Output or runtime?

[afahmic]

Which do you prefer more between output and runtime (if you allowed to have one single stage light only, ie. between 120 lumens for 1 hour and 10 lumens for 12 hours)?

As for me, i am an efficient lights fan that tends to prefer runtime over output, so i can only consider a light to purchase if it has runtime at least for 12 hours with usable output (at least 10 lumens), so in case of power outage, i can be sure that there's still some decent light at least for one night. :candle:

 

[Sgt. LED]

In the end it's runtime.

 

[jasonsmaglites]

output, but i still want it to be efficent.
ie, cree, or rebel100

 

[GreySave]

I prefer a balance, but if I had to choose one it would be runtime. In the majority of situations the most powerful lights with short run times are not what is necessary to get the job done.

 

[spyderknut]

I want a light that can do both at my discretion

 

[Brozneo]

Output first, then runtime a VERY close second! Eg. Mag11 on 6xAA's - good output, 40ish mins runtime - does it for me!

 

[Bearcat]

Seems pretty clear from this poll that run time is the most important, so when are the manufacturers going to start listening. When you get into those multi-modes flashlights you have those annoying gimmick flash and SOS modes that you have to cycle threw.

 

[KeeperSD]

Seems pretty clear from this poll that run time is the most important, so when are the manufacturers going to start listening.

17 voters is hardly conclusive, the question is difficult to answer. If you take the example in the OP then put me down for output but I guess it all depends on what you use your lights for. For me a 10 lumen light is basically worthless, especially outdoors, unless it comes to a survival situation and for this purpose i prefer a multi level light allowing me to select the level of light i need for the given circumstances.

However when it comes to work, for me i need output so runtime has to suffer, but not to the point where runtime is ridiculously low. So rather than selecting one i think i would be put down as a balance between both. (but i did select output )

 

[Bearcat]

17 voters is hardly conclusive, the question is difficult to answer. If you take the example in the OP then put me down for output but I guess it all depends on what you use your lights for. For me a 10 lumen light is basically worthless, especially outdoors, unless it comes to a survival situation and for this purpose i prefer a multi level light allowing me to select the level of light i need for the given circumstances.

However when it comes to work, for me i need output so runtime has to suffer, but not to the point where runtime is ridiculously low. So rather than selecting one i think i would be put down as a balance between both. (but i did select output )

I think you are correct, there is a certain number of people who want output, but not at the expense of run-time. Maybe a med-high output with a better run-time is the best choice.

 

[f22shift]

that's a hard one with your specific examples. since i live where there is light pollution a higher output would be more beneficial as i would only use it sparingly.
for out in the woods ala camping etc, it'll be a no brainer with the runtime. your eyes would adjust and it will be all you need.
i guess this is why multimodes are so popular. for me 2hrs in the magic number for minimum on one battery change. so i would prefer 80 lumens at 2hrs
out of your choices i picked the output because i dont mind carrying extra batteries ever. it's the bullets to the gun.

 

[Tiny86]

I want the output for throw. But if that is not a factor, then I go for runtime.

 

[scottaw]

You forgot to add the obvious third choice....multi-mode. I like my cake and eating it too!

 

[afahmic]

You forgot to add the obvious third choice....multi-mode. I like my cake and eating it too!

I didn't add the third choice to makes clear the distinct between output and runtime orientation, as there's trade off between them for the same power source limitation.

 

[PhantomPhoton]

On a quality LED light there's no reason you can't have both. However I generally need output, not runtime. So thats where my vote goes. I have extra batteries and chargers (solar chargers too for dire circumstances) so generally runtime isn't an issue for me.
In addition I always carry more than one light with me so I always have one capable of good low light disaster runtime too.

 

[thermal guy]

thats why i love hds so much very brite or long run time both!:twothumbs

 

[Tempest UK]

Output may be impressive, but runtime is more important to me.

Regards,
Tempest

 

[MikeSalt]

Output all the way! I can always carry more cells for runtime (or more flashlights).

 

[curry__muncha]

haha.. voting standing at 20:20 atm.

i voted output .. but thats only coz i (like all us CPF'ers) use rechargeables. and im loaded on the latter (as long as its AA . )

 

[afahmic]

Most of the time, especially at the unexpected natural disaster or emergency situation, we can not be so well prepared to carry so much spare batteries. So we really depends on the only battery already resides on the EDC lights.

 

[quatra2008]

I would rather have a compromise but output is better for me.