question for HDS light owners..

Hey guys,

I just had a quick question for those of you who have multiple HDS lights. Im loving everything I have seen and read about them and am just waiting for them to get the orange coated bodies back in stock so that I can place my order.. But my question to you is-
Can you really notice much of a difference in the 170 lumen and 200 lumen version? Is it worth it? The only light that I have right now that is rated at 200 lumens is a SF LX2 and its fairly bright I'd say. But is it really worth the extra $40 for the 30 lumens you get? I would love for your honest opinions here as I know not what to do! :thinking: Im looking into the 170 or 200 lumen clicky, tactical presets version.

thanks cpf!

Lots of variables when comparing objective lumen numbers to subjective perceptions of brightness, but overall the effect is logarithmic (not linear). The rule of thumb I use is that a 40% increase in output is usually easily noticeable, but it takes nearly 10x-output (about 1000% increase) to appear "twice as bright". Also, it takes quadruple the output to approximately double the throw. These are very rough guidelines, of course....

As an example, when the EDC-200 drops down from burst, it drops to 141 lumens output - and many do not notice this decrease without searching for it.

Hope that helps

Though what archimedes said is scientifically sound, but I find that in actual comparison visual perception does play a part. In my personal experience, the more floody nature of the 200 coupled with the 200 lumen output does indeed look much brighter visually when indoor. The 170 having a narrow beam profile only shows it's worth when outdoor where throw is what you need.

Spyder, since you have the LX2 which is primarily a throw light, I would suggest you go with the 200 lumen clicky for the flood. I am sure that you would definitely find it more useable than the LX2 when using it indoor.

I'd opt for the highest lumen rating possible with HDS lights as long as pockets can afford. These lights are built for runtime. Higher lumens with the same runtime with the same battery whether 140 or 170 lumens. Cannot speak to 120 or 200 lumen models. Don't have those.

Okay guys that sounds good, I appreciate the quick responses and all the great info!! So what Im gathering is that the 200 lumen is more floody and the 170 is more for throw..?

thanks

SpyderHS08 said:

Okay guys that sounds good, I appreciate the quick responses and all the great info!! So what Im gathering is that the 200 lumen is more floody and the 170 is more for throw..?

thanks

Click to expand...

Yes you are right. 170 uses a GDP emitter which has a smaller die and it helps project the beam further. In comparison, the 170 looks slightly brighter at the hotspot in long distance throw, but do note that it is only very slightly brighter. The 200 on the other hand looks much brighter when in close range or indoor environment due to the floody nature of the beam. I vote for the 200 because I prefer a more floody light which is useful for 90% of the application at hand and the usefulness of the flood beam far outweigh the very slight loss in throw over the 170. If you need throw, your LX2 does a much better job than the 170 HDS.

Hmm, I do enjoy my throwers over flood as I use my lights outdoors muuuch more than indoors so the 170 lumen may just be what I lean towards, also that will save me some $, plus Ill probably already be spending extra since my greedy self needs the orange version. So if i need alot of throw I can grab one of my surefires- M6 LX2, L1, E1b(x2 one of each color of course!!) E1e, E1L, 6P, G2X lol...and the list goes on. Im sure I will be stewing over this decision for some time as I cant get either now since they arent in stock.

So I will keep reading around and watching here to see what you guys tell me is the best thing to do!

Get whichever that you feel is best for you as all of us have different preferences. You really can't go wrong with either. I doubt the cerakoted ones would be available anytime soon. Maybe you can check if HDS or Oveready is doing any run soon?

pjandyho said:

Though what archimedes said is scientifically sound, but I find that in actual comparison visual perception does play a part. In my personal experience, the more floody nature of the 200 coupled with the 200 lumen output does indeed look much brighter visually when indoor. The 170 having a narrow beam profile only shows it's worth when outdoor where throw is what you need.

Spyder, since you have the LX2 which is primarily a throw light, I would suggest you go with the 200 lumen clicky for the flood. I am sure that you would definitely find it more useable than the LX2 when using it indoor.

Click to expand...

Sounds like the ultimate EDC duo!

SpyderHS08 said:

Hmm, I do enjoy my throwers over flood as I use my lights outdoors muuuch more than indoors so the 170 lumen may just be what I lean towards, also that will save me some $, plus Ill probably already be spending extra since my greedy self needs the orange version. So if i need alot of throw I can grab one of my surefires- M6 LX2, L1, E1b(x2 one of each color of course!!) E1e, E1L, 6P, G2X lol...and the list goes on. Im sure I will be stewing over this decision for some time as I cant get either now since they arent in stock.

So I will keep reading around and watching here to see what you guys tell me is the best thing to do!

Click to expand...

Well, you can always add a diffuser to a thrower, if you want flood....

archimedes said:

Well, you can always add a diffuser to a thrower, if you want flood....

Click to expand...

I said that too. But guess what? I always forget about the diffuser or I misplaced it when I needed it. LOL! I definitely failed to practice what I preach. So now I stopped preaching about it.

While the 200 is floodier than the 170, my experience with XP-G based lights is that they still have plenty of punch. I think it provides a great and more USEFUL beam than the tighter beamed lights for EDC purposes, with a good balance of hotspot and functional spill.

I think I will go with the throwier 170 version. Im also liking the price better as well and I think it will suit my uses better. I was able to get in touch with Henry and he said it will be about two months before they have any orange so now I get to play the waiting game...

Also do the lights come with diffusers to make for more flood or can they be purchased seperate?

No diffuser at all. I use a Surefire F04 beam shaper and some here are using diffusers fashioned out of bottle caps.

The CPF way: Buy them all!:devil: I have 3 HDS lights and rotate them regularly. I especially like the rotary convenience. They are all superior lights that will last a lifetime. The high CRI doesn't seem as bright, but it gets the job done with good color rendition.

pjandyho said:

I said that too. But guess what? I always forget about the diffuser or I misplaced it when I needed it. LOL! I definitely failed to practice what I preach. So now I stopped preaching about it.

Click to expand...

Temporary diffusers made of polythene bag, surgical tape, or even a handkerchief can save the day. I prefer throw models since these can be easily converted to diffused, but not vice versa.

nbp said:

While the 200 is floodier than the 170, my experience with XP-G based lights is that they still have plenty of punch. I think it provides a great and more USEFUL beam than the tighter beamed lights for EDC purposes, with a good balance of hotspot and functional spill.

Click to expand...

+1. The 200 has a much more useful beam. Check out these shots I took a while back for comparison.

170



200

SpyderHS08 said:

Can you really notice much of a difference in the 170 lumen and 200 lumen version?

Click to expand...

In terms of brightness, not really. The general rule of thumb is that you need a 4x increase in output for a perceived doubling in brightness, so the difference between 170 and 200 will be slight. However, there may be other reasons to prefer one over the other such as beam pattern -- generally speaking, the narrower the beam the better the "throw", though I prefer a wider beam myself.