Flood vs spill brightness

[B0wz3r]

High all.

I'm still trying to decide on a new EDC light and am currently comparing the Q-mini AA and the EZAA.

I found a beamshot by EngrPaul on the Quark Mini Users thread that compared their beams quite nicely.

http://www.candlepowerforums.com/vb/showpost.php?p=3191833&postcount=34

What I'm thinking about here is the size vs brightness of the spill area. The mini clearly has a larger spill area, what I think most here would call a floodier light.

However, I'm thinking that the EZAA might be considered floodier because even though the area of the circle of light is smaller, it's brighter. (Yes, I know that there's an inverse relationship between them and all that, not my point.)

Now I personally prefer "floodier" lights for close work but to my mind, the fact that the EZAA has a brighter spill even with less area makes it the "floodier" of the two lights. Seems like more usable illumination because of the lower difference between the spill and hotspot.

I'd appreciate any thoughts on this to help me decide. I've been very happy with the Quarks I've purchased, and if I went with the EZAA it would be my first NiteCore. I'm still chafed, however, by the fact that neither has a good clip... :thumbsdow

 

[Saint_Dogbert]

Well, my def of flood is having a wide hotspot. The umodified spill portion of the beam is just that: spill. It can provide some peripheral illumination, but generally won't be the best for really lightin' stuff up. Spill size or intensity does not make a light more or less floody. If you need a light on the floody side, I would be inclined to think that you'd be happier with the larger hotspot of any XP-G light.

 

[madmook]

For up close work I'd want pure flood over any sort of hotspot.

Look up the Zebralight H501, $60+

Or the Romisen RC-29, ~$23

Both are 1xAA lights.

I also have a Nitecore EZAA, but the levels are a bit lop-sided imo. The low is very low (enough for finding your way around in the dark, but imo not enough for general tasks), and the high is too distractingly high for up-close work, and plus it gets too hot after a few minutes on high.

 

[Beacon of Light]

A nice floody headlamp is a Princeton Tec EOS 4 mode. It has some throw so it's not like a Zebralight H-50 (120 degree reflector) which is all flood and no throw.

 

[B0wz3r]

Well, my def of flood is having a wide hotspot... Spill size or intensity does not make a light more or less floody.

This is exactly what I've been thinking. It seems most people define "floody" as 1) the diameter of the spill. Seems to me a better definition is, 2) the relative size of the hotspot to the spill size, or 3) the brightness of the spill relative to that of the hotspot.

Seems to me the best way of thinking about it is 2 and/or 3 above. That said, I've been interested in the EZAA because while its spill area is smaller than the Q-mini AA, it's a lot brighter, therefore providing more usable light.

With regards to the EZAA though, i'm also thinking of going with the neutral white... would the fact that it's got a lower rated brightness reduce the high being too bright? Or is the lower rating just because of the perceptual difference in tint?

 

[jhc37013]

Well, my def of flood is having a wide hotspot. The umodified spill portion of the beam is just that: spill. It can provide some peripheral illumination, but generally won't be the best for really lightin' stuff up. Spill size or intensity does not make a light more or less floody. If you need a light on the floody side, I would be inclined to think that you'd be happier with the larger hotspot of any XP-G light.

Thanks for making think about this, I guess I have always considered spill and flood the same thing but this makes alot more sense now. The hotspot is floody(large diameter hotspot) and has lots of spill for example.

Sometimes its the simple things we look over.

 

[B0wz3r]

Well, I had to get it out of my system.

I had originally ordered a Quark AA R5 with a prism kit and filters, but I changed my mind and decided that would be my wife's christmas present. She normally turns her nose up at my guy-stuff like this, but this summer we bought an entry level telescope for my 4th grade son, and we've been really getting into it since then. The Quark and prism with filters will be a great light for her for astronomy, combining the moon-mode and the red filter for the prism kit.

Anyway, to get to the point, I just popped off for an EZ AA in neutral white from 4sevens. My first NiteCore and my first neutral light. I'm looking forward to seeing how it works. From what I've read here, the neutral EZ AA is not as bright as the cool white version, but for my EDC uses, I'm not going to be searching for stuff at range... rather, I'll be using for all kinds of close-up tasks. That's why I think that at least from what I have learned and understand right now, the EZ AA will be the best choice as it has the most uniform light output across its entire beam area compared to other lights. (Yes, I know... not a Zebra though...)

Anyway. I'm looking forward to getting it to see what it's like. :twothumbs Despite the fact it doesn't come with a clip and there are none available for it... :thumbsdow

 

[NutSAK]

I don't really think it comes down to the size of the hot spot....

I would call a "floody" light one that has a low ratio of spot (beam center) brightness to spill brightness. A perfect "flood" would really have no spot at all, which would result in the lowest (1:1) beam center:spill brightness ratio. A "thrower" would have a much larger ratio of brightness spot:spill, as a light meter would show. If you switch a "thrower" with a SMO reflector to an OP reflector, you have diffused some of the intensity of the spot into the spill area of the light. This would lower the spot:spill brightness ratio, and therefore make it more "floody".

A larger spot would accomplish a lower ratio, because you are collimating a portion of the beam into a larger central area, but I don't think it's just the size of the spot that defines "floody". One good example of a light with (what I consider) a "floody" beam but doesn't have a large hot spot is a Novatac.

...just my opinion, of course.

 

[OceanView]

I would call a "floody" light one that has a low ratio of spot (beam center) brightness to spill brightness. A perfect "flood" would really have no spot at all, which would result in the lowest (1:1) beam center:spill brightness ratio.

I have always thought of "flood" this way, too. To me, a floody flashlight is like a floody workshop light--a big, diffuse amount of light without a single intense spot of illumination.

The overall size of the beam is harder to pin down in a definition. A light that projects a large, even beam even up close--textbook flood in my book. But take another light. The beam may seem narrow when you shine it on the wall next to you so you might think "thrower", say because of an optic, but shine that same light down a hallway where it now projects a 12 foot circle of even light, and I'd be inclined to call that a floody light, at least for use at that kind of distance.

In any case, to take the opposite extreme, I personally don't call a light with a pronounced hot spot "floody" no matter how big the spill is.

 

[hoongern]

I don't really think it comes down to the size of the hot spot....

I would call a "floody" light one that has a low ratio of spot (beam center) brightness to spill brightness. A perfect "flood" would really have no spot at all, which would result in the lowest (1:1) beam center:spill brightness ratio. A "thrower" would have a much larger ratio of brightness spot:spill, as a light meter would show. If you switch a "thrower" with a SMO reflector to an OP reflector, you have diffused some of the intensity of the spot into the spill area of the light. This would lower the spot:spill brightness ratio, and therefore make it more "floody".

A larger spot would accomplish a lower ratio, because you are collimating a portion of the beam into a larger central area, but I don't think it's just the size of the spot that defines "floody". One good example of a light with (what I consider) a "floody" beam but doesn't have a large hot spot is a Novatac.

...just my opinion, of course.

I generally agree with this definition by ratio, however, you will also run into issues with aspherics... since it also has a 1:1 ratio. I guess that you could say that when it has a 1:1 ratio, then it is EITHER ALL flood or ALL spot.

I'm not sure either. Too tired to think out the logics of these statements right now..

 

[B0wz3r]

Hi guys,

Thanks for the input; it's nice to see that I'm not off my rocker or anything with respect to what I've been thinking about this issue. Your thoughts match up pretty well with what I've been thinking. :twothumbs

As an aside, today I received the new Quark AA XPG that I ordered. As it is going to be a Christmas present for my wife, I very carefully opened the box to keep it as pristine as I could and pulled the head off and tried it out on my AA^2 (XRE) to compare them.

Now you're going to think I'm crazy because this goes against the conventional wisdom everyone has been passing along here about the XPG, but the hotspot was smaller than that on the XRE head. (And just so you know, I don't have any beamshots; don't have the equipment, etc. to be able to do so. Sorry.)

It also has a greenish cast that lessens as the output increases. In moonlight mode the entire output is VERY green. On max though, I can't be sure that I see it at all except for the fact I know it's there so I might be imagining it as a result.

Anyway, as the AA is for my wife for astronomy, I put the XRE head on it and carefully packed it back up and stashed it away until Christmas. I also received shipping notification that the prism kit and filters, and the EZ AA (w) I ordered shipped today. I'm amazed at how quickly the QAA got here, so if the next order follows the same timetable I'll have it by Saturday. I'm anxious to try out my new EZ AA.

And damn it... now I want a Q-mini AA too! Augh! It's happened... I guess I'm officially a flashaholic now!

 

[NutSAK]

I generally agree with this definition by ratio, however, you will also run into issues with aspherics... since it also has a 1:1 ratio. I guess that you could say that when it has a 1:1 ratio, then it is EITHER ALL flood or ALL spot.

I'm not sure either. Too tired to think out the logics of these statements right now..

Good point. An aspheric is a different beast altogether from a reflector or collimating optic. I would consider an aspheric to be all spot, no spill. All (well, most) of the light emanating from the die is collimated by an aspheric, so I would consider that a beam with no (or negligible) spill. Therefore, it is not technically 1:1 (1:0?) and not floody. But you're right, the definition doesn't apply as well here...

Perhaps we should also add something about the overall size of the beam, because it does have an impact, as OceanView pointed out. :shrug:

 

[CaseyS]

My floodiest light is a Malkoff MD2 with M60WLF drop-in. It uses a 20 degree optic to produce a very large hotspot with essentially no spill. It's a nice happy medium between a zebra light and a typical reflector based light.

 

[B0wz3r]

Hi again,

Just bumping this thread because I've been looking for a new bicycle light set up. I recently had to rig my Quark AA^2 into a helmet mount light using the hand strap it came with; it worked very well. In fact, it worked so well, I'm now of a mind that I want to get two single AA lights and a pair of bikeblocks to mount one on each side of my helmet (Clone-trooper style), and just lose the handlebar mounted light I've been using for the last year and a half.

I was originally thinking going with a pair of Quark AA's, but I've been investigating NiteCores as well. I recently bought an EZAAw as a keychain light and like it very much, particularly because of the beam pattern. I consider it to be floodier than the Quarks because even though the circle of light is smaller, the spill area is much brighter, and they have an overall higher output.

I'm also considering going with 14500's if I do this. I know this should give me more run time over primaries, but can anyone confirm this for me? Also, how do AW 14500's compare weight wise to L91 primaries? I know the L91's are nice and lightweight (which is a concern because I'm going to be wearing these things on my head), but are the AW's significantly heavier, or of a comparable weight?

 

[Dude Dudeson]

I have an old LED light that I'd describe as "splood".

If I shine it at 10 feet it has about a 2 foot wide circle of perfectly uniform light. So it will kind of throw (for an old 30 lumen 1x CR123), yet there's no hotspot whatsoever, yet it's not quite like a flooder either.

More like a BIG hotspot with no spill.

 

[kaichu dento]

I don't really think it comes down to the size of the hot spot....

I would call a "floody" light one that has a low ratio of spot (beam center) brightness to spill brightness. A perfect "flood" would really have no spot at all, which would result in the lowest (1:1) beam center:spill brightness ratio. A "thrower" would have a much larger ratio of brightness spot:spill, as a light meter would show. If you switch a "thrower" with a SMO reflector to an OP reflector, you have diffused some of the intensity of the spot into the spill area of the light. This would lower the spot:spill brightness ratio, and therefore make it more "floody".

This sounds like as good a description as I've seen yet and corresponds with my thoughts, except that it's written better than I could express!

I've been interested in the EZAA because while its spill area is smaller than the Q-mini AA, it's a lot brighter, therefore providing more usable light.

With regards to the EZAA though, i'm also thinking of going with the neutral white... would the fact that it's got a lower rated brightness reduce the high being too bright? Or is the lower rating just because of the perceptual difference in tint?

I have a few of the EZAAw's and got my cool tint MiNi AA last week. The flood area of the MiNi beats the EZAA for me hands down, and is bright enough to make the EZAA seem just far too narrow. Although I've been carrying the EZAAw for months now, and still like the light in general, I have wished right from the start that it had a wider beam pattern, not to mention a wider hot spot too. I got all that from the MiNi, and a third level too.

Both lights have a low that is higher than I would like to see, but at least the MiNi, with it's 3 levels has a little lower low.

I think that someone wanting a little narrower search type beam may like the EZAA better, and for purposes of general walking light, close range room searching will like the MiNi AA better.