Zebralight S6330 and S6330b 2400 Lumen flashlights in the making. .

[JudasD]

$199 might be a bit high for me. It would need to be a real performer since i already own a TM-11.

JD

 

[tonkem]

I have a Lupine Betty TL, and Wilma TL, but have fallen in love with the smaller form factor of the Zebralights. Nothing could compare with the Betty TL or Wilma TL, for its size, until this light, and the Lupines are MUCH MORE EXPENSIVE

 

[WmArnold1]

Holy Molly....11 Modes!!!

That's only two more than the SC600's 9 modes; two high, two medium, and two low; with four separate choices within H2; programatically selectable after seven quick-clicks..

Yes, setting up H2 was a royal PITA to at first, and, the SC600 refuses start-up in H2 if you choose strobe. But I love the gui and find myself double-clicking within my selected level all of the time.

 

[guiri]

The only way I could afford the Betty ($850) is if Greece, Italy, and Spain all default on their national loans, thereby causing them to be ejected from the EU, resulting in a significant drop in the Euro.

And since what happens in Europe won't stay in Europe, this will cause our US economy and dollar to drop. But there will be a small lag-time period between the drop in the Euro and the drop in the dollar whereby I could possibly order direct from Germany or another European dealer at, say, half-price.

But then, I would still have to convince my wife we can afford a $425 flashlight in a dropping economy, thanks to the problems in the EU, and this will still be a very hard sell since I am a family man with a kid in private school.

But we can always hope....

Now if Greece would just reject the austerity measures demanded by Germany and France and get the ball rolling on this exquisite plan.....(lol!)

Now, I don't know if your wife will buy the story but I tell you one thing, she might actually give up after HALF the explanation and go ahead and let you do it so I say, go fer it!

 

[Patriot]

I'm really looking forward to the first pictures of these two models. I've been a huge fan of the triple XM-Ls with 3 or 4 18650s and is seems these might be the smallest yet and at prices that can't be beat. I'm setting money aside for this one now.

 

[don.gwapo]

Wow! At 4 inches with over 2k+ lumens, the size is just amazing and the price is very reasonable.

 

[WmArnold1]

Wow! At 4 inches with over 2k+ lumens, the size is just amazing and the price is very reasonable.

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm under the impression that the S6330 is essentially three SC600's, with three reflectors almost exactly like the SC600 too: 80 degree spill & 10 degree hot spot. Thus, the "wall-of-light" said by many.

I've EDC'd a 2x CR123 light since 2008 and the SC600 for a little over a month now. I imagine that the S6330 will be a little thick for the pocket (no jokes here please ;-) but it should be a superb hoster item for short range lighting.

I feel that my pocket SC600 works perfectly for searching within a 10 yard radius but said wall of spill is a little distracting when I'm, say, trying to read house numbers from the street. So, my next light will have a little more throw in lieu of a wall-of-light that is just three times brighter. The S6330's bezel diameter is 2.25 inches (57 mm) and I'd rather carry a single-emitter light with that bezel size on my belt for searching within 40 yards or so. Sorry. YMMV

 

[g.p.]

I feel that my pocket SC600 works perfectly for searching within a 10 yard radius...

Are you joking? Something is wrong with your SC600 (or your eyes) if it's only good for 10 yards. I can light up the house at the other end of my block (6-7 houses down) well enough to easily pick out people and details. It gets even better when I'm somewhere without any light polution.

 

[don.gwapo]

I'm under the impression that the S6330 is essentially three SC600's,

That's my guess as well. Maybe S6330 is a blown up SC600 but we could be wrong until we see a photo of this light.

 

[WmArnold1]

Are you joking? Something is wrong with your SC600 (or your eyes) if it's only good for 10 yards. I can light up the house at the other end of my block (6-7 houses down) well enough to easily pick out people and details. It gets even better when I'm somewhere without any light polution.

Yes, I'm old and wear glasses But, I don't believe that the 10-degree hot-spot from our SC600's will be very helpful reading numbers on a house that is 150 to 200 yards away after the nearby wall-of-light has caused my pupil to choak down and reduce my night vision. Be real. With my bad eyesight and all; I have trouble reading house numbers that are more than 25 yards from the street using my 750 lumen SC600. But, I can read them easily using my old 200 lumen oLight T20-Q5 because it throws better and the side-spill isn't so overwhelming.

P.S. my "only good for 10 yards" was a little harsh; sorry. IMHO, I can read house numbers and search effectively out to 20 yards with my SC600.

 

[g.p.]

Yes you definitely need to use the levels on the SC600appropriately, or face pupil dilation and loss of night vision!

 

[tobrien]

Omg finally

 

[biglights]

Very very intersesting

 

[carl]

I sure hope the girth of the light is not too big - otherwise maybe ZL should go with a 26650 configuration.

I sure like the form factor of the Lupine Betty - still way too expensive though.

Unless of course, the Spanish banks go belly up even after the recent bailout, the Greeks vote for the leftists on June 17, and as of lately, if Ireland leaves the EU too, thus forcing the euro way down and giving all of us an opportunity to get a 'economic double-dip recession' special deal straight from Germany (lol!). On the other hand, such a serious situation with its contagion most likely spreading to the US, will make spending on our little pet hobbies that much more difficult to justify. We will all need to hunker down and be satisfied just to look at pictures of flashlights, and coming here to CPF of course.

 

[guiri]

Which Carl is why we need to stock up on lights now

Don't forget to mention in the Europe thing that if some old ladies from Russia win the Eurovision contest, it could really impact the economy as well

As for girth. If it's not thicker than the TM11, I'm good

Love my TM by the way but I did want a little more throw so if I can sell it at a decent price, I might.

Would like to see pics of the light though

 

[TEEJ]

Yes, I'm old and wear glasses But, I don't believe that the 10-degree hot-spot from our SC600's will be very helpful reading numbers on a house that is 150 to 200 yards away after the nearby wall-of-light has caused my pupil to choak down and reduce my night vision. Be real. With my bad eyesight and all; I have trouble reading house numbers that are more than 25 yards from the street using my 750 lumen SC600. But, I can read them easily using my old 200 lumen oLight T20-Q5 because it throws better and the side-spill isn't so overwhelming.

P.S. my "only good for 10 yards" was a little harsh; sorry. IMHO, I can read house numbers and search effectively out to 20 yards with my SC600.

I did some measurements, and the side spill shutting down the pupils is not so much the factor as the lumens being more concentrated, thus producing more lux on target.

Apparently, from what my meters, etc, and eyes, are telling me, is that if the 200 lumens is concentrated onto a patch of small surface area, that area will be more brightly lit/easier to discern details of, than the light from a 750 lumen light that is covering a much larger surface area.

So, if I spread out my 750 lumens over a large area, each lumen is spread thinner, and, the LUX produced is proportionally lower. (We SEE Lux, we do NOT see lumens...).

This is why I can get a brighter lux reading on a distant target with a crappy 131 lumen LED maglite than with a 750 lumen SC600, etc.

By the time the lumens HIT the target, if I use a shotgun analogy...the maglite pattern is super tight, and all the lumens whack the small target, so I get almost all of the 131 lumens being turned to lux.

The SC600 pattern is like a sawed off shotgun, for a distant target, the llumens are so scattered in such a large pattern, that only a few of the original 750 actually HIT the target, and, therefore, only a few of them get turned to lux.


If ENOUGH lumens get turned to lux, you CAN read that house number....if not, well, you need to shoot at it from a closer range/use a different choked light, etc.


The aspheric lensed lights are more like sniper rifles in this regard....SUPER small patch of light, BUT, ALL the lumens hit the target (Hitting it in the shape of the LED)




So, its not so much that spill ruins night vision...what you are FOCUSED on controls your pupil dilation (Hence how you look for a concussion, etc, with a flashlight...the pupils contract differently under these scenarios...)

In other words, If I used the aspheric to project a tight beam onto a distant target sufficiently for you to see the house number, with zero spill...and you are looking AT those numbers...you will STILL see them even if I ALSO turn on the SC600. The added peripheral light didn't make the lux on target needed change. (I tried it, it works).



I think the impression was given by the lights that were available back when impressions were being formed. Almost all lights had tight beams, as they produced, compared to today's lights, almost no lumens...and HAD TO concentrate everything as tightly as they could to SEE anything anyway.

When competitive lights came out with more floody beams, people would notice that even though the lights were "brighter", they could see distant details better with the more concentrated albeit lower lumen beams.

Once an opinion like this forms, and gets "taught" as dogma....well, its all but impossible for facts to intervene.


Obviously, its all a question of DEGREE, but, all things being equal...the concentration of the available lumens will play a much larger role than the amount of spill per se.

 

[moozooh]

I guess it also depends on your purposes and the clarity of your vision—mine isn't too good, and I don't wear glasses (so that it won't worsen faster), so having a distance of some 200 m brightly lit entirely is at least as good for me as a 200 m throw, as I won't be able to discern anything meaningful past that point anyway.

 

[peteybaby]

Interesting email. I would just add a bit to it:

I usually use my high-powered lights walking the dogs in the woods. I'm on trails with trees everywhere. If I always pointed the light straight ahead, and always looked straight ahead, what you wrote would probably be true. But I look all around us when we walk in the woods at night. If I look to the side, I'm often still pointing the light forward and using the spill to see the side. In that case, a really bright spill can probably close down the pupils.

Your post was a good reminder though that when I go for night walks, I should keep my light pointed forward and use the spill, rather than point my light at everything I look at.

 

[TEEJ]

Interesting email. I would just add a bit to it:

I usually use my high-powered lights walking the dogs in the woods. I'm on trails with trees everywhere. If I always pointed the light straight ahead, and always looked straight ahead, what you wrote would probably be true. But I look all around us when we walk in the woods at night. If I look to the side, I'm often still pointing the light forward and using the spill to see the side. In that case, a really bright spill can probably close down the pupils.

Your post was a good reminder though that when I go for night walks, I should keep my light pointed forward and use the spill, rather than point my light at everything I look at.

LOL

Of course.

I call it the projector screen phenomenon. You see "the light", but not what the light is ON.

If you have TOO MUCH light on something you are looking AT, it WILL require you to close down to avoid "over exposure"...and, typically, you just see a bright light reflecting back at you...as you can't stop down your eyes enough to overcome the LUX you're faced with.

An aspheric is again the poster child for this. Too close, and you see the LED's image projected onto the tree or wall or whatever, and that's about it. The LED image itself is so bright, that you can't see what its ON. What its ON is acting like a projector screen.



This is a case that illustrates that too much light concentrated on a target can actually obscure the target details. Too much light ON the target can also obscure what's NEXT TO the target for the same reason.

Its analogous to how we see best in full daylight...but NOT with the sun in our eyes.

Aspheric beam on a round tree ~ 405 meters away...you see the LED, but, not much else.



Its also why there might be more than one light that's BEST for a particular scenario....it puts the right intensity of light, with the right sized spot of light onto the target, at the range you need.

Reflector Based Olight SR90 at the same tree...can see the tree, AND what's around it (If what you wanted was in the tree, and jumped off and ran, you'd SEE them do it...)

The SR90's generous spill is not preventing me from seeing the tree and its details...its adding context. In full daylight, I'd be able to see the tree fine, even though everything ELSE is also lit up by the sunlight all around me. As long as the lux on target is not too dim, I will still be able to see it.


If your eyes are night adapted, that intensity/lux produced can be lower to see the same levels of detail...but, night adapted eyes are not as good at SEEING certain types of details, a trade off.


As you age, it worsens of course...as the adjustment time, and night vision, go bye bye with time.




To further complicate matters, you see DETAILS with about a 2º cone of vision dead ahead from your pupils...which is your WORST night vision range.

This is why for night fighting, etc, you learn to look to the SIDE of where you are trying to see something in the dark...as you have BETTER light gathering off center from your normal line of sight.

Essentially, your peripheral vision is better at seeing in the dark.

That all means that you need even MORE light on a target far away to SEE details...as seeing DETAILS requires you to get your fovea (~ that 2º field of vision that hates the dark...) centered on the details of interest.


So, as I've gotten older, I've found I need more and more light for the equivalent tasks.

Luckily, the lighting technology seems intent of keeping up with my slide into darkness. (I see worse, so they make the available lights brighter...)

 

[WmArnold1]

The "throw" of a light is as much a factor of the spill as it is of the spot. Please grab a fresh cup of coffee (or whatever) and bear with me for a few sentences..

Although ANSI throw is defined as the distance out to 0.25 Lux in the center of the beam, (ref) it presumes that your eyes are fully night-adapted and that you can see whatever you need to see on a clear, moonless, starlit night.

That's not reasonable enough for a lot of people. Subsequently, there is a competing formula for "throw" with the distance out to 1.0 Lux. But, there again; it still presumes that your eyes are fully night-adapted and that ambient light levels (which includes your side-spill) have not compromised eye sensitivity significantly above said starlit paradigm.

Although our bare eyes can work within ambient lighting conditions ranging over nine orders of magnitude, our eyes are limited to about two orders of magnitude (100:1 - say; ambient / 10 thru ambient * 10) within any particular environment and adaptation to changing scenes takes several minutes. Our eyes do this to optimize visual acuity within a scene. (ref: "luminance adaptation")

For the sake of argument; I'm going to say that we cannot see whatever we need to see when it is lighted below 1/10th of the ambient light level. Subsequently, the "throw" of my flashlight in an 500 Lux (IES category D) department store setting would be the distance out to a 50 Lux spot. For my personal favorite; the SC600, we're talking roughly 8 meters (26 feet) here. Ymmv.. And, most importantly; the distance to 0.25 Lux is irrelevant within a department store.

The point I'm trying to establish here is that real-world "throw" depends on ambient lighting conditions. And, in sufficient darkness; side-spill contributes to the ambient!

At full tilt; my SC600 pumps approximately 280 Lumens (37%) into the 20-degree-spot cone and 470 Lumens (63%) into the overlapping 80-degree-spill cone. (total: 750 lu) So, assuming that I arbitrarily place my wall-of-(spill)-light at, say, 2 meters (6 feet); I will respectfully assert that my ambient light is never below 53 Lux and my eyes wouldn't be able to see whatever I need to read accurately below 5.3 Lux; Which is.. 24 meters? Yes, this is totally subjective, but under no circumstances does a SC600 have anywhere near a real-world "throw" of 150, 200, or even 405 meters; because of it's wall-of-(spill)-light. And, Imho, the forthcoming S6330 won't have it either, for that same reason!

Repeating what I said here; I can personally read house numbers at 25 yards better with my 200 Lumen Olight T20-Q5 than my SC600, and, I'm going to predict that the brighter S6330 will just choke my pupils down a little further and I'll end up with essentially the same visual acuity that I had with my SC600. (readers: I apologize for needing seven paragraphs to justify saying that..)

The bottom line; when I look for a bigger light, I'm looking for a narrower spill-cone, or, best of all; the same 80-degree spill-cone, just with fewer Lumens within it; as TIR (total internal reflection) optics could do without increasing any outside diameters. ==> I'm visualizing triple XM-L's feeding three merged TIR's!!

P.S. Here's some quick & dirty measurements & math for my old T20: 97 lumens (47%) into 6 degree spot cone, 108 lumens (53%) into a 48 degree spill-cone. (total: 205 lu) Technically, it throws 1.8 times farther than my SC600, but the T20's beam is just too narrow for 99.44% of my EDC use.