M2XC4 versus LX2

[DimeRazorback]

:laughing:

I understood it as a joke personally... maybe use more emoticons :nana:

:D

 

[run4jc]

...SF lights exclusively use CR123A, otherwise expect a huge drop in performance which i despise.
and thank you run4jc, your talk was inspirational.

As for the talk, you are welcome. Although I do tend to sometimes 'go on' too much. Too much passion, I guess. As for the batteries, I know Surefire says to use CR123A batteries only, but I am using LiFePO4 3.0v rechargables in my LX2 and my E1B - can't 'see' any difference in output (I plan to invest in a meter to check some of this). No problems so far - I remain careful to charge them on a 3.0V charger after every 20-30 minutes of use.

Just more food for thought. It's all good.

:grouphug:

 

[run4jc]

The more I learn about this hobby, the more fascinated and appreciative I become of the smaller, higher quality lights. The Quark lights really impress me – small, great quality construction and beam. The Novatac 120E impresses me – don’t own an Ra yet but a 170T is on my wish list.

This morning I took my Surefire LX2 (small) and EagleTac M2XC4 (large) out on a pre-dawn dog walk. Approximately 40 yards away in a soccer field is a goal – the only light being the light of a moonlit sky filtered by low clouds. I thought it would be interesting to pit the relatively large, 3 emitter, claimed 800 lumen M2XC4 against the small, 1 emitter, claimed 200 lumen Surefire LX2. Forgive the shaky image quality – like another post HERE, I am trying to hold 2 dog leashes, a flashlight and take a photo with no tripod or any other support.

This is the shot from the EagleTac – again, it is somewhat shaky, but as far as exposure is concerned, it is un retouched – the Exif data can be found HERE.

Here’s the shot from the LX2 – I didn’t notice when I took it that I had not quite centered the beam on the goal – but the spill still lit it. Here’s the Exif data for this photo.



No doubt the beam from the M2XC4 is stronger – looks like a laser coming in from the side. But when you consider the size:




And look at the bezels:




it gives a new appreciation for what the Surefire is able to do. It’s almost the perfect package for size, quality and beam.

I’m hooked – I’ll have to do more of these type comparisons and post the results – but for now I hope you find this useful.

UPDATE - out this morning with my M1X and my newly acquired Quark 123.2T Neutral tint. I really like both these lights - and the warm tint from the Quark is great - as well as the quality. I had a 'normal' tint that I gave as a gift - it appears 'brighter' than this neutral tinted one, but I wanted this neutral tint even if it isn't quite as bright. Pitting an M1X against the little Quark isn't fair - I'm not meaning to compare them - just adding to the beam shots above.

Here's the Quark - you can see the goal, but just barely. A bit better to the naked eye:

The Jetbeam M1X:

The 'hardware':

Next I'll pit a Surefire C2 with Nailbender's SST-50 drop-in versus a Surefire E2DL and E1B...fun stuff! Might do another comparison of the LX2 versus the M1X - but if you compare these photos (different days) you might find that interesting, too.

 

[youreacrab]

Wow, am I glad I bought the LX2 as my first light. Since I have gotten it I have not been glued to the CPF marketplace and the web shopping for lights. I think the LX2 was the cure!

+1