# A bit of fun beamshot comparison



## troutie-mtb (Sep 20, 2007)

Thought I would throw out a bit of a challenge

6 lights all powered at 1 amp and camera setting the same mtbr standard 
the spooky house was approx 100 mtrs away ( darent go any closer as dog started growling and barking )

various optics and leds also number of leds .
it also throws up some supprise results

the challenge is which leds and how many 
and bonus points for correct optics 
also which looks best

No minus 1 is a 2 led setup 1 XPE and 1 XPG @ 1 amp and the Tina2 optics










No -1 









No -2









No-3









No-4









No-5









No-6









aspherical 7 UP


----------



## smudgemtbuk (Jul 13, 2008)

No idea, but hope they weren't in !

5 just edges it for me though, please don't say its the Bastid light !


----------



## troutie-mtb (Sep 20, 2007)

smudgemtbuk said:


> No idea, but hope they weren't in !
> 
> 5 just edges it for me though, please don't say its the Bastid light !


Ha Ha no its not the bastid .

its a real spooky place in the daytime no residents only the zombies and undead .
Oh and a few rats and sheep


----------



## mike1980 (Nov 6, 2008)

3 is the worst, the colour is awful.

5 looks good but perhaps a little too much flood? is it a couple of mc-e? if so likely Ledil CMC lens, SS or RS?


----------



## mojojojoaf (Sep 9, 2008)

number 5 is the all powerful magic shine- LOL jk.


----------



## Jim Z in VT (Sep 9, 2007)

I could not even begin to guess which or how many LEDs are in use. But I like the color and beam shape of #3. Is that maybe the Liberator housing?

JZ


----------



## VaskaS (Aug 19, 2009)

№3 seems to be something like Osram Decostar 35 W.


----------



## notaknob (Apr 6, 2004)

#1, 4 Cree R2, Cute Narrow 
#2, trout-in-one 2XPE
#3, Car, VW?
#4 Mini-trout, 4XPE, R5
#5 LL, R5, 4narrow, 2Med
#6, ??


----------



## BrianMc (Jan 5, 2010)

Best implies application:

Best Trail: 5 or 6 depending how much side flood you need. 5 if more, is better.
Best Road 1

1. Three in line XPG-R5 aspheric lens from CFL supplier
2. Borrowed an Edulux? Or your mad aspheric experiment.
3. Looks halogen and two wide sources. Car, Pickup.
4. Liberator
5. 7-Up NS-NR XP-G's
6, 7-Up NS-NR XP-E's

Interesting. I don't like the false colour of 3, BUT it seems to reveal more 3-D of the field.


----------



## troutie-mtb (Sep 20, 2007)

Ha Ha I said some supprises .

No 1 = all in one light 3 XPE Q5 Carclo 10417 

No 2 = Baby trout with 4 XPE R2 s Carclo 10417

No 3 = Liberator 6 XPE L1-4D-R2-0-0 neutral white with 6 carclo 10417

No 4 = Liberator 6 XPG R5 carclo 10417

No 5 = 7 up XPE R2 WH 7 x carclo 10417 s 

No6 = 7UP 4 XPG 3 XPE cutters mixed board Khatod 6 degree optic

My old eyes really like no three


----------



## kwarwick (Jun 12, 2004)

troutie-mtb said:


> Ha Ha I said some supprises .
> 
> No 1 = all in one light 3 XPE Q5 Carclo 10417
> 
> ...


Funny I really like number 3 also. Might be because those are the same tint of XPE I'm running in my 7 up light. 

Karl


----------



## Itess (Feb 22, 2009)

I don't understand the difference between 1 and 2. 3*Q5 is better than 4*R2 - is something wrong with the optics, driver or aim?

BTW, I really like no 3. Did you try 3*4D + 3*WH combination in Liberator?


----------



## BrianMc (Jan 5, 2010)

troutie-mtb said:


> Ha Ha I said some supprises ...
> My old eyes really like no three


THAT was educational, and no mistake! :thumbsup:

I see what the FWHM numbers of the 10417's mean with a narrow emitter! Nothing like a side by side like this to sort what a little floody means. I have what is essentially half of a number 4 as a low beam. More is good. Well placed is better. And for this near sighted older cyclist, I suspect warm is best.

I suspect that in person, 3 is more endearing to see and to ride with in that field without the whiter ones to compare it to. I'd be riding, not painting. The textures and rolls pop and the brain does do a color adjustment that it can't when the other pics are in view.

Thanks for another lesson in the art of bike light design. :rockon:


----------



## mtb_robs-x (Dec 13, 2009)

no.5 surprised by 6 deg optics,

seam to have the most side spill, trees on left.
do like the side spill.
thanks


----------



## troutie-mtb (Sep 20, 2007)

mtb_robs-x said:


> no.5 surprised by 6 deg optics,
> 
> seam to have the most side spill, trees on left.
> do like the side spill.
> thanks


OOPS :blush: Made a mistake there on No5

it is 7 of the 10417`s 
have now edited it


----------



## Madmusk (Nov 10, 2009)

troutie-mtb said:


> Ha Ha I said some supprises .
> 
> No 1 = all in one light 3 XPE Q5 Carclo 10417
> 
> ...


What was the white balance set to? Did the 4D tint look that warm to your eyes? I have some 4D tint XP-E's and they seem just a shade or two warmer than your standard cool white. I was hoping they'd be a bit warmer like your's looks in the pic.


----------



## BrianMc (Jan 5, 2010)

Madmusk said:


> What was the white balance set to? Did the 4D tint look that warm to your eyes? I have some 4D tint XP-E's and they seem just a shade or two warmer than your standard cool white. I was hoping they'd be a bit warmer like your's looks in the pic.


Just to understand: did you see yours as only being a shade or two warmer in A/B comparison to whiter tint XP-G's?


----------



## troutie-mtb (Sep 20, 2007)

Madmusk said:


> What was the white balance set to? Did the 4D tint look that warm to your eyes? I have some 4D tint XP-E's and they seem just a shade or two warmer than your standard cool white. I was hoping they'd be a bit warmer like your's looks in the pic.


White balance set to daylight 
to be honest I never really noticed untill I got home and saw the pics side by side 
I only had 1 battery so could not compare them side by side

I might do the pics again in the woods tonight to see how they look


----------



## Madmusk (Nov 10, 2009)

BrianMc said:


> Just to understand: did you see yours as only being a shade or two warmer in A/B comparison to whiter tint XP-G's?


I don't consider myself an expert when it comes to comparing tints. I also don't have much to compare to on hand but my amateur opinion would be that the 4D's I have are no warmer than 5000k. Trout's pic makes it look a lot warmer than what I have but it could just be his white balance.


----------



## curiously-coherent (Nov 2, 2009)

Great comparison beam shots Troutie! My riding buddy (KWarwick) is building me a XPG version of your 7-up light which I'm really hoping will look like pic #5. My eyes are getting old too, but I still prefer the cool blue LEDs. KWs 7-up uses XPEs and looks as warm as your #3 pic. Once he gets mine sealed up we'll post some comparison beam shots for those here who might be on the XPE/XPG fence.

EDIT: Dang... I guess my lurking days are over... :-}


----------



## BrianMc (Jan 5, 2010)

To some degree, our visual cortex sees colors as relative, not absolute. Added to that, we have a very short term memory for that aspect of what we see.

So, with no back and forth A/B to see which which is warmer, if close, it wouldn't be hard to miss. The real question would be whether you saw potholes or roots better or subtle grade changes better. still you both are familiar with warmer and cooler lights, so the issue remains. Maybe the real proof is in whether you see the road or trail better. An A/B ride evaluation.

One other observation that might explain this. I see a slightly warmer spill reflected off the copper heatsink (light that doesn't get out the 10417's). So slight, that I am not sure I am seeing it, but the long exposure on the camera shows it's there. So maybe it isn't so much the daylight setting, but that 6 minutes exposure that triggers more yellow in the film with the long exposure than what we see in real time. Just a thought.


----------



## troutie-mtb (Sep 20, 2007)

curiously-coherent said:


> Great comparison beam shots Troutie! My riding buddy (KWarwick) is building me a XPG version of your 7-up light which I'm really hoping will look like pic #5. My eyes are getting old too, but I still prefer the cool blue LEDs. KWs 7-up uses XPEs and looks as warm as your #3 pic. Once he gets mine sealed up we'll post some comparison beam shots for those here who might be on the XPE/XPG fence.
> 
> EDIT: Dang... I guess my lurking days are over... :-}


Cheers CC Welcome

Be cool to see the comparison shots and get both yours and Karls feedback on the 2 differing setups . I am guessing that the housing finally arrived a bit slower than the first one ..

OK a pic of the 2 libs shining on a white wall










now the same pics in the woods in the same order

















































Added aspherical 7UP









added Baby Trout with 10417s over 2 of the Neutral white XPEs and 2 R5 XPGs again at 1 amp


----------



## Itess (Feb 22, 2009)

I like numbers 1, 3, 5. But what is wrong with no 2?


----------



## ozlongboarder (Jan 12, 2004)

I scrolled down through the pics and had the following responses:
#1 hmm
#2 mehh
#3 ohh I like that!
#4 hmmm
#5 yeah baby !!!
#5 hmm

I like the tint of number 3 in both shots, but that gene in most males the say's mmmm MORE POWER!!!! kicked in for number 5 for me LOL.


----------



## Madmusk (Nov 10, 2009)

Thanks for the beamshots Troutie! The XPE 4D still looks super warm to me compared to mine. A lot like beamshots of warm-white 3500k mc-e's I've seen. Still, I'll reserve further judgment till I can get some beamshots of my own to compare. Should be next week before I can get to that unfortunately. Was the difference in tint as apparent in person as it is in the side by side beamshot?


----------



## BrianMc (Jan 5, 2010)

Wonderful shots again! :thumbsup: 

Number one light I presume has three concentrically arranged Q5s? The Baby Trout in 2 is an inline setup. There is a slight difference down trail but it is less than expected with an extra LED and higher output on all of them. So the inline arrangement has an effect that spreads most of a 50% increase in output over the near and middle only slightly increasing throw. I wonder what the Baby Trout beam would look like with it at 90 degrees.

In 3, the reddish browns aren't grayed out and 3-D effect seems to hold especially for the low shrubs/plants along the trail. Maybe this warmer tint thing will help old eyes extract more info.

I have a 3 XP-G 10417 light in concentric arrangement that looks a lot like 1 and 4 combined (with 4 at half power). So that in-line design is a natural for trail use to get that smooth floody front area without a hot spot.

Number 5 has a first impression of power with the hot spot but it is easier to see the detail in 6 as it isn't as washed out, and you can see better further. I agree that at first glance 5 has a viseral "More Power!" response, but on closer looking, it appears to be more show than go.


----------



## curiously-coherent (Nov 2, 2009)

Thanks for the continuing beamshots Troutie. (and the welcome)

Karl says he's got it sealed up now, so we get to do a side-by-side test tonight. Unfortunately I don't like bringing my precious SLR on rides, so no pix yet.

That being said, do you have any specific camera settings you use for consistent beamshots? ( ie; 1 sec @ f _n_ ) For these shots I'll lock the white balance to Daylight to avoid any auto-adjustments of the tints. We'll find a nice trail location like your pictures above for the shots and give some trail-riding feedback re: contrast perception and flood vs hotspot comparison of the 2 setups.

Thanks so much for making this all possible with your CNC masterpiece!

Cheers, CC


----------



## troutie-mtb (Sep 20, 2007)

Be good to get some feedback specially with two differing setups and with you and karl riding together be a good comparison

those pics were at the mtbr standard F4 @ 6 seconds daylight wb

I have just added a pic of baby trout down below with 2 natural white xpes and 2 R5 whatever the first lot of xpgs were still with the 10417 optic .
I like it for a 4 led light it looks nice to my eyes A customer requested the mix and I think he will be happy with it .

Here is one for Brian and his quest .
a zoomable Aspheric torch , dead cheap from DX it has inside it an XRE of some ilk










and followed by a Tail light using 2 red xpes @ 350 ma hacked together as cheap as poss for a guy who wants it for his dynohub .commuter bike 
home made optic which gives 180 degree visibility 
and cheap ebay 350 ma buck driver


----------



## mike1980 (Nov 6, 2008)

I didn't like the colour of #3 in the first shot but it looks much nicer in the woods and the others look less nice, I think the #7 you added is my favourite.


----------



## Bobblehat (Dec 1, 2007)

*Slightly O.T. but related to C-C's question*

Beam shots ...... set the ISO to 100 too!

Mused about this before, and after reading c-c's very thoughtful query regarding settings ...... I realised that I don't think we have ever recommended a lens focal length for beam shots.

With recent affordable digital compact cameras having wider and wider wide-angle capability built-in (or longer and longer :nono: ), along with the availability of the "exotics" for digital SLR's, should we recommend a set focal length (35mm film equivalent) for consistency? Say 35mm or 50mm (equivalent) focal length for example, which nearly all digital cameras have?

And if 35mm (equivalent) is thought insufficient to show all spill (approx 54 degree coverage horizontally on a 3:2 landscape shot) ... what would we recommend, and would this in some way "devalue" those shots from those who do not have the recommended capability?

We could just all go by what Troutie shoots at ........ he certainly sets "a" standard ... if not "the" standard! 

Could be useful to avoid unfair or misleading comparisons. Just an idea.

Cheers, [email protected]


----------



## Jim Z in VT (Sep 9, 2007)

Bobblehat said:


> Beam shots ...... set the ISO to 100 too!


If I'm remembering correctly, the agreed upon MTBR beamshot standard is 6 SECONDS AT F4 / WHITE BALANCE: daylight / ISO: 100 / MANUAL FOCUS: infinity

Did I miss anything there?



> I don't think we have ever recommended a lens focal length for beam shots.
> With recent affordable digital compact cameras having wider and wider wide-angle capability built-in ........should we recommend a set focal length (35mm film equivalent) for consistency? Say 35mm or 50mm (equivalent) focal length for example, which nearly all digital cameras have?


Is there a way to accurately set focal length? I can't find any visual indication on my little Canon A60, and on my "fancier" Canon SX10is I find no way to read this number on-screen, just a very basic scale printed on the barrel of the zoom lens. The first 2 lines indicate 28 and 85mm equivalents, and they're only 1/8" apart, so its not going to be very precise.

JZ


----------



## BrianMc (Jan 5, 2010)

troutie-mtb said:


> Here is one for Brian and his quest .
> a zoomable Aspheric torch , dead cheap from DX it has inside it an XRE of some ilk


Thanks. I have never seen a beamshot of it.

If I remember right, they are Q5 bin. Couldn't find my post where I challenged anyone interested in a road beam to buy 6 or 8 to focus and stack their beams, then beamshot the setup for the road beam thread. No takers. Or none that posted. Can't afford 6-8 of them just now or they'd be my reference for beamshots comparos. But if I come into some pocket money....


----------



## Bobblehat (Dec 1, 2007)

JZ .... Nope ......what you said ..... it's all there ...just thought I'd mention an important parameter that was missing from Troutie's post, since c-c enquired. Auto ISO or other could have wasted their efforts.

Yep! Several potential problems recommending a "standard" focal length. Maybe all that is needed is to mention the focal length (35mm equivalent) the shots were taken at if known e.g. if you shot at minimum on the SX10 it would be 28mm, or if known from exif data.

Cheers, [email protected]


----------



## Jim Z in VT (Sep 9, 2007)

Yes it's definitely in the EXIF data. Too bad it can't be read on the camera's display. I'm surprised it can't...dozens of other parameters can be viewed.

JZ


----------



## troutie-mtb (Sep 20, 2007)

Jim Z in VT said:


> Yes it's definitely in the EXIF data. Too bad it can't be read on the camera's display. I'm surprised it can't...dozens of other parameters can be viewed.
> 
> JZ


Whats it say for focal length for my pics

how do you see the Exif data in someones pic


----------



## Itess (Feb 22, 2009)

troutie-mtb said:


> Whats it say for focal length for my pics


File name : beamshots041.jpg
File size : 157034 bytes
File date : 2010:03:17 07:39:05
Camera make : Canon
Camera model : Canon PowerShot S40
Date/Time : 2010:03:16 21:21:05
Resolution : 800 x 600
Flash used : No
Focal length : 7.1mm (35mm equivalent: 36mm)
CCD width : 7.11mm
Exposure time: 6.000 s
Aperture : f/4.0
Focus dist. : 30.17m
ISO equiv. : 100
Whitebalance : Manual
Light Source : Daylight
Metering Mode: center weight
Exposure Mode: Manual



> how do you see the Exif data in someones pic


I have to download it first  Then I can see these properties in meta information. Not sure how it's on Windows*.


----------



## Madmusk (Nov 10, 2009)

Just want to point out, since it'll probably come up somewhere down the line that not every camera goes down to 100 ISO. My Nikon DSLR for example starts at 200. If you need to shoot at twice the standard ISO, you can halve the amount of light coming in with one of the other settings so for instance 3 seconds exposure. Also, you can close the aperture by one stop. From f/4.0 the next stop would be f/5.6.


----------



## curiously-coherent (Nov 2, 2009)

Thanks for the camera settings folks. I use a Sony α200 which supports ISO 100, so the shots will be consistant with the mtbr standard when we get to shoot them. My light is still not fully sealed because Karl wants to make sure there's no infant mortality with the LEDs before he seals the front, and the trails here are very muddy still, so we'll get some shots once we get it all together. 

First impressions? über-lumen love...  A nice floody light field with no hot spot at all. Did about 65 Km on bike paths yesterday and the mid setting was fine for that. The high setting was just brilliant, but it beat the crap out of the 4x18650 battery pack I'm using pretty quickly. Karl is investigating 8000 mAh of LiPo in a waterbottle as a more robust power source, so I will definitely move to that for trail riding. High is actually too bright for path use. I get a lot of "too bright!" and the occasional finger just running 900 lumens, I can't imagine the abuse I'd get with 2000+! LOL But on trail at speed, lumens will save your ass. The floody goodness of these XPGs I'm sure will help a lot with what I call the "Tunnel Effect". I find that a lot of my spatial orientation relies on my periferal vision. When I'm running spotty lights there's not enough spill to give my periphery enough info, especially on switchback trails. I find myself getting disoriented in twisty bits. This light will definitely fix that, and in conjunction with a P7 on my helmet, should be the perfect setup. Can't wait for the technical stuff to dry up!

Cheers, CC

P.S. Just can't stop saying "Thanks!" to Troutie for an awesome design and Karl for a nice tight build. Kudos to all.


----------



## emu26 (Jun 23, 2008)

curiously-coherent said:


> Karl is investigating 8000 mAh of LiPo in a waterbottle as a more robust power source, so I will definitely move to that for trail riding.


I haven't checked what v battery you are running or need but a mate just bought one of these Small enough to store in a small "feed" bag on the top bar

Apart from the fact that the capacity is about twice what he needed, and therefore the battery is physically bigger than needed he is happy with the 12hr burn time on his DIY light


----------



## kwarwick (Jun 12, 2004)

emu26 said:


> I haven't checked what v battery you are running or need but a mate just bought one of these Small enough to store in a small "feed" bag on the top bar
> 
> Apart from the fact that the capacity is about twice what he needed, and therefore the battery is physically bigger than needed he is happy with the 12hr burn time on his DIY light


That's an awesome deal on a battery of that capacity and I'd have already bought it when I clicked the link... until I saw it is really a 3 cell 10.8V nominal battery wth the 12.6V being the peak voltage with a full charge.

Unfortunately that voltage a bit too low for the 7 up lights. Due to the heavy stress that 7 LEDs place on the Maxflex driver used in these lights, we need at minimum a 4 cell 14.8V nominal battery to maximize the boost efficiency to keep the driver from burning out.

Karl


----------



## emu26 (Jun 23, 2008)

Kwarwick, yeah its nt a genuine 12v battery but suits his needs perfectly. I can help you though.

I talked another mate into getting these using this charger and charging them in this charge bag

If you visit the sellers store I am pretty sure he had some larger capacity 14.8v batteries


----------



## kwarwick (Jun 12, 2004)

emu26 said:


> Kwarwick, yeah its nt a genuine 12v battery but suits his needs perfectly. I can help you though.
> 
> I talked another mate into getting these using this charger and charging them in this charge bag
> 
> If you visit the sellers store I am pretty sure he had some larger capacity 14.8v batteries


Ah, great minds think alike it seems.. 

Here's what I've got already in transit to me:

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=300404621089

and http://www.okhobby.hk/product.php?id_product=1040

Also have some balance charging plugs coming so I can retrofit my 4 x 18650 battery.

Karl


----------



## emu26 (Jun 23, 2008)

oh, nothing like flashers to bling up your steed.

Sorry Troutie, back on topic now


----------



## curiously-coherent (Nov 2, 2009)

Wow. First long ride with the Troutie 7-up (+ Dinotte 400 & P7 helmet light) and here's my illuminated observation.

You know you finally have enough lumens on your bike when... You get in your truck at the trail-head, drive off and think to yourself _"why are my headlights so frickin' dim?"_. LOL

Cheers, CC


----------



## troutie-mtb (Sep 20, 2007)

more beamshot comparisons

LEDIL CXP-RS XPE









LEDIL CXP-RS XPG









TINA XPE









TINA XPG









Interesting one here 
2 x cmc -rs the MCE optic with 2 XPEs 









Ignoring the intensity as the camera was on full auto these were just to get a grip on beam shapes .

distance to the blinds is 18 feet and the two blinds are 6 ft wide by 4 ft high


----------



## Jim Z in VT (Sep 9, 2007)

Hmmm....so I AM going to be disappointed in the dual Tina XPG helmet lights I'm building. Bummer :-(

Is that the Tina RS? 

JZ


----------



## Alekz-Od (Jan 28, 2008)

troutie-MTB, thanks for the good work.
You did beamshot with lens LXP?


----------



## BrianMc (Jan 5, 2010)

troutie-mtb said:


> more beamshot comparisons
> 
> Interesting one here
> 2 x cmc -rs the MCE optic with 2 XPEs
> ...


If my trigonometry is correct, that is a 19 degree beam with little spill. My impression from my wall shots is that the Carclo 10417 10 mm with the XP-G has close to the same hot spot diameter (18-20 degrees) but with more spill.


----------



## DavidR1 (Jul 7, 2008)

Great beamshots!

Can the 7up be mounted to the helmet? How heavy is it?


----------



## troutie-mtb (Sep 20, 2007)

Jim Z in VT said:


> Hmmm....so I AM going to be disappointed in the dual Tina XPG helmet lights I'm building. Bummer :-(
> 
> Is that the Tina RS?
> 
> JZ


Yes it is the Tina RS Jim I am rapidly going off the XPG led at the moment though mixing them with XPEs seems to work nicely for spill and throw .
I have a twin one of each so will try and get a beam shot of it in the woods .

Alekz-Od

I have an LXP but forgot to include it in the shots so will get one later sorted .

DavidR1


> Can the 7up be mounted to the helmet? How heavy is it?


Sure can be helmet mounted head weighs approx 155 grammes










I just recieved an email from a guy in Sweden who is using one like the pic for night orienteering

Hi Chris

Wonderful NEWS
Yesterday i was number One in a Night Orienteering Competition.
It's a lot easer to run and see in the forest.
I just cant give you enough credit for this wonderful Head lamp.
Will be back with pictures some day when I got the time ;-)

Have a really nice day
Br

Lennart


----------



## troutie-mtb (Sep 20, 2007)

:eekster: :skep:


----------



## scar (Jun 2, 2005)

That ought to produce an interesting beam


----------



## Alekz-Od (Jan 28, 2008)

troutie-mtb said:


> Alekz-Od
> I have an LXP but forgot to include it in the shots so will get one later sorted .


Thanks, I'll wait for photo.


----------



## Alekz-Od (Jan 28, 2008)

I think it will be a narrow beam, but the lens should be closer to the XPG


----------



## BrianMc (Jan 5, 2010)

I saw the 7-Up kit on Cutters -Congrats! - but I blew the budget on my 2 x 3 XP-G's! Now the aspheric version! :cryin: 

So what lenses, LED's, at what focal lengths, any aiming (off center)? (Building the anticipation, building...)  

Looks like you're about to scoop BillyNoMates in the CPF road beam thread for a 7-Up multibeam aspheric light.

Lots of power here. My 6 X (2 x 3) on half amp is great most nights. Full amp in civil dusk to twilight. I need a wet pavement without violent thunderstorms and a chance of tornados to see if 1 A is enough on wet pavement. If not, maybe Taskled will give me an upgrade route to 1.5 A. Rain is water cooling, right?


----------



## troutie-mtb (Sep 20, 2007)

BrianMc said:


> I saw the 7-Up kit on Cutters -Congrats! - but I blew the budget on my 2 x 3 XP-G's! Now the aspheric version! :cryin:
> 
> So what lenses, LED's, at what focal lengths, any aiming (off center)? (Building the anticipation, building...)
> 
> ...


I have had these little 12 mm aspherics for a long while supposed to be 6 mm focal length ( from the Surplus Shed ) but are sat a little closer to the xpgs I think 4 mm to the top of the dome .
they are supposed to be aimed all on the same plane , it is really an experiment for my mate who wants one like it for a dive light .

it is still daylight here so I have no real idea what it will be like one thing though is I can feel heat out of the front 18 inches away .
It will be a thrower thats for sure may even be too narrow . .

daylight beam shot


----------



## BrianMc (Jan 5, 2010)

troutie-mtb said:


> I have had these little 12 mm aspherics for a long while supposed to be 6 mm focal length ( from the Surplus Shed ) but are sat a little closer to the xpgs I think 4 mm to the top of the dome.
> 
> 
> > Surplusshed doesn't have a lot of selection at 12 mm and 6 mm FL, and that matches the L10017 that BillyNoMates has and which I got to test and maybe use defocused for a 'not too narrow' low beam. Mine look like yours, too. FWIW
> ...


----------



## troutie-mtb (Sep 20, 2007)

Well an interesting evening and one the dog enjoyed as he got an extended walk 
I wish I could see in the dark like him would not need lights the bugger can spot a rabbit in a pitch dark field and give full speed chase with no lights .

it is a nice throwy light and does send most of the lumens down trail but when compared to the 7 ups in the earlier shots it seems odd .

I have posted a pic in each of the posts below for a comparison and here they are again .



















and also a small 2 led light with batteries inside using 2 of the XPE s with the Ledil CXP-RS optic and I have to say it looks nothing like the tint in real life it is real easy on the eyes .and not a bad performer too


----------



## Jim Z in VT (Sep 9, 2007)

troutie-mtb said:


> Yes it is the Tina RS Jim I am rapidly going off the XPG led at the moment though mixing them with XPEs seems to work nicely for spill and throw .
> I have a twin one of each so will try and get a beam shot of it in the woods .


I'd love to see that beamshot Trout, if you can squeeze it into your schedule 

Since the leds are not glued into my housings yet, I'm considering ordering some XPEs and doing one of each. Maybe that will salvage my dual Tina project. I just wish it was still free-shipping-February at Cutter.

JZ


----------

