LED versus Xenon ? What is better?

[BB]

I understand that most folks who now exclusively use LEDs at one time used incandescents...I love this light and it easily beats out my Fenix P3D for a trail light...Now, is this $20 cheap incan better than my Fenix P3D? No. If I had to choose just one light to own, would I choose it over my P3D? No....The point is, I enjoy both technologies and I would hate to see you all keeping yourselves from doing so just because of some unnecessary hang-ups....However, this message was directed at the broader LED-only community...

Why continue this? Nobody has limited themselves to LED only. You are evangelizing for incandescents but say a cheap incandescent is not a good as a cheap LED--but you would still get the cheap cheap incandescent over the cheep LED.

What is the point about arguing which is "better" when you, apparently, ignore your own conclusion and get the "less good flashlight" .:shrug:

Buy and use what you like with great joy.

-Bill

 

[wrathothebunny]

I do agree that LEDs (for flashlights) along with Fluorescents (for indoors) are the wave of the future. Incandescent is older technology, though their have been novel ideas of how to improve their efficiency, such as coating the insides of the bulbs with substances that reflect back heat. The problem with increasing the color temp of the filaments is that color temp really does correspond to how hot that thing is getting. Current 3300 K bulbs are approaching their limit, much higher and the filament will just plain start to melt, oxidation or no. In any case, current research suggests that most people will find a 4000 K lightsource (perhaps even as low as 3700 K) most pleasing in lower light environments, such as the outdoor night-time environment. For indoor work, you may prefer 5000 K I suppose. Of course, every person is different, but for the general populous, I believe a flashlight in the 3700-4000 K range would be preferred over a 5000 K flashlight, all things being equal.

 

[jtr1962]

The problem with increasing the color temp of the filaments is that color temp really does correspond to how hot that thing is getting. Current 3300 K bulbs are approaching their limit, much higher and the filament will just plain start to melt, oxidation or no.

I was thinking along the lines of a synthetic filament material here, not tungsten which is already at its limits. If we could find something which conducts electricity plus remains solid at as high a temperature as possible then incandescents may still yet have a future. As for color temperature preference, the beauty of a 5000K or even 6000K filament material is that you don't have to run it near its limits if you don't want to. You can run it at 3700K, 4000K, anything up to its maximum rated temperature, depending upon your preference. The only major problem I see with much higher temperature filaments would be the need to block UV, perhaps via a UV reflective coating which can also reduce power consumption similar to the way present IR coatings work.

Although my sweet spot for general lighting seems to be in the 4500K to 5500K range, I find CCTs as low as 3500K or as high as 6500K acceptable.

 

[2xTrinity]

I was thinking along the lines of a synthetic filament material here, not tungsten which is already at its limits. If we could find something which conducts electricity plus remains solid at as high a temperature as possible then incandescents may still yet have a future. As for color temperature preference, the beauty of a 5000K or even 6000K filament material is that you don't have to run it near its limits if you don't want to. You can run it at 3700K, 4000K, anything up to its maximum rated temperature, depending upon your preference. The only major problem I see with much higher temperature filaments would be the need to block UV, perhaps via a UV reflective coating which can also reduce power consumption similar to the way present IR coatings work.

I don't think we'll ever see a practical solid material able to physically reach temperatures higher than tungsten or carbon (around 3700K). It is certainly possible to reach apparent color temperatures higher than that using incandescent technology by using things like filters and reflective coatings -- I know there has been some work done with IR reflective coating, and I'm sure there's a lot of potential to go there. However, I expect that LEDs will both drop in cost, and improve in capability to the point where it will actually be cheaper to go solid state, than with some exotic next-generation incandescent, for effectively the same thing.

In the shorter term, I'd like to see some more options become available in small-scale HID lights and ballasts (read: the 10-50 watt range suitable for flashlights).

Although my sweet spot for general lighting seems to be in the 4500K to 5500K range, I find CCTs as low as 3500K or as high as 6500K acceptable.

Indoors, for ambient lighting, I prefer 3500K. I actually find I can see better at that color temp and actually get away with less light -- For example, I find that a 9W 3500K CFL (500 lumens) is a suitable replacement for a 60W incan, or 14W 2700K CFL (850 lumens). For task lighting, I prefer 5000K.

Outdoors, my preference is HID at about 4000K (true for flashlights, street lights, and auto headlights -- provided glare is properly managed). The closer to that, the better -- the LEDs that I prefer are Cree WH bin, around 5000K, augmented with a small amount of red light. The incans I prefer are the ones being driven the hardest, 3200K+.

 

[R11GS]

I'm no material specialist, but what materials have a higher melting point than tungsten (3695 °K)? I understand that tantalum hafnium carbide (Ta4HfC5) has an extremely high melting point of 4488 K, but I can't think of anything else.


Seems like to incandesce at the temperatures you folks are discussing you may need to bail on anything solid...

 

[wrathothebunny]

JTR1962,

I doubt that'll be the way they go. Right now some researchers are looking into carbon nanotube filaments, but they top out at 3500K. Perhaps filament-less designs is where future technology will take us, like HID, but better spectral qualities, shorter ramp-up time to full brightness, and lower power options. The problem is, of course, that insane voltage is required to create that filament-less arc, but there could be a lot of creative ways to address this problem, perhaps creating multiple mini-arcs.

 

[PlayboyJoeShmoe]

The TEC 40 trick sounds good.... IF I meant to take the light for use.

The small LED lights like the P1 or the MTE are WITH me because they take up little room.

I haven't sworn off Incans by any means. But they don't ride on my person anymore.

 

[wrathothebunny]

I would agree that LEDs seem better suited for EDC for most general, non law enforcement or military applications. I EDC my P3D, but I don't see swearing off incans any time soon. For camping and hiking, nothing beats their rendering properties, and 3 hours runtime is not too shabby for the Tec 40.

 

[jtr1962]

However, I expect that LEDs will both drop in cost, and improve in capability to the point where it will actually be cheaper to go solid state, than with some exotic next-generation incandescent, for effectively the same thing.

Probably true. I was just postulating some possible developments which might save incandescents from extinction. In the long run I'm sure solid-state will win as it's inherently cheaper to make an LED instead of a gas-filled sphere with a coiled filament. Look at those tiny lamps used for modeling. Despite the advantages of decades of production, they're much more expensive than 5mm LEDs.

 

[wrathothebunny]

One can spend a lot of time speculating over which technology will win out: LEDs, Incandescents, HID, etc. I don't personally see the point in it if such speculation is meant to justify what you've perchased today. It seems like the rationalization process is: I purcahsed an LED - Someone just addressed an advantage that Incans have that LEDs don't - But that's ok, because LEDs will eventually have those advantages too - So I made the right choice buying into LEDs. :thinking:

In any case, tomorrow's technology won't improve today's LEDs or Incans. Judge each technology on its current merits as it applies to the flashlights you own. Who really cares who wins? As long as the products continue to improve, we all do.

 

[woodrow]

I just looked at Flashlight Reviews and pulled up the review on the Wolfeyes 3.7v incan running on a 18650. It seems to produce about the same overall output as a Fenix P3D with more throw, with over 40 min of good light output. That would be tempting to me.

I had a SF 9n shortly after they came out. While I did not like the nicad batts (I believe they are better now than when they first released the light) It really had a nice beam and I liked the 2 bulb setup and size.

The new Wolfeyes 300 light looks pretty cool as well.

This debate has made me re look at incans. I want Free lumans both for myself and rechargables are better for the environment. But there are still some pretty neat incan designes out there. I was also really impressed by the Wolfeyes flat discharge curve.