Fenix L2D-CE Comparison Review

[UnknownVT]

Again through the kind courtsey of 4sevens (http://Fenix-Store.com) the other much anticipated light - the Fenix L2D CE -

The head is the same as the Fenix L1D-CE - just on a 2x AA body -

Size -

I deliberately changed my normal layout and lined up the tails of the flashlights - one can see that the new L2D-CE is longer than the L2T because of the longer/bigger head. Also if one looks carefully the diameter of the L2D-CE head is wider.......

This photo should show it better -

Head -

L2D-CE Turbo vs. Fenix L2T High - both on Alkalines

the Cree XR-E in the L2D-CE clearly is brighter than the previous generation Luxeon III

L2D-CE Low vs. Fenix L2T Low - both on Alkalines

comparable.... so the L2D-CE has a usable Low level -
However I remember lots of people used to complain that the low of the L2T/L1T wasn't low enough....
(can't please everyone.... even if this level on the L2D-CE, rated at 9 lumens, is supposed to have a runtime of 55 hours!!!(but battery type not stated - 2500mAh NiMH? vs. the 22 hours of the L2T)

L2D-CE Turbo alkaline vs. P1D primary CR123A High

not surprisingly similar to the L2T High comparison....
The P1D would be a fabulous light by any account until the arrival of these Cree versions.......

vs. P1D both on primary cells - Low

again the Low levels are similar - but the L2D-CE is rated at 55 hours on 2x AA vs. 21 hours of the P1D on primary CR123A

Not fair, those were older gen Luxeon III lights - how about other Cree based lights?

One of the current brightest lights Fenix P1D-CE -

alkaline Turbo vs. Fenix P1D-CE primary CR123A High

perhaps not surprising - since both are on 3V -
BUT the P1D-CE has the advantage of Lithium technology which is capable of delivering sustained higher currents - alkalines are well known to droop.
So this is actually quite an impressive performance from mere 2x alkaline AA's.....

vs. Fenix P1D-CE both on primary Low

L2D-CE has a noticably lower low.....and is rated to run for 55 hours vs. 21 hours of the P1D-CE (which is brighter)

Of course the main advatage of the P1D-CE is its much smaller size - use of Lithium battery -
but the L2D-CE runs on common AA's - has a much easier UI (user interface) due to the (reverse) clicky switch - and can use the 1x AA L1D body when they become available with a slight decrease in brightness performance and about 1/2 the runtimes please see - Fenix L1D-CE Comparison Review.

For grins I wanted to see how the Cree XR-E in Fenix L1/2T (link) performed against the L2D-CE - since I originally speculated the Cree Mod in L1T/L2T was kind of like a preview for the L1D-CE and L2D-CE........ so was I right?

Turbo vs. Cree XR-E in Fenix L1/2T High - both on alkaline

similar perhaps the Cree Mod L2T may have a slightly more diffused beam since it is using a McR18 stippled reflector........
(so maybe I was right?

)

Low vs. Cree XR-E in Fenix L1/2T Low - both on alkaline

The Cree Mod L2T has a noticably brighter low - its estimated runtime based on the rated L2T low is about 22 hours vs. the rated 55 hours of the L2D-CE

is the Low of the Cree Mod L2T as bright as the Medium of the L2D-CE?

in a word - no........

Wait!........

There's more.....

How does the L2D-CE compare to the Fenix L1D-CE ?

vs. Fenix L1D-CE both on alkalines - Turbo -

Important Note: the positions are reversed - the L1D-CE is on the left and the L2D-CE on the right.....
L2D-CE is brighter...... but the L1D-CE uses only a single AA.

L2D-CE on 2x Lithium AA vs. Fenix L1D-CE on 3.7V Li-Ion Rechargeable 14500 - both on Turbo

Important Note: the positions are reversed - the L1D-CE is on the left and the L2D-CE on the right.....
L1D-CE using Li-Ion is just brighter than the L2D-CE on Lithium Primaries....

Current draw on NiMH and primary Lithium - Post #11
Part 2 - Fenix L2D-CE NiMH vs. Primary Lithium AA - Post #17
Part 3 - practical indoors Stairway beamshots - Post #21
ReFocussed beamshots comparison - Post #26
ReFocussed Stairway beamshot comparison - Post #29

Fenix L2D CE and L1D CE runtime graphs by Chevrofreak

 

[Ty_Bower]

In your L2T Cree mod, was anything done to the McR-18 reflector? Was it shaved or shimmed?

Does anyone know if the McR-18 could be used as a drop in replacement for the stock reflector of the L2D-CE? It looks like the McR-18 gives a better looking beam.

 

[UnknownVT]

Ty_Bower wrote: "In your L2T Cree mod, was anything done to the McR-18 reflector? Was it shaved or shimmed?
Does anyone know if the McR-18 could be used as a drop in replacement for the stock reflector of the L2D-CE? It looks like the McR-18 gives a better looking beam."

I didn't do the mod - but I'm pretty sure that the hole had to be enlarged -
also because of the space on a stock L1T/L2T head and the way the Cree was mounted - the silver surround of the Cree protudes into the reflector - that is probably the prime cause of the dark halo - although the stippling does somewhat reduce the effect and makes the overall beam smoother - with an attendant loss in throw.

Please go look at the full review for a lot more details and discussion -

Cree XR-E in Fenix L1/2T (vs. UWAJ, stock)

 

[Anders]

Thankyou Vincent for your comparing pictures, always good info and nice pics from you

I have a question, do you know which is the brightest light, P1D CE with 3,7 V Lion on High VS L2D CE with Nimh in Turbo mode.


Anders

 

[UnknownVT]

Anders wrote: "which is the brightest light, P1D CE with 3,7 V Lion on High VS L2D CE with Nimh in Turbo mode."

I believe that the L2D-CE on primary Lithium AA's should be brighter than using NiMH.

If that's the case, via a round-about deduction -

from Part 2 - 3.7V Li-Ion Rechargeable 14500 in Post #92 - in
Fenix L1D-CE Comparison Review

vs. Fenix P1D-CE 3.7V Li-Ion Rechargeable RCR123 - High

not surprisingly - pretty even.

Now look at the comparison beamshots of the L2D-CE on 2x Lithium AA vs. Fenix L1D-CE on 3.7V Li-Ion Rechargeable 14500 - both on Turbo in the opening post above (last set of shots).

So I don't think the L2D-CE on NiMH or primary Lithium AA is as bright as the P1D-CE (or L1D-CE) on their respective 3.7V Li-Ion rechargeable batteries.

 

[ruralott]

Thank you so much. Great reviews on all the LXD-CE.

At first, I thought the dark ring is much less noticable with the L2D-CE because it's so bright. But on medium, it's not much either.

Time to pull out the wallet

:goodjob:

 

[daq]

Once again, thanks for your excellent work Vincent.

I got my L2D-CE 2 days ago and am very pleased with it. I did unscrew the head a bit to minimize the darker ring around the hotspot.

Right now, I have it mounted on my bike helmet. I use "turbo" mode when riding, either steady when it's dark or flashing during daytime. It's kind of funny to see reflective signs (like speed limit signs) flashing during the day on my way to work. This summer, I'll use the light for camping and I plan to keep it in general mode. Low is plenty of light for many situations ("Dad, leave a light on") and medium is just a click away...

I really like the UI. It is very well suited for my needs.

I have to admit I was hoping for a turbo hotspot that rivaled my Survivor LED. However, the Survivor hostspot is significantly brighter (I'd call it ~2x) but it's diameter is less than half the L2D (meaning the hostspot area is less than 1/4 of the L2D). Also, the L2D spill is at least 2-3x brighter than the Survivor LED spill.

Thanks again for your work.
Dale

 

[Anders]

Thanks again for the quick answer Vincent.

But i am not sure if regular Lithium AA cells could handle that amount of A.
Therefore, i had to test with a regular DMM and my result is as follows:

Energizer e2 primary Lithium cells open voltage 1,7 V showed 0,91 A in Turbo mode (new cells).

My old Digital 2000 Nimh showed 1,47 A in Turbo mode?
Both Energizer 2500 Nimh and Eneloop showed 1,24 A in Turbo mode.

I measured at the battery.

Am i correct in my guessing that Nimh is the proper way to go if i want the most of my L2D CE?

Edit:Vincent wrote:"So I don't think the L2D-CE on NiMH or primary Lithium AA is as bright as the P1D-CE (or L1D-CE) on their respective 3.7V Li-Ion rechargeable batteries."

Maybe you are right on that, but i wonder if that is the case with primary lithiums, it would be intresting to know the correct answer.

Anders

 

[Xygen]

:goodjob:
Thanks for your effort!

 

[lightbug]

Another great review from you, thank you so much. People like you make CPF so much fun to come again and again! :goodjob:

 

[UnknownVT]

Anders wrote: "i am not sure if regular Lithium AA cells could handle that amount of A.
Energizer e2 primary Lithium cells open voltage 1,7 V showed 0,91 A in Turbo mode (new cells).
My old Digital 2000 Nimh showed 1,47 A in Turbo mode?
Both Energizer 2500 Nimh and Eneloop showed 1,24 A in Turbo mode."

Dang-nabbit - if you're not right...

I'll teach you to make a fool of me....
(actually I manage quite well by myself, thank you

)

These are my readings -

2x NiMH 2.57-2.56V open-circuit
Turbo = 1.33A
Low = 0.05A
Medium = 0.21A
High = 0.47A

2x primary Lithium AA 3.28-3.15V open-circuit
Turbo = 0.92A
Low = 0.04A
Medium = 0.16-0.21A
High = 0.43A

So maybe the L2D-CE on NiMH will be brighter than on primary Lithium AA's?

The L2D-CE on NiMH Turbo is about the same level as the P1D-CE on 3.7V Li-Ion rechargeable RCR123 High
- this is a fabulous performance.

Anders wrote: "Am i correct in my guessing that Nimh is the proper way to go if i want the most of my L2D CE?"

I think so....

More reason to get the L2D-CE to use with NiMH -
or if you already have a L1D-CE -
the L2D body!

 

[pantshacker]

Because of this review and the other reviews of the L1D-CE, I convinced myself that I just had to have the L2D. I am finally getting onboard the cree bandwagon. Thanks alot, UnknownVT :thumbsup:

 

[Anders]

Hello Vincent.



I was wrong in my statement, i was thinking about this during the day and found out about it . "Mike abcd" also told me in another thread.

Now when i got home i did another measure.
Lithium under load 3,47 V X 0,91 A = 3,25 Watt
Nimh under load 2,65 V X 1,23 A = 3,15 Watt

The numbers in my DMM aren't steady so it is basically the same Watt
, no advantages of any of them in the manner of giving more power to this light, exept that Lithiums give more hours with 2900 mAh but they are more expensive than Nimh if you use you light frequently.

I don't know how the cells behave when half way used, maybe one is better then the other?


Anders

 

[UnknownVT]

Anders wrote: "I was wrong in my statement, i was thinking about this during the day and found out about it

. "Mike abcd" also told me in another thread.
Now when i got home i did another measure.
Lithium under load 3,47 V X 0,91 A = 3,25 Watt
Nimh under load 2,65 V X 1,23 A = 3,15 Watt
The numbers in my DMM aren't steady so it is basically the same Watt
, no advantages of any of them in the manner of giving more power to this light"

Both you and Mike_abcd are correct to calculate the wattage consumption - as that is the total power delivered from the batteries.

However are your figures the actual voltages UNDER-LOAD? - they look more like open-circuit voltages (normally I would have thought voltages under load were lower).

Using my measurements and taking the lower open-circuit voltages (measured directly after my tests) I get -

NiMH 2.56V x 1.33A = 3.4 watts
primary Lithium AA 3.15V x 0.92A = 2.9 watts

even taking into account that there may be some inaccuracy in my measurements or DMM -
the NiMH is delivering over 17% more power/watts than the primary lithium AA's - although 17% may theoretically still be in some sort of a margin of error - it just seems a bit too high/significant to me for that.

My side-by-side beamshots also seem to show that the L2D-CE on NiMH appears to be brighter than on primary lithium AA's

 

[Anders]

Hello Vincent.

Interesting,.

In my earlier post my Nimh was lower, now i did it again and waited for the numbers to stop:
I got 3,27 Watt with my old Digital cells, fresh from the charger.
3,30 Watt with new GP 1800 Nimh cells.
3,25 with Eneloop.
3,10 with my Lithium cells.

Yes it is a very small difference, but it is a difference.

Anders

 

[UnknownVT]

Anders wrote: "In my earlier post my Nimh was lower, now i did it again and waited for the numbers to stop:
I got 3,27 Watt with my old Digital cells, fresh from the charger.
3,30 Watt with new GP 1800 Nimh cells.
3,25 with Eneloop.
3,10 with my Lithium cells.
Yes it is a very small difference, but it is a difference."

Yes, but even the bigger difference you got was only about 6.5% - which may be just in the margin of error.

Mine was over 17% - where I would expect just to be able to see a difference side-by-side or compared to a known reference light of similar brightness - and my beamshots do show that.

I would suspect/guess that you may not see any difference in brightness between NiMH and primary lithiums for your combination -
whereas on my sample of L2D-CE, NiMH, and primary lithium batteries seem to measure a more significant difference and actually do show in beamshots that the L2D-CE on NiMH is brighter than on primary lithiums.

Coming back to your original question - NiMH would seem to be the way to go in the L2D-CE for regular and frequent use - as it's virtually "free" power - without any brightness penalty - even when compared to primnary lithium AA's.

But Lithium AA's should give the longer runtimes - so they're the ones to keep in the light - that's reserved for emergencies, and long term outages

 

[UnknownVT]

Part 2 - Fenix L2D-CE NiMH vs. Primary Lithium AA

Previously it was brought up whether in the L2D-CE primary Lithium AA's were brighter than NiMH - I had always assumed so - but further investigation seemed to show that my sample appeared to be brighter on NiMH.

CPF memeber Anders also did some more tests including beamshots that seem to show they were about par/equal (in another thread - see post #128 link)

So to see more directly - I took beamshots of the L2D-CE on NiMH and then primary lithiums with the exact same fixed exposures at full exposure (as suggested by the camera) and one at the exact same -2 stops underexposed.

Then cropped one of each pair of the photos and flipped them horizontally and merged the cropped and flipped photo with the respective pair on the other battery to form a composite merged photo that looks like a direct side-by-side beamshot - but they are of the same L2D-CE just on different batteries (now side-by-side) -

L2D-CE NiMH vs. primary lithium AA - Turbo

I also took some side-by-side comparison beamshots against a reference control light the Fenix P1D-CE on primary CR123A High for each battery combination -
NiMH

primary lithium AA

Based on these beamshots I would now say there is very little if any difference between the brightness on Turbo using primary lithium AA or NiMH -
certainly not enough to make any real practical difference for me.

 

[Anders]

Thankyou Vincent for your effort in theese photos and all extra work you did because of my questions.

Now we can see that is none, i can't see any difference between them both.

:goodjob:

Anders

 

[UnknownVT]

Anders wrote: "all extra work you did because of my questions."

I didn't mind doing this at all -
assumptions need to questioned and tested.

When it's this close a call on which may be brighter -
we can either dismiss it as "close enough for jazz" -
or, actually compare the levels side-by-side -
so I did the "extra" work - it was just as much for myself -
so there is no resentment or wasted effort here.

In fact I thank you for bringing the subject up.

 

[luminari]

Another kick *** review by Vincent! I've been waiting for this UnknownVT review to decide if I should get that L2D-CE. Thanks!