Review OrcaTorch D550 1000 Lumen Handheld Dive Light Review

[tmassey]

OrcaTorch D550 1000 Lumen Handheld Dive Light Review​

The OrcaTorch D550 is a 1000 Lumen handheld dive light with a metal body and a pushbutton switch on the end, and uses a single rechargeable 18650 lithium battery. It's a very popular format for dive lights. When OrcaTorch offered a free D550 for a review, I took the opportunity. I have wanted to test this class of dive lights for a while, and this seemed like the perfect chance. I already own a few pocket-sized OrcaTorch D560 lights I've purchased on my own and I've been pleased with the quality, so I was happy to be able to try a lager one from OrcaTorch rather than taking a chance on a random direct-from-China light.

This review will likely not be a typical light review. My use case is probably different than most: as a backup light for overhead diving. My perspective is probably also different than most: as a technical DIR-leaning diver. Because of this, I have tried to write up a detailed review of both pros and cons. I've tried to keep separate my impressions about both the light itself as well as about the way the light wants to be used, so if your philosophy or use-case do not line up with mine, you can still hopefully learn enough about the light itself to see how it might work for you. Like everything I write, it's very long. Skip to the Conclusions section if you just want the (still detailed) bottom line, though you might want to also take a quick glance at the photos along the way.

(No, really, this is *insanely* long. I figure if OrcaTorch was going to give me a light for a review, I was going to review it as well as I could: crummy pictures and rambling screeds on dive accessories and all. Besides, geeking out about diving is therapy for me -- and I guess I need a *lot* of therapy. If you're going to complain about how long it is, stop now. I'm not kidding.)

The short-short version is: I was quite impressed with the light itself. I do have a number of nitpicks, but many of them are more about the style of diving this light is designed to support rather than the quality of the actual light itself. In the end, I only had one reservation, and that is mainly related to serious technical use.

Contents:
Post 1: About my diving and expectations for this light (you're here!)
Post 2: Purchase, unboxing and accessories
Post 3: Light prep and initial impressions | Working with the light
Post 4: Using the light underwater
Post 5: Runtime
Post 6: --- Part 2
Post 7: Conclusions

About my diving and expectations for this light​

I have approximately 700 dives over the past 15 or so years in a variety of environments, mostly in the Great Lakes and Florida, including open water and overhead shipwrecks and caves. I'm a relatively new Full Cave diver: I only have something like 70 full cave dives post-class. Most of my training has been provided by a variety of instructors using PADI and TDI curriculum. See my ScubaBoard profile for details of the certifications I've taken.

My application for this light is as a primary backup light: that is, a light that is strapped to my shoulder strap. My primary light is a Dive Rite HP50 with expedition canister. My current backup lights are Dive Right In Scuba 1000 Lumen lights, affectionately known as 'the fish-killer': it's big and long with a clubhead on the end...

Why did I choose that light for my backup? While most of my technical training is with TDI, I do have some GUE influences. I do not consider myself a GUE diver, but much of my gear was selected to be 'GUE-compatible'. That includes backup dive lights, for which GUE requires non-rechargable alkaline batteries. The DRIS light uses the common GUE-recommended 3-C-cell configuration.

This choice may have made sense in the 1990's, where the only alternative was NiCd batteries which had a number of weaknesses: noticeably lower capacity than alkaline batteries along with high self-discharge: you could lose 50% charge in 1 month just sitting there! In addition, NiCd has a flat discharge curve, which means they stay near maximum brightness -- right up until they fail on you. Consistently bright is good, but conversely there's no way of knowing what the charge of that battery is unless you just pulled it out of the charger. Combined with their self-discharge, that's a good recipe for a backup light that strands you in the dark before you get out of the cave.

But times have changed. With modern lithium batteries, you get much higher power capacity (about triple) and much lower self-discharge (less than 1% per month). They do still have a flat discharge curve to worry about, but if you charge them when you use them, and throw them on the charger every few months for good measure, having an unexpectedly low battery should not actually be an issue.

There is one other GUE-driven requirement: the light can't have a switch. It must be operated by twisting the light on or off. That is to avoid as much as possible accidental activation. Twisting makes it much more difficult to accidentally turn the light on than bumping a switch. (It can be done, but it's hard, especially if when you turn it off you give it an extra half-a-turn.)

At this point in time, I question GUE's wisdom on lithium batteries, but I don't really question the wisdom of switch vs. pushbutton. Forever ago, I owned a pocket dive light with a tail-mounted pushbutton. Accidental activation was a regular occurrence.

But, it's been a good while since I've tried a pushbutton light, and frankly, the market has spoken: it's 95% lithium-powered pushbutton lights. How would such a dive light -- one that is not expected to live in a pocket -- perform? How much am I giving up for twist activation and alkaline batteries?

So, when I saw the offer from OrcaTorch, I jumped at it.

My expectations for this light are pretty low: I want a light that will reliably sit on my harness and patiently wait for the time when I need it. When I do need it, I want to activate it easily. It will primarily be used in overhead environments (caves and shipwrecks), so it does not need to outcompete the sun (literally), but it does need to be effective. I want it to shine brightly over a reasonable distance with a strong spot, but with sufficient spill to light my surroundings. I want the interface to be very simple: on and off is really all I need or even want. I don't want too many or unnecessary modes to interfere if I make a mistake. I want it to be reliable. I want it to be easy to maintain.

And I want it to be cheap. Is that too much to ask?


Next section: Purchase, unboxing and accessories.

 

[tmassey]

Purchase, unboxing and accessories​

I ordered the light on Amazon. Because of the review process, there were a couple of extra non-Amazon hoops to jump through that a normal buyer would not have. I had issues with that part and OrcaTorch jumped in quickly and effectively and helped me to resolve the mistakes I made. They were easy to deal with, which is not always the case for Amazon vendors. The light arrived exactly like you would expect an order from Amazon would. By the way, make sure you buy it from the right vendor on Amazon: the one I used was "Outdoor Equipment Expert". (Duplicate, even fraudulent Amazon vendors are becoming such a nightmare. I never thought I would get to this point, but between that and the price increases for Amazon Prime, the idea of actually not renewing has occurred to me...)

Here's a (non-affiliate) link to the one I purchased ($95 at this time): (Text link: www.amazon.com/gp/product/B07F8S81CX/ )

The light comes in an attractive plastic box. This is a reusable box that holds all of the light accessories. That was a pleasant surprise. My expectations for such packaging is very low: it usually just becomes more waste. I'd actually prefer a thin plastic bag: it'll take up that much less space in a landfill... But in this case, the box actually seems quite thick and actually durable. I mean, it's not a toolbox; but assuming you don't run it over or smash it under tanks it seems like it will last a while. There's room in my life for a compact box that can store needed accessories in my larger dive bags.

Opening the box offered a second pleasant surprise: two batteries. I didn't expect that. One would have been sufficient, and with entry-level gear, that's usually the most you'll get. Unlike, say, a battery-operated drill, when this battery runs out, you're not going to be able to stop and swap packs. But having a second charged battery on the boat certainly helps, especially if this is your primary light and you want to swap between dives or boat trips. So this was also appreciated.

Small pleasant surprise number 3: the charger has a cord. And the cord has a 2-prong USA wall plug. Often the chargers I've seen included have either a flip-out 2-prong USA plug or just some sort of USB connector and no wall plug at all -- maybe a few-inch-long cable if you're lucky... I hate devices that don't include a complete way of charging them! Yes, maybe I have an open USB plug somewhere, but there is no guarantee I do, and I prefer that every device that needs a USB brick has one stored with it. As for the flip-out plugs: they are convenient to store, but can be difficult to use: they tend to block other outlets or have to be oriented weirdly just to use them. I realize that this is pretty much pure personal preference, but my preference is to have a device with a cord that can actually plug into the wall (USB cord with brick or straight to wall plug), and that's exactly what I got.

The other two included accessories are a wrist lanyard and a 'soft Goodman handle'. For me, these two are a total miss. Most of that is because of the biases I have toward gear and the way I will be using this light. For me, the lanyard is useless. First off, I will be using a snap bolt on the tail to attach to a D-ring on my harness. That's pretty much non-negotiable. The lanyard would merely dangle in the way. What if I drop the light? If I'm in a cave or shipwreck, I pick it up again. On the rare occasion I might be using it without a bottom, I guess I lost a dive light: grab the other backup and be more careful this time! A foot-long loop of string is not something I want. The quality and construction seem typical, even reasonable: it's a decent nylon-looking braided string with a plastic sleeve and one of those ubiquitous plastic spring-button stoppers that I find tend to break after a short while.

The glove ('soft Goodman handle') is also of questionable utility. Obviously, the glove would be used if this is your primary light, and for me it's not. But even if it were, 'soft Goodman handles' are not particularly useful. The entire point of a true Goodman handle is that it's easy to take on and off. When you have a light on your hand, sometimes you need to take it off when you do things with your hand. If you reach back and use your kidney dump on your wing (you do use the kidney dump, right? ) or check your pressure on your hip-mounted SPG, you blind the guy behind you. Never mind trying to run a jump line or such. So, you move the light to your other hand. You're going to do this a dozen or so times an hour, so it better be quick and easy. With a Goodman handle, it is.

With a glove that's strapped to your hand? Not so much. It's impractical to take it off and even less practical to put it on under the water. So, you're stuck with it on your hand the whole time. No good in a truly dark environment like a cave. So that alone eliminates it for me.

The other downside of a glove is that you can't change the angle of the light without changing the position of your hand. So, if you're trying to shine the light straight forward, your fingers must point forward. If your hands are in front of you in a relaxed manner, they tend to be pointing at an angle across the centerline right in front of you, not nearly straight ahead. This can be corrected by mechanically positioning your arms and hands, but that requires energy and gets uncomfortable. With a true Goodman handle, you can change the angle of the light on top of your hand: problem solved.

However, if you're sold on a glove, how is the quality of this one? I would say fairly good. I didn't even get mine wet, so I didn't really test this, but examining it didn't show any noticeable flaws. There were no loose threads, or stitches that only caught the edge of the material and will therefore unravel quickly -- a common problem I find with inexpensive sewn goods. The design is the typical neoprene sleeve on top for the light, nylon material for the "glove" with a hole for the thumb, nylon strap with velcro for the closure. This is way better than cheap mostly-neoprene gloves I've actually spent money on in the past: sewn neoprene tends to fall apart quickly. The neoprene portion of this glove is trimmed in fabric, which helps tremendously. Plus it's just for the light, which will take a lot less abuse.

I find the glove's strap odd. It's very long, and designed to be looped back on itself after it's closed -- there's an extra strip of velcro to hold that second loop. It makes no sense to me. Having that fold-back area forces the first patch of velcro to be relatively small: about 2.5 inches. That's plenty to hold it closed (at least when the velcro is new and clean) if your hand is small enough to fit the glove. For larger hands (and I wear an XL glove), it fits fine -- if you're not already wearing gloves... Even 3mm neoprene gloves start to become an issue. With dry gloves and liners, you either have the light glove strapped too tight, or there isn't that much velcro holding things closed. And as for the extra length that wraps back around: there is a plastic loop that I think is supposed to be used to basically double-secure the glove. That's an idea, I guess... Now it's really unlikely to come off (though I already described that it needs to be able to come off!), but it also tightens the glove even more. So much so that it's uncomfortable with my bare (XL-sized) hands. All in all, I'd be happier with a strap that was half as long, with just a single pair of velcro patches that were twice as long. More versatile, more reliable. But I'm clearly not the target market for this accessory, both in use and probably in hand size as well.

Or maybe I'm just using it wrong. Either way, I'm not using it.

The nice thing about rejecting the glove and the lanyard is that it leaves a lot more space in the box for other stuff. The box comes with shape-fitting foam to hold everything in place. That certainly looks great, but fitting everything (especially the glove) back in is kind of like fitting a tent back in its original sleeve: it can be done, but only if you really take some time with it... I'll likely tear out most of the foam and just leave the part where the light gets held in place: I'd rather have more room for more stuff. But I will keep and use the box.

OK, the accessories are great and all, but what about the light itself?!?


Next section: Light prep and initial impressions

 

[tmassey]

Light prep and initial impressions​

The first thing I did was charge the battery overnight. That gave me plenty of time to get familiar with the manual and prep the light. The manual was noticeably above average: it still felt translated, but mainly because the language was more formal than a native speaker would use even if they were trying to be formal. It was extremely easy to understand, with minimal grammatical issues.

The user interface is very easy. From off, briefly push the button. You get high. Briefly push the button. You get low. Briefly push the button. You get off. Doesn't get much simpler! My favorite part is that there is a strobe mode, but it's 'hidden': Push the button for more than 1 second and you get strobe mode. Briefly press the button and you go back to normal mode. That's great: I have not yet ever wanted strobe mode. It just gets in the way and annoys everyone around you in a dark cave -- and some lights have two needless strobe modes to cycle through... So, for those that want strobe it's there and easy to get to, and for those that don't it's not there. And for in-water use, two power levels are great for a small light. In water, a very-dim-mode is pretty useless: even in a dark cave you need to see more than the few feet dim mode might give you, and in any kind of light dim mode can't be seen at all.

I also attached a snap bolt to the bottom of the light. The bottom is your typical wavy ridge with a pushbutton on the end of the light. There are slits in the taller part to attach to. I was lazy and simply used a wire tie to attach the snap bolt. (At least I used Ty-raps! Don't judge me! )

One area of concern I have is the durability of cave line. I've found that using cave line with aluminum-body lights like this tends to be hard on the cave line: it ends up fraying quickly. I end up having to replace them every few months or so. (Which is why I've started being lazy and using wire ties here: if I'm going to have to redo them every few months, I can do the same with wire ties, and it's a lot faster and easier.)

Once the battery was fully charged, I popped the battery in. The light immediately turns on to low. You push the button once and it turns off. Initially, I didn't have a reason to think about this: it worked fine. I'll talk more about that later when I discuss the switch. I then turned the light on high. I was surprised at how bright it was just in my bedroom. I am used to the brightness of my 'fish-killers' on land from checking them before a dive. This sure felt brighter. (ETA: This is likely because my fish-killer batteries were not brand new: the brightness drops off pretty fast. They looked much closer when I used fresh batteries for the runtime testing. Note to self: change the fish-killer batteries sooner...)

So, initial (dry) impression was a very nice light for the size, weight and cost. A very reasonable interface, and a good collection of accessories. Pleased so far!

Working with the light​

Fortunately, I had a trip to Cave Country scheduled in a couple of weeks. So, I put it in the box, put it in my dive bag and took it down to Florida. I ended up taking it out and using it (not just carrying it) on three different dives. I was able to compare it to both my HP50 and my backup lights. On one of the dives, I was even able to take a few minutes of video comparing them. The video isn't great: I have only a very inexpensive action camera, and my videographer skills are awful. I'm not going to use the video at this time, but I did pull some screenshots that are somewhat representative of what I saw. I'll hopefully be back in Cave Country next month and hope to take some more video so that I can hopefully patch together something worth looking at -- but have low expectations. What I have does allow you to get a bit of an A-to-B comparison of the lights, though.

When gearing up, you quickly notice the smaller size and weight of the OrcaTorch. Compared to the fish-killers, it takes up less space on the harness, and the head is more proportional to the body, which makes getting them on and off the harness easier as well. You also notice that the pushbutton is a lot easier to operate when you're doing your surface checks. It's a one-handed job. Twisting the other lights was very much a two-handed job -- one that could require a decent amount of oomph to accomplish.

Unfortunately, the pushbutton was a little too easy. Both on land and in the water, I was able to accidentally activate the light. I don't mean 'I could play with it and "accidentally" activate it'; I mean that on more than one occasion the light turned itself on when I didn't want it to. I think it happened twice in the first three days. At that point, for me personally, I considered the pushbutton dead to me. It was not reliable enough to be allowed to be used.

Fortunately, I was able to make an adaptation: I treated the light as a twist-on light and ignored the switch. That wasn't much of a problem at all: I was already used to twist-on lights, so I wasn't that heartbroken. In fact, doing this only had one flaw: when you twist the light on, it starts in low mode, not high. Had it turned itself on to high, it would have been perfect: it would have given me exactly what I wanted, even with my unusual requirements. As it is, it's not terrible, but more annoying than I would like: I have to twist the light on, then push the button (which turns it off), then push the button (which turns it on high). The off part is what makes it annoying. Our procedure is to twist our light on before we take it off the D-ring. That way, if we drop it, the light is on. Having the light go off (and not attached to anything) is not great.

Of course, I can (try to) twist it and push the button while it's still on the harness, but with the snap bolt tied there and it up against the D-ring, it's not straightforward. I would prefer if I didn't have to! I would guess the light does that for some sort of safety reason, so it won't overheat? Of course, it's more likely to self-activate sometime after the battery is installed, and that does go to high immediately... So why not from installing the battery? Seriously, that is by far my biggest complaint for this light. So close to exactly what I want...

ETA: I later thought about it: the way I want to use this, there's no reason I can't simply twist it on (to Low), take it off the harness, move it to the QR on my Goodman handle, and then easily manipulate the light to Off and then High... Even less reason to not like this light! But I still do wish it would simply power on in High: it goes to High after a single button push, why not from installing the battery, too?

I'm sure you're thinking that this is great and all, but when are we going to actually see what this light can do underwater?!? That's next, I promise!


Next section: Using the light underwater

 

[tmassey]

Using the light underwater​

ETA: I'm pretty sure the batteries in my fish-killers were lower than I thought they were. I did not put fresh batteries in them for this trip. I absolutely should have done that. Seeing the results from the runtime testing made me realize that the results here may be worse than they actually should be: the alkaline batteries drop off much quicker than I thought. Unfortunately, I don't have any other pictures that I can use to illustrate the lights. Because t's not actually a review of the fish-killers, I will leave it, but I think the fish-killers will possibly look better with new batteries. The runtime section might give a bit more balanced idea. The HP50, though, was freshly charged... I've got another trip scheduled in February: hopefully I can update this review with more accurate pictures.


Finally, the only part you probably actually care about... What does the light look like underwater?

I have to say, I'm impressed. I fully acknowledge that before this I had ignored the entire middle of the modern light range. For me, I'm either using a $1200 "can of sun", or I've fallen back to an emergency light where long shelf-life and reliability are much more important than light quality, which ends up compromising the light output.

What that means is that I only have two types of experience with lights. My backup lights are certainly reliable, but if you're using them, you're probably OK compromising on seeing the entire cave. You can see well in a small circle in front of you, and that's enough to get you out. Of course, my main light is entirely different: it literally lights up the entire room, both forward and to the sides. In fact, my HP50 does this a little bit too much: it has enough of a spot for proper team communication, but it throws so much light out to the sides that I will drown out teammates' lights unless they are relatively new and powerful (e.g. I have to drop my light to medium if my teammate has an LX20). But it will very nicely light up even a good-sized cavern.

I have to say, I think the OrcaTorch is closer to my HP50 than it is to my backup lights. The experience it provides is closer to that of a primary light than a backup. It has a strong spot as well as a reasonable amount of spill. This means that you have enough light to be able to penetrate a reasonable distance, and enough light to be able to see your closer surroundings to a decent distance to the sides. In fact, my initial impression was that the light was closer to what you would experience with something like an LX20 than what you'd expect from a backup light.

There is a noticeable difference in light pattern between the OrcaTorch and my backups. The backup lights are significantly more spotty, with very little spill. When you're using them, you can see exactly one thing: the thing you're shining your light on. You can see for a reasonable distance, but not well to the sides. If you want to see around the room, you have to move the light a lot more.

All of this makes sense, of course. The OrcaTorch isn't designed to be a backup light. It's designed to be an entry-level cordless primary light. And from a light output perspective, it does a great job. It is a very nice balance of throw distance, beam/spill width, size, weight and cost. My backup lights, on the other hand, are designed to be backup lights -- and backups for people who value reliability much more highly than the actual light produced.

What about comparing it to my primary light? Of course, my HP50 is also designed to be a primary light... But it also costs more than ten times what the OrcaTorch costs, and it's also considerably larger, and there's a cord to deal with, too. With all that, you would expect it to be better than the OrcaTorch. And it is: it's brighter, covers more area, throws the light farther and lasts longer. What was surprising to me was how reasonably close the OrcaTorch was to the HP50. In general, the OrcaTorch felt like it was doing about 50% of what the HP50 was doing. The HP50 could indeed see farther and wider, but not so much more that it felt dramatically better, like the OrcaTorch over the backup lights. The HP50 was noticeably brighter, but that by itself didn't necessarily improve things. (In fact, my HP50 has a bad tendency to blind me from backscatter on water that is less than pristine: I end up having to hold it way out away from my body to avoid that. The HP50 is probably too wide a beam, and maybe even a touch too bright because of that. But that's a different review.)

You can really see that in the stills. First a quick word about what you'll see. As I mentioned, I'm a terrible videographer. Trying to operate a light and a camera when you have very little practice is quite difficult, so I apologize for the framing, etc. It leaves a lot to be desired. Also, it's a cheap camera, and even expensive cameras do not capture light the way your eye does -- especially the difference between bright and dim areas of the scene. So while these pictures show you what the lights look like in comparison to each other, they do a poor job of representing what my eye was seeing at the time. Even the dimmest light was able to show a decent amount of the room to my eye, though the camera makes it look like it is merely a dim tunnel of illumination. So know that when you are using any of these lights, what you actually see will seem to be much brighter and more evenly illuminated. But even to my eye, the difference between the OrcaTorch and my backup lights was noticeable.

First, here is the fish-killer: (ETA: remember my warning about battery condition above!)

As you can see, the beam is narrow, and it doesn't do much to light up the room. Again, to my eye it was noticeably better, but even then you still got the impression of 'dim' and 'tunnel of light'. You'll notice that you can see some rocks sticking out up ahead. That's as far as that light could go. And other than a small bit of floor in front of me, you see nothing else. There's rock all around me, but you wouldn't know that from the picture.

This light is functional, reliable and meets the DIR dogma. But it is not appealing to use. How much am I sacrificing for that dogma? That's exactly what I wanted to find out by reviewing a better light! Maybe it's time for a change?

Let's see the OrcaTorch and find out!

This is a noticeable difference. I'm basically shining the light from the same spot and in the same direction. As you can see, the light is providing a lot more spill: enough to be able to see much of the tunnel around me. You can also see the rocks at the end of the spot quite a bit clearer, as well as the floor leading up to that point. You can't really tell because the spot is blinding the camera, but you can see a bit farther with the OrcaTorch, past that rock sticking out. It's a much more comprehensive view of the surroundings.

Now, let's see what the HP50 can do:

So, that's why I paid 10 times as much... The first thing you might notice is the fact that you can see another set of rocks in the background. The HP50 is able to get enough light back there that now the camera can see them -- I could see them with the OrcaTorch, but the camera couldn't. Of course, now even I can see them better with the bigger light. Plus you can see that the surroundings are more illuminated: again, the camera can see better because there's more light. You'll notice that in the HP50 picture I'm actually holding the light closer to the floor (so the backscatter doesn't blind me so I can see farther, a frequent issue I have with this light...), yet the ceiling is still well-lit as well as farther down the tunnel. That is the biggest difference with the HP50: I just have a larger volume of light both down the tunnel and around the sides.

You can see that by comparing another still from the OrcaTorch, where I'm holding the light nearer the floor:

You can see that it's doing a great job of lighting up my near surroundings, very similar to my HP50. But it just can't get enough light farther down the tunnel like the HP50 can. Looking at these stills, I think what it shows here is very similar to what I would see with a previous-generation canister light (like the LX20 I mentioned before). In fact, I must have thought the same thing while I was testing them, because right after this I switched my HP50 to medium and filmed it for comparison:

This picture looks a lot like the first OrcaTorch photo above. It's a very similar level of illumination and distance, and the results are similar -- and the OrcaTorch cost a lot less than an HP50 or even an LX20 -- though it doesn't last nearly as long, as you will see in the runtime section below.

The stills here are useful, but they do not really give a great representation of what it's like to use these lights. The video allows you to get a better general impression, though even then it's not that great. Just know that the light (any light) will look better to your eye than it does in a poorly-shot video like mine (or most amateur videos you might look up on YouTube). But for an A/B comparison, it will give you a very good general idea.

ETA: Given the lower batteries, I don't think it's fair to use the video. I hope to redo the video and use that, and maybe add some of this video to that as well.


Next section: Runtime

 

[tmassey]

Runtime​

Brightness is certainly important. Runtime is pretty important too, though. What can we expect from this light?

The manual says 125 minutes on high. I'm reluctant to simply trust that number: I need to be able to count on what this light will deliver. So, I turned the light on High, dropped the light into the sink and waited. While I was at it, I did the same with a fish-killer, with a fresh set of alkaline batteries (Duracell Procell Constant).

Runtime is a very tricky thing to measure. This was far from a scientific process. Basically, every 30 minutes I checked on the lights, shined them on a nearby wall, and took a picture of them in the sink. This is 100% subjective, under far-from-ideal conditions. But it's what I've got!

First impressions were that the fish-killers started out ahead of the OrcaTorch. This didn't surprise me, given that they have a tighter beam. (Lumens is total light output out of the LED: focus that in a narrower beam, and that beam will be brighter.) The difference was identifiable, but not dramatic. (Sorry about the spots: I turned off the overhead lights after this...)

(Also note: the HDR photos looked a lot better on an OLED iPhone screen. At least on my old notebook here, it's much harder to tell the difference between the beams. You'll have to take my text descriptions on faith: the differences I'm describing were quite evident by eye and on the iPhone screen... Maybe your screen will be better, too! )

Start of test

By the time the first half-hour was over, the lights had evened up: to my eye, they looked very similar. To the camera, the OrcaTorch comes out a bit ahead. There's an entire *world* of factors between what a camera sees and records and what an eye sees and a brain perceives, so it's really hard to draw hard conclusions. The differences are small, anyway.

30 minutes

By the hour mark, there is a noticeable difference here: the OrcaTorch is brighter, both to the eye and to the camera. They're both down from their initial blue-bright peak, but the OrcaTorch is holding on better to what it's got. That's most likely the flatter lithium battery curve for you.

60 minutes

By the 90 minute mark, the OrcaTorch has started to fade: it's back to being a touch dimmer than the fish-killer. The fish-killer seems to have stayed steady, which was already down quite a bit from its initial brightness. At this point, I would consider the OrcaTorch to be ready to turn off. Sure, you can still use it, but past this I personally would not call that part of the light's usable capacity -- more like contingency capacity.

90 minutes

I kept it burning, though, just to see. I meant to check in after 15 minutes but life got in the way: it was 20 minutes. At that point, the OrcaTorch spot was significantly dimmer. Again, in a pitch-black cave, it might be usable: it's probably not a lot less dim than my D510's, which only put out 100 or so lumens -- and I have absolutely used them to exit a cave. But 10% brightness does not in my book constitute a usable capacity.

110 minutes

The fish-killer seems to still be going decently. But how much is it really going? It's hard to tell when you can't make direct comparisons to what it used to be.

Or can we?

To compare, I popped the other fully-charged battery in the OrcaTorch and put it on High and compared that to the fish-killer. This will give you an idea of where we are compared to where we started. After all, the fish-killer started out a touch brighter. How does it compare now?

I'd love to show you... but you can only attach 5 pictures to a single post! So, on to the next post!


Continued...

 

[tmassey]

Runtime - Part 2​

Here is the fish-killer running for 115 minutes compared to the OrcaTorch with a fresh battery on High, to compare to our starting brightness:

115 minutes, OrcaTorch with fresh battery on High

So, it turns out the alkaline battery light is down a good amount too. In fact, here's a comparison to the fresh OrcaTorch on Low:

115 minutes, OrcaTorch with fresh battery on Low

They were very similar. So, while the fish-killer is plenty usable (certainly more than the OrcaTorch was at that time), it was pretty far from what it started out with. By the way, the manual for the OrcaTorch says that Low mode is 367 lumens, so we're at literally 1/3 of peak brightness.

Of course, those alkaline batteries can run a *long* time at that low level... I checked it every 15 minutes, and it took until a total runtime of 3 hours for the fish-killer to drop noticeably below the OrcaTorch fully-charged on Low.

165 minutes, OrcaTorch with fresh battery on Low


So... after all those barely-different photos, how do you actually count the runtime? I guess it depends on what you call usable capacity:

If you want to be noticeably near the maximum output the entire time you're using it, the OrcaTorch provides about 60-90 minutes of runtime, depending how "near" to the maximum you want to count. For the fish-killers, it's 30-60 minutes.

If you are OK with the light being at least decently usable (say, at that 1/3 maximum capacity, which is probably perceptually 'half as bright'), the OrcaTorch provides no more than 90-100 minutes. The fish-killers are the clear winner here: 3 hours of decently usable, and if you want to stretch "decently" usable, I'm sure you could get 4+ hours of usable light out of the thing. That's the benefit of the alkaline discharge curve: they run a long time at 30% brightness...

Which do you need? It depends on how you're using it. As a cave diver using it as a backup, I want that "decently usable" range. For me, I need it to give me at least half of my longest runtime. Right now, my longest dives are in the neighborhood of 140 minutes. If my primary light fails I'm thumbing the dive, so I only need it to get me out from the farthest point, so let's call it 75 minutes. The OrcaTorch gives me that. Barely; and I'll have to keep an eye on this as the battery ages.

For use as a primary light, you need it to last the entire dive, for all the dives you're doing, and you likely want it to stay as bright as possible the whole time. For single-tank divers on a recreational-depth shipwreck, it might be 40 minutes or so. But if it's a boat charter, you might be doing two of those dives, so that might mean 80 minutes -- about the same runtime as what I'm looking for! If you're doing two charters (4 dives) that day, that second battery will come in handy! (Just don't forget to swap -- which is why the expedition canister on my HP50 is nice: I never have to mess with it during the day.) The OrcaTorch will give you more and brighter light throughout both dives, and if you could conserve a few minutes of use from the first dive to the second (say, only 30 minutes of burntime), you'd likely have near-maximum brightness for both dives.

For technical divers, using this as a primary light is a little more difficult. Runtimes get longer, and you need it to last your entire dive and then some. It's pretty easy to imagine runtimes of 90 minutes or longer. You need to make sure you have sufficient margin to safely complete the dive before you run out of light: an extra 1/3 would not be too much. This light would work great for a planned runtime of 60 minutes or less. As your dives get longer, though, you're going to need a longer burn capacity. You might need a bigger light -- or, I guess, more than one (not including backups!).

The flatter discharge curve on the OrcaTorch is noticeable. I did no quantitative measurements of course, but the OrcaTorch stayed reasonably bright the entire time. Not so for the alkaline batteries. They dropped pretty hard right from the beginning. That fading can be an advantage (you can get an idea if the batteries are fresh based on brightness/blueness), but it also means you suffer with a light that spends a lot of time at half-brightness. The lithiums can't really be checked for full charge by eye (they're always decently bright), so you need to make sure they stay charged; but when you do use them, you get a lot of light out of them the whole time.

Even though my runtimes were shorter, I don't criticize the 125 minutes mentioned in the manual: my research indicates that the standard for such runtime numbers are to 10% of maximum output! But that's *really* hard on the batteries, and who wants to use a light at 10% capacity anyway? That's why you have to do your own test and decide on the level of brightness (and battery abuse) that is acceptable to you. The results I got for burn time seemed reasonable, and I think for most applications will provide sufficient time -- certainly for recreational users where a lack of light is not a safety issue. And at least it's easy to change the batteries between dives -- and they give you two of them in the box. Most likely, at worst you will only have to change them between boat trips, rather than actually on the moving boat.


Next section: Conclusions

 

[tmassey]

Conclusions​

As mentioned, this review comes from an unusual perspective: a technical diver looking for better backup lights. My thoughts are mainly focused on this use, but I've tried to detail how the light might work for a recreational or new-to-tech diver so you can apply this to your own diving.

My expectations are for the light to be reliable, easy to use, and bright enough for its purpose as a backup light in a technical environment. This means that a strong spot and good distance with reasonable spill are much more useful than broad, even light with limited throw. Also, the runtime needs to be sufficient for the length of dive. And at a price that provides a strong value.

How does the light measure up?

Strengths
Beam strength and quality: I was impressed by the light. It's way overqualified as a backup light! It is noticeably bright, with a strong spot and good amount of spill. Objectively, the D550 has a better balance than my HP50. The HP50 throws more light, both further and wider. But the light that the OrcaTorch does provide -- which is a very good amount -- has a better, more useful balance. Compared to my current backup lights, it is a more pleasant light to use. For anything other than emergency use, the OrcaTorch is noticeably superior.

Accessories: I really like the accessories I will use. The charger was of good quality and had a complete cord. It includes two batteries. And I know it's silly, but I really like the box: it is high-enough quality that it's not just a waste of plastic in a landfill, but is actually useful. I have no use for the lanyard, and I think glove handles are an anti-feature, but for those who disagree with me, they both seem of decent quality: I've previously spent money on a glove handle that wasn't nearly as durable as this one seems to be.

Build: The size, shape and weight of this light are appealing. They fit better on the harness and are easier to get on and off than the fish-killers, especially underwater. The materials seem fine: it's the standard aluminum construction you'd expect, with no rough edges or obvious flaws. It has a good size hole for a bolt snap right where it needs to be.

Interface: Works like I'd expect. Press for high, press for low, press for off. Perfect. Strobe mode is buried away (long press) so I'll never have to think about it again, let alone see it. Lovely.

Price: This is not quite the cheapest light of its peers, but it's pretty close: $95 delivered on Amazon. There aren't really any dive lights in the 1000 lumen range that are noticeably cheaper. The fish killer is $80, so the difference is surprisingly close. And even at the low price, it still includes solid accessories. And it's a capable light. I would consider that an outstanding value.

Neutral Features
Runtime: How much you need depends on your type of diving. For recreational divers, you might need runtime for a two-tank dive trip. This light has you covered. The included second battery is perfect for two trips: swap the battery during lunch. For technical divers as a backup light, this should have enough runtime to get you out from 2000' feet back: more than half the runtime of a 2.5 hour dive. For technical divers as a primary light: it'll work, but you'll probably outgrow it. There's not enough margin for more than a 60 minute dive. But you know what? It can easily shift to becoming your backup light when you buy that new canister light!

Holding a light: This is very much not a weakness of this light. It's a weakness of all flashlight-shaped lights. How do you hold this thing when you need your hands? Unlike on land, it's not easy to just set it down or put it in your mouth. There are workarounds like a lanyard to let you drop it or a glove to keep your fingers free, but both let the light dance around when you're using your hands and distract or even dazzle everyone, among other problems. (I solve this by using a Dive Rite Quick Release on a hard Goodman handle. If my primary dies, I can use the QR to swap the backup onto the handle and use the backup exactly like the primary.)

Weaknesses​

Button: I know the market has spoken, but I don't like the button. I's not the actual button, just the ease with which a button can be pushed. Having it activate more than once in less than a week of diving is... too much. I need this to be dependable, and that means being confident that it will be charged when I need it and stay off when I don't. An accidental activation is a risk I don't want to have to worry about.

Sure, I can have a second fully charged backup battery. Or, I could leave the battery out and put it in only when I gear up. But the last thing I actually want to do in the field is unscrew my light. That's how you get dirt or grit or hair on the o-ring... and that's how you flood a light. A light that makes me open it in the field for any reason has a serious weakness.

Of course, I could just use it like a twist light and keep it untwisted. And that does mostly work, except...

Power-on interface: Putting the battery in turns the light on Low. If it just turned it on to High, I could have everything I want, and it doesn't change anything for anyone else in any way except when that battery is first inserted. Without that, I have to twist the light on, and then still fumble with pressing the button a couple of times. Deal-killer? No. But frustrating. So close to a perfect interface...

Cave line durability: I have found that this style of mounting hole eats cave line. For example, I need to replace the cave line on my OrcaTorch D560's more than something like a SPG, which I use way more. I don't actually know this will be an issue with this light: not only haven't I had the light long enough to know, I was lazy/pragmatic and used zip ties. But I still think this could be a problem and want to note it.

Verdict​

Honestly, the OrcaTorch D550 did way better than I thought it would. I was genuinely startled by the amount of light this thing put out. I knew the lithium batteries would make a difference compared to the alkaline batteries in my backups, but just how much of a difference was noticeable. But that's part of the reason why I've only mentioned the specific brand and model of my backups in passing. It's not their fault the lights are so much dimmer: they were designed for people who are backwardly demanding a crippled dive light, and I'm grateful that they sell them for us Luddites.

But... if you don't have a hangup about lithium vs. alkaline, or button vs. twist, there's almost nothing bad to say about this light. It's made of durable materials, the fit and finish seem very sufficient, it includes good-quality accessories and unless you're a very picky technical diver, they are probably the type of accessories you actually want to use. And the price is within a few dollars of even the least expensive 1000 lumen lights. Why would you buy anything else?

For these divers, I would recommend it without reservation.

For us demanding (and crumegonly?) tech divers, though... I'm willing to embrace the batteries. The light is just so much better with lithium. And I can easily manage the slight downside that lithium batteries provide. The more glaring issue for me is that button. Fortunately, it can be managed by treating it like a twist-activated light. The only real downside is I've got to both twist and fiddle with an awkwardly-positioned button before I can use it. Of course, switching lights is not an emergency. If it takes me 15 seconds to get the light turned on, that is not really dangerous.

So I will continue to use the light. In fact, it will easily be my primary backup light: Once it's on, I'd much rather use it than the alkaline light! But will it always be there, charged and ready for me to use it? Only time will tell. So I'll keep a fish-killer as my secondary backup. At least then I know I have 4 hours of emergency light if I'm down to my very last backup. (Who am I kidding? I've got at least 2 D560's in my pockets as well... They're tiny, and I own them, so why not bring them. )

The question I've been struggling with is: if I didn't own any other backups, what would I buy? In the end, probably the OrcaTorch. It's just too nice a light to sacrifice that much performance because of an awkward and annoying button. And alkaline batteries just sacrifice too much performance to carry more than one of them.

For those divers, I would still recommend it with a small reservation.

Now, for GUE people... You'll have to stick with your alkaline batteries and twist-only lights. Maybe you can carry one of these as an 'extra-extra' light, even if it's the first one you'd actually go to? If so, it's well worth it: that's what I'll be doing.


Thank you very much for reading my review -- even if you just (wisely) jumped to the conclusions. And for those of you who slogged through the whole thing... I salute you. I hope the review was worth the cost of the light to someone. (Though in the end, with the time I took for this, it would have been a lot cheaper to just buy the thing... )

I hope this has helped you to feel comfortable enough to know whether the light will fit your needs. More likely than not, it will be a very effective addition to your gear. I hope you enjoy it, and I would love to hear your opinions of the light for your use case!

 

[Akimbo]

Wow, excellent work. Thank you.

 

[Marie13]

Just had to chuckle at the “fish killer” lights. I call them “fish bashers.” LOL