husky20
Banned
What are the current cream of the crop LEDs out there and what are they capable of in output?even ones on the horizon?and by baddest i mean best for all you non cali people.
Last edited:
newest baddest LED
- Thread starter husky20
- Start date
Help Support Candle Power Flashlight Forum
Gunner12
Flashaholic
Right now?
The best single Die LED is the Cree XR-E R2. Should be around 250 lumen at 1 amp.
There is also the Seoul P7. 4 Seoul P4 dies on one slug. Up to 900 lumen.
On the horizon? Well, Cree is developing a 1000 lumen 1 die LED driven at 3.6v and 4 amp(the testing one is already made). Luxeon should have something. Not sure about Seoul.
The best single Die LED is the Cree XR-E R2. Should be around 250 lumen at 1 amp.
There is also the Seoul P7. 4 Seoul P4 dies on one slug. Up to 900 lumen.
On the horizon? Well, Cree is developing a 1000 lumen 1 die LED driven at 3.6v and 4 amp(the testing one is already made). Luxeon should have something. Not sure about Seoul.
BabyDoc
Flashlight Enthusiast
It is interesting that "baddest" LED almost always stresses MORE Lumens. How bright do these have to get before we will be happy? Do we have to literally blind somebody with our lights before we say it is bright enough? I guess we get a warm fuzzy feeling knowing we have the "baddest" LED even if we rarely use all its lumens. I have been attracted to these monsters myself only to find I rarely use beyond 10 lumens.
I would hope someday, improvements are forthcoming in LED technology that will enhance the quality of the light, rather than just the quantity. I have heard this is actually happening with home lighting but so far we have not seen this with our flashlights. It is no feat for a light to look great on a white wall. However, it is a feat for light to acurately illuminate and reflect the colors of the world we live in. There are very few LED's today that do this well. In that regard most of our LED lights produce "bad" lumens. Hopefully good lumens are around the corner. That's what I am waiting for.
I would hope someday, improvements are forthcoming in LED technology that will enhance the quality of the light, rather than just the quantity. I have heard this is actually happening with home lighting but so far we have not seen this with our flashlights. It is no feat for a light to look great on a white wall. However, it is a feat for light to acurately illuminate and reflect the colors of the world we live in. There are very few LED's today that do this well. In that regard most of our LED lights produce "bad" lumens. Hopefully good lumens are around the corner. That's what I am waiting for.
Last edited:
LukeA
Flashlight Enthusiast
Put a Cree P4 7A tint emitter in one of your lights.
Illum
Flashaholic
to the theoretical limit in lumens per watt of course
LEDs have already surpassed the limit to lamp longitivity, its already solid state, the only thing its not fulfilled is multi-color white, similar to that of incandescents.
Well the reality is that single LEDs in flashlights haven't even matched or are comparable to the brightest single incandescent bulbs yet, so you can't really criticize the development of LED technology just yet. Until a 1000 lumen capable single LED actually comes out (ok, well maybe the SSCP7 is close), I just don't see the point in griping about color rendition. Sure it would be nice if LEDs were able to have comparable color rendition to that of incandescent, but since the output comparability isn't there yet either...I just don't think it's worth griping about. Personally I like the push for more lumens, so I hope they'll hit that 1000 lumens mark soon. Just my 2 cents...
Last edited:
MrGman
Flashlight Enthusiast
- Joined
- Feb 6, 2007
- Messages
- 1,777
To me there are 2 directions I want to see them go and I believe they are making progress in both.
1) Is to make brighter lights with better color spectrum
2) Is to make lights in the lumen ranges we now have but use less and less power.
I would love to have a 500 to 1000 lumen search light that can run on no more than 4 CR123 (or equivalent) type batteries that can run for up to 4 hours at full power, When they can do that with 2 CR123 (or equivalent) that would be outstanding.
I would love to have a 2AA flashlight or a 2 CR123 flashlight that can put out 10, 30, 80, 160, 240 lumens that will last at least 4 hours on high mode because its not drawing a full amp to do it. That even on the highest mode it would only draw 350mA because the efficiency was that good up to aorund 240 lumens of useful light.
If they finally make the nanocrystal technology and can have 300 lumens from 1 watt that would be great. 2 CR123 batteries would only need to draw 166mA at 6V.
2 AA batteries at 3V would only need to draw 333mA.
So just think how well that would work for a every day flashlight.
I am finding that the 2 flashlights I carry in my pocket make better light sources (individually) in most cases then the high intensity fiber optic light sources I have in my lab to light up objects I am taking pictures of under the digital microscopes, when I need angled side lighting, or transmitted light coming up from underneath the object.
1) Is to make brighter lights with better color spectrum
2) Is to make lights in the lumen ranges we now have but use less and less power.
I would love to have a 500 to 1000 lumen search light that can run on no more than 4 CR123 (or equivalent) type batteries that can run for up to 4 hours at full power, When they can do that with 2 CR123 (or equivalent) that would be outstanding.
I would love to have a 2AA flashlight or a 2 CR123 flashlight that can put out 10, 30, 80, 160, 240 lumens that will last at least 4 hours on high mode because its not drawing a full amp to do it. That even on the highest mode it would only draw 350mA because the efficiency was that good up to aorund 240 lumens of useful light.
If they finally make the nanocrystal technology and can have 300 lumens from 1 watt that would be great. 2 CR123 batteries would only need to draw 166mA at 6V.
2 AA batteries at 3V would only need to draw 333mA.
So just think how well that would work for a every day flashlight.
I am finding that the 2 flashlights I carry in my pocket make better light sources (individually) in most cases then the high intensity fiber optic light sources I have in my lab to light up objects I am taking pictures of under the digital microscopes, when I need angled side lighting, or transmitted light coming up from underneath the object.
Photon_Whisperer
Newly Enlightened
I agree, when you are camping and want to see what's down the trail or want to light up camp, you could care less if the CRI of your light is 80 or 100, you just want a light that's bright and lasts a long time. Even for interior lighting, the CRI of good LEDs now equal that of fluorescents which we've been using for a long time.
WadeF
Flashlight Enthusiast
While many of us want even more lumens coming out of our flashlights, I think many of us are also cheering on LED tech because a 200 lumen LED light bulb isn't going to cut it. Most household bulbs are putting out 800-900 lumens, or more. I can't wait until I can screw in a 1,000 lumen LED light bulb, and hopefully by then they'll put out a better quality of light as well with the added lumens.
Imagine if you could have a pocket LED light that blasts out 1,000 lumens, or more, instead of having to lug around a larger light that sucks batteries dry in under an hour, or in under 30 minutes? That could help save lives as well. Also it could mean your 10 lumens would last a lot longer than it does now with the same battery type as the LED's get more efficient.
husky20
Banned
I totally agree with your statement:twothumbs
husky20
Banned
you read my mind:thumbsup:also liked MRGman statement excellentWhile many of us want even more lumens coming out of our flashlights, I think many of us are also cheering on LED tech because a 200 lumen LED light bulb isn't going to cut it. Most household bulbs are putting out 800-900 lumens, or more. I can't wait until I can screw in a 1,000 lumen LED light bulb, and hopefully by then they'll put out a better quality of light as well with the added lumens.
Imagine if you could have a pocket LED light that blasts out 1,000 lumens, or more, instead of having to lug around a larger light that sucks batteries dry in under an hour, or in under 30 minutes? That could help save lives as well. Also it could mean your 10 lumens would last a lot longer than it does now with the same battery type as the LED's get more efficient.
Last edited:
Robocop
Moderator, *Mammoth Killer*
Most of us here will get any new light and quickly compare it to our brightest light to see how it compares. The fact is that many of us do use sheer output as a factor in determining how good any one light performs. I have hundreds of lights and have leraned to appreciate all aspects of a good emitter however still get excited when any new light puts out more light than some of my best performers.
When it is all said and done many here could care less about low level tint, heatsinking ability, runtime, VF, or any other ability other than sheer brute output. I use many of my lights in my work as tools however I am also a collector and simply enjoy the hobby of having lights. With my tool lights I choose them carefully and an not afraid to spend higher costs for them however with my toy or shelf queens I always go for tint and sheer out the front lumens. I believe this is why the cheaper dealers such as KD or DX do so well is that many of their lights do only one thing well and that is make a lot of light....sure the build is crappy at times and reliability is not so great but when they work they can compete with many higher cost lights as far as actual output is concerned....even if they break after a week...hehe
So for many here it is easy to see why when we say "baddest" or even "best" emitter it is measured simply by output.
When it is all said and done many here could care less about low level tint, heatsinking ability, runtime, VF, or any other ability other than sheer brute output. I use many of my lights in my work as tools however I am also a collector and simply enjoy the hobby of having lights. With my tool lights I choose them carefully and an not afraid to spend higher costs for them however with my toy or shelf queens I always go for tint and sheer out the front lumens. I believe this is why the cheaper dealers such as KD or DX do so well is that many of their lights do only one thing well and that is make a lot of light....sure the build is crappy at times and reliability is not so great but when they work they can compete with many higher cost lights as far as actual output is concerned....even if they break after a week...hehe
So for many here it is easy to see why when we say "baddest" or even "best" emitter it is measured simply by output.
I agree and think that the best LED is still the Seoul P4 Ubin, lumens do not trump a smooth beam/corona. Useful lumens are more important than ringy lumens that distort your vision.
husky20
Banned
I have the P3D Rebel and think it has a beautiful beam.Its very nice at color rendition and very bright to.I just am still hoping its one of the good ones and not from the so called bad batch so far so good. very impressive i must say. This has been my favorite flashlight that i have ever owned to date. also have the lod rebel very impressive.I cant wait until the new tk10 gets more power with a newer emitter because when it does that is the light that i can not wait for. an everyday carry that puts out crazy light.The kind of light that when you whip it out somewhere to show a non flashaholic they are like holy cr..!that is what i have done when i took my P3D to work people were just like i cant believe that thing is awesome.there was a guy i work with who always carrys a regular old mini mag and leatherman in a pouch and i was like hey lets have a flashlight contest he was like okay we went and turned off the lights there was about four of my coworkers there.i said well go ahead bring it he lite his up and it was pathetic i said check this out turned mine on low and smoked his. everyone was like wow that thing is pretty bright then i said stand back and turned it on turbo and blazzzoww they were like holy mackerel that thing is sick.It was cool that guy was toast
then i turned on them and strobed them they couldnt believe it they were asking me were they could get one and how much everybody had to try it took me 15 minutes to get it back:thumbsup:
then i turned on them and strobed them they couldnt believe it they were asking me were they could get one and how much everybody had to try it took me 15 minutes to get it back:thumbsup:
Last edited:
This is true. However, it is this craving for more lumens (or higher efficiency) that drives the advancements in the world of lighting. I too find myself using right around 10 lumens for the vast majority of personal lighting but just think of having a single AA, or even AAA, sized light in your pocket with a 5-10 lumen "utility" mode and with a 500+ lumen "emergency" mode with a runtime of a few hours. When I go for walks at night it feels good to have a tiny, unnoticeable, light in my hand ( I use an LOD Q4 with 10440's) that can output alot of light in an emergency or a little light for quite awhile in an emergency. The quest for lumens drives the search for more efficient and longer lasting emitters as well as increased output. I, myself, hope that I live long enough to see two things.................world peace and an infinitely variable torch the size of an LOD that can go from .5 lumens up to something like 1000 lumens and uses a tiny nugget of plutonium as a power source that will last for 25 years. The next step will not be in emitters but rather in the power supply for them. Fun to think about isn't it!
As far as the "quality" of light produced this, too, will be refined. You just happen to have a special need for color rendition being a physician but for most uses the current crop works pretty well. More runtime would please me more than better color rendition.
Last edited:
I'd like 1, 10, 100, 1000 lumens from a single lamp.
Something like the successor to the UB2.
Maybe 1-500 in the successor to the UA2.
Color temps should match the highest that filaments can deliver [right up to the melting point]. Something like 3750K.
Something like the successor to the UB2.
Maybe 1-500 in the successor to the UA2.
Color temps should match the highest that filaments can deliver [right up to the melting point]. Something like 3750K.
BabyDoc
Flashlight Enthusiast
I respectfully disagree about the need of 1000 lumen caple single LED for a flashlight. Does anyone carry an EDC incadescent flashlight today that can put out 1000 lumens? Sure a 150 watt incadescent bulb in a home lighting fixture puts out that kind of lumens, but nobody carries a 150 watt incadescent bulb in their pocket. Furthermore, a 1000 lumens coming from a point source LED in a small flashlight would have little use except for illuminating someting on the other side of a football field. Without a big diffuser, it wouldn't serve any general lighting need like illuminating a campsite. IMO, what we need NOW before we need a 1000 lumens, is an LED in a portable format that has the color rendition of an incadescent. With LED's we have gone backwards with color rendition. What we have done by giving up our incadescents is like giving up high definition Color TV with millions of colors and going back to an ordinary color TV with fewer colors or even worse a black and white TV. It seems that people seeking bigger lumen outputs are more interested in blinding than in seeing. If they aren't blinding others with these ridulous lumens, they are blinding themselves to the real world by altering it with wrongly colored light.
Having said all this, and reviewing the comments here, I would venture to say that I am probably in the minority. Most people don't give a damn about accuracy whether it is with light or with sound. In addition to being a flashaholic, I am an audiophile. It has distressed me no end, that the general public no longer cares for accurate sound reproduction. Many of the high end audio dealers have closed their doors, because people will not spend the money for accurate sound like they once did. The general public wants convenience, not accuracy. In sound, the MP3 format is winning out even though it fars less accurate than CD's or even vinyl. Shoebox speakers are winning out over bigger more accurate reproducers. The same people who would would rather carry 1000 inferior fidelity music files around with them in their pocket MP3 player, will prefer 1000 inferior lumens in their pocket flashlight, rather than use an inefficient but more accurate incadescent.
What I am hearing here is clear. To most people quantity is more important than quality. Perhaps that's because the average guy can't perceive quality as easily as quantity. Of course, in the end it is easier, too, for a manufacturer to deliver quantity rather than quality. You would think it would be possible to deliver both, wouldn't you? That's my hope. But why should a manufacture even try to deliver both quality and quantity, when most people settle for less.
Chrontius
Flashlight Enthusiast
Babydoc, with regard to quality and quantity, I kinda get your point, but it seems like it's going too far. Sure, I have an iPod, what with all that implies - a 30 Hz cutoff, lossy file formats... but I'm also feeding it alt-preset extreme LAME files, and it's feeding them to a pair of Sennheiser HD-280s.
Quality vs. quantity is not a zero-sum game. In the sort of noisy environments I listen to music in, I can't hear a difference between MP3 and CD - or a reference uncompressed WAV file made from vinyl.
Modern LEDs offer good enough color rendition for spotting, if there's enough light. Nominally dimmer incandescents offer better effective range despite that due to color rendition issues - but it's still more efficient to throw more photons at it than drive an incandescent bulb. And, at least until multiphosphor LEDs come out, that's not going to change. We want a pocket light that can put out 5, 50, 500, and 5000 lumens simply because we may need that. EDC stuff is about just-in-case scenarios, very often; some of us can imagine a possible scenario where we'll need to light up the inside of a large building. Everyone who carries a concealed weapon knows what I'm talking about, and there's some definite other uses for that too. Stranded? signal the rescue chopper a couple miles off. Hurricane damage? See whether the situation is safe to approach. I'm honestly here because of Hurricane Charley, and my attempt to wire a 12v searchlight to a backpack of sealed lead-acid batteries. We may not use it on a regular basis, but having something a couple orders of magnitude brighter than we usually need can come in awful handy on occasion.
Quality vs. quantity is not a zero-sum game. In the sort of noisy environments I listen to music in, I can't hear a difference between MP3 and CD - or a reference uncompressed WAV file made from vinyl.
Modern LEDs offer good enough color rendition for spotting, if there's enough light. Nominally dimmer incandescents offer better effective range despite that due to color rendition issues - but it's still more efficient to throw more photons at it than drive an incandescent bulb. And, at least until multiphosphor LEDs come out, that's not going to change. We want a pocket light that can put out 5, 50, 500, and 5000 lumens simply because we may need that. EDC stuff is about just-in-case scenarios, very often; some of us can imagine a possible scenario where we'll need to light up the inside of a large building. Everyone who carries a concealed weapon knows what I'm talking about, and there's some definite other uses for that too. Stranded? signal the rescue chopper a couple miles off. Hurricane damage? See whether the situation is safe to approach. I'm honestly here because of Hurricane Charley, and my attempt to wire a 12v searchlight to a backpack of sealed lead-acid batteries. We may not use it on a regular basis, but having something a couple orders of magnitude brighter than we usually need can come in awful handy on occasion.
BabyDoc
Flashlight Enthusiast
When you look at a lot of the SureFire lights sold, many of their LED models sport less than 100 lumens maximum (some with only 45). People ARE buying them because that is enough light for them. Wouldn't it even be better for them if the color rendition equaled the efficiency of these lights? I suppose you could argue that for those people, they can still buy the incadescents SF offers if they are interested in more accurate colors. But why not have both? That's all I am asking for, and until others ask for it too, we will be stuck only with incadescents that can do the color job right. What is frustrating is that it IS possible. Home lighting with LED's uses more accurate CRI LED's. These could be put into portable lights as well if there was a market for it. When I hear people complaining about the tint of their lights, I can't help but think there is such a market.
