NEW Surefire L1 (65Lu) 2x brighter than Fenix L2D-CE '135 Lu'!

[xiaowenzu]

Hi guys! *waves*. After a long absence, I'm back I initially considered getting the L2D-CE buuuuuuut just to let everyone know, I've just put in my order for the new Surefire L1 cree after reading Craig's review at the LedMuseum!... just confirmed what I knew Thought to share my pleasant surprise at what I'd found..

[4 hotlinked images removed by moderator]

Surefire L1 Cree review:
http://ledmuseum.candlepower.us/tenth/l1-2-2.htm

Beam photo at ~12".
Measures 1,950,000mcd on "high" and 230,000mcd on "low".
Both measurements taken from 12" on a Meterman LM631 light meter.
Beam photo at 10 feet.

Fenix L2D CE review:
http://ledmuseum.candlepower.us/ninth/fenixl2d.htm
Beam photograph on the test target at 12".
That "rotten squid urine green" color you see in the photograph does not exist in reality.
A slightly more accurate rendition (though without the greenish corona around the hotspot) is shown in the photograph directly below.
Measures 135,400mcd (low) to 905,000mcd (high) on a Meterman LM631 light meter.
Beam photograph on a wall at ~10 feet.

Okay, I'm quite frankly SHOCKED! We all know that Fenix inflates their light output, but I didn't know it was by this much! From the beamshot reports, it looks like the Surefire L1 High mode is twice brighter than the Fenix on Turbo mode. 1,950,000 vs 905,000. I haven't got an integrating sphere, but it looks like the L1D-CE is producing much less light than the claimed output. :sigh:

Anyways, that's my rant for the night. It's nice to be back guys! I'm also looking forward to see reviews of Novatac 120-P coming soon! 120 'REAL' Lumens of BLIND DESTRUCTION!

 

[leeleefocus]

I think craig is measuring the intensity of the beam and not the lumen output which are two completely different things. The L2D could have more lumens with a lower candle power rating.

 

[WadeF]

+1 to leeleefocus, and if you look at the beam cross-section analysis you will see the Surefire max out at 46.1 (Cd) on his chart, while the Fenix maxes out at 188.6 (Cd). The Surefire's hotspot looks more broad, and probably has less spill. Doesn't the Surefire L1 use an optic? So more light maybe concentrated in that spot, where the Fenix has a tighter hot spot and more spill.

 

[xiaowenzu]

I think craig is measuring the intensity of the beam and not the lumen output which are two completely different things. The L2D could have more lumens with a lower candle power rating.

Oh I see, I thought it simply can't be possible that the SF L1 cree at 65lu could be overall brighter than the Fenix L2D-CE @ 135Lu even when taking into considering the over-inflation from Fenix. Still, I gotta say the SF L1 cree is doing pretty well, and I can't wait to receive my light this week yay! :twothumbs

P.S so Craig is actcually measuring the Hotspot intensities and not the spill? I think maybe the Fenix L2DCE might have a wider spill to compensate for the lower brightness at beam center. However I read that the SF L1 TIR optics is designed for producing a wider spill than the typical reflector optics *confused* If that's the case then I'd love to see some spillshots of both compared! Probably not as broad as L2DCE I think, but still pretty good, I'd reckon.

 

[jumpstat]

What I see is two(2) different beam pattern. SF L1 which has an intense spot not much spill, whereas the Fenix L2D spot is slightly smaller but has some spill in the mix. So it depends on the users preferences. To me spill is more useful in close quarters work but do not contribute at all for throw.......

 

[WadeF]

It would be easier to compare if Surefire told us how many mA they were sending to their emitter and how man lumens their emitter is producing. Say they send 350mA for ~ 80 lumens, and out the front they get 65lm. Does anyone know how much current Surefire is sending to their emitter?

 

[xiaowenzu]

What I see is two(2) different beam pattern. SF L1 which has an intense spot not much spill, whereas the Fenix L2D spot is slightly smaller but has some spill in the mix. So it depends on the users preferences. To me spill is more useful in close quarters work but do not contribute at all for throw.......

From what I've read here so far, there's nil complaint about the spill (or lackof) of the SF L1 cree, and that's a good thing because I've just ordered one! Anyways, from the beamshots above, I'm pretty happy that SF L1 hotspot is Larger and Brighter than Fenix L2D, even though it can't match the far side spills. Not bad for a 65lu light against the 135Lu Fenix! :nana:

 

[Handlobraesing]

Point them both at the ceiling in the dark and compare how they light up the room. This is a good, no cost way to do a rough total output relative comparison.

 

[TigerhawkT3]

Yet another "my SF has more output than a Fenix, based solely on hotspot mcd readings" thread.

Um, hooray?

:shakehead

EDIT: And this time, we get hotlinked pics from Craig's site! Aren't we lucky? I'm sure Craig wouldn't mind. :thumbsdow

 

[adirondackdestroyer]

Point them both at the ceiling in the dark and compare how they light up the room. This is a good, no cost way to do a rough total output relative comparison.

I do this from time to time to compare output, but it has to be a pretty small room (bathroom,closet) to make the difference all that noticable. Mostly because an extra 50 lumens doesn't do a whole lot when you figure it is lighting up a very large space during a ceiling bounce.

About the two lights in question... the Fenix L2DCE has been tested to put out right around 110 lumens on Turbo. The new Surefire L1 has not been tested (to my knowledge) by any third party reviewer, but Surefire is very reliable when it comes to lumen claims. I would think that it will be right around 65 lumens.
The difference is that Surefire claims output lumens while Fenix claims bulb lumens. Neither is wrong and alot of companies claim bulb lumens. Look at Inova for example and how they claim 100 lumens for the old T4 which really put out around half of that. Now that is an OVER estimate.

 

[daveman]

Yet another "my SF has more output than a Fenix, based solely on hotspot mcd readings" thread.

Um, hooray?

:shakehead

EDIT: And this time, we get hotlinked pics from Craig's site! Aren't we lucky? I'm sure Craig wouldn't mind. :thumbsdow

So Xiaowenzu is back with his old "hit and run" tricks.... this guy's trick is just sad. According to the link above, he pretended he was a noob last time and took Craig's reading numbers (beam intensity=throw) and insisted they were numbers for overall output (lumens). He was corrected once already, I guess he retreated from CPF in shame, but now comes back with the same trick in the hope that everyone has already forgotten who he is.

I also had to correct him on a fake beamshot comparison he took between a Fenix and some Inova light, I think. He apologized like crazy and insisted it was an accident and was not heard from again until now. Rigged beamshots...:shakehead Feel free to search his posts if anyone is interested.

 

[Valpo Hawkeye]

FWIW, I have a P2D CE and a Cree L1. The Fenix is less than 135 lumens and the Cree L1 is brighter than 65 lumens. That being said, they are different types of beams, as has already been noted by several others in this thread. I think either Chevro or VT did tests that put Fenix 135 lumen claim somewhere just north of 100. The L1 Cree seems to be in the 80-90 range, but that's a guess.

The Fenix still has fantastic output, especially for its size. It lights up a room better than the L1 Cree. However, the L1 THROWS! IMHO, it has better throw than the A2. I've used both in informal tests while walking the dog and, color rendition aside, the L1 lights up a larger spot at a better distance.

 

[xiaowenzu]

He was corrected once already, I guess he retreated from CPF in shame,

Hi daveman! *hugs* I only wish I did, but I just came back from a loooong trip to Europe, it's been such a long time! Anyways, I'm just saying with Craigs review, now, that the center hotspot of the SF L1 cree is more intense/brighter than the Fenix, and the hotspot is larger too. However, overall the Fenix L2D 135 Lu is likely to produce more total light though. :nana:

 

[daveman]

I think either Chevro or VT did tests that put Fenix 135 lumen claim somewhere just north of 100.

Both Chevrofreak and Quickbeam (better known as Flashlightreviews.com) have tested the Fenix L2D at 110 lumens.

The L1 Cree seems to be in the 80-90 range, but that's a guess.

I wouldn't know, the L1 could JUST BE a 65~70 lumen light, as it says it is, no one has tested it.

Anyways, I'm just saying with Craigs review, now, that the center hotspot of the SF L1 cree is more intense than the Fenix, and the hotspot is larger too. Overall the Fenix L2D 135 Lu is likely to produce more total light though. :nana:

Right....isn't that what you said the FIRST TIME you tried this stunt? Of course, you forgot to change the title of your thread to reflect your mistake.

 

[xiaowenzu]

Chevro or VT did tests that put Fenix 135 lumen claim somewhere just north of 100. The L1 Cree seems to be in the 80-90 range, but that's a guess.

That's darn impressive! Yea, now that you mention it, I do remember reading that review sometime ago:twothumbs I'm glad I put in my order for the L1 Cree - I can't wait to hold it in my hot lil hands very soon! hehe

Right....isn't that what you said the FIRST TIME you tried this stunt?

No stunt, I am simply genuinely impressed with the brightness of the HUGE hotspot from the L1 Cree. And the spill seems aint bad either. I've just came back from Europe long trip and my minds still a bit rusty with everyone, but I'm settling back in! hehe

 

[Valpo Hawkeye]

I wouldn't know, the L1 could JUST BE a 65~70 lumen light, as it says it is, no one has tested it.

Yeah, I remembered Chevrofreak's test put the Fenix's between 100 lumens and their claimed output of 135. As for the L1 Cree, I base my guess off two things:

1) Comparing it with other lights that I know the output of such as the Fenix L2D CE.
2) SureFire has consistantly understated their output values of their lights, presumably so no one can say their SF didn't meet output expectations.