Goncz Hi-Tech M-7

[Whistler]

Kenshiro, the only way to tell which light is really brighter /beam is broader is to make a direct comparison between 2 lights on the same picture. Or to set the camera out of the automatic into a fixed manual setting... otherwise the camera will choose different auto settings (relaxation-time etc)and the pictures are not a good reflection of the real output.

BTW: sorry guncollector, but thanks anyway.

 

[guncollector]

kenshiro-

Not to dispute what you're saying, but much of what you propose can also possibly be explained by the angle at which the light are hitting the garage window panes. At 35 yards, little angles can make a big difference.

No slam on John Holley's photographic prowess, but he is not a professional photographer--and is not representing the pics as scientific by any means. The pics are more to satisfy the insatiable appetite of this forum for more info on the Goncz product line...

Furthermore, I noticed that the M7 beamshot (unlike the 3 other Surefire beamshots) is not well-centered either on the garage door--as evidenced by the distinct curvature of the hotspot's right side, but totally lacking on the left. This off-center beamshot may also be artificially affecting comparison.

 

[guncollector]

Whistler writes:
BTW: sorry guncollector, but thanks anyway.

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">No need to apologize.

For everyone's edification: the pictures were provided by John Holley (Catdaddy) to me for a quick-and-dirty hosting & posting while he readies his own website.

All I did was consolidate the pics into one collage, label them, and upload them to my AOL server space.

 

[lemlux]

I agree with guncollector's comments that the beamshots are inconclusive. Reflections on the glass vary and the center hot shots are all overexposed. Mr Goncz's suggestion that a longer throw distance be used makes sense. It also makes sense to avoid oversaturating the brightest hotspot if possible.

 

[Bushman]

Also notice that the picture of the 12 pt is out of focus.. this may interfere with the beam shot to some extent. Look at the window frame on the house, it is out of focus when compared to the other three shots.

 

[Rothrandir]

these look like superior products, but is there any specific reason to go with HA 2 rather than HA 3?

 

[G.L.JOHN]

Kenshiro,

I promissed I will stay out of the judging, but when I saw your statement I am just claryfiying the facts at this time. Because this time (maybe other times too) You stuck Your foot into Your mouth and before You get choked as a friend let me save You.

I read your posting and The reason You see the least amount of lights, because the beam is culminated, other words the smooth shiny reflector with a single bouncing (reflecting) exit the light at designated angle and combined lined in almost parallel. The reflector has more tha 6 radiuses that combined forms the reflector wall. You can take our words ford because we designed ours. (We do not want to coment on the other brands.) The aim is to project the light as far as can be in focused form, although because the Wavelenght (nm) will varry at the distance...

From the compared lights the only one I ever see is the M-6 and that has a orange peel reflector that bounces the light in every direction and propably a beam before exit the reflector bounced maybe 3 , 4 times and the angle that exits could be anything. At a short distance you will see illuminated larger area; that dos not mean in a smaller concentrated are is not more lights (energy) projected.

When I meet Jeff he had one of the M-6 with him we compared it from shooting the light from The Cafee terace with lots of parasite lights (lantern parking lot lights etc.)for a distance of about 50 yards the M-6 light pattern was more than twice the size of the M-7, when we shined on a tree top about 100 plus yard, the M-7 light pattern was precise and some where 6 to 7 feet. The M-6 focus light was totaly faded away. The M-6 had a new sets of batteries in according Jeff, where The M-5 was in the last stage of the charge.

That is the reason I ask John to post the shots the one he took at 150 yards and was raining.

Kenshiro, I initialy had the impression that you were smart and intelligent. So next time if You not sure of something ask me and I will (If I know) explain.

Lets SEE John will post the 150 yard shots???!!!

 

[Size15's]

And about about a photo of the illumination tools themselves?

Please!

Al

 

[Catdaddy]

ok guys and girls, 100 yards tonight. What kind of background? White? dark? (black will be hard to find in my neighborhood, not too many witches or Satanists houses)

Trees? Sky?

Let me know soon.
John

 

[Bushman]

background dosent matter as long as it is smooth. John Goncz, I realize that you are defending your product, but please, cool off a bit. We are picky but we want to know about what we are considering to buy. Just as any good consumer would. You come off as very defensive and harsh. I don't think that kenshiro was being unreasonable, in fact, I almost had posted the same analysis, but it would have been worded about the same. Still considering buying one of your lights...respectfully yours, Bushman

P.S. eagerly awaiting the "long throw test" I am sure that the m-7 is a BIG condenter there!

 

[Catdaddy]

This arguing is really pointless. I hate the tone and wish I could stay out of it completely. Read my post earlier comparing the lights in different situations. The Goncz is not the best light for every situation and at any price. But it is great at what it does. Most gymnist are not that good at basketball. I know, a pathetic analogy.
John Holley

 

[Bushman]

John H. I really couldn't agree more!!! Thanks for helping bring this light closer to our hands.

 

[Ratso]

Is it getting a little hot in here???!!!

Remember guys, it is near impossible to compare a Gonzc Rechargeable duty-style light with a Surefire. They are two totally different applications. Tactical "entry" lights need to have a wider flawless beam which is what Surefires are known for. A SWAT team would not carry a 17" flashlight while using a gun. Then again what use has a patrol officer for a light that costs many many times more just to run for 20 minutes? The Goncz M series would be much more practical here.

I would personally like to see comparisons to "established" duty lights such as the Mag Charger, Ultra Stinger, SL-35, SL-20, Tiger Light etc.

And how about that contest with the Reva Long Arm RI-2400? I remember Kenshiro had gotten his hands on one and wanted to put it against the M-10 with 3" reflector. Remember the RI-2400 is an HID light in the same league as the Maxabeam, but reduced down to a conventional flashlight size.

 

[guncollector]

[RANT MODE ON]

Okay, this is getting silly.

People asked for pics from John, he complied. Now, people are requesting pics at different distances, at specific backgrounds, he's going to try and comply.

Yes, Mr. Goncz has used some aggressive rhetoric in advocating his product. So what? Is everyone out there so thin-skinned and have so much time on their hands that it truly bothers them that much?

I'm not going to take sides here, but here is the bottom line:

Mr. Goncz offers a 30-DAY MONEY BACK GUARANTEE.


What more do some of you want? If you're one of those who is so damn curious and can't get enough feedback here, shell out for a GHT light, and if you don't like it, don't find it a value, or rather bet the money on the World Series (BTW: Giants in 5 games)--send it back within 30 days for a FULL REFUND. Again, what more could you want?

I have no association whatsoever with GHT, other than being an end user/consumer like most of you. I put my money where my mouth is, and forked over for an M5 last week via Paypal. I'm not worried, if I don't like it, I got 30 days to return it for all my coin back.

[RANT MODE OFF]

 

[Saaby]

I have an idea--how about instead of spending all that time taking 100s of photos you package one of those up and send it (With demands for it's return if you want) to one of the many people here at CPF that are certified, if you will, to do this kind of thing. Craig would be my first choice but it might be over a month before we get results there...

 

[geepondy]

Boy, if you don't have to see across a whole football field, gotta love the broad white swarth of the 10X. If I were to decide to spend $300 on a light, that would get my vote, hands down.

 

[geepondy]

Originally posted by Saaby:
I have an idea--how about instead of spending all that time taking 100s of photos you package one of those up and send it (With demands for it's return if you want) to one of the many people here at CPF that are certified, if you will, to do this kind of thing. Craig would be my first choice but it might be over a month before we get results there...

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">I suggested Al. With Craig's domain (small apt., middle of city), it would be difficult to accurately test these hi power lights.

 

[Nerd]

G.L John, I believe that you took a lot of pains to design your light to have the best of everything. You tried to use the best parts available, the best technology and so on and so forth, to bring to us a light, with very impressive specifications (esp the one with 1600 lumens. M-10 is it?)

You see, M6 is more of a wide area light for close-medium range. M-7 is more of a SPOT light for long long range illumination. Therefore shining it at a garage door at 35 yards is not a good way to show each torch's characteristics.

Plus this is just one picture (okay, 4 seperate pictures stitched into 1. I am going to upload a edited picture, I have desaturated it so it's black and white. I have also reduce the brightness and contrast so that not everything appears to be washed out. Pardon my poor photoshop skills. Here is the link

You don't say that this orange is sweeter than that apple because they are two different fruits even tho they are fruits.

G.L John, why don't we wait for a full fledge review showing accurate side by side posting of lights in different focus using full batts before we start shooting anyone. This is just one picture (oh how many times have I said that). It's only too bad I don't have a digi cam, otherwise I would be happy to review the torch since I got some pretty far area to shine the light on (only if my neighbour doesn't mind their appartment being lighted up when all the lights are out) But I am getting my Canon A40 soon.... next on the wish list... M-10..... bwahahahah

 

[vcal]

[No message]

 

[Nerd]

See again, I have edited it so many times I have lost track of what I wanted to say....

(Rant mode in overdrive)

Let's not take into consideration brightness cos that cannot be conclusive in the picture. What I am trying to focus on is the focus/spread of the beam

Gonz and 12PT
From the above pictures which I have reduced in both colour and intensity, we can see clearly how the Gonz HT light focus well. It has a rather clearly define hotspot which gives way to very smooth and even side light, when compared with the 12PT which still has a rather bright corona and softly falling off at the edge. The 12PT here don't seem to give much peripheral light. Rather it's very SPOT too. Which explains why it seems brighter in the colour picture. The camera is probably overloaded.

The M6 and the 10X
Ah, the 10X seems to be giving off more light, but it's hard to tell. Look at the colour photo, see the amount of light on the ground? Now compare the M6 and the 10X. Because they were taken seperately, it's hard to tell which one is brighter, or any spot/flood identification. Maybe someone want to draw some conclusion here?

My conclusion is that the M7 is definitely a SPOT light. Very focus, very long range. That's what it's for. long range identification. But it also has a nice spread of peripheral light. That makes it good for walking in the woods?

I am not completely sure that the points I have said are true. Let everyone draw their own conclusion. I am not responsible for whatever fight, damages, direct or indirect that arises from this post. Please moderate yourselves....

[Rant mode off]