EDC Light Beam Shots

[NH Shooter]

I've been working on a project to depict "real world" use and performance of EDC lights from a personal security perspective.

Most people encounter "low light" environments every day, which we'll define as one with enough light for safe footing and navigation without the use of a flashlight. The level of light can vary from brightly-lit to just barely enough light to see.

It's under these lighting conditions that my goal is to illustrate the use and performance of EDC lights to maintain SA and enable the detection of potential threats.

The lights used for these series of photos were a BG v.2 18350 (1,000 lumens, 12k candela) and an E2HT 18350 (500 lumens, 35k candela). The "bad guy" is an ISPC target armed with a plastic training knife.

A Canon DSLR was used with a 17-40L lens set at 17 mm (24 mm equivalent). For each series the exposure was locked in manual mode, set to replicate as closely as possible what was seen with the naked eye.

Series 1 - Bright

This series of photos was taken in a brightly-lit parking lot, distance to target about 30 feet. Though the light level is more than enough to see everything within it, the challenge could be back-lighting where a person might be clearly seen in silhouette but important detail cannot be discerned;




With the BG v.2 18350, the light is pointed downward to avoid a confrontational blast-to-the-eyes but to get enough light on the subject to see some detail;




With the subject identified as a threat, the center of the beam was placed directly on the target;




Same series with the E2HT 18350;









Series 2 - Typical Lighting

These photos were taken at a local supermarket, with lighting typical of what's used in large parking lots. Distance to target is about 40 feet. Once again, we detect the presence of another person in the cart collection bin but there is not enough light to see any detail;




Starting with the BG v.2 18350, the light is aimed low for the non-offending look and then moved directly on-target in the second photo;







Same series with the E2HT 18350;









Series 3 - Low Lighting

This series was taken in a dimly-lit parking lot with abundant dark areas, distance to target about 75 feet.




I placed our bad guy in a dark area under a tree. The target could not be seen at all without additional light.

Note - there were no "light-down" photos taken in this series.








Observations

• In the typical "low-light" conditions as defined at the start of this post, brighter spill does little to aid SA. It's only when we move into very low-light conditions (Series 3) does the brighter spill gain some advantage. In all cases, the high-candela light more brightly illuminates the target regardless of range.
• The transition from center hot spot to spill is shorter and more well defined with the typical high-candela beam pattern. This proves useful for the "light low" threat assessment without getting an offensive amount of light into the subject's eyes.

Conclusions

1. For traversing a space that is in total darkness, a high-lumen light with a broad beam and bright spill is a definite advantage.
2. For identifying threats in the typical low-light environment, a high-candela light is a definite advantage.

I hope you found this post useful!

[dontshakepandas]

This is really cool. Thanks for taking the time to do this. I'd really like to see how something like a Modlite PLHv2 does in this scenario since it is kind of a middle ground between the two lights you posted.

In the typical "low-light" conditions as defined at the start of this post, brighter spill does little to aid SA

I think there may be some ways that it could help that aren't necessarily directly shown in the photos. I think in both the second and third series of photos, that additional spill would be quite helpful in actually "finding" the person. In either of these scenarios if you were made aware of the person because you heard them, but didn't know exactly where they were it may take longer to actually locate them using the tighter focused beam. I don't know if I'd want to make that trade off for a handheld light though, but I think this could be a situation where a light with good spill AND higher candela could outperform lights that only do spill or only do candela.

I also have some questions I've been meaning to ask in regards to your reply to the X300 Turbo thread, but think it may actually make more sense to ask here since they are more related to how lumens/candela impacts the capabilities of different lights and not necessarily the X300 Turbo itself. I've quoted the post for easier reference.

I don't have a WML on any of my pistols, but if I did I'd go with the high-candela X300 Turbo.

Being able to illuminate targets at greater distances is IMO not what the high-candela light discussion should be about. A few of my own observations and comments;

For a civilian, it's more likely to need the pistol in a low light environment, not a totally dark one. The need for bright spill in those conditions is largely lost.
I have found the higher candela light creates greater contrast of the sights on the target, making sight alignment easier
If I can leverage a photonic barrier to my advantage, the high-candela light makes that easier to do
Inside a normal size residential room, there is so much reflection from the ceiling and walls that the high-candela beam still illuminates the entire space
At 34 feet, the well-defined center beam of the Malkoff E2HT (500 lumens / 35,000 candela) measures about 24 inches in diameter. Simply centering that beam on an IDPA target makes it abundantly clear that it can be used for effective aiming at typical pistol fight distances.

Navigating a pitch-black road is easier with a broad beam. But once I become "target focused" on a threat, a more focused beam to illuminate the threat as much as possible is IMO an advantage.

Are there any specific differences that you'd look for with a pistol mounted light versus a handheld light?

Based on the images you've posted here, I think both lights did an adequate job of illuminating the the bad guy to a degree where you can see it, but the high candela light definitely did more to help determine that it was a threat or potentially controlling the person with the light. That is definitely something I want in a handheld light, but I'm not sure those advantages are as useful once the light is mounted on a pistol.

As a civilian, if I have my gun out of the holster it means that I've already made a decision that someone needs to be shot so I'm past the point of needing to identify if the person is a threat or not. Considering that it is fairly common for people to get tunnel vision when shooting, it seems to me that the extra spill would definitely be helpful to maintain situational awareness. For example, in your 3rd set of photos I think the first light would make it easier to notice if there was an additional person between the tree and light post to the right.

Here are some screenshots from the TRex video on the X300 Turbo (High Candela) on the left vs the X300 Ultra (High Spill) on the right at 40 yards. The camera angles are slightly different so isn't an exact 1 to 1 comparison, but I think it is close enough to be useful.



With the high candela light, you can barely tell that there are 2 other targets in the frame. If it weren't for the backlight behind the right target you probably couldn't see it at all. With the high spill light, all 3 targets are adequately lit. In a situation where I've already decided that I need to shoot, I want to be aware of the other targets, what they are doing, and where they are going.

Also, you mentioned that the higher candela could create more contrast making it easier to see the sights on a pistol, could you see that having the opposite affect on RDS pistols since the brighter hot spot could cause more issues with the dot washing out?

The more I think about it, the more I think the answer to the question "Lumens or Candela?" is YES! Give me as much of both as I can possibly have.

[NH Shooter]

Also, you mentioned that the higher candela could create more contrast making it easier to see the sights on a pistol, could you see that having the opposite affect on RDS pistols since the brighter hot spot could cause more issues with the dot washing out?

This is most definitely the case! Where the high-candela beam makes iron sights pop (especially as close range), a RDS set for a lower light level will absolutely wash out. I find I need to keep the RDS in a bright dalylight setting for it to remain visible on a target lit with high candela.

The more I think about it, the more I think the answer to the question "Lumens or Candela?" is YES! Give me as much of both as I can possibly have.

Yes, but ease-of-carry takes a hit: 1,600 lumens and 75,000 candela;

[NH Shooter]

In these two photos, the target is 75 feet away.

The top photo illustrates the wide beam and bright spill of the BG v.2. Notice how well the tree trunk is illuminated.

The bottom photo illustrates the high-candela beam of the E2HT. Though the tree trunk is not as well lit as with the BG v.2, notice how much more can be seen in back of the target;





While I can manually scan the E2HT side-to-side to compensate for the narrow beam, there's nothing I can do to make the BG v.2 reach further.

But the BG v.2 remains a remarkably useful EDC light, especially considering the long run time of the 250 lumen step-down. My solution to the conundrum is to carry one of each.. ;-)