Monday, November 09, 2009

A Few Beam Shots

You've asked.


I've heard.

There was a lull in the weather, allowing me to run out and get these. I had to change the camera settings a little, since the lights are so stinking bright. (My settings were: F5.6, shutter at 1.3seconds and an ISO of 800. I just now realized the ISO bit, and since I am a rank amateur with the camera, I'm going to have to read up on how to change that.) Here's the lineup:

Lupine Tesla
Magicshine 900
Lupine Betty*
NiteRider Pro 1200
NiteRider Pro 600

*It may seem like I am picking on Lupine. I'm not. The Tesla is in here because the Magicshine is a knock off of it and the Betty is included because it is the brightest headlight I've got laying around and I had to have something to compare the Pro 1200 to. Note though, that this is an older Betty, not the new 1750 lumen (claimed) version.

Now that that disclaimer is out of the way, on with the images.

The Lupine Tesla:


The Magicshine:


The Lupine Betty:

The NiteRider Pro 1200:

The NiteRider Pro 600:

And there you have it. I'll be back later this week with some Exposure Light stuff.

14 comments:

Anonymous said...

Thanks for the shots!

Wow--that's surprising how much difference there is between the NR Pro600, MS, and Tesla (specifically the Tesla/MS vs NR), all which use the same emitter.

What can you tell us about where the differences come from: emitter bins, optics/reflector efficiency, drive current, etc.? I'd be particularly interested to hear what the voltage/current specs are for the three.

ab138501 said...

I think there is a possibility that the Niterider Pro lights use a different emitter than the Lupine Tesla and the Magic Shine.

My understanding is that the Lupine Tesla and the Magic Shine use the Seoul Semiconductor Z-Power P7 LED (http://www.seoulsemicon.com/en/product/prd/zpowerLEDp7.asp).

I have seen a rumor that the Niterider Pro lights use the Cree MCE LED (http://www.cree.com/products/xlamp_mce.asp).

One reference for the rumor about the Niterider Pro lights is http://forums.mtbr.com/showpost.php?p=6235179&postcount=6

Disclaimer: I wasn't able to find any other information and the post on forums.mtbr.com may not be right.

James said...

Anon,

Aside from the info provided by ab138501 (via MTBR) I do not know. I can tell you that the reflectors used on the NiteRider Pro series lights are very trick.

I'll contact NR and see if they are willing to give out the info on the emitters. Some companies will, others will not, so no promises.

radirpok said...

"...this is an older Betty, not the new 1400 lumen (claimed) version"
-> the new 1750 lumen (claimed) version ;-)

The Magicshine I have (straight from DX) has a noticeably wider spot than the Tesla. It also looks brighter because of that, and is a bit better suited for handlebar mounted offroad riding.
The Tesla however has the penetrating spot... which means above a certain speed the advantage is there. Road or helmet mounted the Tesla is the one to go with.
I have to say though that the difference is minimal, both lights are very good if you are going to have a single light only mounted to your handlebar.

radirpok said...

By the way, will you have the Dinotte 1200L? That would be another light to go against the Betty...

James said...

radirpok,

Good catch, I'll fix that. That's what I get for rushing and posting a spec without double checking.

As for the 1200L, I'm looking into it and will keep you posted.

James said...

Ok all, I've got information from NiteRider regarding their LEDs.

They are using the Cree MCE in the Pro Series lights.

There you have it.

JohnJ80 said...

I'd love to see a comparison between the Niterider 1200 and the Dinotte 1200L. I have one of the 1200L's and have been pretty pleased with it.

The beamshot of the NR 1200 is really something! I may have to check one of those out. Do you have any information or pictures on how the battery mounts to the bike? I'm concerned about cable routing etc...

From these beamshots, looks to me like the Magicshine is somewhere slightly south of the Dinotte 400L. Does that seem about right?

Brian said...

Great line up of beam shots. I have both the NR tri-newt and the Betty (waiting for the cree upgrade). Gave the newt to the wife. The NR 1200 beam pattern looks spectacular. As bright as the betty is, I really miss the beam pattern of the tri-newt. Betty is a little narrow and does not feel twice-plus as bright as the tri-newt. Beam pattern is everything.

Anonymous said...

Any chance that we are going to see the 2010 LED Bike Lights Comprehensive Review?

James said...

Anon:

Yes.

I'll have a list of the included lights in the coming weeks.

JohnJ80 said...

Just a note on beamshots - as these lights get brighter and brighter and there is more contrast between the dark and light, the beamshots will be less representative. A digital camera can only process about 5-6 f-stops of light and the human eye can see about 20 (each f-stop represents a doubling of light). So, the beam shot is really a gross (and getting grosser) approximation of what the light will really do.

James said...

JohnJ80,

True, but it's the only tool I have to demonstrate the differences visually.

JohnJ80 said...

Oh, I totally agree and love seeing them. I'm just saying that as the lights get brighter, the beamshots get less and less accurate. I noticed that when I took some beamshots of my Dinotte 1200L. I have some pretty high end camera gear (all professional stuff) and when looking at the beamshots I realized that much of the subtlety was lost - especially in the spill.