Should emitter lumen readings stop being advertised?

[bigchelis]

Hi all,
Emitter lumen readings advertised have got me exausted. What good is the potential lumens, if the actual lumens I can see are a lot less.

EX: A P7 or MC-E can make up to 1000 lumens, but based on the cells, current, and heatsink the actual out the front lumens change. I keep reading a 20% loss from emitter to out the front, but from testing my lights at MrGman that has never been the case.

Out the front lumens are one thing, but the beam quality is more important to me. Why can't everyone just advertise out the front lumens like Surefire. I know Malkoff now has a integrated sphere MrGman calibrated for him so he can deliver his awesome modules with out the front readings. Nailbender will have one soon and I hope other custom builders start to get their own sphere because at the end of the day the lumens that count are the ones I can see. I can potenially make 100million dollars a year, but I don't. So, why do I keep reading potential lumens, when I see less.
Should flashlights companies (custom builders) advertise out the front lumens or am I missing something?

 

[RyanA]

I'd like to see where they get the numbers from stated. In fact I'd rather they just tell me the emitter and drive level (to be fair, many of the modders and customs guys do this, but unfortunately many manufacturers do not.), so I can do the math on my own.:sigh:

 

[csshih]

woah woah.. what's this about everyone getting spheres?
.. how much do they cost?


you know you're a flashlaholic when you start asking prices of stuff like that.

I'll agree with ryan about the drive current and emitter.. emmitter lumen readings could also be inflated.. like some *ahem* "extreme" overseas company does ..

 

[TooManyGizmos]

.
No ........ just standardized .
.

 

[Tom_123]

Should flashlights companies (custom builders) advertise out the front lumens or am I missing something?

I'd say they should not.

These companies would have to buy expensive equipment and this will
raise the price of their lights with no advantage for the costumer.

Because perceiving the brightness of a flashlight is a process with a lot of variabels like light color,
shape of the beam, environment and the like.
Having the exact number of the light output won't tell you much about how bright you will perceive the light
and if it is the right light for the job, you bought it for.
In addition, I dare to say that one can't distinguish a difference of 50lm – 60lm anyway,
even if he has two lights to compare.

Further, companies will always find a way of "creative calibrations" and as most people don't have their own,
well calibrated integrated sphere they will still have to guess
if they can trust the advertisement/ measurement of the company.

Therefore, I don't take this light output numbers too serious anyway.

 

[vali]

The sad thing is a lot of people trust in those numbers. I read some claimings that I dont know if I have to laugh or cry, and then ppl start to recomend blindly some flashlights "because its 90 lumens" and its "brighter" than some premium brands (Tank 702 anyone?)

 

[DM51]

Why can't everyone just advertise out the front lumens...?

If by some miracle every single manufacturer worldwide agreed to do this, and every country in the world passed laws to enforce it, then we might get the sort of standardisation you wish for. But we all know that's not going to happen, don't we?

 

[Marduke]

There will always be a "fudge factor" with certain brands.

I recommend just enjoying the light, and when it comes to specs just take one chill pill, two grains of salt, and a cup of "it doesn't matter".

The light is what it is no mater the advertising, and people will buy it or boycott it based off it's various merits. And it's not like there is a real difference between 160 and 200 lumens (20%) in actual use anyhow. As you stated, tint and beam pattern can be just as big, if not bigger contributors.

 

[bigchelis]

I have noticed the P7/MC-E's that are said to make 1000 emitter lumens make only 350~450 out the front lumens, That is more than a 50% loss. The single emitters are closer to that 20% loss.

It would be nice if most manufactures advertised lumens like Surefire. It seems Surefire is dishonest too because their lights actually make more

After purchasing many lights for the sake of testing and trying to decipher why the P7/MC-E's can't deliver; I have come to appreciate Malkoff and Surefire more. They advertise the closest to their out the front lumens than just about anybody.

Now, I need the Malkoff E-series bezel, and another M30.

lovecpf

 

[yellow]

why stop using that meat between ones ears?
Getting all info together --> easy to say if the data might be correct, or not.

without that, even the most deinterested person might have the "coolest" light, but by now: not

 

[bigchelis]

There will always be a "fudge factor" with certain brands.

I recommend just enjoying the light, and when it comes to specs just take one chill pill, two grains of salt, and a cup of "it doesn't matter".

The light is what it is no mater the advertising, and people will buy it or boycott it based off it's various merits. And it's not like there is a real difference between 160 and 200 lumens (20%) in actual use anyhow. As you stated, tint and beam pattern can be just as big, if not bigger contributors.

A 20% loss of actuall lumens would be welcomed, but the quad emitter lights are way north of that. Even the Osram 6 die lights tested can't come close to a 20% loss.

I had a P60 diamond dragon and a Mag 3D Diamond dragon with the most awesome beam. The beam quality and tint is IMHO more important, but If someone tells me it makes 400 plus out the front: I want 400 plus out the front lumens or at least a 20% loss.

This issue is so car related. When you measure flywheel vs. rearwheel.....I would feel duped if I purchased a New Corvette thinking I have 400 plus flywheel HP and then have it measure 50% less at wheels. Wouldn't you feel less than happy, yet we come to accept this as standard practice with our lights.

 

[nerdgineer]

Advertising is of course something we can't control at all. If we could, then I'd probably start with the cheap land adverts on TV rather than flashlight lumens.

The only defense against misleading claims is knowledge, which is what our whole candlepower thing is about.

Our reviewers all - correctly - try to measure out the front lumens with various forms of lightbox (and one real one, thanks gman) as that's what counts. We use that knowledge to calibrate the fudge factors used by various sellers based on our shared experiences here, and continue this game...

 

[Marduke]

This is where informed purchases come into play. As long as you know what you are buying beforehand, you have no reason to be disappointed. If you don't do the research beforehand, you must not care about the real specs anyhow.

Buy a product for what it is, not what it claims to be.

 

[HKJ]

I have noticed the P7/MC-E's that are said to make 1000 emitter lumens make only 350~450 out the front lumens, That is more than a 50% loss.

But that difference are not because of loss in the optic system, but because the initial specification are wrong.

 

[bigchelis]

But that difference are not because of loss in the optic system, but because the initial specification are wrong.

MrGman was edumacating me on this issue....He said that when he saw actual testing they use an LED with a huge 2lb finned chunk of metal and power supply. So, you get more than enough heatsink and no battery sag. Then measure the lumens with no glass or bezel and you get the max potential.

I guess I dream of a small single cell IMR 18650 (Surefire 6P size) light that can make a true 600 plus out the front. Maybe next year the P7 will run a lot cooler making this possible.

 

[HKJ]

MrGman was edumacating me on this issue....He said that when he saw actual testing they use an LED with a huge 2lb finned chunk of metal and power supply. So, you get more than enough heatsink and no battery sag. Then measure the lumens with no glass or bezel and you get the max potential.

Why does he believe they measure anything at all?
I would expect that these kind of result are obtained more like this:
Measure the current to the led with fresh batteries, divide that current with the specified current for the led and multiply with maximum specified lumen.
I.e. a led specified for 2.8 A with max. 800 lumen at 25 degree emitter temperature and measured to 3.5 amp with direct drive on fresh batteries can be sold as a 1000 lumen light (3.5/2.8*800).
Or am I just to cynical?

 

[MichaelW]

But the measuring of that 400hp has a standard that applies to it. SAE net, now 'certified' SAE net.
Power to the rear wheels depends on what gear the transmission is in, rear tire pressure, atmospheric temperature, pressure, humidity.
and even then you can't compare a single axle drive car against a car which powers both front & rear axles (EVO, WRX, STi, quattro, etc.) because that power number at the pavement of a vette wasn't reduced by the rolling resistance of the front axle.

 

[bigchelis]

But the measuring of that 400hp has a standard that applies to it. SAE net, now 'certified' SAE net.
Power to the rear wheels depends on what gear the transmission is in, rear tire pressure, atmospheric temperature, pressure, humidity.
and even then you can't compare a single axle drive car against a car which powers both front & rear axles (EVO, WRX, STi, quattro, etc.) because that power number at the pavement of a vette wasn't reduced by the rolling resistance of the front axle.

Wow you know your stuff. First as a Ford man myself I was always fascinated by how Corvette LS2 or Camaro SS LS1's will always put to the rear wheels close to what Chevy claims at the flywheel.

Now this is just what Surefire does too. I purchase a P91 thinking 200 lumens and no, it is 470ish out the front with 2 IMR 18650's. Then the P90 just measured by MrGman at 138 out the front. This makes me think the newer LX2 Surefire lights will actually make more than the advertised lumens too.

 

[csshih]

well, with 2 IMR 18650s, the P91 is pretty highly overdriven, hence the uber high lumens... oops, sidetracked.. carry on.

 

[Chrontius]

well, with 2 IMR 18650s, the P91 is pretty highly overdriven, hence the uber high lumens... oops, sidetracked.. carry on.

Sounds like a poor man's M4, if we add a soft-starting tailcap to it...