New H53c AA Headlamp Neutral White High CRI!

[Genzod]

The H52 series had boost to 500+ lumens. The SC5c has boost of 475 lumens with same LED and presumable same or similar driver as H53c. H53c has the same head size as the H52 series. If the H52 size head could manage the heat then an even more efficient LED with less lumens will work as well for the H53c. So heat management reason is NOT the reason for lack of boost.

covered this back a page or two.

I'm focused on these two high CRI models below, not the other models that have higher tint temps and lower CRI. I don't think we've seen such high CRI's before by this manufacturer? I'm suggesting that maybe getting to those numbers requires more conductive metal and larger surface area to manage it. You can see differences in the size and masses below.

H53c SC5c

Head diameters: 0.86" 1.0"
Lengths: 2.9" 3.2"
Weights: 31g 48g

 

[mellowman]

I'm focused on these two high CRI models below, not the other models that have higher tint temps and lower CRI. I don't think we've seen such high CRI's before by this manufacturer? I'm suggesting that maybe getting to those numbers requires more conductive metal and larger surface area to manage it. You can see differences in the size and masses below.

H53c SC5c

Head diameters: 0.86" 1.0"
Lengths: 2.9" 3.2"
Weights: 31g 48g

and what I'm suggesting is that given the head size is the same from the previous gen and the previous gen had a boost mode with more lumens and the new led in the new gen is more efficient (i.e., less heat) that heat is not the issue.

your premise that HI CRI produces higher temps that requires more conductive metal and larger service area than a non-Hi CRI version is incorrect.

yes ZL have had high CRI lights before.

edit: also those head diameters are because the reflectors are different sizes because they have different use cases. the head diameter is not larger for purely heat management reasons.

 

[Genzod]

If the H52 size head could manage the heat then an even more efficient LED with less lumens will work as well for the H53c. So heat management reason is NOT the reason for lack of boost.

The H52 didn't go as low in tint temperature and as high in CRI I don't think. I don't think you can make that conclusion based on that statement. I think it's the nature of 'c' models, especially very high CRI to push color in the orange and red spectrum where temperature starts to become more involved? Pushing 500 lm in a 'w' and cool white H52 generates heat, yes, and thermal management ramps down the lumens. But is it the same thing as pushing the red end of the light spectrum in a 'c' model with such a much higher CRI? Maybe it isn't. Maybe it renders higher lumens (which add heat on top of it) impractical in a 31g case ZL probably wants to keep that light weight for marketing reasons. If it isn't, then equating two different heating situations to draw a conclusion that dismisses a theory on thermal management isn't exactly the kind of help I'm looking for in understanding this question.

But I'm not trying to shut you down. I'm just trying to get to what's really going on here.

 

[mellowman]

thermal management isn't ramping down lumens from heat due to high CRI. seriously read more on how high cri is made. the underling LED dies are the same it just a phoshpor coat above the die that converts wavelengths.

if the was such a signficant difference there would be another graph in the spec sheets. check the xp-l2 and xm-l2 datasheets yourself.

and that's it I'm out.

 

[Genzod]

and what I'm suggesting is that given the head size is the same from the previous gen and the previous gen had a boost mode with more lumens and the new led in the new gen is more efficient (i.e., less heat) that heat is not the issue.

your premise that HI CRI produces higher temps that requires more conductive metal and larger service area than a non-Hi CRI version is incorrect.

yes ZL have had high CRI lights before.

edit: also those head diameters are because the reflectors are different sizes because they have different use cases. the head diameter is not larger for purely heat management reasons.

93-95 CRI in a AA case? 93-95 is fairly new in terms of numbers for ZL.

I didn't assert a premise as a fact, I offered it as a question. You are imagining I'm trying to make an argument here to support a theory. My only argument is with your reasoning. It's jumps to a conclusion with unequal parallels. You're equating 500 lumens with my "premise" of heat coming from the low end of the light spectrum--I don't think 500 lumens in this ligh is the same as 500 lumens in cooler tint and lower CRI models. Just because the H53 H52 AA body could handle 500 lumens for 1-3 minutes doesn't necessarily mean it can handle the heat of a more pronounced lower end production of the spectrum. But if you are correct that higher CRI (from the low end) doesn't produce more heat, then that would be helpful to understand as true--can you offer some reference?

If they could do it on the SC5c (high lumens), then why not on the H53? ZL would be shooting themselves in the foot not to I would think. It just doesn't make sense. I believe they were constrained by some limitation in their design. I'm just suggesting it might be a thermal constraint arising from amplifying wavelengths near the red end of the light spectrum and increasing CRI up to 93-95.

 

[Genzod]

thermal management isn't ramping down lumens from heat due to high CRI. seriously read more on how high cri is made. the underling LED dies are the same it just a phoshpor coat above the die that converts wavelengths.

if the was such a signficant difference there would be another graph in the spec sheets. check the xp-l2 and xm-l2 datasheets yourself.

and that's it I'm out.

I didn't say "thermal management was ramping down lumens from heat due to high CRI". I was surmising that they simply capped the max lumens as a design constrain due to thermal limitations. Reading more carefully would help you understand how to help me better.

 

[lampeDépêche]

I am far from an expert on all of this, but maybe I can say one useful thing:

So far as I know, the tint of an LED has no effect on how much heat it generates. Ditto for the CRI.

We call certain emitters "cool" or "warm" as a short-hand for describing the spectrum of light that they put out, and how it would compare to the radiation produced by a black body at different temperatures.

But "cool" LEDs don't run any cooler (i.e. generate more heat, measured e.g. in calories), and "warm" LEDs don't run any warmer (i.e. generate fewer calories). As mellowman said, the underlying die is the same for each, and if it is soaking up X watts then it will convert Y of those into photons and the remaining Z will be lost as heat. Yes, the "cooler" emitter will have higher lumen output for a given wattage (holding all else but color-temperature constant), but when we switch to the "warmer" emitter, I don't think that the difference will be lost as heat. (Some of the difference will simply be the result of how different wave-lengths contribute to the lumen-reading: the lumen measures what the human eye is sensitive to, and we are more sensitive to blues and greens than to reds and oranges, so the same wattage output of red and orange will score fewer lumens than the same wattage output of blues and greens.

Anyhow, back to the short story: no reason to think that the "warmer" tint (or higher CRI) poses any new challenges for heat management.

I also agree with mellowman that the larger head on the SC5 line is dictated first by the desire for a larger reflector with a throwier beam. Any extra heat-sinking capacity that results is a secondary design feature, not the primary objective.

 

[TCY]

I'm surprised that ZL told some of you "No" and nothing else, ZL's staff has always been prompt and informative to me for some reason. Maybe they see that I'm the one who constantly posts their replies on CPF answering questions and doubts? Dunno.

Anyway I have the official answer from ZL regarding the lack of 14500 support and boost mode: "14500 support is dropped in the H53 series, compared to the H52, in order to lower the cost (and the price) a bit. High output from Eneloop/NiMH batteries in the SC5 series requires a much more sophisticated and expensive driver."

Also, ZL will have H53's runtime specs later this week when they get the first production batch.

 

[LightObsession]

Maybe the headlamp is lighter than the handheld because it's a headlamp and lighter is better?

 

[TCY]

Maybe the headlamp is lighter than the handheld because it's a headlamp and lighter is better?

The SC5 series is the beefiest out of all ZL's AA-based offerings. At 1.1 oz the H53 line is indeed the lightest ZL so far.

 

[mellowman]

I'm surprised that ZL told some of you "No" and nothing else, ZL's staff has always been prompt and informative to me for some reason. Maybe they see that I'm the one who constantly posts their replies on CPF answering questions and doubts? Dunno.

Anyway I have the official answer from ZL regarding the lack of 14500 support and boost mode: "14500 support is dropped in the H53 series, compared to the H52, in order to lower the cost (and the price) a bit. High output from Eneloop/NiMH batteries in the SC5 series requires a much more sophisticated and expensive driver."

Also, ZL will have H53's runtime specs later this week when they get the first production batch.

Thanks for asking ZL and sharing.

So dropping ~475 lumen boost mode on eneloops to save $6-$10 from a flashlight that is still ~$60 is an unfortunate decision. I'm on the fence as is, if it had the boost mode even if $10 more it would be a must buy.

Maybe I can hope for a future H53c+ with the boost mode.

 

[eraursls1984]

I don't think the reason for the larger size of the SC5 was the reflector size. One of the first SC5's was a "F" model. I think it's either for heat management, driver size, or a combination of both.

 

[NPL]

Thanks for asking ZL and sharing.

So dropping ~475 lumen boost mode on eneloops to save $6-$10 from a flashlight that is still ~$60 is an unfortunate decision. I'm on the fence as is, if it had the boost mode even if $10 more it would be a must buy.

Maybe I can hope for a future H53c+ with the boost mode.

Totally agree, would have also spent the extra $10 to get the more sophisticated driver with higher output. Hopefully this translates to better runtimes than the sc5c equivalent.

 

[TCY]

I think they are probably doing it to differentiate the two models as the SC5 is supposed to be the "flagship" of their AA flashlight offerings but there's not a headlamp equivalent. I intend to use my H53Fc as a close range reading light so I can live without the boost mode, but it's certainly nice to have one available just in case.

 

[Genzod]

I am far from an expert on all of this, but maybe I can say one useful thing:

So far as I know, the tint of an LED has no effect on how much heat it generates. Ditto for the CRI.

We call certain emitters "cool" or "warm" as a short-hand for describing the spectrum of light that they put out, and how it would compare to the radiation produced by a black body at different temperatures.

But "cool" LEDs don't run any cooler (i.e. generate more heat, measured e.g. in calories), and "warm" LEDs don't run any warmer (i.e. generate fewer calories). As mellowman said, the underlying die is the same for each, and if it is soaking up X watts then it will convert Y of those into photons and the remaining Z will be lost as heat. Yes, the "cooler" emitter will have higher lumen output for a given wattage (holding all else but color-temperature constant), but when we switch to the "warmer" emitter, I don't think that the difference will be lost as heat. (Some of the difference will simply be the result of how different wave-lengths contribute to the lumen-reading: the lumen measures what the human eye is sensitive to, and we are more sensitive to blues and greens than to reds and oranges, so the same wattage output of red and orange will score fewer lumens than the same wattage output of blues and greens.

Anyhow, back to the short story: no reason to think that the "warmer" tint (or higher CRI) poses any new challenges for heat management.

I also agree with mellowman that the larger head on the SC5 line is dictated first by the desire for a larger reflector with a throwier beam. Any extra heat-sinking capacity that results is a secondary design feature, not the primary objective.

Most assuredly there has been no kidnapping of linguistic devices in my understanding about the physics of an LED in order to jump to a conclusion of greater heat generation. I've always understood it as a matter of inefficiency, the LED requiring more power (in the same family of LED) to get those results.

 

[Genzod]

Anyway I have the official answer from ZL regarding the lack of 14500 support and boost mode: "14500 support is dropped in the H53 series, compared to the H52, in order to lower the cost (and the price) a bit. High output from Eneloop/NiMH batteries in the SC5 series requires a much more sophisticated and expensive driver."

I had assumed that much about the driver disappearing. The more meatier question is, why is the SC5c able to get outputs around 475, even without L-ion support, while that performance is neglected in the similar H53c?

 

[Genzod]

Totally agree, would have also spent the extra $10 to get the more sophisticated driver with higher output. Hopefully this translates to better runtimes than the sc5c equivalent.

AHA, here's something. Are the output drivers dissimilar between the two models? I have been led to believe by others in this forum that the two models are similar. Seems like if they dropped the 14500 driver to reduce cost so as to add the more expensive and sophisticated driver of the SC5 series, they could have done that in the H53c rather cheaply as well but didn't in favor of a simple $5 price reduction. It seems fairly evident, but in my opinion doesn't make a lot of sense. Technology, performance and quality at a reasonable price is what people shop for in the ZL line. Cutting corners to reduce price is the mark of cheap headlamp manufacturers.

 

[Genzod]

Totally agree, would have also spent the extra $10 to get the more sophisticated driver with higher output. Hopefully this translates to better runtimes than the sc5c equivalent.

$69 for an H53c with 475 lm output...? I agree with mellowman here.

 

[lampeDépêche]

Wait, you mean this whole time the reason for the lack of a high H1 was not engineering of any kind, but just marketing?

Look, if you want to sell more headlights by offering reduced performance, that's okay.

But why reduce the performance of your cutting-edge headlights?

Why not offer an entire new line of lower-priced, lower-performance headlights to capture the broader market, while keeping your original headlights on the cutting edge of performance?

Something like...what you are are *already* doing with the Eco line! $39 dollars for a good quality AA headlight with simplified engineering.

That's great! Now you have the popular market covered.

And what you need to do with the H53 line is to keep it on the cutting edge of performance, for the specialist and enthusiast market. They will happily pay the extra $10.

 

[Genzod]

Wait, you mean this whole time the reason for the lack of a high H1 was not engineering of any kind, but just marketing?

Look, if you want to sell more headlights by offering reduced performance, that's okay.

But why reduce the performance of your cutting-edge headlights?

Why not offer an entire new line of lower-priced, lower-performance headlights to capture the broader market, while keeping your original headlights on the cutting edge of performance?

Something like...what you are are *already* doing with the Eco line! $39 dollars for a good quality AA headlight with simplified engineering.

That's great! Now you have the popular market covered.

And what you need to do with the H53 line is to keep it on the cutting edge of performance, for the specialist and enthusiast market. They will happily pay the extra $10.

I couldn't agree more. This is EXACTLY what I was thinking.

Consider. I know of a son of a cabinet shop owner who told his father that he should sell the cheap garbage of the hardware stores in order to compete. But the truth is, the survival of small places like such a shop depends on quality manufacture, not quantity.

Same with small bookstores. How does using a large bookstore model like Barnes and Nobles fit into their dynamic? Copying it is a certain death sentence. Offering what the big guy who has deeper volume buying power has covered is going to destroy you. You have to reach beyond the big quantity distributor who knows absolutely nothing about the product they are selling and focus on specialization, those things which the big guy fails on. Your case ZL--cutting edge technology and quality.

ZL. If it only raises the price of the H53c $10 from $59, install the SC5c driver on the next batch for higher output performance, DO IT (DO IT uh, DO IT), call it the H53c+ like one mentioned earlier on this thread. I will buy it in a heartbeat. The general consensus is, you haven't impressed your better, more knowledgable constituents with this headlamp. If it's a heating issue, just increase surface area with more grooving along the case. Some people have been complaining that the hold on the lamp is insecure, and that would provide better grip as well.

Honestly, I was looking forward to an H53c with the performance of your SC5c, but it seems you didn't include the more expensive driver to get it and nixed the 14500 driver as well, leaving a shabby maximum output. Now that you have pulled the H32w and I have no idea how long it will be before you either wake up on this mistake or release an H33w or c with better performance, I'm hard pressed to look to Amytek for a better lamp.

Disappointed...so disappointed. I expected better.