# Lights shootout 2010 edition



## Francis Cebedo (Aug 1, 1996)

My first article is up here:

http://reviews.mtbr.com/blog/2010-mtbr-lights-shootout/

You guys are my ears and eyes so check it out and give me comments. I will shoot a video review about each light in the next couple of days.so give me some feedback and opinions and tell me what you want to see.

fc


----------



## gmcttr (Oct 7, 2006)

Thank you Sir. We appreciate the good work.


----------



## RobbieG (Nov 13, 2009)

Hmmm.. the Magicshine doesn't look so "magic" in the beamshot comparison... the Lupine Betty on the other hand is insane...


----------



## mcoplea (Nov 11, 2004)

Thanks for "shedding some light" on the topic, francois. It is interesting to see the different beam shots and the claimed lumens vs. Lux chart. 

The Niterider Pro 600 claims 600 lumens and threw out 46 Lux on your test.

The Magicshine claims 900 lumens and only threw out 37 Lux on your test. Enough said.


----------



## Jim311 (Feb 7, 2006)

RobbieG said:


> Hmmm.. the Magicshine doesn't look so "magic" in the beamshot comparison... the Lupine Betty on the other hand is insane...


The price is also insane.

I liked the format for the shootout that had the "rollover" where you could just sorta mouse over each option and it would display it. I don't like the 9 page format. Just my two pesos.


----------



## Francis Cebedo (Aug 1, 1996)

Jim311 said:


> The price is also insane.
> 
> I liked the format for the shootout that had the "rollover" where you could just sorta mouse over each option and it would display it. I don't like the 9 page format. Just my two pesos.


The rollover is definitely coming back. We'll do some other comparison formats too.

fc


----------



## RobbieG (Nov 13, 2009)

Jim311 said:


> The price is also insane.
> 
> I liked the format for the shootout that had the "rollover" where you could just sorta mouse over each option and it would display it. I don't like the 9 page format. Just my two pesos.


Yeah, over $1K is not wallet friendly, but that light output is intense compared to any of the other lights in the shootout... I would love to try a setup like that on a ride...


----------



## Francis Cebedo (Aug 1, 1996)

RobbieG said:


> Hmmm.. the Magicshine doesn't look so "magic" in the beamshot comparison... the Lupine Betty on the other hand is insane...


The Lupine Betty is just ridiculous and renders my backyard test area inadequate. So I will actually get the most powerful lights and take them to a nice long trail with a canopy and a few markers to photograph these super lights.

The Magicshine is more prone to inconsistencies since they are from the Seoul P7 C Bin leds (not the highest quality batch). Some lights are brighter than others. My light was shipped last week and is a little more blue tint and not quite as bright as my friend's which measured 39 lux. But it is a great value of course.

fc


----------



## Francis Cebedo (Aug 1, 1996)

Can someone educate me on what the most popular LED emitters are being used today in production and DIY lights?

What are the price points and what's good/bad about each emitter?

fc


----------



## odtexas (Oct 2, 2008)

XPG R5 and MCE M bin for the DIY crowd. XRE still gets alot of use as well.

XPG run around $6 to $10. Most efficient, less energy consumed and produces less heat, newest emitter. No real down side.
MCE anywhere from $16 to $29 based more on where you get it than the bin level. Some central artifact in beam, needs larger optic/reflector to focus. This is the reason the Pro 1200 is sort of big. Smaller optics can get the job done as the Darkstar proves. 
XREs are old school but will still cost you $6 to $10 in general. Not as efficient as newer LEDs but still competitive as the Lupine demonstrates. Lots of optics and reflectors since it has been around the longest of the three afore mentioned emitters.

LED cost in a Lupine is probably around $50. 

Diy yourself average driver cost is around $25.
Optics would cost under $10 in general.
Batteries from reputable online sites cost anywhere from $9.00 to $100 depending on number of cells and voltage.


----------



## RobbieG (Nov 13, 2009)

francois said:


> The Lupine Betty is just ridiculous and renders my backyard test area inadequate. So I will actually get the most powerful lights and take them to a nice long trail with a canopy and a few markers to photograph these super lights.
> 
> The Magicshine is more prone to inconsistencies since they are from the Seoul P7 C Bin leds (not the highest quality batch). Some lights are brighter than others. My light was shipped last week and is a little more blue tint and not quite as bright as my friend's which measured 39 lux. But it is a great value of course.
> 
> fc


Definitely not dissing the MagicShine... its the price/performance ratio champ for sure. I just ordered one of the MS torches to run as a handlebar light to complement my Tesla which I am running helmet mounted... should be a decent combo.


----------



## mcoplea (Nov 11, 2004)

RobbieG said:


> Definitely not dissing the MagicShine... its the price/performance ratio champ for sure. I just ordered one of the MS torches to run as a handlebar light to complement my Tesla which I am running helmet mounted... should be a decent combo.


Valid point. If the $85 MS light gets more people out there that would not otherwise be riding at night, it is a good thing.

I am not a fan of the quality of the MS lights or their highly questionable claim of 900 lumens.


----------



## Flyer (Jan 25, 2004)

The Lupines and the NR 1200 beams are truly impressive. The Betty, Nite Flux 1350, and NR 1200 need a real trail that can reveal their throw. I was thinking about that incredible lawn and when you mentioned astroturf, it all made sense. 

Great job, francois- and much appreciated. You need to shop for a house with a bigger yard though. Looking forward to the complete collection (and my Betty upgrade). Finally, a thread worth spending time on....


----------



## mtbmojo (Nov 9, 2004)

The only thing I would say is just make sure that the exposure settings on the camera are locked at the same values for all the tests so it is truly apples for apples. But I’m sure you were already going to do that.


----------



## Cyco-Dude (Feb 12, 2004)

mcoplea said:


> Thanks for "shedding some light" on the topic, francois. It is interesting to see the different beam shots and the claimed lumens vs. Lux chart.
> 
> The Niterider Pro 600 claims 600 lumens and threw out 46 Lux on your test.
> 
> The Magicshine claims 900 lumens and only threw out 37 Lux on your test. Enough said.


light claims from manufacturers (or worse, from led spec sheets) are to be taken with a large bucket of salt. not to mention, how one manufacturer comes up with light output vs anyother could be totally different. only when an objective third party compares lights in similar conditions can you get any useful info.

light shootout wish list: niterider minewt.200 / 400, cycolite trion / triden x


----------



## noshortcuts (Nov 29, 2005)

Thanks for the work and upcoming reviews.

I want to see the same camera location and focal length used. I also want the same picture size and picture cropping for each image. 

Then your pictures will have captured the same area in the images and using the same size and cropping of images will further help in comparing photos.


----------



## itsdoable (Jan 6, 2004)

Here's the measured data so far in graphical form for comparison.










I have normalized the measured Lux (red) with the claimed lumens (yellow) of the NiteRider Pro600 (them being one of the manufacturers that measure their output). There is obviously some variation there, but the manufactures that are known to quote measured lumens agree fairly well. This also allows you to read the measured Lux off the opposite scale to get an idea of the actual lumens output.

The price in $ is in blue, and can be read off the left scale, and the difference between the blue and red gives you an idea of the cost/benifit.

Here is the Cost per Lux as requested:









Lights are sorted from lowest to highest cost/Lux (red), and the total cost is plotted on the right hand side (blue).

edit: fix date...; add cost/lux


----------



## lidarman (Jan 12, 2004)

itsdoable said:


> The price in $ is in blue, and can be read off the left scale, and the difference between the blue and red gives you an idea of the cost/benifit.


When you say "difference" did you really mean ratio?


----------



## radirpok (Feb 1, 2006)

Too bad that Dinotte (1200L?) are missing this time.

Also it is nice to see that Lupine listened to the critics and they significantly lowered their "claimed lumens" number. Eg. the old Betty was claimed 1400-1500 lumens (around 1000 in reality), the new one is claimed just 1750, but is almost twice as bright as the previous one. Same thing with the Wilma (not included in this review): old one claimed 920 (around 800 in reality), new one only 1100, but this time it's gonna be over 1000 indeed...

However it's pretty strange that all the P7-equipped lights are below 40 lux measured EXCEPT for the Lupine Tesla. That's a bit suspicious ;-)


----------



## caminoloco (Jan 13, 2008)

Great test, thanks !

I find it however a bit confusing that in some pictures you get the beam shots of several lights at the same time and in others it's just one... in that case, might I suggest a combo shot of two MS lights ? 

That's a setup a lot of people seem to be running (handlebars/helmet), and which I'm thinking of.


----------



## pimpbot (Dec 31, 2003)

*Yeah, good work*



caminoloco said:


> Great test, thanks !
> 
> I find it however a bit confusing that in some pictures you get the beam shots of several lights at the same time and in others it's just one... in that case, might I suggest a combo shot of two MS lights ?
> 
> That's a setup a lot of people seem to be running (handlebars/helmet), and which I'm thinking of.


and for all the whining about what a POS the MagicShine, I don't see a lot of difference between the Exposure Diablo, Toro and the MS.


----------



## czarny_kruk (Jan 23, 2008)

*francois*, could you repeat Betty lux test? This lamp even with Cree is not twice brighter than the Niterider 1200PRO. In fact, the Niterider lights better.


----------



## MaximusHQ (Aug 6, 2007)

Flyer said:


> The Lupines and the NR 1200 beams are truly impressive. The Betty, Nite Flux 1350, and NR 1200 need a real trail that can reveal their throw. I was thinking about that incredible lawn and when you mentioned astroturf, it all made sense.
> 
> Great job, francois- and much appreciated. You need to shop for a house with a bigger yard though. Looking forward to the complete collection (*and my Betty upgrade*). Finally, a thread worth spending time on....


So flyer you couldn't resist the Betty upgrade either? I just ordered up a Betty and Wilma upgrade myself from gretnabikes. Should be a fairly bright combo. As exciting as the improved brightness brings to these lights I am equally stoked that I will be able get longer run times when running at equivalent brightness that I run now.

Thanks francois for all you do. I am impressed with the thorough and professional job you do with the reviews. This years crop looks like they will kick some major butt. I see NR brought some muscle to the party too this year and I hope to see more of what I call the heavyweight division of lights (lights that put out over 1000 lumens). Fun stuff.


----------



## bentboy242 (Nov 7, 2009)

I am interested in the Dinotte 1200L.


----------



## RobbieG (Nov 13, 2009)

Of all the beam shots the Lupine Tesla and TrailLED Darkstar seem the most user-friendly, at least to my eye... bright is important, but penetration, spill, etc, are equally so.


----------



## fightnut (Jul 5, 2007)

In that particular line up so far, it looks like the Baja Stryker is the next best value (after the MS) in terms of amount of light vs. price.

I agree with caminoloco, I'd like to see 2 magicshines together for the same reason he stated, you're showing other popular "combos" that people use, and many people use 2 magicshines together on helmet and bars.

Either way, all your work is appreciated Francois! :thumbsup:


----------



## ToddN (Feb 2, 2007)

Since we're talking about combos people ride with... How about a Betty Tesla combo. I know quite a few people that ride like that.


----------



## RobbieG (Nov 13, 2009)

[email protected] said:


> Since we're talking about combos people ride with... How about a Betty Tesla combo. I know quite a few people that ride like that.


The light meter might explode....


----------



## Floriante (Apr 22, 2009)

How come Exposure Lights Maxxd looks less bright than Toro?

Whats the main difference between these two lights besides one of them is 960 and the other is 700 lumens?


----------



## Francis Cebedo (Aug 1, 1996)

Floriante said:


> How come Exposure Lights Maxxd looks less bright than Toro?
> 
> Whats the main difference between these two lights besides one of them is 960 and the other is 700 lumens?


That is a good observation.The MaxxD uses 4 LEDs and the Toro uses one with a reflector.

The Toro is a very efficient beam pattern where it has a huge halo that is not very bright then a center spot that is bright and focused. This works very well for singletrack since it allows you good peripheral vision and you can see quite far ahead with that bright spot. The Tesla and the Magicshine have similar patterns as they all use the Seoul P7 emitter.

So the Toro appears really well in my test backyard setup.

The MaxxD has 4 leds and it produces a consistent and very wide tunnel of light. So you don't see the grass lit up as much. Also, a lot of the beam is used up on the fence and on the tree above. It's great for singletrack as well as high speed on the fire road since you'll light up a wide trail a long way.

fc


----------



## Francis Cebedo (Aug 1, 1996)

RobbieG said:


> The light meter might explode....


He, he... my backyard test will be useless and that will burn a hole through my fence!

I will go out on a longass (technical term), covered trail and take this shot though.

fc


----------



## Francis Cebedo (Aug 1, 1996)

RobbieG said:


> Of all the beam shots the Lupine Tesla and TrailLED Darkstar seem the most user-friendly, at least to my eye... bright is important, but penetration, spill, etc, are equally so.


I've been riding with the Tesla for a year. It has been my favorite light.

This past few weeks, the Niterider 1200 has been the standout. It is so bright, wide and even that it is very easy to go fast even without a helmet light.

Tonight, I ride with the Darkstar. I can't believe that light is coming out of a helmet light.

fc


----------



## Francis Cebedo (Aug 1, 1996)

czarny_kruk said:


> *francois*, could you repeat Betty lux test? This lamp even with Cree is not twice brighter than the Niterider 1200PRO. In fact, the Niterider lights better.


I shall do that indeed! The Niterider 1200 seems low too even compared to the 600.

The Lupine Betty does a funny thing on the light meter. When I turn it on, it registers really high (175 lux then it drops down to about 160 lux in about 30 seconds) I thought it was heat so I'll run a fan on it while testing.

fc


----------



## Francis Cebedo (Aug 1, 1996)

bentboy242 said:


> I am interested in the Dinotte 1200L.


I'll get that. The new Light and Motion will be here this week too.

fc


----------



## Francis Cebedo (Aug 1, 1996)

MaximusHQ said:


> So flyer you couldn't resist the Betty upgrade either? I just ordered up a Betty and Wilma upgrade myself from gretnabikes. Should be a fairly bright combo. As exciting as the improved brightness brings to these lights I am equally stoked that I will be able get longer run times when running at equivalent brightness that I run now.
> 
> Thanks francois for all you do. I am impressed with the thorough and professional job you do with the reviews. This years crop looks like they will kick some major butt. I see NR brought some muscle to the party too this year and I hope to see more of what I call the heavyweight division of lights (lights that put out over 1000 lumens). Fun stuff.


Thanks!

The Niterider 1200 has a beautiful beam pattern indeed. I don't like heavy lights but this one is a legitimate no-helmet light needed so that works out ok.

Niterider has invested a ton of pennies on their new configuration software. I think the real selling point though will be the beam pattern.

fc


----------



## Floriante (Apr 22, 2009)

I thought Toro had a narrower but longer beam so it allows very fast riding while Maxxd has a wide but shorter beam so you cant ride as fast.

You said "a lot of beam is used up on the fence and on the tree above" whats the point of this?

Which light will you prefer for city ridings?


----------



## Francis Cebedo (Aug 1, 1996)

radirpok said:


> Too bad that Dinotte (1200L?) are missing this time.
> 
> However it's pretty strange that all the P7-equipped lights are below 40 lux measured EXCEPT for the Lupine Tesla. That's a bit suspicious ;-)


I'll get the Dinotte for sure.

I'll retest the Lupine Tesla.

fc


----------



## Francis Cebedo (Aug 1, 1996)

itsdoable said:


> Here's the measured data so far in graphical form for comparison.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Thank you, thank you!! What was that old request by users.. Lux per dollar?

I fixed the navigation btw, so each product links t its page.

I'll get the same photo sizes as well for all lights.

fc


----------



## Francis Cebedo (Aug 1, 1996)

Floriante said:


> I thought Toro had a narrower but longer beam so it allows very fast riding while Maxxd has a wide but shorter beam so you cant ride as fast.
> 
> You said "a lot of beam is used up on the fence and on the tree above" whats the point of this?
> 
> Which light will you prefer for city ridings?


I prefer the Toro style of lights these days. I think the most efficient use of light is a very wide halo of light then a focused spot to see far away. The more even the transition is between the two beam patterns, the better.

"a lot of beam is used up on the fence and on the tree above" 
I'm just saying where the light went in the photo. Bike lights are really only visible when they hit something. So the beam pattern normally needs to be pointed to the ground, objects or to the periphery to be visible. For a test area, you want a really a lot of objects like a tree or fence to capture all the light produced.

The ideal test trail for photos is a really long, slightly uphill trail with a canopy of trees and a lot of ground features and obstacles to capture all the light

The Light and Motion Seca and the Lupine Tesla style lights try to address this by good reflectors that put more of the light to the ground and they are quite successful I think.

fc


----------



## Floriante (Apr 22, 2009)

As far as i can see, Toro's light is wider than maxxd near the bike, thats obvious.

So the maxxd wastes some of its light (as the light goes up on the fence and the tree)

I would consider light and motion or tesla BUT i want something cable free.


----------



## CdaleTony (Jun 21, 2005)

RobbieG said:


> Hmmm.. the Magicshine doesn't look so "magic" in the beamshot comparison... the Lupine Betty on the other hand is insane...


Yea ok 
I guess with all the MS love that is flying around people will naturally generate some negativity.
Flat out, its as good or better the the NR Enduro I had. The one I paid $240 for. Comparable to other lights out there that cost $200+.
That is such a huge differential it warrants attention. But the whole MS war is getting old.
Spend as much $$ as makes you feel good. I myself would add a 2nd or even 3rd MS ....
For most night time trail riding anything more is for bragging rights...
CDT


----------



## Floriante (Apr 22, 2009)

By the way, is BR Lights C2K so much brighter than maxxd or toro?


----------



## Francis Cebedo (Aug 1, 1996)

Floriante said:


> By the way, is BR Lights C2K so much brighter than maxxd or toro?


It's brighter yes. Our review is here. The beam shots are directly comparable
http://reviews.mtbr.com/blog/br-lights-c2-k/

In 2009, they made their beam more even and spread out. Also, they made it a touch more yellow to make it easy on the eyes and to enhance contrast.

fc


----------



## Francis Cebedo (Aug 1, 1996)

CdaleTony said:


> Yea ok
> I guess with all the MS love that is flying around people will naturally generate some negativity.
> Flat out, its as good or better the the NR Enduro I had. The one I paid $240 for. Comparable to other lights out there that cost $200+.
> That is such a huge differential it warrants attention. But the whole MS war is getting old.
> ...


Hey, you're the one getting mad. 

This thread is pretty darn civil IMHO.

fc


----------



## znomit (Dec 27, 2007)

francois said:


> I shall do that indeed! The Niterider 1200 seems low too even compared to the 600.
> 
> The Lupine Betty does a funny thing on the light meter. When I turn it on, it registers really high (175 lux then it drops down to about 160 lux in about 30 seconds) I thought it was heat so I'll run a fan on it while testing.
> 
> fc


Its the leds warming up. Expect a 10-20% drop until steady state is reached for a well designed light.

Could you do individual lux readings for the narrow and wide(covering the adjacent beam). 
They should be the same lumens so this will tell if the lux test favors narrow beams.


----------



## RobbieG (Nov 13, 2009)

francois said:


> Hey, you're the one getting mad.
> 
> This thread is pretty darn civil IMHO.
> 
> fc


Yes, this thread is going really well overall... my comment about the MS was more tongue-in-cheek than anything... I actually have one of the MS torches on order to run as a backup to my Tesla... I can't afford two Lupines...


----------



## Flyer (Jan 25, 2004)

Yeah, how could I resist the Betty upgrade! Next year, I'm hoping for a Tesla upgrade, I'd like to be able to see 200 yards down the trail.



MaximusHQ said:


> So flyer you couldn't resist the Betty upgrade either? I just ordered up a Betty and Wilma upgrade myself from gretnabikes. Should be a fairly bright combo. As exciting as the improved brightness brings to these lights I am equally stoked that I will be able get longer run times when running at equivalent brightness that I run now.
> 
> Thanks francois for all you do. I am impressed with the thorough and professional job you do with the reviews. This years crop looks like they will kick some major butt. I see NR brought some muscle to the party too this year and I hope to see more of what I call the heavyweight division of lights (lights that put out over 1000 lumens). Fun stuff.


----------



## CdaleTony (Jun 21, 2005)

francois said:


> Hey, you're the one getting mad.
> 
> This thread is pretty darn civil IMHO.
> 
> fc


I prefer 'Defensive'


----------



## MaximusHQ (Aug 6, 2007)

Flyer said:


> Yeah, how could I resist the Betty upgrade! *Next year, I'm hoping for a Tesla upgrade*, I'd like to be able to see 200 yards down the trail.


An upgraded Tesla would be about the only light that I would trade my Wilma for. Just got in the door from a night ride and you can definitely tell winter is coming. 28° F is a bit nippy, but refreshing too.

Nice job on the graph itsdoable.


----------



## Flyer (Jan 25, 2004)

Yeah winter tires (car) are on and a trip to Moab in two days is happening, it seems. I'm sure Porc Rim will destroy me. Winter came too early but snowboarding will start up. I actually plan on doing some night snowboarding too. I would be surprised if a Tesla upgrade didn't happen next year. I love that light and a Tesla with twice the brightness and even more throw would be insane....insanely welcome. The Tesla replaced my Wilma though my buddy had the Wilma now. He loves it though claims there is no "need" for a Wilma upgrade. When did "need" come into play? What a nutjob!



MaximusHQ said:


> An upgraded Tesla would be about the only light that I would trade my Wilma for. Just got in the door from a night ride and you can definitely tell winter is coming. 28° F is a bit nippy, but refreshing too.
> 
> Nice job on the graph itsdoable.


----------



## Bajamike (Jul 15, 2009)

Hi Francois, 
If you have time can you post a picture of the wide beam pattern for the Strykr. I think it's a more useful beam pattern for mountain biking when used by itself; unless you are on more wide open faster trails.


----------



## gticlay (Dec 13, 2007)

HOLY CRAP a couple of those kick butt. wow.


----------



## louisssss (Jun 24, 2009)

_____


----------



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

Hi All...I hate to post duplicate posts but didn't realize that most of the comments from the 2010 review were over here ( not over on DIY )...So, This was my first Post...( below )

*I CANT BELIEVE WHAT I'M SEEING*....:madmax: :madmax:

I just finished looking over the 2010 Pro Review and I have *ONE COMMENT....
WHAT THE HECK HAPPENED WITH THE BEAM PHOTO OF THE
HIDTECH LUMEN 8R QUAD!!!???* :madmax: :madmax: :madmax:

The photo is two sizes smaller than the others, looks like it is taken at a lower resolution...looks almost out of focus! You can't even see the bike even though it is rated at 66lux ( 1000 claimed lumens ) *EVEN THE MAGIC SHINE LOOKED BRIGHTER AND CLEARER! *( 37lux ) :madmax: 
No cones in this photo...Different angle...is the lens here smudged? I find it very stange that this beam photo is the only one that appears this way..:nono: :nono: :nono:

Francois....*You owe Daniel from HIDtech an apology for totally misrepresenting his product. *( Note: FWIW...I own one of these. If I had a decent camera I would post my own picture. )

I've heard of Bad Santa...so is there a BAD FRANCOIS :nono:

AND...this was my second post....below

Once again...a quick comparison of the photo's. *The larger photo is of the Magic Shine. The smaller is the Lumen8R quad. *All other photos in the review were the same size as the MS photo.* My Adobe Photoshop list the MS photo as having a file size of 147K.
The LM8R quad listed as 48K.* No wonder you can't see the bike in the LM8R photo..  . ( ...even though it has almost double the lux...:incazzato: ) All the other photo stats look about the same, all at the standard MTBreview settings. HOWEVER....the photos do look to be taken at a different time of year...at least that is what the photo file shows..:skep: ANYWAY.. ..I've had my say. I guess the big name bike light manufactures need some help ( like 3 x picture resolution ) to sell their lights...rft:

Clearly, the Aussie made light isn't going to get a fair shake again....shame, shame.


----------



## RobbieG (Nov 13, 2009)

^^ Wow, you are rally passionate about your lights... maybe give Francois a chance to explain the beamshot before you lambast him about not giving your lights a fair shake.. a wee bit melodramatic don't you think?


----------



## Francis Cebedo (Aug 1, 1996)

Bajamike said:


> Hi Francois,
> If you have time can you post a picture of the wide beam pattern for the Strykr. I think it's a more useful beam pattern for mountain biking when used by itself; unless you are on more wide open faster trails.


Oh yes!! I completely forgot that the Stryker comes with an optional wide reflector. I dismissed that as a 'spare' lens. So yes, as I am a fan of wiiide. I have a couple more lights coming in so more photo shoots.

fc


----------



## Francis Cebedo (Aug 1, 1996)

Cat-man-do said:


> .....
> Clearly, the Aussie made light isn't going to get a fair shake again....shame, shame.


Dude, don't be so angry. We're all friends here.:thumbsup:

We already covered that all photos need to be the same size. I'll fix that. The Lumen8r and Wilma 5 photos were taken back in May 2009 and I can't find the large photos. I had to grab the photos from my Rollover Widget here: http://www.mtbr.com/beamcomparisoncrx.aspx

I'll fix that though and reshoot as I am doing individual, detailed reviews and videos for each light.

Camera settings were kept the same though and you can see that Lumen8r is clearly brighter. My wife needed to mow that lawn though.

fc


----------



## bentboy242 (Nov 7, 2009)

could I use F5.6 6 second exposure ISO 200?
my nikon D40 won't do ISO 200.
seems totally equivalent.
or 3 seconds F4 ISO 200?
thanks


----------



## MtbMacgyver (Jan 23, 2007)

Not to seem un-grateful for all the effort you've put into this, but is there a way to get the pictures framed more consistently between the beamshots. It would make comparing different pictures easier....especially in the rollover views. 

Would it be possible to mark the exact location of the tripod and always put one of the focus points in the viewfinder on the same object for every picture and set the zoom level to a specific focal length.


----------



## Jim311 (Feb 7, 2006)

Cat-Man-Do wins annoying post of the year award.


----------



## Francis Cebedo (Aug 1, 1996)

MtbMacgyver said:


> Not to seem un-grateful for all the effort you've put into this, but is there a way to get the pictures framed more consistently between the beamshots. It would make comparing different pictures easier....especially in the rollover views.
> 
> Would it be possible to mark the exact location of the tripod and always put one of the focus points in the viewfinder on the same object for every picture and set the zoom level to a specific focal length.


Yes, I'm paying more attention to that. I have reference points now in my backyard. Some of those photos in the rollover though are from 2 years ago so it's prone to change.

We'll do a new rollover for this season's crop.

fc


----------



## bentboy242 (Nov 7, 2009)

isn't the light testing a lot of fun?


----------



## Francis Cebedo (Aug 1, 1996)

bentboy242 said:


> isn't the light testing a lot of fun?


You know, it is except for one small detail. Night riding where I live, San Jose CA is largely illegal. The rangers hunt me down and give me $350 tickets. These ultra bright lights aren't helping either.

He, he... I wish I was kidding.

Here's me at a beautiful park 2 miles from my house.









This is our park district: https://openspace.org/

breaking the law for the call of duty,
fc


----------



## mcoplea (Nov 11, 2004)

Jim311 said:


> Cat-Man-Do wins annoying post of the year award.


+1

We apprecite your efforts, francois, and look forward to your future updates.


----------



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

Jim311 said:


> Cat-Man-Do wins annoying post of the year award.


Huh....:skep: Well...I suppose truth sometimes is annoying but ..."Annoying Post of the Year"?.....Please  ....apparently you've never read some of the really WAM-Bang threads that are posted on here. FWIW, I felt it necessary to include some bells and whistles since I had previously requested that the Lumen8R quad be tested ( since last year... )
Truthfully though, I felt the Manufacturer wasn't getting a fair shake. You have to remember, people sometimes make their living with this stuff and it was the only photo not up to par. If this had happened to one of the Lupines there would have been an avalanche of complaints...I kid you not. Just try dissing a Lupine and you'll see what I'm talking about.  I was par-say a little dramatic but my comment got noticed...totally in keeping with, "The squeaky wheel gets the grease" theorem. I'm sure Francois has been called worse things than "Bad Francois"....especially when wifey wants something done..   ( edit: darn, almost forgot to take my bow for winning the award....:ciappa: ... )


----------



## louisssss (Jun 24, 2009)

Cat-man-do said:


> Huh....:skep: Well...I suppose truth sometimes is annoying but ..."Annoying Post of the Year"?.....Please  ....apparently you've never read some of the really WAM-Bang threads that are posted on here. FWIW, I felt it necessary to include some bells and whistles since I had previously requested that the Lumen8R quad be tested ( since last year... )
> Truthfully though, I felt the Manufacturer wasn't getting a fair shake. You have to remember, people sometimes make their living with this stuff and it was the only photo not up to par. If this had happened to one of the Lupines there would have been an avalanche of complaints...I kid you not. Just try dissing a Lupine and you'll see what I'm talking about.  I was par-say a little dramatic but my comment got noticed...totally in keeping with, "The squeaky wheel gets the grease" theorem. I'm sure Francois has been called worse things than "Bad Francois"....especially when wifey wants something done..   ( edit: darn, almost forgot to take my bow for winning the award....:ciappa: ... )


2nd most annoying post of the year! use proper grammar and paragraphs please


----------



## RobbieG (Nov 13, 2009)

And talk about overuse of emoticons....  now back to the business at hand... testing lights.


----------



## bonesetter2004 (May 27, 2007)

Shame you can't compare Mr Troute's new troutelight 

Coming in at a cool Lupine thrashing 2200 Lumens!


----------



## MaximusHQ (Aug 6, 2007)

It that the Lumen Liberator that he makes? I was checking it out and on his site he rates it as putting out 1600 lumens actual unless he managed to get more out of it somehow. That light looks to be pretty amazing though as all of his lights do. I especially like the low profile design and how it sits in the center of your bars not off to one side. Almost makes me want to sell my Betty and buy one.


----------



## mfx (Jul 16, 2005)

francois said:


> You know, it is except for one small detail. Night riding where I live, San Jose CA is largely illegal. The rangers hunt me down and give me $350 tickets. These ultra bright lights aren't helping either.
> 
> He, he... I wish I was kidding.
> 
> Here's me at a beautiful park 2 miles from my house.


How far into the trails do you need to go? If you take your pedals off, can you walk it? Then you can claim you weren't riding, but had walked in just to do the tests. Unless the park is just entirely closed at night.


----------



## wormvine (Oct 27, 2005)

bonesetter2004 said:


> Shame you can't compare Mr Troute's new troutelight
> 
> Coming in at a cool Lupine thrashing 2200 Lumens!


And also a shame you can't test the RUBIX. 
2200 lumens, Weaksauce! This handmade light puts out 3600 claimed lumens and he also runs a 2 led helmet light for 5600 lumens (claimed) total.

http://forums.mtbr.com/showthread.php?t=568134


----------



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

francois said:


> Dude, don't be so angry. We're all friends here.:thumbsup:
> 
> We already covered that all photos need to be the same size. I'll fix that. The Lumen8r and Wilma 5 photos were taken back in May 2009 and I can't find the large photos. I had to grab the photos from my Rollover Widget here: http://www.mtbr.com/beamcomparisoncrx.aspx
> 
> ...


Cheers Francois! Oh, I'm not _that_ upset and I know your not _really_ a "bad" guy. The reference to Bad Santa was suppose to be funny. Seems like people misunderstood my intent. This was just my way of _metaphorically_ poking you in the ribs with a wake up call. I was not trying to skew you, sorry if that's what was thought, my bad. I'll admit, I didn't think it possible to use too squeaky a wheel! :lol: . Now I know better. Next time I'll steer away from using the flaming emoticons. I had no idea that they tend to draw *flies from the peanut gallery. ( *correction: the word "flies" could be too harsh. Please insert the word, "Trolls" as it is more appropriate ) ( *snicker* )

Glad to hear that you are going to fix the photos. I appreciate your effort to included all the lights that you have gathered. Someone else mentoned that they liked the comparison set-up that was used last year. I'll second that, I like being able to just scroll over and bring the photo up. Your idea of having video might be a bit of over-kill. Video's tend to not be real clear so I don't know if they are worth the trouble. Having photo's that show the longer throw of the "Power house" set-ups would be great. I can't wait to see what you come up with.


----------



## bonesetter2004 (May 27, 2007)

MaximusHQ said:


> It that the Lumen Liberator that he makes? I was checking it out and on his site he rates it as putting out 1600 lumens actual unless he managed to get more out of it somehow. That light looks to be pretty amazing though as all of his lights do. I especially like the low profile design and how it sits in the center of your bars not off to one side. Almost makes me want to sell my Betty and buy one.


He had a last minute change before final builds and used a different LED unit giving slightly more output. So theoretical output before loss was up from 2000 to 2200. Afraid I can't give you the technical run down, or the actual output figure

The low profile is a pretty good feature. He does a 'Baby Trout' helmet light which fits very low. My iBlaast! is a right branch hooker by comparison


----------



## bentboy242 (Nov 7, 2009)

when are the next reviews going up? thanks. this is my favorite forum lately.


----------



## lidarman (Jan 12, 2004)

The reason Francois doesn't test the hand made machined lights is because the cost per lux would cause an overflow error.


----------



## notaknob (Apr 6, 2004)

*Even The Nights Are Better*



bonesetter2004 said:


> Shame you can't compare Mr Troute's new troutelight
> 
> Coming in at a cool Lupine thrashing 2200 Lumens!


He'd have to have stock to provide one. Since he was sold out in a week or two prior to even having all the pieces, I don't think there would be one available for testing. I don't even think there's more than 2-3 in the USA.

I know I don't want to loan mine out, even though I can't ride again until mid Jan.


----------



## yetibetty (Dec 24, 2007)

francois said:


> You know, it is except for one small detail. Night riding where I live, San Jose CA is largely illegal. The rangers hunt me down and give me $350 tickets. These ultra bright lights aren't helping either.
> 
> He, he... I wish I was kidding.
> 
> ...


Francois, I have to ask why night riding is ilegal in San Jose CA? Is there a good reason for it?
Sorry if it's a daft question but it's unheard of(at least to me)in the UK for places that are legal in the day to be ilegal at night and I'm curious.


----------



## pimpbot (Dec 31, 2003)

*Probably has to do with...*



yetibetty said:


> Francois, I have to ask why night riding is ilegal in San Jose CA? Is there a good reason for it?
> Sorry if it's a daft question but it's unheard of(at least to me)in the UK for places that are legal in the day to be ilegal at night and I'm curious.


the gubmint not wanting to pay for extra rangers and rescue workers to pick bodies off the mountain at night when its 10 times harder. Also, to curb illegal activity, like growing weed, cooking meth, or burying dead bodies.


----------



## fightnut (Jul 5, 2007)

yetibetty said:


> Francois, I have to ask why night riding is ilegal in San Jose CA? Is there a good reason for it?
> Sorry if it's a daft question but it's unheard of(at least to me)in the UK for places that are legal in the day to be ilegal at night and I'm curious.


Not just CA. I'm in PA and most of our parks close at dusk and no one is suppose to be in them after dark. Sucks!


----------



## CdaleTony (Jun 21, 2005)

fightnut said:


> Not just CA. I'm in PA and most of our parks close at dusk and no one is suppose to be in them after dark. Sucks!


+1 for Northern Illinois. We have one state park thats open most of the year till 10 pm (1.5 hours from chicago) and one nice system in Wisconsin the same way.
Other than that, the normal riding places close at dusk/sunset. Which means you have to consult the tables to know what the official time is every day.  
CDT


----------



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

*Francois*....I was going over the 2010 review again and noticed that there are no links or photos of the actual light systems that you are reviewing. I was quite impressed with some of these photos and was dying to see what the systems look like, not to mention what batteries and mounts are included with each one. Is this going to be included in the next line up of photos ?


----------



## Francis Cebedo (Aug 1, 1996)

The first review is here and it features the Exposure Diablo.

I don't write so good so I'm just going to yak-yak on the video now.

http://reviews.mtbr.com/blog/exposure-diablo/

fc


----------



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

*Bravo!!* I take back what I said about the video being useful. I thought you were refering to to just a beam shot video. *Instead we are seeing a full review of the product PLUS some beam shots. Very NICE touch. * :thumbsup:

My initial impression of the Exposure's, FWIW. This is the first time I actually got to see someone holding one of the Exposure lights. They are smaller than I thought. Not a bad little system...expensive, but if you are into self-contained light units and don't mind paying the extra bucks for a more quality built product ( vs. 2 x P-7 torches at < $100 ) ...this could be the way to go.


----------



## billysorton (Jul 29, 2007)

*Cheers to Francois*

Wow, it's easy to see how much time and effort goes into this, thank you for all your great efforts!


----------



## Francis Cebedo (Aug 1, 1996)

A major update is here:
http://reviews.mtbr.com/blog/2010-mtbr-lights-shootout/

Also, a lot of the videos are now available before the reviews
http://www.youtube.com/user/MtbrVideos

fc


----------



## czarny_kruk (Jan 23, 2008)

Excellent job francois. Thank you.


----------



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

francois said:


> A major update is here:
> http://reviews.mtbr.com/blog/2010-mtbr-lights-shootout/
> 
> Also, a lot of the videos are now available before the reviews
> ...


Excellent! :thumbsup: Can't wait to see one of these with the HIDtech Lumen8R quad which at this point is earning, " The Rodney Dangerfield Award" as the least respected/known about light systems.


----------



## radirpok (Feb 1, 2006)

francois said:


> Also, a lot of the videos are now available before the reviews
> http://www.youtube.com/user/MtbrVideos


This is actually better than TV, I've been watching these videos for like an hour! 
There are some small mistakes and/or factual errors, but overall it's an excellent job, thank you! 

As an owner of these hyper-expensive Lupine lights I'd like to emphasize a few points that I feel are missing from the review - eg. why on earth does one buy these, when one can get the same stuff much cheaper (eg. Tesla vs MS).

One point I'd like to make is that the quoted price is for the full kit (battery plus charger plus lighthead plus accessories), it's fine to make comparisons easier, but perhaps you could note that for example a Betty head in itself doesn't cost a 1000 bucks, it's 700 MSRP (I've just checked it at Gretna), which of course is still a lot (btw. Tesla basic - $270), BUT if you have purchased a kit earlier, then you may not need the extra charger and/or battery, so you are fine with the light head alone. You can even get a used lighthead from eBay, for example, a bit cheaper than the new one... so this is an important point for me, that the system is completely modular, and actually there are a lot of options to choose from, eg. battery size from the 50gr micro to the 13Ah bottle-style, different chargers, headbelt etc. Also, each lighthead is compatible with each battery and charger.

The other point is upgradeability, which is probably at least as important, and we are just seeing this becoming reality - anyone who purchased an older Wilma or Betty will be able to upgrade now to the newest technology for a small fee. Please tell me which other ligths on the market have this option (and also consider whether the light must be sent back to the manufacturer for upgrades or if you could do it yourself).

I know, it sounds like marketing BS, but these in my opinion are legitimate reasons why someone would choose the more expensive option when he/she has a choice (and the money of course).


----------



## RobbieG (Nov 13, 2009)

^^ Great points Radirpok... I totally agree that the modularity and upgradability of the system have to considered as part of the evaluation criteria.

BTW, I had the opportunity to compare my Tesla to a Magicshine last night and IMO there is no comparison in beam intensity, quality, etc.... the Magicshine is nice for the price, but its not a Tesla. I am not a Lupine fanboy either, I have a Magicshine torch for backup purposes.


----------



## RobbieG (Nov 13, 2009)

Any more updates to the shootout forthcoming? I have a TrailLED Darkstar on its way to me (darn postal service) and would love to see some more test data. The video reviews have been very good to date.


----------



## BBW (Feb 25, 2004)

radirpok said:


> This is actually better than TV, I've been watching these videos for like an hour!
> There are some small mistakes and/or factual errors, but overall it's an excellent job, thank you!
> 
> As an owner of these hyper-expensive Lupine lights I'd like to emphasize a few points that I feel are missing from the review - eg. why on earth does one buy these, when one can get the same stuff much cheaper (eg. Tesla vs MS).
> ...


you are missing my favorite: crash-ability 
After crashing with the Wilma and realizing that the front cap/front glass is only 20$ and the light looks like new.... they are winners
Most lights out there won't stand a crash and lets be real, we do crash (at least if you ride hard or technical terrain)


----------



## RobbieG (Nov 13, 2009)

My Darkstar arrived on XMAS eve.. about 10 days late (thanks posties)... this is one serious piece of kit.. what amazes me is not what's there, but what isn't.. .The lighthead is so small I almost missed it amidst the packing material... I was absolutely astounded by the light output from the 80g lighthead... makes my previous Tesla seem pretty pedestrian. Hope to try it out on boxing day and will report back.


----------



## Shark (Feb 4, 2006)

Good job! Thanks for all the info, very useful.

Does anyone use Jet Lites anymore? Not too many people talking about them at all. I have an old 13 watt halogen that still does the job well, but I'm sure would be put to shame with the new LED stuff now. The build quality was top notch.


----------



## BBW (Feb 25, 2004)

Shark said:


> Good job! Thanks for all the info, very useful.
> 
> Does anyone use Jet Lites anymore? Not too many people talking about them at all. I have an old 13 watt halogen that still does the job well, but I'm sure would be put to shame with the new LED stuff now. The build quality was top notch.


I started "really" riding with a Jet 12W helmet mount. I remember everyone's eyes like this  every time I powered that thing ;-)
Amazing light. Can you believe that the battery was still strong after 5 years?:thumbsup: 
I sold it because of new (lightweight) technology but sure is hell of a system


----------



## bentboy242 (Nov 7, 2009)

*next installment?*

hey franc, when is the next installment of the light shootout? I am interested in your opinion of the Dinotte 1200L. thanks for your en"light"ening reviews.


----------



## indebt (Nov 8, 2009)

*NiteFlux Enduro 12 Single,1000 claimed lumens.*



francois said:


> My first article is up here:
> 
> http://reviews.mtbr.com/blog/2010-mtbr-lights-shootout/
> 
> ...


NiteFlux Enduro 12 (single) 1000 claimed lumens would be nice to hear your review, aprox $379USD. Wasn't happy with the Enduro 8. The 12 watt Enduro 12 much better.Am guessing it would be similar to the Photon Max 12 watt?


----------



## bentboy242 (Nov 7, 2009)

*dinotte 1200L?*

When will this review be available?


----------



## Shin-Chan (Aug 22, 2006)

*Waridi lights*

Hello Francis

Thanks for your reviews!!

It would be grate if you could give more technical details (Like the german magazines) and more photo examples in different situations.

I want to buy a good like system. After various reviews i think that Lupine is one of the best if not the best

I don´t know if i need two lamps or just one.

For example, one Wilma 7 in the handlebar and another one on the helmet... or just a Betty on the handlebar... or just a Wilma on the helmet.

Do you know the brand: WARIDI sport lights ? www.waridi.de

Because in a German Magazine is the test winner. But the Lupine rival was the TESLA and not the Wilma with the new cree...

German online magazine:
http://emag.bikesportnews.de/ausgabe_11-12_09/index.html

Page 50-52

Could you ask them to give you a sample to test it ?

Some photos:

































Regards


----------



## Infinity123 (Dec 11, 2009)

Shin-Chan said:


> Do you know the brand: WARIDI sport lights ? www.waridi.de


Nice comparison :thumbsup: . Look at the WARIDI and the VW-bus....cool


----------



## indebt (Nov 8, 2009)

*Thanx to Francois!*

Have seen the updates on the new Cree Wilma at 103lux, Dinotte 800 at 60 lux/1200 at 81 lux,and the Seca 900 at 95 lux,many have been waiting for these light reviews. Thanx Fracois for all the work you have put into this.:thumbsup:


----------



## znomit (Dec 27, 2007)

*Shootout pic ripoff*

Not sure what to say about this

These guys are selling the magicshine:
http://nitelights.co.nz/mountain-bike-night-light-stockists
Though they claim is not the DX light...
_We have compared, upgraded and brought to market a much better product. I brought in 50 of the lights from the manufacturer of the DX lights before we went to market and have had most fail, it was anm expensive excercise. That manufacturer is still trying to get me to buy through him, we got his upgraded sample yesterday which seems to still have the same faults.

The light is an upgraded copy of the Lupine Tesla with a number of better modifications._

Using the shootout pictures for the Lupine Betty  
http://reviews.mtbr.com/blog/2010-mtbr-lights-shootout/5/#LupineBetty7

I think they're the same guys who were trying to price fix the magicshine online
http://www.comcom.govt.nz/MediaCentre/MediaReleases/200910/trademesellerwarnedagainstanticomp.aspx


----------



## canuckjgc (Jun 22, 2007)

This is awesome work, thank you!

I would be interested in a further comparison of lux vs. weight. Do some of those other lights weigh a lot more? The MS is pretty light with the battery.


----------



## abacojeff (Aug 17, 2008)

znomit said:


> Not sure what to say about this
> 
> These guys are selling the magicshine...
> 
> http://nitelights.co.nz/mountain-bike-night-light-stockists


They STOLE a picture of Francois' backyard??? :madmax:

And the picture they stole is a beamshot of the Lupine BETTY instead of the MS??? :madmax:

WHAT a bunch of a$$-clowns that group is!!! :madmax:


----------



## znomit (Dec 27, 2007)

abacojeff said:


> They STOLE a picture of Francois' backyard??? :madmax:
> 
> And the picture they stole is a beamshot of the Lupine BETTY instead of the MS??? :madmax:
> 
> WHAT a bunch of ass-clowns that group is!!! :madmax:


Just got a nice PM from them which cleared a few things up...

They assure me they are looking into the source of the image and will remove if incorrect. It was manufacturer supplied.

Also note nitelights.co.nz are not selling the DX light(even though it uses the same product image), their light is much better(unspecified improvements over the DX light which makes it better in a number of ways, rightfully justifying the significantly higher price). Note the 12 month warranty is better than the 3 months available for the DX light.
Perhaps our new member nitelights.co.nz could chime in here with some details...

I apologise for mistakenly assuming that the people behind nitelights.co.nz were in some way involved in the commerce commission price fixing case. I was confused as the ruling was against someone who shares the same surname as one of the people behind nitelights.co.nz. I guess its a common name amoungst LED bicycle light sellers.


----------



## Mark2c (Apr 25, 2007)

znomit said:


> Just got a nice PM from them which cleared a few things up...
> 
> They assure me they are looking into the source of the image and will remove if incorrect. It was manufacturer supplied.
> 
> ...


This guy appears to be a used camel salesperson (apologies to the camels):

keltravers wrote (on vorb.org.nz):
_The light is an upgraded copy of the Lupine Tesla with a number of better modifications._

What, other than price, on the Magicshine would be an upgrade compared to a Tesla?

The Tesla has a vastly better user interface, heatsinking, charger, battery (cells and mounting system) and waterproofing. Same handlebar mounting system, better binned LED.

The Tesla doesn't have an underspecified current sensing resistor (ie cooking) and never arrives filled with metal swarf.

That said - price does appear to make up the shortfall!


----------



## louisssss (Jun 24, 2009)

May have been answered but is the magicshine fom DX = the magicshine fom geoman? Other than price


----------



## nitelights (Mar 16, 2010)

There are three manufacturers, two are cheap copies. The cheaper copies are sold on trade me


----------



## Mark2c (Apr 25, 2007)

nitelights said:


> There are three manufacturers, two are cheap copies. The cheaper copies are sold on trade me


So Kel, tell us:
1) What, other than price, on the your lights would be an upgrade compared to a Tesla?

2) How are your lights better than the Magicshine sold by DX?

3) Now that you know the photo on your site has been pinched from MTBR without permission and that it is a beam shot from the Lupine Betty when are you going to stop misrepresenting your product to potential purchasers.

Bet you can't answer :madman:


----------



## znomit (Dec 27, 2007)

The bloke on the left is making a DX light, the one on the right... 
https://magicshine.en.alibaba.com/


----------



## nitelights (Mar 16, 2010)

*Nitelights*

I was there not long ago....


----------



## odtexas (Oct 2, 2008)

.......in a galaxy not far, far away
(cue dramatic music)


----------



## louisssss (Jun 24, 2009)

So... Quality&brightness of DX magicshine = geoman magicshine?


----------



## ccfoodog (Feb 10, 2010)

Personally, I'd like to see an enumeration of the differences between these lights. 

From my surfing, the only manufacturing related issues with these lights were the lack of thermal paste and the inclusion of metal shavings. Which, admittedly, are issues that should be resolved. It sounds like Geoman's lights (now?) have thermal paste. Not sure about others, or what anyone has done about the shavings issue.

The rest of the issues were noted as design deficiencies -- little thermal path and electronic design choices.

Manufacturing the same design with different quality standards doesn't address the latter issues.

I agree these lights are a great deal, but it would be nice to see some information about why one is better than the others, and for people to be realistic about what they are getting for their money.

Personally, the big difference (and an important one) I see is that certain vendors appear to be standing behind the lights they sell. 

-john


----------



## Mark2c (Apr 25, 2007)

nitelights said:


> There are three manufacturers, two are cheap copies. The cheaper copies are sold on trade me


This is the same reputable manufacturer who wrongly supplied you with the photos stolen from MTBR's review of the Lupine Betty that you posted on your site to advertise your lights?

Having now seen this Kel, http://skipper.co.nz/ISSUES/ps65/S65 Who is Responsible p58-61.pdf I don't think anyone will be putting any store on your opinion, skill or competence.


----------

