The Case for a Flashlight - Part 1, General Musings

Why a headlamp and not a flashlight? In some respects the answer is obvious, viz. "hands free" operation. For the UL backpacker, this is a compelling reason, especially if one's hands might be otherwise occupied with either trekking poles or ice axe (for some, nearly full-time) or with scrambling (a part-time endeavor, generally). I'll leave climbing and mountaineering out of the picture because what I personally know of these could fill a thimble!

Once I "discovered", so to speak, electric headlamps, I never gave flashlights another look - at least, until recently. So, what's changed? Well, I came across some very small, very rugged, very light, very bright, somewhat expensive tactical flashlights. No, not those from Surefire or Streamlight, but from a Chinese company that I had never heard of called "Fenix".

Fenix makes a wide variety of tactical or pseudo-tactical flashlights - a couple of low power models (which aren't of any particular interest to me), and a whole array of high power ones (which are very interesting, to say the least). The high-powered ones use either 1W, 3W, or Cree 7090 XR-E LEDs. In Fenix-speak a "CE" designation means "Cree Edition" (for some Fenix models there are CE versions and non-CE versions). A Cree LED has 'bout TWICE the light output and about 95% of the "burn" time of a more typical non-CREE, Luxeon-type hi-power LED, like those currently used in Petzl, Princeton Tec, and Black Diamond headlamps (as well as a host of very power "Caving" headlamps). In the future, when Cree LEDs are finally used by PT, Petzl, and BD, then one of the most compelling reasons, for some (e.g., light "hawgs", like me) for using a Fenix flashlight will be moot.

So, why the sudden appeal of these Fenix flashlights? First, before I answer that self-posed question, let me enumerate some limitations of these flashlights that immediately "pop" into my head and also reasons why they may not be for you.

1. They are somewhat expensive - figure $30-$70. This might be an issue for some, and understandably so, IMO. The better ones are ~$53-$70 in price.
2. You might know from firsthand experience that you really don't need any more light than a single 5mm microlight provides.
3. You don't wear a hat (Huh, a hat? Johnson, have you lost it? What's a hat got to do with a "hand"-light?)
4. You do wear a hat, but it has a wimpy, limp, flexible brim.
5. You don't mind carrying an ounce or two more weight than you might actually need to carry, and so prefer a traditional 3xAAA headlamp.
6. You really need the 50 gazillion hours of light output, all the way down to 0.25 lux, that a single 5mm 3xAAA headlamp provides, and simply refuse to perform a simple battery replacement in the field.
7. You are sooo enamored with the PT Eos headlamp and are so closed minded that you just can't look anywhere else for fear of committing "headlamp unfaithfulness" with but a glance.

There are probably other reasons why a Fenix flashlight isn't for some, but these are the ones that just "pop" into my head at the moment as i type these words (remember, i said "my head", which is both small and not terribly clever. if other reasons "pop" into your head as your read this, feel free to share them with me or the Forums - i for one would appreciate it.).


The main disadvantage of these Fenix flashlights, as i see it (for those who DO wear a hat) is the shorter battery life. However, there are some mitigating "burn" time factors which i'll get into later on which somewhat ameliorate this issue.


So, what are the advantages of including a Fenix flashlight in one's UL kit?

1. Other than microlights, they are generally lighter, or can be lighter if the proper model is selected, than a headlamp. Weights range from 0.7oz for a model that uses just 1xAAA batt all the way up to a whopping 3.7oz for one that uses 2xAA batts.

2. The put out a WHOLE lot more light than virtually all headlamps - even the smallest 1xAAA Fenix can nearly rival 3W headlamps like the Apex, Myo XP, and BD Icon for example, but of course doesn't have the "burn" time of 3 or 4 AA batts (generally, you don't get somethin' for nuttin').

3. They seem to possess far better constant current regulation than ANY popular headlamp we normally use for our UL backpacking endeavors.

4. Their light output is a very nice, pure white, and their beam size/pattern is quite good - not too much of a "flood" which would minimize "throw" and distance viewing, and NOT too tiny a "spot" to be useful.

5. They utilize, depending upon the model, one of three common battery sizes, viz. AAA, AA, or CR123A.

6. They can utilize alkaline, NiMH, or Li batteries (of course, CR123A are Li batts).

7. They only need just ONE or TWO of these batteries, NOT three or four batteries.

8. They can be clipped to a stiff hat brim or a ballcap brim for "hands free" operation - just like a headlamp.

9. On hot & humid summer nights, if one is really exerting oneself, then the hat/cap probably comes off in order to dissipate the heat. So, on these occasion, a "Jakstrap" or similar generic headband (which i use) can be worn into which the flashlight is placed. I've added a small velcro loop to my generic headband which is used only when moving quickly to secure the flashlight better and prevent and "bouncing" of the flashlight in the elastic retention loop on the generic headband).

10. They are much smaller than all but microlights and take up less pack or pocket space than a headlamp. Some of this is the lack of a band (unless one requires a "Jakstrap"-like headband for use), and much of it is also the packaging, especially in the smaller single-battery versions, requiring just one AAA, AA, or CR123A battery.

11. They have a very rugged aircraft grade Al case which is quite weatherproof. [Note: they do have a RECESSED glass lens which is extremely optically clear. Can glass be more optically clear than ANY plastic? Don't know. That's a question for Dr. Caffin, which I hope he, or another knowledgeable person will answer.]


In Part Two, i will compare some of the Fenix flashlights with the "sacred cows", so to speak, of headlamps, so that side-by-side "hard and fast" numbers can be used to tell the remainder of this "story". Remember, as the saying goes, "sacred cows make the best hamburger"!!


Please feel free to reply and rip me to shreds. I'm attempting to think "outside of the box" here. Something that should be easy for a "block-head" like me, but, like in many things, i could be totally off-the-wall here, and so far out in "Left Field" that i'm no longer even in the "ballpark"! I would value your input - whether it takes the form of constructive criticism, or just plain criticism. You may fire when ready. Shields Up!!!

The Case for a Flashlight - Part 2, Some "Real" Numbers; a comparison with the Eos


Let me begin by saying that my favorite headlamps are those made by Princeton Tec. Petzl has some models that are close "Seconds", but generally I prefer the Princeton Tec headlamps, though there are exceptions. For example, the Tikka XP gets a very slight "nod", IMO, vs. the PT Eos, but then shouldn't we expect that a manufacturer will bring out a slightly better product than their competitor's earlier product? Of course, or why even bother to bring out an inferior product! That's what has probably occurred here by my way of thinking. However, this Post is NOT about PT vs. Petzl, or the Eos vs. the Tikka XP. It's about the Fenix flashlights.

I'd like to compare some of the Fenix flashlights to the PT Eos and PT Apex headlamps. I'm NOT picking on two of my favorite headlamps here. I selected these two PT models over comparable models from Petzl & BD because: a) the two PT models are constant current regulated, just like the Fenix flashlights, and b) unless i'm mistaken (and please correct me if you feel that i'm am wrong), the general consensus in these Forums and in the Reader Reviews is that these two may well be the best in their respective "classes" available to the L/UL backpacker.

First, let's compare these two PT headlamps to the most expensive of the Fenix flashlights, which would be the four "Cree Editions". Let's compare performance using alkaline batteries, since i don't have "numbers" for any Fenix flashlight using Li batts. This way we are comparing "apples-to-apples", so to speak. Additionally, we would expect, though we can't be sure at this point, that the Fenix flashlights would perform a little better using Li batts than they do using alkaline batts, due to the fact that they are regulated and the flatter, more linear discharge curve of Li batts tend to produce longer regulated "burn" times in regulated applications (as witness, with the Apex using Li batts vs. alk. batts).

The Eos could be compared to any of the three single battery Fenix CE models. The Apex could be compared to the only two battery Fenix CE model, viz. the L2D-CE.


So then, what are the "numbers"?


First, let's begin with a comparison to the Eos.


Eos 3.7oz w/alk. batts.
3xAAA
25 lumens on HI
50% in 3.5h, and 25% in 4.5h in HI output mode
Burn Times (reg.+unreg) using alk. batts (in hours):
Hi = 2+4.5
Med = 9.5+3
Lo = 28+8
$33.95



First, here are the numbers for the three single battery Fenix CE models.

[Note: Calculated 50% burn times for the L2D-CE, L1D-CE, and L0D-CE are based upon the tested time for the P1D-CE. The value of 96% of Mfr. claimed "burn" time may NOT hold due to the different battery types used in these three Fenix models vs. that used in the P1D-CE model (i.e., alk. batts vs. Li CR123A batt in the P1D-CE). These "guesstimated" 50% values are just that "guesses" based upon all of info available to this Poster at this time.]


P1D-CE 1.6oz w/batt.
1xCR123A
135 lumens on MAX, 72 lumens in "Primary" mode, 12 lumens on LOW
50% in ~2.75h in PRIMARY (shuts off almost immediately thereafter)
Burn Times in hours (reg. only - essentially NO unreg. operation):
MAX = 1
Primary = 2.8
LOW = 21
$69.95

L1D-CE 2.4oz w/alk. batt.
1xAA
90 lumens on Turbo, 80 lumens on Hi, 40 lumens on Med, 9 lumens on Lo
50% in 1.96h [calculated] in Hi (shuts off almost immediately thereafter)
Burn Times in hours (reg. only - essentially NO unreg. operation):
Turbo = 1.5
Hi = 2
Med = 5
Lo = 25
$52.50


L0D-CE 0.7oz w/alk. batt.
1xAAA
50 lumens on MAX, 20 lumens on Primary, 7.5 lumens on Low
50% in 3.36h [calculated] in Primary (shuts off almost immediately thereafter)
Burn Times in hours (reg. only - essentially NO unreg. operation):
Max = 1
Primary = 3.5
Low = 8.5
$43.50

To my way of thinking, this last model, viz. L0D-CE should really be compared to multi-LED Li coin cell powered headlamps like the PT Scout and Petzl e+LITE. It really "outshines" them (pun intended) on both MAX and Primary modes of operation and compares favorably to them given the very short time Li coin cells actually allow a headlamp to shine at its brightest level - in fact it exceeds them in duration that it can shine at its brightest in each mode, but can't compare with them in duration on LOW. The PT Scout has only a maximum of 10 lumens output, and the Petzl e+LITE has perhaps twice or two-and-a-half times the light output/brightness of the Scout for only the first 15-30 minutes (estimated). Even then the L0D-CE shines for for a whole hour at 50 lumens which is 2 to 2.5 times the maximum output for the e+LITE, and 3.5 hours at 20 lumens which is only matched, or slightly exceeded by the e+LITE for about 15-30 minutes.

Yet, the L0D-CE in Primary mode is brighter than the Eos some time after the Eos leaves regulated operation (after only 2hr), though the Eos in Hi mode will burn almost twice as long as the Fenix L0D-CE flashlight. The Eos in Med outputs ~40% of the light that it does in Hi mode, and only about 10% of the light that it does in Lo mode. So, in Med mode the Eos outputs an "guesstimated" 10 lumens, and only "guesstimated" 2.5 lumens in Lo. [Note: These two "guesstimates" seem off to me, having used the Eos, but that is the percentages of the Eos output in Lux for these two modes; whether or not it holds for its Lumen values is unknown to me, hence my term "guesstimated".] In Primary mode the L0D-CE is outputting ~2x the light as the Eos in Med. and ~80% of the same amount of light as the Eos in Hi mode. Lo mode on the L0D-CE is sufficient for me to walk a distinct trail in the dark, but insufficient to spot low-contrast, faded blazes 30' ahead (which is my personal desired viewing capability/distance for nighttime navigation on indistinct, leaf-covered, unfamiliar trails). Primary mode should be sufficient for this purpose, however, IMO, based upon experience with other headlamps outputting ~20lumens (which the L0D-CE does in Primary mode).

Keep in mind that the L0D-CE weighs only 0.7oz with one alk. AAA batt as compared to the Eos at 3.7oz. I could carry five L0D-CE flashlights (at MUCH GREATER expense) and still weight less than an Eos. Better, since there is no need for the light from five L0D-CE flashlights, a single AAA alk. batt weighs just 0.4oz, so I could carry SEVEN of them, plus the one in the L0D-CE and still be carrying less weight than the Eos with its three alk. batts. Multiplying the 3.5h Primary burn time (at a constantly regulated 20 lumens output), the L0D-CE could "burn" for 28h at 20 lumens. This 28h is the same as the Eos's regulated burn time on LO output (guesstimated to be only 2.5 lumens)!!! The L0D-CE in Low output mode has plenty of output for the purposes of task/proximity lighting. Actually, it may have too much light as in Lo it outputs ~75% of the light that the Eos outputs on MED output. The L0D-CE using all 8 batteries will burn for 68 hours on Low, making it nearly twice as long burning as the Eos on low, but at ~3x the light output of the Eos!!!

Changing the single AAA batt. in the L0D-CE flashlight is a VERY simple task in the field. In fact, it is so simple, i'd wager (and i'm no gambler, mind you) that most (all???) reading this Post could do it blindfolded.

Of course, the $43.50 price tag of the Fenix L0D-CE is pretty near that of an Eos at full retail price, but the Eos can often be found far cheaper - like for only $33.95 at BrightGuy.com. Price definitely goes to the Eos. Also, the large button on the Eos is simpler to operate, IMO, than the twist head of the L0D-CE.

Using the included clip to clip the L0D-CE to a cap/hat brim is easy to do and is relatively unobtrusive, though the flashlight sticking out like it does from the end of a hat brim my be just a little distracting until one gets used to it and learns to focus out beyond the flashlight and not stare at it. The recessed lens of the L0D-CE prevents any light from spilling back into the wearer's eyes when the flashlight is mounted to a cap brim. Of course, the angle is NOT adjustable like it is with the Eos, and this necessitates tipping the head up, or down to focus the light where one might want it. However, this is not without mitigation due to the very narrow spot beam of the Eos which also entails a fair bit of "chicken" walking, as i term it, involving bobbing the head up and down and side-to-side in order to pick out blazes on rocks and trees.

So, in summary, it is my opinion that another "sacred cow" has met the "barbie"!!! To quote Lucy, in the Vita-Meata-Vegamin episode of "I Love Lucy", "Hmmm..., and tasty too"!!!


In part 3 (or Post #3 in this series of Posts), we will consider how the Eos fares against the other two single battery Fenix flashlights. These would be a more fair comparison for the Fenix-es (Fenixi??? what's the plural of Fenix?) than comparing the Eos to the little L0D-CE and yet the Fenix, some biasedly i'll admit, "creamed" the Eos. Will the Eos answer the bell for Round Two???

PJ,
I'm with you, buddy, but for a different reason: A flashlight is better than a headlamp for trail walking. A headlamp is mounted high and tends to wash out terrain variations. A flashlight in the hand throws shadows to warn you of dips and highlights the bumps. Not so good for you two pole guys, but there it is.

The Case for a Flashlight - Part 3, More "Real" Numbers; two more comparisons with the Eos


We'll continue with our comparison of a "sacred cow", viz. the PT Eos, with a couple of lowly flashlights from a Mfr. called Fenix.
The previous comparison of the Eos with the tiny Fenix L0D-CE wasn't at all pretty (for the Eos). This comparison will be even uglier, IMO.


Once again, what are the "numbers"?


First, let's begin with "numbers" for the Eos.


Eos 3.7oz w/alk. batts.
3xAAA
25 lumens on HI
50% in 3.5h, and 25% in 4.5h in HI output mode
Burn Times (reg.+unreg) using alk. batts (in hours):
Hi = 2+4.5
Med = 9.5+3
Lo = 28+8
$33.95



Next, here are the numbers for the two AA single battery Fenix CE models.

[Note: Calculated 50% burn time for the L1D-CE is based upon the tested time for the P1D-CE. The value of 96% of Mfr. claimed "burn" time may NOT hold due to the different battery type used in the L1D-CE vs. that used in the P1D-CE model (i.e., alk. batts vs. Li CR123A batt in the P1D-CE). These "guesstimated" 50% values are just that "guesses" based upon all of info available to this Poster at this time.]


P1D-CE 1.6oz w/batt.
1xCR123A
135 lumens on MAX, 72 lumens in "Primary" mode, 12 lumens on LOW

50% in ~2.75h in PRIMARY (shuts off almost immediately thereafter)
Burn Times in hours (reg. only - essentially NO unreg. operation):
MAX = 1
Primary = 2.8
LOW = 21
$69.95

L1D-CE 2.4oz w/alk. batt.
1xAA
90 lumens on Turbo, 80 lumens on Hi, 40 lumens on Med, 9 lumens on Lo
50% in 1.96h [calculated] in Hi (shuts off almost immediately thereafter)
Burn Times in hours (reg. only - essentially NO unreg. operation):
Turbo = 1.5
Hi = 2
Med = 5
Lo = 25
$52.50


Immediately, one notices that compared to either Fenix, the Eos's light output is anemic, at best. However, what mitigates this is that the Eos, on both Hi and Med output produces plenty of light for nearly any backcountry purpose with the possible exception of SAR. In fact, in snow covered terrain, on a moonless night, the Eos on Lo output might even suffice for nighttime navigation. One would need to be a real light "hawg" to make use of the two Fenix higher light outputs (SAR purposes possibly excluded).

The second thing one notices is that the output modes of the two Fenix flashlights do NOT line up well with the Eos output modes. In fact, one might say that the Fenix output modes are NOT the most well thought out. For nearly all purposes, the higher modes for each flashlight put out more light than one will almost ever require, and the lowest output mode is perhaps insufficient for moonless nighttime navigation, yet too much task/proximity lighting. The incorporation of one more output mode, somewhere above low, but NOT having as much light output as the next higher mode (i.e., Primary or Med, depending upon which Fenix is being considered) - something with, perhaps 20 lumens of light output, or even just 15 lumens might be in order. The 12 lumen Low output mode of the P1D-CE comes close, but there are times when this Poster, having age degraded low light vision, might want for a bit more light output (something in the range of 15-20 lumens) for nighttime navigation.

Clearly, the P1D-CE on either MAX or Primary setting, 135 and 72 lumens respectively, BLOWS away the Eos's comparatively paltry 25 lumens (on HI) output. The same could be said for the three (of four) highest output modes of the L1D-CE which have 90, 80, and 40 lumens. However, again, how much light does one really need? The Eos's 25 lumens of light output is really quite sufficient for virtually any use in the backcountry that i have encountered to date.

The cost of both of these Fenix models is significantly more than the Eos. The single large button of the Eos is, IMO, easier to operate than the twist bezel/head of the P1D-CE, and just as easy as the tail-end push button and twist bezel/head combination on the L1D-CE.

Thus far, these comparisons are pretty close, with the "nice to have" blazing "sun" output of the two Fenixes evening the comparison with the Eos which otherwise is equal to or superior to either in price and ease of operation.

This brings us to the comparison of "burn times" and an associated comparison, viz. weight.

It is my feeling that we need to ignore the very short burn times of the P1D-CE and L1D-CE on their higher output modes and concentrate on the lowest output mode of the P1D-CE and the two lowest output modes of the L1D-CE.

First, the P1D-CE, then the L1D-CE will be considered.

The P1D-CE outputs a constant regulated 12 lumens for 21 hours on Low. This mode would compare rather favorably with the Eos on Medium output. The Eos on Med burns for ~12.5h TOTAL reg. plus unreg. burn time, and then at only about 10 lumens "guesstimated" light output. Furthermore, the last ~25% of that time is spent in an unregulated, constantly dimming light output mode. The P1D-CE is outputting a constant 12 lumens for 9 hrs more!! The Eos on Hi will output light for about 2.3x as long as the P1D-CE will on its Primary setting. However, the Eos is NOT very regulated when used on its HI output mode, and it's light, even within the first two hours of use dims markedly. Independent testing reveals that after just 2 hrs of use, the Eos is only outputting ~67% of its initial light output, so about 16 lumens. So much for the Eos's constant current regulation in HI output mode - essentially it's non-existent with alk. batts. Additionally, the Eos is down to just ~12.5 lumens at 3.5hrs when run continuously on HI output mode, and is outputting only ~6 lumens at 4.5h under the same conditions. Notice that at the 3.5hr mark in HI, and at ALL TIME in Med, the P1D-CE is brighter on its LOWEST output setting than is the Eos!! This is a rather telling realization. Remember, the P1D-CE can run for 21h in this lowest constant 12 lumen output mode, on a single CR123A battery (which can be purchased for as low as 96 cents to $1.00 online, in my experience). Now, the Eos will only run for ~12.5h on its Med. output setting which happens to output less light than the P1D-CE does on its lowest setting which burns for 60% additional time.

So, the Eos proves to be inferior to the P1D-CE when it comes to "raw" burn time, though there might be some small case made for the first 3.5h of Eos operation on HI mode as compared to the 2.8h of total regulated (i.e., total burn time) of the P1D-CE in its Primary mode of operation. Remember that's 72 lumens of constant light output which makes it appear that there is very little need to operate the P1D-CE in its full 135 lumen MAX mode.

Factoring weight into the "burn time" equation makes the case for the P1D-CE even stronger. A CR123A battery weighs ~59oz. The difference in weight between the Eos at 3.7oz and the P1D-CE at 1.6oz is 2.1oz. Of course, this isn't a strict apples-to-apples comparison as the P1D-CE is the only Fenix we've considered that uses a battery that is only found in a Li battery chemistry. Three additional CR123A batts could be carried as spares and the total is still lighter than the Eos at 3.7oz. Furthermore, an Eos with 3 AAA Li batts would weigh ~3.3oz, and the P1D-CE with three spare CR123A batts would weigh just 3.4oz.

Comparing the burn times considering these spare batts gives us a Primary mode constant 72 lumen output for a full 11.2 hours or a continuous 12 lumen output time of 84 hours. The closest comparable Eos times would be 6.5hours on HI and 12.5 hours on MED. These burn times pale in comparison.


Now we come to the Fenix L1D-CE which operates off of a single AA battery. A single high quality AA alk. battery has about 78% of the stored energy as 3 high quality AAA alk. batts. For the purposes of this comparison we can largely ignore the two highest output modes of the L1D-CE which are 90 lumens for 1.5h and 80 lumens for 2h. This is because even the second lowest of its four output modes output 40 lumens of light as compared to the max 25 lumens of light output for the Eos. Just before it switches off at 5h, the L1D-CE in its Med output mode is still putting out 40 lumens, but the Eos, running on HI is outputting just somewhere between ~4% and ~8% of its 25 lumen initial light output. Sure, the Eos operating on HI will run ~1.5h longer than the L1D-CE on Med, but the Eos won't be putting out too much useful light (other than for task/proximity work) during this last 1.5h.

Comparing the Eos on MED to the L1D-CE operating on Lo reveals that their light output is approximately the same, i.e. the Eos is outputting ~10lumens for the first 9.5h of operation with light decreasing to zero over the next 3h. Whereas, the L1D-CE will be outputting a nearly identical constant 9lumens for a total of 25h!! That's twice as long as the Eos will even remain lit when operated in MED output mode!

Operated solely on LO output mode, the Eos will burn longer than the L1D-CE operated solely on Low, 28+8 hrs vs. 25 hours. Keep in mind that the last 8 of those hours for the Eos will be in a constantly dimming mode. Also, keep in mind that the Eos is putting out a "guesstimated" less than one-third of the light output when on LO as compared to the L1D-CE.

Lastly, if we factor the weight difference into the equation, one additional alk. battery could be with the L1D-CE and the combined weight would only be ~86% of the Eos with its 3xAAA alk. batts. Now, however, we're looking at 10h of 40 lumen burn time for the L1D-CE on Med output and 50h of 9 lumen burn time on Low output. The Eos simply can't come close to matching theses burn times, even NOT considering the far greater light output of the L1D-CE in either of these modes.


So, in summary, it is my opinion that another "sacred cow" is still fit for the "barbie"!!! And as "Oliver" asks at the beginning of the play, "Please sur, may I have some more"!!!


In part 4 (or Post #4 in this series of Posts), we will consider how the PT Apex (perhaps my favorite headlamp, at this point in time, for nighttime navigation) fares against a two battery Fenix.

Vick, understand your reasons. For me, personally, I don't like to see shadows (but, then, i trip/stumble a lot at night & maybe it's partially due to the lack of shadows produced by my headlamp, with the other part due to me just being a klutz). Wearing a headlamp, in my cases, eliminates shadows since the shadows fall on the other side of the object and are obscured by the objects themselves (think of walking into the sun and our shadow is behind us; same thing, except instead of the sun, our headlamp is the light source, but the shadows are still falling behind the objects since we are looking from the same location as the illuminating source). The other thing, is that i CLIP THE FLASHLIGHT TO MY CAP BRIM, so, it is essentially functioning as a headlamp. Each light source has advantages. Each person has his/her preferences.

Edited by pj on 02/18/2007 04:25:36 MST.

Something I've always considered doing(but havn't because most trails I hike on are wide and exceedinly well marked)....

Carry a very small headlamp like the Ion for setting up tarps and cooking at night, and use a small powerful spot beam flashlight for the trail. The Ion is inadequate for hiking after dark due to its low output. In fact, most headlamps are, as they spread their beams over a wide area, sort of like a shotgun.

A flashlight, on the other hand, can have a less bright bulb, but if it is concentrated into a compressed beam it can shine farther along the trail. This, along with better depth perception, makes this a superior system at night. The only reason I don't use it would be the weight of the P Tec Attitude, which is about what I'd be looking for. PJ has provided me with an interesting new product to try though....

PJ,
Wow...you realy get into it!
Aout the position of the light source:
I was reading Andrew Skurka's Ice Box. He carries the light at his waist and says he likes it for better foot falls and less shadows. Just another opinion but I'm going to try it.
from his list:
Waist strap for Tikka XP

I've tried all sorts of lights at diff. times in my life: handhelds, belt-mounted, right-angle pack strap mounted (both MX-991 & UK 1W LED types), clipped to my eye glasses, my cap brim, and of course headband/headlamps.

My preference is to have the light source attached to my head or hat.

For me there are four primary reasons for doing so:

1. Free my hands for other things (primarily for using trekking poles or using tools if i'm repairing something in the house or the automobile in a garage).

2. The light shines everywhere that i'm looking (hence my preference to the use of an old PT Aurora when working on cars vs. a traditional drop-light).

3. Elimination of virtually all shadows.

4. Reinforcement of my Techno-Geek persona.


Attaching a weak light source closer to the ground helps when the light source is weak.

Edited by pj on 02/17/2007 17:27:41 MST.

The Case for a Flashlight - Part 4, For the Heavyweight Bout - the Champion Apex vs. the Challenger L2D-CE


If the PT Eos is a "sacred cow", then the PT Apex would be a "sacred bull". Tougher, but with the right tenderizing and seasoning, it too might be fit for the "barbie". We'll just have to see...

Let's begin with the "numbers"?


Apex 9.84oz w/alk. batts
4xAA
60 lumens on HI
50% @ 1.75h, 25% @ ~2.5h
Burn Times (reg+unreg) using alk. batts (in hours):
3W Hi = 1+72
3W Lo = 9+96
5mm Hi = 8.5+100
5mm Lo = 14+150
Burn Times (reg+unreg) using Li batts (in hours):
3W Hi = 4.5+24
3W Lo = 12+36
5mm Hi = 14+76
5mm Lo = 25+108
$68.95



L2D-CE 3.7oz w/alk. batts.
2xAA (alk, NiMH, or Li)
135 lumens on Turbo, 80 lumens on Hi, 40 lumens on Med, 9 lumens on Lo
50% in 3.84h [calculated] in Hi (shuts off almost immediately thereafter)
Burn Times in hours (reg. only - essentially NO unreg. operation):
Turbo = 2.4
Hi = 4
Med = 10.5
Lo = 55
$53.50



Unfortunately, i don't have lumen values for the Apex's other modes of operation, so the following comparison is largely just a bunch of guesses. Furthermore, I don't have burn time numbers for the L2D-CE with Li batts. Presumably they would be a bit better, but this is really just a guess. Regulated burn times are certainly improved when Li batts are used in the Apex.

Three things jump out when the "numbers" are compared. The Apex has much longer total burn times even using alk. batts as cp. to the L2D-CE, the Apex can't even come close to the L2D-CE when it comes to light output capability, and the L2D-CE is MUCH LIGHTER than the Apex. One thing that the "numbers" don't tell us is about the pattern of the light output. In this case, while the L2D-CE has a fine output size/pattern, the Apex is even more generous, even when using its 3W Luxeon LED. Personally, i don't find the L2D-CE's beam pattern at all restrictive or limiting. It is much larger than the Eos's tiny “spot”, for instance.

There is no operating mode in the L2D-CE that matches the Apex’s 3W Hi output mode of 60 lumens. The L2D-CE, besides its 135 lumens Turbo mode, has a 80 lumens Hi output mode, and a 40 lumens Med output mode (plus a 9 lumens Lo output mode). Again, for hiking purposes, it seems that the Apex has much better thought out light output modes. Thus far, I’ve encountered no nighttime hiking situation which the Apex was not more than a match for. Rarely do I even use the 3W Hi mode, as the 3W Lo mode is more than sufficient for nighttime navigation. Likewise could said for the L2D-CE. The 40 lumen output Med mode is primarily used nighttime navigation and the 9 lumen output Low mode is used for most task/proximity lighting.

In terms of burn time, the 10.5h of constant 40 lumen light output compares very favorably with the Apex’s 3W lo mode’s 9h of regulated light output. However, the Apex will continue to shine as the light continues to burn in unregulated mode for yet another ~96h (though at this point the light is too weak to use for nighttime navigation, IMO). On Low mode, the 9lumen constant light output for 55h far exceeds any regulated burn time that the Apex can muster even when using Li batts to power its 4x5mm LEDs, though the total burn time for the Apex is longer.

What tips burn time in favor of the L2D-CE is its much lighter weight, as compared to the Apex, which allows spare batts to be carried to extend the L2D-CE’s burn times. In fact, seven spare AA batts could be carried and the weight would still be less than the Apex. However, the L2D-CE is a two battery flashlight, so six spare batts would make the total weight ~1.3oz less than the Apex (3.7oz + 6 x 0.8oz = 8.5oz). In fact, four spare sets (8 batts) could be carried and this arrangement would only weigh ~0.26oz more than the Apex with its four alk. batts.

So, what would three spare sets of batts (6 batts) do for the L2D-CE’s burn times. Simple arithmetic yields...

9.6h of constant 135 lumen output in Turbo mode,
16h of constant 80 lumen output in Hi mode,
42h of constant 40 lumen output in Med mode, and
220h of constant 9 lumen output in Low mode.

These numbers compare very favorably with the Apex. Sure, in all but the L2D-CE’s lowest mode, the Apex has longer total burn times on its single set of batteries, but we need to keep in mind that when the Apex leaves regulated mode (particularly on the higher output modes), the light output drops down to ~25% of that mode’s maximum output fairly quickly (compared to the total unregulated burn time) and then continues to diminish at a slower rate, resulting in less usable light output for a particular mode.

In 4x5mm HI output, the Apex appears as bright or a little brighter than the 9 lumen Low mode of the L2D-CE, but what’s good for the goose is good for the gander, meaning as we mentioned before that one can only use so much light, this happens to be true in this case. For task/proximity lighting the 9 lumen Low mode output of the L2D-CE suffices just fine and because of its spot-like beam appears brighter, likewise the 40 lumen Med output mode of the L2D-CE is more than sufficient for nighttime navigation. In most cases most of the additional, constantly dimming, unregulated output of the Apex may not be very usable for nighttime navigation due to its low levels of output. One selects a powerhouse like the Apex because large amounts of light output is desired. When this large amount drops off to a mere 25% in a very, very few hours, this largely eliminates its pure numeric long burn time advantage. Also, keep in mind that the 10.5h of regulated 40 lumen output from a single AA alk. batt in the L2D-CE will pretty much take one through an entire night of hiking, requiring, at most (other than as one approaches the Artic circle) just one battery change per night - not terribly inconvenient for an all-night hike.

The Apex’s two different types of LEDs (Luxeon and 5mm), couple with two light output modes for each type of LED makes it very flexible for use in different situations. Though, IMO, even on 4x5mm LO, it is far too bright form many task/proximity lighting uses.

This comparison seemed much closer, to my way of thinking, even leaning towards the Apex, than comparisons made earlier between the Eos and the various Fenix models. However, when the weight savings of the L2D-CE is sacrificed by considering the inclusion of spare batts, this Poster feels that the L2D-CE wins out, especially when one keeps in mind that much of the unregulated output from the Apex’s Luxeon LED is far lower (25% or less) of its maximum 60 lumen output. Compare this unregulated 70h 15 lumen and decreasing output of the Apex to the 42h constant 40 lumen output from the L2D-CE and many might choose the L2D-CE (keep in mind that the Apex won’t even stay at the 15 lumen level for the entire time).

My impression is that

a) the Challenger L2D-CE has "TKO'd" the Champion Apex (everyone knows that a Heavyweight challenger will never win a decision over the Champion!) and...

b) the Apex too is a “sacred cow” that makes a fine 9.84oz Black Angus filet mignon steak - definitely fit for the “barbie”! So, how would like your Apex cooked? rare, medium, or well done?


-------------------------------------------
Addendum:

Fenix also makes a couple of lines of less expensive non-Cree LED flashlights. They generally have only two operating modes (lo and hi). Lo mode outputs 10 lumens for 10h (for single AA batt models) or 22h (for 2xAA batt models). Hi output mode varies between 37 and 55 lumens, depending upon the model, for 3 to 5 hrs, again depending upon model. Prices for these non-Cree models range from ~$33 to ~$45.

There are some other fine, very small and light pseudo-tactical flashlights besides those made by Fenix. One very good example is the Coast DigiTac1 which sells for ~$33. The 2.2oz (incl. alk batt) DigiTac1 uses a single AA battery and has only one operating mode: a very constant regulated 38 lumen output for 10.5h. The electronics are so good that the battery voltage is only a measured ~0.68VDC when the battery needs changing at the end of approx. ten-and-a-half hours. The DigiTac1 output is 50% greater than the PT Eos and burns nearly as long as the Eos does on its MED output setting. Adding in a couple of spare AA alk. batts makes the combo only one-tenth of an oz. heavier than the Eos and triples the 38 lumen burn time to 31.5h - not too shabby.

Edited by pj on 02/18/2007 04:36:54 MST.

Now THIS is some serious posting!

I've never, even in my own rantings about ESBIT stoves, seen so much detail and such long posts.
I think you made your case. I may just try a lightweight flashlight.

Eric

pj,

What about the ARC Flashlight? Less than one ounce.

Hi Bill,

The Arc Flashlight is a good UL single 5mm white LED (they now use the newer Nichia CS 5mm while LEDs, so, just like Petzl headlamps, are ~80% brighter with the same or nearly 2x burn times (i phrase it this way since i have no personal experience with the newer Arc's).

I've had an Arc and CMG (now bought by Gerber) Infinity and Ultra-Infinity (both a single AA vs. AAA as in the Arc, but still with only a single 5mm LED) flashlilghts.

These would definitely NOT be in the same class as the either the CREE or non-CREE Fenix flashlights which use high-power 1W-3W single LEDs.

It's the difference b/t a simple 5mm LED task/proximity light and a 1W-3W nighttime navigation light. We're talkin' only b/t 3 and 5.5 lumens for these little babies, with only 5hrs burn time to 50% brightness. You get this for 0.75oz incl. a single AAA alk. batt. Full retail cost is $30-$40, depending upon which Arc you get (the 3lumen o.p. is only $30, but the 5.5lumen o.p. is $40).

Now let's have a "horse race" with the "numbers" for the Arc Premium vs. the smallest Cree-based Fenix, viz. the L0D-CE.


Arc = 0.75oz
L0D-CE = 0.7oz
[a tie, or the Fenix by a "nose" - you call it; it's too small a difference for me to care]


Arc Premium = $40
L0D-CE = $43.50
[Arc wins out here on just a plain cost basis (not considering VALUE which takes performance into account) - but, these two prices are very close. The way i figure it, if someone can shell out $40 for a tiny flashlight, they can probably save their pennies for another couple of weeks and get the add'l $3.50 out of their next paycheck and splurge for the L0D-CE, but, then, maybe i'm biased.]

Arc Premium = 5.5 lumens max output (one mode)
L0D- CE = 50 lumens MAX, 20 lumens Primary, 7.5 lumens Low
[The Arc has gotten bumped and turned around is running the race in the wrong direction!]

But all that POWER must be at a cost, surely the Arc will now kill the L0D-CE when it comes to "burn" time? Well, not really...

Arc Premium = 5 hrs to 50% brightness (at 1h the ArcPremium is o.p. only 4.1 lumens; at 2h ~3.7 lumens; at 3h ~3.3 lumens; at 4h ~3 lumens; at 5h ~2.75lumens; at 8.5h ~1.4 lumens.)
L0D-CE =
just 1hr constantly regulated at 50 lumens (HAH!, but wait there's more...]

just 2.8h constantly regulated at 20 lumens (double-HAH!, but wait there's still more...]

8.5h constantly regulated at 7.5lumens (for the entire time).

The ArcPremium will continue to burn after the 50% mark, but at 8.5h will be down to just a tad above 25% of it's starting, maximum light output (viz. now only ~1.4 lumens) and will completely cut out just 15min later (all this according to the Flashlight Reviews website independent testing).

L0D-CE wins the "burn" time race (i'd prefer the higher and more steady light o.p. from the L0D-CE vs. the smaller and steadily declining o.p. from the ArcPremium), and IMHO overall.

It seems like almost a perfect Trifecta for the L0D-CE. To recap:

Weight - a virtual tie
Cost - close enough not to really matter, IMO.
Light output - L0D-CE by 10x (on MAX)
Light modes - L0D-CE has 3 vs. just 1 for the ArcPremium (unless you count it's steadily declining light output as an infinity number of lighting modes)
Burn Time - essentially a tie in terms of just plain TIME, but when one considers that you get a constant regulated 7.5 lumens for 8.5h vs. a steadily declining 5.5 lumens, well, the L0D-CE clearly wins out.

Also, the ArcPremium, acc. to the FLR website has a shorter burn time with a Li AAA batt - only ~5.5h to 50% brightness, only ~6.5h to 25%, and shuts off at only ~7.5h.

The ArcPremium was good in its day, but its day has long since come and gone. Newer, high power LEDs can utilize more of the stored energy in a battery (due to their significantly lower forward bias voltage) which helps their burn time. Couple that with the far more sophisticated regulator circuitry (i know Arc claims to regulate their LED, but the FLR plots indicate to me that it's merely a boost converter and NOT a true constant current regulator like in the Fenix flashlights) and the L0D-CE easily beats out the ArcPremium, IMO.

I no longer own an Arc flashlight.

Edited by pj on 02/18/2007 04:00:10 MST.

C.P.,

At greater weights (due to 'C' cell batts or 8AA batts), *OR* shorter burn times (with 2-4 AA batts), and incandescent headlamp (or an Incandescent-Hybrid headlamp) will accomplish some of what a focusable flashlight will accomplish.

So, if it turns out that you don't like the handheld flashlight (and/or don't like clipping one to your hat/cap brim), but want focusable light, or just the nice, softer amber glow of a flashlight, try something like the PT Switchback, PT Yukon, PT Yukon Extreme (very nice indeed), the Pelican 2660 (a 4D-cell, 32oz hybrid - a real "lighthouse" - one better get something for 32oz!!!), any Petzl Duo version, or (what was once my favorite) the Petzl Zoom Zora-belt (4C cells).

The PT Eos, and the new 3W BD Icon have very bright, tiny (but non-focusable) "spots".

Just some thoughts. YMMV. HYOH (i sure do; so, i've gotta' give others that same opportunity to differ and exercise their free-will).

Eric, if you go back 2+ yrs, you'll see that even then i had a lot of "hot air". I've been trying to be better mannered over the last year-plus timeframe, and keep my posts shorter. Besides, who in their right mind would read them if i had made the four into one veritable full-length novel? I might be crazy enough to write a single Post so long, but who would ever read it besides me? In fact, that's why I broke these into four parts.

Looks like i've failed miserably and undone any "good work" in making my posts shorter. Oh well, back to Step 1 in my 12-step Shorter Posts program. My apologies to all for taking up your time with such long, poorly worded and written Posts. I hope any(???) valuable info contained in them may still be gleaned by those brave hearted souls who dare to read them.

Is a flashlight a panacea for all backcountry lighting issues? No.

Are they perfect lighting devices? No. In particular, stability can be an issue WITH THE LARGER two-cell flashlights, e.g. L2D-CE and similar long 2-cell flashlights - specifically, side-to-side movement when clipped to a hat/cap brim. A more robust clip might be needed. I reform (i.e., "bend") mine to exert more compression on the cap brim. This helps some. Also, adding a high-friction contact patch to a dedicated ballcap brim is an option and, IME (in my experience) helps reduce the side-to-side movement that can occur with rapid side-to-side head movements. I've NOT had this problem with shorter, 1-cell flashlights when they are clipped to my ballcap brim.

Again, i'd certainly welcome criticisms and corrections, particularly since i'm sure my exuberance my have clouded my judgement and prevented me from perceiving more downsides to a capbrim clipped flashlight - "two heads are better than one", and a "second pair of eyes" are two old sayings that come to mind in this regard.

One last point (added as an EDIT), these flashlights, even the "larger" 2-AA Fenix flashlights are anything but a large flashlight. They actually are rather small, even tiny for the the 1-cell models. They take up the same or less room (depending upon model) in my pants pocket than a Petzl ZipkaPlus.

Many thanks for letting take up your time and Forum space.

Edited by pj on 02/18/2007 09:35:52 MST.

PJ,
I appreciate you sharing detailed info about the Fenix Cree line of lights. The only think you left out were links to purchase them.

Though I'm a dedicated headlamp user for hiking, there is always a need for a handheld torch. I peruse Flashlights.com once in a while to get the latest info, but maybe I should just get it from you!

I did a quick search for Fenix Cree and found that Amazon has them on "sale", as there is an Ebay listing showing the same prices. Other sources shown appear to be in the UK.

Bill,

Here's one that IS a direct Arc replacement that is superior to the Arc



James,
Two Links:
BrightGuy.com - pay particular attention to the "CE" - CREE Editions

-AND-

Eliteled.com



Hope this info helps.
pj

pj,
I bought one..
I realize the purpose of your posts was to inform, not to sell lights, but your enthusiasm is contagious. Thank you for the detailed and convincing intro to these lights. What can I say.. even though I have a box of lights, none can give me 50 lumens of a single AAA. Closest thing I have is a Surefire X200A giving an hour of 60 lumens out of 2 CR123s. And that puppy cost me $250. It has two settings; 'blinding', and 'off'. Hope someone who hasn't heard of Fenix will buy it from me on ebay now.

This is the AAA solution Ive been looking for. No more coin sized batteries; no more AAs. No more CR123s. All my devices now use interchangable and rechargable AAAs. This is good.

Oh, I found YOUR next vehicle mounted light pj, 8 hours of 3000 lumens off two (big) batteries.
http://www.surefire.com/maxexp/main/co_disp/displ/prrfnbr/24279/sesent/00

Edited by Brett1234 on 02/18/2007 09:43:21 MST.

"ice cubes to eskimos" - i'm having trouble typing, i'm laughing so much. good one.

Brett, i'm actually anything but a sales person. i've tried it and failed. "too honest", i was told was my problem!!

I prefer the AA or CR123 versions. However, the L0D-CE is a fine light. It is soooo tiny, you're not going to believe it when you see it. Clips to my cap brim and doesn't move around - hey, with a Li AAA it's just a couple tenths of an ounce heavier than a Photon Microlight with its hatbrim clip. Carrying a couple of extra Li AAA batts is no big deal either. It's pretty easy to lose since it's so small, but it comes w/a lanyard too, besides the clip. I've even accidentally shortened the metal clip on the L0D-CE when i was attempting to reform it to provide more compression on the hat brim. The metal is hard and brittle where it has been previously bent/yielded as part of the mfr-ing process. It was easy to bend the clip further up though and still have a very serviceable, but slightly lighter capbrim clip afterwards.

I agree with you. Li coin cells are no bargain (and i don't mean price). They offer very little in the way of continuous service utility, dimming so quickly in higher current drain applications (e.g. Petzl e+LITE) as to be essentially useless if one is desiring the brighter light output that something like the e+LITE offers for only the first 15-30minutes of use. For task lighting, setting up camp, fine, but for walking a trail/path for 30+ minutes, then it might not be a good choice. AAA's "rule" by comparison. A single AAA has the stored energy of nearly 6 CR2032 Li coin cells!!

As far as the next light you suggest that i buy, i'll keep that in mind if i decide to create an Artic circle never setting sun ambience as i hike. I think i could mount it to my noggin', but i can tell you that doing so would leave no room at all for adding a '50' at a later date!!

Hey everyone,
I just received my L2D-CE (2AA) light yesterday.
Sure it weighs almost twice as much as the singles, but also has twice the battery life. Not bad for 3.1 ounces with batteries. The low is easily enough to hike with at night and will last for 45-50 hours, (manf. claim is 55) but flashlight reviews say they last about 90% of the manf. claim, which is tested.

I got it more for adventure racing. Having a light you can use to replace my heavy bike light in 90% of the trails and lasts for about 2 1/2 hours is well worth the $55 for the light.
What's even better is you can easily tell the difference between high and turbo power at a distance (80 lumes vs 135 lumes) but you really can't tell the difference when you have it shined 15 yards in front of you.
So now I get almost 4 hours of really bright light from just 2AA batteries.

As a comparison to the min-mag light (2AA), they are the same length and the weight for the m-m is 2.2 oz while the cree is 2.1 (with out batteries), and is about 40X brighter.

My only consideration on buying the 2AA cree was that the single CR123 cree has a low power of 12 lumes vs the 2AA's 9 lumes. For night hiking the CR123 cree would be better. The bad thing with the single CR123 light is that I own one and its so small that it's hard to handle.

If your serious about going light, the 1AAA cree with the clip is the way to go.
I am soooo amazed with my light that I will be getting one of the 1AAA crees to use for general hiking. Photons may cut it for some, but if you need to hike out at night, you will need a back up. With the 1AAA cree's adjustability, it is the only light you need. With a litheum battery it will weigh just over .5 oz.

Edited by awsorensen on 02/18/2007 11:11:37 MST.