If you live in the city, constantly surrounded by light pollution you could have this opinion, but if you were a guide outside at night with cameras pointed at the aurora you'd change your tune immediately.It has a few uses but is over hyped. Most of the time 1 lumen will work just as well with negligible impact on night vision.
Recently received my first with sub-lumen modes and it's just as useless as I suspected it would be. The light coming into the windows from street lamps and other security lighting overpowers even the brightest of the sub-lumen modes.
I just wanted to post a side-by-side pix of a sample of my current sub-lumen light collection and the approximate light meter readings I get from each (Specifiction/My Reading). I have to say that with 3 out my 4 latest purchases, the moonlight mode spec was off by a mile and quite disappointing to me. I think many others are coming across the same as indicated in this post.
Perhaps some companies cannot accurately measure the dim modes, and perhaps sub-lumen levels are just subject to extreme sample variations, but I own multiple copies of a few different sub-lumen lights and I find them to be very consistent.
I appreciate some of us prefer bright ML modes, and some prefer dim ML modes, but I don't like lotteries - manufacturers, please try and get your specs, and/or your quality control, right.
(Also posted this comparison pix in the OP, and requesting any noobs to vote in the poll.)
The specs for that SC52 are really off compared to the other lights, and that ugly green/blue tint are the ones that I see on those dollar store leds. I'm really surprised. I don't have one, but isn't the SC52 a highly regarded light?
Note that I had to overexpose a bit, in order for the dimmest setting of the SC52 to show up. This makes the SC52 highest moonlight look almost as bright as the Quarks. In reality, it looks less than half as bright as the Quarks.