Cree Q5 - R2 comparison pics- Mtbr.com
Results 1 to 50 of 50
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation: troutie-mtb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    3,062

    Cree Q5 - R2 comparison pics -NEW PICS DONE

    I have been comparing the Cree Q5 and R2 leds today in the cutters narrow beam triple optic.

    camera is a canon s40 / 4seconds at f 2.8

    This is a bit bright so will try 2 secs next time , it was also snowing .

    the first pic is a Q5 triple , bflex , at 1000ma , in fact all pics are 1000ma

    the distance to the wall is 12 metres




    this is R2 triple , the same as above




    the next pics are Q5 then R2 .
    camera same / 2 seconds @ f2.8

    distance to roller door is 25 metres






    If you want to see the pics full size
    http://pics-by-chris.fotoblog.org.uk/c1400943_49.html

    There does seem to be quite a difference between the 2 sets of leds
    Last edited by troutie-mtb; 01-11-2008 at 12:19 AM.

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation: dnlwthrn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    1,267
    I think the second set of photos really tells the story. The R2s seem to have more "punch" than the Q5s...

    That said, I'm still VERY happy with the performance of my Q5 setup. Have you compared the Cutter narrow beam to the older, 10* optic?

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation: troutie-mtb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    3,062
    Yep here they are
    I did not expect that question





    this is the cutter original mr11 lit with Q5 leds
    a nice floody beam I have on the bars with the R 2 new narrow optic on my helmet.

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    1,136
    oh my those R2's are sexy...i really want them for my new light, but cutters the only place that has them, and theyre like 15 bucks each for now ill stick with Q5's

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    586

    When is the R4 coming out?

    This is gettin worse than buying a PC. They go obsolete within a month or two of purchase. I guess I'll be making a stack of "old" leds in no time.

    I didn't think the difference between the R2 and the Q5 would be that noticeable so I stuck with the Q5. I'm getting plenty of light out of my current DIY so I'm not planning an upgrade at the moment or even this season.

    Now if the R4 comes out I think I will jump on that one. The R4 should result in a near 30% improvement in Lumens/watt over the Q5.

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    23
    Quote Originally Posted by il2mb
    This is gettin worse than buying a PC. They go obsolete within a month or two of purchase. I guess I'll be making a stack of "old" leds in no time.

    I didn't think the difference between the R2 and the Q5 would be that noticeable so I stuck with the Q5. I'm getting plenty of light out of my current DIY so I'm not planning an upgrade at the moment or even this season.

    Now if the R4 comes out I think I will jump on that one. The R4 should result in a near 30% improvement in Lumens/watt over the Q5.
    The R4's will come out a few days after I get the R2's I ordered the other day. lol

    troutie-mtb, thanks for this info. Now I'm glad I spent the little extra!

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    778
    Quote Originally Posted by spookydave
    The R4's will come out a few days after I get the R2's I ordered the other day. lol

    troutie-mtb, thanks for this info. Now I'm glad I spent the little extra!

    Same here, I'm very happy that I ordered the R2s instead of the Q5s! I can't wait to get mine, this is going to be a lot of fun.

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation: dnlwthrn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    1,267
    Quote Originally Posted by troutie-mtb
    Yep here they are
    I did not expect that question

    this is the cutter original mr11 lit with Q5 leds
    a nice floody beam I have on the bars with the R 2 new narrow optic on my helmet.
    Looks good. I'm glad to see the difference, as I will be running a similar setup (albeit with Q5s all around).

  9. #9
    Light freak
    Reputation: scar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    2,984
    I just finished up a couple of my Amoeba lights with the new R2 WH LED's. WOW, that is a lot of light coming from only 2 LED's.

  10. #10
    Black Sheep rising
    Reputation: utabintarbo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    917
    Can these be obtained somewhere other than Cutter? Possibly on this side of the pond?
    Let the market decide!

    N42.58 W83.06

  11. #11

    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    52
    I can bring in the R2 but 1 reel is the min order. So if you don't buy, what am I going to do with those LEDS?

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation: dnlwthrn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    1,267
    How many come on a reel? And what kind of price would they run?

  13. #13
    Black Sheep rising
    Reputation: utabintarbo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    917
    Perhaps a CPF group buy might be an option.
    Let the market decide!

    N42.58 W83.06

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation: troutie-mtb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    3,062
    There was a Group buy happening on CPF but is has been cancelled
    http://www.cpfmarketplace.com/mp/sho...d.php?t=173312

  15. #15

    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    36
    Eh Trout!

    Great beam shots, i'm very surprised at the difference.

    Still no 'effin batteries!!!!

    The MK7 is looking good, i can see the improvements there. You would get better cooling still if you made the fins as thin as possible, increased surface area and all that. Not sure what cutters you have, so maybe its a no go. It may also help if the channels were a bit larger too, greater airflow etc, but that way you'd have to stick with 8 fins, just thinner ones.

    (I'm very tempted by the rebel penta, saw it a while ago. I think a boostpuck might be easiest to power them but don't think it'd fit inside the housing, or Maxflex2 maybe? Would make a great low current flood for the bar. Complimented with a triple spot on the lid.)

    Any updated info on the cutter4 yet?

    I'd love my own lathe, if you see one cheap(really cheap!) let me know.

  16. #16
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Lumbee1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    1,908
    I guess I will be the first to say "Somethin ain't right."

    The performance difference between the Q5 and R2 on paper is minimal at best. No one else is reporting significant light output from upgrading a Q5 to the R2. So why are we seeing such a difference here.

    Questions:
    What is the current going to the LED's?
    Are the optics mounted exactly the same?
    What battery is used and was it charged between shots?

    The reason I am questioning the results is because I upgraded a flood light from P4 to Q5 and although I saw a difference, it was much less noticeable than the pictures above. The performance difference between a P4 and Q5 is much greater than the difference between a Q5 and R2.

  17. #17
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Lumbee1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    1,908
    Quote Originally Posted by il2mb
    This is gettin worse than buying a PC. They go obsolete within a month or two of purchase. I guess I'll be making a stack of "old" leds in no time.

    I didn't think the difference between the R2 and the Q5 would be that noticeable so I stuck with the Q5. I'm getting plenty of light out of my current DIY so I'm not planning an upgrade at the moment or even this season.

    Now if the R4 comes out I think I will jump on that one. The R4 should result in a near 30% improvement in Lumens/watt over the Q5.
    The R4 should be a 22% improvement over the Q5 assuming all other specs are identical.

  18. #18
    mtbr member
    Reputation: troutie-mtb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    3,062
    Yep I agree there is something amiss here .
    I am planning to do the same shoot under much more controled conditions
    It was a foul night with driving rain and sleet .and not much fun

    I am just waiting for some pics to upload some shots onto a wall inside.

  19. #19

    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    52
    Quote Originally Posted by dnlwthrn
    How many come on a reel? And what kind of price would they run?
    About 4000 pcs. May not be all R2, depending on quantity available hence price is not fixed but R2 price is good at current quote given to me. For the price you pay for a triple R2 at Cutter, I can offer 4 pcs + shipping. 5 pcs of Q5 at triple PCB price.

    Problem is, I'm from Taiwan. May be too much hassle for guys in the west and our PO suck. Also, delivery timeframe from supplier is unknown. I bought Nichia from them before and they took 5 weeks before comfirming and 1 weeks for delivery.

    However, I considering ordering and opening a webstore but as a student, I'm too chicken to take risk, I need to pay for school and food and if these don't go well, I will be flipping burger for the rest of my student life.

  20. #20
    mtbr member
    Reputation: troutie-mtb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    3,062

    indoor beamshots

    O K folks this is as controlled as I can do at home .

    these 5 pics are all 2.5 metres from the wall , the camera is just under the light .
    settings manual 1/10 sec at F3.5

    all lights are triples at 1000ma from a fresh charged 15v li ion and all using the Bflex.
    all lights are cold at room temp

    pic 1 - R2`s on mcpcb and cutter 4 deg optic


    pic 2 - different light same set up


    pic 3- R2`s direct to heatsink cutters 4 deg optic sat on the metal rings of leds


    pic 4 - Q5`s direct to heatsink cutters 4 deg optic sat on metal rings of leds


    pic 5 - Q5 cutters mr11 kit



    the next pics are the same order as above but run at 350 ma all camera settings the same











    I will try outside next tomorrow. weather permitting

  21. #21
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Lumbee1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    1,908
    could you do the same pics and underexpose? or maybe a side by side with the shot underexposed?

  22. #22
    ballbuster
    Reputation: pimpbot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    12,717

    Heh...

    ... As the other poster said, like buying a computer.... or a cell phone.

    I got two Q5s on the way, but I have not really come up with a real plan on the light, since my original Harbor Freight flashlight plan isn't going to work without hours of cutting with a Dremel.

    It makes me want to plan for easy replacement, tho. No thermal epoxy to mount the emitter. I should probably go back to the other guy's alu tube design with a copper slug... maybe thread the front outside so I can screw on a lens for easy removal.

    I got the optics in. Purdy! I also ordered several diffuser covers so I can see what I like best. Heck, they were only like 60 cents each, so I got an assortment.

  23. #23
    mtbr member
    Reputation: troutie-mtb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    3,062
    Ok so here we go again with the beamshots a little more controled
    this time.

    all batterys fully charged 15v li-ion 2400mah

    all 4 lights fixed to the top rail of a step ladder with the camera on
    the topstep just behind the lights.
    camera setting the same for every shot 2 seconds @ f2.8

    Bflex`s all set to 1000ma

    there are 3 sets of pictures at different distance`s away from the target

    first set of pics are 25 metres from the roller door

    1 cree Q5 led, cutters 4 degree optic


    2 cree R2 leds , direct to heatsink , optic sat on leds .


    3 cree R2 leds , cutters mcpcb . 4 degree optic


    4 cree Q5 cutter mr11 kit as standard


    the next set of pics are 40 metres from the roller door
    and the running order is the same as above

    1


    2


    3


    4


    the next set are 55 metres from the target sign

    1


    2


    3


    4


    the last are 3 of the lights all on together 2 sets of R2`s and 1 set of Q5`s





    I hope I have not bored you all with this long post

    fullsize pics here http://pics-by-chris.fotoblog.org.uk/c1438628_49.html
    Last edited by troutie-mtb; 01-10-2008 at 03:39 PM.

  24. #24
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Lumbee1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    1,908
    What current is running to the Q5 LED's? R2 LED's?
    This might sound stupid, but are all of the Q5's working?

    There is only a 7% performance difference between the Q5 and R2 LED's (~110 lumens vs. ~118 lumens). But the pictures are showing a 50% or more performance difference.

  25. #25
    mtbr member
    Reputation: troutie-mtb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    3,062
    Quote Originally Posted by Lumbee1
    What current is running to the Q5 LED's? R2 LED's?
    This might sound stupid, but are all of the Q5's working?

    There is only a 7% performance difference between the Q5 and R2 LED's (~110 lumens vs. ~118 lumens). But the pictures are showing a 50% or more performance difference.
    yep all the Q5`s are working

    they were all identical batteries charged I measured each battery and at the start of the test they were all 16.4 ish volts and after they read 16.10 volts

    all were using Bflex drivers the only variable here is 2 are user interface uni and 1 is uib2 the Q5`s are the one on uib2 .

    all 3 were ramped up to 1000ma . and set to duo mode .

    the position of the lights relative to the camera was constant

    I was very happy with the Q5 light for riding but am now delighted with the R2 .

  26. #26
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    778
    Quote Originally Posted by Lumbee1
    What current is running to the Q5 LED's? R2 LED's?
    This might sound stupid, but are all of the Q5's working?

    There is only a 7% performance difference between the Q5 and R2 LED's (~110 lumens vs. ~118 lumens). But the pictures are showing a 50% or more performance difference.
    Another possibility is that the source for the Q5s actually gave him something else. You just never know.

  27. #27

    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    9
    Doubt it amounts to 50%, but it could be that these Q5s are on the low end of the Q5 flux bin
    while the R2s are on the high end of their flux bin. That would give more than 7%...

  28. #28
    mtbr member
    Reputation: troutie-mtb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    3,062
    Quote Originally Posted by Sawtooth
    Doubt it amounts to 50%, but it could be that these Q5s are on the low end of the Q5 flux bin
    while the R2s are on the high end of their flux bin. That would give more than 7%...
    that was one possibility I was thinking about .
    that I had a very bad set of Q5`s and a very good set of R2`s

    The Q5`s came from Dealextreme
    I have looked closely at them and they do have 4 bond wires inside.

  29. #29
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    41
    How much have you used the Q5 light? Is it possible that the Q5 light has deteriorated.

    The reason that i raise this is that I have an Achesalot style triple with 3 seouls that i used for the last southern hemisphere winter. I recently made a hiking headlight triple using an old Petzl zoom. The Petzl zoom is made from plastic so i limit the current to 350ma. The petzl mod runs 2 seouls and one Q5 and the seouls use different optics to my achesalot light. When i do a side to side comparison test, the Petzl mod light is considerably brighter despite running at 350ma compared to the achesalot at 1A.

    I am attributing the difference to both thermal degradation as well as different optics and leds.

  30. #30
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    778
    Pics of the Petzl mod?

    Interesting, I didn't think thermal degradation could be that serious, but you never know! Yikes...

  31. #31
    mtbr member
    Reputation: znomit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    1,952
    DX was selling "Q5s" remarkably early last year. I made a Q5 light and Q2 light around the same time and I found the Q2 light remarkably bright, they were rather different lights but the lumens should have been about the same (4xQ2s @ 500mA vs 2xQ5 @ 1A, different optics too). Without measuring lumens a customer cannot say "hey my Q5 is a Q2".
    A R2 is 30% brighter than a Q2 at 100 LPW vs 77. R2/Q5 is only 6%(which would be hard to pick by eye).
    Maybe these R2s are magic.
    Q5s have been out for under 10,000 hours so I doubt its thermal degradation.

  32. #32
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Lumbee1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    1,908
    You may be onto something here. I have two P4's and two Q5's. P4's came from cutter and the Q5's came from DX. The P4's use a spot optic while the Q5's are flood, but the P4's have always looked brighter. Both are WG bin but the Q5's have a much more stale white light while the P4's are warm with a hint of green.

    I know the Chinese copy everything. Are they copying LED's as well? Do DX and Kaidomain get 2nd's cheap and sell them as premium LED's for cheap?

  33. #33
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    76
    Quote Originally Posted by Lumbee1
    I know the Chinese copy everything. Are they copying LED's as well? Do DX and Kaidomain get 2nd's cheap and sell them as premium LED's for cheap?
    What do you mean "get 2nd's cheap" ?
    Do you mean (in theory) they might get knockoffs or "fake" Cree or SSC LEDs and then sell them as the real thing? (not accusing DX directly, but trying to understand this theoretical discussion)

    How could this be tested? Build 2 identical lights with the same bin LEDS one set purchased from DX or KD and the other from a source such as C*tter? and then compare them?

    I got some SSC LEDs from DX and my single light is bright as heck, but I have nothing to compare to - maybe I am impressed, but with no frame of reference know no better.

  34. #34
    Not dead yet, just playin
    Reputation: ohpossum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    910
    Quote Originally Posted by Strong like Bull

    I am attributing the difference to both thermal degradation as well as different optics and leds.
    Can you explain more about how thermal degradation affects output? Are you talking about how high junction temps reduce the relative amount of light or about how running at hight temperatures reduces the led lifetime and white-point?

    I ask because after reading the Cree literature, it appears that problems from high temperatures manifest in 3 ways:

    1) immediate reduction in light output -Page 6 of this doc has a graph that seems to show a 10% decrease in light output as the junction temperature goes from 50C to 75C.

    2) Reduced LED lifetime and white-point -Page 8 of this doc has a graph that shows the white-point tends move after hours of operation at high temps (and high currents - 700mA). The white point shift is measurable after 1000 hours.

    3) Burning up - Obviously, at extremely high temps the physical diodes break down and go "poof".


    So, lets say my light is heatsinked, but not as well as it could be. The junction temp of my leds could get close to 75C. That would decrease my light output by close to 10% when compared to output at 25C. Also, there is a chance that after 500 or 1000 hours I might see a noticeable shift in the color of the light.

    In troutie-mtb's case, neither one of those could explain the perceived 50% difference in light output. Unless he's running his Q5s at ~200C (well past the "poof" point), he shouldn't see that much loss due only to temperature. Maybe what he photographed was a white-point shift, but even that would happen only after at least hundreds of hours of operation.

    I think the different leds and optics have much more affect that temperature.

    op
    www.msmtb.org - Mississippi Mountain Biking

  35. #35
    mtbr member
    Reputation: troutie-mtb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    3,062
    strong .
    The Q5 leds were purchased from DX in october 07 and put in to the light then its usage has been maybe less than 20 hours . in the UK so ambient temps are low to near freezing .
    this is the housing with the Q5 leds in
    both lights are set to 50 degrees thermal protection and have never reached that temp when riding
    they have dimmed when testing inside with no airflow



    the R2 leds arrived 29 december 07 and have had 2 rides of 2.5 hours.
    this is the R2 housing , one I designed for the quad when it comes out but wanted to test it for heat before then so built it up with the R2 leds



    so I do not think heat has had any thing to do with the beamshots
    the issue that you cannot tell what you have been sent from the supplier is not good
    and I may be more tempted to buy from the likes of Cutters than DX in the future
    just to save a couple of dollars each led .

    I am now thinking of swapping one of my 4 degree optics into my mates Cutter Q5 based light and doing the same comparison with the cutter Q5 and the DX Q5
    then this would be a true like for like test .

  36. #36
    mtbr member
    Reputation: troutie-mtb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    3,062
    Here We go again

    I have swopped a 4 degree optic into a light with the cutter Q5 leds for a comparison
    with the R2 shots .

    first up is the cutter R2 - 4 degree optic



    next we have the Cutter Q5 -4 degree optic



    next the cutter R2 -4 degree optic at 45 metres



    next the Cutter Q5 - 4 degree optic at 45 mtres



    and for the record the DX Q5 with 4 degree optic



    DX Q5 with 4 degree optic at 45 mtres



    all the fullsize beamshots are here
    http://pics-by-chris.fotoblog.org.uk/c1438628_49.html


    I think we can safely say what the issue is here .

  37. #37
    Black Sheep rising
    Reputation: utabintarbo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    917
    Quote Originally Posted by troutie-mtb
    ...

    I think we can safely say what the issue is here .
    Hmmm. Yes.

    Let the market decide!

    N42.58 W83.06

  38. #38

    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    36
    Bloody hell Trout, you must have a lot of free time, you'd think you were getting paid to do this!
    Looks like LED's DX are not the bargain they seem. They sell alot of Cree P4's there and the only other ones on the site are Q5's........ See where I'm going with this?

    Good effort though mate, wonder if Mark from cutter is reading this?

  39. #39
    mtbr member
    Reputation: dnlwthrn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    1,267
    Its possible they are a different Q bin, isn't it? I have a single Q4 sitting here on my desk, and I can't see ANY difference physically between it and the Q5s on my kit from Cutter. So its possible that DX (and I'm not pointing fingers, just giving possibilities) is selling Q2-Q4 bin Crees when they think (and we think) they are selling Q5s.

  40. #40
    Bandolero
    Reputation: notaknob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    2,434

    Tanstaafl

    Quote Originally Posted by dnlwthrn
    Its possible they are a different Q bin, isn't it? I have a single Q4 sitting here on my desk, and I can't see ANY difference physically between it and the Q5s on my kit from Cutter. So its possible that DX (and I'm not pointing fingers, just giving possibilities) is selling Q2-Q4 bin Crees when they think (and we think) they are selling Q5s.
    Your optimism is refreshing.

    May I interest you in some sweet lakeside property in Florida or some too-good-to-be-true deals on eBay?
    Slow-core. -.. .-. .. -. -.- .... --- -- . -... .-. . .--

  41. #41
    mtbr member
    Reputation: troutie-mtb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    3,062
    Quote Originally Posted by TheFunkyMonkey
    Bloody hell Trout, you must have a lot of free time, you'd think you were getting paid to do this!
    Looks like LED's DX are not the bargain they seem. They sell alot of Cree P4's there and the only other ones on the site are Q5's........ See where I'm going with this?

    Good effort though mate, wonder if Mark from cutter is reading this?
    TFM call it insomnia or boredom with the going to work in the dark and coming home in the dark.

    It seemed like a good idea to do the camparison shots , then it showed the discrepency in outputs so had to follow it through to work out why.
    and my only measuring devices are the camera and naked eye . I think I have presented the facts as the camera sees it .

    I think I need to ride more and ponder less when this rain stops.

  42. #42
    mtbr member
    Reputation: dnlwthrn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    1,267
    Lets just call it CYA. I personally don't like to accuse, even if its obvious that "someone" is not being truthful in their labeling of product.

  43. #43
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    76
    Quote Originally Posted by dnlwthrn
    Lets just call it CYA. I personally don't like to accuse, even if its obvious that "someone" is not being truthful in their labeling of product.
    It's not even necessarily the place selling the products, if they are trusting their source. I suppose you take info like this all into consideration and look at the value of the products and the reviews and decide from there. That's where it's great to have resources like Trout that take the time to go out in the dark and cold and rain and present this info. This discussion is about Cree, but are there the same potential issues with the SSC sources?

  44. #44
    mtbr member
    Reputation: dnlwthrn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    1,267
    Sure, and that's one reason I didn't want to blame the retailer. It could be their source that is not being truthful, in which case you could have the same issue with any other LED.

  45. #45
    mtbr member
    Reputation: troutie-mtb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    3,062
    There could be another reason why the DX Q5`s are lower output.

    this question was asked on the CP forum .


    Quote:
    Originally Posted by thomas.hood
    How did you remove the Q5s from their stars

    Thanks,

    Thomas Hood

    I held on to the led with some long nosed pliers and heated the star from underneath with a gas lighter and had a mate hold on to the star and as soon as the solder melted the led popped off.


    maybe I have damaged the Q5`s removing them from the stars but I only heated them untill the solder melted and they came off right away.

    now for the record I also removed 3 R2 leds from a cutter mcpcb the same way . I needed to do this because the new optic is 2 mm deeper than the old and it would not fit in my housing , and they are just as bright as their brothers which are still on their mcpcb`s.

    As dnlwthrn says maybe the likes of DX are getting the very low end of the bins .

    or have the unscrupulous types managed to copy the cree leds and we are paying for something that is not what it says.

    The fact that there is no way for joe public to tell the difference between Q5 and R2 we have to take the suppliers word for what we get.

  46. #46
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    41
    What i find strange with the latest pictures is that the the beam angle seems to increase from the R2 - cutter Q5 - DX Q5. The Cutter Q5 looks the best to me.

  47. #47
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    296
    I a little uncomfortable commenting on this as anything will sound a little like
    the sweetness of low pric....... etc. It is not helped by the lack of identification on the XR-E products which I have taken up with Cree as it does allow for easy bin substitution. I firmly believe with authorised distributors you will get what you order, but the temptation of a great deal is always going to be hard to resist

    The new optic however is sweet as I hope you can all see, bulk stock here next week
    Cheers
    WeLight

    Cutter Electronics Pty Ltd www.cutter.com.au

  48. #48
    mtbr member
    Reputation: troutie-mtb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    3,062
    Quote Originally Posted by WeLight
    I a little uncomfortable commenting on this as anything will sound a little like
    the sweetness of low pric....... etc. It is not helped by the lack of identification on the XR-E products which I have taken up with Cree as it does allow for easy bin substitution. I firmly believe with authorised distributors you will get what you order, but the temptation of a great deal is always going to be hard to resist

    The new optic however is sweet as I hope you can all see, bulk stock here next week

    Cheers Mark
    I think A few folks were hoping for some comments from you .

    Yep the R2 with the new 4 degree optic is the perfect helmet light for me and the old optic is good on the bars .

    I know I speak for a few people over here . Any news on the new Quad setup yet.

    Cheers Chris

  49. #49
    mtbr member
    Reputation: dnlwthrn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    1,267
    I too am quite happy with the new optic (paired with Q5s in my case). Good job improving on an already nice product!

  50. #50
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    25
    Can you post or send me some pics of your petzl zoom mod? I have one of those and would like to make it into an LED lamp. Thanks.

Members who have read this thread: 0

Posting Permissions

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

THE SITE

ABOUT MTBR

VISIT US AT

© Copyright 2019 VerticalScope Inc. All rights reserved.