.
Thanks for your explanation! The only thing about the above I question is whether people in general would like the change. Just based on the fact that the TS10 is so popular in it’s present form factor. That has to be a consideration for Wurkkos. I personally would not care for that change. I like the little TS10 just as it is… But as I said, I really have no desire for it to be made into some kind of a mini thrower.
Thank you so, so much for the excellent exposition and diagram! Much better explained than mine. In this way I suppose that diffusion can be thought of as convolving the beam image on the wall with some distribution: if the distribution is compactly supported (for practical purposes a reasonable assumption) then there is a finite “diffusion radius”. It is a very illuminating (!) idea to take the limit as diffusion approaches uniformity and demonstrate the weakened dependence of throw on surface intensity and increased dependence on total flux.
I agree that the best solution would be to use a smooth optic. The periodic-like pattern of the pebbling already introduces artifacts to the beam, I can’t imagine a smooth optic doing much worse. The existing optic and emitter combo makes the light feel like a half-finished idea.
Unfortunately when I tried to adjust the clip like I do on all my TS10, the clip snapped.
I’m guessing this clip had a different heat treatment than the TS10 v1 clips.
The green is a bit surprising, since TIRs tend to make more magenta beams than reflectors, though I’ve also heard of similar reports from others regarding this light. Probably a binning issue with the LED, or a design issue with the shallow TIR (which tends to pick up more of the greenish sideways emission than central purplish emission), or a combination of both.
Since TIR optics are being discussed, I find it quite interesting how Fresnel lenses work.
It looks like all the light is being concentrated to the inner most ring, and that ring glows and acts like a light emitting surface. The beam pattern also also has a hole in the middle similar to the ring, when close to a wall.
Might be the case as the beam doesnt have a sharp cutoff like most zoomies. The pic I shared is from a trustfire MT10 with a n osram p9. I dont think my other TIRs glow like this on the optic itself.
My light arrived today. Impeccable surface finish (same ano as HD10), great e-switch, and overall a lovely light. I am not sure how well I like the lens yet, I will have to wait for nightfall for beamshots and a verdict on that.
I am already writing a full review, for now I will only share these two pics as a first impression. I sadly do not own a regular TS10 for comparison, but I would expect them to be identical apart from lens/MCPCB/driver.
The lens looks like it is a fresnel-style TIR lens, with a smooth center, and increasingly coarse beading towards the edges. Very curious, but looks pretty cool with the aux LEDs on high mode!
This is what is observed at short distances–at longer distances the entire lens should light up when viewed from the axis of the beam, not just the inner ring. Of course, this is assuming that the lens+emitter combo is properly focused.
I boght a few of these clips for the HD10 a while back. I like them far more than the clip that comes with the TS10. But, depending on the thickness and stiffness of the pocket you are using that final bit above the part that fits around the body (collar?) of the light can be a challenge to seat all of the way. It can be adjusted, or course. So far I have not destroyed any doing that. It seems like the clip and collar are formed of a single piece of steel.
Emisar clips have a similar bump, I found a 3d-printed little wedge piece that goes inside and makes the pocket edge ride up the bump easily. I’m linking the model for it below, it works very well.
Seeing people finally start to receive theirs I hope that this goes on sale soon! I really hope that Wurkkos stops gluing the bezel though! All of the recent sofirms I’ve received no longer seem to have glued bezels thankfully. I can’t wait to buy this one though! A single emitter TS10 with aux is like the dream FW1AA I never had!
That’s I wanna say. It could get the best budget replace between TS10 and TS10SG. We can make them lowest price with brass, copper and Titanium options again. I must say thanks so much again for our great Anduril team, thanks for the upgraded and sharing always. I appreciate it and love you guys. I will send the perfect TS10 SG package to Anduril team immediately when it available.
