Battery Junction - Olight
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 66

Thread: Sunwayman V10A (1xAA, XP-G R5, Continuously-Variable) Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS+

  1. #1

    Thumbs up Sunwayman V10A (1xAA, XP-G R5, Continuously-Variable) Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS+

    Warning: pic heavy, as usual.



    Specifications:
    • LED: CREE R5 LED (Cool White)
    • Digital Sensor Magnetic Control system, Infinite Variable Output Switch - slightly twist the Rotator Ring from left to right for Min to Max output.
    • Max: 140 Lumens
    • Min: 1 Lumen
    • Constant current circuit, constant output
    • Uses one single AA battery (Alkaline, Lithium, or Ni-MH) (Batteries not included)
    • High quality reflector maintains great throw distance and spread, as well as perfect beam pattern
    • Aerospace-grade aluminum alloy
    • Military Specification Type III- hard anodized body
    • Waterproof, in accordance with IPX-8 standard
    • Ultra-clear tough glass lens resists scratches and impacts
    • Tactical forward click switch for momentary on
    • Tail stand capable- can be used as a candle
    • Estimated MSRP ~$85

    This is the first V-series Sunwayman light I have reviewed. Although the build looks very similar to the recent M-series light, the control ring now features a continuously-variable output selection feature (as opposed to the earlier defined levels and detents).



    Packaging hasn’t changed much. The light comes in a typical cardboard box with the usual extras - manual, warranty card, promotional insert, good quality wrist strap, pocket clip, extra o-rings and boot cover.


    From left to right: Duracell AA, Sunwayman V10A, Xeno E03, Fenix LD10-R4, 4Sevens Quark AA, Crelant 7G1, Zebralight SC51, Sunwayman L10A

    V10A:: Weight: 58.1g (no battery), Length 100.6mm x Width 23.1mm (bezel)

    The overall dimensions are pretty standard for a typical 1xAA light, if a bit on the tall side.





    Build of the V10A remains excellent overall.

    Although virtually indistinguishable from the recent M-series lights, the control ring is now smooth over the range (i.e. no detents, as no defined levels). Max range of the ring is unchanged at around 1/3 the total circumference of the light.

    The rest of build hasn’t changed. The light can still tailstand (with forward clicky switch). Square-cut screw threads remain anodized for lockout (but still only have a limited number of turns).

    The included pocket clip is serviceable, but these sorts of clip-on clips will never be as study or stable as ones that goes around the body tube.

    Fit and finish is perfect on my sample, in the classic natural color common to Sunwayman lights. Lettering is bright white and clear. As before, there is no real knurling, so gripability is toward the low side (unless you have the clip attached).



    Like the more recent M-series lights, the V10A comes with the Cree XP-G R5 Cool White. The reflector is what I would consider a light texturing/orange peel (LOP).

    Which brings us to the requisite white wall hunting . All lights are on Hi on Sanyo Eneloop, about ~0.75 meter from a white wall (with the camera ~1.25 meters back from the wall). Automatic white balance on the camera, to minimize tint differences.












    As you can see, the beam profile of the V10A is in keeping with its class. Up close, I notice some faint rings in the beam, but these are not so great as to be disturbing (MOP may have helped here).

    Scroll down to my Summary Tables and runtimes for more specifics on output.

    User Interface

    Like with the M-series lights, you turn the light on by the tailcap switch. Half-press the tailcap for momentary-on, click for locked-on

    Mode switching is controlled by the magnetic control ring. The V10A features a continuously-variable interface – you control the output level by twisting the ring. You can select your desired mode while the light is off.

    And that's it - no blinking modes, no standby modes.

    Ramping Pattern

    EDIT: this section has been updated and revised from my initial post.

    The big question is whether the output selection of the V10A is "visually linear". Generally, here on the forums, that has been taken to mean a logarithmic ramp as opposed to an actual linear ramp of outputs. The reason for this is that we perceive brightness in a non-linear way (actually, not just brightness - most of our sensory perceptions are non-linear). This is why twice the lumens doesn't appear twice as bright to us - lumens are an objective (linear) measure of output, and our subjective perceptions are not linear.

    A logarithmic adjustment has long been used to adjust for our relative visual perceptions (e.g. the stops of camera are logarithmic). And like most here, up until now I have found that all continuously-variable lights with a logarithmic correction of output generally look "visually-linear". And then the V10 came along.

    To start, here is what the V10 looks like in my lightbox. To measure this, I slowly turned the ring at as close to a constant rate as I could manage, over ~25 secs or so. My lightbox collected output readings every second, and I then plotted the relative lightbox output against the estimated degree shift of the ring (i.e. with 360 degrees being a complete turn). Note the ring only turns about 1/3 the circumference of the light, or about 120 degrees.



    I have blown-up the first third of the ramp in the inset graph, to show you that output does indeed increase over the whole ring (albeit seemingly slowly at first). Now, you can certainly argue that the output trace looks like it could be logarithmic. Indeed, if you plot it on a log scale, you get something approximating a straight line. However, the V10A does NOT subjectively appear to me to be visually-linear when handling (e.g. it does indeed spend a lot of time at the very low outputs over the first third of the ring).

    Upon reviewing the scientific literature, I see that relative power relationships have superseded simple logarithmic corrections for linearizing our sensory perceptions. For perceived brightness, the currently accepted linearization method is actually a cube root of output. For a full discussion of this - including detailed graphs and primary literature references - please see my post #3 below.

    When plotting with a cube root transformation of my lightbox's output scale, you get the following graph:



    This graph MUCH better matches what I see by eye for the V10A, compared to a logarithmic plot. I have added the LiteFlux LF5XT to the graph, as it does both a linear ramp and a logarithmic step pattern. Max output on the LF5XT on 14500 is also pretty close to the V10A on Eneloop, which facilitates comparisons. The linear and logarithmic ramps of the LF5XT also pretty closely match my relative perceptions.

    The point to the above is to show that the V10A goes to much lower outputs than any other linear or logarithmic continuously-variable light I've seen before. It also betters matches what I subjectively see across the whole range of outputs on these lights. So for now on, I will also include this type of plot (along with standard linear plots) for all the continuously-variable lights I review.

    All that aside, I actually consider this dynamic range control of the V10A to be superior to a purely “visually-linear” ramp across the whole range. The logarithmic correction allows you to exquisitely fine-tune your low output selection. And once you get into brighter outputs, the proportional increase seems quite linear.

    Current Draw

    You would hope that this wide range of low modes translates into a range of super-long runtimes. Unfortunately, the circuit overhead for this level of control is considerable, and Sunwayman estimates max runtime to be only 4 days.

    I have measured the battery current draw at the lowest output as 50mA on 1xNiMH, which for a 2000mAh Eneloop would translate into 40 hours runtime. On 1x14500 (750mAh), I measure 13mA, which would translate into just under 58 hours. So, basically 1.5-2.5 days is all you can reasonably expect for most batteries

    PWM

    I presume the light uses PWM for the variable outputs, but I was unable to detect the frequency with my setup (which means it must be in the high kHz range). It is certainly not detectable visually.

    At the highest output levels (i.e. over the last quarter turn of the ring), I was able to detect a weak signal in the near ~900Hz range on Eneloop and low 3kHz range on 14500. This seems to be some sort of circuit artifact – it definitely isn’t the PWM freq, as you could easily spot those levels with an oscillating fan.

    Testing Method:

    All my output numbers are relative for my home-made light box setup, a la Quickbeam's flashlightreviews.com method. You can directly compare all my relative output values from different reviews - i.e. an output value of "10" in one graph is the same as "10" in another. All runtimes are done under a cooling fan, except for any extended run Lo/Min modes (i.e. >12 hours) which are done without cooling.

    I have recently devised a method for converting my lightbox relative output values (ROV) to estimated Lumens. See my How to convert Selfbuilt's Lighbox values to Lumens thread for more info.

    Throw/Output Summary Chart:

    Effective November 2010, I have revised my summary tables to match with the current ANSI FL-1 standard for flashlight testing. Please see http://www.sliderule.ca/FL1.htm for a description of the terms used in these tables.





    As you can see, the V10A’s max output and throw are very consistent for this class of emitter and light, on all batteries (i.e. it is much brighter on 14500). The lowest output mode is incredibly dim - I can barely measure it in my lightbox. Simply put, you can stare into the illuminated emitter quite comfortably at the lowest levels.

    Output/Runtime Comparison:










    Note for the runs below that I set the control ring based on Eneloop output levels, so “~70%” and “~40%” don’t really apply to the 14500 runs. Rest assured, the light can go quite low on 14500 – almost as low as on standard batteries.




    Overall efficiency seems reasonably good across the range of levels tested - especially considering the continuously-variable interface and (presumed high frequency) PWM-control.

    Of course, a current-controlled light with a limited number of defined (and optimized) output levels would be expected to outperform at comparable outputs. But the V10A seems at least consistent with typical defined-level PWM-based XP-G R5 lights.

    Potential Issues

    Some of the first batch of lights had an issue with flickering at lower output levels. These were recalled, and all currently shipping lights should be flicker-free.

    Clip is basic, and may not adequately hold the light if sudden force is applied. Recommend you use a holster or the included wrist lanyard to secure the light.

    Light body is fairly smooth (i.e. low in grip).

    Relatively few screw threads hold the head onto the body.

    Estimated runtime is not as great as you might expect on the ultra-low levels.

    Preliminary Observations

    I generally like the overall design and build of most of the Sunwayman lights, and the V10A is no exception. It shares most of the same design elements as the M10A and M10R, so it will seem very familiar to CPF users. The one exception is the control ring, which no longer has defined level detents, but is smooth across a continuously-variable range of outputs.

    IMO, the dynamic range of the continuously-variable control ring is excellent on the V10A. While not consistently “visually-linear” in the classic sense, it is quite cleverly designed to allow you to access a wide range of low outputs, and then quickly access a roughly visually-linear set of high outputs. This is the first time I’ve seen this particular pattern, and it makes a lot of intuitive sense to me as I turn the ring (see the output ramp graph earlier in this review).

    The total traverse of the control ring is consistent with the earlier defined-level M-series lights, at around one third the total circumference of the light. Given the continuously-variable interface here, I would have preferred a bit of a wider range, but that’s a minor point.

    I like the lack of detectable PWM with the V10A – rare on a continuously-variable light. For this type of light, output/runtime efficiency seems quite good across the range of outputs directly measured. However, the overhead on the circuit seems fairly high, with an estimated lowest mode runtime of only 1.5-2.5 days, depending on battery source.

    I also really like the ability to use both standard batteries and 14500, with each battery type maintaining appropriate and reasonable output range control. Sunwayman has definitely gotten that right with the circuit - it provides a nice range of options for the end user.

    To get a better feel for how the interface works in practice, I will be carrying this light around as my main EDC for the next little while. I will keep you posted on my experiences!

    ----

    V10A supplied by Sunwayman for review.
    Last edited by selfbuilt; 03-10-2011 at 05:08 PM.

  2. #2

    Default Re: Sunwayman V10A (1xAA, XP-G R5, Continuously-Variable) Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS

    Quote Originally Posted by HKJ 02-17-2011 07:44 AM
    As usual a good review, but you explanation of "visual linear" is flawed. The best way to see a visual linear ramp is to make the vertical scale logarithmic, then the brightness will follow a straight line in the chart.

    My flashlight information page: lygte-info (only some of the contents is in English).
    English part with lots of outdoor beamshots and flashlight reviews: lygte-info English
    Quote Originally Posted by Kackyl 02-17-2011 08:01 AM
    Your reviews rock as always. You've cost me more than anyone else around here has. Not to take away from this review, but did you or do you plan to review the V10R?
    Last edited by Jackyl; 02-17-2011 at 08:32 AM.
    Quote Originally Posted by srfreddy 02-17-2011 08:09 AM
    The v10r is what's been holding me back from the zebralight h51w. Excellent review, but visually linear=logarithmic.
    Quote Originally Posted by selfbuilt 02-17-2011 08:33 AM
    Yes, that would be the way to represent a truly linear output ramp as "visually linear" in an output graph (since the eye sees things roughly logarithmically).But what I'm referring to here is not the representation of output ramps graphically, but rather the user's relative perception.

    It is not easy to describe in text, since the terms get confusing (i.e. a truly linear ramp appears to us as logarithmic, and a properly-construed logarithmic ramp would appear to us as linear).Most lights tend to have a linear ramp, and thus do not look "visually-linear" to us in use (i.e. the first panel in my schematic).A few lights have a logarithmic ramp, which most people consider "visually-linear" when handling (i.e. the second panel in my schematic).

    My point here is that the V10A does not produce a classic "visually-linear" (that is to say, current-logarithmic) ramp.But users complaining that the V10A is not visually-linear would be missing the point - it is not "visually-linear" in the opposite way to most lights.By that I mean the V10A spends a lot of time at the visually-low outputs.A typically linear-ramp spends little time at the visually-low outputs, while a logarithmic ("visually-linear") ramp spends a reasonable amount of time at the visually-low outputs (but much less than the V10A).

    I hope that is clear - again, it is hard to explain in words, hence my schematic to show the comparison of traditional linear/logarithmic ramps to the actual measured ramp in this case (all on linear scales).

    EDIT: Actually, I've revised my position somewhat on the V10A ramp - while I now believe it is logarithmic, it is not visually-linear at the lower outputs.A cube root power relationship better fits perceived brightness.See post #3 for a full discussion.
    Quote Originally Posted by selfbuilt 02-17-2011 09:36 AM

    I thought some actual data might help to clarify the point I was making above.Here is a graph comparing the V10A to a typical linear-ramp light (Jetbeam Jet-II IBS) and a "visually-linear" logarithmic light (Ray D1) with similar max output:



    Note the x-axis is not exactly the same thing in all cases (i.e. the V10A was turned manually, the other two ramps are over time).But both the x- and y-axes are consistently linear, which is what matters here.

    The point is to show that while the V10A is not "visually-linear" in the traditional sense (i.e. purely logarithmic), it is most certainly NOT the same as what people expect when think of a traditional linear (aka non-visually-linear) ramp.

    Sorry for the long explanation, but I have seen some complaining on the main forum that the V10A is not "visually-linear".Again, that misses the point that is in fact quite unique, and the opposite to what most non-visually-linear lights look like.It also quite functional for those who like to have a wide range of low modes.

    EDIT: Actually, I've revised my position somewhat on the V10A ramp - while I now believe it is logarithmic, it is not visually-linear at the lower outputs.A cube root power relationship better fits perceived brightness.See post #3 for a full discussion.
    Quote Originally Posted by HKJ 02-17-2011 09:44 AM
    The V10A looks closes to being visual linear, try plotting them with a logarithmic vertical scale with two decades.
    On a logarithmic scale 0.1-1, 1-10 and 10-100 would have the same size on the axis, 0 does not exist on a log scale.
    Quote Originally Posted by selfbuilt 02-17-2011 01:33 PM
    Yes, plotting the V10A outputs on log scale would make it appear visually-linear on a graph.But that is NOT what users on the CPF mean by "visually-linear" - they mean it by their relative visual perception in actual use, not log-transformed data on a chart (which is what plotting on a log scale really means).

    Part of the reason for the confusion here may be that I am using a crude lightbox to integrate the overall output.The lightbox relative output measures are a roughly good indicator of what the eye sees.If someone were simply using a lux lightmeter to measure center beam throw, then it would be appropriate to log-transform the data (since lux is non-linear scale, and light decays inversely with distance).

    But given that my lightbox approximates what the user sees, plotting actual output is the only way to accurately portray the relative differences between ramping patterns.This would be heavily distorted by artificially applying a logarithmic transform to the already-integrated output data.In fact, here is the same graph on an output log scale:



    As you can see, the V10A looks "visually-linear" on the graph.But every other light in existence now looks horribly distorted - this is not how they appear in actual use (e.g. the Ray D1 really is "visually-linear" in real use, as the programmers used a logarithmic scale to compensate for our visual system).

    Of course, using log-transformed data for illustrative purposes is perfectly valid, as long as you recognized it's been transformed. But it would be very misleading in this context of comparing lights where the output has already been integrated in a lightbox.

    Take-home message is that my lightbox has already integrated the output, so the data needs to be plotted on a linear scale for comparison purposes.This can be empirically demonstrated by looking at the earlier ramping comparison in post #5 - my lightbox reports what you would expect for the Jet-II IBS and Ray D1, given the reported output ramping method used in those cases.

    EDIT: Actually, I've revised my position somewhat on the V10A ramp - while I now believe it is logarithmic, it is not visually-linear at the lower outputs.A cube root power relationship better fits perceived brightness.See post #3 for a full discussion.
    Quote Originally Posted by HKJ 02-17-2011 01:54 PM
    For me visual linear follows a log scale. I have designed dimmers where I used the log scale and they where perfectly visual linear for me. In photo you also uses the log scale for exposure, one step is 1.4 times the brightness. RA light uses the same principle to make their adjustment visual linear.

    This has nothing to do with "integrating the output", but you will have to apply you linearization before doing the log plot.

    Logarithmic plots are often used, because it match our perception better. Try finding any plot of sound that uses a linear scale!
    Quote Originally Posted by tbenedict 02-17-2011 02:00 PM
    Great review on an exciting light selfbuilt.

    How does the twist action feel?Would it rotate in one's pocket without detents?

    Does it have any pre-flash on the low modes if last used on a high setting?

    Other that the circuit overhead and maybe the size (depending on use), this light sounds pretty darn good.Of course I have to say I wish/hope they come with a neutral option.
    Quote Originally Posted by Lobo 02-17-2011 03:27 PM

    Been looking forward to this review(noticed that you had runtimes on the V10A in your last review), thanks! As always, topnotch review. As previously mentioned in the thread, you probably have cost me more than anybody else around cpf. Very rare I buy a light without checking your reviews first.=)
    I love the design and UI of V10A, and the forward clicky and tailstanding capability. Now that it seems that it has a fair bit of throw on 14500 in this class, which was exactly what I was looking for, there isn't much to hold me back. Will complete my ZL H51 nicely.
    Quote Originally Posted by mhelskie 02-17-2011 06:19 PM
    such a great review! Hopefully, I'll have 1 before middle of next month ^_^
    Quote Originally Posted by selfbuilt 02-17-2011 07:03 PM
    No argument with your first point - I agree with you.But in your dimmer example, if you were to measure the variable outputs of your log-dimmed light, would you then plot it all on a log scale as well (i.e. take the log of the log)?

    That is what I am talking about here.If we take a light where the circuit designer has done the same thing - used a logarithmic scale for setting the outputs of a ramp to be visually-linear like your dimmer (e.g. Ray D1, Liteflux LF3XT, etc.) - and plot the outputs from my lightbox on a linear scale, we get a straight line (i.e. my Ray D1 graph in post #5).Taking the log of that gives you something that doesn't represent what you I see visually, and is not linear (i.e. the Ray D1 graph in post #7).

    In this case, taking logarithmic plots of everything that comes out of my lightbox does not match what I see, and doesn't match what the log-adjusted ramps were designed to do (i.e. produce visually-linear outputs).As such, I will stick with linear plots of my output data.

    EDIT: Actually, I've revised my position somewhat on the V10A ramp - while I now believe it is logarithmic, it is not visually-linear at the lower outputs.A cube root power relationship better fits perceived brightness.See post #3 for a full discussion.

    Originally Posted by Jackyl
    Not to take away from this review, but did you or do you plan to review the V10R?
    Sunwayman hasn't mentioned anything to me.

    Originally Posted by tbenedict
    How does the twist action feel?Would it rotate in one's pocket without detents?
    It's sufficiently stiff. I do not imagine it will rotate on its own. But I am EDCing the light now, so will let you know what I find.

    Does it have any pre-flash on the low modes if last used on a high setting?
    No signs of a preflash on either of my samples.

    Of course I have to say I wish/hope they come with a neutral option.
    Agreed, that would be popular here!

    Originally Posted by Lobo
    I love the design and UI of V10A, and the forward clicky and tailstanding capability. Now that it seems that it has a fair bit of throw on 14500 in this class, which was exactly what I was looking for, there isn't much to hold me back. Will complete my ZL H51 nicely.
    So far, it doesn't seem overly throwy in practice - but it is definitely more throwy than my ZL SC51.
    Quote Originally Posted by tbenedict 02-17-2011 08:14 PM
    I like the look of those larger holes in the tail too.I look like paracord would go through it without a split ring (less scratching).Gosh I wish I had deeper pockets.
    Quote Originally Posted by Outdoorsman5 02-18-2011 07:40 AM
    Outstanding review selfbuilt.
    Question, can the control ring be turned with one hand, or is this a two-handed operation?
    Quote Originally Posted by HKJ 02-18-2011 09:25 AM
    Plotting a logarithmic quantity in a logarithmic scale is not taking a log of a log, but showing a log in the best possible conditions. This is also very obvious in your curve, with the log scale you can plot all the points in a meaningful way, with a linear scale you have nearly half the points on the zero line.
    With the log scale it is also easy to see that this light has a very good brightness selection, except for the highest bit.

    You box does not produce a logarithmic output, to get a truelogarithmic plot, you would have to convert your lightbox readings to lumens,before plotting them in a log chart.

    You are welcome to stay with linear plot, but IMHO they are simply not as useful as a log plot and I believe that the V10A illustrates this perfectly. According to you lin plot the brightness on the V10 does not change visually before we are nearly halfway on the scale. According to the log plot is changes visually smoothly all the way, except at the brightest part of the turn.
    Quote Originally Posted by selfbuilt 02-18-2011 11:46 AM
    Originally Posted by tbenedictI like the look of those larger holes in the tail too.I look like paracord would go through it without a split ring (less scratching).Gosh I wish I had deeper pockets.
    Yes, they are quite large (but there is also only so much room around the tailswitch cover).They are also arranged exactly at 90 degree increments (would be better to have a couple closer together for a lanyard).


    Originally Posted by Outdoorsman5
    Question, can the control ring be turned with one hand, or is this a two-handed operation?


    Easily one-handed.


    Originally Posted by HKJYou box does not produce a logarithmic output, to get a truelogarithmic plot, you would have to convert your lightbox readings to lumens,before plotting them in a log chart. ... You are welcome to stay with linear plot, but IMHO they are simply not as useful as a log plot and I believe that the V10A illustrates this perfectly.
    I agree that my lightbox doesn't produce an exact logarithmic output.But nor does it produce absolutely linear output either (i.e. it doesn't linearly correlate to lumens, for example).FYI, for those interested, check out the link in the review text to my discussion of the correlational relationship of my lightbox to lumens, which seems to follow a power relationship quite well.

    At the end of the day, it comes to down to the empirical question - which plotting method bests matches the users' relative perception?

    The linear lightbox plots show a clear difference between standard current linear lights (which give an expected logarithmic pattern) and "visually-linear" logarithmic-driven lights (which give a roughly linear pattern).

    A logarithmic conversion (which would need to be applied to ALL lights) would give you a roughly linear pattern for the V10A.But it means every other light I've ever tested (including all "visually-linear" logarithmic-driven lights) are in fact all widely non-visually linear in real life.It also suggests that there is little difference between all those linear-driven lights and logarithmic-driven lights - the curves would look roughly similar.Put simply, this log-plotting option would mean that all those logarithmic-driven lights are in fact not visually-linear after all.

    On the basis of all the data I have collected over the years in this lightbox, I cannot persuade myself that the latter option is the best representation of relative perception.

    And as stimulating as this discussion has been, I think that will be (mercifully) my last comment on it.

    EDIT: Actually, I've revised my position somewhat on the V10A ramp - while I now believe it is logarithmic, it is not visually-linear at the lower outputs.A cube root power relationship better fits perceived brightness.See post #3 for a full discussion.

    Quote Originally Posted by gunga 02-18-2011 12:23 PM
    Great review.I have a few variable lights coming next week.Can't wait to try these out.I just wish they were easier to mod...
    Quote Originally Posted by selfbuilt 02-18-2011 01:27 PM
    Yeah, a neutral white XP-G R4/R5 would look nice in there.
    Quote Originally Posted by kaichu dento 02-19-2011 06:11 AM
    Make one in warm or neutral and I'll be all over it!
    Quote Originally Posted by shigeu 02-19-2011 01:34 PM
    Selfbuilt, thank you for another great review. I am a big fan of Sunwayman lights and own several. I just wish that they had better clips. I do think that I will pick up a V10A for my boss (missus).
    Quote Originally Posted by tbenedict 02-19-2011 04:15 PM
    I agree kaichu, I would be begging a pleaing with the wife if that was available.Really like how the interface sounds, the forward clicky with tailstand capability, and the ability to control the brightness before it is turned on.I looks like it might fit the hand well where some AA's are a hair short, which is fine for me since I don't typically carry a AA light in a front pocket.I guess it would have been a good alternative to a roll of quarters in my single days....

    Quote Originally Posted by IMSabbel 02-20-2011 12:04 PM
    Thanks for the review. Ordered a CR123 one.

    If its as good as it looks like, i guess a Ti AA one will join it...

    Quote Originally Posted by okwchin 02-21-2011 10:57 AM
    I strongly feel that the V10R/A is Absolutely what I call visually linear. A turn of X degrees at the low end and the high end gives me the same proportional increase in brightness. To me THIS is truly visually linear. The D10 is NOT visually linear, for example, Far from it IMO.This is my opinion, and im happy to read it this way haha.

    I also prefer the short movement of the ring, its almost on the "too much" side for me, because I can almost go from dim to bright single handed, without having to re-grip or use 2 hands. At the same time, there is more than enough control sensitivity to accurately dial a brightness, so I dont feel that it needs to be widened.

    How do you find the ring movement vs brightness. Mine has the lower 2/3 of movement changing brightness, however it reaches full brightness at 2/3 turn, and there is no change in brightness for the last 1/3 of movement of the ring. There is also noticable flicker on any level other than full, at about 10hz or so.

    I also get a doughnut ring in mine, however it is still more throwy than my other XP-G torches of this size.

    Yum
    Quote Originally Posted by selfbuilt 02-21-2011 01:32 PM
    Originally Posted by okwchin
    How do you find the ring movement vs brightness. Mine has the lower 2/3 of movement changing brightness, however it reaches full brightness at 2/3 turn, and there is no change in brightness for the last 1/3 of movement of the ring. There is also noticable flicker on any level other than full, at about 10hz or so.
    The flicker should not be there- sounds like you have one of the early ones that was recalled. I would contact your dealer for a RMA.

    As for the other point, I suspect this might be variable. My first sample (on which I did most of the testing) had no point in the ring when output wasn't changing (i.e. the full ring turn was required).The replacement sample (since the original had flickering issues on 14500) does reach max output shortly before the ring hits the end of its turn It is certainly nothing as large as a 1/3 of the ring (maybe 1/10?).I would consider 1/3 the movement of the ring to be excessive.
    Quote Originally Posted by IMSabbel 02-22-2011 01:51 PM
    Ok, my V10R arrived today.
    Damn, this is a nice light.

    The ring is smooth enough to turn with one finger, and neither it nor the threads show any kind of grit to it.

    The GUI is the most perfect possible to me: Forward clicky and logarithmic(i.e. visually linear, not the wrong definition the OP seems to be using in every review) selection ring. There is no flicker, neither while turning nor PWM noticeable (and I am rather sensitive to it).

    Build quality is excelent. The threads are really nice, and there is no fault in either anodizing or milling of the body.

    The only drawback I can see is the back of the light: While its rock-solid for tailstanding, the button is a few mm too deeple recessed, making it a bit harder than to operate than it should.

    Well, the nightcore IFE2 is also in the mail, lets see how those two compare tomorrow.
    Last edited by selfbuilt; 03-10-2011 at 11:49 AM.
    Full list of all my reviews: flashlightreviews.ca. Outdoor 100-yard Beamshots 2011. Latest: V54 Fenix LD50vn.
    Gratefully accepting donations to my battery fund.

  3. #3

    Default Re: Sunwayman V10A (1xAA, XP-G R5, Continuously-Variable) Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS

    Originally posted by selfbuilt as post #28 on 02-25-2011:

    I’ve been going through the data for all the continuously-variable lights in my collection (including so-called logarithmic/“visually-linear” ones), and I think I can revise my earlier position on the V10A (and NiteCore IFE2, which shares the same circuit). I have also decided on a better way to graphically depict the difference, based on the currently accepted model of human perceived brightness.

    To explain my original conundrum, here is a direct comparison of the V10A to a light that does both a linear ramp and logarithmic step pattern, the LiteFlux LF5XT. Max output on the LF5XT on 14500 is pretty close to the V10A on Eneloop (i.e. facilitates comparisons). Below is a graph where the y-axis is common (relative output), and the x-axis has been adjusted to show the dynamic range of each ramp (i.e. scaled to put everything in direct context for comparison).



    Although not all so-called “visually-linear” ramps exactly match the LF5XT logarithmic steps, I tend to trust that LiteFlux does indeed have a proper logarithmic-adjustment to the outputs. The V10A/IFE2 ramp seemingly looks quite different.

    But it occurs to me now that this is not the best way to present the data, as the dynamic range of all the other continuously-variable lights is too narrow (i.e. they don’t go anywhere near as low as the V10A/IFE2). A better way to plot the difference would be to compare the ramps matched for output levels, like so:



    At this resolution, it becomes clear the LF5XT’s logarithmic steps correlate very well with the V10A, for the range where the outputs are comparable. So would the LF5XT (and other lights with logarithmic ramps) also look the same as the V10A if they driven to lower outputs? They may very well. So far, on the basis of this comparison, I think you could be justified in calling the V10A logarithmic after all – it is just that that it has a much wider range of low outputs not previously seen.

    The question is, are the V10A outputs “visually-linear” over the whole range? Clearly, the V10A is not linear in the linear plot of my lightbox's output readings. So should the lightbox outputs be plotted differently - like on a log scale, as some have suggested? Here's what happens if you do:



    Well, that certainly looks pretty linear for the V10A. The problem is, that is NOT how the V10A subjectively appears to me when handling. The linear plot is more correct in that the overall output doesn't change much over the first third of the dial. Also, the log plot is not accurate as to how the light seems over the last third of the dial either (i.e. the perceived output increases quite a bit toward the end, but the log graph is flat). Plus, the log plot doesn't represent how a traditional linear ramp looks either (i.e. it makes the regular LF5XT ramp seem like the output barely changes over the vast majority of the time ramp).

    So what's the problem here - how come the log scale doesn't accurately represent the perceived brightness over the full dynamic range of these lights? Note that the presumption here has always been that logarithmic = “visually-linear”. But up until now, we only had examples with a relatively narrow dynamic range (i.e. the V10A goes much lower than other lights with a logarithmic ramp). Does this relative relationship still apply over this much wider range?

    I know it sounds like heresy - but could logarithmic not be "visually-linear" over this wider range?

    Before you all hit the roof, I’ve looked into the scientific literature on visual perception and perceived brightness (that is, the relative perception of varying light output), and found an interesting story. Although generally agreed that perceived brightness is non-linear, the method for “linearizing” it falls into two camps:

    1. The Weber-Fechner Law calculates perceived brightness as a logarithmic function. This long-standing method dates back to the late 19th century, and seems to be the prevalent view here on the forums. It also seems to still be popular with amateur astronomers (for low-light viewing of stars through telescopes), and of course many shutter bugs are familiar with it as the basis for photographic light stops. The problem is that while it serves as a good general guideline, it is known to yield wide margins of error across different levels of light output (the limitations of the method are also long-standing - see for example the 1924 paper (ref #4) in my reference list at the end of this post). The general view in the perception field seems to be that a logarithmic-based Weber-Fechner conversion has been superseded by the Stevens' Power Law.

    2. The Stevens' Power Law is a revision of the general Weber-Fechner law based on actual measurements over a much wider range of sensations (including vision). It calculates perceived brightness as a power function, with a specific power exponent derived for different types of stimuli. Although this method is relatively newer than the Weber-Fechner Law (i.e. first published in the late 1950s), it has been refined over the years under a variety of conditions, and is now the accepted method for calculating linear brightness more accurately. It is widely used for calibrating modern display devices (such as computer monitors and TVs), as well everything that plays on them (i.e. computer graphics, games, 3D modeling, etc.). The wiki link above shows you the measured power exponents for perceived brightness of different light stimuli (e.g. point source, etc.). For our purposes, the relevant comparison for the output of a flashlight beam is the perceived brightness of a "5-degree target in the dark" (i.e., with a uniformly dark background), which is calculated as the cube root of the total light output (i.e. power exponent of 0.33 in the wiki table). FYI, this stimuli choice and power exponent is also the basis for modern computer color brightness scaling.

    Also, I should note that Stevens (and others who followed) were not the first to observe a cube root relationship for perceived brightness - I found one reference going back to 1927. Most of the modern literature reports a Stevens exponent for perceived brightness somewhere between 0.25-0.35, with 0.33 (i.e. cube root) the most common. See reference #1 below for a good summary and references.

    So let's see how the lights above look when transformed to a cube root output scale.



    Now, that is a lot better, IMO. No, the V10A ramp is not "linear" on the graph, but it much better represents what I see when handling the V10A. It is also a lot better for depicting the relative perception of the LF5XT ramps.

    I realize many may not like the implication of the last 50+ years of reserch that a cube root power relationship (i.e. Stevens' Power Law) is more linear for perceived brightness that logarithmic (i.e. the older Weber-Fechner Law). But that is what the literature suggests, and fits with my relative perception of all these ramping lights. Don't shoot the messenger!

    For those interested, here are some some links to full-text academic research on the subject:

    1. Does Stevens's power law for brightness extend to perceptual brightness averaging? Ben Bauer. The Psychological Record. 2009, Spring.
    2. Perceiving the Intensity of Light. Dale Purves, S. Mark Williams, Surajit Nundy, and R. Beau Lotto. Psychological Review. 2004, Vol. 111, No. 1, 142–158
    3. A probabilistic explanation of brightness scaling. Surajit Nundy and Dale Purves. PNAS. 2002, Vol 29, No. 22, 14482–14487.
    4. The Visual Discrimination of Intensity and the Weber-Fechner Law. Selig Hecht. The Journal of General Physiology. 1924

    You can also find a general discussion in the online textbook Sensation and perception by E. Bruce Goldstein, 2007.

    In any case, I am just trying to find the best way to graphically compare the difference between light ramps. I think the cube root scale better resolves the relative perceived difference between ramping patterns, and I will be including it along with linear plots in this and future reviews of ramping lights.

    The key point remains – the V10A/IFE2 look very different from other continuously-variable lights, because of their ability to ramp to ultra-low outputs not previously seen.
    Full list of all my reviews: flashlightreviews.ca. Outdoor 100-yard Beamshots 2011. Latest: V54 Fenix LD50vn.
    Gratefully accepting donations to my battery fund.

  4. #4

    Default Re: Sunwayman V10A (1xAA, XP-G R5, Continuously-Variable) Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS

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

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

    My detailed discussion of the logarithmic vs cube root nature of perceived brightness (originally post #28) has been restored as post #3 above.

    Please carry on!
    Full list of all my reviews: flashlightreviews.ca. Outdoor 100-yard Beamshots 2011. Latest: V54 Fenix LD50vn.
    Gratefully accepting donations to my battery fund.

  5. #5

    Default Re: Sunwayman V10A (1xAA, XP-G R5, Continuously-Variable) Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS

    Any chance you are going to test the 2AA V20A? Also I noticed the specs on most of the listings indicate this light only goes down to 1 lumen.

  6. #6

    Default Re: Sunwayman V10A (1xAA, XP-G R5, Continuously-Variable) Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS

    No word from Sunwayman yet on other V-series lights.

    As for the low lumen estimate, it is clear that Sunwayman is considerably over-estimating it on my sample. The V10A produces one of the lowest outputs I've ever seen.
    Full list of all my reviews: flashlightreviews.ca. Outdoor 100-yard Beamshots 2011. Latest: V54 Fenix LD50vn.
    Gratefully accepting donations to my battery fund.

  7. #7

    Default Re: Sunwayman V10A (1xAA, XP-G R5, Continuously-Variable) Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS

    I hope they adjust their specs for their own benefit. They could even add a blurb about the ramping curve.

    After playing with a few ramping lights like the D10/D20 for a while, I can really see the low low and the ability to fine tune the low as a real selling point. Most lights jump out of the low area too quick, especially when you are already low and just looking for a little more or less.

  8. #8

    Default Re: Sunwayman V10A (1xAA, XP-G R5, Continuously-Variable) Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS

    Another great review, thank you. I love this light. I have the V10R also. It's so nice to have from one lumen up with a simple twist. You can always adjust it for exactly what your needs are, that blows me away.

  9. #9

    Default Re: Sunwayman V10A (1xAA, XP-G R5, Continuously-Variable) Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS

    Just an update - I have been EDCing this light for the last couple of weeks, and still really enjoy it. The only thing I would like is more grip to the ring (and greater visual distinction to the rest of the light).

    FYI, check out my Nitecore IFE1 review if you are in the market for an 18650-version of this sort of light. The ramp is comparable, and the ring is easier to access.
    Full list of all my reviews: flashlightreviews.ca. Outdoor 100-yard Beamshots 2011. Latest: V54 Fenix LD50vn.
    Gratefully accepting donations to my battery fund.

  10. #10

    Default Re: Sunwayman V10A (1xAA, XP-G R5, Continuously-Variable) Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS

    I bought both the nitecore IFE2 and the V10R.

    I like the sunwayman better.

    Pros of the Nightcore compared to Sunwayman:
    - Lower low
    - Higher High (noticeable)
    - Better grip on the ring

    Cons of the Nightcore:
    - SOS is NOT hidden in any way. I will inadvertably activate it any time I use the light more than a few minutes...
    - The clip is an astrocity
    - Stobe at the low-end of the wheel
    - Does not Tailstand (switch rubber is a bit too big)


    Some more comments to the control wheel: The one of the sunwayman is more intuitive. All the way right= bright, all the way left= dim, with nice logarithmic ramping in between. The turn range is short enough that you can ramp is all the way with a single twist, and the turn action is smooth as hell, so its no drawback in accuracy.

    With the Nightcore, you have to different ramping speed regions (i assume that they use a combination of current and PWM modulation, as 5 orders of magntiude range would require 10MHz+ PWM frequency for a single stage light). It stays LOOONG in the <0.1 lumen range, and then picks up very quickly. The turning range is too far... you need 2-3 turn actions to get all the way to high brightness, the sunwayman is way sexier.

    Plus the stop... complete left is strope on the nightcore, and there is a "stop" between, where the light is off. I dont like it. It creates ambiguity ("light off, or on and in stop position?"), and to get to low-low, you have to manually adjust it _just_ before the stop. You cant just turn is to the end to get low light.

    Also, the SOS mode activates whenever you go brighter-lower-brighter-lower, no matter how far each turn or at what brightness. As I like playing with the brightness, this is every few minutes.

    So while technically the nightcore would be the better light (brighter and dimmer, 18650 cells, etc), the sunwayman is MUCH more fun to use for me in practice. Just a neat little light.

  11. #11
    Flashaholic* B0wz3r's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    San Francisco Bay Area
    Posts
    1,754

    Default Re: Sunwayman V10A (1xAA, XP-G R5, Continuously-Variable) Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS

    Selfbuilt, as usual, an outstanding review.

    And, kudos on the perceptual science; I literally could not have done better myself, and I have PhD in perceptual and cognitive psychology (University of California, Santa Cruz, 2005). You presented all the relevant info clearly and concisely. The only thing I could have done differently would be to discuss some criticisms of Stevens' Law that address his use of the psychophysical reporting methods he developed, known as magnitude estimation.

    Recently, signal detection analysis methods have come to be applied to the study of these kinds of perceptual judgements, and while they have found some valid issues, they are just quibbles really, and it is a testament to Stevens' work that his principles hold up very well and work for 90% of all psychophysical judgements, and only break down when you get to the very high and low ends of the psychophysical range.

    Again, outstanding review, and simply the best "layman" (I say that without knowing your qualifications, so I apologize in advance for my assumption) science I've ever seen. Adam and Jaime got nothin' on you!!!
    What? Me? Derail a thread?

  12. #12

    Default Re: Sunwayman V10A (1xAA, XP-G R5, Continuously-Variable) Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS

    Quote Originally Posted by B0wz3r View Post
    And, kudos on the perceptual science; I literally could not have done better myself, and I have PhD in perceptual and cognitive psychology (University of California, Santa Cruz, 2005). You presented all the relevant info clearly and concisely. The only thing I could have done differently would be to discuss some criticisms of Stevens' Law that address his use of the psychophysical reporting methods he developed, known as magnitude estimation.
    Thanks for compliment. As with all my reviews, I try to be balanced and fair in my discussion of things - and the borader issues of perceived brigthness deserved similar treatment. It is definitely not my field (and it has been a long time since undergrad psych class), but I enjoyed looking into it. Of course, physics and electronics are certainly not my bag either, yet I review flashlights. My actual background is basic biomedical research.

    Not being my field, I tried to be as fair as I could to the logarithmic Weber-Fechner crowd. But it does seem clear, based on all the modern literature, that Stevens' power law is a better fit for most perceptual issues. I did notice the pyschophysical reporting issue when researching Stevens' law, and it does raise some flags for me. I do have some stats training, so I am immediately suspicious when the data better fits averaging of multiple respondents than it does actual individual ones. Reminds me a little too much of Asimov's "psychohistory" in the Foundation novels (i.e. sounded good in the 1950s, when there was much more limited understanding of these things).

    That being said, the wealth of literature since Stevens' time (and the reasonable range of exponents for non-point light sources that seem to be consistently found) suggests something around a cube-root is the best approximation we have.

    Back on the topic for the V10A, I find after EDCing it for awhile that the control ring is growing on me. Grip could still be better, but the range of motion and its fluidity work well in practice. While I initially prefered the NiteCore IFE2's longer ring traverse, I've grown more comfortable with the V10A. And I agree with the IMSabbel that the IFE2's SOS mode is too easy to activate accidentally - I will update that review.
    Full list of all my reviews: flashlightreviews.ca. Outdoor 100-yard Beamshots 2011. Latest: V54 Fenix LD50vn.
    Gratefully accepting donations to my battery fund.

  13. #13

    Default Re: Sunwayman V10A (1xAA, XP-G R5, Continuously-Variable) Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS

    I'm guessing it has to, but does the control ring work when the light is off...and is there any preflash? I could see being able to rotate the ring to the far stop to be sure it comes on real low.

    You can tell I really want one of these suckers (or the V20A).

  14. #14

    Default Re: Sunwayman V10A (1xAA, XP-G R5, Continuously-Variable) Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS

    Dont quite understand the first part of your question... the light output is depending on the ring position. Of course, it will do nothing when the light is off. But the absolute position is important, so when you turn it down while off it will turn on on low.

    I did not notice any kind of preflash on mine, even when extensively using the forwards clicky at light with the light on total low.

  15. #15

    Default Re: Sunwayman V10A (1xAA, XP-G R5, Continuously-Variable) Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS

    Quote Originally Posted by tbenedict View Post
    I'm guessing it has to, but does the control ring work when the light is off...and is there any preflash? I could see being able to rotate the ring to the far stop to be sure it comes on real low.
    Yes, as IMSabbel points out, the control ring "works" while the light is off - that is, if you turn to a specific position, it will come on at the corresponding relative output level when you click the switch. This way, you can roughly set the output level of the light before turning it on (I say roughly because there are no detents - so aside from Min and Max, you will be making a relative estimate of output before turning it on).

    And I also see no pre-flash. I have been using mine a lot over the last month or so, with no signs of it.
    Full list of all my reviews: flashlightreviews.ca. Outdoor 100-yard Beamshots 2011. Latest: V54 Fenix LD50vn.
    Gratefully accepting donations to my battery fund.

  16. #16

    Default Re: Sunwayman V10A (1xAA, XP-G R5, Continuously-Variable) Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS

    Sweet, thanks!

  17. #17
    Flashaholic AaronG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Vancouver Island, BC, Canada
    Posts
    385

    Default Re: Sunwayman V10A (1xAA, XP-G R5, Continuously-Variable) Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS

    Quote Originally Posted by selfbuilt View Post
    Yes, as IMSabbel points out, the control ring "works" while the light is off - that is, if you turn to a specific position, it will come on at the corresponding relative output level when you click the switch. This way, you can roughly set the output level of the light before turning it on (I say roughly because there are no detents - so aside from Min and Max, you will be making a relative estimate of output before turning it on).

    And I also see no pre-flash. I have been using mine a lot over the last month or so, with no signs of it.
    I was interested in this too. I think I'm going to get a V10R Ti with AA extender tube. As long as the extender isn't too pricey.

  18. #18

    Default Re: Sunwayman V10A (1xAA, XP-G R5, Continuously-Variable) Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS

    Thanks for the review!

    Is it easy to take apart the head if you wanted to do a neutral emitter swap?

    Thanks!

  19. #19

    Default Re: Sunwayman V10A (1xAA, XP-G R5, Continuously-Variable) Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS

    Good review as always! I just ordered one of these today. I hope it can blow away the Quark - AA. I already use a 14500 in the Quark, and from the graphs you posted, it appears I might get a boost with the V10A by using one as well.

  20. #20
    Unenlightened
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    1

    Default Re: Sunwayman V10A (1xAA, XP-G R5, Continuously-Variable) Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS

    Nice review. I'm looking for a single AA light to use on the boat and this looks like the ticket. The fact that you can adjust the output with one hand sells me on this light.

  21. #21

    Default Re: Sunwayman V10A (1xAA, XP-G R5, Continuously-Variable) Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS

    How is the throw on this?

  22. #22

    Default Re: Sunwayman V10A (1xAA, XP-G R5, Continuously-Variable) Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS

    Quote Originally Posted by Animalmother View Post
    How is the throw on this?
    Throw and beam distance measures are given in the summary tables in the review. As you will see, the V10A does well in comparison to most lights of this class, but I wouldn't consider any regular 1xAA light "throwy", as such.
    Full list of all my reviews: flashlightreviews.ca. Outdoor 100-yard Beamshots 2011. Latest: V54 Fenix LD50vn.
    Gratefully accepting donations to my battery fund.

  23. #23

    Default Re: Sunwayman V10A (1xAA, XP-G R5, Continuously-Variable) Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS

    Quote Originally Posted by Animalmother View Post
    How is the throw on this?
    I like it. Mainly because I'm using a 14500 which gives it a nice lumen bump. As a comparison, I also have a NiteCore IFE2 (2x CR123/1x 18650) and in outdoor situations I can't see any measurable difference in the two of them. Max brightness and throw are neck `n neck equal

    V10A's center hotspot is tighter with a slight brownish tint. More characteristic of other AA's I've seen.
    Last edited by RBWNY; 04-26-2011 at 08:54 PM.

  24. #24

    Default Re: Sunwayman V10A (1xAA, XP-G R5, Continuously-Variable) Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS

    Ok thanks guys. I have a LD10 R5 I am thinking maybe I should have gotten the R4 version now.

  25. #25

    Default Re: Sunwayman V10A (1xAA, XP-G R5, Continuously-Variable) Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS

    Well, I finally broke down and got one of these. I am really digging this thing.

    I did notice that on all levels except wide open, it has a slight ramp when turning on. Kind of like the Proton Pro, but quicker. Seems neat when on the real low settings to prevent shock. I'm guessing the circuit has to load up a little and maybe hi has a different path in the circuit.

    The only suggestions for improvement that I can see are:
    1) Adjust the clicky so it is easier to click on with a thumb in the overhand grip.
    2) Add a small notch so a lanyard won't affect tailstanding. I do like the larger holes.
    3) Neutral tints (white on mine is good, just my general preference).

  26. #26
    Flashaholic* EngrPaul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    PA
    Posts
    3,679

    Default Re: Sunwayman V10A (1xAA, XP-G R5, Continuously-Variable) Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS

    The lowest setting seems to vary from sample to sample. Probably due to variations in drivers.
    Last edited by EngrPaul; 05-30-2011 at 10:32 AM.

  27. #27
    Flashaholic* Lou Minescence's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    New England US
    Posts
    666

    Default Re: Sunwayman V10A (1xAA, XP-G R5, Continuously-Variable) Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS

    I didn't see any mention about a low battery warning during the review. My light flashes three times to warn of a low battery. It will draw my IMR 14500 down to 2.2 volts before flashing begins.

  28. #28

    Default Re: Sunwayman V10A (1xAA, XP-G R5, Continuously-Variable) Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS

    Quote Originally Posted by Lou Minescence View Post
    I didn't see any mention about a low battery warning during the review. My light flashes three times to warn of a low battery. It will draw my IMR 14500 down to 2.2 volts before flashing begins.
    Interesting, I had noticed that on standard cells in my original sample (but don't have IMR 14500 to test - always used protected 14500s). Could be a new feature.

    FYI, one thing I did ntotice on my sample is the light flickers (think high-frequency strobe) on alkalines just before the cell is fully exhausted (i.e. well below 1% original output). This strobe effect stops if you dial down the output to a lower level (at least for awhile). Not sure if it happens on other cells - I stop NiMH long before then (bad for the batteries to let them drain that far), and use only protected Li-ions.
    Full list of all my reviews: flashlightreviews.ca. Outdoor 100-yard Beamshots 2011. Latest: V54 Fenix LD50vn.
    Gratefully accepting donations to my battery fund.

  29. #29

    Default Re: Sunwayman V10A (1xAA, XP-G R5, Continuously-Variable) Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS

    Quote Originally Posted by Lou Minescence View Post
    I didn't see any mention about a low battery warning during the review. My light flashes three times to warn of a low battery. It will draw my IMR 14500 down to 2.2 volts before flashing begins.
    No flickering/flashing on mine. Have always used protected 14500's. Was using it yesterday when it just "went to black". Had Trustfire (flame) cell in it. Voltage around 2.8

  30. #30
    Enlightened Budda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Italy
    Posts
    52

    Default Re: Sunwayman V10A (1xAA, XP-G R5, Continuously-Variable) Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS

    I own a RRT-0 with infinite brightness system, which I believe has almost the same circuit of this light.
    in both lights the biggest complain for me is the lack of efficiency of the driver at the lowest modes and in standby.
    My trusted 47 123^2 with R2 runs at 0.3 OTF lumen for months, this lights runs on a lowest level for less than half week.
    And the parasitic drain in standby mode is too high. it happens often to me that I leave the light in standby and forget to switch off... than the next day I need a new battery.

Page 1 of 3 123 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
  •