New 1000 Lumen Energizer Lantern spotted at Target

Lynx_Arc

Flashaholic
Joined
Oct 1, 2004
Messages
11,212
Location
Tulsa,OK
I stumbled into Target and had a look at their flashlight section and spotted the usual stuff but they had a larger greenish lantern on the bottom shelf that was about $40. It was an Energizer 1000 Lumen lantern. The lantern was oblong shaped and didn't take any batteries (built in rechargeable) It looked to have 11 small LEDs in a row 5/1/5 (I think SMD) with the center LED an amber one. The lowest mode was a single Amber LED. It didn't look like 1000 lumens but could be the batteries were discharged a lot looked more like 300-400 lumens. They also had a flashlight that claimed 700 lumens taking 2xCR123s (included) and various plastic lights using SMD chip (square) LEDs including 2AA, 1AA, and 1D versions and some yellow 6v style lanterns that can take 2/4 D cells that IMO were pathetic as they also used SMD LEDs had a poor beam to them at 80 lumens that flickered also (not good contact).
 

Poppy

Flashaholic
Joined
Dec 20, 2012
Messages
8,359
Location
Northern New Jersey
I am only slightly interested in the 1000 lumen rechargeable lantern. Primarily because it is designed to be rechargeable, and almost certainly LiIon. Unfortunately advertisements from different sites conflict, and there is no mention of the capacity of the battery.
Amazon states that it has an auto-on feature in the event of a power failure, but Energizer makes no mention of that feature. I assume that Amazon's ad is incorrect.
Amazon states that it has a 4 hour run-time, and Energizer states 5 hours on the box.
I think both state that it has "Energy saving technology" to give longer run-times. My experience with the energizer Light Fusion folding lanterns, tells me that the lantern will gradually electronically, step down in brightness. I think it is a timed step down, not related to battery voltage. On one hand this is clever, on the other hand, annoying.

I noticed this scheme with the Rayovac 2AA indestructible flashlight too, so Energizer is not the only manufacturer to do this. IIRC the first step down is not so noticeable, but the second one is a bit disheartening, because if you do not see it occur, and are not aware of it, you think that your battery is depleting too rapidly, and you just make do with less light than what you started with. If however you turn the light off, and then back on, it re-starts the clock and the light comes on at full power, or at least whatever the batteries can deliver.

My guess is the LiIon cell is 2600-3000 ma, and at 1000 lumens will run for about an hour at high. That's just a guess. Anyone have any measurements?

Also, IMO I think that 1000 lumens from a lantern create too much glare, and I would prefer a couple of lanterns with no more than 300 lumens. Just my opinion.
 
Last edited:

Lynx_Arc

Flashaholic
Joined
Oct 1, 2004
Messages
11,212
Location
Tulsa,OK
Lots of good questions and I have no answers. The lantern design may not be too bad on glare as the LED chips are on the bottom facing up into the oblong diffused shell. With ANSI these days all it has to do it hit 1000 lumens for 5 minutes before slowly falling to nothing over 5 hours or step down after that time to medium/low mode. What turns me off about it is the weird shape and cost of the lantern and I suspect using LED chips that the efficiency is nothing to brag about plus..... an amber super low mode? What a wasted effort. There is enough room in the lantern for 2x18650 I figure.. could be 4000-5000mah in it for the price it they can still make a big profit off of it.
1000 lumens in a lantern is fine if there is a medium and low mode that both are very very well spaced to get great output/runtime.
I have 2 headlamps that have turbo modes and on occasion it is nice to have that burst but I tend to run on Low/Medium modes most of the time to conserve power.
 

Hooked on Fenix

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Dec 13, 2007
Messages
3,076
I'm done with energizer until they do away with their "battery saving" technology. I got their 400 lumen 2aa flashlight and it starts stepping down after 30 seconds. After 15 minutes, it's below 50% brightness. I went with l.e.d. lights for reliability. I don't just want a longer lasting bulb and batteries, but I want it to stay at the brightness I set it to for as long as I need it at that level. A 1000 lumen lantern is nice, but a 1000 lumen lantern that dims as soon as you walk away from it is worse than non regulated and is a waste of money.
 

Lynx_Arc

Flashaholic
Joined
Oct 1, 2004
Messages
11,212
Location
Tulsa,OK
Have you tried nimh? 400 lumens is a rather heavy load if you are using alkaleaks I'm not surprised it can't sustain it for long. That is why I went to 18650 lights to get decent runtime at higher outputs. If you want bright and long runtimes you just about have to go with lithium ion and 18650 or larger power source and higher quality LEDs that are more efficient.
 

Hooked on Fenix

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Dec 13, 2007
Messages
3,076
I was using Eneloop NiMH batteries. That's why I'm so pissed off about these lights. They aren't just unregulated, they're worse. They have time based dimming that starts as early as 30 seconds. This isn't to make the light more useful or for heat sinking, but to game the ANSI specs on brightness and battery life. This has nothing to do with using better batteries, and better batteries would not fix the problem of a light programmed to lose half it's output in 15 minutes. Energizer and Duracell are both doing this in their lights and as far as I'm concerned, it makes them practically worthless to me. A lithium ion powered light with this "feature" is just a bigger waste of money as it ruins all the advantages of those better batteries by making the light run like you're using cheap carbon zinc batteries.
 

Lynx_Arc

Flashaholic
Joined
Oct 1, 2004
Messages
11,212
Location
Tulsa,OK
There are some lights that have heat sensors that reduce output when they heat level goes up too much. One way I think that helps to detect that feature is to run them with extra heatsinking on them like in water or ice or something. Lots of high end lights now advertise turbo modes that only run for a few minutes before automatic stepdown too.
 

Hooked on Fenix

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Dec 13, 2007
Messages
3,076
There are some lights that have heat sensors that reduce output when they heat level goes up too much. One way I think that helps to detect that feature is to run them with extra heatsinking on them like in water or ice or something. Lots of high end lights now advertise turbo modes that only run for a few minutes before automatic stepdown too.

An easier way to tell if the dimming is heat based or time based is to put the light on a dimmer level and see if the light dims down at the same rate as on high when heat is no longer an issue. The 400 lumen 2aa energizer light, the older Energizer Light Fusion lanterns, and the 500 lumen Duracell headlights and 500 lumen Duracell polysteel flashlights at Costco all have aggressive time based dimming that is very annoying. I have personally tested all these lights and the dimming is not heat based or do to using batteries that can't handle a higher drain. It is very annoying to see more companies switching to this anti regulation technology so they can claim their light is brighter and lasts longer than their competitors by gaming the ANSI specs. As I understand it, they test brightness after 30 seconds and go to 10% brightness for runtime. It's easy to cheat the specs by dimming the light after 30 seconds and running the light around 30-40% brightness for most of it's runtime.
 

Poppy

Flashaholic
Joined
Dec 20, 2012
Messages
8,359
Location
Northern New Jersey
here's my review I submitted to amazon

From the energizer site:
*Light must be turned off while charging.
**Based on an average smartphone battery of 1810 mAh capacity.
†Light output measured from LED. Value is only applicable to the LED. Actual device light output may vary.
††Endpoint determined at 1% of initial value.

They don't list the capacity of the internal battery. I suspect that it is less than my cell phone which is a 3300 mAh battery, and at that it will NOT fully charge my smart phone.
Their statements "light's high lumen output in combination with a long runtime and power bank capabilities" are misleading. It should read, high lumen for a short run-time, certainly less than an hour. In other ads for this lantern I had seen "Extended run time circuitry" That makes me believe that they use the same, timed step down in output as they do in other lights and lanterns. Meaning that in about 15 minutes, they step down the brightness, again and again. Also as the battery depletes, the brightness continues to drop. The ANSI standard for measuring run-time is to 10% output of the initial output. Energizer has chosen to use their own standard of only 1% of initial output.
Amazon advertisement of this lantern states that it has Auto-On capabilities for when the power goes out. I am certain that is a mistake. Energizer doesn't advertise that feature, and that would be a great selling feature.
When this rechargeable lantern was brought to my attention, I immediately took a look at it. Reading the fine print, I decided NOT to buy it.
IMO one would be better served with a 3 D cell powered lantern with a max output of 300 lumens.

41As8KJvhSL._SY88.jpg

 
Last edited:

Lynx_Arc

Flashaholic
Joined
Oct 1, 2004
Messages
11,212
Location
Tulsa,OK
An easier way to tell if the dimming is heat based or time based is to put the light on a dimmer level and see if the light dims down at the same rate as on high when heat is no longer an issue. The 400 lumen 2aa energizer light, the older Energizer Light Fusion lanterns, and the 500 lumen Duracell headlights and 500 lumen Duracell polysteel flashlights at Costco all have aggressive time based dimming that is very annoying. I have personally tested all these lights and the dimming is not heat based or do to using batteries that can't handle a higher drain. It is very annoying to see more companies switching to this anti regulation technology so they can claim their light is brighter and lasts longer than their competitors by gaming the ANSI specs. As I understand it, they test brightness after 30 seconds and go to 10% brightness for runtime. It's easy to cheat the specs by dimming the light after 30 seconds and running the light around 30-40% brightness for most of it's runtime.
I typically take ANSI standards on lights with a grain of salt these days especially with turbo step down in lights we are back to square one in that we (again) have to rely on reviews from others to tell us the truth about lights including runtime graphs. What I would like to see is a lumen hours rating on lights instead of runtime to 10%.
 

Poppy

Flashaholic
Joined
Dec 20, 2012
Messages
8,359
Location
Northern New Jersey
I typically take ANSI standards on lights with a grain of salt these days especially with turbo step down in lights we are back to square one in that we (again) have to rely on reviews from others to tell us the truth about lights including runtime graphs. What I would like to see is a lumen hours rating on lights instead of runtime to 10%.
I agree. I would like to see output vs time graphs like the ones produced by Selfbuilt and SubWoofer in their reviews.
 

Lynx_Arc

Flashaholic
Joined
Oct 1, 2004
Messages
11,212
Location
Tulsa,OK
I agree. I would like to see output vs time graphs like the ones produced by Selfbuilt and SubWoofer in their reviews.

The problem is even if they were required to show runtime graphs they would fudge them too making the light seem better than it is. When I looked at the Energizer lantern I thought to myself this is more like a $25 lantern IMO but then plastic lanterns by Fenix and Nitecore aren't cheap either. One thing I'm curious about is what what batteries the lantern has in it.
 
Top