Well, I went ahead and ordered it. I also picked up at the pet store a "Stink Finder" battery-powered fluorescent T5 4W tube thing that is a nominal 365nm to compare/contrast. I hope that the Streamlight is better as the Stink Finder seems fairly useless for finding puppy wee. Haven't tried it on currency or fluorescent dye yet.
Streamlight Night Com UV Review
- Thread starter subwoofer
- Start date
Help Support Candle Power Flashlight Forum
Norm, I wear glasses everywhere, so maybe mine is just wimpy. I'm running it off of 4x Imedion AAs...
Anyway, the Night Com just showed up today, adding my thoughts to subwoofer's review...
1) other than the tapered body behind the head, the Night Com is almost exactly the same size and shape as my Surefire 6P (which is slightly longer than a standard 6P due to the Malkoff MD2 tailcap.) In fact if I take off the lanyard ring, and/or am careful to insert it with the protrusion in one of the "corners" of the holster, it'll fit in the Surefire V27 holster (mine is old and a little stretched out at the top, which is perfect for the Night Com.)
2) I have no trouble changing the mode dial with my thumb, but I wish it had more distinct detents.
3) The switch is very similar to but slightly different from the McClicky in my Surefire. It has a little longer travel and is slightly stiffer. I'm not sure which I prefer, honestly. Both are nice.
4) Tailcap is slightly shrouded unlike stock SF Z41. Does not tailstand however.
5) Light output on low and high modes seems to bracket the output of my Malkoff M61L 219, with high mode probably being closer to the Malkoff. Purely subjective assessment as the color temp of the Night Com is much higher, although not really into the "Angry Purple" territory. Spot and spill areas are very similar, with the Streamlight being ever so slightly tighter. Other than the artifacts noted by subwoofer due to the six UV LEDs it is actually rather good, with a similar slightly gradual transition as it is also an orange peel type reflector.
6) the UV makes items fluoresce much more than my tube light - the laundry room is the darkest room in the house during the day and the first thing that I noticed was some detergent spills on the floor and some drywall debris on top of the water heater which only dimly glowed with the tube. It also pops the strip on a $20 bill much more brightly than the tube, and makes the tritium tubes on my wristwatch go ape****
7) Knurling is not as aggressive/grippy as Surefire. Just a comment, which is better is personal preference.
To summarize, I think that the combination of this light and a Surefire holster might become part of my "working on cars" kit which was the original intent. If I had any nits to pick with the light, it would be:
1) inability to use RCR123As (had I known I was going to buy this light though, I would have bought 17670s or 16650s for both this and my 6P.)
2) needs better detents on mode dial
3) needs deeper shrouding on tailcap switch for tailstanding ability
4) why no holster offered by Streamlight? (but the fact that the Surefire one works makes this really a non-issue.)
5) as is true of every light that isn't a Nichia 219, tint and CRI is inferior to a Nichia 219
In short... I like it, and am happy with the purchase.
If I have anything to add after using it for a while, I'll check back in.
Anyway, the Night Com just showed up today, adding my thoughts to subwoofer's review...
1) other than the tapered body behind the head, the Night Com is almost exactly the same size and shape as my Surefire 6P (which is slightly longer than a standard 6P due to the Malkoff MD2 tailcap.) In fact if I take off the lanyard ring, and/or am careful to insert it with the protrusion in one of the "corners" of the holster, it'll fit in the Surefire V27 holster (mine is old and a little stretched out at the top, which is perfect for the Night Com.)
2) I have no trouble changing the mode dial with my thumb, but I wish it had more distinct detents.
3) The switch is very similar to but slightly different from the McClicky in my Surefire. It has a little longer travel and is slightly stiffer. I'm not sure which I prefer, honestly. Both are nice.
4) Tailcap is slightly shrouded unlike stock SF Z41. Does not tailstand however.
5) Light output on low and high modes seems to bracket the output of my Malkoff M61L 219, with high mode probably being closer to the Malkoff. Purely subjective assessment as the color temp of the Night Com is much higher, although not really into the "Angry Purple" territory. Spot and spill areas are very similar, with the Streamlight being ever so slightly tighter. Other than the artifacts noted by subwoofer due to the six UV LEDs it is actually rather good, with a similar slightly gradual transition as it is also an orange peel type reflector.
6) the UV makes items fluoresce much more than my tube light - the laundry room is the darkest room in the house during the day and the first thing that I noticed was some detergent spills on the floor and some drywall debris on top of the water heater which only dimly glowed with the tube. It also pops the strip on a $20 bill much more brightly than the tube, and makes the tritium tubes on my wristwatch go ape****
7) Knurling is not as aggressive/grippy as Surefire. Just a comment, which is better is personal preference.
To summarize, I think that the combination of this light and a Surefire holster might become part of my "working on cars" kit which was the original intent. If I had any nits to pick with the light, it would be:
1) inability to use RCR123As (had I known I was going to buy this light though, I would have bought 17670s or 16650s for both this and my 6P.)
2) needs better detents on mode dial
3) needs deeper shrouding on tailcap switch for tailstanding ability
4) why no holster offered by Streamlight? (but the fact that the Surefire one works makes this really a non-issue.)
5) as is true of every light that isn't a Nichia 219, tint and CRI is inferior to a Nichia 219
In short... I like it, and am happy with the purchase.
If I have anything to add after using it for a while, I'll check back in.
Last edited:
N8N - thanks for your comments, it is good to hear more feedback.
This is still a regular user for me. Not EDC, but close to hand at home. Loaded with a 17670. I really like the mode pre-set dial and that I can set it and hand it to someone wihtout having to explain anything.
The UV is really good, but I sometimes wish all six were 365nm rather than including the 390nm ones (which provide some visible blue light). I suppose this wider spectrum makes it more versatile though.
This is still a regular user for me. Not EDC, but close to hand at home. Loaded with a 17670. I really like the mode pre-set dial and that I can set it and hand it to someone wihtout having to explain anything.
The UV is really good, but I sometimes wish all six were 365nm rather than including the 390nm ones (which provide some visible blue light). I suppose this wider spectrum makes it more versatile though.
I'm liking it so far... didn't mean to crap on your review (actually it helped me make the decision to purchase it) I'm sure that I'm using it for different purposes and may have a different perspective that may help others. Had a job today working on a car, and I carried the Streamlight instead of my usual 6P/Malkoff. Didn't really notice a difference, they're pretty much interchangeable for that use (in other words, it worked fine.) Didn't have to do any A/C or leak detection so no use of the UV functionality there. Got home and my package from Lighthound was waiting for me, with my 17670s. I can now authoritatively tell you that I wouldn't try to shove anything bigger than an AW protected 17670 in this light, it takes a touch to get it in! I actually thought that I'd messed up and they were too big until I turned one around backwards just to try it, it went in then, which led me to just verrrrrrry carefully feed it in the right way. It does seem a little tight lengthwise too but the tailcap still tightened down all the way. I didn't try 16650s just because I had some other stuff I wanted to order as well so wanted to get everything from one place. Haven't actually run it for real on the 17670s as they came while I was out, but just dropping one in and turning it on looked good.
I also dropped it once :/ trying to get around a tight corner in a small garage to look at a rear wheel cylinder. No apparent damage, even to the ano.
So far, so good... if I actually have the opportunity to look at a car with a leaky A/C system I'll check back in.
Edit: got bored and decided to take some tailcap measurements. I used two different meters, an old Fluke and a Simpson 260, just to check my work.
On 2x Duracell CR123A which measured 6.00V open circuit
Low LED: .080-.085A
Hi LED: .55A (only used Fluke, as Simpson only has 500 mA and 10A ranges)
UV LED: .175-.20A
On 1x AW 17670 protected cell, 4.18V OC
Low LED: .090-.10A
Hi LED: .64A
UV LED: .070-.08A
this implies to me that while the visible light LED performance is being regulated, the UV LED probably isn't, or at least is dropping out of regulation on the Li-Ion... performance may be compromised on Li-Ion
I also dropped it once :/ trying to get around a tight corner in a small garage to look at a rear wheel cylinder. No apparent damage, even to the ano.
So far, so good... if I actually have the opportunity to look at a car with a leaky A/C system I'll check back in.
Edit: got bored and decided to take some tailcap measurements. I used two different meters, an old Fluke and a Simpson 260, just to check my work.
On 2x Duracell CR123A which measured 6.00V open circuit
Low LED: .080-.085A
Hi LED: .55A (only used Fluke, as Simpson only has 500 mA and 10A ranges)
UV LED: .175-.20A
On 1x AW 17670 protected cell, 4.18V OC
Low LED: .090-.10A
Hi LED: .64A
UV LED: .070-.08A
this implies to me that while the visible light LED performance is being regulated, the UV LED probably isn't, or at least is dropping out of regulation on the Li-Ion... performance may be compromised on Li-Ion
Last edited:
The 3V LiFePO4s are designed to be like for like replacements for CR123s so should be fine. As long as you have the right cells and an appropriate charger (not using a normal 4.2V li-ion charger) you should be good to go.
I'm liking it so far... didn't mean to crap on your review (actually it helped me make the decision to purchase it) I'm sure that I'm using it for different purposes and may have a different perspective that may help others. Had a job today working on a car, and I carried the Streamlight instead of my usual 6P/Malkoff. Didn't really notice a difference, they're pretty much interchangeable for that use (in other words, it worked fine.) Didn't have to do any A/C or leak detection so no use of the UV functionality there. Got home and my package from Lighthound was waiting for me, with my 17670s. I can now authoritatively tell you that I wouldn't try to shove anything bigger than an AW protected 17670 in this light, it takes a touch to get it in! I actually thought that I'd messed up and they were too big until I turned one around backwards just to try it, it went in then, which led me to just verrrrrrry carefully feed it in the right way. It does seem a little tight lengthwise too but the tailcap still tightened down all the way. I didn't try 16650s just because I had some other stuff I wanted to order as well so wanted to get everything from one place. Haven't actually run it for real on the 17670s as they came while I was out, but just dropping one in and turning it on looked good.
I also dropped it once :/ trying to get around a tight corner in a small garage to look at a rear wheel cylinder. No apparent damage, even to the ano.
So far, so good... if I actually have the opportunity to look at a car with a leaky A/C system I'll check back in.
Edit: got bored and decided to take some tailcap measurements. I used two different meters, an old Fluke and a Simpson 260, just to check my work.
On 2x Duracell CR123A which measured 6.00V open circuit
Low LED: .080-.085A
Hi LED: .55A (only used Fluke, as Simpson only has 500 mA and 10A ranges)
UV LED: .175-.20A
On 1x AW 17670 protected cell, 4.18V OC
Low LED: .090-.10A
Hi LED: .64A
UV LED: .070-.08A
this implies to me that while the visible light LED performance is being regulated, the UV LED probably isn't, or at least is dropping out of regulation on the Li-Ion... performance may be compromised on Li-Ion
Got some Surefire LFP 123As (LiFePO4) today, charged up a pair, measured at 3.6V each open circuit...
Initial:
Low LED: .080-.090A
Hi LED: .450A
UV LED: .240-.260A
So it does appear that the UV LEDs are unregulated.
However by the time I finished a few cursory tests they'd already fallen off to a little over 3.2V each, so I reran them. I suspect the initial readings are more or less useless as it was a matter of maybe 5 minutes from taking the cells off the charger to running a few tests.
After cells settled:
Low LED: .080-.090A
Hi LED: .440-.460A (I didn't try this on the simpson initially so only one value for first test, as I expected it to be above 500mA)
UV LED: .230-.250A
So in conclusion, with the LFPs it looks like the white LEDs are fine, fat and happy... UV LEDs are driven a little harder than they were on CR123A primaries. Nothing went poof though and some might appreciate the improved UV performance. I probably will stick with using the LFP123As and see what happens - if anything bad, I'll report back. As of now, this would be my recommendation for someone who really wants this light and wants to run it on rechargeable cells, and doesn't already have a Li-Ion charger or any 17670 or 16650 cells. However, big old caveat time - a single Li-Ion is the safe, conservative rechargeable choice for this light as clearly the LFPs are driving the UV LEDs harder than on CR123As which are as of now the only cells officially supported by Streamlight, whereas the 17670 has the UV LEDs drawing less current.
Last edited:
N8N, thanks for adding that information.
Considering that 2x CR123 will start at 6V, but will run to around 2V (1V each) which the regulated white LED will be fine with, it is disappointing to see the UV leds being direct drive. As mentioned in the review, Streamlight were kind enough to test the NightCom UV up to 8V where it started to smoke (ruling out 2xRCR123) when I queried about input voltage, so be careful with your LiFeP04s even though they are meant to be like for like substitutes for CR123.
Considering that 2x CR123 will start at 6V, but will run to around 2V (1V each) which the regulated white LED will be fine with, it is disappointing to see the UV leds being direct drive. As mentioned in the review, Streamlight were kind enough to test the NightCom UV up to 8V where it started to smoke (ruling out 2xRCR123) when I queried about input voltage, so be careful with your LiFeP04s even though they are meant to be like for like substitutes for CR123.
Yeah I know. I'm running a tune on my car to increase boost pressure also I am liking this light a lot, but I wish they'd made it more enthusiast friendly. Imagine it with a neutral high CRI emitter, sized for 18650, fully regulated from 1 to 2 li-ions, and using a magnetic control ring with good detents instead of the plastic dial. I'd have paid twice as much for that light.
Sent from my XT897 using Tapatalk
I am liking this light a lot, but I wish they'd made it more enthusiast friendly. Imagine it with a neutral high CRI emitter, sized for 18650, fully regulated from 1 to 2 li-ions, and using a magnetic control ring with good detents instead of the plastic dial. I'd have paid twice as much for that light.Sent from my XT897 using Tapatalk
Yeah I know. I'm running a tune on my car to increase boost pressure also
The easiest thing they could have done was make the battery tube good for 18650 as this would not even affect the cost. The other upgrades you mentioned, well you would pay for them, I probably would as well, but they are catering for a non-enthusiast market. It is still a good light at a good price.
Just starting to explore getting a UV flashlight, and that led me to this thread. I've standardized most of my lights, including a recent headlamp purchase, to 18650's so I'd hate to backtrack and buy another light running CR123s. I thought it would be relatively easay to find a 365nm, 18650 powered UV flashlight, but so far I'm coming up empty.
Herb
But remember you could use a 17670 rather than CR123s.
Hi Herb,
As mentioned by subwoofer, 17670s work in this light. And that's what I've been using. I'm currently using my NightCom UV to cure Norland 61 at the moment.
If it is 18650 size that you want, then you might want to check out the Nitecore CU6.
Hi Herb,
As mentioned by subwoofer, 17670s work in this light. And that's what I've been using. I'm currently using my NightCom UV to cure Norland 61 at the moment.
If it is 18650 size that you want, then you might want to check out the Nitecore CU6.
I have been in contact with Nitecore regarding testing the CU6 as I would have also suggested this, but early reports indicate the UV from the CU6 is not 365nm. Until I can test one I can't confirm one way or another.
Thanks for the heads up. Hope they send you one for review soon.
Hmm... Strange, because all the publicity on their website says "Ultraviolet LED provides 3000mW at 365nm". :shrug:
Thank you for all the info. I really would like to standardize to one type of battery (fewer to carry, only need one charger,...) but I will have to decide if that's a deal-breaker or not. I already found out the hard way that not all 18650's are cross compatible.
Bought the 18650 based NiteCore headlamp, only to find that my Klarus (protected) 18650's were not compatible, even though I had asked prior to the NiteCore purchase if the Klarus 18650's were compatible and was told they were by the company who sold me the headlamp. I was not happy about that.
The CU6 looks promising, but I'm not sure I want to invest $100+ in a UV flashlight. I guess my other best options are the Streamlight (new battery type for me), or a longer wavelength Solar Force drop-in and host. Either of those look like they're in the $40 - $50 range.
Herb
[EDIT: I looked at the info for the Klarus 18650 battery charger I have, and it indicates that it is compatible with 17670's as well, so that's good news if I go that route]
Bought the 18650 based NiteCore headlamp, only to find that my Klarus (protected) 18650's were not compatible, even though I had asked prior to the NiteCore purchase if the Klarus 18650's were compatible and was told they were by the company who sold me the headlamp. I was not happy about that.
The CU6 looks promising, but I'm not sure I want to invest $100+ in a UV flashlight. I guess my other best options are the Streamlight (new battery type for me), or a longer wavelength Solar Force drop-in and host. Either of those look like they're in the $40 - $50 range.
Herb
[EDIT: I looked at the info for the Klarus 18650 battery charger I have, and it indicates that it is compatible with 17670's as well, so that's good news if I go that route]
Last edited:
Have you looked at the Kai Domain 365nm UV P60? Sku 22214. You just need to put it in a P60 host of some sort. I don't know if it is 365 nm but it sure does fluoresce things that my 395nm UV doesn't (money).
I've read many posts on many forums now, so I may be at the point where everything is getting scrambled in my brain, but I though I had read a number of reviews where people were claiming that the UV UltraFire (which I think is the Kai Domain) was more at the 395-400nm range of the spectrum, so I dismissed it. Maybe I'll have to go back and verify my what I think I remember.
Herb
Herb
The ultrafire is not the same as this P60 dropin. I think there was an Ultrafire 501b with a UV P60 drop-in sold (from many places not just KD) as a single package but the P60 in that was not the 365nm one, it was indeed the 395-400nm. KD has a few UV drop-ins but 22214 is the right one.
You can however buy an empty Ultrafire 501b host and use it with this drop-in. It is compatible except that I had to remove the lens as the lens retaining ring prevented the P60 from going in all the way to the glass. I wished I got an empty Solarforce host to use instead of the Ultrafire.
