Petzl MYO RXP comes to America

[tnuckels]

Any one else as interested in the arrival of the Petzl MYO RXP … the 8-140lm (160 boost), programmable, regulated version of the MYO XP?

I have it on good authority that the RXP is crossing the great pond and will arrive on US soil within the week, and be for sale at the $90 mark around the end of the month. A few stateside dealers already show it for sale, although they want ~ $100. Don't know if they actual have stock.

I've enjoyed my Tikka XP for several years now, buying it when they first came out in 2005, then P4 upgrading it in 2007, it's still my "go to" light, despite owning a new EOS-R. Though my appreciation doesn't approach the level of fan-boy, I don't quite understand the certain level of disregard that Petzl seems to enjoy here on CPF.

Those Froggies are doing a respectable job, so you gotta' give them their due … vivez et laissez vivez, garçons et filles.

 

[Alan B]

Any one else as interested in the arrival of the Petzl MYO RXP … the 8-140lm (160 boost), programmable, regulated version of the MYO XP?

I have it on good authority that the RXP is crossing the great pond and will arrive on US soil within the week, and be for sale at the $90 mark around the end of the month. A few stateside dealers already show it for sale, although they want ~ $100. Don't know if they actual have stock.

I've enjoyed my Tikka XP for several years now, buying it when they first came out in 2005, then P4 upgrading it in 2007, it's still my "go to" light, despite owning a new EOS-R. Though my appreciation doesn't approach the level of fan-boy, I don't quite understand the certain level disregard that Petzl seems to enjoy here on CPF.
...

I have had a MYO XP for several years, and it has been a great headlamp. I also did the SSC P4 LED upgrade. How does the new unit differ from the older model (how do the light outputs compare, are there other feature changes, etc).

Thanks, Alan

 

[selfbuilt]

Thanks for the head's up.

FYI, my SSC-modded Petzl Tikka XP is still my go-to light.

 

[Vermonter73]

Any idea what tint it's going to be? After seeing a Q3 5A I don't see myself getting anything that isn't a good tint ever again.

 

[tnuckels]

I have had a MYO XP for several years, and it has been a great headlamp. I also did the SSC P4 LED upgrade. How does the new unit differ from the older model (how do the light outputs compare, are there other feature changes, etc).

Here is a linky to Petzl's info on the new light: http://en.petzl.com/petzl/LampesProduits?Produit=667, and be sure to check the additional info on the left side of the page, especially the PDF files. Also, one of our foreign correspondents,Szemhazai, did a brief review recently here on CPF.

Basically you can set the levels in the order (low>high, high>low, etc.) and at the level you want (from a predefined table of 10 set levels) for low, medium, and high levels, plus the lower 8 levels are now regulated, plus 3 blinkey modes, plus it's quite a bit brighter now than the previous model, going from:



Level Lumens

1. 8
2. 13
3. 17
4. 25
5. 34
6. 51
7. 59
8. 71
9. 85
10. 140

Boost 160


I don't know what kind of performance you are getting with your moded MYO, but I suspect these numbers will be hard to beat.

FYI, my SSC-modded Petzl Tikka XP is still my go-to light.

I'd say that's considerable praise, coming from one as versed as selfbuilt.

Any idea what tint it's going to be? After seeing a Q3 5A I don't see myself getting anything that isn't a good tint ever again.

Sorry, don't know about the tint, though according to half-watt's sticky at the top of the headlamp forum, Petzl's using an SSC in their 2008 MYO. Funny how tint, once icing on the cake of a bright light, can become so important once you've had a good one.


Here's to the virtues of patience …

 

[jayflash]

Why bother with an unnoticeable level of boost except to boost sales to the uninitiated? Perhaps a good product featuring a poor gimmick?

 

[tnuckels]

On the Tikka XP, boost is ≈ 43% more light, compared to high, and is a noticeable and appreciated jump.

I had wondered at the spacing myself, i.e. 9 levels seemingly closely bunched together and then suddenly the big jump to high at 140, with boost only being marginally better than high. Digging a little deeper you get the following increments on the MYO RXP from one level to the next:

8>13 ≈ 63%
13>17 ≈ 31%
17>25 ≈ 47%
25>34 ≈ 36%
34>51 ≈ 50%
51>59 ≈ 16%
59>71 ≈ 20%
71>85 ≈ 20%
85>140 ≈ 65%
140>160 ≈ 14%

My hat is off to anyone who can discern a pattern within these figures. Seems almost random, but perhaps there is an underlying logic or constraint that we are unaware of. Odd as it may be, I don't know that I'd ascribe Boost's poor showing to a marketing ploy. It's almost like they wanted "high" to be large enough to be fairly impressive, ran out of steam when it came time to jump to boost, but left it in there because that's the way they did it previously.

You are right, of course. At those levels, users will be hard pressed to notice the 20lm jump offered by the boost mode, unless of course, you set high ≤ 85lm. Then boost will seem superb, but I don't imagine many will set high to less than the maximum and the light even comes with 140lm as one of the default settings.

At least it's up to the customer, and is a first for the neglected-*******-stepchild headlamp industry to let us make the decision and give us a modern, smart light to play with. However imperfect this first iteration might be I think it is a great leap in the right direction.

 

[TGr]

There is simple logic - dont look this levels as one of ten. One of three. And boost is not tenth - is always quick jump to maximum and after release you are back in current level with no need to cycle thru all levels. Another point - dont look lumens increase, compare regulated time. After level 4 is very simple 1-2-3-4 hours.

 

[hopkins]

Press and simultaneously hold this MYO's two buttons and you'll enter a program mode where each of the lamp's three light settings can be turned up or dimmed down as per the wearer's needs. You balance battery life considerations with brightness output, the dimmest light option misting just a pale eight lumens that's tested to glow for more than three days straight.

...8 lumens are what I'd use to cook on an extended wilderness hike. And when the uninvited bear shows up I'd blast him with the 160 lumen boost.

 

[tnuckels]

Good points TGr. In actual day to day operation Boost is not one of ten but rather as much light as possible, easily accessible from wherever you happen to currently be. Hopkins' example demonstrates this perfectly … working up close at low illumination, but quickly need to extend you vision into the night to check something out.

Also, I was overly focused on lumens part of the table as the sole basis for the spacings, not paying enough attention to the runtime portion. The combination of lumens per runtime seems the more considered approach to evaluating a perspective purchase and is always part of my considerations. Petzl seems to have taken this more serious approach by letting runtime dictate the spacings, leaving the lumens to fall where they may. Fun toy lights can run short, hot and impressively, but as a tool it must do a reasonable job for a known & productive amount of time,

 

[hopkins]

thanks TNuckels.
As for the lack of respect Petzl gets here in CPF, I've always hoped they
take it as constructive criticism to make their products better, rather than being
discouraged and let other corps take market share.

Their gadgets are already good but the pressure to innovate
is a good thing for everyone.

And now we have this very nice MYO RXP.

 

[uk_caver]

I had wondered at the spacing myself, i.e. 9 levels seemingly closely bunched together and then suddenly the big jump to high at 140, with boost only being marginally better than high. Digging a little deeper you get the following increments on the MYO RXP from one level to the next:

8>13 ≈ 63%
13>17 ≈ 31%
17>25 ≈ 47%
25>34 ≈ 36%
34>51 ≈ 50%
51>59 ≈ 16%
59>71 ≈ 20%
71>85 ≈ 20%
85>140 ≈ 65%
140>160 ≈ 14%

My hat is off to anyone who can discern a pattern within these figures. Seems almost random, but perhaps there is an underlying logic or constraint that we are unaware of.

I think I can see a pattern (in the sense of how it's done), if not necessarily any logic as to why.
Leaving aside the top two levels, and looking at the power levels from 8 to 85 lumens, the steps between levels (5,4,8,9,17,8,12,14) seem to be roughly multiples of a unit of 4-and-a-bit lumens, with the multiples being 1,1,2,2,4,2,3,3
If you total up all those multiples of 4-and-a-bit between 8 and 85 lumens, you get 18 units in total, making a unit ~4.277 lumens.

If you use 4.277 lumens as the basic unit, and 1,1,2,2,4,2,3,3 as the number of units per power-level change, you'd get outputs of
8, 12.3, 16.55, 25.11, 33.66, 50.77, 59.32, 72.16, and 85 lumens, which is pretty close to what is stated.

I'd guess that whatever chip is doing the regulation, it's digitally measuring the current, and the resolution of measurement is ~4.3 lumens, or maybe some power-of-two fraction of 4.3 lumens.

The odd thing is why they didn't arrange the steps as something more logical, like 1,1,1,2,3,3,3,4, which gives reasonably smooth percentage changes (all between 23% and 43%, apart from the initial jump between 8 and 13 lumens)

Having the '...2,4,2,3...' in the sequence does look a bit strange, like for some reason particularly wanted to have a 51 lumen output level rather than a 46.

Though I'm only guessing, one reason why the boost might be so close to the highest normal power level is that Petzl think a few people might want to have the highest power as a normal setting, and they want the boost to still be a little brighter than that, so they can carry on calling it a boost, but they're reckoning on a lot of people setting 85 lumens as their highest power for battery economy reasons, and in that case, the boost really would be a meaningful boost, not just a token.

The 140 lumen high might just be the maximum power they reckon they can run at continuously, or might just have been selected to be a token amount less than the boost level.

Possibly the 85 lumen second-highest setting was chosen for some specific reason, with the 8 lower settings having to fit in below it?
Isn't the unregulated Myo supposed to be about 85 lumens?

 

[jzmtl]

Does it have better heatsinking than myo xp?

 

[Phaserburn]

Does it have better heatsinking than myo xp?

That's the big question for me.

 

[tnuckels]

Well, the anal-engineer-type-A side of me says they should subtract the lowest setting from the highest (excluding boost), then divided them equally amongst the positions available. In this case that would be 140 highest – 8 lowest = 132 lumens / 8 positions = 16.5 lumen steps. While this looks neat and tidy on paper, I've no idea if reality works like this or if the resulting increments would perform well in practice.

UKCaver, you are right about the 2008 MYO XP topping out at 85lm, with a 150lm boost. They would certainly want to position this product in a favorable light, so to speak, compared to the previous one. I don't know how this compares to older pre-SSC models. Maybe they used a combination of numerology/astrology/psychology/vodoology to derive their numbers.

Jzmtl, there are pictures of the insides of the new light in Szemhazai's RXP review post. Szemhazai gutted open a 2008 MYO XP for our pleasure as well. It is difficult to tell for sure from these pictures, but the heatsinks don't appear to be different.

For all I know the older models might have run acceptably at a higher output setting, except for the pesky shut-off circuit. Was there a problem with the MYO XP's dissipation of heat, other than it being enclosed in a plastic housing?

 

[jzmtl]

Hmm, not sure if I'd trust that heatsinking with 140 lumens. My novatac gets plenty warm on 120, and RXP has no way to vent heat outside from what I can see, it'll step down pretty quickly I bet.

 

[likeguymontag]

Well, the anal-engineer-type-A side of me says they should subtract the lowest setting from the highest (excluding boost), then divided them equally amongst the positions available. In this case that would be 140 highest – 8 lowest = 132 lumens / 8 positions = 16.5 lumen steps. While this looks neat and tidy on paper, I've no idea if reality works like this or if the resulting increments would perform well in practice.

The eye responds to increases in light in a nonlinear manner. Still, good idea. Or, they could have programmed it with enough steps to appear infinitely variable.

 

[tnuckels]

That'd be a real pisser if the 140lm level were only good for short periods under normal circumstances, say < 90° outside temp. I can see where you'd want this under "unusual" conditions, but not for it to come into play on a regular basis.


From Petzl's literature on the MYO RXP:

Automatic power limitation
To avoid overheating the LED, BOOST shuts off after 20 seconds.
Regardless of lighting level, if the temperature is too high, the light automatically dims toallow the LED to cool (after repeated use of BOOST, for example).


I guess we'll just have to get a few and put them through their paces to see what they're capable of. I'll probably jump on the early adopter wagon with this one. Hope I don't regret it.

 

[Alan B]

The eye responds to increases in light in a nonlinear manner. Still, good idea. Or, they could have programmed it with enough steps to appear infinitely variable.

"Even" appearing steps must be done in "log" or ratio fashion. 160 compared to 140 is an almost imperceptible change. Changes by factors of 1.2 are perceptually very small or invisible. Ratios of 1.4 are modest steps.

Knowing the runtime is a quite useful with a headlamp. Having settings that are known in run-time is more useful with a headlamp than most flashlights. It is not unusual for a headlamp to be operated for a known period of time, possibly quite lengthy.

I also hope the heatsinking is better than the old model.

-- Alan

 

[uk_caver]

Thinking about it abit more, as well as the 85 lm setting being maybe chosen to be the same as the unregulated Myo XP, I wonder if the 140 lm highest setting was chosen to be just a bit higher than the new 130lm PT Apex?