List Lights that use NO PWM

[chillinn]

None of our flashlights or headlamps in production now uses PWM (or any other type of pulsing mechanisms) in controlling different brightness levels.

I'd be ecstatic if that were true. I have 2 Zebralights, SC5w and SC62c, and my research here convinced me neither used PWM. Then I bought and used them. They both behave identically, have the same UI. It's not that I noticed PWM, what I noticed was the onset of headaches all the way up to migraine when using certain modes more than others. At the very least, the brightest low mode on both has some sort of PWM-like pulsing mechanism that is visually detectable if looking for it the way we look for PWM, and both the lower medium modes have it also. These were my 3 most-used modes, used for hours on end as the single light source in a room.

I was devastated to discover the headaches were being caused by these Zebralights. These lights are flashlight-perfection in many ways... the single gripe I have is that they definitely are not fully Constant Current drivers on all modes, their single and glaring flaw. And this is certainly not circuit noise, but an intentional scheme to prolong runtime. If I instead use the ReyLight Cu Tool as a single light source, a known CC driver, I get no headaches. But I grow weary of AAA capacity when using a flashlight this way, not as a task light, but as a room lamp. I realize few use flashlights as lamps unless they are camping, but I'd rarely get to use a flashlight if I only used them when needed for flashlight tasks.

If Zebralight has changed something in their drivers since I purchased mine (mid-2016), if they are indeed actually and factually fully constant current without a PWM-like pulsing scheme, then I will be a return customer. But this change in Zebralight driver to fully CC must be proven here first before I'd consider shelling out so much for one again.

 

[jon_slider]

"minimal ripple"

if Zebra has a new driver that does not show minimal oscilloscope ripples or photographable dots, please share photos.

I was devastated to discover the headaches were being caused by these Zebralights. These lights are flashlight-perfection in many ways... the single gripe I have is that they definitely are not fully Constant Current drivers on all modes
...
If I instead use the ReyLight Cu Tool as a single light source, a known CC driver, I get no headaches.

Thank you for sharing your direct experience of the effect of the latest Zebralight SC5 on your brain.

I will leave the Zebras on this NoPWM list, and also on the YesPWM list, as one of the "controversial" lights
imo Zebras use a hybrid system that is neither pure PWM nor pure Constant Current.

 

[Trango]

@ jon_slider
my Fenix E05 SS does not seem to have PWM, did the camera test on low and medium and it always appears as a full line.

 

[Tachead]

I'd be ecstatic if that were true. I have 2 Zebralights, SC5w and SC62c, and my research here convinced me neither used PWM. Then I bought and used them. They both behave identically, have the same UI. It's not that I noticed PWM, what I noticed was the onset of headaches all the way up to migraine when using certain modes more than others. At the very least, the brightest low mode on both has some sort of PWM-like pulsing mechanism that is visually detectable if looking for it the way we look for PWM, and both the lower medium modes have it also. These were my 3 most-used modes, used for hours on end as the single light source in a room.

I was devastated to discover the headaches were being caused by these Zebralights. These lights are flashlight-perfection in many ways... the single gripe I have is that they definitely are not fully Constant Current drivers on all modes, their single and glaring flaw. And this is certainly not circuit noise, but an intentional scheme to prolong runtime. If I instead use the ReyLight Cu Tool as a single light source, a known CC driver, I get no headaches. But I grow weary of AAA capacity when using a flashlight this way, not as a task light, but as a room lamp. I realize few use flashlights as lamps unless they are camping, but I'd rarely get to use a flashlight if I only used them when needed for flashlight tasks.

If Zebralight has changed something in their drivers since I purchased mine (mid-2016), if they are indeed actually and factually fully constant current without a PWM-like pulsing scheme, then I will be a return customer. But this change in Zebralight driver to fully CC must be proven here first before I'd consider shelling out so much for one again.

I am sensitive to PWM and have never noticed any effect what so ever with my H600 MKIII's. I am not saying that you don't, but it is quite common for people that are worried about or looking for a problem to have a problem. It can be psychological(and often is) and I would not read too much into it or say it is proof of anything. There is plenty of research on this phenomenon. Plus, a lot more then the way a light is driven can have an effect on a person. To do a true scientific test, you would have to be using the exact same emitter(literally swapping it between drivers) at an identical output. And, it would have to be on a number of different people that didn't know what the test is about.

I think a lot of you guys stress and obsess about things too much. They are just flashlights guys lol. I try not to buy lights with visible PWM as well but, you have to realize a bit of pulsing or high frequency PWM is not going to harm you and you are already exposed to it, many times a day, every day of your life. The monitor or cell phone you are currently looking at is flickering, as is your TV. Almost every LED household bulb on the market has PWM or flicker. As does all the new street lights. Even the Christmas lights all over town right now use PWM or flicker of some kind. Billboards and digital signs too. You pretty much cannot not be exposed to it unless you live in a cabin in the woods lit by candles and use no modern technology.

 

[chillinn]

I think a stranger and definitely existent phenomenon, compared to your proposed phantom PWM-related illness (which prior to your post I have never heard of), is the PWM-apologies that keep showing up from the "I don't care"-crowd, following the forms of "it doesn't matter," "it's not a big deal," "you're blowing it out of proportion," and the like. Considering that one camp that doesn't care about PWM, they tend to spend more posts than one would think trying to mitigate it as a problem that is only a problem if you let it be a problem.

IMO, if a flashlight is a premium quality flashlight, if it is attempting to compete in a best of the best category, and its driver uses PWM incidently and not because it must, then that is a clear deficit in the design and diminishes the notion of "premium." The manufacturer is cutting corners for a negligible increase in profit. I find it to be nothing less than cognative dissonance that a flashaholic could be more attracted to all the quality details, and then leave one the most important as a "I don't care." So they'd require a glass lens, o-rings for water tight seal, a host milled to perfection with exquisite threading, of a certain specifically sought-after material and type of anodizing, a click switch of such and such quality, an emitter that has certain aspects... but in the end completely ignore that the driver is cheap crap, and then try to promote the idea that "PWM doesn't matter." The idea that this occurs, and occurs over and over, is absurd. Why would you want a flashlight that is nearly perfect, and then have the imperfect part be the driver, of all things? Its like buying a luxury or performance car with all the exquisite trappings, and then saying "I don't care" that the tires have no tread... car still goes and is really nice... but it isn't really perfected... they cheaped out on the tires.

 

[nbp]

I guess then I'm sure glad I cannot perceive PWM, because for me that nearly perfect light actually is perfect. 🙂

I've had many lights and I have never been able to detect PWM in any of them. Finally something I'm good at!

Edit to add: I'm just being funny here, not picking a fight. 🙂

 

[Connor]

Some real i.e. scientific information on the matter: http://webvision.med.utah.edu/book/part-viii-gabac-receptors/temporal-resolution/

I stand by my earlier opinion: if the pulsing frequency is high enough (likely somewhere in the 10 kHz - 100 kHz range), humans are physically unable to perceive it. The chemistry in our retinas needs time to "refresh" before it's able to see the next light pulse.
When the light source/image does not move most of us can't even see 60 Hz.

 

[jon_slider]

Gentlemen, this thread really is not intended to discuss, argue, or even educate, on the importance, value, merit, dangers or other personal preferences about PWM. It is really only intended to list lights that use Constant Current.

If PWM bothers you or not, if your reasons for caring or not caring about PWM are valid, or not, is NOT the purpose of this thread.

I have gotten too caught up explaining Why I Care about PWM. Im not going to do that any more. Im going to respect that people who do not care about PWM have their reasons, and Im not going to try and convince anyone they are wrong or should change their mind.

Similarly, please respect those of us to Do Care about PWM for our own Personal reasons. No need to attack each other personally, for having differences in our personal preferences.

I Choose not to buy lights with PWM. I have a few reasons I wont argue about. If someone Chooses to buy lights with PWM, I respect their choice too.

Please dont use this thread to argue the pros and cons of PWM. There is a Sticky about PWM where all those issues could be discussed.

This thread is only about listing lights that use Constant Current. Not about our opinions regarding whether PWM matters to one person and not to another.

Please, dont shoot the messenger. Merry Xmas!

 

[rookiedaddy]

@jon_slider, my sincere apology for causing so much negativity with the photo I shared... and referring to one member's post here, it's captured using cheap (phone) camera...
so, for full disclosure (actually it's available with the image's metadata -- exif info), I'm using Samsung S7 Edge's camera to capture that image... below is the image again... all TIP in med mode...

NitecoreStore has already posted that these "wave lines" are not PWM, so let's leave it at that.
I'd captured the same "wave lines" at high mode too, which may cause disbelief to some, but let's leave it at that too.

now that I have some free time on hand, I have decided to try capturing the "wave lines" using another "cheapo camera" -- Sony RX100 video mode, and varied the shutter speed variable from 1/10 to 1/2000, as the video is posted in Full HD, please watch it in Full HD mode to appreciate the full glory of the waves...

again, please be reminded to watch it in Full HD mode...

for what it's worth, unlike some light that "truly" uses PWM (e.g. the old Fenix LD05 Penlight, which happens to be the worst Fenix flashlight I ever purchased), I cannot detect the "wave lines" of these TIP in all modes in usage...

 

[jon_slider]

thank you
I took a screenshot of the video

 

[Mr. Tone]

I saw a post in this thread that mentioned the new 2017 Streamlights are not using PWM. Is this really true and confirmed? I really like Streamlight's designs and have used several on duty in the past. However, the PWM on the lower modes was very noticeable and drove me nuts. It was obviously a very low frequency, because it really was noticeable with even slight movement. The models I was using were probably made 2012 to 2014.

 

[jon_slider]

Added Manker LAD (not pure PWM, also imo not pure Constant Current)

 

[ElectronGuru]

Re: List Lights that use NO PWM, nor pulses, and are true Constant Current

FYI
Oveready / TorchLAB v5 are constant current. This includes both Wasp and BOSS.

Elzetta may also be non pwm. Many configurations are single level heads + two mode resistor in the tail cap.

 

[jon_slider]

Re: List Lights that use NO PWM, nor pulses, and are true Constant Current

FYI
Oveready / TorchLAB v5 are constant current. This includes both Wasp and BOSS.

Elzetta may also be non pwm. Many configurations are single level heads + two mode resistor in the tail cap.

thank you. I agree that single mode lights, and 2 mode resistor lights, do not use PWM.

where did you get the info about the Boss and Wasp? have you tested those lights with a camera?

fwiw, Manker Lad, Nitecore Tip, and Zebralight, all claim to use NoPWM, but they are also not constant current, and this can be demonstrated by the presence of scan lines in photos I have posted.

fwiw, Zebralights do not use PWM, but they use pulses. I do not consider Zebralight a Constant Current light.

Here is a photo of Low1 on an SC52 (photo from Samsung Galaxy S7)

 

[nbp]

Re: List Lights that use NO PWM, nor pulses, and are true Constant Current

EG is part of the team that MAKES the BOSS and Wasp, so he knows a lot about the design of the light engine.

 

[jon_slider]

Re: List Lights that use NO PWM, nor pulses, and are true Constant Current

EG is part of the team that MAKES the BOSS and Wasp, so he knows a lot about the design of the light engine.

good to know, thanks

Then this might be a great opportunity to hear whether the light uses any type of pulses, even pulses that do not drop to zero, and are technically not PWM, but also not Constant Current. HDS for example uses a hybrid system that is neither PWM, nor constant Current, so does Zebralight.

Many manufacturers report their lights are NoPWM, Zebralight, Eagletac, Tip, LAD, yet the lights still use pulses that produce scan lines in photos.

I just bought a LAD on the manufacturers say so that it has no PWM, and technically it does not, but it does use pulses. Here is a photo of the Manker techically not PWM. I think we could at least all agree that this photo does not show a Constant Current light.

The manufacturer of Zebralight also claims their lights use no PWM, which technically is correct, but as you can see in the photo, Zebras also do not seem to use Constant Current:

Im guilty of using a broader definition of the term PWM, to include pulses that dont drop to zero, but are not constant current. fwiw, Zebralight insists their light IS constant current.. so maybe Im just confused about the technical terms, but the photo tells the story.

 

[jon_slider]

Re: List Lights that use NO PWM, nor pulses, and are true Constant Current

Added Oveready Boss

extreme closeup photo I requested, courtesy of run4jc. no "circuit noise" of any kind.. Outstanding Flashlight imo!

 

[jon_slider]

Re: List Lights that use NO PWM, nor pulses, and are true Constant Current

Added Astrolux M01 and M03

 

[Lex Icon]

Re: List Lights that use NO PWM, nor pulses, and are true Constant Current

Never having noticed any PWM on my MecArmy PT-18, I found this review and photo on another forum claiming lack of PWM.
http://forum.fonarevka.ru/showthread.php?t=31563

 

[ssanasisredna]

Re: List Lights that use NO PWM, nor pulses, and are true Constant Current

Constant current does NOT mean no ripple (or pulsing or whatever term you want to use). It just means a regulated average current.

Zebralight IS constant current. It is likely (but not a given) that their regulation scheme uses something called peak mode current control, and how they have sized the components, likely for cost, size, efficiency, has some ripple at the switching frequency.