Fenix L0D pros/cons?

[kramer5150]

Looking for all comments from owners and ex-owners.
Does it retain its water resistance when used with a microstream tailcap?

thanks in advance
:thumbsup:

 

[Marduke]

Yes, especially if you shave about 1-2mm off the end of the MS body so the head sits almost flush and fully engages the o-ring.

 

[gswitter]

My wife and I keep one on each of our key chains. They've never let us down. I've run P4 and Q4 models extensively on 10440s, and the emitters don't appear to be any worse for the wear. The L0D isn't perfect (I'd rather the modes were ordered low/med/high...), but if I lost one tomorrow, I wouldn't hesitate to buy another.*

I haven't been wild about a lot of Fenix' recent offerings, but I loves me the L0D!

* Given 4sevens' recent hint, I might wait a little while, but not long.

 

[sol-leks]

Yeah I really like my lod too. I guess I might like it if it were a little floodier and less ringy, but I really only notice that when im testing it on a wall not in actual use. Overall, I love the thing. I don't use 10440's tho. Instead of the microstream I would get the stylus pro, really ups the lights versatility. Or you could always get both!

 

[regulator]

The design offers a large head section making it easy to operate with one hand. It is fairly efficient and its brightness levels are good. The emitter is protected behind a lens so no dirt or scratches to the emitter (like some of the 5mm LED lights).

One con is that it is not "specifically" designed to run on a 14400 cell. Otherwise it is a very nice light overall and very versital and useful.

 

[konut]

Only con after 2 years of keychain duty is wear of the HA coating on the edges. But then it gives it a certain 'character'. This is the original issue version. Using 10440 with no problems. Never fails to impress.

 

[superflytnt]

Well, since you asked, I bought a Microstream solely to use the body on my LOD but I found the stock MS to be so good that I left it as-is and carried it instead of my LOD. I never used low mode on LOD, it was usually med unless I needed some distance and then it was high. What I found was that my MS was brighter than my LOD on medium (sorry Marduke ) with similar runtimes and had as much throw as my LOD (Q4 BTW) on high. I'm a sucker for throw and didn't much like the floody LOD beam but the MS still has plenty of spill and is one of my favorite beams of all my lights. For $15 I don't think you can go wrong with the MS and I, personally, wouldn't pay $45+ anymore for an LOD.......................YMMV

 

[kramer5150]

Well, since you asked, I bought a Microstream solely to use the body on my LOD but I found the stock MS to be so good that I left it as-is and carried it instead of my LOD. I never used low mode on LOD, it was usually med unless I needed some distance and then it was high. What I found was that my MS was brighter than my LOD on medium (sorry Marduke ) with similar runtimes and had as much throw as my LOD (Q4 BTW) on high. I'm a sucker for throw and didn't much like the floody LOD beam but the MS still has plenty of spill and is one of my favorite beams of all my lights. For $15 I don't think you can go wrong with the MS and I, personally, wouldn't pay $45+ anymore for an LOD.......................YMMV

Cool...
thanks all for the feedback. I for one DO find 7-8 Lumen low modes with smooth flood to be VERY useful, hence my interest in the L0D.

 

[Gator762]

Well, since you asked, I bought a Microstream solely to use the body on my LOD but I found the stock MS to be so good that I left it as-is and carried it instead of my LOD. I never used low mode on LOD, it was usually med unless I needed some distance and then it was high. What I found was that my MS was brighter than my LOD on medium (sorry Marduke ) with similar runtimes and had as much throw as my LOD (Q4 BTW) on high. I'm a sucker for throw and didn't much like the floody LOD beam but the MS still has plenty of spill and is one of my favorite beams of all my lights. For $15 I don't think you can go wrong with the MS and I, personally, wouldn't pay $45+ anymore for an LOD.......................YMMV

Brighter than an L0D Q4?

Your L0D battery OK? Microstream is supposed to be 20 lumens, not nearly as bright as the L0D Q4.
http://www.candlepowerforums.com/vb/showthread.php?t=173060


L0D 4 is turning into my most used light. Good run time, and a good floody beam. At first I didn't like M-L-H, but I find that medium is more useful and now I like that order. It's much more of a utility/walking light rather than a thrower with the small reflector IMO.

 

[superflytnt]

Brighter than an L0D Q4?

Your L0D battery OK? Microstream is supposed to be 20 lumens, not nearly as bright as the L0D Q4.
http://www.candlepowerforums.com/vb/showthread.php?t=173060


L0D 4 is turning into my most used light. Good run time, and a good floody beam. At first I didn't like M-L-H, but I find that medium is more useful and now I like that order. It's much more of a utility/walking light rather than a thrower with the small reflector IMO.

Notice I said on medium. LOD is clearly brighter on high, just lacking in throw is all. I find the Microstream to be a perfect combination of output, throw and runtime and, for me personally, it is the better option.....................especially when $$ is taken into account!

If you find that you use medium most of the time, check out the Microstream. It has a great beam that can compete with the LOD in output/runtime while stomping it in throw (again, LOD on medium). You need the LOD on high to get the same throw as MS and on high the runtime is a bit short....................

 

[superflytnt]

Cool...
thanks all for the feedback. I for one DO find 7-8 Lumen low modes with smooth flood to be VERY useful, hence my interest in the L0D.

If you like a 7-8 lumen long runtime low I would suggest a Photon Microlight with a 2032 battery (instead of the stock 2-2016's) along with your Microstream. Still less $$ than an LOD, automatic backup and you get both a long-running floody low and a bright, long running high (four hours on lithium, two on NiMH) with good throw.

Or you could just get an LOD.........................it's just that nearly every review here on the forums of the Microstream is glowing and yet not many people give it a chance because it's only rated at 20 lumens. So sad

 

[Marduke]

Brighter than an L0D Q4?

Your L0D battery OK? Microstream is supposed to be 20 lumens, not nearly as bright as the L0D Q4.
http://www.candlepowerforums.com/vb/showthread.php?t=173060


L0D 4 is turning into my most used light. Good run time, and a good floody beam. At first I didn't like M-L-H, but I find that medium is more useful and now I like that order. It's much more of a utility/walking light rather than a thrower with the small reflector IMO.

He doesn't get the difference between lux and lumens, and uses them interchangeably. LOD is brighter overall with a more floody beam, MS has more throw.

Or you could just get an LOD.........................it's just that nearly every review here on the forums of the Microstream is glowing and yet not many people give it a chance because it's only rated at 20 lumens. So sad

A lot of old Lux I and Lux III lights had good reviews too, but most people want something from the current generation of LED's, not the last generation with half the efficiency.

 

[superflytnt]

He doesn't get the difference between lux and lumens, and uses them interchangeably. LOD is brighter overall with a more floody beam, MS has more throw.


dude, everytime I specify LOD on medium OK? I get the difference between throw (LUX) and overall output (lumens). I do..........no really I do! Fact remains that my particular Microstream is brighter than my particular LOD Q4 on medium/primary.


A lot of old Lux I and Lux III lights had good reviews too, but most people want something from the current generation of LED's, not the last generation with half the efficiency.

well the Microstream circuit must be really efficient then because it equals the output and runtime of the LOD on medium(beats it with my samples) with an emitter that has half the efficiency.

 

[Marduke]

well the Microstream circuit must be really efficient then because it equals the output and runtime of the LOD on medium(beats it with my samples) with an emitter that has half the efficiency.

Which tells me that some part of your story is BS, because that breaks the laws of physics. Do you seriously expect people you believe you have a magic MS which is undeniably half the efficiency, but somehow both brighter AND longer running??

Out of curiosity, is this your LOD?


[short term hotlinked image deleted, it served it's purpose]

 

[Gator762]

He doesn't get the difference between lux and lumens, and uses them interchangeably. LOD is brighter overall with a more floody beam, MS has more throw.

That's what I said.

 

[superflytnt]

Which tells me that some part of your story is BS, because that breaks the laws of physics. Do you seriously expect people you believe you have a magic MS which is undeniably half the efficiency, but somehow both brighter AND longer running??

Out of curiosity, is this your LOD?

LOL, nope. It's the OTHER holiday red model with a Q4 and sleighbells and whatnot. Even if you believe the LOD's claim of 30 lumens on medium with the tested runtime: http://lights.chevrofreak.com/runtimes/Fenix L0D CE/Fenix L0D CE - medium.png
and compare them to the Microstreams rated 20 lumens with the tested runtimes: http://www.candlepowerforums.com/vb/showthread.php?t=183590 then it still does really well for an emitter with half the efficiency. I, personally, have found Fenix lumen numbers to be at the emitter and thus overblown but YMMV. I challenge anyone out there with an integrating sphere to test a Microstream and an LOD Q4 ON MEDIUM and see just how far apart they are.

 

[superflytnt]

That's what I said.

No you didn't. You just didn't catch the fact that I said on medium. Feel free to jump on the bandwagon anyhow.........................

 

[Gator762]

well the Microstream circuit must be really efficient then because it equals the output and runtime of the LOD on medium(beats it with my samples) with an emitter that has half the efficiency.

The Fenix would have to have an absolutely terribly inefficient circuit, when they are generally regarded to be the opposite with pretty efficient circuits.

IMHO, expecting an AAA light to be a thrower is a little much at this point in time, the output and diameter is too small to compete with an AA or CR123 light.

Maybe in 10 years we'll be debating which AAA light is the throw king.

 

[superflytnt]

The Fenix would have to have an absolutely terribly inefficient circuit, when they are generally regarded to be the opposite with pretty efficient circuits.

IMHO, expecting an AAA light to be a thrower is a little much at this point in time, the output and diameter is too small to compete with an AA or CR123 light.

Maybe in 10 years we'll be debating which AAA light is the throw king.

I know but if you handled one and tested it for yourself you would be impressed with it's throw AND it's bright smooth spill. Not to mention overall output and runtime. It's only $15, just try one out and THEN put me in my place..................................no wait, that's Mardukes job

 

[Gator762]

No you didn't. You just didn't catch the fact that I said on medium. Feel free to jump on the bandwagon anyhow.........................

Yeah, I forgot to mention that part.

If you prefer the Microstream, there's nothing wrong with that. I'd rather pocket the L0D Q4. Personal choice. L0D Q4 @ medium is going to have roughly twice the run time, and the ability to go to high when more light is needed rather than having to switch lights (if you do have another one!)