Fenix vs. Surefire/HDS lumen ratings

[Frangible]

Hey,

I've been trying to determine how accurate the lumen ratings are for the listed values for Fenix lights. I've seen Chevrofreak's excellent runtime plots with approximate lumens but I guess I'm still a little confused.

A few years back, most of the calibrated lumen ratings were low. For example, my Surefire L4 was 65 lumens. Then it got bumped to a 100 lumen rating by Surefire. I'm not sure how my HDS EDC was measured, though at 60 lumens it does indeed appear to be not as bright as the L4. My Fenix L0D CE seems a little dimmer than its rating but that might be due to the throw/reflector characteristics. (no, I'm not using alkalines)

So if the L4 is 100 lumens, how does that compare to Fenix light rated at 100 lumens? The Fenix L1D CE Q5 is listed at 120 lumens for 1.5 hours-- is that actually more output than a Surefire L4 for the same amount of time, off a single AA NiMH?? Or how about a Fenix T1's 210 lumens of output... does it really throw about 2x as many photons as the L4?

Has my Surefire L4 become so obsolete already? Or are the integrating spheres just calibrated differently or something?

The same question applies to my HDS EDC. Is it obsolete, or were they just conservative measuring its output?

I just think something seems amiss, because my Surefire X300 also uses a Cree LED and it is a 2x 123A light rated at 110 lumens with a 1.5 hour runtime or so before it drops off. How can the Fenix T1 produce double the lumen rating, with the same runtime, with what I assume is the same LED?

 

[Gunner12]

Fenix measures emitter lumen, which is lower then out the front lumen that Surefire and HDS(also Novatac) measure.

According the Flashlight reviews, the L1D-CE P4 is around 60 lumen out the front. Add about 30% increase for the Q5 and you get around 80 lumen out the front, which is actually not the most for a 1 AA light. There might be one or two 1 AA lights that can break 100 lumen out the front.

Also the current gen LEDs are at least twice as efficient as the last gen ones. So with the same power, the current ones will have double or more output, hence the increased output on the lights. I wouldn't call the last gen LED lights obsolete, if they work well for you then it is great. If you want, you can swap out the LED for a current gen one.

 

[mspeterson]

Hey,

I've been trying to determine how accurate the lumen ratings are for the listed values for Fenix lights. I've seen Chevrofreak's excellent runtime plots with approximate lumens but I guess I'm still a little confused.

A few years back, most of the calibrated lumen ratings were low. For example, my Surefire L4 was 65 lumens. Then it got bumped to a 100 lumen rating by Surefire. I'm not sure how my HDS EDC was measured, though at 60 lumens it does indeed appear to be not as bright as the L4. My Fenix L0D CE seems a little dimmer than its rating but that might be due to the throw/reflector characteristics. (no, I'm not using alkalines)

So if the L4 is 100 lumens, how does that compare to Fenix light rated at 100 lumens? The Fenix L1D CE Q5 is listed at 120 lumens for 1.5 hours-- is that actually more output than a Surefire L4 for the same amount of time, off a single AA NiMH?? Or how about a Fenix T1's 210 lumens of output... does it really throw about 2x as many photons as the L4?

Has my Surefire L4 become so obsolete already? Or are the integrating spheres just calibrated differently or something?

The same question applies to my HDS EDC. Is it obsolete, or were they just conservative measuring its output?

I just think something seems amiss, because my Surefire X300 also uses a Cree LED and it is a 2x 123A light rated at 110 lumens with a 1.5 hour runtime or so before it drops off. How can the Fenix T1 produce double the lumen rating, with the same runtime, with what I assume is the same LED?

To answer your last question, it can't. Stated lumens values are deceptive at best without direct comparison. Your L4 is still an awesome light capable of competing with any of the current batch "flavor of the week" LEDS. Currently there is no real replacement for the LUX V emitter IMO.

Here is the good news: the "flashlight" industry (ie. several large members of that community) is currently working together to devise a meaningful comparison standard for rating the output of flashlights of various types. This group is even including merchant and end user input in this attempt at standardization. Don't know what will come of it, but so good so far!

 

[generic808]

So which 1AA lights out there are 100+ lumens out the front?

 

[Frangible]

Thanks for the info guys, I'd say it was enlightening, but that just seems like a bad pun. I didn't know it was measured in terms of emitted lumens.

According the Flashlight reviews, the L1D-CE P4 is around 60 lumen out the front. Add about 30% increase for the Q5 and you get around 80 lumen out the front, which is actually not the most for a 1 AA light. There might be one or two 1 AA lights that can break 100 lumen out the front.

Do you mean FlashlightReviews.com, or the forum? Chevrofreak's graphs peg the "approx lumens" at the spec, and according to Flashlightreviews.com, here are the comparison chart equivalents, sorted descending by output.

Fenix L2D CE (2xAA): 88.0 (max) (Cree)
Fenix P1D CE (1x123A): 78.5 (max) (Cree)
Surefire L4 (2x123A): 58 (Luxeon)*
Fenix L1D CE (AA): 44.5 (max) (Cree)
HDS EDC 60 XR (1x123A): 44.3 (max) (Luxeon)*
Fenix L0D CE (AAA): 33.8 (max) (Cree)*
Fenix L0P SE (AAA: 21.2 (max) (Luxeon)*

*lights I own

Not that a comparison chart value has any particular scientific validity, but...

I own a Fenix L0D CE and the older L0P SE. The L0D SE is indeed way, way brighter, but not as bright as the HDS EDC 60, which is not as bright as the L4. So from my own experience with the lights I own those numbers don't seem too far off.

Also the current gen LEDs are at least twice as efficient as the last gen ones. So with the same power, the current ones will have double or more output, hence the increased output on the lights. I wouldn't call the last gen LED lights obsolete, if they work well for you then it is great. If you want, you can swap out the LED for a current gen one.

Is it really that significant?

Compare my two Surefire lights:
L4 - 2x123A, Luxeon - Surefire rated 100 lumens, 2.5 hours
X300 - 2x123A, Cree - Surefire rated 110 lumens, 2.4 hours

I know the real full-brightness runtime of the L4 is 75 minutes but I cannot find any runtime plot or statistic for the actual true full-brightness runtime of the X300.

Your L4 is still an awesome light capable of competing with any of the current batch "flavor of the week" LEDS. Currently there is no real replacement for the LUX V emitter IMO.

Yeah, unless there's some difference runtime I'm missing between the L4 and X300 (Cree) I was kinda let down by the differences. Though they have some nice focusing on the X300's beam.

Here is the good news: the "flashlight" industry (ie. several large members of that community) is currently working together to devise a meaningful comparison standard for rating the output of flashlights of various types. This group is even including merchant and end user input in this attempt at standardization. Don't know what will come of it, but so good so far!

That would be very nice.

 

[adirondackdestroyer]

Chevrofreak's approximate figures are about as close to exact as we can get here on CPF. I would bet that they are within 10% of what a light would register if tested in an IS.
I don't think the L1DCE Q5 is putting out 120 lumens on a single NIMH. Maybe around 90 or so, I don't really know. The T1 is putting out every bit of the 200+ lumens that Fenix claims. Chevrofreak has it at right around 212 lumens or so. I would think that the T1 would be putting out at least twice as many lumens as your L4.
I would say the Lux 5 is obsolete. It gives less runtime and half the brightness of the Cree Q5.
The HDS EDC was a top of the line flashlight 3 years ago, but it uses a T/S bin Lux 3. Which doesn't even compare with the top of the line Crees of today. I don't think they were conservative in terms of output. They claimed 60 lumens, and it was tested at slightly under that number in an IS.
I don't know anything about the Surefire X300, so I can't really answer that question. It might not be using a Q5, so that might account for part of it. You never know, it might test out to be better than the given specs.
The brightest single AA light is the Nitecore Defender Infinity. It is over 100 lumens on a single AA NIMH, and around 120 lumens on a 14500 Lithium Ion.

Hey,

I've been trying to determine how accurate the lumen ratings are for the listed values for Fenix lights. I've seen Chevrofreak's excellent runtime plots with approximate lumens but I guess I'm still a little confused.

A few years back, most of the calibrated lumen ratings were low. For example, my Surefire L4 was 65 lumens. Then it got bumped to a 100 lumen rating by Surefire. I'm not sure how my HDS EDC was measured, though at 60 lumens it does indeed appear to be not as bright as the L4. My Fenix L0D CE seems a little dimmer than its rating but that might be due to the throw/reflector characteristics. (no, I'm not using alkalines)

So if the L4 is 100 lumens, how does that compare to Fenix light rated at 100 lumens? The Fenix L1D CE Q5 is listed at 120 lumens for 1.5 hours-- is that actually more output than a Surefire L4 for the same amount of time, off a single AA NiMH?? Or how about a Fenix T1's 210 lumens of output... does it really throw about 2x as many photons as the L4?

Has my Surefire L4 become so obsolete already? Or are the integrating spheres just calibrated differently or something?

The same question applies to my HDS EDC. Is it obsolete, or were they just conservative measuring its output?

I just think something seems amiss, because my Surefire X300 also uses a Cree LED and it is a 2x 123A light rated at 110 lumens with a 1.5 hour runtime or so before it drops off. How can the Fenix T1 produce double the lumen rating, with the same runtime, with what I assume is the same LED?

 

[Gunner12]

Is it really that significant?

Yes, it is really that significant.

Look at this thread.

As you can tell, the Cree is much brighter then the Luxeon III. At 350 mA, the P4 bin Cree XR-E(The higher bins are even more efficient) already has more output then the Luxeon III.

I meant Flashlightreviews as in Quickbeam's site. Sorry that I wasn't clear.

 

[aceo07]

Thanks for the info guys, I'd say it was enlightening, but that just seems like a bad pun. I didn't know it was measured in terms of emitted lumens.



Do you mean FlashlightReviews.com, or the forum? Chevrofreak's graphs peg the "approx lumens" at the spec, and according to Flashlightreviews.com, here are the comparison chart equivalents, sorted descending by output.

Fenix L2D CE (2xAA): 88.0 (max) (Cree)
Fenix P1D CE (1x123A): 78.5 (max) (Cree)
Surefire L4 (2x123A): 58 (Luxeon)*
Fenix L1D CE (AA): 44.5 (max) (Cree)
HDS EDC 60 XR (1x123A): 44.3 (max) (Luxeon)*
Fenix L0D CE (AAA): 33.8 (max) (Cree)*
Fenix L0P SE (AAA: 21.2 (max) (Luxeon)*

*lights I own

Not that a comparison chart value has any particular scientific validity, but...

I own a Fenix L0D CE and the older L0P SE. The L0D SE is indeed way, way brighter, but not as bright as the HDS EDC 60, which is not as bright as the L4. So from my own experience with the lights I own those numbers don't seem too far off.



Is it really that significant?

Compare my two Surefire lights:
L4 - 2x123A, Luxeon - Surefire rated 100 lumens, 2.5 hours
X300 - 2x123A, Cree - Surefire rated 110 lumens, 2.4 hours

I know the real full-brightness runtime of the L4 is 75 minutes but I cannot find any runtime plot or statistic for the actual true full-brightness runtime of the X300.



Yeah, unless there's some difference runtime I'm missing between the L4 and X300 (Cree) I was kinda let down by the differences. Though they have some nice focusing on the X300's beam.



That would be very nice.

FLR's numbers are NOT in lumens. You have to multiple by 1.4 (approx, or find the exact multiplier on his website) to get it in lumens. HDS flashlights have been testing by a few people with a few samples in integrating spheres and the measures do match their rating for each level of output. Maybe off by 1-2 lumens at max.

 

[Art Vandelay]

Surefire's Lumen numbers are sometimes lower than independent out the front tests of Surefire incandescents because Surefire gives a number that is more representative of the average output during the non-regulated runtime of an incandescent flashlight. It's better to under promise and over deliver than the reverse.

 

[yaesumofo]

If everybody just used a Lux at 1 meter or total output measurement made in a IS it would be easy.
IMHO there is no need for any unifying standard since we allready have measurements like LUX and lumens.
Just use those.
The reality is that an IS should be used because it will measure the total output. the problem is that some people sell wider beamed lights and some sell tight beammed lights. there is no good way other than total output as meausred in an IS to compare them.
We certainly don't need a new standard.
Try using ANSI LUMENS.
Yaesumofo

To answer your last question, it can't. Stated lumens values are deceptive at best without direct comparison. Your L4 is still an awesome light capable of competing with any of the current batch "flavor of the week" LEDS. Currently there is no real replacement for the LUX V emitter IMO.

Here is the good news: the "flashlight" industry (ie. several large members of that community) is currently working together to devise a meaningful comparison standard for rating the output of flashlights of various types. This group is even including merchant and end user input in this attempt at standardization. Don't know what will come of it, but so good so far!

 

[mspeterson]

If everybody just used a Lux at 1 meter or total output measurement made in a IS it would be easy.
IMHO there is no need for any unifying standard since we allready have measurements like LUX and lumens.
Just use those.
The reality is that an IS should be used because it will measure the total output. the problem is that some people sell wider beamed lights and some sell tight beammed lights. there is no good way other than total output as meausred in an IS to compare them.
We certainly don't need a new standard.
Try using ANSI LUMENS.
Yaesumofo

If if's and but's were candy and nuts, every day would be christmas.....

It's not that there is a need for a new unit of measurement, nor is there any attempt to create one that I know of in this instance. The reality actually is that every manufacturer rates their product in a different way. From what I have been told, this new "standardization" will do exactly what you said should be done by creating a framework whereby all manufacturers conduct the same tests in the same agreed upon fashion, using Lux at one meter & integrating spheres among other measurements.

 

[cave dave]

..Fenix measures emitter lumen, which is lower then out the front lumen that Surefire and HDS(also Novatac) measure...

I want to clear up this often quoted misconception. Fenix and the majority of flashlight manufactures don't measure anything. They use calculated values based on LED datasheets and the drive levels they plan on using. They seem to conveniently not included losses from reflectors and lenses as well as temperature derating. (although those could be calculated as well). Some other manufactures seem to tack on a few extra "marketing" lumens for good measure.

Also the word "output" by definition is, well, output. The light coming out the front. So called emitter lumens is not the same as output. I notice very few manufactures making this claim but lots of CPF's do. Most manufactures webpages that use emitter lumens just say "200 lm" they don't say "200 lm output". I assume they do this because they understand the difference and they aren't technically lying.

Surefire, HDS, ARC maybe some others send a representative sample of their light to integrating spheres (IS) in order to get an idea of total output measured in Lumens. The IS is a scientific measurement tool that will produce consistent results from one IS to another within its range of tolerance.


To make a bad analogy:
If Surefire wanted to know Cave Dave's weight. They would put him on a lab scale and come up with 153 lbs.

If Fenix wanted to come up with Cave Daves' weight they would take my height and age and cross reference it to a chart and come up with 180lbs.

:sick2:

 

[cy]

cave dave... very well stated!!! got a few chuckles out of that LOL...

spec sheet lumen ratings are just that... vs lumen ratings out the front end. take spec sheet lumens less 35%-40%+ min for transmission/heat losses.

since most of us don't have access to an integrating sphere.... we all can use the integrating ceiling that's how I've been comparing outputs between lights for quite some time.

king of output is still MR-X ... still world's brightest single emitter light (Xbin five watt luxeon). 250+ lumens out the front end. output equal to Surefire M6 LOLA.

 

[shroomy]

spec sheet lumen ratings are just that... vs lumen ratings out the front end. take spec sheet lumens less 35%-40%+ min for transmission/heat losses.

Not always, Adirondackdestroyer just said Chevrofreak put the T1 at 212 lumens, it's advertised as being 225 lumens. So Fenix's quoted lumens for the T1 are only off by about 5%.

It really would be so nice if all flashlight companies had a standardized method of determining output. That's all I want for my birthday.

 

[cy]

I've got a T1 Q5 (very impressive light!)... IMHO it in no way shape or form puts out 200+ lumens out the front end. in order to achieve that ... emitter must put out 300+ lumens range.

the way emitter technology is advancing... 300+ emitter lumens may be around the corner...

my seat of the pants rating for my T1 is 130+ lumens range or aprox. same amount of light as Surefire L6. your mileage may veri... comparing lights by eyeball means little at best.

the 225 lumens rating is probably calculated off a spec sheet after factoring for current. low is rated at 60 lumens. my eyeballs says... 25 lumens.

some mfg rates by emitter lumens, some go by what comes out front end. Naturally what comes out front end is what counts!!

the fab MR-X is the only single emitter light that I'm aware of that will achieve 200+ lumen out the front end.

unless chevrofreak has access of an calibrated integrating sphere. I'd take his ratings with several grains of salt. this in no way down grading chevrofreak's work.

Not always, Adirondackdestroyer just said Chevrofreak put the T1 at 212 lumens, it's advertised as being 225 lumens. So Fenix's quoted lumens for the T1 are only off by about 5%.

It really would be so nice if all flashlight companies had a standardized method of determining output. That's all I want for my birthday.

 

[Nake]

I've got a T1 Q5 (very impressive light!)... IMHO it in no way shape or form puts out 200+ lumens out the front end.

I have a Quickbeam type lightbox. When I've put a T1 and a P3D Q5 in it, I got about 170lm. When I took the headcap/bezel off of the P3D, just the emitter out front, it showed about 200lm.

 

[meuge]

I have a Quickbeam type lightbox. When I've put a T1 and a P3D Q5 in it, I got about 170lm. When I took the headcap/bezel off of the P3D, just the emitter out front, it showed about 200lm.

I am fairly sure that T1 drives the Q5 LED harder than P3D.

 

[Nake]

I am fairly sure that T1 drives the Q5 LED harder than P3D.

I remember David Chow saying the T1 is driven a bit harder than the P3D Q5, so yes you're right.

 

[cy]

again...unless you have a calibrated integrating sphere. it means very little....

I have a Quickbeam type lightbox. When I've put a T1 and a P3D Q5 in it, I got about 170lm. When I took the headcap/bezel off of the P3D, just the emitter out front, it showed about 200lm.