Nitecore TM06S, Olight Marauder or?

Among the higher power LED lights currently available (not just TM06S and Marauder), what do you have, and why do you like it or not?

I recently picked up the Nitecore TM06S, and chose it over the Olight Marauder mainly because of price. I realize max light output is quite different between the models, but the TM06S is already quite bright.

I like the TM06S just fine, and for all the "soda can" references, found the light to be somewhat smaller than I expected, and fits well in hand. I am NOT a fan of the one-button switching though. Too easy to inadvertently switch between modes, especially turning the beacon on and off...

I have MK34 and X7.
Monday a TM06 should arrive.
I will let you know my thoughts

Quote: "Among the higher power LED lights currently available (not just TM06S and Marauder), what do you have, and why do you like it or not?"

Stock: Original Niwalker MM15. True classic. Nice creamy white MTG2, but under powered by current standards.

Vinh54 mod:

Acebeam: X65Vn. This light has the beam profile that I have been looking for. No other light has the power/lumens, throw, beam width, beam profile that this light has. If you have a collection of soda can lights that are very nice, but not great throw, then look to the X65. If you have throwers that have very small beam width, look to the X65. If you want lots of power, well-tempered beam profile, and lots of throw, then you will need very large head diameter. Multiple XHP35 emitters in not too small reflector wells is the magic formula to get the killer beam performance and beam profile that the X65 has.

Fenix: TK75vnX2Q70 dome on. This light is smaller that the X65, so less beam performance, yet larger than soda can light, so better performance than the soda can lights.

Thrunite: TN36UTvn. Soda can light that is under amped by the factory, and very much amped up by Vinh54. Smaller than the the TK75vnX2Q70, but less performance than the TK75vnQ70, too.

Noctigon: Meteor M43vn XP-L pdtc. This light has same head diameter as other soda can lights, but shorter. A true classic.

Niwalker: MM15MBvnSpec1. Upgrade and mod of the MM15, the original soda can light. A true classic.

All the above listed lights I have and use.

Below, lights that I do not have yet:

TM06: Nice size, but very under powered at only 4,000 lumens. Someone please alert me when this or similar size light can put forth 7,000 lumens.

X7: Underamped by the factory, much amped up by Vinh54. I have not purchased this yet, because I already have the TK75vnX2Q70 that has one more emitter and larger, deeper reflector wells. I will have to get the Vn version of the X7, so I can cross it off of my list of lights that I want, but have not gotten yet. This item is a little bit larger and a little bit heavier than most of the other soda can lights.

Manker MK43: Factory and Vinh lumens specs appear to be similar. This can be thought as a more compact M43. But, much lower lumen specs, when compared across Vinh mod for both. 11,000 lumens for the M43vn, 7,400 lumens for the M34vn.


Have fun filling in the high points of your power/size continuum!

I have a Nitecore TM26 and an Olight X7 Marauder. The display of the TM26 eliminates runtime anxiety and confirms the mode the light is in when I am in doubt, without having to cycle through modes. Mine is a relatively old one (3800 lumens) with a useful throw/flood balance but the newer versions (TM28) offer purposive options, as well as more lumens. What I dislike is the UI. After so many years, I still can fail in half pressing or full pressing as I intend. Even when I happen to synchronize the pressure and the duration of my presses, the UI is not intuitive, anyway. For instance, I cannot use it as a bedside lamp because I may quite easily fail in lighting it up at the lowest mode when I wake from sleep in the middle of the night.

For me, the Olight X7 is much better in terms of UI. It is also way more powerful. It is too floody but with so many lumens, it reaches a reasonable range within which almost nothing remains darker than it was in daytime. I like the X7 very much but I would further like it, if flat top batteries would work in it.

Were you looking for throw, flood or a mixed balance?

wjv said:

Were you looking for throw, flood or a mixed balance?

Click to expand...

IMO, over a certain amount of lumens, pure flood does not make the same sense as it does with reasonably powered lights. I feel like there is a threshold for something like "light saturation" at close distance. More power enlightens a larger area but close proximity becomes so bright that I feel like some lumens are almost wasted.

My Preon P0 is very useful with 25 lumens. My Atom AL is more useful with 110 lumens but I feel like the X7 is overkill at 9K lumens. What is overkill is not 9K lumens. It is the way the X7 makes use of them. I use my X7 at lower outputs for close distance because more than that requires sunglasses. I use higher outputs for relatively longer distance. If it was throwing a bit more, it would not lose its close distance performance because if I need more lumens at close range, I could increase the output that I had reduced in the first place.

I am not talking about a mega thrower, or even a thrower. What I mean is that mega lumens would be more efficiently used at a longer range because there is enough power to enlighten a very large area at a further distance without compromising short range performance.

Bucur said:

IMO, over a certain amount of lumens, pure flood does not make the same sense as it does with reasonably powered lights. I feel like there is a threshold for something like "light saturation" at close distance. More power enlightens a larger area but close proximity becomes so bright that I feel like some lumens are almost wasted.

My Preon P0 is very useful with 25 lumens. My Atom AL is more useful with 110 lumens but I feel like the X7 is overkill at 9K lumens. What is overkill is not 9K lumens. It is the way the X7 makes use of them. I use my X7 at lower outputs for close distance because more than that requires sunglasses. I use higher outputs for relatively longer distance. If it was throwing a bit more, it would not lose its close distance performance because if I need more lumens at close range, I could increase the output that I had reduced in the first place.

I am not talking about a mega thrower, or even a thrower. What I mean is that mega lumens would be more efficiently used at a longer range because there is enough power to enlighten a very large area at a further distance without compromising short range performance.

Click to expand...

Here's a pic that sort of backs up that comment. While I love my X7, the most use is made of the three normal outputs and its moonlight mode. The two turbo's are great for that ' WOW ' factor, but do limit your distance vision. While our eyes see a picture differently to how they see the output of a bright floodlight at night, the pic serves to illustrate how a bright flooder can decrease your distance vision when your close vision is bleached out.



Sorry, i meant to say, the pic is a bit bleached out. In the event of an excessively bright foreground light, our pupils close down to compensate. In turn, this makes the smaller amount of light entering our eyes from a distance, even less effective. Doesnt mean to say that flooders are not good lights, they have a lot of good points and uses, as do throwers. I guess its like ' use the right tool for the task at hand '.

Thank you Harro. Your pic does, in fact, illustrate what I mean. Number "49" on the pedestrian walk is way too bright. If the excessive lumens around #49 were saved and added to where the gate is, the X7 would be throwier but not a thrower.

A dedicated thrower could compromise how #49 is lit due to focusing its power into a narrow beam but if the X7 was a bit throwier than it now is, there would be more than enough spill to brightly enlighten #49, anyway.

Bucur said:

Thank you Harro. Your pic does, in fact, illustrate what I mean. Number "49" on the pedestrian walk is way too bright. If the excessive lumens around #49 were saved and added to where the gate is, the X7 would be throwier but not a thrower.

A dedicated thrower could compromise how #49 is lit due to focusing its power into a narrow beam but if the X7 was a bit throwier than it now is, there would be more than enough spill to brightly enlighten #49, anyway.

Click to expand...

Very interesting comment. If only there was a way to distribute the light so that every point along the cone of the beam is nearly identically bright. Wonder what that would look like? Perhaps like daytime, but looking through a circular opening. Would that be a perfect beam?

scs said:

Very interesting comment. If only there was a way to distribute the light so that every point along the cone of the beam is nearly identically bright. Wonder what that would look like? Perhaps like daytime, but looking through a circular opening. Would that be a perfect beam?

Click to expand...

A perfect beam like you describe would be nice but IMO, the X7 could do better than it now does despite the fact that such a perfect beam does not exist. A bit more throw would enable the X7 to make better use of its mega lumens. In that case, the #49 on the above pic would be a bit dimmer and the gate would be a bit brighter.

X7 has too much light up front?

X7 has not enough light further out? The X7 is great for up front power. To get more light further out, go to Acebeam X65. The X65 has the beam pattern that you are looking for.

The Acebeam X65 is not exactly what I am talking about but yes, the difference between the X65 and the conventional mega throwers (that have similar, even better throw with much less lumens) is an example on the other end of the spectrum. Once a flashlight has 12K lumens, it can play both games simultaneously. The X65 is biased towards throw but thanks to sheer power, its beam is quite large. It is not a soda can size light, though. The OP's question is about soda can size lights.