GryphonQ
Newly Enlightened
- Joined
- Jan 17, 2009
- Messages
- 148
The man himself suggested I post the results of my evening spent programming my Tri-V and Tri-V2. So, what the heck. Someone might find it useful.
There were three sets of considerations that had to be...uh, considered for each light:
a. My intended use
b. The tints of the emitters on each version
c. The technical parameters for each version
So let's look at each of these.
Note: I didn't bother breaking out the rechargeables for this, just primaries. I don't know whether there would be any difference. I get the impression that the overdrive might be brighter (and hotter) but I probably won't get around to testing this any time soon due to not knowing where I put the damn AW's.
A. INTENDED USE
My modes of use for a 3-emitter light with 3 different tints and beam patterns are basically as follows:
B. TINTS
Dave has commented on this before, but the tints of the emitters on the two versions differ greatly, at least in terms of flood (mule) and flood + reflector. I happen to be a fan of neutral tint, so that's the version I got of the Tri-V2. I can't remember whether my Tri-V (V1) is neutral or cool and it doesn't really matter for the rest of this. But tints do tie in in one area: as Dave has remarked, the flood + reflector combination on the Tri-V2 is a creamy, pretty blend, whereas their tints and coverage areas clash by comparison on the V1. I never noticed this before because I never programmed the V1 before, and its defaults didn't have any combos. Well, now I see why. It's almost sad that I've compared them, because it makes the V1 that much harder to go back to, in terms of combining emitters, at least; however, the V1 has certain advantages such as a brighter (and I think also floodier) mule by itself.
Anyway, the quality of the blend of flood + reflector impacted my choices in the end, and was the main reason my programming choices were different on the two versions. The other reason for the differences was the different maximum power settings per emitter/combo on the two versions.
C. TECHNICAL PARAMETERS
I was going to say limitations, but that's not the right word. These emitters and battery specs are what they are, and there are good reasons to use them at the low end as well as the high end of their power/brightness ranges.
I had to dig around quite a bit for information on the maximum normal and maximum overdrive settings (100% duty cycle limit vs. programming limit) for each emitter and combination of emitters on the two version of the Tri-V. So I'll save you some time and reproduce the specs here, pasted and edited from posts by Data:
Tri-V1
100% Duty Cycle Limits (Max Normal):
Programming Limits (Max Overdrive):
Tri-V2
100% Duty Cycle Limits (Max Normal):
Programming Limits (Max Overdrive):
MY SELECTIONS
On each line, I've noted the experience of moving from the previous position to the current position. I wanted the increments to feel smooth, not bounce around as they do with the defaults on the V1. Not that that's a bad thing, and the bouncing around thing is sort of cool in its own way, but I liked the smooth transitions of these particular settings. And they also corresponded to the way I use lights: either very dim or as bright as I find reasonable, with some medium in between mostly because there's 6 positions.
Tri-V
Tri-V2
CONCLUSIONS
I've had the Tri-V (V1) for years without ever considering bothering learning to program it, but with the Tri-V2 my instinct was to program it to UNDO the blend of flood + reflector in its defaults. I found I was wrong about that--they look good together--though I did end up reducing the number of flood + reflector levels from three to two. But I'm glad I spent the time to do this, because I really like the final result. It makes a singularly great light even better, at least for my purposes.
The big surprise for me, other than the qualitative flood + reflector differences between the V1 and V2 lights, was how much I liked the reflector + aspheric, and how useful I think it is. I never really liked the aspheric on its own, and it felt wasted, but the combination of spot and super-spot really clicks.
Incidentally, I did enable lockout on both lights, and I think it's very important to do that with a light that's capable of setting your pants on fire.
There were three sets of considerations that had to be...uh, considered for each light:
a. My intended use
b. The tints of the emitters on each version
c. The technical parameters for each version
So let's look at each of these.
Note: I didn't bother breaking out the rechargeables for this, just primaries. I don't know whether there would be any difference. I get the impression that the overdrive might be brighter (and hotter) but I probably won't get around to testing this any time soon due to not knowing where I put the damn AW's.
A. INTENDED USE
My modes of use for a 3-emitter light with 3 different tints and beam patterns are basically as follows:
- Low-power flood
- Medium-power flood
- Medium-power spot
- High-power spot
B. TINTS
Dave has commented on this before, but the tints of the emitters on the two versions differ greatly, at least in terms of flood (mule) and flood + reflector. I happen to be a fan of neutral tint, so that's the version I got of the Tri-V2. I can't remember whether my Tri-V (V1) is neutral or cool and it doesn't really matter for the rest of this. But tints do tie in in one area: as Dave has remarked, the flood + reflector combination on the Tri-V2 is a creamy, pretty blend, whereas their tints and coverage areas clash by comparison on the V1. I never noticed this before because I never programmed the V1 before, and its defaults didn't have any combos. Well, now I see why. It's almost sad that I've compared them, because it makes the V1 that much harder to go back to, in terms of combining emitters, at least; however, the V1 has certain advantages such as a brighter (and I think also floodier) mule by itself.
Anyway, the quality of the blend of flood + reflector impacted my choices in the end, and was the main reason my programming choices were different on the two versions. The other reason for the differences was the different maximum power settings per emitter/combo on the two versions.
C. TECHNICAL PARAMETERS
I was going to say limitations, but that's not the right word. These emitters and battery specs are what they are, and there are good reasons to use them at the low end as well as the high end of their power/brightness ranges.
I had to dig around quite a bit for information on the maximum normal and maximum overdrive settings (100% duty cycle limit vs. programming limit) for each emitter and combination of emitters on the two version of the Tri-V. So I'll save you some time and reproduce the specs here, pasted and edited from posts by Data:
Tri-V1
100% Duty Cycle Limits (Max Normal):
- Flood = 1000
- Reflector = 1000
- Aspheric = 1000
- Flood + Reflector = 1000
- Flood + Aspheric = 1250
- Reflector + Aspheric = 1250
- All Three Together 1400
Programming Limits (Max Overdrive):
- Flood = 2000
- Reflector = 1500
- Spot = 2000
- Flood + Reflector = 3000
- Flood + Aspheric = 3000
- Reflector + Aspheric = 2000
- All Three Together = 3000
Tri-V2
100% Duty Cycle Limits (Max Normal):
- Flood = 800
- Reflector = 1000
- Aspheric = 1000
- Flood + Reflector or Flood + Aspheric or Reflector + Aspheric = 1250
- All Three Together = 1400
Programming Limits (Max Overdrive):
- Flood = 1500
- Reflector = 1500
- Aspheric = 2000
- Flood + Reflector = 2500
- Flood + Aspheric or Reflector + Aspheric = 2000
- All Three Together = 3000
MY SELECTIONS
On each line, I've noted the experience of moving from the previous position to the current position. I wanted the increments to feel smooth, not bounce around as they do with the defaults on the V1. Not that that's a bad thing, and the bouncing around thing is sort of cool in its own way, but I liked the smooth transitions of these particular settings. And they also corresponded to the way I use lights: either very dim or as bright as I find reasonable, with some medium in between mostly because there's 6 positions.
Tri-V
- Flood 5 - A good default for minimal light and in case it gets turned on by mistake
- Flood 500 - Ratchet up from 5% to 50% power flood
- Flood 1000 - Ratchet up from 50% to 100% power flood - I would have added reflector here, but the tints clash, so I went a different way on this light
- Flood + Reflector 1000 - Add medium reflector spot without noticeably dimming flood
- Reflector 1000 - Remove flood and jack up reflector spot to maximum
- Reflector + Aspheric 2000 - Add the aspheric's super spot without noticeably dimming reflector spot. This is the only overdrive mode I can see a use for: a quick blast of concentrated spot. It doesn't seem to heat things up too badly.
Tri-V2
- Flood 5 - A good default for minimal light and in case it gets turned on by mistake
- Flood 400 - Ratchet up from 5% to 50% power flood. Note that 50% = 400 as opposed to 500 on the V1
- Flood + Reflector 800 - Add medium reflector spot without dimming flood.
- Flood + Reflector 1250 - Jack up reflector flood + spot to maximum.
- All Three Together 1400 - Add aspheric spot without noticeably dimming the others. I can't say this is a useful mode exactly--well, maybe for blinding a home invader while exposing his accomplices in the shadows--but since the tints don't clash on this version of the light, and since I turned out to really like the combination of reflector + aspheric for spot, I figured what the hell. My second choice for this position would be reflector 1000 (100%). My third choice would be to put flood 800 (100%) in P3 and move the current P3 and P4 to P4 and P5.
- Reflector + Aspheric 2000 - Remove flood while jacking up both reflector spot and aspheric super spot. This is the only overdrive mode I can see a use for: a quick blast of concentrated spot. It doesn't seem to heat things up too badly.
CONCLUSIONS
I've had the Tri-V (V1) for years without ever considering bothering learning to program it, but with the Tri-V2 my instinct was to program it to UNDO the blend of flood + reflector in its defaults. I found I was wrong about that--they look good together--though I did end up reducing the number of flood + reflector levels from three to two. But I'm glad I spent the time to do this, because I really like the final result. It makes a singularly great light even better, at least for my purposes.
The big surprise for me, other than the qualitative flood + reflector differences between the V1 and V2 lights, was how much I liked the reflector + aspheric, and how useful I think it is. I never really liked the aspheric on its own, and it felt wasted, but the combination of spot and super-spot really clicks.
Incidentally, I did enable lockout on both lights, and I think it's very important to do that with a light that's capable of setting your pants on fire.
