Page 4 of 23 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 14 ... LastLast
Results 76 to 100 of 570
  1. #76
    swag ho Administrator
    Reputation: francois's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 1996
    Posts
    18,228
    Quote Originally Posted by RTM View Post
    the only thing i can think of that would set it apart, since visibility is obviously job 1, perhaps you could lean the bike against your playset in darkness w/the tail light lit, front tire facing the fence and take a picture from your usual spot. a reverse beam shot if you will.

    (isn't it funny how we all know exactly what your backyard looks like?)
    Who says that's my backyard?

    It's funny talking to people at Interbike. They know that play structure intimately.

    For tail lights, I can certainly do a video with each light coming through showing rear and side visibility.

    fc

  2. #77
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    1,618
    Beamshots and video for taillights makes sense because the lumen output is not high enough to be an issue for digital photography.

    For side view, it would be, I think, good to show what sort of red bloom the taillight shows around the bike, not just the straight on view of the LEDs. Some of the light mfgs recommend a slight downward angle of the light in order to get a large red bloom on the road and bike frame for additional visibility.

    I do know that some of the digital cameras have issues with accurate portrayal of red - they do tend to oversaturate a bit.

    J.

  3. #78
    mtbr member
    Reputation: znomit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    1,668
    Quote Originally Posted by francois View Post
    There's a company a few hours from me that is offering my use of their $40,000 integrating sphere to measure light output. Is that a worthwhile endeavor?
    Yes.

    It would be good to see the numbers for the P7 900lm lights and the XML 1000lm lights as they seem to be significantly different.
    DIY LED Bike Lights:
    A few Dynamo builds and some Small battery lights

  4. #79
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    253
    I'm thinking about pulling the trigger on some new lights soon. Are you going to review the 2012 stuff from Baja Designs? I think either their Dual or the 2012 Stryker on the bars plus the new Piko 3 would make an awesome, and blinding, combo. Waiting for your review before making the final decision.

    So......which light is #3 already??? The suspense is killing everyone.

  5. #80
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    223
    Quote Originally Posted by francois View Post
    There's a company a few hours from me that is offering my use of their $40,000 integrating sphere to measure light output. Is that a worthwhile endeavor?

    Also, what's the best way to review tail lights?

    fc
    The main thing you will get out of the integrated sphere is a consistent measure of OTF (out the front) lumens of all lights put into the sphere. This will probably make some unhappy as I am sure some manufactures represent their lights using at the emitter Led numbers which doesnt take into account loses for reflector/optic design or lens, heat energy loss etc. So their claims end up being over rated vs actual readings that you will get from the integrated sphere.

    It would be interesting to see what the ratings are of the big output lights vs their general public claims.

    Your lux reading sort of does the same thing when comparing light to light but it would be nice to know that a reference light "x" is 2200 lumens based on integrated sphere (vendor claim is 3000) and lux is 225 on your lux scale etc.

    I would say it will be time well spent.

    Curtis
    Last edited by cue003; 09-27-2011 at 05:48 AM.

  6. #81
    Got a suspension fork
    Reputation: randyharris's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    2,255
    Quote Originally Posted by francois View Post
    There's a company a few hours from me that is offering my use of their $40,000 integrating sphere to measure light output. Is that a worthwhile endeavor?

    Also, what's the best way to review tail lights?

    fc
    I think this would be time well spent.
    ONE SHOX, ONE GEAR, LOTS of FUN! www.TrailFu.com My Rides

  7. #82
    apocalypse MEOW!
    Reputation: a.k.a.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    31
    On testing tail lights....

    Beamshots and video for taillights makes sense because the lumen output is not high enough to be an issue for digital photography.

    For side view, it would be, I think, good to show what sort of red bloom the taillight shows around the bike, not just the straight on view of the LEDs. Some of the light mfgs recommend a slight downward angle of the light in order to get a large red bloom on the road and bike frame for additional visibility.
    I agree with the above, and will add the following: The whole point of tail lights is vastly different from headlights: Headlights are for the rider, while tail lights are for the inattentive onlooker. So it matters not how much light the tail light puts out in absolute terms. What matters is how attention-grabbing they are in relative terms. From this it follows....

    1) Make sure the tail light shootout videos have as many lights lined up in the same frame as feasible. What looks bright on its own may look insignificant compared to other competitors, which is not too different from saying other "distractions on the road." We want the most distracting light possible, in some sense, burning just below the threshold at which it'll send the oncoming driver into an epileptic fit or an apoplectic rage.

    2) Please upload videos of the tail lights compared in full daylight as well.

    3) Show the tail lights at night from the side at approximately the distance across a 4-way intersection. Side impact is the most dangerous scenario.

    4) Film a video of a drive down a narrow street with red lamps blazing at the driver at set intervals. Ask six of your friends to drive down that same street, and rate subjectively whether some tail lights were more effective than others at alerting them without pissing them off.

    Finally, I'm bumping the list of tail lights that deserve testing, since I tweaked it a fair bit since first posting it:

    Tail lights really worth reviewing:

    Cygolite Hotshot 2W
    DesignShine DS-500
    DiNotte 140
    DiNotte 300
    Magicshine MJ-818
    NiteFLUX RedZone 4
    Philips SafeRide LED RearLight
    Planet Bike Super Flash Turbo
    Portland Design Works Danger Zone

    Side-visible models:

    Cateye TL-LD1100
    Cateye Orbits
    MonkeyLectric
    NiteFLUX RedZone 4
    Nite Ize Spokelit
    Philips SafeRide LED RearLight
    Trek Beacon Bar End Light
    Francois, the NiteFLUX RedZone 4 (can't yet post the link, but easy to find on Google) is really worth a close look. As you know from reviewing previous NiteFLUX lights, it's a high-quality Aussie-made product. It's just out, and I'm sure the company would be thrilled for the Stateside audience. This model is a 4W LED -- yes, that's even brighter than the MagicShine, and double or quadruple the output of the Planet Bike SuperFlash Turbo, PDW and Cygolite offerings. It seems like a killer light, but there are few comparative reviews of it yet.

    Likewise, the Philips SafeRide RearLight is supposedly excellent at throwing light to the side.

    Thanks!!!!!
    Last edited by a.k.a.; 09-28-2011 at 05:41 PM.

  8. #83
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    58
    Quote Originally Posted by francois View Post
    There's a company a few hours from me that is offering my use of their $40,000 integrating sphere to measure light output. Is that a worthwhile endeavor?

    Also, what's the best way to review tail lights?

    fc
    I think it would be an excellent way to compare raw output vs runtime and to measure manufactures' claims against true 'out the front' lumens.

  9. #84
    mtbr member
    Reputation: mattthemuppet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    2,296
    Quote Originally Posted by francois View Post
    There's a company a few hours from me that is offering my use of their $40,000 integrating sphere to measure light output. Is that a worthwhile endeavor?
    I agree with all the others, this would be a fantastic addition to the shootout. With true OTF lumens AND lux, you'll be able to accurately describe how much light gets emitted and how. The only downside I can see is that some manufacturers might not appreciate being outed for overstating their lights output.

  10. #85
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ussprinceton2004's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    336
    I would like to see how the Cateye TL-LD1100 tail light does, having the side visibility feature, compared to the others. I already own this model, but I'm willing to purchase the best tail light in the shootout.

  11. #86
    swag ho Administrator
    Reputation: francois's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 1996
    Posts
    18,228
    Great suggestions on the tail lights. Just to set up expectation, this is a second priority/delivery to all the headlight testing. So don't expect too much too soon.

    Photographing tail lights is usually a lost cause. The light cannot be pointed at the camera and it can't be flashing. But videotaping at angles or when following can be promising. Doing it in daytime is a great suggestion too. I just need to find a video camera that doesn't adjust to the light output.

    The $40k Integrating Sphere session might actually happen. Fyi, this device measures actual lumen output. Integrating sphere - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    So it is a good way to decipher Actual lumen output vs. Claimed lumen output.

    The lux testing I do in my room is actually a rudimentary Integrating Sphere. I measure the total bounced light from a light head. It'll be good to validate my numbers as well to see if there's value and consistency to it.

    fc

  12. #87
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    1,618
    You might be able to compare your room to the sphere and see how good the tracking is. If it's good, then just keep on doing what you do. that way all your reviews from the past are going to be comparable to the newest ones.

    Photos or videos of the taillights straight on will not be representative of anything. The camera will saturate on the brightest parts and will bloom on the rest until it gets into the camera's dynamic range. I think the idea of showing what it looks like against a white wall in both profile and perpendicular would probably do it along with your (subjective) description of what you are seeing. The bloom against the side and perpendicular is going to give an excellent idea of the relative output and beam but yet be doable with your current video gear.

    J.

  13. #88
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    94
    Quote Originally Posted by francois View Post
    Cygolite will not give me lights. I just do not understand. If you have a chance to influence them, let me them know they need to be in the mtbr shootout.

    fc
    Seems very short sighted of them. I may have only just joined but I have lurked around here for a long time and have always been aware of the light comparos.

    I just ordered a Gemini this morning after spending most of the night looking at beam shots, the other one I was looking at was a Cygolite. Could not find any pics of Cygolites so ordered the Gemini.

  14. #89
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    69
    Just wondering when the shootout will be posted. I've got a 24hr coming up in a couple of weeks and need to order a new light. By the way, thanks Francois for your work on this. Always great reading your reviews.

  15. #90
    mtbr member
    Reputation: MaximusHQ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    583
    Can't wait to see the 2012 lights shootout Francois. I wouldn't mind seeing cygolite join the shootout. When I first started night riding in the early 90's I bought a cygolite 30 watt halogen light and it was a good light and I still have it although I haven't used it in years. I charged the battery and the darned thing still lit up to my amazement. Didn't stay lit for too long though as that is one old battery pack. Still the cygolite still worked after near 20 years later.

  16. #91
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    190
    I was able to check out the unfinished link. Great shots! I got the niterider minewt 600 and it looks good on your picture but with the human eye it doesn't look that bright. Also are the lights picture taken from a fresh fully charged light? I notice some of the lights I tested after about 10 minutes of use the light tends to dim and settle to a constant light output.

  17. #92
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    210
    Quote Originally Posted by francois View Post
    I'm working on it now. I have a ton of lights and I'm getting a bunch more!!!

    It will be broken up in a Commuter and High End category.

    What do you guys want to see?

    Here's some sneak peak photos.

    - ok light
    - very flat beam pattern light
    - bright light

    fc
    Personally I'm more excited about the 2nd light than the 3rd one. I mean the 2nd light wouldn't make a good mountain biking light (and this is mtbr.com to be fair) but it would make a great commuting light. Because of the smaller dynamic range of these cameras, the other thing is that usually it's not really completely dark off to the sides, the pic looks that way but I bet there's a little light.

    And it looks like...it looks like a shaped beam you could aim to not hit people in the face. It looks...a *lot* like the Lumotec Cyo dynamo light. I would...well, *really*, *really* like to know what light the 2nd light is as I need a commuting light for my non-dynamo bike....

    The light in the 3rd pic looks bright, but -

    1. I bet it is super bright - but cameras tend to overexaggerate this vs what you see. The problem isn't with the camera or the settings, but that your eyes adjust to how much light you're seeing and hey, maybe they finally made a light bright enough to see at night like it's day. I know if I ran both my Seca 900 and Seca 1400 at the same time it was pretty bright. But I've bought lights based on the pics and the differences aren't as dramatic as pics with constant settings make them out to be. I bet if you're standing there in person the 1st light is brighter (if you turn it on and let your eyes adjust) and the 3rd light is very bright but just not as dramatically brighter than the pic would suggest.

    2. I notice the very bright, nearly washed out spot right in front of the camera on the ground...my Seca 1400 has that same thing, and I'm not a fan. I feel like my eyes adjust to that spot so I don't get as much out of the light as I'd like. This light looks like it also has a center beam so I don't believe it's the Seca...probably the Night Rider 3,000?

  18. #93
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    380
    Quote Originally Posted by PaulRivers View Post
    And it looks like...it looks like a shaped beam you could aim to not hit people in the face. It looks...a *lot* like the Lumotec Cyo dynamo light. I would...well, *really*, *really* like to know what light the 2nd light is as I need a commuting light for my non-dynamo bike....

    The light in the 3rd pic looks bright, but -

    probably the Night Rider 3,000?
    1. It's a Philips commuter light, beam shape is fine but it runs on AA batteries.. come on.
    2. Yes

  19. #94
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    10
    awesome post, thanks!

  20. #95
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    210
    Quote Originally Posted by radirpok View Post
    1. It's a Philips commuter light, beam shape is fine but it runs on AA batteries.. come on.
    2. Yes
    hey, thanks for the response.

    I don't know, I think the one place AA batteries do make sense is in a commuter light if it has a charger built into the light (just plug the light in and it charges the AA batteries). Completely replacing the battery with AA rechargeables costs $10 the last time I checked. Or going on an extra long trip? Bring another $10 set of batteries with you. Have you seen the replacement costs of lith-ion batteries? Dinotte is known for having relatively cheap battery replacement costs, and their smaller 2 cell battery costs $50 to replace. When I was in college, I definitely would have been willing to deal with a larger light in exchange for saving $40.

  21. #96
    swag ho Administrator
    Reputation: francois's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 1996
    Posts
    18,228
    Quote Originally Posted by PaulRivers View Post
    hey, thanks for the response.

    I don't know, I think the one place AA batteries do make sense is in a commuter light if it has a charger built into the light (just plug the light in and it charges the AA batteries). Completely replacing the battery with AA rechargeables costs $10 the last time I checked. Or going on an extra long trip? Bring another $10 set of batteries with you. Have you seen the replacement costs of lith-ion batteries? Dinotte is known for having relatively cheap battery replacement costs, and their smaller 2 cell battery costs $50 to replace. When I was in college, I definitely would have been willing to deal with a larger light in exchange for saving $40.
    That's the first light I'm reviewing!!!

    Philips SafeRide LED Bike Light – 2012 Mtbr Lights Shootout | Mountain Bike Review

    fc

  22. #97
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    210
    Oh wow, cool!

    I am...trying to be helpful so if it comes across at to nitpicky let me know. But I'm confused by a paragraph the end of the article -

    Also, the operation of four batteries (AA, LR6) is possible.Thanks to the battery level / charging indicator and the cyclist has his light reserves in view. Via USB port, the battery can easily power on and charge any computer.

    Was it...run through google translate? "the operation of four batteries is possible" doesn't make much sense. I think the second sentence means the cyclist can see a charge indicator but "light reserves" is very weird working. The last sentence says you can power and charge a computer from the light which must be backwards, lol.

    There were 2 things with this light I was curious about -
    1. I assume this is true from the pics, but the light charges AA's inside the light, you just hook it up, no need to remove the batteries, right?
    2. Some reviews have said that the status lights on the light itself are to bright and you can get light in your face from the light which is annoying. What do you think?

    Maybe...maybe now that mtbr has reviewed it, someone will actually start selling it in the US...right now it's ebay or pay to have it shipped from Europe...

    P.S. Love the pics.

  23. #98
    swag ho Administrator
    Reputation: francois's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 1996
    Posts
    18,228
    Correct! That second page is from the German corporate site run through Google Translate. I'll fix it.

    The battery is charged inside the light through a supplied USB charger.

    The blue indicator lights are pretty dim and are not obtrusive at all. I'll confirm later.

    The light will start selling at Amazon in about a week. QBP will have it mid October so most bike shops will be able to get it.

    fc

    Quote Originally Posted by PaulRivers View Post
    Oh wow, cool!

    I am...trying to be helpful so if it comes across at to nitpicky let me know. But I'm confused by a paragraph the end of the article -

    Also, the operation of four batteries (AA, LR6) is possible.Thanks to the battery level / charging indicator and the cyclist has his light reserves in view. Via USB port, the battery can easily power on and charge any computer.

    Was it...run through google translate? "the operation of four batteries is possible" doesn't make much sense. I think the second sentence means the cyclist can see a charge indicator but "light reserves" is very weird working. The last sentence says you can power and charge a computer from the light which must be backwards, lol.

    There were 2 things with this light I was curious about -
    1. I assume this is true from the pics, but the light charges AA's inside the light, you just hook it up, no need to remove the batteries, right?
    2. Some reviews have said that the status lights on the light itself are to bright and you can get light in your face from the light which is annoying. What do you think?

    Maybe...maybe now that mtbr has reviewed it, someone will actually start selling it in the US...right now it's ebay or pay to have it shipped from Europe...

    P.S. Love the pics.

  24. #99
    apocalypse MEOW!
    Reputation: a.k.a.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    31
    Very cool! Francois, I do wonder if the makers intended for the lamp light to be thrown at the high forward angle at which it's shown in your yard shot. Seems to me that's plenty of glare in an oncoming eye. For purposes of demoing the lamp's brightness, it's appropriate, yet wouldn't the throw angle be pointed more sharply down, in practice, to prevent glare ... say, removing the shadow just in front of the rider?

    If you want the Philips lamp sooner, the UPCs are these:

    Silver: 8727900534917
    Black: 8727900534948, 8727900534931

    Cheapest prices are showing up on Amazon[dot]de and Google[dot]de[slash]prdhp

    Retail, it's currently running about 90 EURO without shipping (about $125).

  25. #100
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    210
    Quote Originally Posted by francois View Post
    The battery is charged inside the light through a supplied USB charger.
    Oh, sweet. :-)

    Quote Originally Posted by francois View Post
    The blue indicator lights are pretty dim and are not obtrusive at all. I'll confirm later.
    It was either that or the light would throw light out the top if you were over it...or they could be exagerrated, lol.

    Quote Originally Posted by francois View Post
    The light will start selling at Amazon in about a week. QBP will have it mid October so most bike shops will be able to get it.

    fc
    wow, that's pretty cool. :-) I searched for one last week and it was either $300 off ebay, or less but still expensive to have it shipped here from Europe. That's really interesting. :-)

Page 4 of 23 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 14 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Lights shootout 2011
    By francois in forum California - Norcal
    Replies: 42
    Last Post: 12-08-2010, 10:55 AM
  2. Lights shootout 2010 edition thread on Lights and Night Riding
    By odtexas in forum Lights DIY - Do It Yourself
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 11-20-2009, 04:17 AM
  3. Mtbr Lights Shootout Update
    By francois in forum Lights and Night Riding
    Replies: 65
    Last Post: 02-22-2009, 06:26 PM
  4. Lights shootout comments
    By francois in forum Lights DIY - Do It Yourself
    Replies: 277
    Last Post: 12-08-2008, 06:39 AM
  5. mtbr Shine-Off lights shootout is here.
    By francois in forum Lights DIY - Do It Yourself
    Replies: 26
    Last Post: 01-26-2004, 08:02 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •