Zebralight SC50w first impressions

[uplite]

So I finally opened the little box received earlier today. Distracted by the iPad launch, and new baby in progress (not mine...cousin...currently 5 minutes between contractions). :twothumbs

Anyway...I have the Zebralight SC50w in hand.

Here's a quick pic next to the Zebralight H501w (which I use about 80% of the time, for task lighting), and the Quark 123w (which I use the other 20% of the time, for throw):

I bought the SC50w to hopefully replace the Quark 123w for night hiking. The side switch should let me turn it on/off frequently for trail finding on the move, in a natural underhand grip. Time will tell if this works as expected.

First impressions...

Packaging -- Small cardboard box. Nothing fancy. I ordered my H501w from a dealer and it came in a very sleek retail package...which I promptly threw away. So...I'm happy that Zebralight does not waste $$ on fancy retail packaging for direct internet orders. :thumbsup:

Accessories -- Headband with silicone holder, and 2 spare o-rings. I doubt I'll ever use this light on my head, but it's nice to have a top-quality spare headband for the H501. :thumbsup:

Size & weight -- Almost exactly the same as Quark 123, even though this light takes AA cells. Length 3.15". Weight 51g with lithium AA cell, vs 53g for Quark 123 with lithium CR123A cell.

Durability -- I was expecting "ultralight" construction like the H501...but no...this is a much beefier handheld light. The tube appears to be twice as thick (.046" vs .023" measured at the tail). Anodize is standard Zebralight olive drab, a little bit more grain than my 501. It feels like I could drop it on river stones without chipping. We'll see this summer.

Fit & finish -- Superb. The machining is impeccable. Obviously these lights are milled, not lathed like 90% of the lights on CPF. The threads & o-ring came pre-greased. Threads are about twice as long as the H501 (6 turns vs 3 turns).

Beam profile -- A little bit floodier than the Quark 123w (XPE Q3-5A). The reflector is smaller, so the spill and hotspot are both a tiny bit larger = more diffuse. I was hoping for a tighter beam. But if you want more flood, or if you want more throw compared to an XPG light, this will work nicely.

Beam tint -- At first glance, same as the Quark 123w (XPE Q3-5A). On closer examination, the Zebralight (XPE Q4-5B) is very very slightly more green. Or the 5A Quark is very very slightly more purple. Compared to other lights though, they are identical.

That's all I have for now. I'll tru to post more pics post-baby. Also some pics after I replace the clip with my own wrist-lanyard loop.

Questions and comments welcome.

-Jeff

 

[hazna]

does the switch feel like it could easily accidentally turn on?

Any chance of beam shots?

 

[uplite]

does the switch feel like it could easily accidentally turn on?

IMO...no. Here is a comparison:

The Zebralight H501 switch can be turned on by pressing the end of the light against a flat surface. I always lock out my H501 by turning the tailcap ~1/8 turn before putting it away in my pocket or a bag.

The SC50 switch is deeply recessed. You cannot turn it on by pressing the switch against a flat surface. However you can turn it on by pressing a narrow object (key or pen or edge of iphone) against the switch. I will lock the tailcap of this light only when I pack it in a bag. I will leave it unlocked in a pocket by itself.

Any chance of beam shots?

Maybe in a few days. No promises. I've never done beamshots, and I only have a Quark 123w and a couple of dive lights to compare against. The Quark is most relevant.

I can tell you though...the beam is roughly the same as an XPE Quark. Slightly larger spill and very slightly larger hotspot. In my initial tests with the Quark 123w XPE high (~70 lumens spec?) and Zebralight SC50w high (~100 lumens spec?) the ZL beam was wider and slightly dimmer.

Just me...I wish the beam was tighter. But I understand that lots of folks prefer a semi-floody beam in a handheld light. :shrug:

Hopefully I'll have a chance to take some more pics soon. Camera in hand has no aperture or shutter control. I can lock the ISO and exposure comp and white balance and take a comparison picture of 2 lights though.

-Jeff

 

[NonSenCe]

picture of the wrist lanyard loop?

and actual measurements of the different parts of the light. the slimmest part of the body and the head etc. they say dimaeter is this or that.. but that likely is from the thickest spot and i wish to know the smallest too.. (curious about these things.. or do i need to wait for my light to arrive after couple weeks and do the measurements myself.)

how about the operation setup.. is the ui easy to master?

how is the baby and mom doing?

how about the threads toughness.. in my h501s i always considered them little too fine and that makes me feel like they are easy to strip or get mangled if not screwing precicely.

 

[FroggyTaco]

how about the operation setup.. is the ui easy to master?

how is the baby and mom doing?

If you own 501's the UI is the same. The only difference is you have light level choices on each level. Whereas the 501 only had the high/strobe option.

So click on for high, hold to cycle low-med-high-release to hold at the level of choosing & fast double-click to switch between light output of each level.

 

[carl]

Thanks for the new thread on this light. And the comparison pic too. But as you say, definitely, the wife/kid come first.

For around the house use, which one is more comfortable and pointable, the 501 or the sc50?

Bravo to Zebralight for giving us a nice standard front-mounted switch (So tired of tail switches - how many of us actually goes around the house with the light in the "tactical" or "cigar-hold" position anyway?).

 

[davidt1]

Thanks for the review. Good stuff!

 

[defloyd77]

how many of us actually goes around the house with the light in the "tactical" or "cigar-hold" position anyway?).

I for one do, the side switch is one of the very few things that I dislike about these lights.

Great review and pics BTW.

 

[uplite]

picture of the wrist lanyard loop?

Here is my first attempt at the lanyard loop, using some cheap & easy 18-gauge galvanized steel wire:

I tried a piece of 3/64" music wire first, but quickly realized that I lack the tools & technique to bend a very small radius in this stuff (music wire is incredibly strong). So I cut a piece of 18-gauge off the spool and used that instead.

It's actually quite strong, plus it is more flexible than music wire, so the screws squeeze it down very well. I think this will do the trick. Will strength test it to be sure.

actual measurements of the different parts of the light. the slimmest part of the body and the head etc.

Slimmest ... 0.707"
Bezel ... 0.828"
Tailcap ... 0.830"

The thickest part is the clip mount. With my wire loop and screws, it measures 0.954" from the top of the screws to the back of the tube. The stock clip is a tiny bit thinner. It's a very nice clip btw, if you prefer clip carry.

how is the baby and mom doing?

Both great, thanks for asking. Big girl, 9lb 2oz. Quick labor, less than 2 hours. All natural, no inducers or painkillers or scalpels. Yay. :thumbsup:

how about the threads toughness.. in my h501s i always considered them little too fine and that makes me feel like they are easy to strip or get mangled if not screwing precicely.

I know what you mean. I am always very careful to press the H501 tailcap whenever I screw it on or off, taking tension off the spring so the threads do not grind.

The SC50 tailcap feels much more solid & smooth.

On close inspection, it looks like the threads have the same pitch. I think the difference is that the SC50 body has about twice as much thread as the H501, and it starts earlier on the tube, so the spring is not so compressed/forceful at the beginning of the threads.

Here is a comparison pic, SC50 left and H501 right:

You can also see in this pic that the SC50 tube is twice as thick, and the o-ring is 2-3 times as thick, as the H501.

I don't know why the H501 has such short threads. The tube obviously has more room. And the tailcap has 5 or 6 turns of thread. :thinking: Anyway, the SC50 does not have this problem. :thumbsup:

BTW, the head of the SC50 also seems very robust. It has a surprisingly thick o-ring between the reflector and window:

-Jeff

 

[uplite]

For around the house use, which one is more comfortable and pointable, the 501 or the sc50?

Well...they are totally different lights.

The H501 is an even flood light, 80° spread. It covers everything that you can reach in front of you. So you don't need to hold it and point it. Just put it on your head (or around your neck, or clipped to your pocket, etc) and rotate it to illuminate your general task area. No hands.

The SC50 is a concentrated light, with about 8° hotspot. That hotspot is meant to be pointed at something, which is best done with the light in your hand. Or maybe in your mouth, if you need a concentrated beam but your hands are full.

I guess you could say that the H501 is most "comfortable" (since you don't have to hold it) and the SC50 is most "pointable" (since it has a concentrated beam).

-Jeff

 

[Zendude]

Very nice review of a very nice light!:thumbsup: I've been impressed by ZL's innovative headlamp designs from the beginning and their flashlights are no exception.

Question: Is it unusual to have the press fitting directly on the lens? Couldn't water migrate behind it?

 

[pc_light]

Questions and comments welcome.
-Jeff

(Jeff, I hope you will forgive my piggy-backing on your thread, I figure it was preferable to starting a separate "first impressions" thread.)

The Easter bunny brought me a little brown box as well , ditto for me on most of Uplite's first impressions.

FWIW, I'll add my two cents on how the SC50w compares to my Quark MiNi-AAw. Interestingly compared to Uplite's regular Quark, I found the SC50w beam tighter than the Quark MiNi-AAw.

Here are some side-by-side beam shots of SC50w on left and Mini-AAw on right. From top to bottom, both on Low-Med-High.



It is difficult to see in the photo at 3-ft from wall but the SC50w's hotspot is made up of an intense center within the larger hotspot, whereas the Mini-AAw's hotspot was slightly smaller and more uniform throughout. At distances beyond the 3-ft wall shots, that translated to the SC50w appearing to have a relatively tighter/brighter hotspot when compared to the wider/uniform hotspot of the MiNi-AAw.

BTW, the above were taken with the lights running on Sanyo NiMH's. There were slight, if any, differences in brightness using NiMH, Alkaline, or Lithium (runtimes are a separate matter); as expected with a boost circuit. However as indicated by ZL the SC50w on a 14500 cell was noticeable brighter.

Here are the beam shots on various cells from left-to-right or top-to-bottom, respectively. The 14500 cell on bottom is visably brighter.



The main attraction of the SC50w for me was the side-switch, in this regard I find it well positioned with a nice solid feel. With regard to using the switch, my personal preference for UI would have been for the default On setting to be user defined and/or "last-mode" memory, rather than High1.

Also, the SC50w body with it's crisp and sharp lines does have a drawback, in particular around the swtch. I have already noticed that the sharp edges around the switch are actually resulting in some skin flaking off my thumb and accumulating as dust around the switch; a small matter (no pun intended).

All in all, a very nice pcoket light :thumbsup:.

pc_light

 

[FroggyTaco]

Very nice review of a very nice light!:thumbsup: I've been impressed by ZL's innovative headlamp designs from the beginning and their flashlights are no exception.

Question: Is it unusual to have the press fitting directly on the lens? Couldn't water migrate behind it?

Actually it is wise on ZL's part. A consumer can't disassemble it & then incorrectly assemble it & create a problem that becomes a thread on a internet forum.

Not if there is an o-ring behind the lens.

 

[FroggyTaco]

This is a good showing of the differences between XP-E & XP-G emitters.

FWIW, I'll add my two cents on how the SC50w compares to my Quark MiNi-AAw. Interestingly compared to Uplite's regular Quark, I found the SC50w beam tighter than the Quark MiNi-AAw.

Here are some side-by-side beam shots of SC50w on left and Mini-AAw on right. From top to bottom, both on Low-Med-High.



It is difficult to see in the photo at 3-ft from wall but the SC50w's hotspot is made up of an intense center within the larger hotspot, whereas the Mini-AAw's hotspot was slightly smaller and more uniform throughout. At distances beyond the 3-ft wall shots, that translated to the SC50w appearing to have a relatively tighter/brighter hotspot when compared to the wider/uniform hotspot of the MiNi-AAw.

BTW, the above were taken with the lights running on Sanyo NiMH's. There were slight, if any, differences in brightness using NiMH, Alkaline, or Lithium (runtimes are a separate matter); as expected with a boost circuit. However as indicated by ZL the SC50w on a 14500 cell was noticeable brighter.

 

[pc_light]

This is a good showing of the differences between XP-E & XP-G emitters.

Hi Froggy,

Although the currently selling QMiNi-AA does use the XP-G emitter, the two I compared were both warm/neutral XP-E's with the main difference being Tint (SC50w=5B; MiNi-AAw=5A; which does bear out with what I noticed with mine).

I did see in another thread where one vendor site is indicating the SC50w to be a Q4-5B, if correct, that would mean a slightly higher flux bin than the Q-MiNi-AA (Q3).

The higher flux of the emitter and/or the relatively smoother OP (and/or geometry) of the ZL reflector might account for the differences in hotspot that I see.


That's my guess.

pc_light

 

[FroggyTaco]

Oh yeah..I forgot they are both warm versions! Doh!

 

[jblackwood]

Accessories -- Headband with silicone holder, and 2 spare o-rings. I doubt I'll ever use this light on my head, but it's nice to have a top-quality spare headband for the H501. :thumbsup:

The holders are different. The one that comes with my SC50w is larger than my H501w's band. When I tried to slip it on, the H501w was too loose and I couldn't use it since ANY shock made it shift in position. Needless to say, the H501w's holder was too tight for the SC50w. I compared both SC50 and SC50w since I had both, but I figured the result would be the same since they use the same body. Never let it be said that I'm not thorough! :wave:

Oh yeah, if more people ran their businesses like Henry (RA lights) did, they wouldn't mess with a good design and the SC50 would keep the XP-E as their emitter. It provides good runtime and the same low low for both Ni-MH and 14500. There are tons of other, NON-side clicky lights that DO use an XP-G. If you prefer that kind of light (especially if it's only because of the emitter choice), please refrain from needlessly trashing a thread by repeatedly expressing your opinion against a light and just go get yourself one of the others that suits your needs. If your position is worth knowing, it shouldn't need repeating.

EDIT: Please disregard my words in red. I don't really believe in erasing things like this especially since someone's already quoted it. Either way, let it be known that I have, once again, frakked up! I posted this in the wrong thread. I must have had sand in my . . . well, if you watch South Park, you know where I'm going with that. Either way, congrats again to the OP and to Zebralight for designing such a uniquely awesome light!

 

[ky70]

...There are tons of other, NON-side clicky lights that DO use an XP-G. If you prefer that kind of light (especially if it's only because of the emitter choice), please refrain from needlessly trashing a thread by repeatedly expressing your opinion against a light and just go get yourself one of the others that suits your needs. If your position is worth knowing, it shouldn't need repeating.

Was there a post deleted? After reading this entire thread, I have no clue who these comments are directed at.

 

[jblackwood]

There were some comments about preferring the latest emitter and passing on this light because there's no XP-G in it. Reviewing the thread, it looks like either the person deleted those comments (likely) or I confused this thread with another (MUCH more likely). Either way, if no one has fessed up, I'll go back and amend my comments with an edit.

To the OP, thanks for the nice little review and I love what you've done as far as the lanyard attachment. Kudos!

 

[uplite]

Is it unusual to have the press fitting directly on the lens?

I dunno if the gasket-behind-lens design is unusual for these lights. It is different from my Q123, which has the o-ring in front of the lens.

This design is preferred for some diving lights because the water pressure on the lens creates a better seal as you go deeper. But the SC50 is obviously not a dive light.

It's also possible that there is another gasket/oring underneath the bezel, in front of the lens. I wish the bezel was removeable for maintenance.

hope you will forgive my piggy-backing on your thread

The more the merrier! This is your thread too. Thanks for the beamshots!

compared to Uplite's regular Quark, I found the SC50w beam tighter than the Quark MiNi-AAw

I think the difference is mostly due to the reflectors. The SC50 has a smaller/shallower reflector than the Q123. Is the MiNi AA reflector even smaller?

I would love to see a Zebralight that uses small TIR optic instead of reflector, for less spill and more throw. Or even better...a Zebralight with a choice of different optics: 5°, 10°, 20°, etc to match the intended use.

8° handheld plus 80° headlamp are a good start, but there are many more angles in between... :candle:

my personal preference for UI would have been for the default On setting to be user defined and/or "last-mode" memory, rather than High1

IMO the great thing about the zebra UI is that you can turn it on in the mode you want, no cycling thru modes. Quick-click High, slow-click Low, double-click Medium.

"Last-mode" memory would change that predictability.

More user-defined settings sounds good to me, if ZL can hide the programming mode. That seems to be the trick. The more complicated the programming, the more difficult it should be to get into programming mode. Otherwise someone will complain that the light is too complicated.

I think ZL has gone down the right path with instant access to three modes, plus double-click to fine-tune 2 of those modes. More options would be nice though. Especially the blinky mode. 2Hz is a good compromise, but I'd prefer to set it anywhere from once-every-30-seconds locator beacon (with many hours runtime) to 10Hz panic strobe.

A consumer can't disassemble it & then incorrectly assemble it & create a problem that becomes a thread on a internet forum.

That makes sense...but personally...I would still prefer a light that can be disassembled.

I hope that most of us who are motivated to break the loctite on a flashlight, also understand that we are breaking the warranty if we mess it up somehow.

But I will not intentionally submerge any light unless it is rated to 30+ meters depth...or I can disassemble & seal the bezels myself.

The SC50 is an extremely tight & light design. I don't know if ZL could make the lens & switch bezels unscrewable without making them bigger and sloppier. But I would love to see a "flashaholic" version of this light that can be disassembled for cleaning & maintenance.

The holders are different. The one that comes with my SC50w is larger

True. Actually...the SC50 holder seems large enough to hold my Q123. I bet this holder & headband would work great for someone with a Quark Prism. :thumbsup:

Headband is the same as the H501 though. And my H501 came with two holders, black and glow. Now I can swap them without taking apart the headband. :thumbsup:

To the OP, thanks for the nice little review and I love what you've done as far as the lanyard attachment. Kudos!

Thanks! It wasn't meant as a review. I bow down to reviewers like selfbuilt and HKJ who have a real methodology. :bow: But I appreciate the kudos.


-Jeff