Why so few adjustable beams?

I have a cheap Nu-Flare Luxeon with an adjustable beam, it's very convenient to switch between flood and throw. Why do the higher end lights mostly lack this feature? I was wondering if perhaps it's due to the heat output, perhaps the screw head would interfere with heat diffusion?

It's really hard to do the zoom thing with LEDs and a traditional reflector without making an abomination of the beam. You're left with specialized optics, which not everyone wants to deal with, plus I think LedLensor has the patents on what appears to be the only zoomy mechanism anyone around here actually finds useful. In most applications, a nicely balanced beam is more practical and a heck of a lot easier to do well.

That's my understanding anyways. :shrug:

:welcome:

I use different lights for flood and throw. No need to adjust them. Just one more thing to fiddle with. It is useful, however, to have a UI that allows the light to get brighter or dimmer. That's common.

Bigger/heavy/quality of head/aspheric for long throw
water resistant
less demand in market
...

1. LED Lenser holds the patents for engineered optics that allow the same lumens to be emitted in both flood and throw mode.

2. The alternative method is using an aspheric lens on an adjustable sleeve that either slides or unscrews to change it's distance from the LED. The total light output dims dramatically with this method when the light is cycled to spot as light is lost into the interior of the sleeve. All budget zoomable lights use this method.

3. It is difficult to make a flood-to-throw light watertight. The sliding bezel must rotate across one or more o-rings to do so. Also, since the interior volume of the light changes, vacuum pressure can cause the bezel to retract or extend into whatever position the light was in when the battery compartment was closed. Cheaper zoom lights work best when the light is purposely left non-air tight so that air pressure can equalize at both flood and throw settings.

4. Zoom mechanisms rely on focusing lenses... they work best with a very bright point light source on the focal point of the lens. Today's newer LEDs such as the XM-L emit much more light, but do so from a very large die. The surface brightness at any one point on an XM-L die is much dimmer than older LEDs. The result is zoom lights using them won't be able to focus to a very tight spot unless they use a gigantic lens which is impractical on today's small lights. A zoom light using an LED from 3 generations back will have a dim flood mode, but a very tight spot mode. Today's newest LEDs do the opposite: a very bright flood mode, and a dim unfocused spot mode.

I do agree that it's a real shame there aren't more zooming lights available. I saw a demo video on the net of a new technology that used a deformable lens. In one mode the lens would be flat, but twist a dial on the bezel and the flexible lens would deform into an aspheric. The demonstration video even showed it being used on a flashlight. If such technology were cost effective, I see many possible advantages. Since the internal volume doesn't change, it might be possible to make a watertight zooming light with none of the vacuum-issues of today's lights. (presumably the flexible lens would be behind a hard conventional lens so that the flexible lens would not get damaged or scratched.

Despite the fact that it's far from perfect, my LED Lenser T7 model does adjustable beams very well.

Unfortunately the only other thing done well on the flashlight isn't even on the flashlight. It's actually the holster that comes free with the light. Very high-quality. Not some cheap, thin, piece of flimsy nylon that you normally get, if you get a holster or belt-pouch with the purchase of a light.

Overall quality of the L.L. T7 is decent. But it could be quite a bit better.

I'm getting one to try.
http://wolf-eyes.com/product/Tac%20Raptor.html

Glenn7 said:

I'm getting one to try.
http://wolf-eyes.com/product/Tac%20Raptor.html

Click to expand...

That Wolfeyes looks good. I hope it throws as good as it claims with the XM-L U2.

Nice explanation Fireclaw!

My wife complained about the whacky beam on the MagLites for years. I was glad to get her one that had a stable unchanged setting. She never complained again once I gave her the light she carries which is a Fenix LD20 she has used on one setting since getting. For me even the ones I enjoy like my 3D MagLite are mostly uneven and cheap looking compared to the fine borderless full light you get from some of the more expensive lights so to me the only one I've ever had that had a half way decent light focus control was the cheap Nebo RedLine which actually has surprised a lot of people. Why can't one of the Mag Lites control a beam that well with that much crisp white unbroken artifact free light?