Fenix L0D R2... If/When?

[ultimaonliner]

Will Fenix make a AAA with an R2, or will they skip it similar to the manner in which they have not made a Q5 for the L0D?

Obviously I want one!

 

[WadeF]

Maybe if someday Cree gets the Vf lower on the R2.

 

[Gunner12]

I think when they get enough R2s.

There's not a huge difference between the Q4-Q5-R2 so they might wait for a bit.

 

[Rzr800]

I would say that it depends on how many lights are delivered at a fraction of the output with little profit delivered on the distribution side.
If folks are more interested in simply a cheap(er) light that runs a long time and Fenix can get even a fraction of what they do now for the LODQ4 in the near future...who is out there salivating over something that the human eye might have trouble easily discerning?

I'd love to see it also; yet I believe that this E01 just somewhat killed that market in terms of what price the average flashaholic even thinks is fair (see the V4 bucklelight...if it ever becomes a reality).

 

[StarHalo]

When it comes to the future of Cree bins, you have to take into account the amount of difference/gain in lumens between each bin. Let's take a look at the Cree bin guide:

So we're currently at Q5 (and in a few rare instances, R2) and the chart shows what we can expect in the future all the way out to the R4 bins. So here's the final net difference for the flashlight user - We know the Fenix L0D, for example, uses the Q4 emitter and is rated at 75 lumens, so what if we dropped a Q5 into it? According to the chart, the difference between the Q4 and Q5 bins is right around 7%, so extrapolating from that (7% over 75 lumens) the finshed L0D Q5 would put out 80 lumens, or five lumens more than the Q4.

"Is that good?" Well not really, and here's why - the human perception of light is logarithmic; meaning in order for you to perceive something as being twice as bright, it actually has to be *four times* as bright! So to make our example Fenix L0D appear twice as bright, it'd have to put out an unbelieveable 300 LUMENS! And that's not going to happen anytime soon off of a single AAA battery.

What if we took it to the extreme and went into the future to acquire a prototype R4 emitter for our L0D? Again going by the chart numbers, the R4 is 30% brighter than the Q4 (a long ways from 400%) which would give you a grand total of 98 lumens - not even enough of a gain for you to be able to distinguish between the two bins visually.

 

[ultimaonliner]

Yeah, but come on. It's an RRRRRR 2222222222 !!!!!!!

When it comes to the future of Cree bins, you have to take into account the amount of difference/gain in lumens between each bin. Let's take a look at the Cree bin guide:

So we're currently at Q5 (and in a few rare instances, R2) and the chart shows what we can expect in the future all the way out to the R4 bins. So here's the final net difference for the flashlight user - We know the Fenix L0D, for example, uses the Q4 emitter and is rated at 75 lumens, so what if we dropped a Q5 into it? According to the chart, the difference between the Q4 and Q5 bins is right around 7%, so extrapolating from that (7% over 75 lumens) the finshed L0D Q5 would put out 80 lumens, or five lumens more than the Q4.

"Is that good?" Well not really, and here's why - the human perception of light is logarithmic; meaning in order for you to perceive something as being twice as bright, it actually has to be *four times* as bright! So to make our example Fenix L0D appear twice as bright, it'd have to put out an unbelieveable 300 LUMENS! And that's not going to happen anytime soon off of a single AAA battery.

What if we took it to the extreme and went into the future to acquire a prototype R4 emitter for our L0D? Again going by the chart numbers, the R4 is 30% brighter than the Q4 (a long ways from 400%) which would give you a grand total of 98 lumens - not even enough of a gain for you to be able to distinguish between the two bins visually.

 

[fireblast713]

What if we took it to the extreme and went into the future to acquire a prototype R4 emitter for our L0D? Again going by the chart numbers, the R4 is 30% brighter than the Q4 (a long ways from 400%) which would give you a grand total of 98 lumens - not even enough of a gain for you to be able to distinguish between the two bins visually.

Idk if I'd go that far, I can see the difference between the high mode (107 lumens) and the turbo mode (120 lumens) on my L1D-Q5, so I think a 23 lumen increase would be perceptible. But the cost to benefit ratio might make it not worth it.

 

[Rzr800]

"..the human perception of light is logarithmic; meaning in order for you to perceive something as being twice as bright, it actually has to be *four times* as bright! So to make our example Fenix L0D appear twice as bright, it'd have to put out an unbelieveable 300 LUMENS! And that's not going to happen anytime soon off of a single AAA battery.."

I have heard this reasoning put forth before up here and appreciate your taking the time to display this chart.

Coincidentally (or not) friction losses force the same four-fold increase in pressure to achieve twice the volumetric flow in piping of the same diameter.

 

[Jarl]

and if you're paddling a kayak, 4x the effort will mean you go twice as fast. There's quite a few examples of it


I think the human eye can tell the difference between 20 to 30 lumens, so it's only really worth upgrading every 4 or so steps- say, P4 to Q4 to R4, etc.


What I'd prefer to see is equal brightness, but 30% more runtime. Run time isn't logarithmic, and so even a 10% increase would be good!

 

[Rzr800]

"..What I'd prefer to see is equal brightness, but 30% more runtime. Run time isn't logarithmic, and so even a 10% increase would be good!"

Agreed; which will most likely be proven soon in (possibly) respectable sales of an even lesser output light such as the upcoming Fenix E01 with now 10 hours or better total.