My EDC, Nitecore DI ----> Quark R4 ??

I've been happy EDC'ing my Nitecore Defender Infinity (Q5), the original version (1xAA). I use Energizer Lithiums and it's quite bright. I just ordered 2 Quark Ti 1xAA Tactical Limited Edition with the R4.

Do you think the Quark will be brighter with a Lithium AA than my Nitecore?

No, it will not be brighter, especially because of the lower bin LED, but it will have much better color rendition.

Edit: Excuse me, I was confused and thought you were talking about the warm white quarks. The quark R4 will probably be brighter.

?? R4 is a higher flux bin, isn't it

I definatly think the quark is a better build quality but thats my opinion

The Quark should be brighter when using a 14500 lithium-ion, but may not be brighter when using a 1.5v Lithium. The 1xAA Quark is rated at 90 lumens with a 1.2-1.5v battery. The XP-G should hopefully bump that up a bit, but I'm not sure by how much.

I'm not sure about the OTF lumens of a NDI when running on 1.5v. Anyone?

I know the 90 lumen rating in the other Quark is supposed to be conservative, but I'm considering:
1. The R4 should be brighter than previous Quarks.
2. The 1.7v Energizer Lithium AA puts out more power than a standard AA, and Um hoping the Quark is brighter with it. My NDI is brighter with it as well.

JBorneu said:

No, it will not be brighter, especially because of the lower bin LED, but it will have much better color rendition.

Click to expand...

R4 is a higher bin than Q5. If your NDI had an R4 it would be brighter but I'm not sure that you would notice the difference.
As far as color rendition; if the R4 is a WC like your NDI Q5, the tint color should be similar (depending on the "tint lottery").
The consensus seems to be that Q3 5A tint would have better color renditioning than a Q5 WC or R2, R4 WC.

You're not going to see much difference between most current 1xAA lights powered by a standard/non-Li-Ion battery, they're all within roughly a couple dozen lumens of one another. Where it gets disparate is output on a 14500, but you'll have to wait until someone tests a Quark R4 to know how it will perform.

The most notable difference between the Quark and NDI would be the beam profile; the Quark has a broad beam with a large hotspot, which you'll find more useful for everyday/general tasks.

The consensus seems to be that Q3 5A tint would have better color renditioning than a Q5 WC or R2, R4 WC.

Click to expand...

Consensus ? Not here. The WC seems pretty close to pure white to me, and no trouble at all with colours of vegetation etc.

State your personal preference by all means but not all of us want yellow lights.

Moonshadow said:

Consensus ? Not here. The WC seems pretty close to pure white to me, and no trouble at all with colours of vegetation etc.

State your personal preference by all means but not all of us want yellow lights.

Click to expand...

https://www.candlepowerforums.com/threads/215025

Oh we do want "yellow" lights.

Moonshadow said:

Consensus ? Not here. The WC seems pretty close to pure white to me, and no trouble at all with colours of vegetation etc.

State your personal preference by all means but not all of us want yellow lights.

Click to expand...

"The consensus seems to be that Q3 5A tint would have better color renditioning than a Q5 WC or R2, R4 WC."

Please note I stated The consensus "SEEMS" to be that Q3 5A tint would have better "COLOR RENDITIONING". I did not state a personal preference and I did not state everyone wants yellow lights or there is trouble with identifying colors with WC tints. I merely noted an observation by reading many posts in this forum regarding warm tints and color renditioning.

StarHalo said:

The most notable difference between the Quark and NDI would be the beam profile; the Quark has a broad beam with a large hotspot, which you'll find more useful for everyday/general tasks.

Click to expand...

Not sure about the XP-G's beam, but the Quark XP-E beam is broader than my NDI's, as far as the spill, but the hot spots are about the same, the Quark is actually smaller, but when you add in the bright corona it looks about the same.

Comparing my Quark 1x123 on MAX to my NDI on MAX (both on 3.7v lithium ions) the Quark has a noticeably brighter hot spot (more throw) than the NDI. The Quark also has a much cleaner beam (MUCH CLEANER) as the NDI's beam has visible rings.

The Quark also has a much lower low mode than the NDI.

I would expect the XP-G's hot spot to be larger than the XP-E's hot spot.

WadeF said:

Comparing my Quark 1x123 on MAX to my NDI on MAX (both on 3.7v lithium ions) the Quark has a noticeably brighter hot spot (more throw) than the NDI. The Quark also has a much cleaner beam (MUCH CLEANER) as the NDI's beam has visible rings.

Click to expand...

Thanks everyone. This direct comparison was very helpful. My NDI has no rings visible and a great beam. I have never run my NDI on anything but 1.2-1.7v AA's, but on the Lithium Energizer AA's, it is just about as bright to the naked eye as a P2D P100 I hand picked after seeing 8. I guess it would really blast with 3.7v, I may need to try it and also be ready for the Quark R4. I didn't know my original NDI could run that high voltage.

I took a couple buddies to Lighthound today, we made some procurements. I also got a PD20 which OI like the looks of, as well as 2 14500 batteries and a charger. My NDI is a little brighter with the 14500, but not much at all. I expect the Quark R4 will have a much bigger jump in power, that was my main reason for getting them.