2007 Inova T3's have arrived! Preview with beamshots.

[ginaz]

whoops

 

[flashy bazook]

the battery tray in the T5 will also not be an improvement - as Doug (quickbeam) likes to say, yet another thing that can go wrong!

 

[Illum]

This is not an improvement. TIROS was what make the T series great. Inova has taken what was a great light and turned it into yet another aluminum pipe with a mirror on one end.

finally someone who also likes TIROS...
cheers to you bud

 

[MattK]

I'll wait to see it before I pass judgement - the guys at Inova seem to think it's cool....

QUOTE=flashy bazook]the battery tray in the T5 will also not be an improvement - as Doug (quickbeam) likes to say, yet another thing that can go wrong![/QUOTE]

 

[pilou]

finally someone who also likes TIROS...
cheers to you bud

Where were all you folks when TIROS got regularly bashed, spit on, and dragged through unspeakable dirt on a regular basis on CPF :lolsign:

 

[prof]

Where were all you folks when TIROS got regularly bashed, spit on, and dragged through unspeakable dirt on a regular basis on CPF :lolsign:

I like the tight beam also. Personally I prefer lights with tight beams and beamshapers...lets me pick what I need.

 

[Illum]

Where were all you folks when TIROS got regularly bashed, spit on, and dragged through unspeakable dirt on a regular basis on CPF :lolsign:

what dirt? hadnt heard of it:lolsign:

 

[Blindasabat]

I argued the same thing about the KL1/new SF L1.

I like the tight beam also. Personally I prefer lights with tight beams and beamshapers...lets me pick what I need.

 

[woodrow]

Thanks for the review. I for one HATED the trios optics and will have to pick up the new t3 and possibly the t5 when they come out.

 

[greenlight]

I liked the fact that Inova was making lights that had a unique factor to them. Let's see if they do anything else that's innovative.

 

[ensile]

not to mention they threw like no tommorrow for the power they were running, the t1 tiros does a great job for something of it's size, all they needed to do was shove cree's into them and there'd be enough light coming out no1 would think twice about a sidespill or flood or whatever the waste of light is called.

 

[MattK]

TIROS made a ton of sense when LED's maxxed out at 50L and optics were required to have useful throw. IMHO that need has been relegated to history by the advent of high output emitters.

To the average flashlight user spill is NOT a waste of light. It's nice to throw a beam but it's also nice not to trip on a tree root.

 

[ensile]

agreed. the optics did a nice job of taking, say.. maybe a dud cree dome placement from an ugly and wierd donut skid mark into something you wouldnt even know existed. I reckon optics could have been designed to give spill too.. precision design, instead of OP style or dull machined aluminium cones, which can't be good for light transmission. I welcome the newer efficiencies, i welcome the lumens, i just think the answer to many problems lie in well designed light transport systems, whilst the tiros was not perfect, i never stated that, but they were on the road to a place where i think LED technology needed to go.. imagine a tiros tube with a wedge or some kind of ring of semi opaque white or frosted outer bevel to give a controlled spill AND a precise spot.. ? it's all i'm saying.