How many Lumens for hiking at night in the woods ?

[00Moonshine]

Well, it depends. For navigating a trail that I'm familiar with 1 lumen is sufficient (SF Saint Minimus on lowest setting). But for trying to find my way in unfamiliar territory I like at least 200 lumens. And if your "woods" contain any critters that may be above you on the food chain (bears, mountain lions, wild hogs) I'd suggest you can't have too many lumens. For me, the Minimus on low usually does the trick, but it's always backed up by a M3LT CombatLight or a HoundDog XM-L, the latter mounted on a rifle.

 

[stockwiz]

 

[B0wz3r]

I'm with most of the ppl who replied here. Once your eyes have adjusted, you need very little to see the trail. In the clear and a good moon, you don't even need any light. For the areas that are covered or if there's no moon, I would say 100 lumens is all you need, and that's to have some reach to look for a suitable campsite. Of course, having a multimode light that can go from 100 lm to 1000 lm is kinda nice

On full moons, I find that I can still get away with 20 - 30 lumens and be just fine. In fact, if I go lower (aprox. 15 - 20) I find my light blends into the moonlight, but is just like having the moonlight in shadowed and dark areas; it's like having moonlight everywhere, all the time.

 

[mmace1]

I've hiked some at night. To join the conensus: for perfect comfort in terms of the trail, and with only my own path to light - 25 lumens. Something like a Fenix E05. Less is doable however.

In terms of looking around (up tall trees, across fields/ravines/etc) or scaring the crap out of wildlife - I can't personally imagine using more throw than your rather good Eagletec can produce.

Question though - do you want more light just to create an even brighter area around you, or to see an even greater distance?

 

[enomosiki]

Rather than sticking with a single output, it'd be better to get a flashlight with multiple output modes. Start off low for hiking, crank it up as soon as you see and/or hear anything suspicious.

 

[Valmet62]

I am more interested in seeing greater distances.

Valmet62

 

[mmace1]

I am more interested in seeing greater distances.

Valmet62

Ah OK...we should all shut up about just seeing the trail then. Sorry.

You might want to re-post the question in terms of achieving greater throw than your current Eagletac model though. Since how far a light can shine is of course a combination of its lumens output and its beam focus. It would be very easy to design a 300 lumen light that could project light a far *shorter* distance than the T100C2...so your question is really about throw, not lumens.

So...maybe rephrase in a new thread with "Recommend hiking lights that can throw significantly further than my Eagletac C100C2", or something like that?

 

[ebow86]

Depending on the situation and surroundings, even a 2AAA mini maglite will provide sufficent light to navigate around with, provided theirs no moon or ambient light. Not that I would be walking around in the dark forest with such a light having dangers lurking around every corner

I personally believe that the best light for navigating around dark woods is by far the A2 aviator. Your LED's give more than enough light to navigate around yet with a simple press you have 80 lumens of wonderful incan goodness on tap. Wooded arears with lots of trees and foliage are where incandescents really shine, once you see the surroundings in the vivid clarity and warmth of a good incan, it's hard to go back to anything less.

 

[Richub]

I am more interested in seeing greater distances.

Valmet62

In that case I'll recommend the Fenix TK41. Throws a LONG way, even on medium setting.
On turbo it's simply amazing, but reading around on CPF you've already noticed 100 or so other flashaholics say the same about the TK41s throw.

 

[bodhran]

20-30 lumens is fine for me, and I don't feel like I'm intruding on other hikers or campers enjoyment. If I need more light, then a high of 100 lumens seems more than enough. More important to me though is a neutral or warm tint.

 

[whomever]

I will happily hike with as little as 5 lumens or perhaps even less. You will find that in the woods you need a lot less light than usual because there is very little ambient light. ... You may, however, want a light with a lot of flood (M61) in case you need to get your bearings, or a light with a lot of throw (G5) if you need to be able to follow trail markers.

+1

On a trail in deep woods, I usually use low on a Zebralight H501, which is in the low single digit lumens. I may click it up to medium (low double digit lumens) for a stream crossing or whatever. I will use high (100ish lumens) prior to leaving camp in the dark, to make sure I'm not leaving anything.

For hiking, I strongly prefer an all flood light like the 501. When you have a light with a hotspot, you (well, me anyway) end up just focusing on the hotspot - it's a lot harder to avoid rocks in the trail and so on, and it's hard to read in bed, cook in the dark, and so on.

When you do want a thrower is scouting for trail markers, etc. I carry the 501 and use it 99% of the time; I also carry a H51 (and used to carry a surefire) for the 1% cases where throw is nice, and as a backup.

 

[Cataract]

On regular flat trails, I use from 0.2 lumens when it's real dark to 30 lumens when it's real bumpy. I might go as high as 50 lumens on rough mountain trails. I don't remember ever needing more than ~100 lumens to check out noises (no bears around here) and do remember my eyes hurt every time I go from 0.2 to 100 lumens, but I often use a lot more than that just to find out if there's a big puddle of mud ahead, only so I don't have to get there and turn back before I look for an alternate road. Of course, I always have something strong to play with, but for actual walking 30 lumens is plenty of light.

 

[rickypanecatyl]

I hike quite often in woods, jungles, mountains at night. A cheap pinch light next to the cosmo magazine at the grocery store check out is plenty to see a well defined trail. At the same time I've had my 80K lux varapower with me and times it just didn't reach far enough. I was searching across moores and valleys and was hoping to be able to see to the other side to be sure of my direction.

I saw a caving movie recently...Sactum I think it was called. Of course caving is different than hiking but there is a lot of overlap. Wathcing the movie would make it obvious why you would want a light that ran on 2-3 lumens or so but would last for days and why also having a light with 100K lux is nice too.

I don't know if this makes sense, but when there is a good moon out and I'm not walking in really dense forest I like to be able to "feather" a low lumen light in with the moonlight - usually about 2-5 lumens of warm light. Often I've been in a scenario when the moon is out and I can make out mountain peaks 10 miles away. I can barely make out the trail I'm walking on by the moonlight alone. If I turn on 100 or even 10,000 lumens of light there is no way I'll be able to see the big picture as well. 10,000 lumens with a 1 million lux at 1 meter isn't near enough light to show the mountain peaks 10 miles away. In that kind of scenario adding 2 lumens the trail is helpful to not stumble and enables me to still see the mountain peaks miles away. 50 lumens though and my night vision would be shot and I would only be able to see the area lit up by my light.
Of course the best light to jockey all these real world variables around is a multi mode light. Some multi mode light are useless for this - like a jetbeam RRT3 - tons of levels that really aren't that different. Seriously spacing levels powers of 10 apart covers the different types of lighting you might need such as .5, 5, 50, 500 lumens.

 

[EnduringEagle]

For hiking I think it is all about how much weight you are willing to carry around. The TK41 is a great light no doubt but carrying it around may not make you happy.

 

[B0wz3r]

I don't know if this makes sense, but when there is a good moon out and I'm not walking in really dense forest I like to be able to "feather" a low lumen light in with the moonlight - usually about 2-5 lumens of warm light.

Yes, it makes perfect sense to me... Sounds like you're echoing what I mentioned before... I like a low level light that is low enough that it washes out under a full moon, but still gives illumination in shaded/shadowed areas, so that the level of light in those areas is comparable to the brightness of the moonlight. That way I get a sort of 'seamless transition' between moonlit areas and shadowed areas.

 

[Cataract]

Seems like we do the same thing. I like to use the minimum amount possible so I don't have to wait around to get my night vision back, unless the terrain is rough enough to twist an ankle.

 

[indychris]

Surprise, surprise, 35+ posts and almost that many opinions!

So I'll add mine. I hike at night quite a bit, and in wooded areas. I've become accustomed to not needing much light, but I will admit to when I first started it took me a while to not want a really bright light b/c of things that go bump in the night. Then it dawned on me that the only thing a BRIGHT light would do for me is let me see what's about to eat me just a little bit better!

Seriously, though, if you're otherwise happy with your EagleTac, maybe try the T20C2 MKII with an R2 module. It gives you good throw with some adequate (for me, anyway) spill, and will allow you to adjust your brightness as well. Or you could even opt for the new XM-L High Output and go with 12/105/500 lumens or a burst of 720. Or you could compromise and go with a XP-G R5 which I think falls somewhere in the middle. I took the T20C2 MKII with XP-G R5 on a recent trip to the Grand Canyon. It worked great!

There really is almost a limitless number of options, so good luck choosing!

 

[octaf]

Walking in the woods at night, I find bright lumen or strong hot spot kind of disturbing. I do not deny that there's an occasion you need to light up the distance with throw, but in most cases I find low lumen floody light much more comfortable for walking.

 

[robostudent5000]

Surprise, surprise, 35+ posts and almost that many opinions!

really? i got the impression that the growing consensus was 30 lumens or less.

 

[KenAnderson]

I hike quite often in woods, jungles, mountains at night.

I don't know if this makes sense, but when there is a good moon out and I'm not walking in really dense forest I like to be able to "feather" a low lumen light in with the moonlight - usually about 2-5 lumens of warm light. Often I've been in a scenario when the moon is out and I can make out mountain peaks 10 miles away. I can barely make out the trail I'm walking on by the moonlight alone. If I turn on 100 or even 10,000 lumens of light there is no way I'll be able to see the big picture as well. 10,000 lumens with a 1 million lux at 1 meter isn't near enough light to show the mountain peaks 10 miles away. In that kind of scenario adding 2 lumens the trail is helpful to not stumble and enables me to still see the mountain peaks miles away. 50 lumens though and my night vision would be shot and I would only be able to see the area lit up by my light.
Of course the best light to jockey all these real world variables around is a multi mode light. Some multi mode light are useless for this - like a jetbeam RRT3 - tons of levels that really aren't that different. Seriously spacing levels powers of 10 apart covers the different types of lighting you might need such as .5, 5, 50, 500 lumens.

This was well spoken and I agree fully. Shining a bright light across a moore won't necessarilly kill my night vision as the vast expanse disperses the light, but shined at an object 20 feet away and I see stars when the bright light goes out. Close up, I need small lumens for a small area, and the perfect light for me is a well spaced out multi-level.