Zebralight SC5 MKII

[ktsl]

It's quite bulky but not that lengthy though. I thougt the CRI would be tickling your fancy

Previously mentioned in the Official ZL thread way back in December : http://candlepowerforums.com/vb/showthread.php?395603-The-Official-Zebralight-Thread/page16

But yea, it should have a really pleasing output. Not a fan of the size though.

 

[ktsl]

I don't get it why we should care so much about pwm? 24fps was movie industry standard, 60fps you got great gaming experience, above 1kHz I really couldn't care. The only situation that pwm might come into play is if you use your it as lighting source in photography - but that's not such a great idea to begin with. Other than that, human eyes have very slow response and automatically do the integral at the receiver cell level.

 

[ktsl]

I also notice the number of modes seems to have increased by 1 over the old model. I'd be super happy if this time they include the beacon mode of 0.2Hz on H1. Well, last time I asked them and they said "sure we can do that", but who knows.
This is actually the reason I didn't buy anything in ZL's AA lineup. Since I'd like to use my flashlight as beacon to mark my camp location.

 

[iamlucky13]

The specs so far look very good. Finish it up and then get cracking on adapting the concept to a headlamp.

I also just noticed the H52 series, although still listed as in stock on their individual pages, have been moved to the discontinued section on the spreadsheet.

Hopefully they're not simply being replaced with the Eco series.

Has anyone here tested out the Hi-CRI XP-L like ZL plans to use? 93-95 cri sounds great, 4k is a little warm for me but I probably could get used to it if it has a pleasing tint. I wonder if they plan any design changes since it's called the MK2? Plenty of questions to be answered and I hope they can get these out by late March so I won't have to wait too long!

There was a thread specifically with your question a few weeks ago. Apparently they're not easy to find in the wild so far:
http://www.candlepowerforums.com/vb/showthread.php?428036-Hi-CRI-XPL-2-in-a-Flashlight

Also, based on other high CRI models Zebralight currently offers, it seems likely they'll also offer an SC5D Mk II with a 5000K emitter.

 

[tops2]

Unless I missed it..I'm curious why they decide to upgrade the SC5 vs the SC52 series?

Aside from the high CRI, do you guys think the throw and spill will be equivalent to the SC5(w) if at the same lumen level? I'm not really sure about the LED difference between these.

Otherwise, sounds like an interesting light. If it works well, maybe they can bring the LED to the SC63 series! I did think my "recently" purchased SC62w will the the last light for a while..but if they have a high CRI verison of this with decent output (which it looks like it may have) and long enough throw...I may have to bite!

 

[snowlover91]

I believe, all things being equal, the XP-L should throw slightly better than the XM-L2 but I don't think it would be much of a difference. It's possible they could change the reflector some which would change things though. They may release this in the SC64 and it's possible they could do the programmable circuit in the SC64 and MK4 series since they mentioned the 18650 lights would be the first to get it.

 

[gunga]

Since XPL has the same die size as XML2, why do you think it would throw better? Is it because of the slightly increased output?

 

[iamlucky13]

The XP-L package is slightly smaller than the XM-L2, but the die is the same and the radius on the dome is the same, or nearly so. As a result, the way it interacts with the reflector or other secondary optic is nearly the same. Thus, you get more or less the same beam pattern.

Some beamshots I've seen, as well as a comparison of intensity plots in the XP-L datasheet seem to be ever-so-slightly less round than those of the XM-L2 due to the trimmed size of the dome, but it's not enough effect that I'd really worry about.

The high intensity variant of the XP-L, does have produce more throw due to the flat dome, but it looks like the SC5 II will have the regular "high density" XP-L.

 

[StorminMatt]

I wouldn't be against it, but I understand the silent argument that 14500 compatibility is superfluous in ZebraLight (but not other brands). ZL uses regulation, and limits top brightness. The dual-chem compatible SC52 is the exception to the rule, in that with 14500, the brightest level was given a boost. But isn't the SC5 top level on AA brighter than the SC52 on 14500? So why would you expect ZL to open the glorious doors of brightness just because you have given it more voltage? Seems to me, ZL likes consistency over brightness.

So consider that even if the SC5 was compatible with 14500, the light would operate exactly the same as on AA, with identical regulated mode brightnesses between the chemistries, but with less runtime and more inherent safety risk with 14500. This isn't necessarily the case, this is just an extrapolation of ZebraLight's mode level ideology, and it seems clear to me, you would not be wowed with 14500 in an SC5.

It's not a matter or being 'wowwed' by the extra brightness of an SC5 with a 14500. And it's not about getting more brightness (like 900 lumens) either. Rather, it's about getting more consistent performance at higher brightness levels. I was never very impressed by the higher brightness modes with my SC5, particularly H1. To me, it seems like they built the light so that they can brag about 500 lumens from AA more than it is about a useful 500 lumen mode. The problem here is that a AA battery simply isn't up to the task of providing this kind of power. As a result, the light rapidly dims at 500 lumens, drops out early (ie requires a high state of charge), and can only run at this brightness level with the freshest and most capable of NiMH AA batteries. By contrast, you can still run the SC52 for a minute at 500 lumens even with a fairly discharged and relatively low current capacity Sanyo UR14500p. And given the limitations of AA, I don't think this poor performance is something that will be improved without vastly more efficient emitters.

 

[snowlover91]

Since XPL has the same die size as XML2, why do you think it would throw better? Is it because of the slightly increased output?

I've seen beamshots and some discussion over the years which indicates the XP-L has a negligible throw advantage, with all things being equal. For all intents and purposes it probably won't produce a notable difference but when measured by someone like selfbuilt there might be a small difference.

 

[scs]

...To me, it seems like they built the light so that they can brag about 500 lumens from AA more than it is about a useful 500 lumen mode. The problem here is that a AA battery simply isn't up to the task of providing this kind of power. As a result, the light rapidly dims at 500 lumens, drops out early (ie requires a high state of charge), and can only run at this brightness level with the freshest and most capable of NiMH AA batteries. By contrast, you can still run the SC52 for a minute at 500 lumens even with a fairly discharged and relatively low current capacity Sanyo UR14500p....

Agreed.

 

[snowlover91]

It's not a matter or being 'wowwed' by the extra brightness of an SC5 with a 14500. And it's not about getting more brightness (like 900 lumens) either. Rather, it's about getting more consistent performance at higher brightness levels. I was never very impressed by the higher brightness modes with my SC5, particularly H1. To me, it seems like they built the light so that they can brag about 500 lumens from AA more than it is about a useful 500 lumen mode. The problem here is that a AA battery simply isn't up to the task of providing this kind of power. As a result, the light rapidly dims at 500 lumens, drops out early (ie requires a high state of charge), and can only run at this brightness level with the freshest and most capable of NiMH AA batteries. By contrast, you can still run the SC52 for a minute at 500 lumens even with a fairly discharged and relatively low current capacity Sanyo UR14500p. And given the limitations of AA, I don't think this poor performance is something that will be improved without vastly more efficient emitters.

I suppose it all depends on how one uses their light... and what they expect from it. I don't expect to be using the 300+ lumen levels on an AA light for long. My primary use is the 180 lumen mode set to come on with a single click. I've used the 500+ level only on a few occasions, for a short burst of time only when needed. Sure the 14500 might give more brightness but it decreases circuit efficiency to do so. If I want 900 lumens of light I won't be bringing a 14500/AA based light I'll use an 18650 light that can easily handle that with superior runtimes and regulation.

 

[marinemaster]

I had a SC5 but the step down was drastic. I had to return it for refund. I did run Eneloop in it so it was either the Eneloop or maybe the light. Not sure. My SC52 does not do that. Hopefully the MK II will run good.

 

[Tachead]

I had a SC5 but the step down was drastic. I had to return it for refund. I did run Eneloop in it so it was either the Eneloop or maybe the light. Not sure. My SC52 does not do that. Hopefully the MK II will run good.

The SC5 is still brighter then the SC52 after it steps down(in 3 min). The difference is you get 3 minutes with 210 lumens more output. And, if the step down bothers you, you can just run the light on H2 which is still 25 lumens brighter then the SC52 and has no step down. I am not sure what more you could want? I guess they could make it thermally regulated like some of their other models so the step down is less noticeable. But really, it is a single AA light and if you need to use high all the time for extended periods, you should probably go with a larger light/cell.

 

[marinemaster]

This was from lowest setting in a level as I run all my ZL on lowest setting they have. I always done that since I had ZL years ago when they came out. It was in any mode, the lowest setting in a specific level it would go down to next level down. I will just get the MK II warm when it comes out and use the newest Eneloop Pro I have. 60 lumens is plenty for me I'm interested in runtime not brightness.

 

[Lumencrazy]

There is a sound technical reason for using PWM for Led's. Led's experience a significant color shift as voltage changes. PWM keeps the forward voltage constant. It is used in most critical lighting applications where minimizing color shift is important. "Why argue against the desire for better engineering" I would do a little more learning before ripping into this subject matter with such aplomb.

 

[marinemaster]

Plus 1

 

[marinemaster]

I wonder if it would be possible for the ZL to make it such that just keep holding the button increases the brightness. Basically press and hold. Not sure what it would take maybe a different switch button or a complete different circuit.

 

[Tachead]

There is a sound technical reason for using PWM for Led's. Led's experience a significant color shift as voltage changes. PWM keeps the forward voltage constant. It is used in most critical lighting applications where minimizing color shift is important."Why argue against the desire for better engineering" I would do a little more learning before ripping into this subject matter with such aplomb.

While this is true, I don't see the relevance of this in this thread. ZL has confirmed that they don't use PWM.

 

[Tachead]

I wonder if it would be possible for the ZL to make it such that just keep holding the button increases the brightness. Basically press and hold. Not sure what it would take maybe a different switch button or a complete different circuit.

There is a couple of Black Diamond lanterns with a feature like that. So, it can be done.