(This is going to be a monster post and doesn't contain any pretty pictures, so you can skip to the last paragraph for my conclusion.)
In the spirit of this thread: http://www.candlepowerforums.com/vb/showthread.php?t=256795
...I've taken a non-technical look at the 1-cell LED lights I have. This is difficult for me because I'm an engineer. I work with numbers. I love comparing numbers with new lights: looking at runtime, brightness, battery amps, lumens per watt, reflector losses, etc. I love beamshots too; those white walls tell quite a bit about beam profiles. Now that I have a small collection of lights, I decided to compare them in actual usage. All the observations below, are based solely on my perception in actual use. The purpose of this was not to do beamshots, use a light meter, get a nice flat runtime graph, or prepare ideal conditions. Just grab each light, turn it on, and look at stuff.
The lights are as follows:
Quark Mini AA - neutral white
Fenix LD01 - original release, un-modded
Fenix L2P - modded with a SSC P4, and used with the 1 AA cell body
Onto the review...
When I ripped open the Quark Package, and stuck in a brand shiny new Duraloop, I immediately noticed that the Quark wasn't super bright. In actual use, it's slightly brighter than the L2P, with the LD01 being noticeably brighter than both. But the Quark has a warm tint. And sacrificing output is worth the supposed improvement in "color rendering"...right?
Indoors, the Quark only enhances reds and yellows, and everything else gets blasted with yellowish light. It's makes my off-white walls look yellowish. It even makes my blue bedsheets look yellowish. It makes me appreciate the cooler LEDs in the L2P and LD01 – I can't locate a stop sign at 1,000 yards with the cool tints, but the overall color balance appears better to me.
Outdoors, shining on winter grass (half brown, half green), tree trunks, and a gravel path it's the same result. The Quark, with its warmer tint, makes the surroundings look yellower and dimmer, and really didn't make the "natural" colors stand out any better. I know that beamshots, science, and CPF tell me that this result is wrong, that it doesn't make sense. Maybe I'm unknowingly colorblind? I've heard stories of cooler lights appearing to "ghostify" or "flatten" scenery, but not one of the three gave me any better depth perception, and the cooler lights actually seemed brighter.
Not one of the 3 lights has exceptional throw outdoors but that's to be expected with the reflector sizes and lumen ratings involved. The Quark wins with the hotspot brightness but not enough to make a noticeable difference. The spill brightness of the L2P and LD01 win, and neither is excessively narrow.
I also did some runtime tests, despite the fact that I was trying to leave numbers out of this. I start the light, and stop timing when it starts to dim. The LD01 manages 56 minutes on high, the Quark goes for 2 hours on high, and the L2P runs for 3 hours. The LD01 goes quick; and the Quark runtime is decent. But for about the same usable brightness, as the Quark, the L2P runs 33% longer. That's hard for me to overlook on a piece of paper.
But, I have a body clock that tells me when I'm tired, and when it's time to wake. It's difficult for me to perceive the passage of time unless I have a nearby star (the sun), a watch, or a cell phone. The LD01 runtime "seems" short, but when I'm busy using the light and not watching the seconds tick away, I don't know if I'd notice the runtime difference as much. Side-by-side perhaps, but individually, it might be difficult. Besides, if I think I'm going to need extended runtime, I'll bring extra cells with me.
The LD01 stays on my keychain. It's my EDC. It's the light I have when I don't have any other lights. It doesn't need to be exceptionally bright, or exceptionally long running. If I know I'm going to need more output or runtime on a particular day, I'll bring other lights or extra cells with me. The L2P is a bit big for my pocket, so it gets holstered when I carry it, but it's a good task light with a fast draw and quick on-off operation. The Quark is in between - it seems silly to attach it to my belt, but it's noticeable in my pocket; it's not super slow to get to high, but not fast either.
Don't get me wrong - I like the Quark. It's very small, has multiple well-spaced levels, respectable runtime, and a very competitive price. It's the cheapest "good" light I've ever bought. I'm just having a hard time knocking the LD01 off my keychain, and a hard time relying on the Quark as a task light, because the L2P has a smoother beam and less-defined hotspot, and dare I say better tint. Maybe I have too many similar lights. Maybe I should look at the Quark as a good balance between the two others, but it can also feel out of place between the other two – a jack where a master is needed.
In the spirit of this thread: http://www.candlepowerforums.com/vb/showthread.php?t=256795
...I've taken a non-technical look at the 1-cell LED lights I have. This is difficult for me because I'm an engineer. I work with numbers. I love comparing numbers with new lights: looking at runtime, brightness, battery amps, lumens per watt, reflector losses, etc. I love beamshots too; those white walls tell quite a bit about beam profiles. Now that I have a small collection of lights, I decided to compare them in actual usage. All the observations below, are based solely on my perception in actual use. The purpose of this was not to do beamshots, use a light meter, get a nice flat runtime graph, or prepare ideal conditions. Just grab each light, turn it on, and look at stuff.
The lights are as follows:
Quark Mini AA - neutral white
Fenix LD01 - original release, un-modded
Fenix L2P - modded with a SSC P4, and used with the 1 AA cell body
Onto the review...
When I ripped open the Quark Package, and stuck in a brand shiny new Duraloop, I immediately noticed that the Quark wasn't super bright. In actual use, it's slightly brighter than the L2P, with the LD01 being noticeably brighter than both. But the Quark has a warm tint. And sacrificing output is worth the supposed improvement in "color rendering"...right?
Indoors, the Quark only enhances reds and yellows, and everything else gets blasted with yellowish light. It's makes my off-white walls look yellowish. It even makes my blue bedsheets look yellowish. It makes me appreciate the cooler LEDs in the L2P and LD01 – I can't locate a stop sign at 1,000 yards with the cool tints, but the overall color balance appears better to me.
Outdoors, shining on winter grass (half brown, half green), tree trunks, and a gravel path it's the same result. The Quark, with its warmer tint, makes the surroundings look yellower and dimmer, and really didn't make the "natural" colors stand out any better. I know that beamshots, science, and CPF tell me that this result is wrong, that it doesn't make sense. Maybe I'm unknowingly colorblind? I've heard stories of cooler lights appearing to "ghostify" or "flatten" scenery, but not one of the three gave me any better depth perception, and the cooler lights actually seemed brighter.
Not one of the 3 lights has exceptional throw outdoors but that's to be expected with the reflector sizes and lumen ratings involved. The Quark wins with the hotspot brightness but not enough to make a noticeable difference. The spill brightness of the L2P and LD01 win, and neither is excessively narrow.
I also did some runtime tests, despite the fact that I was trying to leave numbers out of this. I start the light, and stop timing when it starts to dim. The LD01 manages 56 minutes on high, the Quark goes for 2 hours on high, and the L2P runs for 3 hours. The LD01 goes quick; and the Quark runtime is decent. But for about the same usable brightness, as the Quark, the L2P runs 33% longer. That's hard for me to overlook on a piece of paper.
But, I have a body clock that tells me when I'm tired, and when it's time to wake. It's difficult for me to perceive the passage of time unless I have a nearby star (the sun), a watch, or a cell phone. The LD01 runtime "seems" short, but when I'm busy using the light and not watching the seconds tick away, I don't know if I'd notice the runtime difference as much. Side-by-side perhaps, but individually, it might be difficult. Besides, if I think I'm going to need extended runtime, I'll bring extra cells with me.
The LD01 stays on my keychain. It's my EDC. It's the light I have when I don't have any other lights. It doesn't need to be exceptionally bright, or exceptionally long running. If I know I'm going to need more output or runtime on a particular day, I'll bring other lights or extra cells with me. The L2P is a bit big for my pocket, so it gets holstered when I carry it, but it's a good task light with a fast draw and quick on-off operation. The Quark is in between - it seems silly to attach it to my belt, but it's noticeable in my pocket; it's not super slow to get to high, but not fast either.
Don't get me wrong - I like the Quark. It's very small, has multiple well-spaced levels, respectable runtime, and a very competitive price. It's the cheapest "good" light I've ever bought. I'm just having a hard time knocking the LD01 off my keychain, and a hard time relying on the Quark as a task light, because the L2P has a smoother beam and less-defined hotspot, and dare I say better tint. Maybe I have too many similar lights. Maybe I should look at the Quark as a good balance between the two others, but it can also feel out of place between the other two – a jack where a master is needed.
