E2DL Spread in 2008 catalog

[MorpheusT1]

Why the negativity...
:thinking:


The E2D has always been a Defender flashlight.
There are other Surefires to choose from if your country forbids you to protect yourself.

 

[Kiessling]

Gotta love the "behind the scenes" shots. Thanx for posting !! :thumbsup:

 

[Monocrom]

Love the pic.... from a purely artistic point of view.

From a self-defense point of view.... not so much.
Not sure which weapon the Attacker is holding. It looks more like a semi-auto handgun than a knife. Either way, that girl is screwed. Let's hope he just wants her cash; and not "something else."

Still, the pic itself is absolutely beautiful.

BTW, that street looks familiar. Did the shoot take place in NYC, near Soho?

(Well, I feel a bit silly. Just noticed where you're from).

 

[paulr]

Why the negativity...
:thinking:


The E2D has always been a Defender flashlight.
There are other Surefires to choose from if your country forbids you to protect yourself.

The issue is the public perception of flashlights in general. Yes the E2D and similar lights have been around for a while, but there hasn't been this level of slick advertising for them before. I don't see it as a good development. I'm also pretty dubious about the E2D concept as anything but marketing hype. As other posters said, an X400 mounted to a suitable firearm is a far better self-protection device than an E2D.

Up til now, whether small flashlights are defense devices or not (and I'm of the view that they are not), at least for lights without pointy bezels, nobody has bothered us for carrying them. Surefire seems to be about to spoil that for the sake of promoting a bogus myth for marketing purposes.

 

[Monocrom]

It is a bit of a myth.... You don't need a strike-bezel at all to use a light as a hammer-fist enhancer, or a yawara stick.

 

[Paul5M]

It'll be on California assault weapons :banned: list in no time!!!
I thought SureFires in California :thinking:

 

[Vermonter73]

I guess it won't be long before Surefire gets sued by someone who bought into their marketing, and then found out it's not a good idea to bring a flashlight to a knife(or gun) fight.

It'd be much better if the woman was properly armed. THAT is something that should be promoted a lot more.

 

[270winchester]

It'll be on California assault weapons :banned: list in no time!!!
I thought SureFires in California :thinking:

nope, not after AB2728. Look it up, the DOJ can't name any more "assault weapons" based on arbitrary features.

I know it was sarcasm but couldn't resist.

BTW I always thought it as a terrible idea to sell a light as some sort of defensive tool. But marketing is marketing, a slick salesman can sell you his turd as fertilizer for your orchids and make you pay for it....

 

[marinemaster]

....for those that complain that Surefire are too expensive, here is the proof, where the higher cost comes in, where the money get spent: MARKETING. Just look at how many people are in the pics, they all need to be paid, take in same cases many/multiple shots/takes, etc. All this cost money. I don't believe all the companies that sell lights do this.....marketing is EXPENSIVE. The cost gets passed to the customer. Basic economics, understand it.

 

[Kiessling]

I think *you* do not understand it. Besides marketing being a necessity for anyone who wants to sell outside of a small niche ... look at Mag or LedLenser for instance ... way more marketing than SF does, and way cheaper lights. There must be *something* else resonsible for the price of a SF.
Q.E.D.

bernie

 

[Patriot]

I like the pictures and all but the scenario, as others have already commented, look comic bookish. Obviously any reasonable human being with a sense of self awareness knows that the pictures portrayed do not represent reality very well. I do wish that Surefire wouldn't convey with their ads that light alone is going to destroy a knife wielding mad man with a single burst. Many who see this type of thing actually believe that a flashlight can frighten away a determined attacker. Does anyone looking at the first picture think that the bad guy doesn't look determined? I'd like to see some realistic advertising from the company who basically invented the defensive flashlight.

 

[greenLED]

I see we're playing "turn every other SF thread into a pissing match" again... Good job, guys. :shakehead


Shelby - GREAT photography! I absolutely love the way the perp's face is faintly perceptible in the shadows.

 

[kongfuchicken]

As far as I know, commercials on national tv as mag used to do cost way way (way) more than contracting a poster picture for a catalog...
But that's just me.

I don't like the idea of advertising flashlights are weapons or defensive tools more effective than they can possibly be any more than the average guy, but saying that this picture is the reason sf's cost more is a bit over the top.

But enough about that, when do we get to see the light?! That tiny portion of the bezel does not quite do it! The lady is in the way =P

 

[AlexSchira]

I really love the lighting work, curious how what your 'attacker' was holding. An actual knife would be difficult to catch the lighting with the size and blade angle, he'd have to keep twisting it in his hand until it shows in the picture. I'm guessing it was a prop of sorts that was easier to photograph.

 

[Patriot]

I see we're playing "turn every other SF thread into a pissing match" again... Good job, guys. :shakehead


Shelby - GREAT photography! I absolutely love the way the perp's face is faintly perceptible in the shadows.

I can understand where someone might feel that there was one strong comment in this thread, but I really didn't feel as though it were turning into a pissing match or back and forth squabbling at all. This thread hasn't seemed discourteous to me.

I guess people could respond one of two ways about this thread. They could comment about the photography or comment about the content. Overall it seems that people have commented about content, many of them, like myself, big Surefire fans. Afterall, the actual subject of this particular thread isn't ultimately directed or specific. Perhaps we can extend more latitude for the great variety of opinions as long as conversation remains cordial.

:twothumbs

As far as the photography goes....I also think is top shelf stuff. My hat goes off to the photographer and all others involved.

 

[robbydob]

I think the issue is not whether there's a better weapon for self defense; the issue is whether you'd prefer, rightly or wrongly, to have an E2D in your hand vs. nothing.

 

[0dBm]

The wardrobe assistant looks a bit like Shannon Emery Lee.

 

[AluminumOvercast]

If the image has a comic book feel, then we've done good. The original concept was based off just that. There are many ways to look at this ad. The elements are all done on purpose as not to be too direct, but rather let the viewer decide what it may be. We see a guy, what is he holding? We don't know. Is it a gun? Could be. A knife? Maybe. His car keys? Perhaps. I'd like to think he's just a drunk that stumbled into the road from the darkness, but it may very well be a stalker with bad intent. The girl, she would be just a regular nextdoor type leaving work, or maybe she's versed in hand-to-hand combat? She doesn't look scared to me. These days, you just don't know. In a foreboding situation, it's better to have something, than nothing at all..even if it's just a flashlight.
Say I shot this for a Gun manufacturer and she's holding a 1911. Someone would say "How can she own a gun living in NYC?" or "Why a semi auto vs revolver? It may jam." etc etc. The list will never end.

While you can't satisfy everyone, one thing that is certain is that after all said and done, it made you look.

That is marketing.

 

[light_emitting_dude]

I would look at it as he is holding an E2D and wants to compare output to the E2DL.....Nice pic....it makes a good desktop background!

:laughing:

 

[planex]

Okay, cool pics indeed. Regarding the light, if I understand correctly, it is 120 lumens, 2 stage? and uses an optic. If it is two stage, does the high come on first?