New ITP A3s now have centered emitters via centering device?

I received a new ITP A3 Upgraded recently and just noticed that unlike the pictures in the various A3 reviews on CPF, the emitter PCB actually has 4 black tabs holding it in place from each side. From what I can tell, the emitter is perfectly centered. The tabs look exactly like those on the Preon that are supposed to center the emitter. Is this a new thing that ITP added to the A3 lights or a one-time manufacturing mix-up? It looks pretty nice.

Re: ITP A3 now has an emitter centering device?

Very cool. I have one coming (may even be in the mail today), and I'll look to see if it is has one. If its there, I'll see if it's comparable to the one in my Quark AA.

Here is a pic of the centering device I'm talking about on my A3:



I haven't seen that in any review pics of the A3 yet.

Interesting. I checked the 3 iTP A3 EOS that we have here and none of them have those.

I have an A3 SS and it doesn't have that black centering unit. I checked my A2 and it has that centering unit and thought where have I seen this before... yup it looks exactly like what is used on the quarks

nope mine does not have that. its about 6 months old.

Mine (bought around 3 months ago) has a white surround and the LED is indeed a little off-centre, so this looks like a recent addition.

Certainly looks to me like a blatant copy of the Quark system. Were I buying now this would be a strong reason for me NOT to buy this light.

I'd rather have the Preon anyway, for the more sensible L-M-H sequence and the higher PWM frequency. Perhaps ITP will copy those as well given enough time . . . :thumbsdow

Moonshadow said:

Certainly looks to me like a blatant copy of the Quark system. Were I buying now this would be a strong reason for me NOT to buy this light.

Perhaps ITP will copy those as well given enough time . . . :thumbsdow

Click to expand...

Curious... is the black retainer component a Quark design?... or an off the shelf catalog component?

FWIW, heres my 6 month old light. its a nice light and has not given me any troubles. Its a legit 75L OTF with an eneloop (see bigchelis thread in my sig).

Moonshadow said:

Mine (bought around 3 months ago) has a white surround and the LED is indeed a little off-centre, so this looks like a recent addition.

Certainly looks to me like a blatant copy of the Quark system. Were I buying now this would be a strong reason for me NOT to buy this light.

I'd rather have the Preon anyway, for the more sensible L-M-H sequence and the higher PWM frequency. Perhaps ITP will copy those as well given enough time . . . :thumbsdow

Click to expand...

What makes you think there is any copying going on? Perhaps they're all made by the same company:
https://www.candlepowerforums.com/posts/3186355&postcount=63

"imitation is the...." yaddy yadda....

Unless there's a patent of some sort etc...I got no problem with a company taking the best innovations and incorporating it into their product

Curious... is the black retainer component a Quark design?... or an off the shelf catalog component?

Click to expand...

What makes you think there is any copying going on?

Click to expand...

From 4Sevens Design Philosophy #7 - Perfectly Centered LED's EVERY TIME:

Properly centering every single LED was part of the DESIGN of our light from ground up.

Click to expand...

http://www.cpfmarketplace.com/mp/showthread.php?t=195406

Sure, in an ideal world patents might be the way to go, but they cost a fortune to defend which may not be worth it for such a small component. Or perhaps there is some sort of licensing deal going on.

Nevertheless I'd rather give my business to the guys who've gone to the trouble to listen to what customers want and taken the time and effort to innovate than to those who borrow/copy/imitate whatever you want to call it.

It's a nice sentiment, but like most innovations everyone eventually incorporates it into their designs and after a few generations most people forget/have no idea who "invented" it in the first place.

It's especially true with technology, and one of the reasons why it's constantly evolving so quickly. Kind of reminds me of all the rehashed songs on the radio these days (contemporary/pop/hip hop etc) that are remade versions of songs 10/20/30 years ago....

I for one don't have the interest/patience to look at a light and think to myself hmmm, I wonder if that neat design/component was designed by someone else.

Really not intending to be argumentative, I appreciate the sentiment I do...but like I said, it's not how I make my purchasing decisions and just don't think it's realistic.

To make a reduction ad absurdum type argument...xyz light wasn't the first to use/innovate the use of an LED, they're just copying abc's design

kramer5150 said:

Curious... is the black retainer component a Quark design?... or an off the shelf catalog component?

Click to expand...

Judging by this thread, the design originated with 4sevens, and since it's such a brilliantly simple idea that has been enthusiastically applauded by consumers it's hardly surprising to see a competitor "borrow" the concept for their own lights. The bad news, at least for 4sevens, is that they can no longer boast about having this feature exclusively, but the good news for consumers is that lights with perfectly centered LEDs will start to become more widely available.

Moonshadow said:

Certainly looks to me like a blatant copy of the Quark system. Were I buying now this would be a strong reason for me NOT to buy this light.

Click to expand...

As far as anyone can tell, ITP makes the Preon. Which means that you just don't know how much anything is shared between the two companies or even who developed this particular solution. And the regular Quarks are very similar to Fenix's offerings (particularly in UI), and 4sevens engaged in a few business practices that I don't agree with (which will get this thread closed if I discuss it, so forget it), so nobody is "without sin" in my view.

I'd rather have the Preon anyway, for the more sensible L-M-H sequence and the higher PWM frequency. Perhaps ITP will copy those as well given enough time . . . :thumbsdow

Click to expand...

I'm liking the ITP more. It has none of the BS of the Preon (flashy modes, $55 in Canada vs. $23 for the ITP). I prefer the M-L-H sequence because 99% of the time I use medium mode and would hate to subject the light to more wear and tear by having to twist twice each time I want to use it (you'll notice that the coating of the positive battery contact starts getting worn out very soon after you get it, and since the board of the Preon is almost identical to the ITP, it will wear out faster with twice the number of twists). I also think it looks better. The PWM doesn't bother me at all (I thought it would but decided to get it anyway to try; that turned out to be a very good idea). The centered emitter is a bonus.

the.Mtn.Man said:

Judging by this thread, the design originated with 4sevens, and since it's such a brilliantly simple idea that has been enthusiastically applauded by consumers it's hardly surprising to see a competitor "borrow" the concept for their own lights. The bad news, at least for 4sevens, is that they can no longer boast about having this feature exclusively, but the good news for consumers is that lights with perfectly centered LEDs will start to become more widely available.

Click to expand...

Even then it's hard to say exactly who designed it. Without being privy to the original talks, we don't know if 4sevens designed it themselves or simply asked the manufacturer to come up with some way to ensure perfectly centered LEDs or something in between. The requirement to have perfectly centered LEDs comes from 4sevens as far as I can tell but the actual implementation may or may not have.

Now that you mentioned... My A2 and A1 seem to have that too, and so do SA2.

1138 said:

Even then it's hard to say exactly who designed it. Without being privy to the original talks, we don't know if 4sevens designed it themselves or simply asked the manufacturer to come up with some way to ensure perfectly centered LEDs or something in between. The requirement to have perfectly centered LEDs comes from 4sevens as far as I can tell but the actual implementation may or may not have.

Click to expand...

Based on this comment:

4sevens said:

We created a built in jig that centers every time.

Click to expand...

it certainly looks like they're claiming ownership of the design.

the.Mtn.Man said:

Based on this comment:

it certainly looks like they're claiming ownership of the design.

Click to expand...

It's just marketing-speak. If I hired someone to do design work for me, I can still market it as my own design. Not saying that's the case for sure, but it is possible. Until we get to see their signed and witnessed contracts / design logbooks, we probably won't ever know.

Patents, or it didn't happen.

PerttiK said:

Now that you mentioned... My A2 and A1 seem to have that too, and so do SA2.

Click to expand...

Checked all my A3s but forgot to check the A2 in my pocket

It has the centering cradle.

Maybe my A3 is part of the first batch that has it.