HDS Systems EDC # 16

[ironhorse]

If you really can't see any difference between a standard cool white emitter and a neutral/warm high CRI then the high CRI Rotary is unlikely to be of any benefit to you.

That's kind of what I thought.
Is that common or am I odd?

[THE_dAY]

That's kind of what I thought.
Is that common or am I odd?

What LED is in your Sundrop XRU?

If it's the Nichia 083 HCRI, I think its closer to a cool white color ~6000K. Maybe thats why you didn't notice the difference?
Try comparing your Sundrop to the other lights when viewing skin tones or wood. This is where the HCRI will shine and give you better color rendition.

Regardless, you should clearly notice the difference from the HDS HCRI since it's advertised as 3700K.

This is where preference comes in, if you like the cool white tints then the HCRI HDS might not be a good choice since the tint will look warmer.
But if you are looking for something warmer then the HCRI HDS should fit the bill.

[kaichu dento]

I've checked my order confirmation at least 4 times to make sure I hadn't ordered the wrong thing.

"high CRI 120 lm, uc glass, svr bzl, blk bdy, 123, raised btn"

Yep, that's what I wanted. Better check it again, though, just to make sure.

Hey, are you sure about your order? Can you check it one more time please?

That's kind of what I thought.
Is that common or am I odd?

The previous post by TheDay is spot on and just to be sure you may want to wait until we get some beamshot comparisons coming in before making a decision. If you prefer cool tints then it's probably better that you go with the standard version, but reds and other warmer colors is where you'll notice the difference with the hCRI emitters.

[ironhorse]

Yes it was the Nichia 083 HCRI.
I no longer have it.
I tried it inside outside you name it. I honestly couldn't tell any difference in the colors or tints.
I didn't dislike it, it just made no impression on me at all.

[kaichu dento]

For what it's worth I didn't like my first Haiku or my Sundrop XR-U enough to keep them, but my Nichia 119 Haiku is a different story.

At any rate it's sounding like you may be just as happy, if not happier with the standard tint.

[TyJo]

Any news on what emitter is being used on the High CRI? The pictures earlier in this thread a couple pages back looked like the XP-G to me...

[excfenix]

Any news of an XM-L rotary?

[the.Mtn.Man]

Regardless, you should clearly notice the difference from the HDS HCRI since it's advertised as 3700K.

4000K, actually. Here's the description listed on the custom order page:

"The LED produces a calibrated 120 lumens with a color temperature of roughly 4000°K. The exceptionally high color rendering index (CRI) of over 90 can render colors more accurately than conventional cool white LEDs."

Although it does say "roughly 4000K", so I suppose if the estimate is especially rough then it could include 3700K.

[the.Mtn.Man]

That's kind of what I thought.
Is that common or am I odd?

Some people physically can't tell the difference. Others simply don't care and can't be bothered to even try. I have no idea how common either one is. Then, of course, there are those who can tell the difference and prefer one or the other.

My wife, for instance, can't really tell the difference between cool white and warm high CRI other than she thinks that cool white looks brighter, which she prefers. She's also of the opinion that running a light at anything other than its maximum setting is a waste, so she'll borrow my Rotary to look for the remote under the sofa and crank that bad boy up to a full 200 lumens.

[fnj]

The HDS has a fantastic runtime on a very low,low i haven't got the exact figures on hand but they're very efficent.

Well, that USED to be the case, but looks like no more. HDS EDCs from before the Novatac era were good for from 30-50 days on ultra-low (0.07-0.3 lumens). I think the post-Novatac Ra era HDS models were somewhat less efficient on ultra-low. The present clicky models are only spec'ed at 0.3 lumens for 128 hr on the HDS site. That's only a little over 5 days. The rotaries aren't even run-time spec'ed at all on ultra-low, but are likely even less.

I must admit I am baffled by this design turn. Other manufacturers now blow away the clicky in run-time on ultra-low, not only for 1xCR123 models, but even for 1xAA models.

[the.Mtn.Man]

A bit of housekeeping here just to note that I was way off on my prediction (quoted below). When Henry said "soon", this time he really meant soon!

Henry's reply:
"The CCT is roughly 3700K. We do not advertise a specific LED. Yes, we will update the Custom pages to allow a high CRI option soon.
Henry."

I'm telling you, the man doesn't know the meaning of the word "soon". Look for another announcement sometime in July promising that they'll be released within the month with an actual release in late-October.

[the.Mtn.Man]

The present clicky models are only spec'ed at 0.3 lumens for 128 hr on the HDS site. That's only a little over 5 days. The rotaries aren't even run-time spec'ed at all on ultra-low, but are likely even less.

I think that 128-hours is conservative, but at any rate, someone in one of the previous threads did a runtime test with the Rotary at 0.08 and got a solid 150-hours out of it.

I must admit I am baffled by this design turn. Other manufacturers now blow away the clicky in run-time on ultra-low, not only for 1xCR123 models, but even for 1xAA models.

As I understand it, it was a trade-off for making the lights more efficient on the highest setting which now features almost double the runtime of previous models.

But still, 150-hours on low is not bad when you consider that's still weeks worth of light if used for a couple of hours a day.

[pjandyho]

Placed my order yesterday, I looked at it 20x to make sure I wasn't readying the site incorrectly. I believe the description said it was approximately 4000k. I've been waiting for this opportunity for a long time!

I've checked my order confirmation at least 4 times to make sure I hadn't ordered the wrong thing.

"high CRI 120 lm, uc glass, svr bzl, blk bdy, 123, raised btn"

Yep, that's what I wanted. Better check it again, though, just to make sure.

Oh yes I did check mine many times because I am placing the order on behalf of my friend too so we could share the $40 shipping. Can't be responsible for a wrong order.

[fnj]

In my opinion 128 hr (or 150 if you must) on ultra-low is unacceptable (to me as one user). It is 1/5 to 1/10 of what it should be. It is true that performance on high is better than ever. It is maybe 30-50% better than competitors. But a marginal gain at the top end is not worth sacrifing 9/10 of the performance on ultra-low. It's a masterpiece of engineering and workmanship, a wonderful light for a lot of people, but just of no interest at all to fans of ultra-long-at-ultra-low.

[pjandyho]

but just of no interest at all to fans of ultra-long-at-ultra-low.

I am not saying that I am against people asking for super long run time on lowest output, but I really can't understand this exaggerated mentality, or rather obsession about super long run times. Personally, I couldn't see myself running a light on low low for more than 150 hours. And even if I really wanted to do that, I would rather pack a keychain light than carry such big light to run at that meager output for weeks or months. Even if a disaster were to strike, you are better off packing extra batteries than depending on ultra long run times. Am I missing something here?

[nbp]

In my opinion 128 hr (or 150 if you must) on ultra-low is unforgiveable and unacceptable. It is 1/5 to 1/10 of what it should be. It is true that performance on high is better than ever. It is maybe 30-50% better than competitors. But a marginal gain at the top end is not worth sacrifing 9/10 of the performance on ultra-low. It's a masterpiece of engineering and workmanship, a wonderful light for a lot of people, but just of no interest at all to fans of ultra-long-at-ultra-low.

I love hyperbole and far-reaching generalizations; most entertaining.

I'm am truly curious what light IS of use to you and which you turn to when you need four billion hours of runtime continously with no hope of a battery change?

[the.Mtn.Man]

I agree that the criticisms are exaggerated. The way some people act, you'd think the new HDS lights have the run time of a paper match.

My question is whether or not they want ultra-long run times for practical reasons or for bragging rights? Has anybody here ever been in a situation where they genuinely needed a flashlight that could run for a straight month on a single battery? If we're talking about an apocalyptic scenario then I think a long running flashlight would be the least of your worries.

[TyJo]

I think that 128-hours is conservative, but at any rate, someone in one of the previous threads did a runtime test with the Rotary at 0.08 and got a solid 150-hours out of it.
As I understand it, it was a trade-off for making the lights more efficient on the highest setting which now features almost double the runtime of previous models.

But still, 150-hours on low is not bad when you consider that's still weeks worth of light if used for a couple of hours a day.

I got between 6-7 days (~150 hours) on the lowest setting on the rotary (0.08 lm). IIRC gearmonky did some tests and the runtimes at the low levels aren't a whole lot different from each other. Here is the spreadsheet he did.

I'm really wondering about this emitter. It's roughly 4000K or 3700K, depending on which HDS page you look at, so that would indicate that it is not the XP-G or XP-E, but in the pictures earlier in this thread that is what the emitter looks like. I'm thinking either the color temp is incorrect on the HDS website, HDS got some brand new, rare tint bins/emitters from CREE (that data sheets don't even exist for yet), or HDS isn't using the XP-G/XP-E. Something doesn't add up, and Henry supposedly said it was a CREE emitter?

[P_A_S_1]

In regards to the shortened runtimes of the newest production HDS lights I don't think criticism is unwarranted. The previous generations have been praised for their extended runtimes on low. The newest versions trade this off for better performance at the other end. If the trade off was not as dramatic I don't think you would hear too many complaints but dropping from 2 weeks to 5 days at the .033 lm setting is big. As for the practical use of longer runtimes at those levels, IDK, for campers and caver I would think it's important.

I'm curious as to what the difference is between the lights that results in the runtimes being longer/shorter at either end. Is it hardware or software? And if it was software would it be possible to have the option of favoring lower output efficiency when building a light or as a built in option in the menu?

[AZPops]

I guess run times aren't that important to me, cause I throw in a freshly charged AW every other day. And I only use the low/low when I check the dogs water bowl! So if you ask me what the run times are on any of my lights, ... Well your guess is as good as mine!

[TMCGLASSON36]

I guess run times aren't that important to me, cause I throw in a freshly charged AW every other day. And I only use the low/low when I check the dogs water bowl! So if you ask me what the run times are on any of my lights, ... Well your guess is as good as mine!

I do the same thing. I like knowing that I have a full charge when I leave the house. My dog usually lets me know when she needs water.LOL!!

[Blades]

If I need extended run time on low(How low do we consider low?), I have Safe-Light(http://www.palights.com/) which are "on" for two years. Do I EDC one? Nope. I carry my Rotary(MiNi123 as an extra battery carrier) and a Peak Logan QTC as a back-up.

I would think that in the next few years as more efficient LED's are developed, a HDS light could be made with a month long "low"(.03 lumens?), and a three hour "high"(300 lumens?), or maybe a month long "high", and a two year "low".
Who knows, I am still wishing for night vision contact lenses so I won't need a flashlight anymore.

[fnj]

I love hyperbole and far-reaching generalizations; most entertaining.

I'm am truly curious what light IS of use to you and which you turn to when you need four billion hours of runtime continously with no hope of a battery change?

I really don't want to degenerate a useful thread by going off on a tangent, but I probably should respond since you ask. First, the only hyperbole is yours (billion hours?), as my post merely expressed mostly personal preference, and I suppose some slight criticism. I can get very approximately two weeks to a month of run-time on ultra-low on (1) my Zebralight SC-50+ (1xAA), (2) my ZL SC-51c (1xAA), (3) my several first generation HDS EDC's including but not limited to a U60XRGT and a B42 (1xCR123), (4) my Novatac EDC 120P (1xCR123), and (5) my 4Sevens Quark123 (1xCR123). If I want 80 days of run-time, I can use my ZL SC600 (1x18650). The latter is only 1/2" longer, 3/16" greater diameter, and not noticeably heavier than my Ra Titanium Clicky.

The first LED flashlight I ever bought was an HDS EDC U60XRGT about six years ago. It remains a prized possession, and is still very useful.

[lateralus180]

I just placed an order for a custom light. High CRI 120 emitter, black bezel cap, black decorative clip, regular glass, flush button and executive UI. I sent Henry an email this morning to ask a few questions and how long the turnaround time would be and he told me about 4 weeks. That may be a little conservative because I think people were saying 2-3 weeks. Maybe it's because this is a custom light? Either way, I am pretty excited.

[Shooter21]

i too prefer longer runtimes unfortunately i missed out when the older hds lights had super long runtimes. As the saying goes id rather have a dim light for a long time rather than a bright light for a short time.

[the.Mtn.Man]

I don't know why custom lights have such a long turn around time. Surely they're not assembling each custom order from scratch. Seems like they could have a stock of high CRI heads calibrated and ready to go and just screw the appropriate parts together when an order comes in.

Still, a month? Yeesh. Oh well, I've been waiting for the high CRI Rotary since early last year, so I guess another month isn't so bad (and hopefully it is just a month and won't stretch out to months like some of the horror stories we've heard).

[kaichu dento]

I really don't want to degenerate a useful thread by going off on a tangent...

Then don't.

Every time someone starts a post by saying they don't want to do something, then continue to do what they said they didn't want to do, it makes me suspect that the opener was just a formality which may have just as well stated that what they actually intend to do is...

It was the "unacceptable and unforgivable" part begged a rejoinder and you got it. Now that you've already had your say, and to prove your good intentions, maybe we can get back to the lights.

I wish all my lights could have all the best features of each other packaged together, and while I, like FNJ and many others find certain aspects of the Clicky to be less than we wish for, it's still my most balanced package as far as a single light goes and every light that beats it in one category, is bested by the Clicky in another.

Absolutely, and without a doubt, would not mind longer run times at all, but since I use rechargeables and only have to change out every couple months, I'm fine with run times as they are. However, those who are still on primaries would definitely benefit from higher efficiencies and I guess it's the market place and competitive edges that will determine future winners in the hearts of everyone here.

[the.Mtn.Man]

id rather have a dim light for a long time

150-hours is still a pretty long time. If used for 2-hours a day, that's a month and a half of run time on a fresh cell, and I dare say that most people use their flashlight for minutes a day on average as opposed to hours, so we're talking months of practical use.

[Maxbelg]

Ordered a High CRI clicky yesterday (black bezel, decorative clip, LE programming, flat tailcap). I can't wait to compare it to my current high CRI Clicky (legacy, SSC). I have a sapphire glass currently but ordered UCL. I might swap it out but does anybody know what the lumen-loss is for coated sapphire versus coated UCL?

[choombak]

In an email exchange a few weeks ago, Henry mentioned the high-CRI emitter will be an XP-G.