Cree Bulbs

[Byron]

What is the difference between the the Cree Q5 and R2 emitter? Is one better than the other for flashlight purposes?

R2 is more efficient than Q5, but not by a huge margin. It's just the next generation. They are lettered and numbered:

http://www.cree.com/products/xlamp7090_xre.asp
http://www.cree.com/products/pdf/XLamp7090XR-E_B&L.pdf

P2 is what most of the first Cree based flashlights used years ago. Then came P3, P4, Q2, Q3, Q4, Q5, R2, etc.

R2 is just one level of efficiency above Q5 and as you can see in the PDF above, one level doesn't make a ton of difference. In fact, a 'good' Q5 can be just as bright as a 'below average' R2. Emitters vary within a tolerance so you could own two different "identical" Q5 lights that show some difference in brightness and color temperature.

So if you are buying new and the price between a Q5 and R2 isn't much, opt for the R2. But if the price is a large spike, or if you already have a Q5, no use in spending just for the R2.

I just picked up a Surefire E2DL Defender. It is bright as hell imo, but are there any upgrade kits available for it?

Your E2DL utilizes SureFire's TIR optic with a Cree emitter. Rest assured, you have an amazing light there and I don't think you should mess with it. You could potentially screw a different SF LED head onto it (I don't track their products enough to be able to know for sure what is compatible) but I am not aware of any kind of drop-in solution. I would just leave it as is.

Any input as to how Wolf Eyes compares to Malkoff?

I have read good things about their units, but never personally used one.



Once the sun sets here in a few hours, I'll put together some comparative beamshots like I promised the other day.

[DBR]

Byron: Thanks for the info

[ProMed]

Your E2DL utilizes SureFire's TIR optic with a Cree emitter. Rest assured, you have an amazing light there and I don't think you should mess with it. You could potentially screw a different SF LED head onto it (I don't track their products enough to be able to know for sure what is compatible) but I am not aware of any kind of drop-in solution. I would just leave it as is.

Thanks for the advice!

[Byron]

Each set of photos was taken @ ISO 200, F/1.8, focal length 50mm

Shutter speeds on each grid from left to right are:

1/60 -- 1/125 -- 1/250 -- 1/500 -- 1/1000

Lights from top to bottom in each grid are:
Stock G2 (SureFire P60 incan assembly)
Malkoff M60 Low module
Infrared LED P60 drop-in (don't know the brand)

The first set of grids were taken with a stock Nikon D90 which obviously captures color images in the visible spectrum. White balance was locked to "daylight" for consistency across exposures. This is a pretty standard WB setting to use amongst flashlight nerds. It tends to make incans look a bit warmer than the naked eye sees them, and LEDs a bit cooler. In any regard, the eye is much more adaptive than a camera: your brain is very good about knowing colors under mixed lighting. A camera is much 'dumber'



Note that the stock D90 didn't pick up the IR flashlight at all. While the Malkoff and the P60 don't look worlds apart in brightness, there is a difference. It becomes slightly more apparent when the image is desaturated so you aren't focusing on the color differences as much:



The second set of grids were taken with a D50 which has been converted to capture infrared images. Its internal filter was replaced with a custom one so that only infrared light passes to the camera's sensor.



Note that now the Malkoff has pretty much become invisible. There is a slight hint of light at the slowest shutter speed but you can barely see it at all, and the IR filter in this camera isn't even that "aggressive": it's right at the border of the invisible/visible spectrum.

Same IR photo desaturated:



Note that the incan still looks almost as bright to the IR camera as it did to the standard camera. As far as I am concerned, that is wasted energy. My eye can't see it, so why do I care about it?

The bottom row is the IR flashlight, which is invisible to the naked eye. If you stare directly into it (don't), you will see a faint red, but that is it. I am sure you are wondering why it shows blue in the image. The infrared camera has to use a custom white balance setting. Bright IR sources blow out to blue in it. There's no "real" white-balance setting for infrared since you're asking the camera to turn invisible colors into visible ones.


You may be thinking, "Well, Byron, the Malkoff doesn't look THAT much brighter." Yes, the difference isn't mind-blowing, but there are a couple things to note:

- This is the "low" power Malkoff - there are much brighter Cree modules out there. If anyone really wants, I can dig through my pile to try to find something more scorching.

- The P60 incan was never used before these tests and had a fresh pair of batteries. Take a look at the runtime graph on this site for the G2 and note that the p60 is down to 75% brightness within 5 minutes of burn time on the batteries. It holds there for a little bit, then declines steadily. This is pretty standard for incans. On the other hand, modern LEDs are well regulated, with a much flatter discharge curve.
This means that "what you see is what you get" in terms of LED brightness. If I had run that G2 for a couple of minutes and then done this test, the difference would be much more dramatic.

- Even if you believe that the difference in brightness is no big deal, the run-time on the SureFire is rated at 1 hour, while the Malkoff is 4.5


If you guys want any other clarifying images, please let me know, but I hope this is at least slightly helpful. There's always a brightness/runtime trade-off. I chose this Malkoff unit because it offers me very good brightness, an amazing runtime, and can safely be used for extended periods in an all-plastic light.

When I get some more time, I'll show you guys some other (smaller) form factors that are possible with Cree emitters. Frankly, I find that to be just as exciting as the performance that they offer.

[Byron]

Here's what I was talking about in terms of fun form factors that were previously unattainable before Cree (at least with this much performance). This is a review for a headlamp that I wrote on another site back in the end of 2007 when I had owned the light a few months. It may be slightly dated (references to cost may have changed) but I am more trying to show why I think the Cree revolution has been so exciting.

I originally got this Zebra light as a 'niche' light that I thought I would only occasionally use. Since the first one though, I have purchased a couple more because I use them constantly. Having even-spread hands free light is great when I'm working on something, reading, or doing similar activities. I love these little guys and have been running them for almost two years now (as long as they've been on the market)

Anyway, I am sharing this more as a peek at form factor possibilities than the light itself: hopefully you find it somewhat interesting.

---------------------------------------------------------------------


The Zebralight H50 is a hands-free light, primarily designed to be a headlamp. It runs off of a single AA battery of any type (Alkaline, NiMH, Lithium, Li-ion) although functionality is somewhat limited when using Li-ion (brightness modes are altered, as detailed on official site). Reverse polarity protection is included, and the circuitry also prevents over-discharge of NiMH's. The H50 utilizes a Cree LED emitter in either P4 or Q5 bin, and offers the user three brightness settings. It is a tiny light that is practically weightless and serves as a great tasklight given its beam profile of pure flood.

H50 as compared in size to a standard AA NiMH.

Zebralight is a new company, the H50 being its first offering to the market. This light was designed with some input from the CPF community and has been very well received. The two things that immediately separate it from the majority of headlamps on the market are its Cree emitter, offering amazing runtimes on a single AA, and its unfocused beam. The emitter in the H50 sits behind a small Lexan lens which smoothes out some of the artifacts inherent in the raw beam profile and protects the emitter, but still allows the light to spill out at an amazing spread of 120 degrees. Some users have complained that this is actually too much flood, but I find it to be fantastic for any close range tasks, whether I am reading, working with my hands, or navigating at a walking pace. The flood does have a shorter range, of course, and so some users who anticipated using it as a trail running light were disappointed in the inability to see obstacles at further distances.

Beam profile of a standard keychain squeeze light as compared to H50 on low, med, and hi.

This is not to say that the H50 can only be used at arm's length: it will easily illuminate a campsite. Working with a hands-free light that evenly illuminates a wide area is a true pleasure, and a change of pace from most lights. While I generally like a tight hotspot surrounded by a dimmer flood on my lights, such a profile is a bit annoying for close use where the hotspot serves to blow out your night vision adaptation and then make the areas in the flood harder to see. Not only is the H50 profile easier on the eyes at close range, but this light goes quite low in brightness, allowing you to perform tasks while keeping your eyes dark adapted. Manufacturer's testing with a Sanyo 2700 NiMH shows the following lumens/runtime results:

P4
Low = 2 lumens for 3.5 Days
Med = 10 lumens for 19 Hours
Hi = 50 lumens for 2h 20m

Q5
Low = 2.6 lumens for 3.5 Days
Med = 13 lumens for 19 Hours
Hi = 66 lumens for 2h 20m

Users have reported real world runtimes on Sanyo Eneloops of between 1hr 30m and 1hr 40m, suggesting that the manufacturer's advertised runtimes are accurate, if not conservative, given that Eneloops are only 2000 mAh rather than the 2700 mAh used in the above figures. The manufacturer also claims to be providing out-the-front lumen measurements rather than emitter lumens. From watching this product from the design to the sale phase, I get the impression of honesty and transparency from Zebralight.

Included accessories

With the light comes a handful of accessories. For standard headlamp wear is an adjustable elastic headband with a glow-in-the-dark silicone bracket on the front. The H50 slides in and out of this bracket so that the light is not permanently affixed as a headlamp, and can rotate up and down within it, allowing the user to aim the light. Two extra GITD brackets are included, one on a neck lanyard, and one "spare" which can replace either of the brackets or instead be mounted on your gear with webbing or cord. Also included is a glare shield, which was designed to trim the beam profile slightly for those who wear glasses, two spare o-rings for the double sealed tailcap, and a small black silicone bracket which holds a wire clip, allowing the H50 to also easily clip just about anywhere like a pocket or belt. All the accessories are well executed, allowing many hands-free carry options even if the user does not want to use the H50 as a headlamp.

The H50 is extremely light: advertised combined weight for the H50, alkaline battery, silicone bracket, and elastic headband is 58 grams (2.05 ounces). I unfortunately do not have a scale small enough to give all the weights, but given that an alkaline is around 24.4 gm (per http://data.energizer.com/) that would suggest the H50, bracket, and headband weigh in at only 33.6 gm combined. Also from Energizer's data, I see that a AA 2500 NiMH is around 30 gm and a AA lithium is 14.5 gm. My choice to load it with a NiMH means I have the heaviest possible configuration, but it is still only around 63.6 gm (2.24 oz). This light weight, combined with the comfort of the elastic headband and soft silicone bracket prevents any discomfort when worn on the head. The small form factor and light weight make this one of the lightest headlamps on the market that uses a "standard" battery, but it is of course beaten by coin cell lights such as the Petzl e+Lite.

The GITD brackets take a glow very easily and retain it for a long time, easily out-doing consumer glow products like those stick-on-the-wall stars, for example. The silicone brackets and pocket clip are soft, but feel durable. I have owned the H50 for almost two months and have so far seen no reason to worry about their durability. I get most use out of the clip which can be slid on the light in an emitter-up or emitter-down configuration, and allows the light to rotate.

Various methods of clip carry.


Threads and double o-ring seal

The H50 is 6061 aluminum with a HAIII coating. Its one point of entry, the tailcap, which acts as the switch and the feed point for a battery, is sealed with two o-rings, making the H50 waterproof. The threads came impressively smooth and clean with no sloppiness. To switch the light on, simply tighten the tailcap with a twist, which will start it in low mode. Switching modes is accomplished with another off-on twist and once the user hits high mode, another cycle takes it back to low. Leaving the light off for 5.6 seconds allows it to also reset so that it will come on in low again.

The UI is very easy and having a task light that comes on at such a low level is really great. This low level is perfect when your vision is night adapted and I find that I can use it for reading even why my eyes are adapted to indoor light levels (although I am young enough to still have good vision). The 66 lumens that pump out of this single AA are impressive and really make any task easy to see, but it's not blinding as if you were using a traditional flashlight of similar overall brightness. Again, I can't say enough good things about this beam profile when carrying out everyday tasks.

The wide beam profile does come at the cost of more easily shining it in people's faces. This can be avoided by rotating the light in its bracket (especially when utilizing the glare shield) or simply using it on your belt instead of your head. Even though the diffuse light pattern is easier to flash someone with, it's not as offensive as a focused beam.

While I would say that the beam pattern of this light makes it somewhat of a niche product, I actually find it to meet most of my personal lighting needs better than my traditional flashlights. Zebralight will soon offer more models in different battery configurations. Their next model will also have a lens that is slightly more recessed and feature a beam profile that is more narrow while still lacking any hotspot.

I know that in recent threads, members here have discussed keeping a headlamp in med/blowout kits for hands-free lighting. It is my opinion that this light is perfect for such a kit due to its small size, light weight, use of common batteries, long runtimes, and waterproof ruggedness. While I purchased the Q5 version as I love to have the "best," I plan to order at least one of the cheaper P4 versions to permanently live in a car kit. The difference in brightness will not be that noticeable (especially at the low and medium settings which will see most use) but the cost savings will be appreciated ($40 for the P4, $50 for the Q5).

More pictures are available at the manufacturer's site: http://www.zebralight.com
These lights are manufactured in China but can be purchased through domestic retailer http://www.4sevens.com

As always, I have no affiliation with this product, and I paid full retail value for it. I am extremely pleased with it and feel it was money well spent. I waited two months to write anything as I wanted to make sure I wasn't still in the "honeymoon" phase of a new toy.

And just a few other pictures:

Glare shield


GITD brackets.

Since traditional beamshots aren't that useful for a pure floodlight, here are some comparison shots of "real world" illumination. In the first frame, I am using a Fenix L1P held next to my head. In the other frames, I am using the H50 at its three brightness levels.

All shots used the same settings:
18mm @ ISO 200, daylight WB, f/3.5, shutter 1 second

[RD62]

Talking about using thr Malkoff drop-in in a Surefire G2...

I have a G2L which came with a metal bezel, I assume to help offset the thermal issues you spoke of when using the LED in a polymer light. I also have a G2 with P61 and a shock bezel which is also metal.

If I were to put a Malkoff in the G2 with shock bezel, would it's metal constrction help offset the thermal issues as well, and even though the shock isolation is not neccessary for the LED, would this method of use be prefered over the factory plastic bezel?


Thanks!

-RD62

[Byron]

A metal bezel will indeed conduct heat away from the LED better. As you observe, this is why SF uses one on their G2L. Interestingly, their G2L also offers thermal regulation so as the circuitry decides that the LED is getting too warm, it will decrease brightness on you. Some like this feature, some do not (personal preference).

As for the shock isolated bezel, I will have to dig mine out of the pile at home to see. If I recall correctly, even though it's a metal head, there is less of a 'solid' metal to metal contact between the lamp assembly and the shock iso bezel than a standard bezel. I could be making that up in my head though.

Even with a metal head though, I would still caution against the standard M60 Malkoff in a plastic bodied light. Even with the metal head, the heat still gets more trapped since it won't transfer to the plastic body well.

An all metal light pulls heat from the LED to the head, to the body of the light, and then into your hand. Believe it or not, your own hand (including your circulatory system) acts as a heatsink / cooling system for a hand held light. To see what I mean you can turn on two identical lights for a period of time. Hold one and leave the other sitting on a table. In my experience, the one sitting will be significantly warmer because it doesn't have the possibility to transfer heat to your hand and through your circulatory system.

Of course, with all that said, I do have one G2 that runs the Malkoff M60 (rather than the M60L). I just don't use it for extended periods of time. Malkoff warns that the M60 shouldn't be used in an all-plastic light for more than 15 minutes. With a metal head on a plastic body, you could probably get a few more minutes, but I wouldn't push it far past that. If you are only using bursts of light for brief periods, then that's no problem. If you want something to really walk around with for extended periods, I'd suggest the M60L which is still very bright and has no disclaimer on extended use in plastic lights.

[sonrider657]

What about the new Elzetta light that uses Malkoff technology?

[Byron]

What about the new Elzetta light that uses Malkoff technology?

I don't personally see the appeal: it's just a more expensive host. It still just uses a standard M60 assembly which you could put into any other suitable host. Paying that much more for an arguably beefier host isn't really a plus in my book.

I know some guys like larger tank-like lights but I do not. I have never personally destroyed or done enough damage to something like a 6P where I said to myself, "I really wish someone would come out with a version of this with more material"

If you don't already have a host to put an M60 in, why not save more than $50 over the Elzetta and get one of these directly from Malkoff? http://www.malkoffdevices.com/shop/b...ight-p-65.html
For a little extra (still less total than the Elzetta) you can even get the hi-low switch with it so that you can loosen or tighten the bezel for low and high modes.

I guess it's not as 'sexy' as the Elzetta, but that's never been a big deal for me.

[DRich]

I have Malkoff M60's in several of my 6P/G2/M2 lights. They are incredible.

Are there similar upgrades for the 9v Surefires? I'd love to boost the output of my 9P.

Heck, I'd love to boost the output of my M6!