Jetbeam M1X vs Solarforce L900 p7 <beam shot>

Just got Jetbeam M1X~ :wave:
Look very Nice!!!



Right is M1X



20~30M beam shot...

Nice shots! I really like the beam of the Jetbeam. Solarforce isn't bad either.

So L900 or M1X has brighter side spill ? It's hard to tell in the pics because there is too much ambient light . I'm still debating between these two before taking the final move !

So....technically, is there any difference in major performance between the L900 and the L950M? Looks like the M1-X is better in terms of throw.

Ryanrpm said:

So....technically, is there any difference in major performance between the L900 and the L950M? Looks like the M1-X spanks the L900 in terms of spill wideness and throw.

Click to expand...

I don't know it there's any difference although the L950M is supposed to be a bit brighter.

However, from the beamshots, I'm reading that the L900 has a wider spill than the M1X although the spill is less intense.

Sometimes, its quite hard to see the spill properly in these beamshots, if the spill from the overlapping light is brighter.

In the top beamshots, imagine drawing a circle around the circumference of the outer edge of the beamshot for the light on the left (the L900).
This will make a bigger circle than for the M1X.

easilyled said:

I don't know it there's any difference although the L950M is supposed to be a bit brighter.

However, from the beamshots, I'm reading that the L900 has a wider spill than the M1X although the spill is less intense.

Sometimes, its quite hard to see the spill properly in these beamshots, if the spill from the overlapping light is brighter.

In the top beamshots, imagine drawing a circle around the circumference of the outer edge of the beamshot for the light on the left (the L900).
This will make a bigger circle than for the M1X.

Click to expand...

You are correct, I edited my response. I based the first observation off of the building shot, but I saw later that the flashlight head was blocking a full view.

M1-X has brighter hotspot though....which = more throw.

Is that the new cell extender from Jetbeam without combat grip?

Ryanrpm said:

You are correct, I edited my response. I based the first observation off of the building shot, but I saw later that the flashlight head was blocking a full view.

M1-X has brighter hotspot though....which = more throw.

Click to expand...

Yes there's no doubt that the M1-X throws better in the pictures, which surprises me somewhat since its reflector is not as big.
In addition, by all accounts, its not putting out as many lumens either.
(The M1-X is rated at about 400 OTF lumens, whereas my L950M is definitely outputting more than that)

The MC-E is the smaller package compared to the SSC-P7 though, so presumably the light intensity emitted by the MC-E is greater, meaning that for the same size reflector, the MC-E will throw quite a bit further.

Reflector design might also play an important role. Deeper vs shallower....

Perhaps the OP can show us reflectors side by side of the L900 and M1-X?

easilyled said:

The MC-E is the smaller package compared to the SSC-P7 though, so presumably the light intensity emitted by the MC-E is greater, meaning that for the same size reflector, the MC-E will throw quite a bit further.

Click to expand...

No because smaller lens work as a magnigier. Magnifies dies (look at them side by side - P7 dies look much smaller) and also 'light emitting surface' (whatever it's called).

Is your M1X from a new batch? The early batch ones had a distinct hole in the beam from what people were reporting here. I realize you can't tell in pictures, but is there a noticeable hole in the beam of this M1X you have? I have an L950M and at 1 meter distance to a wall, you could barely see some patchy areas in the middle of the beam. I also owned a Tiablo ACE, which did have a noticeable less bright patch in the middle of the beam. I'm wondering if Jetbeam decided to work on this after the initial release of the first batch and that is why it took so long to get more of them out.

phantom23 said:

No because smaller lens work as a magnigier. Magnifies dies (look at them side by side - P7 dies look much smaller) and also 'light emitting surface' (whatever it's called).

Click to expand...

Then it does seem very strange that the smaller diameter of the Jetbeam would throw further, especially when it doesn't even output as much light.

Ryanrpm said:

Reflector design might also play an important role. Deeper vs shallower....

Perhaps the OP can show us reflectors side by side of the L900 and M1-X?

Click to expand...

Yes this might be true. On the other hand I always thought that the diameter was more significant
than the depth of the reflector as far as throw was concerned. :shrug:

Maybe a course in optical physics would help me.

easilyled said:

Yes this might be true. On the other hand I always thought that the diameter was more significant
than the depth of the reflector as far as throw was concerned. :shrug:

Maybe a course in optical physics would help me.

Click to expand...

LOL, it would help me too!!

I think the depth to diameter ratio plays a large part....as well as the size of the light source. Take the Sunlite 16w for example...which I have done a lot of beamshots with already.... It currently, to the best of my knowledge, has the farthest throw of any quad emitter out there right now. According to Glenn7, it beats the M1-X....according to these beamshots in these photos, it beats the L900 because the M1-X beats the L900, in other threads that compare the 16w to the Wiseled tactical P7 and the Wiseled tactical P7 to the TK40, it looks to have more throw than the TK40.

It has not been tested against the M2 or M2X yet, nor the M30 Triton....but time will tell there.

My point is that the 16w quad emitter is not packed in a dome, so the light source is 3mmx3mm and the reflector dimensions are 44mm diameter x 45mm depth.

If reflector diameter alone determined throw, then all of those mentioned above 'should' throw further.


I appologize of my conversation above if off-topic a bit....just trying to rationalize the part a reflector plays in all of this discusion of quad emitters in the high output lights....

I was heavily contemplating getting the new L950M to see how well it compared to the 16w, but I might forego that now that this thread has popped up. Hmmm:shrug:

Ryanrpm said:

LOL, it would help me too!!

I think the depth to diameter ratio plays a large part....as well as the size of the light source. Take the Sunlite 16w for example...which I have done a lot of beamshots with already.... It currently, to the best of my knowledge, has the farthest throw of any quad emitter out there right now. According to Glenn7, it beats the M1-X....according to these beamshots in these photos, it beats the L900 because the M1-X beats the L900, in other threads that compare the 16w to the Wiseled tactical P7 and the Wiseled tactical P7 to the TK40, it looks to have more throw than the TK40.

It has not been tested against the M2 or M2X yet, nor the M30 Triton....but time will tell there.

My point is that the 16w quad emitter is not packed in a dome, so the light source is 3mmx3mm and the reflector dimensions are 44mm diameter x 45mm depth.

If reflector diameter alone determined throw, then all of those mentioned above 'should' throw further.


I appologize of my conversation above if off-topic a bit....just trying to rationalize the part a reflector plays in all of this discusion of quad emitters in the high output lights....

I was heavily contemplating getting the new L950M to see how well it compared to the 16w, but I might forego that now that this thread has popped up. Hmmm:shrug:

Click to expand...

Yes I understand what you're saying.
There are probably quite a few factors at play.
I would advise you not to forego the L950M on the basis of this thread though.
It could be that this was an early model of L900 and that the L950M is considerably brighter now.
All I can say is that my L950M is a hell of a light and I'm very happy with it.
It certainly beats the MG-RX1 for throw (just tried them out in the garden) and the MG-RX1 is no slouch, since it beats the Tiablo ACE-G.

easilyled said:

It certainly beats the MG-RX1 for throw (just tried them out in the garden) and the MG-RX1 is no slouch, since it beats the Tiablo ACE-G.

Click to expand...

Thanks. That alone is convincing me to go ahead with getting one....oo:

Times like this are very interesting....

But I don't think it can beat ACE because it has much deeper reflector than ACE-G. Throw is similar or even better tahn M1X.

I have a L950M and it is a D bin P7 as upposed to the L900 which is a C bin P7. I would say that the L950M would outperform the M1X.Not saying the M1X isnt a nice light.Im just saying that the L950M is reall hard to beat and is driven real hard.Also I dont see any donut in the beam anywhere unless Im 6 inches from the wall.I compare it to my DBS MC-E which is an M bin and is 600 emitter Lumens according to Crees chart and the L950M is way brighter and out throws it easily.If your thinking about getting a L950M dont hesitate for the price and quality of the light it is very hard to beat.

phantom23 said:

But I don't think it can beat ACE because it has much deeper reflector than ACE-G. Throw is similar or even better tahn M1X.

Click to expand...

The thread below by csshih with beamshots comparing the ACE-G to the MG-RX1 clearly show that the MG-RX1 throws further than the ACE-G

https://www.candlepowerforums.com/threads/229633

I have the MG-RX1 and the Solarforce-950M and the Solarforce-950M clearly outthrows the MG-RX1. (I have just tested them both in the garden pointed at some distant tree-tops)

Therefore I must conclude that the Solaraforce-950M throws considerably further than the Tiablo ACE-G.

That's what I said. ACE and ACE-G are different flashlights with different reflectors. L950M outthrows ACE-G but not ACE.