Inova qc on X0 might be below par

I just sent a new X0-titanium back to a CPF sponsor for replacement or refund. Inova's quality control might not be what we expect, at least on this initial offering. There was a really obvious fisheye marking on the inside of the lens, with some dust apparent inside (you can't open the thing, remember!), and the body and switch had fine black residue or dirt inside the clamshell packaging. Kind of like someone read the newspaper and then handled the light before inserting it. Maybe they had just drylubed their packaging equipment. Damn it!

I saw the same thing on the Inova X1 I just received from BrightGuy. There was a tiny circular hole on the inside of the lens. The hole seemed to be perfectly centered so I assumed it was supposed to be there. I'm not sure if this is the same "fisheye" that you refer to. I also saw lots of dust on the inside of the lens. I didn't notice any dirt on the light or in the packaging though.

I'd be interested in hearing what you find out about this.

On the X0, the defect was close to the edge. It looks like the fisheye you get when trying to put paint over a silicone spot -- I think it was a problem with the antireflective coating being applied over a less-than-pristine glass lens. You sometimes see this on eyeglass lenses.

But I just looked at my wife's X1. No hole and no markings on that lens!

I just closely examined the lens of my X1 in response to this thread, and found no fisheyes or dust.
I bought mine late last year from Meridian Tactical, rather than having it sent to me by the manufacturer, so I know I did not receive a special, hand-picked unit to evaluate.

My evaluation of the X1 is right here if anybody is interested.

Just got an Inova XO. . .No problems noted either with the lens or at the other end with the switch. Beam is nice and white (by my eyes anyway, with some rings and a nice hot spot. I think the rings might be unavoidable when using a lens like the XO does. . .the lens appears sort of "beveled" like the Fresnel lenses used in lighthouses. At any rate, the rings are not a factor as they are almost unnoticeable to me. The unit is quite light, but still feels solid. Oh, by the way, the holster (or pouch) is kind of crappy. . .nice cordura nylon, but too "floppy", and so tight it's hard to get the light in and out. Since most CPFers usually use aftermarket holsters, I don't think this is a dealbreaker either.

Overall, I'm quite happy with the XO.

I just got sample #2, from Pocketlights.com.

The lens has no obvious defects, but the inside of the antireflective lens wasn't cleaned up to be pristine -- a lenspen would do the job, if I could get in there. And there's dust or some bigger particles between the outer lens and the inner optic. The stainless steel threaded cap at the end of the light can be removed by hand, but there's no obvious way to get the lens out and clean things up. It looks like it's just inserted in the end, but something is holding it in so it won't fall out when I tap the body of the light or put a piece of tape on it and pull (there's no obvious physical retaining mechanism, and I don't have a small suction cup).

I just sent Inova an e-mail note asking whether I should send it in to them. If they seal the lens to the optic holder, they should at least clean it out first. I'm not talking about a spec or two -- this stuff is bigger and more plentiful.

Damn it!

Guess I was lucky. Mine is spotless. The only thing I am having issues with is my own finger prints. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/icon3.gif

Just ordered an X0 from Meridian Tactical (where else /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif ). Supposed to be here this week. I'll report any problems, but all my Inova lights thus far have been stellar. I'm a big fan of Inova. There's NOTHING in the flashlight world more durable.

I finally picked up an XO at a local Discovery store. Mine has some dust specks behind the mineral glass, but it does not affect the beam at all. I'm not sure of the anodizing though. Emissive Energy's site says it's type III HA, but right out of the box, my sample (in black) had a few tiny spots where the finish had either rubbed off or was not applied very well and you can see the bare aluminum. Had it been the titanium/grey finished model, I wouldn't have even noticed. A minor cosmetic issue to be sure, and has no bearing in the use of the light. This light is built like a tank and is quite a handful, yet not at all cumbersome. It's size makes the X5 seem tiny, but it's not any bigger than a Mini-Mag. Despite minor cosmetic blemishes on my sample, I'm definately keeping it.

I just got off the phone with Inova. Their immediate reply: "We don't work in a dust-free environment." They told me I could send it in to them for replacement, but they won't promise that the next one will be dust-free. I'm just going to send it back for a refund. And I won't be ordering a T3, either.

Perhaps I'm picky about this, but I don't expect this level of particles and dust in the assembled light, where I can't clean it up! I'm not talking about a few dust motes, but a half-dozen or more really obvious white dots much larger than dust, on the black walls of the sealed unit. And the inside of the AR coating could use cleaning, too. Not quite a fingerprint smudge, but damned close.

Maybe the lights I got were done on a bad day, but I've never seen anything like this that's quite so obvious.

I just talked to an Inova retailer yesterday about the QC problem with the X1 lens. He said their entire stock had dust particles on the inside of the lens. I also talked to an Inova CS representative about the X0 & X1 lens problems and she insisted that since the lenses were different, the two models couldn't have the same problem (????). I'm done with Inova until they get their QC problems worked out.

Most "users" who will buy the light aren't as picky as alot of flashaholics are. Since the tiny dust particles behind the lens don't affect the beam, I doubt Emissive Energy will do anything about it. I guess it's like farkle in the Arc LS.

One must also consider the price point at which Inova products are sold. I own two X1's (one white & one green) and they both have visible dust particles behind the lens. I don't like the fact that it's there but it doesn't affect the beam quality and overall, they are very well put-together lights. Despite the dust inclusion and the much maligned "spot" beam, I am truly impressed that Inova can achieve such high build quality in a light that can be had for a mere US$15. I don't own an X0, but at about $40-$50, it seems like a tremendous buy for a 1 watt LS with impressive "throw". Manufacturing the Inovas in a clean room environment would certainly drive up the cost and it is unreasonable to expect Emmisive to do so when there is no real functional benefit to be had.

In short, if you want perfection, you'll have to part with a couple of C-Notes and buy an ARC or Surfire. If you want a solid, functional light at a reasonable price, it's tough to go wrong with Inova. YMMV

The light did not have to be assembled in a "clean room." Just a room that was clean! It wouldn't take too much for them to use compressed air or CO2 to remove the obvious white particles from the black area between the plastic optic and the glass lens cover. These are more than a few dust motes, folks. I am picky, but I wouldn't put up with this kind of debris under a watch crystal, inside a camera lens, inside a phone display, or in binoculars.

I second what JML said. It is not excuseable. You don't prepare food in a clean room do you? But yet you still need to ensure that the food is clean.

[ QUOTE ]
pjandyho said:
You don't prepare food in a clean room do you? But yet you still need to ensure that the food is clean.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's not a valid comparison. Anyone who has ever tinkered with optical equipment knows that lenses have a magical ability to attract dust and lint particles. I distinctly remember one instance where I disassembled a hand-held monocular to remove a range-finding reticle. When I was done, no amount of blowing or rubbing with lens tissue was effective in removing all of the dust that had entered the body of the scope. In the end, I was not pleased with the result and I was left wishing that I had not messed with it at all.

That is precisely why products like binoculars and camera lenses are assembled in "clean room" environments. A quick blast of compressed air prior to final assembly might alleviate the problem but it won't eliminate it altogether.

A screw-off face cap might have been the solution. That would probably increase the cost slightly but would be well worth it IMO.

The stainless steel face cap screws off, but the lens cover under it isn't removable (at least I wasn't going to try and get it out -- it almost seems to be press fit in place).

The day after I returned the light to the dealer for a refund, I got a phone call from "Matt," someone at Inova higher up the customer service chain, based on my e-mail to customer service after my first phone call. We were unable to connect before the holiday (we played telephone tag), but I left a long detailed message about what was wrong with the two samples I received, that I didn't expect to find so much dust and other white debris inside the lens, that the AR coating on both lenses was dirty on the inside, and that I didn't like the "too bad" attitude of the first two customer service reps. I also mentioned CPF, and that I'm not alone in finding stuff inside the lens to be a problem.

Perhaps they'll listen.

I received my Inova X0 recently from Meridian Tactical and, after reading this thread, I inspected the lens assembly very closely. Fortunately, I don't see any dust, smudges, fisheye marks or any other imperfection inside the LA. In addition, the body is flawless in every respect. I guess I got lucky, but I have not had problems with any of my Inova lights. JML, you must have gotten two bad apples. Third time's the charm?? Good luck to you. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif