Have LED's really caught up with incans?

[Icebreak]

Trying not to sound mean spirited here, JTR, but it's doubtful I'll be able to hang with you much longer on this exchange. Frankly, your sequential structure and logical structure are just too muddy. One thing bleeds into another. One thing morphs into another. Everything drifts back to your personal world in the role of the universal benchmark. It's actually beginning to give me a headache reading it. The subject is about a performance trend in LED hand held lighting and how that trend compares to incandescent hand held lighting performance. The subject is not about what jtr1962 thinks society needs. The subject is not about your displeasure with your city's lighting choices.

If they work for you then wonderful. My comment about the need part is exactly that. A doctor examining tissue may need a light source biased towards red (or a much brighter light source without red bias) to be able to shine enough red photons at tissue to discern subtle differences. Same for you cooking steak or examining a snake. That's exactly what I meant about need and thanks for giving those examples. Many (most?) really have no such needs.

See what I'm talking about? Before it was all about what people are used to, their habits. Then you admit and concede incan's superiority. But then you turn around and discount the need. Just a flippant blow-off…no such needs exists. It continues…

Point of fact I'd say the majority have no real need to distinguish subtle degradations of color at either end of the spectrum, so pretty much any light source will do, and people generally buy based on initial purchase price. That's their real preference

Here you've discounted my reference to light source preference as not being the "real" preference. You've also decided to rule that any light source will do for the general populace. Awesome that you have decided most humans don't qualify to have valid preferences. Wow.

Those who have really specific needs for lighting know it and buy accordingly. Everyone else it's either force of habit or just buying whatever is cheapest. I wouldn't call such behavoir a preference.

And this is some real clear-as-mud cognitive processing. You just now used cost to discount light source preference as not being the "real" preference. You make cost the "real" preference. Now you say cost is not a preference. Nothing is a preference. I'll challenge that not even the author can follow that reasoning.

I don't really care for red meat (and would use a thermometer, not a flashlight, to determine temperature if I did),

It doesn't matter that you don't like steak. Other people do. Some of us prefer our recipes to Capriccio's. The temperature of a steak is determined by color not Fahrenheit. color...light...yes?

I doubt I'll ever meet Eva in person much less need to see her blush.

Eva is not the only beautiful woman in this world that may cross your path. They are everywhere. And beautiful women are not the only bio-form that will give important visual ques. Outside in the real world, in the woods, in the city, on the ocean, in the mountains, in the air, there are important visual ques available for observation. Some are so important they could be the difference between life and death.

My only real need is to see white that looks like white and to have a light source which doesn't fatigue me or give me headaches.

That's a very narrow need with a highly specialized criteria. Judging what everyone else needs based on what you need is not clear thinking. You say you understand that some people may prefer different light sources but you annoyingly dribble right back to why it's not valid, or important based on your own experience. Simply put, it's really not all about you.

The information is still there with LEDs, but the end result just looks different

Just looks different? JUST - LOOKS - DIFFERENT? :candle:

And you do remember what we are talking about right? :laughing:

Well, you got part of it right. If the frequency is undetectable by the human eye it has no value. The end result is that the target illuminated by a deficient source will look different than a target illuminated by a source that is fully potent across the photometric grid. The latter is what many people prefer whether you think it's valid, important, reasonable or not.

Here's something you might try that could help you to see a different perspective. Get outside at night, way outside. Bring a couple of flashlights. Pop up a tent. Start a fire. Cook a simple meal on said fire. Share a bottle of Cabernet Sauvignon. Pinch a pretty girl on the butt.

 

[jtr1962]

Yes. I in fact was surprised by some of the studies mentioned in your links pointing towards a higher color temp being preferable. I expected the opposite. Those studies either covered just color temp (with flourescent) or compared two low CRI source (high pressure sodium vs LED) so they aren't directly applicable. They just put the whole discussion in a "new light" for me. <cues the drummer for the rimshot>

I'm not surprised at all. We evolved under a 5500K light source. Also, those studies don't use low CRI sources. The 7500K scotopically enhanced source has a CRI of 91. Even regular white LED isn't a low CRI source. It's middle of the road, around 80, comparable to CFLs or the lower grade of triphosphor T8 tubes, both of which are considered acceptable light sources for non-color critical application. The cool-whites used in industry for years had a much worse CRI of around 62. Sodium vapor (HPS) and mercury vapor are far worse. LPS has no color rendering at all as it's a single wavelength.

As a kid I had two pairs of corduroy pants that I HATED wearing. (Those pants are a couple orders of magnitude worse in my memory than all of my incan haze annoyance combined.) I swear it felt like the fabric sucked all moisture from my skin and the noise made me hate moving. I was perfectly oblivious to the horror of them being bell bottoms and the big collared, loud patterned, plaid polyester shirts I was normally forced to wear with them. I wouldn't argue that people shouldn't wear similar fabrics. Their might be some parallels to this discussion.

I can easily argue for nobody wearing fabrics like that. Those 1970s styles and colors were tacky and an assault on the eyes. Wouldn't surprise me if the designers were high on LSD.

 

[jtr1962]

The subject is about a performance trend in LED hand held lighting and how that trend compares to incandescent hand held lighting performance. The subject is not about what jtr1962 thinks society needs. The subject is not about your displeasure with your city's lighting choices.

And thank people like LuxLuthor and you for the tangent we're on here because the thread went from talking about mainly LED output and throw relative to incandescent to how incandescent is a superior type of light which LED can't match, or other really subjective comments based on both of your personal preferences. The problem is both of you make it out to be some kind of absolute, as if there's something wrong with anyone who doesn't prefer incandescent light. And you expect not to be challenged? Are my preferences not equally valid?

You go on and give a few valid example where indeed the red-biased light of incandescent might be better for the task at hand. I countered by stating that most people don't have such specific needs. Pretty much any halfway decent light source is "good enough". That's not a blow-off, it's a fact. Even LuxLuthor stated as much when he said he was 99.9% sure most people won't even notice if he changed the light sources in his house while having them over for dinner several nights in a row. Sad to say most people are not very aware of their environment.

My statement about cost not being a preference needs a little clarification. When you mention preference for a given light source I'm assuming that the reason for preferring it has to do with the spectrum, to put things in the broadest possible terms. This is why when I say when people buy light sources based mainly on cost it is NOT a preference for a given type of light because the decision to buy it is not based on the type of light emanating from the lamp. Rather it is a preference to save money, or rather initial purchase price. In other words, the fact that many still use incandescents doesn't necessarily mean there's any special preference for that type of light because the low cost is likely the primary driving factor. If on the other hand, people will still buy incandescents in a world where they cost as much or more than alternatives, then this is telling me they have a strong preference for this type of light. Using myself as an example, I did and do pay more for the harder to find 5000K full-spectrum tubes I use because I prefer their light over the alternatives. Yeah , I need to distinguish subtle colors when doing electronics work but beyond that most of my lighting needs are simply as I initially stated. Granted, I muddied things up a bit the way I initially stated them. I hope I'm clear now.

Eva is not the only beautiful woman in this world that may cross your path. They are everywhere. And beautiful women are not the only bio-form that will give important visual ques. Outside in the real world, in the woods, in the city, on the ocean, in the mountains, in the air, there are important visual ques available for observation. Some are so important they could be the difference between life and death.

Granted but to me anyway it seems you think only incandescent light can pick up these cues. If you need to distinguish between subtle shades of blue or purple or even green your incans may not be of much use unless you really ramp up the intensity. They're as deficient on that end of the spectrum as LEDs are on the other end. The spectra shown earlier in this thread vividly illustrate that. They even show that incandescent is nothing at all like the primary light source we evolved under-sunlight. They're both blackbody curves but the similarity ends there.

Just looks different? JUST - LOOKS - DIFFERENT? :candle:

And you do remember what we are talking about right? :laughing:

Well, you got part of it right. If the frequency is undetectable by the human eye it has no value. The end result is that the target illuminated by a deficient source will look different than a target illuminated by a source that is fully potent across the photometric grid. The difference is what many people prefer whether you think it's valid, important, reasonable or not.

And what is this source which is fully potent across the photometric grid? The only one I can think of offhand is sunlight, although LEDs like the Nichia 083 are getting close. The problem is you don't want to admit that an object illuminated with incandescent is going to look way different than it would illuminated with sunlight. You had to train yourself to pick out the necessary information under this different type of light. I submit that this is no different than training yourself to pick out the same information under LED light, or for that matter any other fairly decent light source not having huge spectral gaps. Remember that an LED spectrum is continuous even though it has peaks and valleys. The photons are there. To get more info on the red end you might need to increase the intensity relative to incan, but I submit you can cook a steak or do anything else you currently do just fine given enough training. Now if there was no red in the spectrum at all that's another story. Of course, you have no real need to do this as you can just pull out your incan, but my point is you can if you wanted to.

Here's something you might try that could help you to see a different perspective. Get outside at night, way outside. Bring a couple of flashlights. Pop up a tent. Start a fire. Cook a simple meal on said fire. Share a bottle of Cabernet Sauvignon. Pinch a pretty girl on the butt.

I'm not really into the whole outdoor thing. Outside of the wine and pinching the girl, nothing on your list appeals to me. That's my preference. It's as equally valid as your preference for doing those things.

Unless you have anything to add I think we're pretty much done here. I'm starting to get a headache, too, and my CTS is acting up.

 

[Icebreak]

I'm not really into the whole outdoor thing. Outside of the wine and pinching the girl, nothing on your list appeals to me. That's my preference. It's as equally valid as your preference for doing those things.

Unless you have anything to add I think we're pretty much done here. I'm starting to get a headache, too, and my CTS is acting up.

Agreed. Wine and girls.

Really, I think the most important thing we've learned in this thread is that everyone likes Eva.

Take care of yourself.

 

[Kiessling]

So ... we can at least agree on this version of Eva then?

 

[baterija]

In your case, has it been bad enough that you've actually gotten headaches like me?

Just to reinforce what I said to Lux, so he can stop worrying about a sample size of 2 becoming "common knowledge"...no. (Breathe Lux...breathe. 😉) It's just the occasional "this sucks" realization followed by a couple minutes of grumpy light fiddling. Once I realize I am wasting time and force my self to move on my brain gradually goes back to auto-correcting.

And to add to what you wrote, the lack of blue in your peripheral vision is what accounts for the well known tunnel vision effect of driving on a street lit with sodium vapor lights. While lack of blue light is merely an annoyance indoors, it's actually downright dangerous while driving. Do you find the effect you described to be even worse under sodium streetlights? I know I do. It's a shame that knowledge of how we see was limited when these lights were foisted on us in the 1970s. Besides the tunnel vision, the much lower S/P ratio meant these lights appeared dimmer than the mercury vapor they replaced, even though the photopic lumens and efficiency were higher on paper.

Not really... take a look at my avatar a second. I have experience moving vehicles in far more adverse lighting conditions than sodium lamps. Sodium lighting sucks at just about everything but efficiency, and LED's have caught up there, but I don't really notice it except when I am not driving. Given my frames of reference I think I trained my brain into being happy it can see past the front of the vehicle when it's in motion.

Here hold this and stand with your head out of my sunroof while we drive to the store :candle: Driver move out!

...and I liked the first picture of Eva better. :naughty:

 

[asdalton]

Back to the subject of optics versus reflectors ...

Here is a beamshot comparing the Surefire TIR against a reflector.

Left: Surefire KL1-R (older KL1 Luxeon III w/ McR-20 reflector); Right: Surefire L1 (2008 Cree version)

Two things that the photo doesn't show quite correctly:
1. The hotspot of the L1 is about 4x as bright as that of the KL1-R.
2. The outer sidespill of the L1 is about the same diameter as that of the KL1-R.

 

[kaichu dento]

Trying not to sound mean spirited here, JTR, but it's doubtful I'll be able to hang with you much longer on this exchange. Frankly, your sequential structure and logical structure are just too muddy. One thing bleeds into another. One thing morphs into another. Everything drifts back to your personal world in the role of the universal benchmark. It's actually beginning to give me a headache reading it.

Ever heard of the pot calling the kettle black.

 

[LuxLuthor]

Yes, this is the brightes of the lot that uses the new TIR. There's also the L1, E1L, E2L and the E1B with the same TIR. Or you can buy the KX2C head that produces the same oomph as the E2DL but is one level only and sports no teeth. It costs the same as the whole E2DL though :green:

bernie

I just ordered this E2DL, and some SF batteries, so when I get it, I'll come back and give you my honest opinions on this TIR feature. It's always good to be open to new improvements. Thanks! :thumbsup:

PS) I can't enjoy that B&W version of Eva....partly the cig...can't ever imagine kissing an ashtray...and she somehow looks suicidally depressed. LOL! Isn't it so funny how different we all are? I really enjoyed this thread, because it makes you think about why you like what you like...which in some cases is not really as valid as you started out thinking it was. Baterija, your posts were really wonderful to read--I admire people who can convey what they want in such a manner. Seriously.

 

[Icebreak]

kaichu -

Gesundheit.

Where are my manners?

Let me be of some assistance. Yes. You have an internet connection. Yes. Your keyboard is operational.

Will there be anything else? How about a short story to break up the monotony? Yes? OK.

Petey was the strange little local Chihuahua. The children wished him no harm, they just wouldn't play with him. Petey, continuously confused by the aroma that remained after the lead dogs had been at work, became so excited he rendered himself incontinent. He piddled out some dribbles of pee pee. Happy with his contribution, he ran about in a tight circle but then stepped in his own puddle. With a worried look on his face, he shook his paw then galloped off to find some other stupid thing to do; all the while thinking to himself, "I'm a big dog, I'm a big dog".

Hope you liked the story.

Will there be anything else today sir?

Oh, wait. I almost forgot. Could you do us all a big solid? Yeah, um, when you're doing reviews of cheap flashlights on Amazon could you not refer to the CPF membership as "flashlight fanatics" in your failed attempts to make yourself feel better about that cheap, cat-urine green, China light you got? Yeah, that'd be great. Thanks.

 

[kaichu dento]

kaichu -

Gesundheit.

Where are my manners?

Let me be of some assistance. Yes. You have an internet connection. Yes. Your keyboard is operational.

Will there be anything else? How about a short story to break up the monotony? Yes? OK.

Petey was the strange little local Chihuahua. The children wished him no harm, they just wouldn't play with him. Petey, continuously confused by the aroma that remained after the lead dogs had been at work, became so excited he rendered himself incontinent. He piddled out some dribbles of pee pee. Happy with his contribution, he ran about in a tight circle but then stepped in his own puddle. With a worried look on his face, he shook his paw then galloped off to find some other stupid thing to do; all the while thinking to himself, "I'm a big dog, I'm a big dog".

Hope you liked the story.

Will there be anything else today sir?

Oh, wait. I almost forgot. Could you do us all a big solid? Yeah, um, when you're doing reviews of cheap flashlights on Amazon could you not refer to the CPF membership as "flashlight fanatics" in your failed attempts to make yourself feel better about that cheap, cat-urine green, China light you got? Yeah, that'd be great. Thanks.

Your last tasteless post had nothing to do with this thread, but neither has a good percentage of your other posts. 🙄

Trying not to sound mean spirited here, JTR, but it's doubtful I'll be able to hang with you much longer on this exchange. Frankly, your sequential structure and logical structure are just too muddy. One thing bleeds into another. One thing morphs into another. Everything drifts back to your personal world in the role of the universal benchmark. It's actually beginning to give me a headache reading it.

Judging what everyone else needs based on what you need is not clear thinking. You say you understand that some people may prefer different light sources but you annoyingly dribble right back to why it's not valid, or important based on your own experience. Simply put, it's really not all about you.

You should read some of your own posts and realize how they reflect on you more than the people you've aimed them at from your keyboard war room.

Yes, "it's really not all about you". Bring it back to incans & led's and quit picking bar fights on the internet. 😉

 

[Icebreak]

Reality check. Another member and I completed an exchange in a friendly way. You thought you'd stick your nose into it after the fact. There's always one of those guys at a bar. Often they are named Petey.

See if you can contribute some knowledge to this thread. If you are unable to, then do us all a favor and try to make amends for insulting this community in another highly public format.

 

[jtr1962]

I can't enjoy that B&W version of Eva....partly the cig...can't ever imagine kissing an ashtray...and she somehow looks suicidally depressed. LOL!

Same here. No matter how attractive someone might be, the minute I see a cigarette in their mouth forget it-instant turn off. 😱 I picture them in a cancer ward with no hair and with all sorts of tubes sticking out.

Isn't it so funny how different we all are? I really enjoyed this thread, because it makes you think about why you like what you like...which in some cases is not really as valid as you started out thinking it was.

Yep, and it's interesting reading about how we all see the world differently. I really think you're on to something regarding anatomical differences being as important as cultural ones. For example, I made an earlier comment about 5000K being used a lot in Japan and other Asian countries but attributed that to mostly cultural differences. Now I wonder if the distribution of rods and cones of Asian races on average is somehow a little different than those of Caucasian, perhaps enough to account for this preference? And furthermore, I wonder if my own distribution is closer to that than to those of most Caucasians? Although I'm of Italian background I'm sure the full range of rod and cone distribution types is represented in every race. Interestingly, to add a little weight to this theory, most of my friends back in school tended to be Asian as I felt most comfortable with them, and I absolutely adore Asian females (not to take anything away from Eva however 😉 ). So maybe the similaraties go beyond rod and cone distribution. Anyway, very interesting discussion here.

Almost forget to mention-one thing I absolutely HATE about LEDs is the tint lottery. I'll give incan points here for always giving the same color light at any given drive level. LED still has a long way to go in that regard. And hopefully that takes the discussion back to the original purpose of this thread.

 

[js]

I just ordered this E2DL, and some SF batteries, so when I get it, I'll come back and give you my honest opinions on this TIR feature. It's always good to be open to new improvements. Thanks! :thumbsup:

PS) I can't enjoy that B&W version of Eva....partly the cig...can't ever imagine kissing an ashtray...and she somehow looks suicidally depressed. LOL! Isn't it so funny how different we all are? I really enjoyed this thread, because it makes you think about why you like what you like...which in some cases is not really as valid as you started out thinking it was. Baterija, your posts were really wonderful to read--I admire people who can convey what they want in such a manner. Seriously.

Lux,

I'll be really interested to see how you like the TIR. As one incan guy to another, I can tell you that my SF L1 Cree is awesome. It has the tightest beam of any flashlight I own--although I'm really not a throw fanatic, so maybe that's not saying much, and the throw from a stock magcharger focused down to its tightest beam is probably just as tight or tighter.

But, in any case, I find that the combination of the Cree and the TIR does really really well outdoors. Not as good as a good incan, in my personal experience, but pretty damned good.

As for milkyspit throwing TIR's away, I think there are two main reasons for this, neither of which is a comment on the quality or performance of TIR's:

1. He and his customers prefer a wider beam with more spill, and also an aesthetically smoother, more appealing beam. TIR's do have some ringy-ness to them, and some texture in various regions. I find it to be a total non-issue, but if you place a high premium on beam aesthetics, you won't like it.

2. He is a modder and wants to change things up, and the TIR in a TIR light isn't really as amenable to that as a reflector, from what I can see. But I'm no expert on TIR's.

Anyway, I look forward to your impressions.

 

[js]

Everyone,

<MODERATOR HAT ON>

The tone of this thread is getting a little bit worrisome to me. Please let's not go down that train-wreck path here, OK? There have been some great contributions by many, so far.

So, please respect the opinions of others, or rather respect the others in this thread, even as you disagree with their opinions. There is no need to get nasty, OK?

Thank you. Please return to your regularly scheduled conversation.

<MODERATOR HAT OFF>

 

[Stereodude]

In terms of output they're getting there...

M*g 2D-->6AA ROP:


Epsilon ED-P72 (SSC P7):



Color is getting closer too...

Dereelight CL1HV3 w/ Q3 "warm" pill:


Dereelight CL1HV3 w/ Q5 "cool" pill:


Baseline/control:

 

[kaichu dento]

***Improper posting deleted by js***

On topic once again, I see far more comments about the superiority of incan than the reverse, and up till recently have been inclined to agree, but am gradually leaning towards the newer warmer tints being released. I guess it's this type of thread that allows a wide variety of views to come together, sometimes in a harsh manner, that allows all of us to learn a little more, but I sure wish it could consistently be done in a less abrasive manner. :sigh:

 

[js]

kaichu_dento,

I warned everyone to STOP with the personal attacks. EVERYONE was warned, including you, including Icebreak, including jtr.

The bell has been rung. The fisticuffs are at an end.

Make one more post along these lines and you will find yourself with a week off from CPF.

I trust I've made myself clear.

 

[kaichu dento]

In terms of output they're getting there...

M*g 2D-->6AA ROP:


Color is getting closer too...

Dereelight CL1HV3 w/ Q3 "warm" pill:

Both nice and warm, but I'm tending to lean more towards the Q3 here.

 

[kaichu dento]

kaichu_dento,

I warned everyone to STOP with the personal attacks. EVERYONE was warned, including you, including Icebreak, including jtr.

The bell has been rung. The fisticuffs are at an end.

Make one more post along these lines and you will find yourself with a week off from CPF.

I trust I've made myself clear.

JS, I really enjoy reading your posts and am sorry to all for the disruption. I really do try to come in a peaceful manner and will continue to do so. :wave: