Fenix Outfitters        
Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast
Results 61 to 90 of 204

Thread: The LunaSol 20: the new benchmark for EDC lights

  1. #61
    *Flashaholic* js's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Upstate New York
    Posts
    5,791

    Default Re: The LunaSol 20: the new benchmark for EDC lights

    The Sun,

    Just keep in mind that when you move away from a locked camera setup, the responsibility for fidelity and accuracy falls on you, and it requires you to take utmost care to ensure that the images you capture correspond to what you see / saw. This is far from easy, unfortunately, but it can be done.
    -Jim Sexton, creator of the M6-R, the TigerLight Upgrades, Fixture-ring lamp potting, the SL60, co-designer of the B90 Upgrade, and proponent of the SF A2, the SF M6 X-LOLA, Titanium, the Haiku, and the LunaSol 20

  2. #62
    Flashaholic*
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    1,475

    Default Re: The LunaSol 20: the new benchmark for EDC lights

    That was a GREAT read!! Thank you for taking the time to do all that.

    I AM a huge McGizmo fan already. Now I want a LumaSol even MORE than EVER!!

  3. #63
    *Flashaholic* js's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Upstate New York
    Posts
    5,791

    Default Re: The LunaSol 20: the new benchmark for EDC lights

    Well THANKS so much, TKC!
    -Jim Sexton, creator of the M6-R, the TigerLight Upgrades, Fixture-ring lamp potting, the SL60, co-designer of the B90 Upgrade, and proponent of the SF A2, the SF M6 X-LOLA, Titanium, the Haiku, and the LunaSol 20

  4. #64
    Enlightened
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    California
    Posts
    41

    Default Re: The LunaSol 20: the new benchmark for EDC lights

    Quote Originally Posted by jimmy1970 View Post
    I find these super high quality in-depth reviews on high performance titanium lights stimulating, exciting, intriguing and depressing all at once!

    My interest and curiosity of these McGizmo creations is always hightened to such a point mid way through a lengthy review only to be heavily deflated by the end when I realise I can't afford such a beast!!

    But it's OK to dream isn't it!

    James...
    Well I'm in a similar place... Fascinating review. Great pics of the grip positions.

  5. #65
    *Flashaholic* Burgess's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    6,130

    Default Re: The LunaSol 20: the new benchmark for EDC lights

    i LOVE to read about fancy new flashlights, like this one.


    Even if they are beyond my financial capability.


    These are truly great times to be a Flashaholic !



    _

  6. #66

    Default Re: The LunaSol 20: the new benchmark for EDC lights

    JS, excellent review! Thanks for all your effort and for sharing it with us.

    I know one thing that I was worried about before ordering an LS20 was that the flood beam would appear triangular, but that is not the case at all. In practice, you get a very nice and extremely useful flood. Even if you use it for reading, you will not notice any triangular artifacts.

    As far as the different holds go, you left out the one I use almost exclusively: the three over, one under hold. I find it more comfortable then the overhand hold since it naturally forces a ~20 degree tilt of the tail toward the base of my palm, that makes it easier to use my thumb to actuate the piston.

    Also, I have replaced the spring with a lower force constant spring from the group buy, and to me it made a large difference in the force required to depress the piston. It is now almost too easy. It took a few days to get used to it, but I find that I now prefer it. Plus my two year old finds it easier to play with the light.

    Lastly, I was looking at the low light pics of the Surefire L1 and the Ti PD-S and it seems that there is a loss of color in the periphery of those two shots in particular. Is that an artifact of the processing or just my monitor?

  7. #67
    *Flashaholic* js's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Upstate New York
    Posts
    5,791

    Default Re: The LunaSol 20: the new benchmark for EDC lights

    RocketTomato,

    Thanks! And yes, the triangular-ness of the low beam isn't usually noticeable at all. As for the three over, one under, it's the same idea as the two over, two under, right? If so, one would naturally suggest the other. For me the two under two over is preferable, but I'm glad you mentioned it in case someone didn't think to modify that to three/one.

    As for the L1 and Ti-PD low beam pics, yes, there IS a loss of color in the periphery. Good eye! It's a byproduct of using the "lighten shadows" effect; it's not your monitor. It's an artifact, in the sense that it doesn't correspond with reality. But, the resulting picture (even with the slight artificating) is a lot closer to what I saw than if I hadn't lightened the shadows at all. I should have mentioned it though!

    I will edit my review to insert that information in the near future.

    In contrast to my SF A2 review, I'm going to probably keep making changes to the first post here to incorporate what we all talk about and what others bring. I have a few other things I need to add or modify, too. When I do these edits, I'll make a post about it, documenting it. So far, my edits have just been to fix stupid typos, and were all done the first day or so that the review was up. But the next edits will be more significant.

    Thanks for your post!
    -Jim Sexton, creator of the M6-R, the TigerLight Upgrades, Fixture-ring lamp potting, the SL60, co-designer of the B90 Upgrade, and proponent of the SF A2, the SF M6 X-LOLA, Titanium, the Haiku, and the LunaSol 20

  8. #68
    Enlightened
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    California
    Posts
    41

    Default Re: The LunaSol 20: the new benchmark for EDC lights

    Quote Originally Posted by js View Post
    THE LUNASOL 20 – THE NEW BENCHMARK FOR EDC LIGHTS

    BEAM SHOTS

    I'm really excited about the beamshots I've put together for this review. I think they're something special and unusual. Possibly, there may be some who will agree that, yes, they are something special and unusual—something unusually, especially bad!—but I believe they are something special in a good way. The reason why some might take issue with them is that I have parted ways, more or less completely, with the conventional wisdom, the conventional method, that one must lock the aperture, shutter speed, and exposure/ISO (and even the white balance, possibly). I did not do this. I went down this path-less-taken because I felt compelled to do so. I have long been profoundly dissatisfied with beamshot pictures taken with a locked camera. I have always felt that they just didn't look much like what I experienced when using the light in person. They weren't what I actually saw. It's that simple. It makes me think of a tape recording of a class-room lecture. Have you ever heard one of those? Where your friend just set his or her tape recorder on the desk and let it record? When you listen to the recording, some sounds are greatly magnified and exaggerated, while others are muted and recessed, and still others have been lost completely. If you compare the recording with your auditory memory of the event, you come away dissatisfied. The recording is just not faithful to your experience, to what you actually heard. This is how I feel about most of the beamshots I have seen, or personally gathered, that were taken with a locked camera.

    The crux of the issue is simply this: the camera is not the eye. The dynamic range of even the best digital cameras (not to mention film!) is nothing compared to the human eye. When you shine a light against a wall, your eyes are able to deal with the huge disparity in intensities presented to them, and your brain is able to compose a scene that has both the shadow details, and the hotspot details—which is a far cry from a single white circle floating in darkness that results when a camera tries to capture a scene with such a huge disparity of light intensities. Further, even setting that issue aside, the differences between lights are not seen the same by the eye as by the camera. Both in terms of total output, hotspot intensity, and color temperature (white balance), the eye and brain make immediate and unconscious adjustments that in no way correspond to a locked camera.

    There are a number of factors in the conventional approach that contribute to the problem(s). First of all, using a white wall as the background is going to create the absolute largest range of light intensities. It's great for showing up differences in beam tint, and for capturing hotspot size and shape and general beam aesthetics, but if you don't over-expose the most intense of the hotspots of the lights being reviewed, then the shadows will be badly underexposed, and the dimmer lights in the line-up will look much dimmer than they really are in person. Conversely, if you try to capture more detail in the shadows and/or dimmer lights, the brightest hotspots will be seriously over-exposed, and you will lose all the information in that area. So, with this in mind, I did not use a white wall for my beamshots. I used a scene with a lot of color and texture, and with an overall reflectance somewhere in the middle of the grayscale.

    Next, the conventional approach has the camera and the flashlights at basically the same distance and angle away from the beamshot surface. This makes a lot of sense, honestly, and seems the straightforward thing to do, but it also does nothing to reduce the range of light intensities that the camera will be required to capture. If you move the camera closer to the scene, the light falling across it will be somewhat more even. How much do we really care about all that dark area far away from the hotspot, anyway? Why include so much of it in the beamshot? For my setup in this review, the camera was about 5 feet from the wall, and the lights were about 8 feet; the camera was also a bit below the beamline axis, and angled up at the hotspot, in order to avoid casting shadows on the subject.

    Finally, as I have already stressed, locking the camera parameters across all beamshots means that the dynamic range needed isn't just of that between the hotspot and shadows of one light, but is of that for all of them, i.e. it is the range between the hottest hotspot of all the lights, and the dimmest shadow area of all the lights. As if the situation wasn't challenging enough without making it more difficult!

    So, what to do? My answer was simple: cheat. Damn straight. And I will not apologize for it, although I will explain. First, you just can't lock the camera if you're concerned with capturing the subjective human reality experienced when using a flashlight. I know all the arguments for doing so, and they are very compelling, and if you place objectivity above everything else, you will of course lock all parameters; but you just simply can't do that if what you want is to try to create pictures which come even somewhat close to being faithful to what you actually see. The main problem, as I mentioned, is lack of dynamic range. The dimmer areas, the shadows, of the dimmest lights don't end up as just lower in intensity—they end up as all ZEROS. Really, they would be negative, but in the digital language of the camera, zero is as low as it goes, so anything less is represented also as a zero. Information is lost. The same goes for the maximum intensity: turn all the bits on, and that's it, that's as high as it goes. Anything higher is just represented by the same number of bits, all turned on to 1. Thus, if you want to capture a scene with greater dynamic range than zero to highest count, you will need to take two exposures. And this is precisely what I did. In one exposure, I lost no details in the shadows, and in the other, I lost no details in the hotspot. I then combined these together in photoshop, with the shadow-exposed shot as the background, and the hotspot-exposed shot as the top layer, with a 50 percent opacity, which allowed details from both shots—information from both shots—to combine into one picture. The problem, as many readers are certainly already yelling out at the computer screen, is that I have now lost the information about which light is brighter than another. Yet, this isn't really true. The camera is only a tool used by the reviewer. I, as the reviewer, don't need the camera to tell me which light is brighter or dimmer than another! I can go out again and again to my composition area, and repeatedly experience the actual lights, the actual scenes themselves, and compare the experience with the pictures. (Plus, in my case, I pushed the exposures either up or down, to the points just before details were lost to under or over exposure, and thus the resulting composite shots were far from arbitrarily bright or dark, nor all the same brightness; they were actually already ranked up pretty closely, from dimmest to brightest, with a couple exceptions.) The thing is that once you have a composite with no lost information, you are free to use a number of adjustments on it. I used the exposure slider to darken the low-level shots, for example. And I used the lighten shadows slider to bring out that shadow detail captured by the second shot. All the time during this process, I was carefully checking the results against the realities, in order to create as faithful a facsimile to the reality as possible. That was my goal at every step of the way—to CHEAT in order TO TELL THE TRUTH. Paradoxical, to be sure, but I stand by my results. I maintain that the following beamshots are a lot closer to the realities that I experienced than any I could have gathered by locking the settings.

    For those who are still not (and never will be) convinced, I have also included four shots all taken with the same settings in order to highlight the throws and hotspot characteristics of the high-levels of the lights. Although, I should mention that these four locked shots were taken of a different scene, from a different (and much greater) distance.

    OK. Enough of that. Here are the beamshots. First, the SureFire A2 on low:
    wonderful beamshots, js can you shed some "light" lol on your pentax k10d exifs?

    also, there was a post suggesting hdr for beamshots but i can't find it.

  9. #69
    Moderator
    Kiessling's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Germany, Old World
    Posts
    16,137

    Default Re: The LunaSol 20: the new benchmark for EDC lights

    Here you go ... HDR imaging and beamshots:

    http://www.candlepowerforums.com/vb/...d.php?t=216691

    bernie
    There is a type of perfection that transcends the quest for lumens. Buying a $250 1-cell light for "lum factor" is like buying a $250 single malt Scotch for the alcohol content.
    - paulr


    It's always darkest just before it goes pitch black.
    My shoes are too tight. But it doesn't matter, because I have forgotten how to dance.

  10. #70
    *Flashaholic* js's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Upstate New York
    Posts
    5,791

    Default Re: The LunaSol 20: the new benchmark for EDC lights

    Nice link, bernie! How could I have missed that?!? I'll have to take some time and read that thread.

    es2qy,

    What do you want to know about my Pentax K10D exifs? I'm wondering if there really is any info on that front, as most of the pictures are composites made in photoshop, from DNG digital negatives (RAW) of two shots, and then flattened and exported as JPG's. Is there even any EXIF data in those jpgs? There might be for the locked shots, I suppose, but I think those were RAW shots as well, converted with Adobe Camera Raw (ACR) and exported as JPG's. But I can't be sure I didn't take those directly as jpgs. I may have.
    -Jim Sexton, creator of the M6-R, the TigerLight Upgrades, Fixture-ring lamp potting, the SL60, co-designer of the B90 Upgrade, and proponent of the SF A2, the SF M6 X-LOLA, Titanium, the Haiku, and the LunaSol 20

  11. #71
    Enlightened
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    California
    Posts
    41

    Default Re: The LunaSol 20: the new benchmark for EDC lights

    thanks bernie and js.

  12. #72
    *Flashaholic* js's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Upstate New York
    Posts
    5,791

    Default Re: The LunaSol 20: the new benchmark for EDC lights

    Also, I wanted to mention to those who can't afford a LunaSol 20 that the SureFire A2 and L1 are awesome lights. Get one of those!
    -Jim Sexton, creator of the M6-R, the TigerLight Upgrades, Fixture-ring lamp potting, the SL60, co-designer of the B90 Upgrade, and proponent of the SF A2, the SF M6 X-LOLA, Titanium, the Haiku, and the LunaSol 20

  13. #73
    Flashaholic* jimmy1970's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Brisbane, Australia
    Posts
    1,042

    Default Re: The LunaSol 20: the new benchmark for EDC lights

    Quote Originally Posted by js View Post
    Also, I wanted to mention to those who can't afford a LunaSol 20 that the SureFire A2 and L1 are awesome lights. Get one of those!
    Nah, js, too late!! You have spoilt it for everybody. You mentioned that after purchasing a Lunasol 20, that other lights don't interest you anymore... I can believe that - after reading your review, other lights don't interest me anymore either!

    James....

  14. #74

    Default Re: The LunaSol 20: the new benchmark for EDC lights

    Great review js! Thanks for the great perspective on a perfect light.


    Cheers
    Dave

  15. #75
    *Flashaholic* js's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Upstate New York
    Posts
    5,791

    Default Re: The LunaSol 20: the new benchmark for EDC lights

    Quote Originally Posted by jimmy1970 View Post
    Nah, js, too late!! You have spoilt it for everybody. You mentioned that after purchasing a Lunasol 20, that other lights don't interest you anymore... I can believe that - after reading your review, other lights don't interest me anymore either!

    James....
    Well, yeah, the LunaSol 20 is indeed in another league than the SF A2 or L1. True. But let me put it this way: if I was ship wrecked or something like that and I managed to salvage my SF A2 and some batteries, I'd still be deliriously happy about it! The SF A2 or L1 are still the same amazing lights they always were, and if you can't afford a LunaSol 20, it's not such a hardship to have to "settle" for an A2 or L1 !!!

    Still . . . I think they LunaSol 20 is worth every penny and is indeed in my opinion the new benchmark for EDC lights (or one of them, anyway), outclassing the A2 or L1 by a significant margin. So, if you can figure out a way to afford it, that's the best course.

    So, in other words *sheepish grin* . . . ah . . . sorry.
    -Jim Sexton, creator of the M6-R, the TigerLight Upgrades, Fixture-ring lamp potting, the SL60, co-designer of the B90 Upgrade, and proponent of the SF A2, the SF M6 X-LOLA, Titanium, the Haiku, and the LunaSol 20

  16. #76
    *Flashaholic* js's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Upstate New York
    Posts
    5,791

    Default Re: The LunaSol 20: the new benchmark for EDC lights

    Quote Originally Posted by Data View Post
    Great review js! Thanks for the great perspective on a perfect light.


    Cheers
    Dave
    Thanks Dave!
    -Jim Sexton, creator of the M6-R, the TigerLight Upgrades, Fixture-ring lamp potting, the SL60, co-designer of the B90 Upgrade, and proponent of the SF A2, the SF M6 X-LOLA, Titanium, the Haiku, and the LunaSol 20

  17. #77
    Flashaholic* BabyDoc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Beachwood, Ohio
    Posts
    1,245

    Default Re: The LunaSol 20: the new benchmark for EDC lights

    SureFire has announced an LED A2 for 2009 at the ShotShow. It sounds a bit like the Lunasol to me, just in a larger format without the PD switching. It remains to be seen when this will be actually released and if it it will be anything close to the Lunasol in terms of functionality. One thing is for sure, it isn't going to be as convenient to carry as a Lunasol, since it is a 2 cell light. But for the guy for whom the Lunasol is out of reach from a price standpoint, this may be the answer. Hopefully it won't be too long before we will see it.

  18. #78
    Flashaholic* FrogmanM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Kauai
    Posts
    1,292

    Default Re: The LunaSol 20: the new benchmark for EDC lights

    Quote Originally Posted by BabyDoc View Post
    SureFire has announced an LED A2 for 2009 at the ShotShow. It sounds a bit like the Lunasol to me, just in a larger format without the PD switching. It remains to be seen when this will be actually released and if it it will be anything close to the Lunasol in terms of functionality. One thing is for sure, it isn't going to be as convenient to carry as a Lunasol, since it is a 2 cell light. But for the guy for whom the Lunasol is out of reach from a price standpoint, this may be the answer. Hopefully it won't be too long before we will see it.
    I can't wait for the reviews for the new A2. I also would like to see how well the low white LED tint matches the high beam (which also will be white?). My LS27 tint doesn't vary much from low to high, or at least it matches well enough IMO.

    Mayo
    Last edited by FrogmanM; 01-20-2009 at 02:06 AM.
    Torch Collection

    *Where fact is fiction and TV, reality*

  19. #79

    Default Re: The LunaSol 20: the new benchmark for EDC lights

    Quote Originally Posted by js View Post
    Well, yeah, the LunaSol 20 is indeed in another league than the SF A2 or L1. True. But let me put it this way: if I was ship wrecked or something like that and I managed to salvage my SF A2 and some batteries, I'd still be deliriously happy about it! The SF A2 or L1 are still the same amazing lights they always were, and if you can't afford a LunaSol 20, it's not such a hardship to have to "settle" for an A2 or L1 !!!

    Still . . . I think they LunaSol 20 is worth every penny and is indeed in my opinion the new benchmark for EDC lights (or one of them, anyway), outclassing the A2 or L1 by a significant margin. So, if you can figure out a way to afford it, that's the best course.

    So, in other words *sheepish grin* . . . ah . . . sorry.
    Very nice write up JS! I am in the group who would consider the light more a beloved show piece however as my income would not allow me to treat it as a EDC...if I sacrificed other areas to buy one. I see EDC.. like others have said...as expendable, without making me feel bad if I lose it.. or destroy it.

    I don`t even like loaning my Nitecore D10 to friends who like to work under their cars at night, for example. My EDC is an old Fenix L1D that is very ugly at this point...not much black left on it...but it still works same as it always did. Dimm, compared to the newer stuff.

    Perhaps there is a "Best lower end EDC" and "Best upper end EDC". And a sewer worker might have a differant opinion of what is an ideal EDC than a stockbroker...even if their incomes were the same.

  20. #80
    Flashaholic* :)>'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Tampa, Florida
    Posts
    2,607

    Default Re: The LunaSol 20: the new benchmark for EDC lights

    O.K.

    I have nothing to add excep that I agree with you. I love this light and if it weren't for you and Bernie raving about it, I wouldn't have bought one.

    I am so glad that I did.
    -Goatee

  21. #81
    Silver Moderator
    SilverFox's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Bellingham WA
    Posts
    12,386

    Default Re: The LunaSol 20: the new benchmark for EDC lights

    Hello Jim,

    Excellent review.

    I particularly enjoyed your efforts with the beam shots. Like you, I have always felt that beam shots really didn't show things like what you could see in person.

    I was hopping to find some discussion on the battery it uses and if there was a rechargeable option, but I guess I will have to look elsewhere...

    Oh, I see, one of the drawings shows a CR123 cell.

    Is there a way to actually measure the force required to turn the light on, then to go from low to high? It seems to me that if we had that information, we could put our thumb on a scale and get an idea of what was required. It wouldn't be the same, but still it would give an idea. We could then go around and see what is required to turn on other lights for comparison.

    Tell your wife that she has excellent taste and an wonderful eye for design.

    Tom
    Behind every Great man there's always a woman rolling her eyes...

    Most batteries don't die - they are tortured to near death, then murdered...

  22. #82
    *Flashaholic* js's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Upstate New York
    Posts
    5,791

    Default Re: The LunaSol 20: the new benchmark for EDC lights

    Tom,

    Thanks!

    The first run of LunaSol 20's take only primary CR123A Li-Mn-O2 cells. But the second run (the one currently being sold) will take either primaries or rechargeables. You can tell a first run/wave LS20 by the red conformal coating on the circuit board surrounding the bat + contact. The later LS20's don't have the red, but rather a clear, coating.

    As for force, I think Heckboy measured it in his PD modifications thread in the McGizmo forum.

    And thanks for the comments about design and taste--I'll pass them on to my wife.
    -Jim Sexton, creator of the M6-R, the TigerLight Upgrades, Fixture-ring lamp potting, the SL60, co-designer of the B90 Upgrade, and proponent of the SF A2, the SF M6 X-LOLA, Titanium, the Haiku, and the LunaSol 20

  23. #83

    Default Re: The LunaSol 20: the new benchmark for EDC lights

    Well, JS, as I mentioned above, your review pushed me over and I ordered a LunaSol 20 from Don. It arrived today. From your review I expected a lot, but from Don's FAQ I was prepared to 'lower my expectations' about minor blemishes and tooling marks. Well no need for that, it is a great light, in terms of functionality, design and finish.

    I thought my black anodized Aeon was the highest price I would go for a flashlight, but I am happy I did did the quantum leap (in terms of spending) to the Lunasol. I love both flashlights. I have been carrying the Aeon for about 4 months and will add the Lunasol to my daily carry tomorrow.

    Thanks--and I thought at my age I was beyond adding another expensive hobby (as was my wife :-( but I have always liked and appreciated good flashlights and it is nice to own a few that are truly great!

    T.

  24. #84
    Flashaholic* LEDmodMan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Over a MILE high, CO
    Posts
    1,719

    Drool Re: The LunaSol 20: the new benchmark for EDC lights

    Jim,
    How are you? (wow, you're a Mod now huh?)

    Frickin' helluva a review there man!!! Write a book why don't cha???

    These kind of lights are the EXACT reason I have to stay away from this forum! (seems like I spend money every time I even glance over here) I just can NOT afford it! $20 here, $30 there, then $40 over there, and oh ya, there's the $500 right there too... It adds up way too fast!!! Heck, I'm only just now *finally* getting a decent charger (Likely Triton 2 EQ).

    It is nice to see decent LED lights in the stores now, but I still don't think they hold a candle to the mod lights from here from several years back. I still EDC my original Firefly (modded of course), and it still kicks butt, 5 1/2 years later!!! However, the lights people here keep coming up with just blow me away!

    The torch incans we made here still aren't touched by anyone of course (still love my 1/2D NiMh 6D mag 1185), but when you can actually melt stuff with them I imagine legal departments start squirming.

    Lights like the LunaSol 20 will keep upping the ante, and companies like Surefire have to take notice make improvements to their products to keep up. I honestly think that if it wasn't for some of the modded lights on here (and CPF in general), we wouldn't see the products in the stores like we do now. Who doesn't have some sort of high-powered LED light these days?

    Anyway, keep up the good work. Gotta run before I buy something I REALLY shouldn't...
    "The problem with engineers is that they don't idle well."
    "A man without fear is a man without hope."
    WooHoo!!! That's not the sun lighting things up, it's my homemade flashlight!!!


  25. #85
    *Flashaholic* js's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Upstate New York
    Posts
    5,791

    Default Re: The LunaSol 20: the new benchmark for EDC lights

    LEDmodMan,

    How are you my friend!?! It's really great to see a post from you! I miss your presence here on CPF! How is your family?

    As for me, I'm good, but a bit too overloaded at work. The NSF budget got cut across the board, in some unusual way (described to me as "in the middle of the night" - LOL!), and all the particle accelerator labs were hard hit, ours included. We had to cut somewhere around 20 positions, and my boss got moved to full-time R&D for our new Energy Recovery Linac & ILC TA project, and I took over his job as head of the operators, thus reducing the operator staff by 1, effectively. Add to that all the survey work which was needed to accomplish our switch over to the ILC TA project for our ring, and the disassembly and decommissioning of the particle detector (CLEO), and operating shifts, and I've been crazy busy at work. Took my way longer to finish this review than I had anticipated for just that reason.

    Anyway, thanks for your kind words about the review! And just keep in mind that your Firefly is still just as awesome and useful to you as it was 5 1/2 years ago (assuming you haven't been losing your eyesight, of course). No need to upgrade.
    -Jim Sexton, creator of the M6-R, the TigerLight Upgrades, Fixture-ring lamp potting, the SL60, co-designer of the B90 Upgrade, and proponent of the SF A2, the SF M6 X-LOLA, Titanium, the Haiku, and the LunaSol 20

  26. #86
    Moderator
    Kiessling's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Germany, Old World
    Posts
    16,137

    Default Re: The LunaSol 20: the new benchmark for EDC lights

    Hi LEDmodMan !!
    Good to see you back. Has been a while, has it?

    bernie
    There is a type of perfection that transcends the quest for lumens. Buying a $250 1-cell light for "lum factor" is like buying a $250 single malt Scotch for the alcohol content.
    - paulr


    It's always darkest just before it goes pitch black.
    My shoes are too tight. But it doesn't matter, because I have forgotten how to dance.

  27. #87
    *Flashaholic* Sgt. LED's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Chesapeake, Ohio
    Posts
    7,486

    Default Re: The LunaSol 20: the new benchmark for EDC lights

    Quote Originally Posted by js View Post
    Also, I wanted to mention to those who can't afford a LunaSol 20 that the SureFire A2 and L1 are awesome lights. Get one of those!
    Unless God decided I was a very good fella and I win that one in the supporter raffle I will settle for the new A2L when it comes out. Yeah an LS20 would be loads better but it's not in the cards right now.

    This thread is inspiring js, want to flesh out my Fulton anglehead love thread! It really lacks in comparison.

  28. #88
    Flashaholic* LEDmodMan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Over a MILE high, CO
    Posts
    1,719

    Default Re: The LunaSol 20: the new benchmark for EDC lights

    Heh, overloaded at work - I can understand that. I'm 1,750 miles from home right now (but only about 450 miles south of you) and for the next few weeks.

    I wish I had the time and money to spend more time here. I miss it. I want to hang around and post, but invariably I'll end up spending money. Maybe again soon I hope.

    Kiddos and wife are doing good - daughter will start kindergarten this year. Time flies... I still have a job and I'm still here, so I can't complain too much. I was sad to see 3rd_Shift and Roy pass on. I had met both of them in person, and wish I had known them better. That kind of thing sure puts it all in perspective.

    I'm trying to keep tabs on happenings here better now, but with the MASSIVE growth this place has experienced it's tough. I'll try and draft you a pm later this evening. Later.

    PS - Hi Bernie! Ya, it has been awhile.
    "The problem with engineers is that they don't idle well."
    "A man without fear is a man without hope."
    WooHoo!!! That's not the sun lighting things up, it's my homemade flashlight!!!


  29. #89
    Flashaholic* BigHonu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Honolulu, HI
    Posts
    1,242

    Default Re: The LunaSol 20: the new benchmark for EDC lights

    js,

    Bravo! An excellent read! I really enjoyed the entire copy, but the sections on beamshots and tint were absolutely phenomenal!

    I also like that you left the pricing issue out of your review. If the light works for you, then it wouldn't matter if it were $5 or $500.

    Like yourself, I believe that the LS20 does set a benchmark for EDC lights. So much so, that I have not looked at lights since receiving mine. The only situation that I find that the LS20 is NOT on me is when I'm out fishing at night. I have the LS27 instead.... ;D

    I would humbly suggest, as someone else pointed out, please include a blurb about the uniformity in tint between the Nichias and the Dragon. To me, it is an essential reason as to why the transition between levels works so well with this light.

    Brian

  30. #90
    Flashaholic*
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    1,475

    Talking Re: The LunaSol 20: the new benchmark for EDC lights

    I HAVE been meaning to upgrade my membership; this gave me the extra push to do so!

    Thank you for this opportunity!!

Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •