Good topic. I felt the same way about XPL-HI after getting a BLF X6 SS/Cu because of its great beam and throw. Suddenly I thought all my lights should have XPL-HI, but now I’m not so sure. My understanding is with XPL-HI over an XML2 you give up some overall output in exchange for the better throw.
So now I think XPL-HI is needed only in lights where you want more throw than what a regular XPL or XML2 offers and you are willing to give up some overall output in exchange, but not giving up nearly as much as you would with XP-G2.
—
So here’s some of my thoughts (not necessarily facts, someone please correct me if I’m wrong):
XP-G2: Long throw from a more intense hotspot with less spill, but less overall output than XPL/XML
XPL-HI: Better throw but slightly less overall output than XPL/XML2, solves the above issue giving long throw with more overall output than XP-G2.
—
Lately I read some people commenting are not happy with their XPL-HI modded lights, I’m not sure if that’s because they are using a reflector or optic that’s designed for XML? I have a feeling that sometimes may be the case. Does a reflector or optic need to be optimized for XPL-HI?
Here are some beamshots with mouse-overs that showing a good comparison between XML2 and XPL-HI in the same light, an Eagle Eye X6 (post #126 by MRsDNF in this thread: https://budgetlightforum.com/t/-/36967/124)
You can see how the XPL-HI has better throw but less overall output. It appears to be different tints as the XML2 looks more neutral, and I’m not sure if he is using the same reflector.
—
I also had the same feeling about XPL when it came out, shouldn’t all lights have XPL instead of XML2? (I assumed XPL made the XML2 outdated)
XML2 vs XPL (not HI): Not sure there is any difference in the beam profile or output?
For lights not needing the throw of XPL-HI should we use XML2 or XPL for the best overall output?