Black Moon LTD
Page 5 of 9 FirstFirst 123456789 LastLast
Results 121 to 150 of 241

Thread: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS +

  1. #121
    Flashaholic
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    123

    Default Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT

    I need some feedback from actual users about the 80° "spill beam" angle combined with the 11° hot spot on the new H-51 ZebraLight headlamps.

    I have used 3 H-50's since they first came out all over the world, in some very demanding situations doing medical volunteering in the jungles of Africa, Central and South America, among others. They are reliable and the floody 120° angle is very useful in lots of situations, tho certainly not all [so I do carry other lights as well.]

    I am contemplating purchasing an H-51 to have more available light, and wondered if some actual users have tried reading in bed with the H-51's 80°-11° angle combination? Does the 11° fully and evenly cover the open pages of a book when you are reading? I really don't like a strong or even noticeable hot spot on the page when I am reading in otherwise complete darkness.

    Thanks very much for sharing your experience!! And I want to echo the thanks of many others to members like selfbuilt who have done such careful and extensive reviews of lights here on the Forum.

    John

  2. #122
    Flashaholic* nanotech17's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    N 03°13.884° / E 101°29.329°
    Posts
    2,151

    Default Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT

    Quote Originally Posted by photonhoer View Post
    I need some feedback from actual users about the 80° "spill beam" angle combined with the 11° hot spot on the new H-51 ZebraLight headlamps.

    I have used 3 H-50's since they first came out all over the world, in some very demanding situations doing medical volunteering in the jungles of Africa, Central and South America, among others. They are reliable and the floody 120° angle is very useful in lots of situations, tho certainly not all [so I do carry other lights as well.]

    I am contemplating purchasing an H-51 to have more available light, and wondered if some actual users have tried reading in bed with the H-51's 80°-11° angle combination? Does the 11° fully and evenly cover the open pages of a book when you are reading? I really don't like a strong or even noticeable hot spot on the page when I am reading in otherwise complete darkness.

    Thanks very much for sharing your experience!! And I want to echo the thanks of many others to members like selfbuilt who have done such careful and extensive reviews of lights here on the Forum.

    John

    i use my H60w while reading to avoid stress on my eyes,i have just received the H51 and tested it while reading,with H51 the best level to read a book is on the medium mode (M2 which is on 8lumens),but overall performance (for reading ) i still prefer the H60w ( 80 degree flood beam, with no hotspot) YMMV



  3. #123
    Flashaholic
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Irving, Texas
    Posts
    310

    Default Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT

    Quote Originally Posted by tandem View Post
    That is excellent news regarding the addition of the strobe output. Can you tell us what nominal output level (lumen) the strobe is at? Is it run at/near max, or 140 or ?

    Thanks and regards!
    140
    ZEBRALIGHT.com

  4. #124
    Flashaholic
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Irving, Texas
    Posts
    310

    Default Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT

    Quote Originally Posted by photonhoer View Post
    I need some feedback from actual users about the 80° "spill beam" angle combined with the 11° hot spot on the new H-51 ZebraLight headlamps.

    I have used 3 H-50's since they first came out all over the world, in some very demanding situations doing medical volunteering in the jungles of Africa, Central and South America, among others. They are reliable and the floody 120° angle is very useful in lots of situations, tho certainly not all [so I do carry other lights as well.]

    I am contemplating purchasing an H-51 to have more available light, and wondered if some actual users have tried reading in bed with the H-51's 80°-11° angle combination? Does the 11° fully and evenly cover the open pages of a book when you are reading? I really don't like a strong or even noticeable hot spot on the page when I am reading in otherwise complete darkness.

    Thanks very much for sharing your experience!! And I want to echo the thanks of many others to members like selfbuilt who have done such careful and extensive reviews of lights here on the Forum.

    John
    Wait for 2-3 weeks for the H51F.
    ZEBRALIGHT.com

  5. #125

    Default Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT

    Quote Originally Posted by ZebraLight View Post
    Wait for 2-3 weeks for the H51F.
    More good news! Awesome!

    Note to self: must wait for neutral white.
    EDC: Zebralight H52w; Backup/loaner: Olight i3S
    Zebralight Mods: http://www.candlepowerforums.com/vb/...d.php?t=293092
    The only useful tool is the one you have with you when you need it.

  6. #126
    Flashaholic
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    123

    Default Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT

    Quote Originally Posted by ZebraLight View Post
    Wait for 2-3 weeks for the H51F.
    Thanks very much for the advice. After using them A LOT, I am a big fan of ZebraLights. I just do not want to order the wrong tool.

    John

  7. #127

    Default Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT

    Quote Originally Posted by nanotech17 View Post
    I just received my H51 on the 10/22/10 so i thought there is no strobe after using it for 2 days now but after reading this i tried mine and it has that 4Hz strobe YESSSSSS!! I have got the latest H51 with the updated driver circuit
    Good deal! You might the first person to get the H51 V2.
    EDC: Zebralight H52w; Backup/loaner: Olight i3S
    Zebralight Mods: http://www.candlepowerforums.com/vb/...d.php?t=293092
    The only useful tool is the one you have with you when you need it.

  8. #128
    Flashaholic* nanotech17's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    N 03°13.884° / E 101°29.329°
    Posts
    2,151

    Default Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT

    Quote Originally Posted by davidt1 View Post
    Good deal! You might the first person to get the H51 V2.
    i couldn't believe it at all



  9. #129

    Default Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT

    I had a shipping confirmation today from Zebralight. Can't wait to receive the beast !

  10. #130

    Default Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT

    Just put my order in for one of these last night. I noticed in the review that you used 14500 batteries for some of the tests. Zebralight's website says that they are unsupported though, and that the max input voltage is 2.5v. Was the prototype used in the review special, or will I be able to safely use 14500's? Looking at the graphs there probably won't be much gain to using 14500's, but it would be nice to know if it's safe to do or not.

    Thanks!

  11. #131
    Flashaholic
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Honolulu, HI
    Posts
    494

    Default Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT

    If the max input voltage is 2.5V, then I don't see how it can be safe (for the light) to use batteries with a nominal voltage of 3.7V, regardless of whether it works in the short term. If nothing else, it probably voids the warranty. Plus, as you noted, there doesn't appear to be much, if anything, to gain by using 14500's with this light that has been optimized for NiMH.
    Various old Fenix models; Zebralight H501w_SC50w+_SC600W; LiteFlux_LF2XT, various Solarforce with XM-L drop-ins.

  12. #132

    Default Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT

    Yeah, I think I'll just stick with AA's since I've get them free at work, and I've got a bunch of Eneloops too.

  13. #133
    Flashaholic
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Honolulu, HI
    Posts
    494

    Default Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT

    Quote Originally Posted by g.p. View Post
    Yeah, I think I'll just stick with AA's since I've get them free at work, and I've got a bunch of Eneloops too.
    Eneloops would be the best, much better performance than regular Alkaline AA's. And also much less risk of any leakage occurring with Eneloops.
    Various old Fenix models; Zebralight H501w_SC50w+_SC600W; LiteFlux_LF2XT, various Solarforce with XM-L drop-ins.

  14. #134

    Default Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT

    Quote Originally Posted by NightTime View Post
    I had a shipping confirmation today from Zebralight. Can't wait to receive the beast !
    People are liking this light. I think you will too.
    EDC: Zebralight H52w; Backup/loaner: Olight i3S
    Zebralight Mods: http://www.candlepowerforums.com/vb/...d.php?t=293092
    The only useful tool is the one you have with you when you need it.

  15. #135

    Default Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT

    Selfbuilt, If I read the graphs in post #1 right. This light only hits 200 lumens on 14500 bats. On eneloops its 160 lumens on H1 (80% of 200 lumens, assuming 100% relative output is 200 lumens). Is this correct?

  16. #136
    Flashaholic* srfreddy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    New England
    Posts
    918

    Default Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT

    Quote Originally Posted by mellowman View Post
    Selfbuilt, If I read the graphs in post #1 right. This light only hits 200 lumens on 14500 bats. On eneloops its 160 lumens on H1 (80% of 200 lumens, assuming 100% relative output is 200 lumens). Is this correct?
    Its pretty much impossible to have flat regulation when getting 200 lumens.

  17. #137
    Flashaholic*
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Central Ca
    Posts
    525

    Default Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT

    Quote Originally Posted by srfreddy View Post
    Its pretty much impossible to have flat regulation when getting 200 lumens.
    Are you talking exclusively about the SC51 or any light?
    Travis

    Various Neutral Tinted Goodness.

  18. #138
    Flashaholic* srfreddy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    New England
    Posts
    918

    Default Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT

    Any light with an XPG/XML, on one AA.

  19. #139

    Default Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT

    Quote Originally Posted by srfreddy View Post
    Its pretty much impossible to have flat regulation when getting 200 lumens.
    Quote Originally Posted by srfreddy View Post
    Any light with an XPG/XML, on one AA.
    So you're saying there is something funny with the High mode 14500 graph?

    Seems there is something funny about calling the SC51 a 200 lumen flashlight on eneloops too.

  20. #140

    Default Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT

    Written by selfbuilt on 11-02-2010 07:42 AM GMT

    Quote Originally Posted by g.p.
    Just put my order in for one of these last night. I noticed in the review that you used 14500 batteries for some of the tests. Zebralight's website says that they are unsupported though, and that the max input voltage is 2.5v. Was the prototype used in the review special, or will I be able to safely use 14500's? Looking at the graphs there probably won't be much gain to using 14500's, but it would be nice to know if it's safe to do or not.
    Good question, I don't know. 14500 certainly ran fine on my engineering sample, but they may have changed something on the shipping version. Good question, I don't know. 14500 certainly ran fine on my engineering sample, but they may have changed something on the shipping version.

    Written by jason978 on 11-06-2010 01:16 PM GMT

    so, has anyone been brave enough to try 14500's yet?


    Written by SloNicK on 11-10-2010 10:56 AM GMT

    No, wait daredevil. ))

    Received yesterday a torch. It seems that it shines a little weaker than my SC50 +. Perhaps because the tone a little colder.

    Written by LetThereBeLite on 11-12-2010 01:48 AM GMT

    Quote Originally Posted by ZebraLight
    The shipping started on last Friday.
    Does any dealer have this in stock and for sale now? Does any dealer have this in stock and for sale now?
    Written by d.frentzel on 11-12-2010 03:24 AM GMT

    Thanxs for the the Review.

    regards Dirk

    Written by Johnno on 11-12-2010 03:40 PM GMT

    Ordered a SC51 from Zebralight's site 4 days ago - my order shipped 3 days ago, right before they went into back-order mode... Hoping it arrives tomorrow. The only thing better than actually owning a light is the anticipation of awaiting its arrival!!

    Great review by the way - looks like its going to be a fantastic addition to my rather meager collection.

    Written by coyote on 11-15-2010 11:03 AM GMT

    any news from those who have a new one in hand???????

    comments, criticisms, likes/dilsikes????

    Written by coyote on 11-15-2010 11:10 AM GMT

    Quote Originally Posted by LetThereBeLite

    Does any dealer have this in stock and for sale now?
    yes. a buddy just ordered two factory direct (in Texas) and instantly recieved an email that they were shipped. yes. a buddy just ordered two factory direct (in Texas) and instantly recieved an email that they were shipped.

    here's the link: Zebralight SC51 $64 with free shipping
    Written by Justintoxicated on 11-15-2010 07:00 PM GMT

    So how much brighter would this be than a quark AA, or Mini 123?
    Written by NightTime on 11-16-2010 07:05 PM GMT

    Quote Originally Posted by coyote
    any news from those who have a new one in hand???????

    comments, criticisms, likes/dilsikes????
    I received mine about a week ago. Great little light. I changed my Preon 1 for the SC51 as my keychain light. What a brightness difference ! Small, powerfull, lightweight and tought. Also I received mine about a week ago. Great little light. I changed my Preon 1 for the SC51 as my keychain light. What a brightness difference ! Small, powerfull, lightweight and tought. Also very well machined. A masterpiece.

    The light went on while in my pocket though. I always unscrew the tail cap a bit now. I like the UI (took a few practice sessions), but never found the 100 lumens mode. I've got 2 low, 2 medium, 2 high & the strobe but no << 100 Lm (2.4 hrs) >> mode. Is the 100 lumens for the strobe ? Doesn't look like it.

    Anyone found it ?

    thx

    Written by LetThereBeLite on 11-17-2010 08:02 AM GMT

    Quote Originally Posted by coyote
    yes. a buddy just ordered two factory direct (in Texas) and instantly recieved an email that they were shipped.

    here's the link: Zebralight SC51 $64 with free shipping
    Really strange as the status on their website has consistently been "Availability Really strange as the status on their website has consistently been "Availability: Back Order"

    Written by davidt1 on 11-17-2010 08:48 AM GMT

    Quote Originally Posted by NightTime
    I received mine about a week ago. Great little light. I changed my Preon 1 for the SC51 as my keychain light. What a brightness difference ! Small, powerfull, lightweight and tought. Also very well machined. A masterpiece.

    The light went on while in my pocket though. I always unscrew the tail cap a bit now. I like the UI (took a few practice sessions), but never found the 100 lumens mode. I've got 2 low, 2 medium, 2 high & the strobe but no << 100 Lm (2.4 hrs) >> mode. Is the 100 lumens for the strobe ? Doesn't look like it.

    Anyone found it ?

    thx
    Glad you like it. And glad you brought up the 100lm. I thought that is a another high mode. But after reading the specs closely, I now think that's for the strobe. Glad you like it. And glad you brought up the 100lm. I thought that is a another high mode. But after reading the specs closely, I now think that's for the strobe.

    Written by JA(me)S on 11-17-2010 10:36 AM GMT

    Quote Originally Posted by NightTime
    Is the 100 lumens for the strobe ? Doesn't look like it.

    thx
    I do not yet own the SC51 (waiting for neutral). However, ZL's website states the 100 lm is for the 4Hz strobe for 2.4 hrs: I do not yet own the SC51 (waiting for neutral). However, ZL's website states the 100 lm is for the 4Hz strobe for 2.4 hrs:

    "High: H1 200 Lm (0.9 hrs) or H2 140 Lm (1.7 hrs) / 100 Lm (2.4 hrs) / 4Hz Strobe"

    - Jas.

    Written by NightTime on 11-17-2010 02:50 PM GMT

    Thanks for your point guys. But I'm still not convinced the 100 lumens is for the strobe mode for these reasons.

    First, I find the strobe mode fairly bright, but it's hard to tell went it's flashing.

    Secondly, following the syntax of the sentence, the "slash" found in << 140 Lm (1.7 hrs) / 100 Lm (2.4 hrs) / 4Hz Strobe >> suggest to me that we are talking about another mode.

    Third, have a look at this statement:

    << The second sub-level of the High can be further configured to different brightness levels or strobes. >> don't know why "strobe" is plural here though.

    So if the 100 lumens is for the strobe, we should read:

    << The second sub-level of the High can be further configured to strobe. >>

    Anyways, I won't die for that. There are more important things in life. I wouldn't use the 100 lumens mode anyways . lol

    Written by Lite_me on 11-17-2010 04:48 PM GMT

    Best I can tell, I have my SC51 configured on high mode for, H1 - 200Lm, (un-adjustable) and H2 for 100Lm. When adjusting the L2 hi setting in the configuration mode, when cycling through the the 3 options, I see the 2 brightness levels and a strobe. If I choose the brighter of the 2 output levels, (140Lm) and save, when testing the light afterwords, there is very little noticeable difference between the 2 Hi outputs. (140Lm & 200Lm) I don't even see a need to offer the 140Lm level if this is working correctly. So I went back into the programing mode and set the H2 setting to the lower of the 2 outputs (100Lm) and now there is a great enough difference to justify the setting.

    With the SC51 settings programed like this, the spacing on the 6 different outputs is near perfect. The Lm specs might not indicate this, but the actual output spacings are about as good as it gets I think. HTH and makes sense.

    Written by dmn42 on 11-18-2010 10:12 AM GMT

    PWM is visible on lowest low ;(
    Written by g.p. on 11-19-2010 09:12 AM GMT

    I can't notice it.
    Written by Lite_me on 11-19-2010 08:10 PM GMT

    I can 'see' it. But only if I study the beam on something up-close. In actual use, the output is so low I can't detect it at all. On some of my older lights that have PWM, I sometimes detect it when moving the light around from one object to another. The output on the SC51 on low-low isn't enough for me to see it or the PWM is high enough not to be a problem for me I guess. I rarely use that setting anyways.
    Written by iocheretyanny on 11-19-2010 08:15 PM GMT

    I really wish this was available with S2 or R5 instead of R4...
    Written by leon2245 on 11-21-2010 12:04 AM GMT



    Advanced Operation and Configuration

    Short click turns on the light to High. Short click again quickly to cycle from High to Medium, and Low.

    Press and hold to cycle from Low to High, release to set. When press and hold, the light always cycle from Low to High regardless which level you are currently in.

    Double click to toggle and select between the two sub-levels for that main level. Sub-level selections (except the strobe) for the 3 main levels are memorized after the light is turned off and through battery changes.

    The second sub-level of the High can be configured after 6 double clicks. Double click (startng with the 7th) to cycle and select different brightness levels or strobes. Short click to turn off the light when finishing configurations. The selections for the second sub-level of the High are memorized after the light is turned off and through battery changes.
    So the part in bold just refers to reprogramming the strobe's brightness right? It doesn't mean that unless you double clicked 6+ times while on high, you'd never even see the strobE?

    For instance if I double clicked twice to get to high's third sublevel of 100l, that sublevel would be memorized for the next time I turned directly to high, & one double click at that point would take me to strobe? Or before you get anything byeond the one default sublevel for hi, you'd have to do the 6 double clicks to choose from the others & strobes?

    I REALLY like the idea of jumping directly to low or hi with the short or long click options, just trying to understand the configuration stuff.
    Last edited by selfbuilt; 03-12-2011 at 09:42 AM.
    Full list of all my reviews: flashlightreviews.ca. Outdoor 100-yard Beamshots 2011. Latest: Fenix LD60.
    Gratefully accepting donations to my battery fund.

  21. #141

    Default Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT

    Written by Lite_me on 11-21-2010 01:44 AM GMT

    You cannot adjust the brightness of the strobe. And there is only one.

    You can only configure 2 settings for the hi mode. The 200Lm setting is non-configurable. It will always be one of them. The other hi output setting can either be 100Lm, 140Lm or strobe. If you choose the strobe to be your secondary option, it can not be the default when jumping to high mode. Jumping to hi will go right to 200Lm. If you choose one of the other 2 levels of output (100Lm or 140Lm) to be secondary hi, then you can set one of those to be the default when jumping to high, and the 200Lm will be available with a dbl clk. Or vice versa.

    Written by leon2245 on 11-21-2010 02:10 AM GMT



    ou can only configure 2 settings for the hi mode
    Thank you- so as it comes from the factory, can you confirm the following statement is true: Thank you- so as it comes from the factory, can you confirm the following statement is true:

    "unless you double clicked 6+ times while on high (at once while it's on), you'd never even see the strobE?" true?

    If so that's far enough removed for me, & i won't even worry about programming it for the 100l sublevel on high. I was just making sure it doesn't cycle through all those sublevels on hi just by double clicking through them. Thanks again.

    Written by Lite_me on 11-21-2010 02:36 AM GMT

    Quote Originally Posted by leon2245
    Thank you- so as it comes from the factory, can you confirm the following statement is true:

    "unless you double clicked 6+ times while on high (at once while it's on), you'd never even see the strobE?" true?
    You know, I don't even remember whether the strobe was programed from the factory or not. It's really no biggie tho. It can be easily be reprogrammed to one of the constant outputs and you'll never accidentally ever run into the strobe again. You know, I don't even remember whether the strobe was programed from the factory or not. It's really no biggie tho. It can be easily be reprogrammed to one of the constant outputs and you'll never accidentally ever run into the strobe again.
    Written by LetThereBeLite on 11-21-2010 02:42 AM GMT

    Quote Originally Posted by Lite_me
    You can not adjust the brightness of the strobe. And there is only one.

    You can only configure 2 settings for the hi mode. The 200Lm setting is non-configurable. It will always be one of them. The other hi output setting can either be 100Lm, 140Lm or strobe. If you choose the strobe to be your secondary option, it can not be the default when jumping to high mode. Jumping to hi will go right to 200Lm. If you choose one of the other 2 levels of output (100Lm or 140Lm) to be secondary hi, then you can set one of those to be the default when jumping to high, and the 200Lm will be available with a dbl clk. Or vice versa.
    Can you explain the easiest method to get the strobe feature functioning on this light? For my use, easy and immediate access to strobe is a requirement. I don't want to be fiddling with numerous clicks or turns to get emergency strobe functioning. Can you explain the easiest method to get the strobe feature functioning on this light? For my use, easy and immediate access to strobe is a requirement. I don't want to be fiddling with numerous clicks or turns to get emergency strobe functioning.

    How do you activate strobe on the SC51?

    Written by Sarlix on 11-21-2010 03:59 AM GMT

    Quote Originally Posted by LetThereBeLite
    Can you explain the easiest method to get the strobe feature functioning on this light? For my use, easy and immediate access to strobe is a requirement. I don't want to be fiddling with numerous clicks or turns to get emergency strobe functioning.

    How do you activate strobe on the SC51?
    It was explained by the Zebralight rep dude a few pages back: It was explained by the Zebralight rep dude a few pages back:

    Quote Originally Posted by ZebraLight
    The second sub-level of the High (H2) is expanded to include 100Lm, 140Lm and a 4Hz strobe. Double click 6 times in High to enter the configuration mode for the H2. Further double clicks to cycle throgh the list. Short click or long click to exit.

    All sub-levels except the 100 and 0.2Lm are now current regulated. L2 PWM flickering has been reduced to a much lower level.

    These updates are also implemented in the H51.
    Written by nlight3318 on 11-21-2010 11:16 AM GMT

    great review! I have zebralight H60 headlamp ,works pretty good, haven't tried zebra's flashlight , looks like I have to get one too.
    Written by g.p. on 11-21-2010 01:06 PM GMT

    Quote Originally Posted by Lite_me
    I can 'see' it. But only if I study the beam on something up-close. In actual use, the output is so low I can't detect it at all. On some of my older lights that have PWM, I sometimes detect it when moving the light around from one object to another. The output on the SC51 on low-low isn't enough for me to see it or the PWM is high enough not to be a problem for me I guess. I rarely use that setting anyways.
    I still can't see it....even if I try. Guess my eyes have a lower frame rate than most. I still can't see it....even if I try. Guess my eyes have a lower frame rate than most.

    Well, I'm loving mine. It didn't blow me away at first, but the more that I use it, the more that I love it. The UI is the best that I have ever used. It takes a few minutes to figure out, but after that it's perfect. It's very well made too, and just looks quality. The best part is that I'm sure that it puts out more light than my 3 D cell maglite of years past. When you think of it that way, it's pretty amazing for a light of this size!
    Written by SloNicK on 11-22-2010 01:06 PM GMT

    so, has anyone been brave enough to try 14500's yet? (с)
    Written by susuman on 12-01-2010 12:58 AM GMT

    Quote Originally Posted by NightTime
    Thanks for your point guys. But I'm still not convinced the 100 lumens is for the strobe mode for these reasons.

    First, I find the strobe mode fairly bright, but it's hard to tell went it's flashing.

    Secondly, following the syntax of the sentence, the "slash" found in << 140 Lm (1.7 hrs) / 100 Lm (2.4 hrs) / 4Hz Strobe >> suggest to me that we are talking about another mode.

    Third, have a look at this statement:

    << The second sub-level of the High can be further configured to different brightness levels or strobes. >> don't know why "strobe" is plural here though.

    So if the 100 lumens is for the strobe, we should read:

    << The second sub-level of the High can be further configured to strobe. >>

    Anyways, I won't die for that. There are more important things in life. I wouldn't use the 100 lumens mode anyways . lol
    It has the 100lm mode, just switch it on HIGH , then keep double click until you see the strobe, now keep double click to cycle through the selection of Stobe/100lm/140lm for the H2 mode. The single click to memorized the mode(100/140). It has the 100lm mode, just switch it on HIGH , then keep double click until you see the strobe, now keep double click to cycle through the selection of Stobe/100lm/140lm for the H2 mode. The single click to memorized the mode(100/140).

    Written by Tuikku on 12-06-2010 05:56 AM GMT

    Thanks for the review!

    I have ordered 3 H51 Zebralights for presents based on this review.
    for batteries

    Written by Tierdaen on 12-09-2010 09:58 AM GMT

    After reading the review here, I was so disappointed to find that both the SC50 and SC51 are unavailable where I live, and I cannot put money in my PayPal account for an international order at the moment. I was leaning toward an LD10 for a bit, then saw this review, then hunted around for it like mad, and, unable source one locally, I settled for the LD10 instead. I have a feeling I'll continue looking for the SC51 periodically, even though I'm mostly satisfied with my LD10 R4.
    Written by Dino2010 on 12-10-2010 11:00 PM GMT

    I saw that it has different type of model and Zebralight has gone through a couple of iterations. What is the regulation of this type of model?
    Written by maniacyak on 12-11-2010 07:25 AM GMT

    Quote Originally Posted by Dino2010
    I saw that it has different type of model and Zebralight has gone through a couple of iterations. What is the regulation of this type of model?
    From ZebraLight's From ZebraLight's web page for the SC51:



    200, 140, 30, 8 and 2.5 Lumen output are current regulated. 100 and 0.2 Lumen output are PWM generated.
    Written by chadvone on 12-12-2010 09:35 PM GMT

    ZL claiming 12 hours on Medium 1, Selfbuilt got 7h 47m both on Eneloops. Why would there runtimes be off that much??

    Quark AA medium 6 hours, Selfbuilt got 12h 25m.

    Wonder how the Med2 on ZL would compare to the Med on the Quark.

    I want this light, I want this light.

    SelfBuilts reviews have always been spot on, and I hardly buy AA lights that he hasn't reviewed.

    Written by LightObsession on 12-12-2010 11:36 PM GMT

    Thanks for the review. This light is quite tempting.
    Written by selfbuilt on 12-13-2010 08:05 AM GMT

    Quote Originally Posted by chadvone
    ZL claiming 12 hours on Medium 1, Selfbuilt got 7h 47m both on Eneloops. Why would there runtimes be off that much??

    Quark AA medium 6 hours, Selfbuilt got 12h 25m.
    Well, I often review early versions of lights. It is quite possible that manufacturers have tweaked outputs on later batches, and the runtimes are no longer comparable. Well, I often review early versions of lights. It is quite possible that manufacturers have tweaked outputs on later batches, and the runtimes are no longer comparable.

    But this is also why I always post the manufacturer's specs at the time of the review - if my numbers don't match, then it does indeed call into question the manufacturer's specs. But as time goes by, it's harder to know.


    Written by Flying Turtle on 12-20-2010 09:18 AM GMT

    Based on this great review I've recently received a SC50w+. An impressive light it is. That body design probably should be in a industrial museum. The olive anodizing is a nice change from most of my lights. Must more robust than I expected.

    It's kind of funny that in size, weight, high, and low output it is almost identical to my old favorite LF3XT. Not quite as smart as that light, however.

    Of course, now they're coming out with the 51w in a few weeks. I did know about it, but didn't expect it so soon. Heck, I seldom use those high levels anyway.

    Geoff

    Written by pae77 on 12-20-2010 09:37 AM GMT

    I've really come to like my SC50w+, especially for it's two low modes which are, imo, very well spaced and I find them very useful for navigating around the house w/o disturbing anyone. I don't have any problems with the pulse modulation which is pretty much undetectable to me.

    Used the light in an emergency situation (dealing with some basement flooding) for several hours today and it performed well with a pair of 14500's (one at a time of course). It packs a lot of power in a very small package and the various levels are pretty well spaced, imo. For now, it's my main single AA light, although I usually EDC only my LF2XT (single AAA) and use my larger Solarforce lights powered by a single 18650 for most outdoors stuff. But for it's size, the SC50w+ is a great light, imo.

    Written by selfbuilt on 12-20-2010 11:04 AM GMT

    Quote Originally Posted by Flying Turtle
    It's kind of funny that in size, weight, high, and low output it is almost identical to my old favorite LF3XT. Not quite as smart as that light, however.
    Yes, it is almost exactly the same height (the LF3XT is fatter, though). FYI, the SC50w (on 14500) has replaced the LF3XT on my belt as well. Yes, it is almost exactly the same height (the LF3XT is fatter, though). FYI, the SC50w (on 14500) has replaced the LF3XT on my belt as well.

    A shame that LiteFlux doesn't seem to have updated anything in awhile. But the SC51/SC50 series covers a lot of the ground that I need.


    Written by davidt1 on 12-27-2010 12:54 PM GMT

    Quote Originally Posted by SloNicK
    so, has anyone been brave enough to try 14500's yet? (с)
    SC50 needs 14500 for maximum brightness. SC51 does not need 14500 for maximum brightness. SC50 needs 14500 for maximum brightness. SC51 does not need 14500 for maximum brightness.

    Written by mellowman on 12-28-2010 12:08 PM GMT

    Quote Originally Posted by davidt1
    SC50 needs 14500 for maximum brightness. SC51 does not need 14500 for maximum brightness.
    The question was not about "need" but about if it works or not. The reviewer says yes but may have been an engineering sample and production versions of SC51 may not work. The question was not about "need" but about if it works or not. The reviewer says yes but may have been an engineering sample and production versions of SC51 may not work.

    The best response todate is "not recommended" from zebralight which doesn't answer the question if productions versions can work with 14500 bats. There are some of us who'd prefer a straight Yes or No answer.

    A "not needed" or "not recommended" is not an answer to the question as it still leaves open the question that 14500 can work.

    If the answer is NO a further clarification that this is because it would fry the driver which has a limit of 2.5v would really be a definitive answer. Again the reviewer used 14500 with no problems and none of the changes related to us since the original review has specifically mentioned a driver voltage limitation.

    Last edited by selfbuilt; 03-12-2011 at 09:44 AM.
    Full list of all my reviews: flashlightreviews.ca. Outdoor 100-yard Beamshots 2011. Latest: Fenix LD60.
    Gratefully accepting donations to my battery fund.

  22. #142

    Default Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT

    Written by NightTime on 12-28-2010 09:24 PM GMT

    Quote Originally Posted by susuman
    It has the 100lm mode, just switch it on HIGH , then keep double click until you see the strobe, now keep double click to cycle through the selection of Stobe/100lm/140lm for the H2 mode. The single click to memorized the mode(100/140).
    Thanks Thanks susuman & Lite_me for your explanations. I got it all now !

    Written by pae77 on 12-28-2010 09:57 PM GMT

    Quote Originally Posted by mellowman
    The question was not about "need" but about if it works or not. The reviewer says yes but may have been an engineering sample and production versions of SC51 may not work.

    The best response todate is "not recommended" from zebralight which doesn't answer the question if productions versions can work with 14500 bats. There are some of us who'd prefer a straight Yes or No answer.

    A "not needed" or "not recommended" is not an answer to the question as it still leaves open the question that 14500 can work.

    If the answer is NO a further clarification that this is because it would fry the driver which has a limit of 2.5v would really be a definitive answer. Again the reviewer used 14500 with no problems and none of the changes related to us since the original review has specifically mentioned a driver voltage limitation.
    But the question that arises (in my mind at least), is why would anyone want (or need) to run the SC51 on 14500s since it supposedly performs best (brightest as well as longer runtime) on NiMH which is the type of cell it was optimized for. But the question that arises (in my mind at least), is why would anyone want (or need) to run the SC51 on 14500s since it supposedly performs best (brightest as well as longer runtime) on NiMH which is the type of cell it was optimized for.

    On the other hand, the SC50's perform best on 14500's rather than on NiMH. But a 14500 appears to be wasted in the SC51. Jmo.

    Written by mellowman on 12-28-2010 11:02 PM GMT

    Quote Originally Posted by pae77
    But the question that arises (in my mind at least), is why would anyone want (or need) to run the SC51 on 14500s since it supposedly performs best (brightest as well as longer runtime) on NiMH which is the type of cell it was optimized for.

    On the other hand, the SC50's perform best on 14500's rather than on NiMH. But a 14500 appears to be wasted in the SC51. Jmo.
    Question is not about "want" or "need", question is about "can" 14500's work without damaging the flashlight. Question is not about "want" or "need", question is about "can" 14500's work without damaging the flashlight.

    Also you are misinformed. Look at the first post in this thread again. Even with the SC51 the 14500 are a little brighter and last a little longer. 14500's are not wasted in an SC51. At least not with the version the reviewer had.

    BTW, some of us still have 14500's we would like to use rather than buy a few more eneloops. 14500 are also a bit lighter than an eneloop which is appreciated, but not a deal breaker, when EDC'ing.

    I don't expect to get an answer from zebralight as they seem to want to distance themselves from 14500 for safety reasons, however since they don't come out and explicitly state not to use 14500 does seem to suggest it does work. Zebralight can PM me and I promise not to tell anyone.
    Written by LetThereBeLite on 12-29-2010 02:17 AM GMT

    Quote Originally Posted by mellowman
    Question is not about "want" or "need", question is about "can" 14500's work without damaging the flashlight.


    Also you are misinformed. Look at the first post in this thread again. Even with the SC51 the 14500 are a little brighter and last a little longer. 14500's are not wasted in an SC51. At least not with the version the reviewer had.

    BTW, some of us still have 14500's we would like to use rather than buy a few more eneloops. 14500 are also a bit lighter than an eneloop which is appreciated, but not a deal breaker, when EDC'ing.

    I don't expect to get an answer from zebralight as they seem to want to distance themselves from 14500 for safety reasons, however since they don't come out and explicitly state not to use 14500 does seem to suggest it does work. Zebralight can PM me and I promise not to tell anyone.
    You can phrase your question in whatever way you want but I find you purposely trying to be argumentative. It's been stated to you NOT RECOMMENDED to use 14500 with the SC51. Can ZL force you to not use 14500. No, they cannot. You still have the ability to use 14500 despite their warnings. So the correct linguistic answer is to recommend that you not use 14500. That's all they can do. They can't prohibit you from using it. You can phrase your question in whatever way you want but I find you purposely trying to be argumentative. It's been stated to you NOT RECOMMENDED to use 14500 with the SC51. Can ZL force you to not use 14500. No, they cannot. You still have the ability to use 14500 despite their warnings. So the correct linguistic answer is to recommend that you not use 14500. That's all they can do. They can't prohibit you from using it.

    It's pretty clear from your posts that you really want to use 14500, even despite warnings against doing so. Why don't you go ahead and do it? Come back and let us know how your real world experience is. If you report that your light got fried after a while, then we'll know for certain that you can't use 14500 with the SC51.
    Written by mellowman on 12-29-2010 02:43 AM GMT

    Quote Originally Posted by LetThereBeLite
    You can phrase your question in whatever way you want but I find you purposely trying to be argumentative. It's been stated to you NOT RECOMMENDED to use 14500 with the SC51. Can ZL force you to not use 14500. No, they cannot. You still have the ability to use 14500 despite their warnings. So the correct linguistic answer is to recommend that you not use 14500. That's all they can do. They can't prohibit you from using it.

    It's pretty clear from your posts that you really want to use 14500, even despite warnings against doing so. Why don't you go ahead and do it? Come back and let us know how your real world experience is. If you report that your light got fried after a while, then we'll know for certain that you can't use 14500 with the SC51.
    Your post adds nothing to this thread. Your logic is silly. They can use stronger language than "not recommended" and still be "correct linguistically", like prohibited. Then it would be very clear. If you want to argue the meaning of words take it to another forum. Your post adds nothing to this thread. Your logic is silly. They can use stronger language than "not recommended" and still be "correct linguistically", like prohibited. Then it would be very clear. If you want to argue the meaning of words take it to another forum.

    Seems more like it does work but they don't want to take on any liability from people using cheap 14500's and they don't want to lose any sales either so they say not recommended.

    I don't have an SC51, might consider buying one if I can get an answer to the question.

    I'm not the only one asking. Check the thread it's been asks for weeks with no definitive answer. I'm just trying to get a definitive answer.

    What is the purpose of this forum? This thread? I think the question is very CPF.

    Written by pae77 on 12-29-2010 04:10 AM GMT

    Speaking of "silly logic," (btw, I would normally never use such argumentative words to describe another member's post), but I find it rather amusing that the contention or theory that ZL apparently doesn't "want to take on liability from people using cheap 14500's . . . ," based on their lack of specificity wrt the use of li-ion cells with SC51, seems especially deserving of such characterization in light of ZL's past history wrt li-ion cells because: 1) ZL specifically designed the circuit in the SC50 to use 14500's and even posts lumen data with respect to the light being used with 14500's on their site; 2) ZL makes other lights that are designed to run on li-ion cells; and, 3) They even makes some lights that canonly be run on li-ion cells (e.g., SC60 which runs on an 18650). So the contention, conclusion or speculation that ZL doesn't want to take on liability from people using "cheap" li-ion cells doesn't seem very logical at all in light of the actual facts and circumstances concerning ZL's product line and history wrt li-ion powered lights.

    Written by hazna on 12-29-2010 04:41 AM GMT

    well, zebralight don't recommend it... selfbuilt's review seems to indicate it can run on 14500, but we do not know the long term ramifications of doing so. From peoples lack of response to your question... it seems most people are afraid to run the sc51 on 14500 due to zebralight's warning.

    You can either buy the sc51 and take a punt to see what the long term results are using 14500, or get the sc50+ which does officially support 14500 batteries.

    Written by mellowman on 12-29-2010 06:19 AM GMT

    Quote Originally Posted by pae77
    Speaking of "silly logic," (btw, I would normally never use such argumentative words to describe another member's post), but I find it rather amusing that the contention or theory that ZL apparently doesn't "want to take on liability from people using cheap 14500's . . . ," based on their lack of specificity wrt the use of li-ion cells with SC51, seems especially deserving of such characterization in light of ZL's past history wrt li-ion cells because: 1) ZL specifically designed the circuit in the SC50 to use 14500's and even posts lumen data with respect to the light being used with 14500's on their site; 2) ZL makes other lights that are designed to run on li-ion cells; and, 3) They even makes some lights that can only be run on li-ion cells (e.g., SC60 which runs on an 18650). So the contention, conclusion or speculation that ZL doesn't want to take on liability from people using "cheap" li-ion cells doesn't seem very logical at all in light of the actual facts and circumstances concerning ZL's product line and history wrt li-ion powered lights.
    SC51 is the latest design. Past history does not guarantee the future. ZL not liking 14500 because of cheap bats comes from others posting who apparently have spoken with ZL. I've said nothing about 18650. Get a grip. SC51 is the latest design. Past history does not guarantee the future. ZL not liking 14500 because of cheap bats comes from others posting who apparently have spoken with ZL. I've said nothing about 18650. Get a grip.

    Written by mellowman on 12-29-2010 06:32 AM GMT

    Quote Originally Posted by hazna
    well, zebralight don't recommend it... selfbuilt's review seems to indicate it can run on 14500, but we do not know the long term ramifications of doing so. From peoples lack of response to your question... it seems most people are afraid to run the sc51 on 14500 due to zebralight's warning.

    You can either buy the sc51 and take a punt to see what the long term results are using 14500, or get the sc50+ which does officially support 14500 batteries.
    Well it would be nice to hear a bit more from ZL about it. What's the point of their participation in the forum if not for simple questions like this? Just to generate product hype? Well it would be nice to hear a bit more from ZL about it. What's the point of their participation in the forum if not for simple questions like this? Just to generate product hype?

    Yes, an alternative is to buy one and do long term evaluation. Except if something happens long term how will I know it was using 14500 or something with the build that would have happened even with eneloops. Lets be honest, ZL's build quality rep is not exactly spotless now is it.

    Too many other worthy lights to consider. If such a simple question cannot be addressed then why should I buy it.

    Written by hazna on 12-29-2010 07:17 AM GMT

    Well you could ask zebralight directly about 14500 support. I have found they have been fairly responsive to my questions previously.
    http://www.zebralight.com/crm.asp?action=contactus

    Please keep us informed on what they say.

    If you are worried about 14500 support get the sc50+. One of the benefits I feel of the sc50+, is the strobe mode is slower and more useable (YMMV). Or as you said, you could get another light completely.

    Quote Originally Posted by mellowman
    ZL not liking 14500 because of cheap bats comes from others posting who apparently have spoken with ZL.
    I am interested where you read this. I haven't been trawling through all the threads on sc51/sc50... I am interested where you read this. I haven't been trawling through all the threads on sc51/sc50...

    Written by g.p. on 12-29-2010 11:20 AM GMT

    Quote Originally Posted by mellowman
    If such a simple question cannot be addressed then why should I buy it.
    They have addressed the issue: They have addressed the issue:

    "Battery: One 1.5V AA (NiMH, lithium or alkaline). 14500 Li-ion batteries are not supported." http://www.zebralight.com/SC51-Flash...00Lm_p_43.html

    I absolutely LOVE my SC51..........love it......way too much to risk destroying it for a minor potential gain. I strongly suggest that you buy one and see for yourself though, then let us know how it goes! I bet that if you buy one you will fall in love with it too, and won't want to chance it either. By far the best UI, nicest finishing, most beautiful beam, most practical level spacing, and smallest useable light that I have ever owned. I still can't believe that something the size of a single AA cell has replaced my mini mag, and 3D mag work lights (and it blows them both away in light output too, even compares to my 3D Maglite with Malkoff drop-in).

    Written by pae77 on 12-29-2010 12:00 PM GMT

    Quote Originally Posted by mellowman
    "SC51 is the latest design. Past history does not guarantee the future. ZL not liking 14500 because of cheap bats comes from others posting who apparently have spoken with ZL. I've said nothing about 18650. Get a grip." [Emphasis added.]
    True, you've not specifically referenced 18650's per se, but I was under the impression that both 14500 (which you did mention) and 18650, in many if not most cases, use the same type of Li-ion chemistry. And therefore it seems reasonable to conclude (at least to me) that if a company is supposedly concerned about liability with respect to one of those li-ion cell sizes, they would logically similarly be concerned about liability wrt other li-ion cell sizes. But I guess since I don't apparently, in your opinion, have "a grip," (btw, was it really necessary to add that unpleasant barb to your post?), that something must be wrong with my logic, although tbh, I still don't see where I've gone wrong. True, you've not specifically referenced 18650's per se, but I was under the impression that both 14500 (which you did mention) and 18650, in many if not most cases, use the same type of Li-ion chemistry. And therefore it seems reasonable to conclude (at least to me) that if a company is supposedly concerned about liability with respect to one of those li-ion cell sizes, they would logically similarly be concerned about liability wrt other li-ion cell sizes. But I guess since I don't apparently, in your opinion, have "a grip," (btw, was it really necessary to add that unpleasant barb to your post?), that something must be wrong with my logic, although tbh, I still don't see where I've gone wrong.

    Written by LetThereBeLite on 12-29-2010 12:48 PM GMT

    Quote Originally Posted by mellowman
    Your post adds nothing to this thread. Your logic is silly. They can use stronger language than "not recommended" and still be "correct linguistically", like prohibited. Then it would be very clear. If you want to argue the meaning of words take it to another forum.

    Seems more like it does work but they don't want to take on any liability from people using cheap 14500's and they don't want to lose any sales either so they say not recommended.

    I don't have an SC51, might consider buying one if I can get an answer to the question.

    I'm not the only one asking. Check the thread it's been asks for weeks with no definitive answer. I'm just trying to get a definitive answer.

    What is the purpose of this forum? This thread? I think the question is very CPF.
    Your posts add even less to this thread. Question has been asked and answered. The definitive answer is NOT RECOMMENDED. Period. Move on. Your posts add even less to this thread. Question has been asked and answered. The definitive answer is NOT RECOMMENDED. Period. Move on.

    Written by g.p. on 12-30-2010 06:59 PM GMT

    Quote Originally Posted by mellowman
    BTW, some of us still have 14500's we would like to use rather than buy a few more eneloops. 14500 are also a bit lighter than an eneloop which is appreciated, but not a deal breaker, when EDC'ing.
    Quote Originally Posted by mellowman
    Too many other worthy lights to consider. If such a simple question cannot be addressed then why should I buy it.
    I have some 14500's laying around, but have been having trouble finding any good lights for them. Can you please point me in the direction of a light that is comparable in size and weight to the SC51? I would also expect a 14500 light to put out more lumens too. So far the Lumapower Trust 1 is the only 14500 EDC light that I have found that does better (lumenwise) than the SC51. It's I have some 14500's laying around, but have been having trouble finding any good lights for them. Can you please point me in the direction of a light that is comparable in size and weight to the SC51? I would also expect a 14500 light to put out more lumens too. So far the Lumapower Trust 1 is the only 14500 EDC light that I have found that does be
    Written by pae77 on 12-30-2010 07:11 PM GMT

    Quote Originally Posted by g.p.
    I have some 14500's laying around, but have been having trouble finding any good lights for them. Can you please point me in the direction of a light that is comparable in size and weight to the SC51? I would also expect a 14500 light to put out more lumens too. So far the Lumapower Trust 1 is the only 14500 EDC light that I have found that does better (lumenwise) than the SC51. It's much heavier and much bigger though.
    How about the SC50 or SC50w+? If it's not exactly the same, then it's How about the SC50 or SC50w+? If it's not exactly the same, then it's almost exactly the same size as the SC51 but, unlike the SC51, the SC50 line is optimized for 14500's. It uses a different emitter though. Instead of the XPG, it uses the XPE, iirc (not bothering to check the first post). Anyway, on 14500's the SC50/SC50w+ put out about the same amount of light as the SC51 on Eneloops.

    Btw, the SC51's performance on Eneloops is very unusual. I don't think any other light puts out so many lumens on a single AA Eneloop. So expecting to find a single 14500 powered light that does a much better than that is not going to be easy. 200 lumens or so on a 14500 is about what I think you can currently expect, at least until the new XM-L emitter perhaps finds its way into a single 14500 powered light. If that happens, it will be a whole lot brighter than any of the currently available single 14500 lights, but runtime at max brightness will be quite limited due to the limited capacity of 14500s and the high current draw the XM-L requires to get really bright. I have one I currently run on a single 18650 that puts out about 500 to 600 lumens (my estimate) on max and gets about 40 minutes of runtime from a 2400 mAh battery (on max). It's awesome. I'm looking forward to ZL putting that emitter in the SC60's body which I'm pretty sure they will be doing in the not too distant future.

    Written by LetThereBeLite on 12-30-2010 07:15 PM GMT

    Quote Originally Posted by mellowman
    Well it would be nice to hear a bit more from ZL about it. What's the point of their participation in the forum if not for simple questions like this? Just to generate product hype?

    Yes, an alternative is to buy one and do long term evaluation. Except if something happens long term how will I know it was using 14500 or something with the build that would have happened even with eneloops. Lets be honest, ZL's build quality rep is not exactly spotless now is it.

    Too many other worthy lights to consider. If such a simple question cannot be addressed then why should I buy it.
    Narcissistman, don't buy. Who really cares if you buy or not. NO one. Take it to another thread. Narcissistman, don't buy. Who really cares if you buy or not. NO one. Take it to another thread.

    Question has been asked and answered: NOT RECOMMENDED.

    Written by g.p. on 12-30-2010 08:30 PM GMT

    Quote Originally Posted by pae77
    How about the SC50 or SC50w+? If it's not exactly the same, then it's almost exactly the same size as the SC51 but, unlike the SC51, the SC50 line is optimized for 14500's. It uses a different emitter though. Instead of the XPG, it uses the XPE, iirc (not bothering to check the first post). Anyway, on 14500's the SC50/SC50w+ put out about the same amount of light as the SC51 on Eneloops.
    Yeah, I like the SC50, but there's no benefit of buying it when I've already got the SC51. I thought maybe there was something amazing out there that I didn't know about. Something approx the same size as the Zebralight since he's concerned about the weight of a 14500 vs the weight of an Eneloop! Yeah, I like the SC50, but there's no benefit of buying it when I've already got the SC51. I thought maybe there was something amazing out there that I didn't know about. Something approx the same size as the Zebralight since he's concerned about the weight of a 14500 vs the weight of an Eneloop!

    Written by pae77 on 12-30-2010 09:10 PM GMT

    Quote Originally Posted by g.p.
    Yeah, I like the SC50, but there's no benefit of buying it when I've already got the SC51. I thought maybe there was something amazing out there that I didn't know about. Something approx the same size as the Zebralight since he's concerned about the weight of a 14500 vs the weight of an Eneloop!
    I see. Well there is something truly amazing but it remains to be seen if it will ever find its way into small lights like the SC50/51. And that is the XM-L emitter I mentioned in the other post. It's like having 3 XPGs rolled into one emitter. Very bright, huge hot spot, big smooth floody beam but very good throw that is a little better than the throw of most XPGs. But I think they will need to be powered by an 18650 to have a practical amount of runtime on max brightness. But ZL has already put an 18650 into a pretty small package with the SC60, so what I'm waiting for next (unless Liteflux comes out with something new, but that's another subject) is ZL to put an XM-L in a single 18650 powered light like the SC60 has done. That will be like having a xenon car headlight that fits into the palm of your hand (and pocket). Should be quite an achievement. I see. Well there is something truly amazing but it remains to be seen if it will ever find its way into small lights like the SC50/51. And that is the XM-L emitter I mentioned in the other post. It's like having 3 XPGs rolled into one emitter. Very bright, huge hot spot, big smooth floody beam but very good throw that is a little better than the throw of most XPGs. But I think they will need to be powered by an 18650 to have a practical amount of runtime on max brightness. But ZL has already put an 18650 into a pretty small package with the SC60, so what I'm waiting for next (unless Liteflux comes out with something new, but that's another subject) is ZL to put an XM-L in a single 18650 powered light like the SC60 has done. That will be like having a xenon car headlight that fits into the palm of your hand (and pocket). Should be quite an achievement.

    Written by hazna on 12-30-2010 11:02 PM GMT

    maybe you could try the xeno e03. I don't have one, but it seems to run on 14500. Measures: 96.5mm x 21.5mm. Or Quark AA... there's quite a few choices actually.
    Last edited by selfbuilt; 03-12-2011 at 09:44 AM.
    Full list of all my reviews: flashlightreviews.ca. Outdoor 100-yard Beamshots 2011. Latest: Fenix LD60.
    Gratefully accepting donations to my battery fund.

  23. #143

    Default Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT

    Written by JA(me)S on 12-30-2010 11:10 PM GMT

    Quote Originally Posted by pae77
    But ZL has already put an 18650 into a pretty small package with the SC60, so what I'm waiting for next (unless Liteflux comes out with something new, but that's another subject) is ZL to put an XM-L in a single 18650 powered light like the SC60 has done. That will be like having a xenon car headlight that fits into the palm of your hand (and pocket). Should be quite an achievement.
    You beat me to the punch! I was going to post this very concept in the LED lights forum for discussion... You beat me to the punch! I was going to post this very concept in the LED lights forum for discussion... I would jump on this in a heartbeat (well, when the XM-L neutral is available)
    Written by pae77 on 12-30-2010 11:15 PM GMT

    Quote Originally Posted by JA(me)S
    You beat me to the punch! I was going to post this very concept in the LED lights forum for discussion... I would jump on this in a heartbeat (well, when the XM-L neutral is available)
    I don't know if all the XM-L's are like the one I got but although mine (in a drop-in) is the normal T6 bin white, it's actually really almost neutral in tint. I quite like the tint and I'm one who buys neutral whenever possible. So I would suggest not to be afraid to try one of the regular XM-L T6 drop-ins (if you are into using drop-ins). KD is selling a couple of surprisingly good ones for only $18.80 shipped atm. There is a 5 mode and a one mode. I got the 5 mode version and it's quite awesome, imo. It has a limited voltage range, however, so it can only be run on one li-ion cell (which is not a problem for me though as I like single 18650 powered lights). The one mode module can take a much wider voltage range, however. Sorry to go off topic but these new "affordable" high power emitters from Cree are really quite impressive and they are just a very few dollars more expensive than XPG's. I don't know if all the XM-L's are like the one I got but although mine (in a drop-in) is the normal T6 bin white, it's actually really almost neutral in tint. I quite like the tint and I'm one who buys neutral whenever possible. So I would suggest not to be afraid to try one of the regular XM-L T6 drop-ins (if you are into using drop-ins). KD is selling a couple of surprisingly good ones for only $18.80 shipped atm. There is a 5 mode and a one mode. I got the 5 mode version and it's quite awesome, imo. It has a limited voltage range, however, so it can only be run on one li-ion cell (which is not a problem for me though as I like single 18650 powered lights). The one mode module can take a much wider voltage range, however. Sorry to go off topic but these new "affordable" high power emitters from Cree are really quite impressive and they are just a very few dollars more expensive than XPG's.

    Written by g.p. on 12-31-2010 12:05 AM GMT

    Cool! I didn't realize that the XM-L's were that much brighter. I've just started reading up on some new XM-L's throwers and my initial impression was that they were slightly brighter, but mostly just used less power to do it. That will be cool when Zebralight makes a light with an XM-L LED.....'cause I already love my Zebrealight!
    Written by g.p. on 12-31-2010 11:36 AM GMT

    Sorry, just saw the reply. I can't find any lumen numbers on the Quarks with 14500's. It seems as though they are not officially supported. I'll check the xeno e03 though.

    I received my Trust 1 last night, and it compliments the SC51 nicely when used with 14500's. It's a bit brighter, and a little larger which is good when using gloves at work. My SC51 may stay at home now, because I like it too much to get hydraulic fluid all over it! I really hope that Zebralight does come out with a brighter 18650 light. Now that I've moved into 18650's, I love them. Their current 18650 offering just doesn't drive it hard enough though. I like to have a really high mode, even if it means that I can only use it for a minute or two at a time. That way I don't have to carry any bigger lights around all night for those few seconds that I need one.

    Written by pae77 on 12-31-2010 11:54 AM GMT

    Quote Originally Posted by g.p.
    Sorry, just saw the reply. I can't find any lumen numbers on the Quarks with 14500's. It seems as though they are not officially supported. I'll check the xeno e03 though.

    I received my Trust 1 last night, and it compliments the SC51 nicely when used with 14500's. It's a bit brighter, and a little larger which is good when using gloves at work. My SC51 may stay at home now, because I like it too much to get hydraulic fluid all over it! I really hope that Zebralight does come out with a brighter 18650 light. Now that I've moved into 18650's, I love them. Their current 18650 offering just doesn't drive it hard enough though. I like to have a really high mode, even if it means that I can only use it for a minute or two at a time. That way I don't have to carry any bigger lights around all night for those few seconds that I need one.
    While we are waiting for ZL to come out with an XM-L based light, if you don't mind something a little larger (about the size of a Surefire 6P), you can pair a Solarforce L2 or L2P flashlight body (host) either of which are available for under $20 shipped, with the XM-L drop-in from KD (also under $20 shipped) and those Solarforce bodies can run on a single 18650. (Or 2 - 16340's or 2 - 18350's, assuming the drop-in being used can handle the additional voltage generated by using multiple cells. Also, battery tube extensions are available that enable the use of more than one 18650. But I usually prefer to just use a single 18650 which is all the 5 mode XM-L drop-in from KD can take anyway.) While we are waiting for ZL to come out with an XM-L based light, if you don't mind something a little larger (about the size of a Surefire 6P), you can pair a Solarforce L2 or L2P flashlight body (host) either of which are available for under $20 shipped, with the XM-L drop-in from KD (also under $20 shipped) and those Solarforce bodies can run on a single 18650. (Or 2 - 16340's or 2 - 18350's, assuming the drop-in being used can handle the additional voltage generated by using multiple cells. Also, battery tube extensions are available that enable the use of more than one 18650. But I usually prefer to just use a single 18650 which is all the 5 mode XM-L drop-in from KD can take anyway.)

    Anyway, with that combo, you can have the benefits of XM-L and 18650 now in an inexpensive but slightly larger package. But it makes an awesome powerhouse for under $40 shipped. And the quality of both the body (especially the L2P) and drop-in are much higher than the price would suggest.

    The Solarforce bodies are available from several vendors, some on Ebay and there are some websites. The one I personally use and prefer (because it usually seems to have the lowest prices and they provide good cust svc) is here.
    Written by selfbuilt on 01-01-2011 01:49 PM GMT

    Quote Originally Posted by pae77
    200 lumens or so on a 14500 is about what I think you can currently expect, at least until the new XM-L emitter perhaps finds its way into a single 14500 powered light. If that happens, it will be a whole lot brighter than any of the currently available single 14500 lights, but runtime at max brightness will be quite limited due to the limited capacity of 14500s and the high current draw the XM-L requires to get really bright.
    I rather doubt we would ever see that configuration - for exactly the points you mentioned. The XM-L draws a lot of power at higher outputs, and that would not be safe on the low-capacity 14500 (i.e. discharge rates would be too high for standard Li-ion). And if you are limited to lower outputs, there's not much point for a manufacturer to go with the more expensive XM-L (i.e. much the same reason why you don't see a 14500-based MC-E or SST-50 light). I rather doubt we would ever see that configuration - for exactly the points you mentioned. The XM-L draws a lot of power at higher outputs, and that would not be safe on the low-capacity 14500 (i.e. discharge rates would be too high for standard Li-ion). And if you are limited to lower outputs, there's not much point for a manufacturer to go with the more expensive XM-L (i.e. much the same reason why you don't see a 14500-based MC-E or SST-50 light).

    Something like the XP-G S2 seems to be in the sweet spot for 1xRCR/14500 lights right now.


    Written by pae77 on 01-01-2011 02:46 PM GMT

    Quote Originally Posted by selfbuilt
    I rather doubt we would ever see that configuration - for exactly the points you mentioned. The XM-L draws a lot of power at higher outputs, and that would not be safe on the low-capacity 14500 (i.e. discharge rates would be too high for standard Li-ion). And if you are limited to lower outputs, there's not much point for a manufacturer to go with the more expensive XM-L (i.e. much the same reason why you don't see a 14500-based MC-E or SST-50 light).

    Something like the XP-G S2 seems to be in the sweet spot for 1xRCR/14500 lights right now.
    Yes, I certainly agree with you and that's why I qualified my speculative remarks you quoted with the word "perhaps." But just speculating here but if the XM-L is really 20% more efficient than the XPG as Cree has claimed, then Yes, I certainly agree with you and that's why I qualified my speculative remarks you quoted with the word "perhaps." But just speculating here but if the XM-L is really 20% more efficient than the XPG as Cree has claimed, then perhaps there would be a benefit to putting an XM-L in a light designed to be run at considerably lower power levels than the max the XM-L can handle, simply to gain the benefit of that increased efficiency and perhaps also be designed to have a level that allows a slightly increased max power level over what an XPG could be run at, so it could also be some modest amount brighter than an XPG (but not so much as to create a high risk of damaging smaller capacity batteries).

    There is also the benefit of the better, imo, beam pattern (i.e., bigger hot spot, wider brighter spill), that the XM-L puts out at almost all power levels. For example, the beam of my XM-L drop-in on low is still very smooth and big with relatively bright spill and a very big hot spot. So, imo, there are still other reasons besides running at the max brightness the XM-L is capable of, to put the emitter in a lower power drawing light. But certainly it's total speculation at this point whether any manufacturer or custom maker will agree and decide to actually produce such a light. Another thing to remember is that the XM-L currently is only a couple of dollars more expensive per unit than the XPG and that difference will likely shrink even more after the "newness" premium currently built into the price goes away. So it likely won't be much more expensive to use the XM-L in place of the XPG before too much more time has passed, imo.

    Written by RBWNY on 01-08-2011 09:19 AM GMT

    Quote Originally Posted by g.p.
    I absolutely LOVE my SC51..........love it......way too much to risk destroying it for a minor potential gain. I strongly suggest that you buy one and see for yourself though, then let us know how it goes! I bet that if you buy one you will fall in love with it too, and won't want to chance it either. By far the best UI, nicest finishing, most beautiful beam, most practical level spacing, and smallest useable light that I have ever owned. I still can't believe that something the size of a single AA cell has replaced my mini mag, and 3D mag work lights (and it blows them both away in light output too, even compares to my 3D Maglite with Malkoff drop-in).
    I can't agree more! My SC51 arrived yesterday and I'm totally thrilled with it I can't agree more! My SC51 arrived yesterday and I'm totally thrilled with it For cryin' out loud it's the SAME SIZE as a Quark 123!! How can you get much better than that when it's using a single AA? Anyway, I too will recommend it highly. I just hope and pray that single clickie switch stands the test of time.
    Written by selfbuilt on 01-08-2011 12:53 PM GMT

    Quote Originally Posted by RBWNY
    I just hope and pray that single clickie switch stands the test of time.
    Having EDCed the SC50w for several months now, I can tell you the switch still works as new. However, there is a an issue there as well - the light easily turns on if something presses against the switch in your holster/pocket. You need to lock the light out at the tailcap to prevent this. Having EDCed the SC50w for several months now, I can tell you the switch still works as new. However, there is a an issue there as well - the light easily turns on if something presses against the switch in your holster/pocket. You need to lock the light out at the tailcap to prevent this.

    Otherwise, you may notice some heat coming from your pants - the light usually comes on in Max with a quick press. I've also had a few cases of finding it on Lo/Med, with a nearly depleted battery after being on for hours.


    Written by g.p. on 01-08-2011 05:19 PM GMT

    Yeah, I only made the mistake of not locking it out once......my pants got very hot!
    Written by tandem on 01-09-2011 11:03 AM GMT

    Quote Originally Posted by pae77
    Yes, I certainly agree with you and that's why I qualified my speculative remarks you quoted with the word "perhaps." But just speculating here but if the XM-L is really 20% more efficient than the XPG as Cree has claimed, then perhaps there would be a benefit to putting an XM-L in a light designed to be run at considerably lower power levels than the max the XM-L can handle, simply to gain the benefit of that increased efficiency and perhaps also be designed to have a level that allows a slightly increased max power level over what an XPG could be run at
    You don't need to speculate, you can look at Cree's data. Here is a snapshot I took of Cree's product comparison application showing output at different drive current rates for the XP-G R5 compared with the XM-L T6 and XM-L U2 output bins. The T6 is readily available right now.

    Of course short of asking the maker or doing surgery on our lights we've no way of knowing exactly what the drive current at the emitter is in the SC51 so we'll have to estimate by working backwards, sideways and maybe upside down. Bear with me while I puzzle this out and realize that I may be way off base on this:

    How about we use 75% as the efficiency factor to convert emitter to out the front lumens so to go backward we'll divide by 0.75. 200/.75 = 266 emitter lumens. From the data sheet we can see the XP-G can generate ~266 lumens with roughly 0.75A but with Vf at 3.2V. A fresh AA NiMH is no where near 3.2V so that voltage has to be stepped up and since you get no useful work without power this requires more current... roughly 2.2A of current in fact, just over 1C for a 2000 mAh cell. I wonder if we can estimate current at the LED, even if roughly so? 2.2A / 0.75A = a factor of 3.

    Does that hold up? Let's see... the light is said to put out 100 lumen out the front on High 2. 100/.75 = 133 emitter lumens. The Cree table doesn't go that low so we'll have to extrapolate. Assuming Vf of 3.2 and lumens per watt at 130 (close enough) drive current P=IV so I = P/V = 1W/3.2V = 0.3A or thereabouts for the XP-G.

    Using the same cell for measurement of the light on High 1, I get 0.8A for High 2, so the conversion factor isn't exactly linear (no surprise) but works out to 0.8/0.3 = 2.66. That sounds about right as these LEDs are all supposed to be more efficient at lower drive levels. I suppose I could have used lumens per watt and nominal NiMH voltage to get at this too.

    Anyway... would a light designer want to draw more than 2.2A from a NiMH cell? To do so you start dropping the light's runtime on max. Let's say they were willing to introduce a burst or "High 3" feature and go up to 3A draw from the cell. 3 divided by our conversion factor of 3 = 1A.

    1A at the emitter produces 347 lumens on a XP-G R5 and 388 on an XM-L for a 12% improvement. 388*.75 = 291 OTF lumens for the XM-L vs 260 for the XP-G. I guess 11% is worthwhile enough a difference, **if one were to decide pulling 3A from a 1xNiMH cell was a design objective**. But as the XP-G can already be driven by 1A (at the emitter, 3A at the tailcap for a 1xNiMH light) and since no production 1xAA does this today, one has to assume the introduction of the XM-L won't change that.

    I guess that is the real bottom line - for 1x NiMH or alkaline powered lights the XM-L doesn't really introduce anything new by way of potential except for perhaps a different beam profile much as the XP-G is different than the XR-E. There is a downside to going XM-L early on as initially at least you lose access to all manner of tint bins.

    Where the XM-L really shines for flashlight makers is lithium ion powered lights, particularly those taking larger capacity cells that can deliver 1.5 - 3A without being driven (much) over a 1C rate. Li-ion powered lights have an efficiency advantage over NiMH/Alkaline given their drivers can be more efficient since they operate much closer to Vf for the LEDs. Plus they are physically larger lights that will handle heat better.

    Edit: To bring this all directly back to the Zebralight -- Maybe a 14500 powered SC51/H51 would auto-enable a somewhat higher high simply by virtue of detecting the higher input voltage. But the lack of official support for 14500's seems to suggest that Zebralight isn't as keen on supporting lithium ion cells in AA format lights, so why would they enable such a thing? Lithium ion cells are truly an enthusiast's domain, not the mainstream. As this industry matures the volume producers surely are looking more at the mainstream than a few of us here on CPF.

    Written by LetThereBeLite on 01-15-2011 02:50 AM GMT

    Placed my order for a SC51 with goinggear tonight. I think I snagged the last unit of their current batch.

    I'm anxious to finally get my hands on one of these. I still think ZL lights in general are quite ugly but the 200 lumen and its UI does impress me so I'm hoping to overlook the ugliness for it's impressive feature set.
    Written by g.p. on 01-15-2011 10:27 AM GMT

    Your opinion might change once you have it in your hand. I used to think it was ugly too.....
    Written by Russ Prechtl on 01-15-2011 11:11 AM GMT

    Quote Originally Posted by LetThereBeLite
    Placed my order for a SC51 with goinggear tonight. I think I snagged the last unit of their current batch.

    I'm anxious to finally get my hands on one of these. I still think ZL lights in general are quite ugly but the 200 lumen and its UI does impress me so I'm hoping to overlook the ugliness for it's impressive feature set.
    I used to think they were ugly as well until I got my SC51 and carried it for awhile. Now I've grown quite fond of it! It grows on you after awhile. I don't even notice the looks any more...now it's about the features. I love the ability to go to virtually any brightness I want quickly. If they would just recess the button or make it harder to turn on in a pocket without locking the tailcap out, it would be as close to perfect as you could get. I used to think they were ugly as well until I got my SC51 and carried it for awhile. Now I've grown quite fond of it! It grows on you after awhile. I don't even notice the looks any more...now it's about the features. I love the ability to go to virtually any brightness I want quickly. If they would just recess the button or make it harder to turn on in a pocket without locking the tailcap out, it would be as close to perfect as you could get.

    Written by LetThereBeLite on 01-15-2011 04:47 PM GMT

    Quote Originally Posted by g.p.
    Your opinion might change once you have it in your hand. I used to think it was ugly too.....
    Quote Originally Posted by Russ Prechtl
    I used to think they were ugly as well until I got my SC51 and carried it for awhile. Now I've grown quite fond of it! It grows on you after awhile. I don't even notice the looks any more...now it's about the features. I love the ability to go to virtually any brightness I want quickly. If they would just recess the button or make it harder to turn on in a pocket without locking the tailcap out, it would be as close to perfect as you could get.
    Quite possible. Many people--including myself--have a tendency to comment more positively about or favor an item one owns. Sometimes I think it's a form of self convincing one does to believe/think that a thing is better than it really is because one now owns it or have paid x amount of money for it. So I wanted to publicly put it out there that I now think it's quite ugly. Quite possible. Many people--including myself--have a tendency to comment more positively about or favor an item one owns. Sometimes I think it's a form of self convincing one does to believe/think that a thing is better than it really is because one now owns it or have paid x amount of money for it. So I wanted to publicly put it out there that I now think it's quite ugly. It's quite possible that after a while of carrying it around, I'll change my mind and start 'thinking' the appearance of the SC51 is not bad. But then, you guys can point/cite to this post and keep me honest.

    I'm sure the SC51 will impress me with its abilities/features. I'm ok with changing my mind to liking its appearances as time goes on.

    BTW, GoingGear shipped it out today. LOL. I didn't realize they shipped on Saturday. Perhaps I'll be able to get it on Monday. LOL.

    Written by Anto on 01-17-2011 03:57 AM GMT

    WOW. I recently began looking for a work/SHTF 1xaa light, decided on a D10 with an emitter swap. Then I saw the D10 Tribute, and wanted that. Now, I stumble across the SC51 and most definitely want this one over the other two. Way more efficient, and smaller OAL as well.

    What are the chances ZL is going to be offering this with a rear switch? I like the ergonomics of holding a rear clicky light vs. a side clicky one. Maybe they can streamline the head to be good looking too
    Written by g.p. on 01-17-2011 08:27 AM GMT

    Quote Originally Posted by Anto
    What are the chances ZL is going to be offering this with a rear switch?
    Slim to none is my guess. I don't think they've ever offered a light with a rear switch. Slim to none is my guess. I don't think they've ever offered a light with a rear switch.

    The side switch is much more versatile IMO. You can change modes with one hand while holding it underhand, or verhand with a pencil type of grip. A tail clicky is very limiting in my experience as I can only change modes while holding it overhand, which is tiring and awkward for lor long periods of time. Plus my thumb gets sore at the weird angles that it has to bend to change the modes on smaller rear clicky lights, especially if they have recessed switches for tail standing.

    Give it a try, you'll probably find that it's more natural and end up liking it. If not I'm sure you wouldn't have any problem getting rid of it in the marketplace.

    Written by LetThereBeLite on 01-17-2011 04:35 PM GMT

    Quote Originally Posted by g.p.
    Slim to none is my guess. I don't think they've ever offered a light with a rear switch.

    The side switch is much more versatile IMO. You can change modes with one hand while holding it underhand, or verhand with a pencil type of grip. A tail clicky is very limiting in my experience as I can only change modes while holding it overhand, which is tiring and awkward for lor long periods of time. Plus my thumb gets sore at the weird angles that it has to bend to change the modes on smaller rear clicky lights, especially if they have recessed switches for tail standing.

    Give it a try, you'll probably find that it's more natural and end up liking it. If not I'm sure you wouldn't have any problem getting rid of it in the marketplace.
    I would have to agree. I like side switches much better than tail switches. I doubt ZL will make tail switches. They know side switches work for them and they're going to stick with side switches. I would have to agree. I like side switches much better than tail switches. I doubt ZL will make tail switches. They know side switches work for them and they're going to stick with side switches.

    Written by Lite_me on 01-17-2011 06:14 PM GMT

    Quote Originally Posted by Anto
    What are the chances ZL is going to be offering this with a rear switch?
    A tailswitch also adds length. That's another reason why it's smaller. If it had a tailswitch, it'd be like most other lights. I like different. Especially when it's in a good way. A tailswitch also adds length. That's another reason why it's smaller. If it had a tailswitch, it'd be like most other lights. I like different. Especially when it's in a good way.
    Written by Anto on 01-19-2011 03:17 AM GMT

    You guys bring up some good points. I just picked up an SC51 off the MP. Can't wait!
    Written by LetThereBeLite on 01-19-2011 03:25 AM GMT

    Just received mine from GoingGear today. Interesting light. It does grow on you.

    I do like how tiny it is and it is NOT as ugly in person as it is photos.

    However, my SC51's LED is WAY off center. Of all my 4 quality LED flashlights, the SC51's LED is by far the most off center. Should I return it and have it replaced? Does anyone else have this problem? Anyone have a very centered LED?

    Written by qtaco on 01-19-2011 05:39 AM GMT

    Quote Originally Posted by LetThereBeLite
    However, my SC51's LED is WAY off center. Of all my 4 quality LED flashlights, the SC51's LED is by far the most off center. Should I return it and have it replaced? Does anyone else have this problem? Anyone have a very centered LED?
    Does it affect the beam? If not I'd let it slide. Does it affect the beam? If not I'd let it slide.

    Written by pae77 on 01-19-2011 08:02 AM GMT

    My SC50w+'s LED is perfectly centered, imo. I'd send a photo of it that shows how off center it is to ZL and see what they have to say about it.
    Written by Flying Turtle on 01-19-2011 02:34 PM GMT

    The LED in my SC50w+ is also nicely centered. I've not heard of this being a problem with Zebralights. Sorry you got a bum one.

    Geoff

    Written by RedForest UK on 01-19-2011 02:53 PM GMT

    Just be glad it isn't like mine, which is off centre and it also seems they touched it with the soldering iron at some point as it has that thin translucent layer on the dome. There's a small scratch on the reflector as well.. I bought directly from zebralight however and as it doesn't seem to affect the performance of the light I don't want to pay $10 to send it back for replacement.

    All in all it's still a nice light so I'll keep it until/if it breaks then send it back. If it doesn't ever break then it makes up for the cosmetic issues in durability I guess.

    Written by LetThereBeLite on 01-19-2011 04:07 PM GMT

    Here is a close-up of my SC51:




    You guys tell me, is that off center enough for a replacement? I tend to think so, especially for a brand new item.

    Quote Originally Posted by pae77
    My SC50w+'s LED is perfectly centered, imo. I'd send a photo of it that shows how off center it is to ZL and see what they have to say about it.
    I may do that, but first I'd like to here what other users/owners of the SC51 think. I may do that, but first I'd like to here what other users/owners of the SC51 think.

    Quote Originally Posted by qtaco
    Does it affect the beam? If not I'd let it slide.
    I'm uncertain how a perfectly centered beam looks like for a SC51. Because it's such a floody light with OP reflector, everything is smoothed out pretty well. Still, the center hot spot is not perfectly round on my light. I'm uncertain how a perfectly centered beam looks like for a SC51. Because it's such a floody light with OP reflector, everything is smoothed out pretty well. Still, the center hot spot is not perfectly round on my light.

    Quote Originally Posted by Flying Turtle
    The LED in my SC50w+ is also nicely centered. I've not heard of this being a problem with Zebralights. Sorry you got a bum one.

    Geoff
    What do you think of my photo above? Is yours like mine? What do you think of my photo above? Is yours like mine?

    Quote Originally Posted by RedForest UK
    Just be glad it isn't like mine, which is off centre and it also seems they touched it with the soldering iron at some point as it has that thin translucent layer on the dome. There's a small scratch on the reflector as well.. I bought directly from zebralight however and as it doesn't seem to affect the performance of the light I don't want to pay $10 to send it back for replacement.

    All in all it's still a nice light so I'll keep it until/if it breaks then send it back. If it doesn't ever break then it makes up for the cosmetic issues in durability I guess.
    There are a few nicks and scratches on the externals of my unit, but it doesn't bother me enough to want to return it for a replacement. I know I'm going to scratch it up in time anyway but the off center LED bothers me. It may be enough for me to ask for a replacement. There are a few nicks and scratches on the externals of my unit, but it doesn't bother me enough to want to return it for a replacement. I know I'm going to scratch it up in time anyway but the off center LED bothers me. It may be enough for me to ask for a replacement.



    Written by pae77 on 01-19-2011 04:23 PM GMT

    Too me it doesn't look like it would have that much effect on the beam, but it certainly couldn't hurt to ask for a replacement if it bothers you. It definitely looks off center to me. Be interesting to hear what ZL says about it.
    Written by RBWNY on 01-19-2011 08:07 PM GMT

    I got mine directly from Zebralight as well, which certainly appears as well centered as any I've ever seen. If the hotspot (on yours) is noticeably off center when white wall hunting at close range, then you know (as I would) that it's going to be something that sticks in the back of your mind ALL the time. Although in practical situations when lighting a large area you probably won't notice it.

    All in all... you would think they'd have better quality control to check for such imperfections before they go out to paying customers .

    P.S....................

    I TOO considered it kinda funny lookin'... but its functionality and features have caused me to overlook that from the first day I had it
    Written by g.p. on 01-20-2011 09:18 AM GMT

    Mine is off center too, but it's not quit as bad as the one in the picture. My beam looks perfect though, so I never worried about it. Actually, it's the nicest beam out of all of my lights IMO.
    Written by Lite_me on 01-20-2011 04:26 PM GMT

    I am not sure which ver of the SC51 some of you are referring to. I think RedForest is referring to the SC51w per the post in the LED forum. Guess it doesn't really matter tho.

    I ordered 2 of the SC51w's, about a week apart. The first one came with the LED off-centered. It doesn't effect the beam enough to be a problem. In fact, I tend to like it better for my use compared to the other one, which is perfectly centered... for two reasons. The tint is a little better, and the hotspot is a little larger and less defined. It probably doesn't have as much throw but illuminates a larger area in its spot at usable distances. I tend to prefer that.

    The second light that came, that has the LED properly centered, is a little warmer in tint, with a very defined hotspot circle. But, it has the clouding over ~half the LED dome like RedForest alluded to.

    I not sure at all whether or not this clouding effects the output or how much. I welcome comments on this from those with more experience.

    I am otherwise happy with the lights as they seem to perform well despite the noted defects. I'll take some pics to substantiate my findings.

    Comments welcome.

    Here is the off-centered one. The dark spot on the reflector is just a reflection.



    Here is the centered one. Note the clouding.



    Here is a closer view so as to better see the LED clouding.



    And for comparison, the other one that has no clouding, but is off-center.



    Actually, the clouding looks worse by the naked eye through a magnifying glass though. That may be understandable though too.

    So, are we being nit-picky, or should we expect better for our money? Like I said, otherwise fit & finish is good and the light performs well. I do like them!

    Written by LetThereBeLite on 01-20-2011 08:29 PM GMT

    Hi Lite_me. That's very interesting. Your photo of your off-center SC51w seems even a little worse than my off-center SC51. SZ needs better quality control. I actually want more focus and throw so the extra diffusion is a concern for me but if it's at the cost of a cloudy LED, I wouldn't like that too much either. I'd almost suggest you return both as they both seem to have defects from manufacturing. But that is of course up to you. I'm still debating whether I should return mine or not.

    Quote Originally Posted by Lite_me

    I ordered 2 of the SC51w's, about a week apart. The first one came with the LED off-centered. It doesn't effect the beam enough to be a problem. In fact, I tend to like it better for my use compared to the other one, which is perfectly centered... for two reasons. The tint is a little better, and the hotspot is a little larger and less defined. It probably doesn't have as much throw but illuminates a larger area in its spot at usable distances. I tend to prefer that.

    The second light that came, that has the LED properly centered, is a little warmer in tint, with a very defined hotspot circle. But, it has the clouding over ~half the LED dome like RedForest alluded to.

    I not sure at all whether or not this clouding effects the output or how much. I welcome comments on this from those with more experience.

    I am otherwise happy with the lights as they seem to perform well despite the noted defects. I'll take some pics to substantiate my findings.

    Comments welcome.

    And for comparison, the other one that has no clouding, but is off-center.



    So, are we being nit-picky, or should we expect better for our money? Like I said, otherwise fit & finish is good and the light performs well. I do like them!
    Last edited by selfbuilt; 03-12-2011 at 09:45 AM.
    Full list of all my reviews: flashlightreviews.ca. Outdoor 100-yard Beamshots 2011. Latest: Fenix LD60.
    Gratefully accepting donations to my battery fund.

  24. #144

    Default Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT

    Written by selfbuilt on 01-21-2011 07:15 AM GMT

    Thanks for the pics everyone. It seems clear that the centering on these lights is variable. However, as the SC51/50 series is not focused for throw, I imagine that it is not disturbing the overall beam pattern too much. Of course, that's a call only you can make - if it bothers you, by all means contact your dealer/ZL for a RMA.

    Personally though, I would be more concerned about any "clouded" emitters. That's an emitter QC problem that could potentially lead to shortened emitter lifespan and reduced output. Just personal preference again, but I wouldn't want to trust any partially damaged emitter for long-term use.


    Written by mikeyx on 01-21-2011 09:10 AM GMT

    I just ordered a flood version and I wonder how easy it will be to determine if the emitter is cloudy.

    Mike

    Written by macnoodle on 01-23-2011 08:20 PM GMT

    I don't know how you would check the emitter with the flood version, but it looks like their recent QC is not so good. Some people here already complained about decentered LEDs and sometimes cloudy LEDs, as if the emitter was partly melted during construction, or exposed to some glue or solvent. My SC51W arrived today, and this is what I found



    I have to day that I'm very disappointed! I love the light and the UI, but for the sort of money they ask, I expect better! This one will be going back for a refund. Not yet sure if I want to order another one. Currently it looks like Zebralight QC is non-existent, or very close to it.
    Written by LetThereBeLite on 01-23-2011 11:24 PM GMT

    Quote Originally Posted by macnoodle


    Wow! You have a great camera that can take very up close macro photos. My photo really pails in comparison. Wow! You have a great camera that can take very up close macro photos. My photo really pails in comparison.
    Written by spoonrobot on 01-24-2011 01:44 AM GMT

    My SC51w also has a off-center emitter as well as two small black spots on the emitter dome.
    Written by Tierdaen on 01-24-2011 07:44 AM GMT

    I haven't even gotten mine yet. Now I'm reading about these issues and will be stuck wondering if I'll even have something worth waiting for.
    Written by FroggyTaco on 01-24-2011 09:03 AM GMT

    I had a SC50 that had some cloudiness in the emitter dome. I sent a pic with questions about it to ZL & they promptly replaced the light. Life happens & this is what warranties are for.

    My understanding when you enter contract with a manufacturer in China often times they will try to lower the quality & see if they get away with so the factory makes more money. It takes some effort to keep these factories honest with regard to making stuff to the quality you ordered.

    Does anyone here honestly think ZL would intentionally damage their reputation by selling less than ideal products so they can increase profit margins 1-2%? And then lose most of that so called profit savings on freight costs for replacement lights & processing the returned lights. They likely can't resell the cloudy lights since they don't want them in the marketplace.

    My personal perspective is the ZL lights would cost at least 50% more if they were American made in a American factory. Saving that much money is a worthwhile trade off for the potential to have to deal with a return now & then.

    Travis

    Written by davidt1 on 01-24-2011 09:20 AM GMT

    What they should do is have the lights sent to their TX office first and do a quick inspection before sending the lights out to customers.
    Written by g.p. on 01-24-2011 09:47 AM GMT

    I'm sure a check and balance could be put into place without adding the time and cost of sending it to the U.S. just to have someone look at it. Not only would that add time and shipping costs, but it would add duty fees for those of us that aren't in the U.S..
    Written by LetThereBeLite on 01-26-2011 06:03 AM GMT

    Quote Originally Posted by g.p.
    I'm sure a check and balance could be put into place without adding the time and cost of sending it to the U.S. just to have someone look at it. Not only would that add time and shipping costs, but it would add duty fees for those of us that aren't in the U.S..
    I've been told by ZL that they now check the lights before it leaves the manufacturers and that they also check the lights here before they leave ZL in TX. I've been told by ZL that they now check the lights before it leaves the manufacturers and that they also check the lights here before they leave ZL in TX.

    Here is the email I received from ZL:



    Hi LTBL,

    Yes, we check it [LED] before we ship our lights now.

    The issue has been addressed in the manufacture as well.

    Best regards,

    Lillian Xu

    ZebraLight
    I'm sending my SC51 back to ZL for a replacement. I hope I get back a new SC51, not a refurbished one. I was told only to send back the light and nothing else. So that's what I'm sending back. Postage came out to $1.75 for 3 oz. I was specifically directed to send it back USPS First Class mail, NOT FedEx or UPS. Very interesting directions. I'm sure it was suggested to save the customer some money on return shipping, but if the light is lost during transit, the shipper is out the money, not the receiver. I'm sending my SC51 back to ZL for a replacement. I hope I get back a new SC51, not a refurbished one. I was told only to send back the light and nothing else. So that's what I'm sending back. Postage came out to $1.75 for 3 oz. I was specifically directed to send it back USPS First Class mail, NOT FedEx or UPS. Very interesting directions. I'm sure it was suggested to save the customer some money on return shipping, but if the light is lost during transit, the shipper is out the money, not the receiver.

    Written by XtremeLaplander on 01-29-2011 09:44 AM GMT

    Hi Folks!

    I have been reading the CPF for about 2 years and have also become a flashaholic during this time. Now I couldnīt resist anymore of joining to the community and decided itīs time for me to register to the CPF There maybe some mistakes in my language, because Iīm not native English speaking (Iīm from Finland) but try to keep up with me

    About the ZL SC-51, I have 3 of those and there definitely seems to be some lack in QC, because one of them has really badly off-center led (havenīt ever seen so bad), second one has perfectly centered led and the third has some cloudiness in the emitter.. Though the off-center led doesnīt seem to affect the beam so much, itīs just not so well defined and a tiny bit more floody, but I think itīs good because the beam looks kind of "softer" But seriously thinking my opinion is that if a light is at this price range we should expect perfect quality.
    Written by pae77 on 01-29-2011 11:14 AM GMT

    Quote Originally Posted by XtremeLaplander
    Hi Folks!

    I have been reading the CPF for about 2 years and have also become a flashaholic during this time. Now I couldnīt resist anymore of joining to the community and decided itīs time for me to register to the CPF There maybe some mistakes in my language, because Iīm not native English speaking (Iīm from Finland) but try to keep up with me

    About the ZL SC-51, I have 3 of those and there definitely seems to be some lack in QC, because one of them has really badly off-center led (havenīt ever seen so bad), second one has perfectly centered led and the third has some cloudiness in the emitter.. Though the off-center led doesnīt seem to affect the beam so much, itīs just not so well defined and a tiny bit more floody, but I think itīs good because the beam looks kind of "softer" But seriously thinking my opinion is that if a light is at this price range we should expect perfect quality.
    Welcome to CPF (as a poster) and your English is great. Welcome to CPF (as a poster) and your English is great.

    I agree with you about the quality we should expect from ZL. It sounds like they have addressed it but there probably are still a lot of lights with defects in the pipeline. I'm sure ZL would exchange any lights with defects, however, the customer usually has to pay to ship the light back to ZL or the vendor. I suppose that might be expensive from Finland.

    Written by dandism on 02-04-2011 03:19 PM GMT

    Can these lights be taken apart for LED swaps? I think an XM-L would make it brighter and floodier.
    Written by pae77 on 02-04-2011 03:25 PM GMT

    Quote Originally Posted by dandism
    Can these lights be taken apart for LED swaps? I think an XM-L would make it brighter and floodier.
    Not really, although I think someone has done it. But it's not easy or practical to take them apart. Not really, although I think someone has done it. But it's not easy or practical to take them apart.

    Written by Rej on 02-07-2011 07:13 PM GMT

    Thank you everyone for all this added info, and of course a great review Selfbuilt!

    Once again, shamefully I must admit, I've succumb to this evil disease

    I went an ordered the SC51 after reading only the review!

    My heart sunk, when I got to page 8, and I see all these off center & cloudy LED's

    So as a preemptive strike, I created a case file yesterday 'after placing my order' and sent Zebralight an email voicing my concern and what fellow CPF'rs have been seeing lately with their Q.C., and sent a link to these pictures (I hope you don't mind; Lite_Me, Macnoodle & LetTherebelite).

    I'll say their customer service is excellent; I received this email today in response;

    ---------

    Ticket status: Completed

    Department: Customer Serivce

    Subject: Quality Control for SC51 LED; Order #103xxxxx

    We'll check again before shipping out your light.

    Sincerely,

    Lillian Xu

    ZebraLight, Inc.

    8320 Sterling Street

    Irving, TX 75063

    --------------------

    Not saying much, but they did get back to me

    See what happens...order status was updated....shipping from China. which I figured since the price included free shipping.

    Written by LetThereBeLite on 02-11-2011 08:26 PM GMT

    Quote Originally Posted by LetThereBeLite
    I've been told by ZL that they now check the lights before it leaves the manufacturers and that they also check the lights here before they leave ZL in TX.

    Here is the email I received from ZL:

    I'm sending my SC51 back to ZL for a replacement. I hope I get back a new SC51, not a refurbished one. I was told only to send back the light and nothing else. So that's what I'm sending back. Postage came out to $1.75 for 3 oz. I was specifically directed to send it back USPS First Class mail, NOT FedEx or UPS. Very interesting directions. I'm sure it was suggested to save the customer some money on return shipping, but if the light is lost during transit, the shipper is out the money, not the receiver.
    Just wanted to update you guys that ZL did replace my SC51. Just received my replacement today. I don't think it's perfectly centered, but it's acceptable (like 95-97% centered). I'm satisfied with ZL's customer service. Will purchase ZL lights in the future. I'm now waiting for this SC600. Just wanted to update you guys that ZL did replace my SC51. Just received my replacement today. I don't think it's perfectly centered, but it's acceptable (like 95-97% centered). I'm satisfied with ZL's customer service. Will purchase ZL lights in the future. I'm now waiting for this SC600.

    Written by Lite_me on 02-12-2011 01:13 PM GMT

    Quote Originally Posted by LetThereBeLite
    Just wanted to update you guys that ZL did replace my SC51. Just received my replacement today. I don't think it's perfectly centered, but it's acceptable (like 95-97% centered). I'm satisfied with ZL's customer service. Will purchase ZL lights in the future. I'm now waiting for this SC600.
    Along the same line, I just ordered an H51w and ask that they check the emitter for centering and clouding. It arrived from Texas and the LED is very close to centered. Way close enough. There isn't anything I would call clouding, but there is what I would call a small smudge mark on one side of the dome. It most likely has little-to-nothing to do with output. I'm happy with the lite as the tint is wonderful. Very neutral looking with Along the same line, I just ordered an H51w and ask that they check the emitter for centering and clouding. It arrived from Texas and the LED is very close to centered. Way close enough. There isn't anything I would call clouding, but there is what I would call a small smudge mark on one side of the dome. It most likely has little-to-nothing to do with output. I'm happy with the lite as the tint is wonderful. Very neutral looking with maybe a hint of peach. I'd go on about how more versatile I think this model lite is, but it's the wrong thread.

    Written by tygger on 02-12-2011 07:27 PM GMT

    Good to know they're checking the lights before shipping. Ordered a SC51w last week. I really think I'm gonna like this light.
    Written by tygger on 02-17-2011 03:11 AM GMT

    Update. SC51w received. Perfectly centered and clean emitter. Very pleased, and I'm getting addicted to the side switch. Thanks for the great review Selfbuilt.
    Written by Lobo on 02-17-2011 09:08 PM GMT

    Two H51 received(basically the same light). The regular one is centered, the neutral white I wouldn't call centered, but since it doesn't affect the beam, I don't really care. No clouding.

    Shame to hear that they had problems with their QC and hope they get it straight. As a manufacturer Zebralight offers a lamp nobody else have.

    Written by Federal LG on 02-20-2011 07:33 PM GMT

    I donīt know if here is the correct place but...Can someone indicate me a trustable Zebralight dealer?

    Their factory website is offline.

    I intend to buy one or two ZL. I live in South America, so it has to be a dealer which works with international shipping...

    Thanks!

    Written by pae77 on 02-20-2011 08:00 PM GMT

    Quote Originally Posted by Federal LG
    I donīt know if here is the correct place but... Can someone indicate me a trustable Zebralight dealer?

    Their factory website is offline.

    I intend to buy one or two ZL. I live in South America, so it has to be a dealer which works with international shipping...

    Thanks!
    I don't know about international shipping but I've been pleased with the service and prices for ZL at Illuminationgear.com. There is also a CPF forum member discount for use with that vendor on the I don't know about international shipping but I've been pleased with the service and prices for ZL at Illuminationgear.com. There is also a CPF forum member discount for use with that vendor on the CPF specials page.

    Written by tygger on 02-20-2011 08:46 PM GMT

    Quote Originally Posted by Federal LG
    I donīt know if here is the correct place but... Can someone indicate me a trustable Zebralight dealer?

    Their factory website is offline.

    I intend to buy one or two ZL. I live in South America, so it has to be a dealer which works with international shipping...

    Thanks!
    ZL website is working now. Free international shipping. ZL website is working now. Free international shipping.

    Written by Federal LG on 02-21-2011 05:35 AM GMT

    Unfortunately itīs not.

    Since February 18 itīs offline.

    Written by macnoodle on 02-21-2011 06:32 AM GMT

    Quote Originally Posted by Federal LG
    Unfortunately itīs not.

    Since February 18 itīs offline.
    It's working for me... It's working for me...

    Written by treek13 on 02-21-2011 06:46 AM GMT

    Works fine for me, too.
    Written by Hickorystick on 02-21-2011 02:55 PM GMT

    I received my H31 from GoingGear on Friday and the LED was perfectly centered and clear. So, I went ahead and ordered an SC51 from them today. I did include a note with my order requesting them to inspect the LED before shipping.

    I don't know about international shipments, but I can say they (GoingGear) are very fast here in the US. I ordered my H31 on 2/16 and received it on 2/19. After placing my order for the H51 today, I received a shipping notice in less than 1 hour. This was all with their free shipping.

    Written by Federal LG on 02-21-2011 04:54 PM GMT

    Damn... maybe itīs my browser? Sorry for the off topic...

    Iīll try GoingGear. Thanks for the tip!

    Written by Tierdaen on 02-21-2011 11:16 PM GMT

    Site still works for me too.

    As an extra note, people who live in Chinese-speaking countries like Taiwan might benefit by including their Chinese address in their order. I ordered with my English (international) address and the shipment never came, but it came quite promptly once I sent it to them in Chinese. I suppose most CPF members won't benefit from this advice, but perhaps someone will.

    Written by Filip on Yesterday 02:20 AM GMT

    Hello, does SC51W suffer from pre-flash?

    Thank you
    Written by macnoodle on Yesterday 04:40 AM GMT

    Quote Originally Posted by Filip
    Hello, does SC51W suffer from pre-flash?

    Thank you
    Nope. Nope.

    Written by Ralls on Yesterday 10:42 AM GMT

    I just ordered a SC51w from Zebralight and I'm really looking forward to trying this light out. I was holding out for one of the new HDS EDC Tacticals, but they're taking too long to be released and I saved a hundred bucks by going with the ZL. The fact that the ZL uses a common AA is very appealing, as well, as I think that I'm going to try to make AA and AAA the only cells that I use from now on.

    I've been using a neutral Quark Tactical 123 and I'm not crazy about the UI, or the pre-flash. It did introduce me to neutral tints, though, which I'm now a big fan of.

    I'll report back here with my impressions of the light when I receive it.

    Thanks for the excellent review selfbuilt!

    Written by Tierdaen on Yesterday 12:14 PM GMT

    Quote Originally Posted by Filip
    Hello, does SC51W suffer from pre-flash?

    Thank you
    I don't have experience with lights that have "pre-flash", so I'm not entirely sure what it is. The SC51w doesn't have a bright blink before any low mode though, if that's what you're curious about. I don't have experience with lights that have "pre-flash", so I'm not entirely sure what it is. The SC51w doesn't have a bright blink before any low mode though, if that's what you're curious about.

    When you push the button, you can see that it automatically goes into the low mode, but if you release the button in less than half a second or so (like a standard click), it jumps into high mode. If you instead hold the button for longer than that half second (instructions say 0.6s), the light will remain in low mode.

    So when you want to use high mode from off, you'll probably see it "step up" the brightness from low to high very quickly. I don't think I'd call it a flash, but it is something you'll probably notice. I find it pretty inoffensive.

    Written by Rej on Unknown

    This is killing me....ordered my SC51 and zebralight shipped from China direct to me in Canada.

    Tracking number has been in 'limbo' since Feb 13th->destination Greece...ahhh
    Written by pae77 on Unknown

    Maybe nothing is wrong. Could be a data entry error, I suppose.

    On the other hand, this kind of thing is why I prefer to order my ZL's from one of the dealers who give free shipping and discounts to forum members. Usually turns out to be cheaper than direct from ZL and the customer service is usually better too. But I don't know if that applies to orders with destinations outside of the U.S. Probably not. Maybe you should contact ZL about the shipping problem. . . Perhaps they would reship if you don't receive the light w/i a certain time frame.

    Last edited by selfbuilt; 03-12-2011 at 09:46 AM.
    Full list of all my reviews: flashlightreviews.ca. Outdoor 100-yard Beamshots 2011. Latest: Fenix LD60.
    Gratefully accepting donations to my battery fund.

  25. #145

    Default Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT

    The main review post has been updated with the final review text.

    The thread discussions for the last few months have been fully restored from the search engine cache data (thank you tandem!).

    A few new posts were added to the thread before I could take care of the reconstruction - they are in post # 135-139. Below is my initial response to them.

    Please carry on!


    Quote Originally Posted by mellowman View Post
    Selfbuilt, If I read the graphs in post #1 right. This light only hits 200 lumens on 14500 bats. On eneloops its 160 lumens on H1 (80% of 200 lumens, assuming 100% relative output is 200 lumens). Is this correct?
    This review pre-dates my ANSI testing, so I don't have all the numbers off-hand. I'll take a look when I am done doing all the thread updates.

    Be advised that I have nearly 4 pages of threads to recover for this review, which I will hopefully get to tomorrow. I've left placeholders above, so any further posts won't get trapped before the recovery.
    Last edited by selfbuilt; 03-12-2011 at 09:48 AM.
    Full list of all my reviews: flashlightreviews.ca. Outdoor 100-yard Beamshots 2011. Latest: Fenix LD60.
    Gratefully accepting donations to my battery fund.

  26. #146
    Flashaholic
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Atlanta, GA, USA
    Posts
    133

    Default Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT

    Quote Originally Posted by mellowman View Post
    So you're saying there is something funny with the High mode 14500 graph?

    Seems there is something funny about calling the SC51 a 200 lumen flashlight on eneloops too.
    I noticed the same thing when selfbuilt first published his review, and I tested my SC51 when I got it back in Nov last year. Based on a bounce test and compared to a 100 Lumen HDS Hi-CRI clicky, I estimated about 160-165 Lmns on Eneloops.

    However, when I tried a NiZn I got right around 200 Lmns, and it held above 90% for 33 mins, then to 75% at 39 mins, and then dropped rapidly after that. I got 43 mins to 75% on an Eneloop. Once you hit 75%, it drops like a rock on either chemistry.

    So, total run-time is just slightly shorter on Nizn, but roughly comparable to Eneloops. I've repeated the test several times since with the same results. I don't get the full 200 Lms w/ Eneloops, but definitely do w/ the higher voltage NiZn's. I haven't the courage to risk trying a 14500, as selfbuilt did before he knew they were not recommended, but there's not much point IMO if you get the full brightness w/ a NiZn.

    Perhaps Zebralight got their max lumen rating w/ a 1.7v Lithium primary, but then used an Eneloop for the run-time rating? Pure speculation on my part on that, but I sure can't get 200 lms from any of my Eneloops.

    Still a fabulous light in any event, good enough that I don't mind using NiZn's in it at all (some folks have found NiZn's very cheap at Big Lots I hear). Yeah, it's another battery type & charger to deal with, but that's no big deal to me, and it's still plenty bright even on Eneloops.

    I do agree that it's perhaps a bit deceptive when they strongly imply you get 200 lumens on eneloops, but perhaps they have some extra-powerful ones that we mere mortals don't have access to.

    Just my $0.02...

  27. #147
    Enlightened Rej's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Stoney Creek, Ontario Canada
    Posts
    58

    Default Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT

    Thank you for getting this review back up Selfbuilt....now waiting patiently for my SC51 arrival which shipped Feb 13th, arrived in Vancouver, Canada March 2nd....still not here

    Thanks Glow worm for those detailed runtimes and brightness info, I've got some 14500's coming too...but after all these warnings I don't want to be the 1st to fry my new baby, whenever it arrives

  28. #148

    Default Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT

    The thread discussions for the last few months have been fully restored from the search engine cache data (thank you tandem!).

    Basically, all the original posts from pages 5-9 of this thread have been captured and reposted in 5 posts above (#140-144). You can now carry on with everything in place.
    Full list of all my reviews: flashlightreviews.ca. Outdoor 100-yard Beamshots 2011. Latest: Fenix LD60.
    Gratefully accepting donations to my battery fund.

  29. #149

    Default Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT

    Quote Originally Posted by mellowman View Post
    Selfbuilt, If I read the graphs in post #1 right. This light only hits 200 lumens on 14500 bats. On eneloops its 160 lumens on H1 (80% of 200 lumens, assuming 100% relative output is 200 lumens). Is this correct?
    I've double-checked my data for the ZL, and get the following ANSI FL-1 ratings (i.e. estimated lumens at 3+ mins into the run)

    SC51 on Hi1 on 14500: 245 estimated lumens
    SC51 on Hi1 on eneloop: 200 estimated lumens
    SC51 on Hi1 on L91: 175 estimated lumens

    Over the course of the run, the SC51 on 14500 stays pretty close to ~245 estimated lumens for awhile. The eneloop runs seems to level off at something closer to ~180 estimated lumens. The L91 run actually increase slightly and levels off at about the same ~180 lumen estimate.

    The put those numbers in perspective, here are the FL-1 ratings for the SC50w:

    SC50w on Hi1 on 14500: 140 estimated lumens
    SC50w on Hi1 on eneloop: 85 estimated lumens.
    Full list of all my reviews: flashlightreviews.ca. Outdoor 100-yard Beamshots 2011. Latest: Fenix LD60.
    Gratefully accepting donations to my battery fund.

  30. #150
    Flashaholic
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Atlanta, GA, USA
    Posts
    133

    Default Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT

    Thanks much for the addition of those lumen numbers selfbuilt, now we know what your 100% value actually represents. I know your ratings are much more accurate than my bounce test guesstimates.

Page 5 of 9 FirstFirst 123456789 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •