Zebralight H51w is too dim. Is the H51 cool white better for trail running?

[Outdoorsman5]

Update -- I received the Zebralight H51 cool white version Friday, and have taken it running with me every morning. Comparing it to my ZL H51w neutal white version, the cool white version is noticeably brighter. It's not a big difference indoors, but there seems to be a bigger difference outdoors (for reasons discussed above with GeoBruin.) The neutral white H51w is much nicer looking indoors, but the cool white H51 is much better (IMO) & more useful outdoors for trail running & seems brighter in every way (spot & especially spill.)

I now clearly see that for indoors I prefer neutral white, but for outdoors I prefer cool white for the perceived brightness. Even in my backyard this morning the neutral white light just seems dull compared to the cool white when lighting things up. I don't think I'll be buying very many more neutral white lights after this experience since I use my lights outside more often.

I know there are a lot of die-hard neutral fans out there, and I understand it. I now recognize that throughout my day I'm mostly using pure white or cool white lights to light up my office and my home. It's only at night while relaxing & watching TV that I prefer my neutral white lamps to be on. My lamps are similar in color to the neutral white color of the H51w. They are dimmer lights, and perfect for when I use them. Looks like I'm a bigger fan of cool white lights for most things though, but it's nice to have both.

 

[carbonita]

By any chance, have you had a chance to compare H51 with H502 for running? I'm choosing between the two at this point, but attracted by the potential versatility of dc-fix on h51 when needed.

Update -- I received the Zebralight H51 cool white version Friday, and have taken it running with me every morning. Comparing it to my ZL H51w neutal white version, the cool white version is noticeably brighter. It's not a big difference indoors, but there seems to be a bigger difference outdoors (for reasons discussed above with GeoBruin.) The neutral white H51w is much nicer looking indoors, but the cool white H51 is much better (IMO) & more useful outdoors for trail running & seems brighter in every way (spot & especially spill.)

I now clearly see that for indoors I prefer neutral white, but for outdoors I prefer cool white for the perceived brightness. Even in my backyard this morning the neutral white light just seems dull compared to the cool white when lighting things up. I don't think I'll be buying very many more neutral white lights after this experience since I use my lights outside more often.

I know there are a lot of die-hard neutral fans out there, and I understand it. I now recognize that throughout my day I'm mostly using pure white or cool white lights to light up my office and my home. It's only at night while relaxing & watching TV that I prefer my neutral white lamps to be on. My lamps are similar in color to the neutral white color of the H51w. They are dimmer lights, and perfect for when I use them. Looks like I'm a bigger fan of cool white lights for most things though, but it's nice to have both.

 

[Outdoorsman5]

By any chance, have you had a chance to compare H51 with H502 for running? I'm choosing between the two at this point, but attracted by the potential versatility of dc-fix on h51 when needed.

Not yet. I'm waiting on the H502w, and am not planning on using it as a running light. I'm sure I will try it out on the trail though. I prefer a headlight with some throw when in the woods running on trails. My favorite is my H600 for its run times and output. My favorite AA trail running light is still the H51. It works ok with diffuser material on it, but I prefer it more without it. On running trails I need more throw so I can see far enough ahead. In the summer I need the throw more for spotting spider webs (a face-full of spider webs sucks.)

I have an H501w (pure flood,) and feel that it is not bright enough & doesn't throw well enough for trail running. It works good on the streets though, but still needs to be brighter. The H501w is, however, my favorite general use headlight...I love pure flood. I use it more than any other headlight for around the campsite & around the house, and am looking forward to the upgraded H502w (when it comes out.)

 

[Woods Walker]

Update -- I received the Zebralight H51 cool white version Friday, and have taken it running with me every morning. Comparing it to my ZL H51w neutal white version, the cool white version is noticeably brighter. It's not a big difference indoors, but there seems to be a bigger difference outdoors (for reasons discussed above with GeoBruin.) The neutral white H51w is much nicer looking indoors, but the cool white H51 is much better (IMO) & more useful outdoors for trail running & seems brighter in every way (spot & especially spill.)

I now clearly see that for indoors I prefer neutral white, but for outdoors I prefer cool white for the perceived brightness. Even in my backyard this morning the neutral white light just seems dull compared to the cool white when lighting things up. I don't think I'll be buying very many more neutral white lights after this experience since I use my lights outside more often.

I know there are a lot of die-hard neutral fans out there, and I understand it. I now recognize that throughout my day I'm mostly using pure white or cool white lights to light up my office and my home. It's only at night while relaxing & watching TV that I prefer my neutral white lamps to be on. My lamps are similar in color to the neutral white color of the H51w. They are dimmer lights, and perfect for when I use them. Looks like I'm a bigger fan of cool white lights for most things though, but it's nice to have both.

I am surprised you can distinguish given the relatively low % of lumens between them. For me it has got to be a good % higher before in actual use I could tell. Maybe it is a the tint that makes one light look noticeably brighter than the actual lumens? Heck if I know.

 

[beamis]

I am surprised you can distinguish given the relatively low % of lumens between them. For me it has got to be a good % higher before in actual use I could tell. Maybe it is a the tint that makes one light look noticeably brighter than the actual lumens? Heck if I know.

I have an H51w and a Quark AA2 S2, which are supposed to be nearly equal in lumen output. The Quark is noticeably brighter than the H51W in all respects. I sincerely doubt I can see a 5 lumen difference that well. Just guessing, it seems more like about 50 lumens or so brighter.

 

[tickled]

I think there's a lot of different things going on here. I will try to address each of them in turn. First of all, it has been my experience that you are doing yourself a great disservice by trying to use a head lamp not in total darkness. I don't know if you are, but you said you go running before sun up so I assume it gets light at some point during your run. I have always found that a little bit of daylight (even a VERY little bit) makes my lights appear to perform very differently. I prefer to run in either total darkness where my lights perform very well, or in enough daylight that I don't need a light. When I do get caught doing an adventure race that spans day and night, I always find dawn and twilight the hardest times to regulate my light situation. I'm just throwing this out there because it's something I've noticed although I really don't have an explanation (or a solution).

I am not sure what you're saying the OP should be doing? Plan living activities around the lights that he owns or simply get something that fits better? My neutral light has always seemed dimmer in appearance compared to cool lights at equivalent lumen levels. No idea as to why but it just is.

When you're running on a trail, you're looking primarily at objects that are various shades of browns and greens. When you shine a cool light in front of you, the contrast between the areas that are illuminated by your light and those that are not is greater than the contrast would be with a warmer tinted light. This creates the perception that the light is brighter. In fact, you don't actually want a bunch of cool light reflected back to your eye. You want the color of whatever the object is that you are illuminating to be reflected back to your eye.

That may be what you want...

 

[reppans]

I have an H51w and a Quark AA2 S2, which are supposed to be nearly equal in lumen output. The Quark is noticeably brighter than the H51W in all respects. I sincerely doubt I can see a 5 lumen difference that well. Just guessing, it seems more like about 50 lumens or so brighter.

I think your eye meter is a bit off - I think the difference is going to be more like 75 lumens.

I have a QAA2X in NW that I use with a 1xAA tube, it is rated at 107 lm on high (max is the same) and I've just tested it's high against my H51w's 172 lm max using my DSLR light meter (both lights ceiling bounced in a small bathroom, light metered off a piece of paper on the floor). The Quark is a hair brighter, both are on an Eneloop. I also have the QAA2 S2, and with 2 batts, there's no point in testing it - it's a slaughter. You're probably looking at 105 vs 180.

Someone is fibbing big time here.... I always heard FourSevens is conservative with its specs, but sheesh, can it explain that much of a difference?:thinking:

 

[bbb74]

Someone is fibbing big time here....:thinking:

I kind of suspect so.

There is a noticeable difference between my SC51 or H51 vs my SC51w. There is also a big difference between my Quark AA2 R4 neutral and the sc51w, guessing I'd say about 50 lumens. It wouldn't surprise me if my sc51w was in the low-ish 100's. This is when using eneloops.

 

[srfreddy]

I kind of suspect so.

There is a noticeable difference between my SC51 or H51 vs my SC51w. There is also a big difference between my Quark AA2 R4 neutral and the sc51w, guessing I'd say about 50 lumens. It wouldn't surprise me if my sc51w was in the low-ish 100's. This is when using eneloops.

I'd look at selfbuilt's reviews a bit harder if you're saying that... the SC51 is 200 lumens, beamshots show the cool and neutral variants to be roughly comparable. R4 neutral bins are common for the XPG, R5 is common for cool. I doubt that the difference between R5 and R4 is 100%.

 

[bbb74]

I'd look at selfbuilt's reviews a bit harder if you're saying that... the SC51 is 200 lumens, beamshots show the cool and neutral variants to be roughly comparable. R4 neutral bins are common for the XPG, R5 is common for cool. I doubt that the difference between R5 and R4 is 100%.

All I can say is with the same batteries, using ceiling bounce there is a noticeable difference between SC51 and SC51w. It would have to be much more than 7% otherwise I doubt I'd notice it (and note even zebralight don't claim the difference is 7% - the drop from "200" lumens to "172" is more than 7%). And I can see a much bigger ceiling bounce difference between SC51w and Quark AA2 neutral. Of course that is comparing 1xAA to 2xAA, but a claim is a claim. It could just be my light but I've seen a few people now who have doubted the output on their sc51w's.

 

[reppans]

bbb74, what's your QAA2 NW rated for, and how does it compare to the SC51? You think this lumen overstatement is unique to the 51w's?

I don't have any other ZLs.

 

[Mr Floppy]

Have you guys perhaps have a dud?

Here's a review of the SC51w from a year back.
http://www.candlepowerforums.com/vb...he-Zebralight-SC51w-(replete-with-beamshots!)

 

[bbb74]

bbb74, what's your QAA2 NW rated for, and how does it compare to the SC51? You think this lumen overstatement is unique to the 51w's?

I don't have any other ZLs.

4sevens didn't provide official rating for it, but it was described as being 7% less than the cool version (206 lumens).

I haven't compared the sc51 to the qaa2, I'll give that a go.

 

[beamis]

Here's my H51w compared to a Quark AA2 S2

 

[beamis]

So I got to the office and decided to use some of our equipment to measure the output of the lights. I used an Extech EasyView 33 light meter and because this sensor measures lux I held each light on high right up to the sensor to get the maximum value. The results are that the Quark AA2 S2 registers 634,100 lux and the Zebralight registers 431,400 lux. My eyes do not deceive me.

If that sensor is 3/4" in diameter and we assume all of the light is falling on the sensor (or close enough), that puts the Quark AA2 S2 at 181 lumens and the Zebralight at 123 lumens. That jives with what my eyes see, but it makes me a little bit angry that this light is represented as 170+ lumens when it clearly is NOT.

 

[reppans]

I'm also quite disappointed.... maybe we do have duds as has been mentioned above, but that makes 3 of us which is pretty bad.

I still like my ZL for its low modes and hands-free versatility, and that's what I bought it for... those levels look about right to me. But for this type of overstatement, short warranty, and what sounds to be relatively poor customer service, I find myself buying many more 4/7s products when I want an efficient, long runtime light.

 

[Mr Floppy]

So I got to the office and decided to use some of our equipment to measure the output of the lights. I used an Extech EasyView 33 light meter and because this sensor measures lux I held each light on high right up to the sensor to get the maximum value.

I'm not sure that is the best way to measure it. Can you build a small integrating sphere of some sort? A shoe box painted white perhaps?

 

[beamis]

I'm not sure that is the best way to measure it. Can you build a small integrating sphere of some sort? A shoe box painted white perhaps?

The sensor is larger than the head of both lights. Essentially all of the light is going into that sensor (minus some trivial amount reflected away, but the sensor should be calibrated for that). Even if the lumen calculation is off, the relative difference is undeniable. The Quark is definitely 47% brighter than the Zebralight.

Another thing to note is that the value for the Zebralight never stabilized, it just kept dropping and dropping. I just snapped the picture after about 30 - 45 seconds (and it had dropped about 15,000 lux in that time). If I would've waited for the full ANSI specified time of three minutes I'm sure it would have been even dimmer.

 

[srfreddy]

I'm not sure that is the best way to measure it. Can you build a small integrating sphere of some sort? A shoe box painted white perhaps?

I also am a bit doubtful of that method of measurement. You could try ceiling bounce in a dark room with a white ceiling... also, neutral lights have a different wavelength pattern than cool lights, and light meters can be calibrated to different patterns, affecting measurements between neutral and cool white lights.

 

[srfreddy]

The sensor is larger than the head of both lights. Essentially all of the light is going into that sensor (minus some trivial amount reflected away, but the sensor should be calibrated for that). Even if the lumen calculation is off, the relative difference is undeniable. The Quark is definitely 47% brighter than the Zebralight.

Another thing to note is that the value for the Zebralight never stabilized, it just kept dropping and dropping. I just snapped the picture after about 30 - 45 seconds (and it had dropped about 15,000 lux in that time). If I would've waited for the full ANSI specified time of three minutes, I'm sure it would have been even dimmer.

You need the light to be evenly distributed across the sensor, hence the need for an integrating sphere. You also need to take the square root of lux measurements to find relative lumen measurements- There is only an 18% difference in the lumen values you found, if they were accurate.