phantom23
Flashlight Enthusiast
- Joined
- Nov 3, 2007
- Messages
- 2,044
Similar. XP-G will be brighter bicause of higher emitting area but surface brightness (lumens per square mm) is bascally the same.
No more flashlights - waiting on Cree XP-G
- Thread starter JohnR66
- Start date
Help Support Candle Power Flashlight Forum
RobertM
Flashlight Enthusiast
My purchase of LED lights has actually slowed quite a bit as of lately. While the XP-G looks promising, I'd really like to see greater efficiency and output in high-CRI emitters. Actually, I'd just like to see some manufacturers actually use high-CRI emitters (such as the Seoul 93 CRI P4) in their lights.
-Robert
-Robert
kramer5150
Flashaholic
Not terribly excited over anything on the near horizon, at least not till' emitter efficiencies improve. 700 Lumens for 10 seconds doesn't really excite me.
Garys actual lumen thread was a real eye opener for me.
Garys actual lumen thread was a real eye opener for me.
Last edited:
Henk_Lu
Flashlight Enthusiast
"Cree is taking sample requests now, and plans the product to be commercially available the third quarter of this year,"(source), so pretty soon.
The "37% brighter and 53% more efficient than the brightest XR-E LED" -part sounds pretty good to me
Someone said that 100 Lumen are 100 Lumen. Damn right! The only issue is that the 100 Lumen out of a Luxeon V eat 2 x CR123A in an hour (serves as a hand heater though...) and the 100 Lumen out of a modern LED take less than half of that, the XP-G should take about a quarter.
That is the really interesting point for me! I don't know how many Lumen I need, depends on the light, in a house 100 are more than enough, I don't know how much a thrower at the "normal" size of a CR123A can handle up to the point where the eye doesn't see a difference anymore.
What I know is, that it is a good thing to have more output for less consumption. Imagine a light that runs 24 hours at 100 Lumens... :huh:
kramer5150
Flashaholic
"...The "37% brighter and 53% more efficient than the brightest XR-E LED" -part sounds pretty good to me
x2.. Ooh thats got my attention.:twothumbs
mudman cj
Flashlight Enthusiast
I'll take an R2 or R3 in a nice 5B tint please. 
waddup
Flashlight Enthusiast
- Joined
- Oct 29, 2008
- Messages
- 1,269
eventually there will be an emitter that produces 500 lumens and runs for 6 hours on a single AA alkaline.
what will flashoholics do then?
:thinking:
what will flashoholics do then?
:thinking:
WadeF
Flashlight Enthusiast
Cram 5 of them in a Maglight for 2,500 lumens.
I'm exciting to see the XP-G R4's as it's anther step up in efficiency, output, and supposedly a little better CRI. Any gain in CRI is a plus, especially when it comes along with better efficiency. While it may not match the LED used in McGizmo's Sundrop, that LED takes a big hit in the efficiency department to get that high CRI. So this is good news seeing the CRI and efficiency improve over XR-E R2's.
I've wondered if the CRI from a XP-E is any better than a XR-E as I've been very impressed and satisfied with my Quark 123 with a XP-E R2. I think I like it over my neutral white 5B and 5A tinted XR-E's.
While it's great to get more lumens, it's also great to get the same lumens with more run time and less heat. Why would you want a light that's 100 lumens and gets hot when you could have a light that's 100 lumens and runs cool, and for a longer time, with the option to crank up to 250-300 lumens out the front? A XP-G R4 at 1A should be impressive. Can't wait to see some of them tested in an IS.
Last edited:
Kestrel
Flashaholic
Over here, I'm waiting. Pared the stable down to two Malkoff's for my user hosts, even though I have more P60-type hosts that currently want drop-ins. Also I have at least one NIP SureFire that will want to make its way to 'Milky' once these are available...
Actually, there's an issue here. Cutting-edge LED technology is closing in on what, ~50% efficiency, roughly? So there would be an upper limit (100% conversion efficiency, for example), and also based on the energy in the AA cell & the maximum rate that it can deliver power, for example.
LEDAdd1ct
Flashlight Enthusiast
I have seen no news whatsoever to suggest the XP-G will have higher CRI.I'm exciting to see the XP-G R4's as it's anther step up in efficiency, output, and supposedly a little better CRI. Any gain in CRI is a plus, especially when it comes along with better efficiency. While it may not match the LED used in McGizmo's Sundrop, that LED takes a big hit in the efficiency department to get that high CRI. So this is good news seeing the CRI and efficiency improve over XR-E R2's.
I've wondered if the CRI from a XP-E is any better than a XR-E as I've been very impressed and satisfied with my Quark 123 with a XP-E R2. I think I like it over my neutral white 5B and 5A tinted XR-E's.
While it's great to get more lumens, it's also great to get the same lumens with more run time and less heat. Why would you want a light that's 100 lumens and gets hot when you could have a light that's 100 lumens and runs cool, and for a longer time, with the option to crank up to 250-300 lumens out the front? A XP-G R4 at 1A should be impressive. Can't wait to see some of them tested in an IS.
DHart
Flashlight Enthusiast
I'm really impressed with the XP-E R2... a noticible improvement in beam characteristics... how will the XP-G differ from the XP-E?
nanotech17
Flashlight Enthusiast
I can't wait for the Phlatlight LEDs too but they will not be capable of the same surface brightness as the XP-G.
I've wondered if the CRI from a XP-E is any better than a XR-E as I've been very impressed and satisfied with my Quark 123 with a XP-E R2. I think I like it over my neutral white 5B and 5A tinted XR-E's.
Do you have any WC or WH XR-E emitters? The tint of the WC in the XP-E is becoming your favorite over the 5A and 5B XR-E? Even outdoors? Now that has me interested in seeing the standard Quark R2 as well as the warm tinted ones I ordered.
Saabluster, since you have so much knowledge about Cree LED specs I have some questions for you.
The XP-E is physically smaller than the XR-E right? Because of the size difference it seems the opinion is the beam quality of the XP-E is better than XR-E. That is what I am gathering from other's experiences, not firsthand knowledge so correct me if I'm wrong.
Is the XP-G larger than the XR-E? If that is the case would the opposite be true? That the beam quality would be worse than XR-E?
Last edited:
BentHeadTX
Flashlight Enthusiast
The head will have to be larger to hold the bigger reflector required for the XP-G to get the same throw. As far as beam quality goes, the ring around the emitter on the XR-E is the culprit. The XP-G won't have that ring so the beam quality should improve.
Quark AA and 2AA XP-G lights with larger heads? Sign me up!
