# High CRI 4000K LEDS better for cycling?



## jjziets (Apr 14, 2010)

My factory fitted xenon head lamps are 4300K lights and I noticed that all my cycle lights are much more white/blue. On Ebay there is a  Magicshine mj880 with 4000k LEDs

Browsing the Cree datasheet the BIN drop must be about T4 or T5 which means a light drop of about 14%-7% the photos looks nice.

Any-thoughts on that?


----------



## znomit (Dec 27, 2007)

jjziets said:


> Any-thoughts on that?


The warmer lights are much nicer to ride with despite losing a few lumens, just make sure the helmet and bar lights are tint matched.


----------



## yetibetty (Dec 24, 2007)

jjziets said:


> My factory fitted xenon head lamps are 4300K lights and I noticed that all my cycle lights are much more white/blue. On Ebay there is a  Magicshine mj880 with 4000k LEDs
> 
> Browsing the Cree datasheet the BIN drop must be about T4 or T5 which means a light drop of about 14%-7% the photos looks nice.
> 
> Any-thoughts on that?


jjziets, I posted this on the Gloworm thread a while back: http://forums.mtbr.com/9020257-post509.html Notice that with the cool tint the bricks all look the same but with the warmer tint you can see that there are many different coloured bricks.

When off road things stand out more with a warmer tint and can help show the difference between mud, roots or rocks. It's less blinding for car drivers when using the light on the road if you have to ride to the trail.

At first it looks less bright but you can actually see more.


----------



## MaximusHQ (Aug 6, 2007)

There's no doubt that a warmer color shows more detail, but it seems like most light manufacturers are more interested in the lumen war. Still the Led lights I own are less annoying than the Niterider Hids I used to run. Everything looked extremely blue and flat with those. You could hardly tell if you were running over leaves or grass or whatever else as they all blended. The only reason I chose to go to Hid from halogen was b/c of very long runtimes at a decent brightness. I would prefer something warmer colored than the typical led light out now.


----------



## Cat-man-do (May 16, 2004)

MaximusHQ said:


> There's no doubt that a warmer color shows more detail, but it seems like most light manufacturers are more interested in the lumen war. Still the Led lights I own are less annoying than the Niterider Hids I used to run. Everything looked extremely blue and flat with those....
> ...... I would prefer something warmer colored than the typical led light out now.


Agreed. Warmer is better for detail and are easier on the eyes but the cooler bins are a bit brighter and as such offer a little longer throw. On the other hard I tend to like the neutral white bins because it's a compromise between the two and seems to work for me.

Hopefully those of us that ordered the upgraded Gloworm X2 will soon get to see what the new U bin emitters can do ( compared to the T6 )


----------



## jjziets (Apr 14, 2010)

Nice, then I'm keen for one.:thumbsup: The human eye is logarithmic so you actually need to loos about half the light to really notice it. 14% is not going to be much on 1500 lumen

on there site  www.pyrolights.co.za they say:

*"Key advantages of light that has a warm Correlated Color Temperature (3700-4300K)


The 3 types of cones in human eyes are equally stimulated which improves vision and focusing time.
Better colour contrast perception allowing quicker response time.
Reduced glare and eye fatigue.
Improved dust and fog penetration.
"*

it does make sens, we are predators and can see color to find food but 4000K is not really warm it is natural from what I reed in the Cree datasheet but comparing it to +6000K it is much warmer.


----------



## Vancbiker (May 25, 2005)

Tint has a noticeable affect on how you see things. My first MCE light had a greenish tint. It really killed the contrast on green leaves and brush.


----------



## Cat-man-do (May 16, 2004)

jjziets said:


> on there site  www.pyrolights.co.za they say:
> 
> *"Key advantages of light that has a warm Correlated Color Temperature (3700-4300K)
> 
> ...


I truly can believe the "better dust and fog penetration" claim. One of the things I noticed when I first started using LED lighting is that LED lights tended to illuminate particulate matter in the air. Really noticeable when the pollen count is high or there is moisture ( fog ) hanging in the air. When I used halogen lights I never noticed this effect.

To bad our LED lights don't allow for easy ( drop-in ) replacements. Not that you can't replace LED's but certainly not an easy-in, easy-out option.


----------



## whs (Jun 25, 2007)

Cat-man-do said:


> I truly can believe the "better dust and fog penetration" claim. One of the things I noticed when I first started using LED lighting is that LED lights tended to illuminate particulate matter in the air. Really noticeable when the pollen count is high or there is moisture ( fog ) hanging in the air. When I used halogen lights I never noticed this effect.
> 
> To bad our LED lights don't allow for easy ( drop-in ) replacements. Not that you can't replace LED's but certainly not an easy-in, easy-out option.


I tested all these things in 2010 (with a few later additions that only confirmed what I knew already then) and the results were clear: Neutral white is better than warm/cool white. Fog penetration is better with warm white but the downsides are the overemphasis on yellows in any other situation, and it doesn't help all that much, but also, fog isn't that common, so neutral white is the one to choose. Strangely manufacturers STILL don't understand this. Whoever does it first can claim to have the best (as in: most useful) road or MTB lamps but still none of the big brands seem interested.

See:

LED light colour, CRI and experiments


----------



## Baja Designs (Aug 3, 2010)

whs said:


> I tested all these things in 2010 (with a few later additions that only confirmed what I knew already then) and the results were clear: Neutral white is better than warm/cool white. Fog penetration is better with warm white but the downsides are the overemphasis on yellows in any other situation, and it doesn't help all that much, but also, fog isn't that common, so neutral white is the one to choose. Strangely manufacturers STILL don't understand this. Whoever does it first can claim to have the best (as in: most useful) road or MTB lamps but still none of the big brands seem interested.
> 
> See:
> 
> LED light colour, CRI and experiments


Uhhh, hmmm (insert throat clearing noise)...we at Baja Designs understand the concept and importance of light color very well from our desert racing experience. Understanding nuances of a trail at motorized racing speeds is just as vital as it is on a mountain or road bike. We also understand the effects of light on floating particles in the air vs. the color/quality of light hitting the ground.

We use the T6 at roughly 5000k which is on the warmer/neutral side for the T6 which could be quite cool if that's the way we wanted to run it. Our lights, whether they are built for the Baja 1000 or the 24hrs of Moab, need to be effective on everything from sand to snow. We came to the decision to use the T6 XM-L and keep it in the Neutral White range after MUCH testing in the desert (sand/rock/light colored soil), regular (dark brown) soil/mud, granite rock, organic/leaf cover, deep silt (as found on desert courses and for military applications), asphalt/cement, as well as snow. While we are figuring out what color we want our systems to utilize we also are testing different reflector styles for the single beam lights and combinations with the dual/multi-LED systems. All of that is wrapped in a fully submersible (to 33ft/one atmosphere), military grade, life-time warrantied light head.

So...because we understand all of that does that mean we get to officially be the best/most useful MTB and road lamp?  I may be biased, but I've been saying that for awhile now.

If you'd like to see shots of the color correct Baja Designs Strykr II, Strykr SL, or Double Stryk in action check out our Facebook page(s): http://www.facebook.com/bajadesigns.bicycle

Here's the Truck page: http://www.facebook.com/BajaDesigns.truckbuggy

Here's our Motorcycle page: http://www.facebook.com/bajadesigns.motorcycleatv

We put our heart and soul into the lights we produce, racers in multiple disciplines depend on our systems to win or at very least safely finish some the most gnarly races in the world. Did I mention Marines, soldiers, and sailors use our systems to return safely to base after night missions? Well they do, and that is something we are particularly proud of.

If you have any questions either let me know here on the forum or you can email us at [email protected].


----------



## jjziets (Apr 14, 2010)

A agree Colours do look more vivid <6000K lights. using an magicshine MJ880 with 4000K LEDs


----------



## rschultz101 (Oct 5, 2009)

the 4000k is more pleasant . 
and if you have enough light, try yellow shooting glasses . 
it filters the blue part, and adds contrast. Gives you better depth perception.
most , want lumens, at lowest price, so it won't get mainstream. 
for true choice, need to go custom.  on top of it, everybody's eyes are slightly different,
in color perception.
mixing color temp led's within same housing is ok,
in different housing, aka, helmet - handlebar, not .
LED's produce excessive blue wavelength , as such add excessive glare.
most perceive it as brightness . does not necessary aid in seeing, since it reduces depth.
the super-duper blueish ones, make things look flat, aka HID . 
the other thing is, the yellowish light, is attributed to the good old halogen lights,
as such, currently not in fashion . so for the mainstream , the lumen war , brightness / glare is king.
other note, on CRI, most high CRI, don't necessary look pleasant, since the wavelength distribution , and bin is not consistent. what makes it much harder to implement, and increases cost.
might take another 2 generations, to trickle down to bike lights.
on yellow glasses, don't expect miracles, especially for the cheap ones. 
decent remingtons or scotts, tag heuer are best. 
the older you get, the more complicated it gets, near sight, far sight, night blind, myopia, etc,...
one more, lots of riders don't like glasses, because they fog up, on the uphill, and the yellow, feels weird . still recommend at least clear glasses, for the bush whacking rides.
cheers, Rob


----------



## h79 (Jun 27, 2012)

By the way - warmer light is better if it's foggy outside, I think …


----------



## Cat-man-do (May 16, 2004)

rschultz101 said:


> the 4000k is more pleasant .
> and if you have enough light, try yellow shooting glasses .
> it filters the blue part, and adds contrast. Gives you better depth perception.
> most , want lumens, at lowest price, so it won't get mainstream.
> ...


Agree on all points.

I think in the future you might start to see more bike lights being sold with the option for lower ( < 5000 ) CRI emittters. Yes, lower CRI does seem to lower the output but if you have the right optics and enough emitters to compensate you can create a very nice output that reduces glare yet still allow you to see what you need to see.

A while back I picked up a torch that was ordered with a neutral white XM-L emitter. It turned out that the emitter was a little more "warm" in tint than expected. Since then this torch has kind of grown on me. Even at it's brightest level there is little if any glare.

I do have an advantage though in that I wear prescription lenses that are treated with an anti-reflective / anti-glare coating so whatever lights I use generally do not give me any problems. The only emitters I have problems with are the ones with a lot of blue. Thankfully I have only one of those.

On a side note the fogging of glasses is an issue. There is a substance sold that you can use to apply to glasses to prevent fogging. I forget what it's called. Perhaps someone else will chime in with the brand/name. All I know is I could really use some now. On my last rides my glasses were doing some major fogging.


----------



## jjziets (Apr 14, 2010)

Cat-man-do said:


> Agree on all points.
> 
> I think in the future you might start to see more bike lights being sold with the option for lower ( < 5000 ) CRI emittters. Yes, lower CRI does seem to lower the output but if you have the right optics and enough emitters to compensate you can create a very nice output that reduces glare yet still allow you to see what you need to see.
> 
> .


Strange it is now 6 months later and winter is coming in the US but still none of the major manufacture has joind the Natural or warmer tints


----------



## pethelman (Feb 26, 2011)

jjziets said:


> Strange it is now 6 months later and winter is coming in the US but still none of the major manufacture has joind the Natural or warmer tints


Makes perfect sense. As long as "1-up'ing" the competition with higher lumens continues to sell more lights, you won't see the shift towards warmer tints. Cool white in the 5K to 6.5K range isn't too bad, but if you go above that, it starts getting a little harsh.


----------

