Arc LSH-P or LSHF-P?

Hi, After recently purchasing my Arc AAA I now have a hankering for a Arc LSH. But my question is which one should I get? This will be used as a EDC, and i'm afraid I can only buy one. I am MORE than happy with my CPF AAA so I know i'll be happy with whichever I get. Thanks for your help!

Ryan

Depends upon usage needs. I have both.

The LSH-P is a good general purpose bright light for both indoor and outdoor use. It can also be used for close-up work in the side spill area.

The LSHF-P is good for ranges (as others have posted and I agree with) of 20 feet+ which means good for outdoor use. It has little to no spill and is way too bright for close-up work in the hot spot. The flood of light from the LSHF-P is really amazing for it's size and weight. At 50-60 feet out, the beam width is a dozen or more feet wide and really lights up a path.

I suggest the LSH-P with the regular NX-05 optic for EDC. It's more versatile. With the Fraen optic you're limited to throwing applications.

Please have a look at the older Spec.Ed. LSH-P w/ Fraen LP threads.

There aren't that many of them at all, and they contain many comparisons/voices of opinions (not to mention beamshots) for the differences between the two lights that will help you tremendously.

If you only have enough dough to spare for one, this little bit of homework, which will take well less than an hour to *_completely_* research is an invaluable use of your time.

/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif

Allen
aka DumboRAT

I have a LSHF-P. Among my growing collection of flashlights, this small wonder continues to amaze. If you are satisfied with your AAA for indoor use, you might want to pick up the LSHF-P for outdoor/longer range use. The light output is pretty crazy for such a small light. You might also want to consider the "twisty" tailcap if it is to be your EDC.

-David Lee

I have both the LSHF-P and the LSH-P. IMO the LSH-P is a better EDC light. If you find that most of your light use is illuminating objects at 20' or further then you'll benefit from the extra throw of the LSHF-P. Otherwise I'd stick to the LSH-P. That should work well for you.

I have both.

I think the LSHF-P is not optimal for indoor use and not enough for outdoor use.

My opinion is go with the LSH-P.

GregR

Hi Ryan.

I have both the LSHF-P and the LSH-P too. But, as time goes by, I find I always choose the LSHF-P for EDC.

Why? I find, more and more, I prefer the brighter, bigger hotspot even for closeup tasks. And, the extra throw often comes in handy.

During the day, the wider flood of the LSH-P isn't much needed. Ambient light usually provides that. At night, the LSHF-P's flood seems to give enough side spill for walking since I am usually aiming a bit ahead anyway.

If I can only have one light along, I'd rather have focused brightness, a bigger hotspot and more throw. I can't make my LSH-P do that. However, with the LSHF-P, I can always satisfy the need for more side spill just by panning the light.

What's best for me may not be best for you because your usage will vary. What's really best is to have both. You might consider buying both and trying them out to find out which one works best for you. Then sell the one you don't want here on CPF.

Bottom line, if I could have only one, I would vote for the LSHF-P. I do vote this way every day when I consider both of them sitting on the dresser and walk off with the LSHF-P in my pocket.

[ QUOTE ]
mporter said:
What's really best is to have both.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree 100% /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif

I guess the answer lies mainly in what you are used to, with the intended use a close second. For me, the LSHF-P wins hands down.
I grew up using a lot of dive lights with strong, long reaching spot-light style beams in an environment with a lot of non-reflective material (dark foliage with dark lava rocks/boulders) with minimal light pollution. IMHO, this type of terrain requires a flood to be really strong to be effective, and most of the good flood lights were too big, BUT you can get away with a smaller light with a good spot.
I am used to scanning an area, navigating unfamiliar terrain, and performing close up tasks with this type of spot. If I am indoors, then I shine the light at the ceiling to soften the impact of the spot. I acknowledge that a flood is superior in navigating unfamiliar terrain (and now have headlights for just that purpose), but the ARC LSHF-P is the only light I have on my person at all times, and has the characteristics that I am used to and am comfortable with. My wife is the opposite. She is used to more urban settings and cannot function in the dark without a good flood light.
In the intended use scenario, my friend uses a low dome ARC LS, not because he is used to a flood type beam, but for his job (Emergency Medical Technician), he feels a flood works best. He noted that being able to see the most area as quickly as possible is a big advantage in assessing a situation.

Aloha

Thanks alot guys for all your help! I guess I have some reading to do! /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif Thanks again for all your suggestions!

Ryan

Ryan W,
One thing that I noticed with my LSHF-P that is unique - the beam produced is extremely even, flat, bright elumination. No hot spot. No fall off (spill). This is the most usful feature of the thing. It IS tight and bright at close range.
Mike /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/faint.gif

I have an LSH-S, have used it extensively, and recently added the LSHF-P. No LSH-P, so my remarks may not be of full value.

The best choice really depends on what use the light gets.

#1 use: Night running companion/guide. I run 3 or 4 times per week, usually late at night on account of schedule limitations. The LSs help me through unlit sections and spotlight aggressive dogs until I'm past. The LSH-S gives me a more "daylit" look, but I choose the LSHF-P since it stops the dogs better.

#2 use: At work to inspect construction, investigate field conditions, and work in unlighted building areas. The LSH-S is better for picking through an unlit building, but the LSHF-P is my choice because its excellent throw saves me ladder trips when investigating conditions above ceilings.

#3 use: General purpose after dark light. The LSHF-P casts a tighter overall beam than the LHS-S, yes, but it's surprising how often the beam it casts is exactly the right size, and the sharp cutoff is sometimes actually a benefit. Just last night I was helping my niece hunt for something in her car's trunk. No trunk light. From my distance the beam nicely matched the trunk mouth size, there was plenty of light for her to poke around, and the sharp cutoff kept the light from glaring in her eyes.

#4 use: Camping. Dead heat. The LSH-S wins for general camp strolling since it gives a more natural look to the woods ahead. The LSHF-P wins when spotting wildlife and distant rambunctious children.

I was at first sceptical of the LSHF-P's versatility, but it has really grown on me. The beam width is an excellent balance of spread and throw. Wide enough for general purpose use, even without strong spill light. Narrow enough to throw further than the NX05.

But...all of this is splitting hairs. Either of the lights work very well for any of my uses. I should mention that I do not use either LS for long duration close tasks, such as night reading. I use an Arc AAA or AA for that.

I would ge the tighter focus of the Fraen optics. If you need a wider beam for close work, use a difuser. you can make one from an old film can, or other translucent plastic container.

Since this is your first Arc LS I would go with the LSH-P because you get more flood light, unless you need to see 25+ feet.