Liteflux LF1 v Ultrafire 602A1 v Fenix L1P, L2P please

Nice if someone could do a comparison between these torches !!

Output and RT my main questions.

Flashlightreviews.com has the reviews on all the torches, except the Ultrafire.

Flashreviews.com has all the values and graphs for comparison on output and RT, so i won't go into that area. also i do not have a ultrafire602A1 to commend on its features.

If i may, i would like to point out the main differences between these AA/2AA LED lights. the differences are LiteFluxLF1 has a 3W T bin Luxeon, 2 stage tail cap, true clickie and can act as a 2 stage electric candle with the bezel off.

by twisting the LF1 tail cap, the 2 stage works across all types of batteries (AA/2AA/14500) with the low output dependent on the type of battery used.

also by carefully adjusting the position of the LF1 tail cap and combining with its clickie, the user has the following options.

High mode
fully tighten the tail cap. press button for momentary high. click button for constant high.
when clicked on high, twist/loosen tail cap for constant low.

low mode
loosen tail cap by 1/2 - 1 turn. press button for momentary low. click button for constant low.
when clicked on low, twist/tighten tail cap for constant high.

low mode with momentaty high
carefully loosen tail cap by 1/8 - 1/4 turn. lightly press button for momentary low. press further in for momentary high (the clickie has enough travel to do this).
click button for constant low. when clicked on low, press(not click) button for momentary high! release button light will go back to constant low.
when clicked on low, twist/tighten tail cap for constant high.

lock out mode
loosen tail cap by 2 - 2 1/2 turn for lock out function. note O ring do not show when in lock out mode.

i hope these help to give members a better understanding on the major differences between the above mentioned AA/2AA LED lights.

The problem with FLR, as far as I can see, is that you cannot directly compare outputs.

My personal output readings are:

UF601........13.1...RT...3.5...hrs
L2P............12.9...RT...4.0...hrs
L1P............12.1...RT...2.8...hrs
UF602A1.....11.9...RT...1.8...hrs
UF602........11.0...RT...1.5...hrs
No LF1 to test...

Readings torch 12" from Lenin 4 Photographic lightmeter, as per all my reviews.

11.0= 5,100 lux
12.0= 10,000 lux
13.0= 20,000 lux

well if we can consider the Luxeon LED used in these lights, i would say that the LiteFlux LF1, which use 3W T bin Luxeon LED, would have a much higher output at the expense of lower runtime.

i have a Meterman LM631 Digital light meter, will try to give you a lux reading at 12". may i ask what batteries were used in your personal output reading?

LED Cool

abvidledUK said:

...My personal output readings are:

UF601........13.1...RT...3.5...hrs
L2P............12.9...RT...4.0...hrs
L1P............12.1...RT...2.8...hrs
UF602A1.....11.9...RT...1.8...hrs
UF602........11.0...RT...1.5...hrs
No LF1 to test...

Readings torch 12" from Lenin 4 Photographic lightmeter, as per all my reviews.

11.0= 5,100 lux
12.0= 10,000 lux
13.0= 20,000 lux

Click to expand...

You might want to re-check your calibration. 20,000 Lux at one foot would be about 2000 lux at 1 meter, i.e. 2000 cd beam brightness. That's a lot higher than the 800 cd that FLR measured for the same light.

Just a thought...

If anyone has a 602A1 and some 14500 Li-ions they'd loan to me for some runtime tests I'd be glad to do them.

I've been drooling over the 602A1 for a while now, but dont want to buy one until more is known about its performance.

chevrofreak said:

If anyone has a 602A1 and some 14500 Li-ions they'd loan to me for some runtime tests I'd be glad to do them.

I've been drooling over the 602A1 for a while now, but dont want to buy one until more is known about its performance.

Click to expand...

I bought mine (602A1) from Apliu Street, Kowloon, Hong Kong a few weeks back.

Brighter than original 602A, with 1AA. (11.9 cf 11.0)

Much brighter with 14500 3v, virtually same as 601 (2AA) (13.1) using nimh, slightly brighter (13.5). (Yes I know they're different battery technologies)

The 602A1 is actually same brightness as 602A with 14500 3v, the 602A being overdriven somewhat.


Using nimh's
UF602A1.....11.9...RT...1.8...hrs
UF602A.......11.0...RT...1.5...hrs
UF601........13.1...RT...3.5...hrs
L2P............12.9...RT...4.0...hrs
L1P............12.1...RT...2.8...hrs

nerdgineer said:

You might want to re-check your calibration. 20,000 Lux at one foot would be about 2000 lux at 1 meter, i.e. 2000 cd beam brightness. That's a lot higher than the 800 cd that FLR measured for the same light.

Just a thought...

Click to expand...

That's for a pinpoint light source radiating in all directions. The formula is 2^n where n is the multiple of the farther distance vs the nearer distance... i.e. 1 meter is about 3.3 times the distance of 1 foot therefore the formula is 2^3.3, or about 9.8 (let's call it 10). In that case your 2,000 vs 20,000 would be right.

However, for a focused light source you have to know the beam's angle of spread as well as the two measured distances... the tighter the beam, the less you would lose from a foot to a meter. If you had a perfectly focused beam that didn't spread at all, the measurement would be the same at a meter as it was at a foot because the sensor would be receiving the same amount of light.

TornadoKat said:

...However, for a focused light source you have to know the beam's angle of spread as well as the two measured distances... the tighter the beam, the less you would lose from a foot to a meter. If you had a perfectly focused beam that didn't spread at all, the measurement would be the same at a meter as it was at a foot because the sensor would be receiving the same amount of light...

Click to expand...

A good point. I was only commenting that abvidledUK's conversion of EV readings to brightness (LUX at one foot in his case) appeared to be much higher than FLR's measurements for the same model light.

The point source approximation suggested that abvidledUK's measurements were almost 3 times higher than FLR's measurements. A more focused assumption would result in estimated 1 meter LUX measurements even HIGHER than the 2000 cd estimate for point source dispersion, which only reinforces the point that perhaps abvidledUK should take another look at his EV to LUX at one foot conversion.

BTW, it's been a while but I think a rule of thumb for most optical and RF emitters is that once you get more than about 15 aperture diameters (about 10 inches for a 602A1) from a radiating source, the point source approximation for energy density falloff applies pretty well. It also applies for a laser - eventually; you just have to back off a lot more aperture diameters (don't know how many) before the point source approximation becomes accurate.

Even a "perfectly focused" light would eventually spread like a point source because of classical single slit diffraction through the aperture. More knowledgeable CPFers out there can correct me but I think this becomes noticeable (for monochromatic light) when you get a distance of about D/lambda (where D is the diameter of the aperture and lambda is the wavelength of light) times D away from the "perfectly focused" light. Probably a little closer than that for white light.

nerdgineer said:

A good point. I was only commenting that abvidledUK's conversion of EV readings to brightness (LUX at one foot in his case) appeared to be much higher than FLR's measurements for the same model light.

The point source approximation suggested that abvidledUK's measurements were almost 3 times higher than FLR's measurements.

Click to expand...

Getting way off track here.

EV measurements are just that, measurements. (11.9 etc)

Lux conversion from EV from another source, just that, conversion, not measurements.

If lux is wrong it is other source that is wrong, but relative lux's compared to other torches has been roughly correct in the past.

Example : http://www.sekonic.com/support/support_2.asp