How much difference does a UCL make?

How much, if any, increase in light output is there after changing to UCL's? Or is it mainly for temperature and scratch resistance?

Thanks

Flashlightlens.com claims 11% over poly carb, and he's da man when it comes to this, I think.

It made a BIG difference! It was worth all 700 pennies!

The difference is most noticeable if you are replacing a stock plastic lens, especially if it's one of the cheaper grades of plastic.

It does make a noticeable difference. As has been pointed out, more when replacing a plastic lens.

You can actually "see" the effect. Take a plastic lens, a regular glass lens and a UCL and put them on a sheet of bright white inkjet paper under a bright light. It is the UCL that becomes almost invisible.

Mark

Well, I really like them and I offer them on the few mods I've sold and while 11 percent is 11 percent, the other side of the coin tells us that it is very difficult for our eyes to see the difference of 20%... All I know is, on a light that I really like, I can't quite imagine not having a UCL installed.

How prone to breakage are they if you drop the flashlight? Are they pretty tough when it comes to impacts?

Though it landed on branches and then dirt rather than concrete or anything like that, I dropped one of my modded Mags from a deerstand about 32 feet up (actually about 36 feet since it was out of a hanging backpack) and it didn't break the lens... didn't even scratch it!

I've probably gone through 15 to 18 UCLs and have never broken one. Never had one break in shipping either.

YES indeed it does make a BIG difference over the stock plastic ones! As already mentioned above, once you replace say the Mag-Lite stock lens, you can see it when you turn the Mag on. It expressed itself immediately even after dropping in the DB3W in my Mag 3D.

One of the UCLs did break on me when the neighbor's kid used my MiniMag and then dropped it onto the concrete garage floor! Oh well. . .

Enjoy! You'll See!

11% of intensity difference is ~ 4.5% brightness difference!
Noticable but only if you are testing the two light source side-by-side.

Regarding durability of the UCL, as long as you don't drop them on a hard surface (concrete/cement) you're pretty much OK.

My 17m old son dropped mine numerous time at 1-2ft on the carpet & hard wood floor and it's still OK.

Me on the other hand did not have that 100% luck. I dropped it three times (all on concrete or cement) from 3-4ft two out of three time they cracked.

IMHO, we're extremeist! If we didn't seek a better/bright/smaller light CPF might not be around.

I use UCL in most of my personal lights.

I've heard people complain that they couldn't see the difference. I can't tell the difference in the ones I've changed out. Supposedly you must have a much greater increase than 10 or 12% to be able to notice unless you're comparing side by side.

Having said all that, I love UCL and use them in all of my lights that I can. I'm perfectly happy to know that I'll get 10% more output and I'll be able to see better whether I may consciously notice or not.

I also like the stability of UCL lenses. Most of the soft, cheap poly-carbonate lenses that come with new lights start out poorly and begin to go downhill from day one. The UCLs are much harder to scratch and are much less apt to get cloudy from chemical exposure.

I haven't broken any yet but I have bought all of mine in lots of four from the Flashlightlens CPF Specials Page.

I think that Flashlightlens is a really great resource and we're lucky to have access to such cool stuff.

modamag said:

I use UCL in most of my personal lights.

Click to expand...

ditto

Sub_Umbra said:

I also like the stability of UCL lenses. Most of the soft, cheap poly-carbonate lenses that come with new lights start out poorly and begin to go downhill from day one. The UCLs are much harder to scratch and are much less apt to get cloudy from chemical exposure.

Click to expand...

This is exactly what I was thinking. A polycarbonate lens starts out with a ~10% disadvantage compared to UCL. That difference will get larger over time as the polycarbonate lens suffers from scratches and chemical degradation.

Great thread, I just put one in my PentagonLight L2-3W about 10 minutes ago and its really nice. I think they should be in all high-end lights...

The difference is actually noticable in comparison with many glass lenses as well; many have reported seeing an improvement over Surefire's Pyrex-based lenses as well as McGizmo's sapphire lenses (both made more for temperature or damage resistance than light transmission, admittedly.) They've even been reported to have sufficient temperature resistance for high-power hotwire mods like the famous Mag85 by a few individuals, though I haven't read enough to stand by that myself (nor have I tried it. Personally I'd go with a Borofloat there just for the extra shock and scratch resistance.)

IMO, whether or not you can notice a difference depends on your use of the light in question. If you're using it for close-up work and you already find the light to be sufficient for your task, chances are that you either won't notice or won't care. If you're trying to shoot farther, or the light is wanting for any improvement in luminescence, it just might make a nice difference.

For well-used lights, it's worth noting that a treatment with DeoxIT and ProGold will also reap a number of benefits regarding light output (possibly moreso than a lens upgrade, if the lens isn't pretty much destroyed.)

Also using it in the Mod MiniMags with the drop-in "pills"/"sammie". And once again—YES THERE IS a difference. Your eyes may tell differently with what you're using or none at all. Enjoy!