# Magicshine MJ-880 vs MJ-872 beamshots heavy ;).



## Dominik.M (Sep 21, 2007)

At the end of 2011 Magicshine launched an attack on so called premium lights category - not only in terms of the amount of light, but also in terms of price . Now we can check how they were able to fulfill their promises of 2000 lumens in a small original housing design.

Magicshine MJ-880 vs MJ-872 (2x Cree XM-L vs 4x Cree XP-G) - HIGH

















In the high mode you almost cannot see the difference between MJ-880 (20.5W) and MJ-872 (16W) - XP-G still rules ? . 
880 have a little warmer color tint, but in Magicshine lamps it depends on series.

Magicshine MJ-880 vs MJ-872 (2x Cree XM-L vs 4x Cree XP-G) - MID-3 / MID-2 (872 have only 2 intermediate modes)









Magicshine MJ-880 vs MJ-872 (2x Cree XM-L vs 4x Cree XP-G) - MID-2 / MID-1









Magicshine MJ-880 - mid 1









Magicshine MJ-880 vs MJ-872 (2x Cree XM-L vs 4x Cree XP-G) - LOW

















Better focus and range for 880 - 3.23W vs 3.26W of power and almost the same amount of light.

Summary.
It's a quite difficult decision - in terms of usability 880 from 872 do not differ too much in terms of lumen output, burn time and modes are also very similar. 880'y more interest to users looking for better range and a more refined design-control buttons are located on top of the light, making it easy to switch - placing the buttons on the back of the MJ-872 sometimes causes it to move when user is switching modes. Probably the most decisive factor will be the price - 127 vs. 220 $ for the same amount of light and working time means that you have to pay almost 70% extra for nicer design, better mount and a little better range... Is it worth it ? You have to check it yourself - I stay with my MJ-872 :cornut:. Currently waiting for some nice tint XP-G 2 :aureola:

Full version of the review : Magicshine MJ-880 Cree XM-L ^2


----------



## saypat (Sep 4, 2012)

Well, thank you for the beam shots. It was/is a bit confusing to me however. I take it all the 880 shots are on the left side? Your mid 3,2,1 definitions were confusing to me. The 872 has 4 modes. Yes the 872 is a good buy but a bright light with a low mode of nearly 500 lumens, too bright for me in the city ")

thanks again for the beam shots!


----------



## saypat (Sep 4, 2012)

Hello again:

* 1600 Lumens (100%) - 2 HRs
* 1200 Lumens (75%) - 3 Hrs
* 800 Lumens (50%) - 4 HRs
* 480 Lumens (30%) - 9.5 Hrs

just curious for those who have this light, is each step up in mode visible to your eye? And on the high mode it no doubt gets quite hot quite fast?

thank you,
patrick


----------



## Dominik.M (Sep 21, 2007)

*saypat*, in high 880 is getting hot after a few seconds - I've added some more thermal paste here and there .

Modes based on current draw not on manufacturers declaration's are as follow :
880 

```
High	20,51	100%
Mid3	15,82	77%
Mid2	10,79	53%
Mid1	5,51	27%
Low	3,23	16%
```
872 

```
High	16,05	100%
Mid2	11,50	72%
Mid1	8,35	52%
Low	3,26	20%
```


----------



## TwoHeadsBrewing (Aug 28, 2009)

saypat said:


> Hello again:
> 
> * 1600 Lumens (100%) - 2 HRs
> * 1200 Lumens (75%) - 3 Hrs
> ...


The high mode will get hot if you're just sitting in place. I've never had it reduce output automatically while riding. I typically reduce the light down to 50% or 75% while climbing, not to avoid heat, but because I like to conserve the battery. Never know when a mechanical is going to strike, and I always try to save some light for an unforeseen event.

The step between 100% and 75% is noticeable, but just barely. I've ridden many times at 75% and didn't even realize it until halfway through the ride. 75% to 50% is very noticeable as is the final step down to 30%.


----------

