How do you like your LSHF-P?

[Phaserburn]

I am contemplating getting one of these, and am curious about how you like yours. Especially if you also have/had a LSHP for comparison. For example, is the beam so tight that it becomes a tunnel light, ala the X-1 or some Palights? All impressions welcome, thanks!

 

[this_is_nascar]

For my purposes, the LSH-P was a more usefull light than the LSHF.

 

[snuffy]

The LSHF-P isn't a "tunnel light" by any means. The LSHF-P hot spot at 20' is about twice as large and the side spill is about 2/3 that of the LSH-P. Most of the beam is hot spot at the expense of side spill. At 75'-100' the LSHF-P does a better job.
My opinion ( for whatever it's worth /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif )= if you're looking for that extra 25' of reach go with the LSHF-P otherwise the LSH-P will do just fine.

 

[CM]

The best way to describe the Fraen's beam is that it is conical in shape and there is an absolutely steep drop off of light once you go outside the volume of the cone. It's not exactly tunnel vision since it does broaden out at a distance. I find that I have a use for both the NX05 and the Fraens. It's just that the NX05 is better for general purpose needs. However, for times when you need to punch out, you can't beat the Fraens with any other optic of the same size.

CM

 

[Likebright]

I find that the pattern of the light produced from the LSHF-P to be very even over the 20º spread of the beam. This is the most useful quality of the light. The optic in my LSH-S produces a much more spread out beam with a hot spot in the center, which some here desire as the spill illuminates more but with less light. In this forum somewhere there are some beam shots which quite accurately represent the pattern produced by the two.
I like my LSHF-P and find my self using it as my EDC over the LSH-S.
Mike

 

[Gransee]

You guys probably already know this, but we are out of stock on the LSHF right now. We hope to have more made before Christmas but it will be tight.

Peter

 

[EvilLithiumMan]

I don't have a LSH-P to compare with, but I love my LSHF-P just the way it is.

 

[Dave Wright]

I have a LSH-S and LSHF-P. Not quite the LSH-P/LSHF-P comparison, but I've worked with enough Luxeon lights to get a feel. I prefer the Fraen. I find it to simply put more light where I need it. Less peripheral vision, yes, but still plenty for me. In fact, I just got back from a night run that included about 2 miles of trail running. If it can keep me over roots and under low branches at a fair running pace then it's not a spot-only light like the X1 and PT Impact.

 

[BigHonu]

In general, if you do alot of close up stuff, go with the LSH-P. It has more spill, smaller hotspot, shorter reach. This may be a bad comparison, but picture the AA beam characteristics, and multiply the brightness a whole lot. The LSHF-P does have some spill, but your eyes will be drawn to the larger, but more intense hotspot. GREAT for 25' and over!

Aloha

edited to add: I really like (and am more used to) the beam characteristics of the LSHF-P better.

 

[Zigzago]

A few days ago I used my LSHF-P, clenched in my teeth, while fixing the chain in the toilet tank. It provided all light I needed. Would the LSHP have been better for this? Probably, but I don't own one. I can say that I love the long reach that the LSHF-P's spot beam has and it's still useable for closeup tasks. For me, this light seems very versatile.

 

[kaseri]

I love both of my ARC LS lights equally as each has it's strong points. LSH-P for EDC and tasks. LSHF-P for longer throw applicatons.

 

[Nathan S]

You guys are just making it harder for me to wait for the delivery of the LSHF - P I have on order .... /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/frown.gif

 

[mporter]

I have both but I prefer the LSHF-P even for close up work. It's more useful for general work. Its more focused, even light does a better job for me for everyday tasks. I have both on my dresser and every morning I always choose the LSHF over the LSH for my EDC light.

If I need to see more to the side, I can always pan the LSHF-P. But if I need more throw and I've only got the LSH-P, I'm stuck.

When walking at night, the LSHF's beam is plenty broad enough. I'm usually wanting to see ahead down the path so the extra throw works better.

 

[Tony_Britton]

My LSHF is the one light that's always with me.
I wouldn't have believed it before owning one (yes, it is my first!). I have several other Luxeon lights from other manufacturers, and they're all great lights for specific purposes. They're larger & tend to have to be 'taken for a walk'. The Arc however just lives in a pocket and goes along without a thought. It's there particularly at the times I didn't realise a light would be useful or necessary.
I reckon that it's the 'swiss army knife' of flashlights.

As for the choice, LSH/LSHF, I went for the 'F', a tighter beam, a little more throw, can't hurt. If I want wider coverage I'll wave it about a bit, as they say!

 

[SilverFox]

Hello Phaserburn,

Both lights are great. I still EDC the LSH-P, but the LSHF-P is growing on me.

Tom

 

[nexro]

Just wondering, how long would the LS last in the LSHP ?
is it 100,000 hours? or less?

 

[Mattman]

It says over 100,000 in the FAQ, but I don't know if it's specifically referring to the LS series. Whatever it is, it's a long time.

 

[James S]

I don't have the Arc with the fraen optic in it, but I do have some in some other 1w luxeon lights, and I think they are fantastic. I'm not quite ready to dive in and get another Arc for one, but I do want to put one in my current LSH-P.

Now if I could just get the thing open...

 

[Nathan S]

I just received my LSHF - P, and I'm very impressed. It will take over EDC duties immediately, in place of my LSH - P.

Congratulations on the fine product, Peter.

 

[Frenchyled]

I like it quite simply! My wife in is jealous /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif