Dive Light Myths

[lucca brassi]

What you have done Boby is not some serious test it is just ''FEELING TEST'' just pictures that some guy glitch on uneven rock or seabead in unclear water ?

You have no data about taking beam , you don't measure distance , angle , colour , lux or anything , have you ever see integrating sphere to gives us lumens as TORCH SOURCE ?

You have '' lumens'' from led emiter datasheet , you have calculated in account also led cooling and thermal graph which lower lumens ?

Of course you don't have with you reference source ( that mean light which have absolutley known parameters) , because distance we measure with meter , and temperature with thermometer ,

but you measure light with ...?

Does LM have old /new bulb , does have RIGHT adjusted beam ( even we know that these HIDs are far to be efficient ! and they are certainly not some reference)

OK no problem - it is just feeling ......but nothing more - for me : to less . It was an objective critique and dispersed myth .

BTW : if you search web MBSUB have at least some measurments on some older lights.

 

[Diver0001]

Diver0001,
No problem and thanks. We actually get as much if not more frustrated with the hype that is out there. As far as the video goes we did what we could to create a level playing field. We also put in a number of other LED lights as well. We are seeking input for how we could do it better. We had many past attempts at putting a video together and failed miserably. If we can do it better in the future we will make the effort.

Good luck with your next light search and if we can do anything to help please let us know.

The problem I see with the video is that it's taken in uncontrolled circumstances. I can appreciate that you attempted to be objective about it but the exact distance and angle to the ground can significantly influence how bright the light looks. In any case, I couldn't draw any conclusions from watching it.

What I think would work better is to illuminate a fixed target at various distances and angles while keeping the beam steady. That way it's easy for the viewer to compare the light output, colour and beam width of various heads. After that, showing a video of a diver using the light in a cave or on a wreck (I personally think wrecks are more photogenic because of the marine life) can be the icing on the cake that allows a potential buyer to "put him/her self in the picture" as it were, and fantasize about owning one.

To me it looks like you have a solid product that a lot of people would like to buy but if you ask me, the video you have right now does more to confuse people than it does to convince them.

R..

 

[Bobby]

Lucca,
Thanks for your feed back, it is appreciated.

What you have done Boby is not some serious test it is just ''FEELING TEST'' just pictures that some guy glitch on uneven rock or seabead in unclear water ?

You are correct it is a "feeling" test/comparison. We made every effort to make it fair and useful. It was taken in a particular cave that is known for clear water and enough flow that any silt that might get stirred up would quickly be taken out and not affect the outcome. We had a tripod with us but had technical issues when deploying it and had to resort to hand held. As listed in the comparison video we used the same manual settings for each run and markers so we would have the same turning point and beam sweeps. We made our best effort to point the beam at the same spot from the same angle as much as we could in a dynamic environment.

You have no data about taking beam , you don't measure distance , angle , colour , lux or anything , have you ever see integrating sphere to gives us lumens as TORCH SOURCE ?

As was stated in the comparison video it is a simple test for end users. We have tested our lights and competitors and yes we have experience with integrating sphere. We also understand and appreciate the difficulty of putting together all of this data for our lights and other dive light manufacturers. The reality is that we are a small company that does not have the resources to do all of this testing and it would be a waste of our time as others would simply accuse us of being biased.

You have '' lumens'' from led emiter datasheet , you have calculated in account also led cooling and thermal graph which lower lumens ?

Yes we have the calculations. What is the point when other manufacturers are stating Lumen output beyond even the basic data sheets? We are conservative with our specifications because we do account for efficiency losses.

but you measure light with ...?

We have a Lux box that we designed specifically to compare primary light output. It levels the field and gives useful information between different lights. It is a quick and easy tool for our own internal testing. We don't publish our Lux numbers as they are useless information unless they can be compared with Lux readings taken with another identical box from other manufacturers. Again if we published the numbers for competitors we would be accused of being biased in some way and we are in the business of manufacturing lights. We just don't have the resources to spend our time on testing everything available on the market.

Does LM have old /new bulb , does have RIGHT adjusted beam ( even we know that these HIDs are far to be efficient ! and they are certainly not some reference)

Excellent question and yes both the HID lights had bulbs that were less than a month old. We also took voltage readings of the battery packs for all the lights if anyone questions that they were fully charged. We did take the time to ensure the reflectors on the HID's were adjusted as best we could for their best output.

OK no problem - it is just feeling

......but nothing more - for me : to less . It was an objective critique and dispersed myth .

Thank you that is appreciated.

BTW : if you search web MBSUB have at least some measurments on some older lights.

Yes there are Lux measurements but as discussed the numbers mean nothing unless the environment can be duplicated. Unless someone has a better idea on how to present specifications we believe that Lumen output with any rounding towards the more conservative. It would be a step forward if we stopped rounding up. It would be another step in the right direction if other manufacturers took into account at least some efficiency losses in their specifications.

We have already made good progress by getting away from using watts to specify output. That was just silly but as the consumer becomes more educated they are getting better information.

---------- Post added March 13th, 2013 at 05:30 AM ----------

Diver0001,
Again thanks for the input. We will take all the input we can get and may do another video some time down the road. We had a number of attempts before we got this video that did not work out for various reasons. We chose a cave because it offered a completely dark environment without outside light sources to have influence. As we have a lot of prototyping going on with video light designs and we are still struggling to keep up with orders it may be a while before we have time to dedicate to this type of project again.

 

[lucca brassi]

I completly understand small firm which have to look on costs , but with some right approach it can be done a lot.

For start I recomend you to look on Unbenanntes Dokument I think it is a good way ( but most at all it is TRACEABLE and REPEATABLE ) with small modification that can be done underwater too.

PS I have recently read that SOLA have submerged integration sphere for true lumen measurments

 

[3D diver]

Hmmm...pictures that are mostly black with little blobs indicating the light pattern. The one video I looked at was the same, but moved.

Maybe there's more there, but I'm not patient enough to search for it.

I appreciate the attempt, but 'til there's an industry wide test standard it's still buyer beware, IMHO.

 

[PapawJ]

I don't have a dog in this fight so here we go, in reading some of the posts here in must say how else do you test a light? In the dark perhaps, a cave light in dark wet spaces with uneven rocks or in unclear water. It seems to me that the Fine folks from Slovenia, and Europe use their lights for something other than diving in which case they would be correct in their assumptions. Do you do the garage door test, you know backup 25 yds or so and shine the light at the door on a cloudy night. Crap you folks use meters hold on thats 22.86 meters. Now I must say if you drink like us Americans do then the story will change following each additional beer/pint. I use my lights underwater for recovery missions as well as recreation therefore any light I might buy damn well better be tested in the dark and in the water against rocks, caves and merky rivers. Thats the most I have typed since my suicide note last year.

 

[lucca brassi]

I have to buy a gun or two or three , probably automatic , with light fast ejector to protect myself ;-)))

Of shi!t , I forgot shootgun !

 

[PapawJ]

I have to buy a gun or two or three , probably automatic , with light fast ejector to protect myself ;-)))

Of shi!t , I forgot shootgun !

Good idea, I'll bet you know about guns. Lights are not your strong suit.

 

[lucca brassi]

Some to strong Moonshine for you probably PapawJ ? or pains in ass !

 

[PapawJ]

Moonshine, now you are speaking my language. You dumbass, maybe sometime you can make the trip over and we take a taste.