New Digital D-mini Q2 vs original D-mini P4: RUNTIMES, pics & more - UPDATED!

selfbuilt

Flashaholic
Joined
May 27, 2006
Messages
7,007
Location
Canada
EDIT 11/8/07: Turns out you can still lock-out the light with a 1/4 turn at the tailcap, even though the threads are not anodized. Not sure how they've managed this, but my apologies for not realizing it earlier. :ohgeez:

This thread is a comparison of the new digital 3-stage Q2 D-mini compared to the previous single/resistored 2-stage P4 version

The contenders:

From left to right: original P4 D-mini (black type II anodized), new digital Q2 D-mini (natural HA-III)
Dmini-1.jpg


As you will notice, the new digital multi-stage D-mini is a little taller, thanks to the protruding GITD tailcap and forward clicky used to switch modes.

Beamshots:

On Hi with AW protected RCR

Note: These beamshots are misleading, as there is no difference in initial output on RCR (although the new digital version gets slightly brighter over time on RCR). But there is a large increase in output on primaries with the new digital Q2 version (see runtimes and summary below).

Dmini-2.jpg

Dmini-3.jpg


Note: all pics and throw measurements done with the original smooth reflector.

As you can see, beam profiles are very similar. Tint bin on the new digital Q2 D-mini is a premium white bin (I'd estimate WC), while my original P4 was a warmer tint (likely WG).

Method: All my output numbers are relative for my home-made light box setup, a la Quickbeam's FR.com method. My relative overall output numbers are typically similar to his, although generally a little lower. You can directly compare all my review graphs - i.e. an output value of "10" in one graph is the same as "10" in another.

Throw values are the square-root of lux measurements taken at 1m using a light meter.

Summary Chart

DminiSummary.gif


Runtimes:

Hi mode on Energizer primaries
Dmini-Hi.gif


Med/Lo modes on Energizer primaries
Dmini-Med.gif


Hi mode on AW protected RCR
Dmini-HiRCR.gif


Med/Lo mode on AW protected RCR
Dmini-MedRCR.gif


General observations:

Digital control: I'm not sure how the new digital D-mini regulates its low modes, but if it uses PWM the frequency is too high for me to detect by eye or by instrument.
Memory: The new digital D-mini lacks a dedicated memory mode that retains last setting used. Instead, the light comes on in the following initial sequence: Hi - Med - Lo, repeat (cycle accessed by soft-pressing the forward clicky until the desired mode is found). According to Ricky at LP, if you leave the light on in any mode for more than 2 secs, after turning it off it will come back on at the start of the initial sequence (i.e. Hi), and cycle from there. In my case, it seems more like ~5 secs, and I see a momentary flash at that point letting me know the memory resest has been activated. If you turn the light off before the 5 sec period, it will move along to the next mode in the sequence when you turn it back on.
Interface: You soft-press the forward clicky repeatedly to switch between modes, and click for lock-on. You can also click on/off to change modes if you are fast enough. If you leave the light on for more 5 secs in any mode, the light will revert back to the initial sequence at the next start up (i.e. Hi). Forward clicky switch works well and is easy to access with good tactile feel.

Dmini-4.jpg


Build Quality
  • Build quality is generally comparable to the original D-mini, with one noticeable change - the tailcap screw threads are no longer anodized (see pic above). Nevertheless, tailcap lock-out still seems to work with a ~1/4 turn. I'm unclear how they've managed this, but it does mean that you can lock-out the tailcap while travelling (to prevent accidental activation) - despite my earlier reports to the contrary.
  • The new digital D-mini now comes in a Hard Anodized natural finish (HA-III). Finish is smooth overall, but unfortunately there is some mottling of the anodizing on the bezel of my unit.
  • The lettering is more difficult to read on the new digital D-mini, although this may be due in part to the lack of contrast against the natural finish.
  • Light no longer tailstands with the protruding forward clicky switch.
    EDIT 2/28/08: FYI, Marlite informs me LifeRNA found a solution to allow the D-mini digital to tailstand: insert a #10 o-ring between the tail button and the inside base of the tailcap retainer, as discussed in post #939 onwards here.

Dmini-5.jpg


Accessories
  • I purchased the new digital D-mini from batteryjunction.com, and it came with a nice collection of extra o-rings, black tail-cap cover, OP reflector, and carrying pouch.
  • The carrying pouch is somewhat disappointing, as it seems to be identical to the cheaply-made all-nylon pouches you can buy at DX/Kai. Compared to the original higher quality inscribed nylon/felt pouch, this is a let down (see pic below: old D-mini pouch on left, new pouch on the right).
EDIT 11/02/07: Ricky at Lumapower informs me that the old style pouches are back in stock now. However, I would imagine it will take some time before all the distributor channels start shipping the light with them.
Dmini-6.jpg


Output
  • The new circuitry results in a considerable increase in output/throw on primaries on Hi, with similar runtime. In fact, initial output on primary on Hi now matches that of RCR on the new digital model, which is most welcome.
  • Initial output and throw on RCR on Hi on new Q2 version is unchanged from the earlier P4 light (see beamshots and runtimes), although the new digital D-mini got marginally brighter over the course of the RCR run. In fact, all RCR modes show a slight increase in output over time from initial values.
  • Efficiency of the low mode on the new digital D-mini is far greater than the resistored low of the 2-stage switch for the original D-mini. Output levels on Lo are roughly comparable, but runtime has increased significantly on the new model (especially on RCR).
  • New medium mode is intermittent to Hi and Lo modes, as expected.

Conclusion:
  • A significant upgrade to the original D-mini, with greatly improved output/throw on Hi on primaries for equivalent runtime, and improved runtimes for similar output on low. Medium mode in intermittent to Hi/Low in terms of output.
  • Output, throw and runtime on Hi on RCR are largely unchanged from the earlier version, so users of the light in this format may want to wait for a Q5 digital edition. Although I don't have a 18650 body tube, I expect the same pattern as seen for RCR would hold true for 18650.
  • Q2 edition comes with a premium white tint bin.
  • Forward clicky seems to be of high quality, and likely to be popular with many users as it facilitates mode changing.
  • Lack of a retained last mode memory setting is disappointing. Light reverts to Hi - Med - Lo sequence once you turn it off (assuming you leave it on for ~5 secs in any given mode first), which is good for users who prefer the light to always come on in Hi mode. However, a dedicated memory mode would allow each user to choose their preferred start-up mode. Still, lack of strobe and SOS modes make cycling much less annoying than on 5-stage lights without memory.
  • Build quality is at least comparable to the older model, and anodizing has been upgraded to HA-III natural (although mine had cosmetic blemishes on the bezel).

There you have it - a worthwhile upgrade to classic light. Cheers! :wave:
 
Last edited:

Kilovolt

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Mar 1, 2007
Messages
2,401
Location
Lake Como, Italy
Re: New Digital D-mini Q2 vs original D-mini P4: RUNTIMES, detailed pics and more!

Thank you very much, it's really interesting.

:twothumbs:twothumbs:twothumbs
 

Dobbler

Enlightened
Joined
Feb 12, 2007
Messages
503
Re: New Digital D-mini Q2 vs original D-mini P4: RUNTIMES, detailed pics and more!

The D-Mini Q2's from DX had fully anodized threads. The tint is very nice and white (WC claimed). Only Type II anodizing though.
 

selfbuilt

Flashaholic
Joined
May 27, 2006
Messages
7,007
Location
Canada
Re: New Digital D-mini Q2 vs original D-mini P4: RUNTIMES, detailed pics and more!

The D-Mini Q2's from DX had fully anodized threads. The tint is very nice and white (WC claimed). Only Type II anodizing though.
Hi Dobbler, that's true, but those weren't the new digital circuit D-minis. Those seem to have been partial original D-mini bodies that had been given away as part of a settlement to a former company partner, and were completed with additional parts and re-sold with no warranty through DX and others. So build wise, they seem to be using the old body tubes (which were fully anodized).

The new Digital D-mini is an official product that has circuit-controlled medium and low modes for more efficient output/runtime, improved output on primaries on Hi, HA-III natural, and a forward clicky - but oddly no longer has the tailcap thread anodizing. Strange ... :thinking:
 
Last edited:

Dobbler

Enlightened
Joined
Feb 12, 2007
Messages
503
Re: New Digital D-mini Q2 vs original D-mini P4: RUNTIMES, detailed pics and more!

I only use hi mode -- the D-mini is a pocket thrower and the lower modes are of little use (to me).
 

selfbuilt

Flashaholic
Joined
May 27, 2006
Messages
7,007
Location
Canada
Re: New Digital D-mini Q2 vs original D-mini P4: RUNTIMES, detailed pics and more!

I only use hi mode -- the D-mini is a pocket thrower and the lower modes are of little use (to me).
There's still an advantage if you use primaries on Hi (noticeably brighter now). But if you are running RCR, there would be no real reason to upgrade. And based on ernsanada's numbers, it looks like output on 18650 with the extra body tube is just like RCR - basically unaltered on Hi.

Oh, and I just updated main post with Ricky's info about the old-style pouches being back in stock.
 

woodrow

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Feb 7, 2006
Messages
2,027
Location
New Mexico
Re: New Digital D-mini Q2 vs original D-mini P4: RUNTIMES, detailed pics and more!

selfbuilt,
Thanks for the pics and runtime graphs and all the hard work they involve. I just ordered this light, and did so after seeing your review. Thanks again!
 

selfbuilt

Flashaholic
Joined
May 27, 2006
Messages
7,007
Location
Canada
Re: New Digital D-mini Q2 vs original D-mini P4: RUNTIMES, detailed pics and more!

Thanks for the pics and runtime graphs and all the hard work they involve. I just ordered this light, and did so after seeing your review. Thanks again!
Thanks woodrow - glad you found it useful.

Actually, I'm surprised there doesn't seem to be more interest in this light. I think maybe the initial reviews showing no difference in throw on 18650 discouraged people. But that's hardly surprising, since there's not going to be much of a difference between a Q2 and P4 when driven by a 3.6V rechargeable Li-ion (i.e. just as my RCR results showed). The real benefit to this light is its more efficient low modes, and (thankfully) greater output on primaries.

Now I just wish they would re-introduce thread anodizing ... Luma is the only Chinese maker of thrower lights that has this excellent feature (i.e. MRV has it, but Tiablo, DBS, Regal, etc. don't). I missed it on my new D-mini.
 

spoonrobot

Enlightened
Joined
Aug 2, 2005
Messages
396
Re: New Digital D-mini Q2 vs original D-mini P4: RUNTIMES, detailed pics and more!

What's up with the no tailcap lock-out? Seems like more and more lights are forgoing this feature for no good reason. Most people who EDC a light do so in their pocket, with other items, and an accidental activation is a real pain if you can't prevent it.

:thumbsdow
 

StandardBattery

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Sep 2, 2007
Messages
2,959
Location
MA
Re: New Digital D-mini Q2 vs original D-mini P4: RUNTIMES, detailed pics and more!

I just got a D-Mini Digital a little more than a week ago, an impluse buy really... I didn't properly research it before I bought it. I knew the original was popular and I liked the look. I didn't know a Q5 was on the way, but that's not a huge deal.

I have no problem with locking out with the tail cap. Mine only needs a 1/4 turn to lockout. My theads don't look anodized either.

I think the switch is way too sensitive.

I just switched to the OP reflector as the SMO was really ringy. I'm going to go test out side.

What's the easiest way to get a D65 tube for it, and how much? I wish BJ would carry them.

This light looks cool, but I guess I really don't need it. An 18650 option for it though might be the ticket. I feel the light is already a bit over priced, though. Not many good 18650 solutions out there right now though.

Thanks for the review.
 

selfbuilt

Flashaholic
Joined
May 27, 2006
Messages
7,007
Location
Canada
Re: New Digital D-mini Q2 vs original D-mini P4: RUNTIMES, detailed pics and more!

I have no problem with locking out with the tail cap. Mine only needs a 1/4 turn to lockout. My theads don't look anodized either.
Now that's interesting. Unfortunately, I'm travelling at the moment, and don't have my D-mini with me to re-test. I do recall trying a 1/4 turn when it arrived, and the light still lit. I will have to play around with it some more when I return in a few days. I'll keep you posted.

Not many good 18650 solutions out there right now though.
In the thrower category, there are some excellent choices on this cell (Luma, Tiablo, Dereelight especially - see my sig for a review). For general purpose, I'm a fan of the VB-16.
 

StefanFS

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Oct 12, 2006
Messages
1,262
Location
Silicon Road 1, Sweden
Re: New Digital D-mini Q2 vs original D-mini P4: RUNTIMES, detailed pics and more!

I'm amazed that LumaPower didn't go with higher output on the highest level. The D-mini design is capable of running a CREE at 1 A for quite a while without overheating. With a CREE Q2 that should translate to about 10 000 Lux in throw at 1 m. That and the lack of mode memory. Otherwise it seems to be a good upgrade on a great light.

Stefan
 

EVOeight

Newly Enlightened
Joined
Dec 12, 2005
Messages
117
Re: New Digital D-mini Q2 vs original D-mini P4: RUNTIMES, detailed pics and more!

I do have to say Thank You for not including SOS and strobe! Thank you!
I would really like to see memory added so it will remember last setting. Very close to my perfect EDC light...
 

StandardBattery

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Sep 2, 2007
Messages
2,959
Location
MA
Re: New Digital D-mini Q2 vs original D-mini P4: RUNTIMES, detailed pics and more!

In the thrower category, there are some excellent choices on this cell (Luma, Tiablo, Dereelight especially - see my sig for a review). For general purpose, I'm a fan of the VB-16.
You're right in the throw category there are a couple nice choices. I'm familair with the DBS and the A8/A9, don't know anything about Luma. In the general area The Dereelight CL1H is pretty good, except I've had several issues with mine, and they are changing things daily. It's a little too big/heavy for EDC and they have cancelled the 3 stage.

So is the D65 tube actually available for the D-mini digital, or is it out of stock and we have to wait to see if it comes back?

I'll look at the VB-16 again, it has been a while since I looked at that one. Thanks for the tip.

ps... moved back to the SMO reflector D-mini-D for a couple more tests.
 

woodrow

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Feb 7, 2006
Messages
2,027
Location
New Mexico
Re: New Digital D-mini Q2 vs original D-mini P4: RUNTIMES, detailed pics and more!

Of course, I see today the Q5 version is availible now...have not even gotten my Q2 yet. However, I am not too sad. I do not believe that the Q5 will be as bright (or at least throw as far) as the Tiablo q5 I have...also runtime is short. This hopefully will be a great throw in the pocket throw light when for what ever reason the Tiablo is to big to take with me.
 

liquidinfo

Newly Enlightened
Joined
Nov 3, 2007
Messages
13
Re: New Digital D-mini Q2 vs original D-mini P4: RUNTIMES, detailed pics and more!

In the general area The Dereelight CL1H is pretty good, except I've had several issues with mine, and they are changing things daily. It's a little too big/heavy for EDC and they have cancelled the 3 stage.

What others would you consider for the general category? The CL1H looks pretty good to me but I'd like to do a little compare and contrast with some other lights before I make the plunge.
 
Last edited:

Fooboy

Enlightened
Joined
Nov 4, 2007
Messages
276
Re: New Digital D-mini Q2 vs original D-mini P4: RUNTIMES, detailed pics and more!

I am having trouble deciding between a digital mini for $70 bucks or a SF L1 (cree) for $135.

I don't know if the surefire is worth 2x the price ... I mean I am not special forces haha. Any advice?
 

StefanFS

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Oct 12, 2006
Messages
1,262
Location
Silicon Road 1, Sweden
Re: New Digital D-mini Q2 vs original D-mini P4: RUNTIMES, detailed pics and more!

I am having trouble deciding between a digital mini for $70 bucks or a SF L1 (cree) for $135.

I don't know if the surefire is worth 2x the price ... I mean I am not special forces haha. Any advice?

The D-minis are great lights. I have had several. I still use the original version I got a year ago every day (it's modded a bit by now). It throws really good and it has good spill light. Highly recommended.
Stefan
 

selfbuilt

Flashaholic
Joined
May 27, 2006
Messages
7,007
Location
Canada
Re: New Digital D-mini Q2 vs original D-mini P4: RUNTIMES, detailed pics and more!

I agree with Stefan, the D-mini makes for a great little throw light (both original and new digital). And I doubt the Q5 will make much of a difference on primaries.

Personally, I typically EDC a 1AA format light on me, running on 14500. This gives me the output of a CR123/RCR light, but with the option to switch to standard batteries if needed. But if I'm travelling somewhere where I want a more throwy light, the D-mini is what gets tossed in my travel bag (due to its excellent throw and low weight). Personally, I'm very interested to see how the new jetbeam II will do in the throw department. I plan to pick one up, so I'll do a comparison review when it's out.

For general use, I haven't tried too many of the 2xCR123/18650 options out there. I have the original VB-16 modded to SSC, and it's a wonderful light for its huge range of output levels. I personally tend to go more for the throwy lights in this category, and stick with 2xAA options for general use (e.g. Fenix L2T/L2D - again for access to common batteries).
 

StandardBattery

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Sep 2, 2007
Messages
2,959
Location
MA
Re: New Digital D-mini Q2 vs original D-mini P4: RUNTIMES, detailed pics and more!

What others would you consider for the general category? The CL1H looks pretty good to me but I'd like to do a little compare and contrast with some other lights before I make the plunge.
That's the problem, there aren't many. You can put together a custom light, or try to find a custom body for one of your existing lights, but it's tough finding a good quality 18650 in the general category. The cell is too limited in use to the Flashaholics crowd right now.

On idea I like is to bore out a 6P, and install a LED drop-in, but the light is a little big and heavy for EDC. That VB16 does look interesting.

I'm hoping 4Sevens will get a good response on the PEU tactical tubes they made for the P3D and make an 18650 one; hopefully for the P1D, since its driver is better suited to an 18650.
 
Top