Sr95 vs nitecore tm26

[Cheeze1617]

The olight has less lumens(2000) but its range is 720. The nite core has more lumens (3500) but its range is 415. So what was is better fore a long range search light?

 

[CouldUseALight]

My sr95 is informative out to about 550 yards. Going by the ANSI specs, I'd not take a TM26 to inform me about what's going on further than 300 yards away. :thumbsup:

 

[thedoc007]

The Olight is amazing, but unless you have some incredible vision or use binoculars, 200 meters is more than enough in my opinion. Think about it - 2 full football fields plus change...unless you have a really big target, hard to see much of anything that far out. The TM26 will illuminate a much wider area, so less panning back and forth is necessary to find a target.

So, my .02, officially. If you are searching from the air, or over water, you'll likely be better served by the Olight SR95UT. But if you are like most of us, the TM26 is more practical and it will do flood, low lumens, etc. Hard to go wrong.

 

[Slidder]

Umm, I own the TM26 and also had my eye on the Olight SR95 for distance, as the TM 26 in comparison to the SR95 is more like a medium range flood. I kinda like the SR95 over the SR95UT, as it has better spill, but the SR95UT definately has better throw, but not as much fill.

I'll also throw out another light that I was considering for throw with nice spill, and that would be the Xtar S1, but I think the SR95 out performs the Xtar.

 

[Overclocker]

Supbeam X40 3200 lumens. throws better than TM26.

TM26 steps down way too quickly. heatsinking not very good.

X40 more intuitive magnetic control ring. better heatsinking

 

[TEEJ]

The olight has less lumens(2000) but its range is 720. The nite core has more lumens (3500) but its range is 415. So what was is better fore a long range search light?

The real question is what is the range you need to search with it?

All things being equal, the floodier the beam, the more you see at a time, which for searching, is VERY useful.

The flip side of that is that to flood an area with light, you need a LOT more light to cover the larger area to the same brightness (Lux).


So, if you NEED to see a person face down in grass at 400 meters, you'd better have a light that can give you the lux at the at range needed to resolve that level of detail.

The ranges they PUBLISH are ANSI standard ranges, meaning, the specification says the distance at which the lux has dropped to 0.25. 0.25 lux is considered as about like average moonlight, so, on average conditions, using that number, in an open area, you would not need a flashlight to get 0.25 lux, the moonlight would do it already, etc.

In search work, frankly, the 0.25 lux measurement is not a useful range estimator...its too dim to resolve details with. You might be able to tell there's a tree line, or a large tree 300 meters away, but not the guy leaning on the tree, etc.

1-5 lux works much better in real life for resolving details.

To see the range at 1 lux, just take the square root of the cd, and that's the range, in meters to 1 lux.

This will typically be ~ 1/2 what the ANSI range will be (0.25 lux will be at the square root of the cd times 2).

So if a light has a published ANSI range of 400 M, you will probably find it USEFUL to about 200 M, and so forth. (Seeing the spot of light on something off in the distance is not the same as seeing details highlighted by that light)


This is where many people miss a critical detail - Just because one light has an ANSI range of 720 meters vs one with 415 meters, doesn't mean that if you only need to SEARCH at 200 meters that the "415 meter one" is overkill OR that the 720 meter one is even overkill.


Lets say you are looking for a small low contrast target, a lost child wearing dark clothes laying in grass or uneven terrain, where you will see only a part of them, and will need to be able to resolve a small leg or arm or head from a rock or branch or shadow, etc.

At long ranges, you have poor night vision, especially straight ahead, as you have almost no rods in your fovea...its about all cones, etc....with terrible low light vision.

To RESOLVE such small details, even at a mere 200 meters, you might need 4-5 lux (Or more) on target to be able to do it.

If we make the math easy and use only 4 lux, that's the root of the cd/2, or about a quarter of the ANSI range.

If the ANSI range is 415 meters, at 200 meters, the light is too dim, and won't hit even 4 lux unless you're within more like ~ 100 meters.

If the ANSI range is 720 M, a 1/4 of that is 180 meters, STILL shy of the 200 meter search range we were looking for.


If we say we are looking for a higher contrast target, say a fiberglass canoe/an overturned canoe on a sandy or not too jagged shore line, and 1 lux might be OK, the 720 M ANSI range is down to 360 meters of useful range, but the 415 M ANSI version is down to just over 200 M, BARELY within our 200 M search criteria.

Make it an aluminum canoe (Shiny object), and/or people in safety striped gear, etc, and the 0.25 lux numbers work OK, as a reflective target can be very far away, and still at least "blink" as you sweep a beam across it, etc.)


So don't fall into the trap of thinking that buying a light for searching with a "range of a country mile" will be ridiculous, as you can't SEE that far anyway. Remember, that ALSO means you can see BETTER at closer distances too, not JUST a country mile away, etc.


:D




So, in searches, sometimes, its terrain where the LINE OF SIGHT is simply not that far. Rolling hills, forested or wooded areas, heavy underbrush, etc...all block your line of sight, so, really - in those locations, even in broad daylight, you might not be ABLE to see anything further than 100 meters away anyway...then, go for all the flood you can get.

At night, your peripheral vision sees better in the dark than your straight ahead vision...if you HAVE more light to the sides, THAT'S where you spot those little details that catch your attention and allow you to find partially hidden targets, etc. If you are looking with a tightly focused dowel shaped thrower beam, you have tunnel vision, and will not see as much as soon, etc. So FLOOD is the way to go for close quarter searches most of the time.


In situations where you might be on one side of a ravine or cliff, shining down or across to look for things...you can't always GET closer easily enough or quickly enough, and you simply need a beam to show you what's out there....from where you can look.

If you are in a boat or truck with power, a giant search light powered from the truck, etc, CAN give more flood AND throw.

If you are CARRYING the light, the batteries/cells become an issue, and, typically, to have the search duration, and the range, you sacrifice the flood to get the range.


In those cases, the throwy light is the only one that CAN reach, and tunnel vision beats blind.

So, depending on the TYPE of search, what you are looking for, in what terrain, etc, dictates what will work best.


In the old days, it was a line of people, shoulder to shoulder, walking in a broad line, methodically working back and forth to cover large tracts of land in a search, holding those little plastic lanterns with drycells or D cells, etc, and no comparable range or flood to speak of - hoping to essentially trip over what they were looking for. That took a LONG TIME, and people could die of hypothermia, etc, while you are doing all that.


With modern techniques, that same area might be searchable in minutes rather than hours...and people might be found BEFORE they succumb to the elements, etc....or, in thick woods, etc, it might take almost as long, as the lines of sight are just the limiting factor.


Just this Spring IIRC, we were searching for a 90+ year old guy who wandered away from the senior housing...and disappeared into the nearby woods. He was described as wearing dark clothes, no coat or sweater, and the nights dropped to the 40's, not a good scenario for a 90+ guy, potentially without full faculties, to survive. The terrain was very tight, thick brambles and undergrowth, tree cover that stymied the helicopter search, and a series of ditches and drainage culverts that would be easy to fall into, etc. There were jogging and hiking trails we HOPED he'd be on, but, he wasn't, so, off into the brush and ditches we had to go. It took ~ 4 hours to thoroughly cover maybe a 50 - 100 acre area. We used pretty much all flooders to comb the areas, with throwers to screen some adjoining fields.

So the TM26 would have been a better light for THAT search than an SR series thrower for example....and so forth.


Hope that helps a bit!


:D

 

[1AbominAble1]

Holy Crap!
That was the most informative and well thought out post I've ever had the pleasure of reading on an Internet forum.
Thank you for sharing your first hand experience and knowledge with all of us. I'm new to the higher end flashlight world and have been researching the TM-26, I found your post while doing so and have taken a wealth of knowledge from it. Thank you for that, you've given me a lot to think about.

 

[AFireInside]

Personally i'd split the difference and go for a TK75 or RC40, almost as bright (or as bright) as the TM26 and almost as long-throwing as the Olight.

I own both the TM26 and the TK75, for the price/performance I much prefer the TK75, seems way more useful as a searchlight too!