LiteFlux LF3XT or 4sevens Quark 123? (Confused about runtime, too)

I'm having trouble deciding between the two. What I'm mostly stuck on is the battery life of the LiteFlux. From what I can tell (and I admit I am new to flashlights and reading all the graphs), I'll only get about 2-2.5 hours of 1600 lumen "50%" light out of the LiteFlux, and 5 hours on 1800 lumen "high" with the Quark? That difference seems so large that I feel like I have to be interpreting it wrong. I'm getting the information from light-reviews.com, as well as reviews posted here.

http://www.light-reviews.com/liteflux_lf3_xt/

http://www.light-reviews.com/4sevens_quark123/

It will be an EDC light, and these two seem to fit the bill best. From what I've read, they're neck and neck for me, it seems like it might just come down to how long I'll get usable light from them. I'm not too concerned about the LiteFlux's complicated UI. I also considered the NiteCore EX10. I could be talked into a AA model, too, if it would have a good runtime.

Can anyone clarify the runtime issue? And I'd appreciate if anyone would strongly recommend one over the other.

Not sure where you're getting those lumen ratings of 1600 & 1800 from but they are about 10x more than these lights put out. The Quark is listed there at 181 lumens.
On rechargeable RCR123, 16340 batteries, the L.F. puts out 3440 lux for 30 min. & will run at 50% power for 1:22.
The Quark will run at 4100 lux for 34 min. & 50 % power for 2:19 advantage Quark.
The Quark seems to get longer run time on primaries as well so it looks to me the Quark wins all around and it's cheaper with a better 10 yr. warranty.
If you get the Quark from 4Sevens use the discount code CPF8 for a 8% discount.
If it matters, it appears they will both run forever on their lowest settings of less than 10 lux.

They're pretty different lights - the Quarks appear to use updated drivers that Fenix uses/used which to their credit were quite efficient. The Liteflux has a unique UI and one cost of that is the relative efficiency. About the only knock on the LF3XT is the less efficient driver - but as noted it isn't dreadful it just isn't as good as the Quark. So what is the tradeoff? Programmability and customization with the LF3XT. I'm not sure there is a light other than a Novatac/Ra in production that has any more features than the LF3XT (and the LF3XT arguably has more - I just really like the Novatac/Ra UI) - it has overdischarge protection, a voltage meter, two interfaces, basically you can more or less set it up exactly as you'd like it. The beam is also quite nice and artifact free.

I think the Quarks are nice lights as well - great output, well made and affordable. More limited in terms of features but you do get better runtimes and they are less expensive.

I think you need to decide how important the programmability is with the LF3XT and if you're willing to take a less runtime to have those features.

For an EDC light I tend to top off my batteries every other day anyway and as long as there are lower levels that run forever I'm OK if the higher levels drain the battery a bit.

I have both of these lights. I haven't really noticed a big difference in runtime, but I don't tend to use my lights for more than a couple minutes at a time.

One thing I learned about the LF3XT is that the pocket clip is pretty much useless. It's really thin, weak wire that did not hold the light in my pocket. The Quark pocket clip is much stronger. I also noticed that the LF3XT would frequently turn on accidentally when clipped in my pocket. For these reasons, I don't carry it anymore. But I still use the LF3XT around the house.

If you're not too concerned about the LiteFlux's complicated UI, then you've pretty much made the choice right there. The reason to get the LF3XT is the UI. It really is amazing and without a doubt, the most versatile UI available. But the Quark is a great light if you only want a few preset modes.

The EX10 is also a great light. You get the versatility of ramping, but the UI is still simple. My current EDC light is a warm tinted EX10.

I actually ordered a Quark just now. They aren't in stock for a couple days, so I guess I could still change my mind. My thinking was, the light-reviews.com review gave the LiteFlux an overall score of 8.5 mostly due to the UI features. While I wouldn't be afraid to get my hands dirty in the CUI or FUI modes, I really am not sure that I would take full advantage of all that it offers regarding programming. So, that takes away what seems to be its key selling point over the Quark. The Quark got a score of 8 (I know these ratings are subjective and .5 points doesn't really mean much) and a better rating on the light output marker, and the objectively better battery performance pushes it ahead of the LiteFlux once I disregard its UI capability.

That the Quark's clip is more robust also nudged me in that direction.

I like lights to be as small as possible for the size battery that they use and the Mini123 is a nice light that does this well. The LF3 it a little larger but has many more features and also a pushbutton which offers a different user interface. But since you already made a decision it does not matter. I think you made a good choice and either are good lights.

What is nice in the Mini is that it uses the latest LED for efficiency advantage (for how much that may be worth).

One thing that I have seen in the LF3 that I did not care for was a dull reflector. In all the posts that I have seen (and in some review comments), the reflector is not very shiny. It does smooth the Cree beam due to this but I think it does so at the expense of some output efficiecy as well.

I think he's talking about the regular Quark 123, not the Mini.

I have the Quark and the EX10. I prefer the EX10 for an easy UI that still gives it flexibility with ramping and shortcuts, but the Quark still has a nice useable UI. It is even more simple, but the modes are sequential, which I don't like, so I got the Tactical version. I wish the tactical UI took far less time to change levels though. Waiting ten seconds for very bright flashes is no good when someone is there waiting for you, or you are trying to do something fast.
I prefer the EX10 and Novatac style reversible ramping combined with shortcuts to get to the level I want faster. I was actually able to let a coworker borrow my EX10 with less than 5 seconds demonstration for just ramping so he could get the level he wanted very quickly. I have read the LF3XT UI and it looks very nice with shortcuts and programmability, but seems more complicated if you want to use all of the features. It's a lot to remember. If it were one of only a couple of lights I owned and it I used it a lot, I would remember the UI, but I go through a dozen EDCs in a couple of months and can't remember too many complicated UIs. Which is the only reason I have not bought an LF3XT. It seems like a bigger, more complicated EX10 to me. The size and clip of the EX10 are its additional advantages.

Looking at it again, I'm not sure what it is that turned me off from the EX10. When I first started looking, that was actually what I was sure I was going to get. I must have read something somewhere that made me hesitate, but I do agree that the ramping and other UI features seem a little more appealing than the Quark's.

In the end, though, none of these lights are break-the-bank expensive, so maybe in a few months I'll get an EX10 and see how I like it! I hope this isn't the start of a lifelong battle with flashoholism...

uspfan said:

In the end, though, none of these lights are break-the-bank expensive, so maybe in a few months I'll get an EX10 and see how I like it! I hope this isn't the start of a lifelong battle with flashoholism...

Click to expand...

Yup, do like the rest of us do-buy both :naughty::twothumbs:laughing:

mr.snakeman said:

Yup, do like the rest of us do-buy both :naughty::twothumbs:laughing:

Click to expand...

You mean all three : LF3XT, Quark 123 & EX10?

That would be an idea of course, but what about the Fenix PD20, which is also a nice light? Don't forget the Olight i10 Infinitum, more throwy. There's also the Dereelight C2H, very versatile. Lately I discovered the Lumapower Incendio, haven't got it yet...

As some are available with neural white emitters, buy wisely! lovecpf

Henk_Lu said:

You mean all three : LF3XT, Quark 123 & EX10? lovecpf

Click to expand...

Of course, I did, and two of them in Titanium as well (still waiting for a Ti LF3XT). And a Happy and Bright New Year to you all :wave:.

I obsessed for a while over the Liteflux and debated back & forth between the lf3tx and lf5tx. "Ooo, programmable!" I drooled. Glad I waited. I snagged a programmable Akoray on the MP for far less, and after playing with that awhile I realized that programmability is not such a big thing to me. Once I set it up it was just another multimode clicky, like any of the others. If I buy a nonprogrammable light with a few well-spaced modes, it's about the same thing. Programmability doesn't excite me anymore.

I find that I still like the UI of my D10 quite well. Quick access to low and high, with a nice ramping ability anytime I need something else. The knurling gives a great grip. I can either twist the head or click the PD.

If it weren't for the tiny Maratac AAA, I'd be EDC'ing the D10. 1-AAA lights are sooo comfortable in the pocket.