It's 15k candela per their website: https://www.streamlight.com/en/produ...index/tlr-1-hlOriginally Posted by Trukinjp13
I have both a x300U and the TLR-1 HL and honestly would have to nitpick to tell the difference. The X300U is more green and the TLR-1 HL is more cool white. The X300 as a more defined edge on the outer ring where the TLR does not. The TLR hot spot is slightly wider, but the intensity seems the same.
Last edited by Gio; 08-10-2018 at 07:39 AM.
To be clear, I do not need a light just to navigate my house - I would only need to do the ramp-up I mentioned when I felt I actually needed to use the light for the first time for PID when searching. A quick sweep of the bezel off my body to the area of interest has worked really well for me and takes less than a second. Also, just to say, in the event of a kicked-in door or broken window at night we would be barricading, not searching.
As an aside, strict light discipline is certainly a thing but I feel like more is made of it (especially when speaking theoretically) than is generally warranted, particularly in a civilian context. None of us is Riddick, after all... good guys and bad all need light to do their thing. I have zero expectation of being set upon by thugs with NV or ninja assassins - in my home, at least - so the need for extreme stealth is just not there, and anyone moving around in my house at night without light is almost certainly not a threat.
Anyway, back to lumens. As I see it, hitting a potential threat with an overpowering amount of light is the distinct advantage of having more lumens. You are using the light to completely take away their visual horizon... and, yes, that might require a bit of adaptation from behind the light but not even close to the same amount. With enough light, you are buying a lot more time than it costs you. Testing various lights on friends and family can be... enlightening ;-)
Have you experimented with the any of the Intellibeam lights from Surefire? I am personally not a fan of them but they would seem to do what you are after without sacrificing high lumens when they would be truly advantageous.
"A man's character is his fate."
Thank you! I assumed the streamlight was similar enough that the lumens were the difference in my comparison. But I honestly do not know a whole lot about the other light measurements.
I usually pay attention to reviews and see how the hotspot is on the light and the throw. That usually gives me a good idea. The tlr1 @300lumens has a pretty good light output. I prefer SF personally now. But that tlr1 has served well for a long time and its always mounted on a backup pistol. Hell when it first came out SF did not have a comparable output light in my recollection.
This is a great thread with varying points of view! Love it
I spent some time last night documenting my observations with a series of photos - it was not nearly as easy as I thought it would be!
Using a Canon DSLR set up on a tripod at the top of the steps, I made a series of photos with the exposure manually adjusted to most closely represent what I was actually seeing. An IPDA target was set up at the bottom of the steps to represent an intruder.
The ambient light level on the first floor is fairly high due to the light above the kitchen sink and the light coming through the glass at the top of the front door (seen behind the target) from the exterior front door lights. With my eyes adjusted to the ambient light, I can clearly see the target though no detail on it. I can just barely make out the brown color of the cardboard.
The Lights Used
- Malkoff MD2 with M361 drop-in and high-low bezel switch. Six total output levels: sub 1-lumen, 2 lumens, 8 lumens with bezel switch set to low; 15, 80 and 400 lumens with bezel switch set to high.
- Malkoff M61T-MD2 (375 lumens/12,000 lux)
- Malkoff Bodyguard (600 lumens/7,700 lux)
- Malkoff Hound Dog 18650 Neutral (900 lumens/29,000 lux)
- Malkoff Wildcat v.6 Neutral (1,000 lumens/5,200 lux)
Things to Observe
- How much light is hitting the stairwell walls. Less is better, more creates more back splash and less light hitting the target.
- How much light is actually hitting the carboard target. The brighter, more washed-out it looks, the more light hitting it.
- Contrast on the target, the ability to discern the scoring rings. Our vision discerns detail based on contrast, not actual level of illumination!
Also note that with the exception of the Wildcat, all beam patterns have a "hot spot" in the center of the beam where the light is more intense. The intensity of the hot spot varies considerably, the best way to determine that intensity is to look at the ratio of lumens to lux - the greater the lux to the amount of lumens, the brighter the hot spot (greater focus of the light).
Again, bear in mind that the photos below are adjusted to best represent how I perceived the scene, the intensity of light and my ability to discern the target. I feel they are quite representative.
Photo 1
This is the MD2-M361 set to 8 lumens. Contrast of the target is good and there is a minimum of spill on the walls coming back at me. When I turn off the light, there is no momentary darkness due to my eyesight adjusting back to the ambient level of light. As I've stated previously, I find this quite adequate for the purpose of PIDing an intruder standing at the bottom of the step.
Photo 2
This is the MD2-M361 set to 15 lumens. Contrast on the target is good though there is more spill on the walls. Overall I feel there was a slight gain at 15 lumens, though it was at the upper threshold of ideal contrast. When the light was turned off, there was a very slight and momentary darkening of my vision adjusting back to ambient, but it was extremely minimal.
Photo 3
This is the MD2-M361 cranked up all the way to 400 lumens. Compared to the lower settings, there is considerably less contrast on the target and much more back splash from light hitting the walls. At this level of lumens, I found I need around 3 seconds for my vision to readjust to ambient light levels. For the sole purpose of target identification, I found this level way too high.
But for the purpose of overwhelming the intruder with blinding light, more is obviously better. But there is a hit in this scenario with 400+ lumens in terms of seeing detail (contrast), light coming back to my own eyes and recovery period when the light is turned off.
Photo 4
This is the MD2-M61T (T = "throw") that uses a TIR lens to focus the light. Though slightly less lumens than the previous photo, you can clearly see (1) more light on the target (greater blinding effect) and (2) much less spill on the walls (less back splash), but at the expense of contrast on the target (the scoring rings are just barely visible). Also note that you can see the square shape of the LED through the TIR lens, resulting in a less uniform beam pattern compared to a reflector based design.
Overall I judged this light preferable to the MD2-M361 set on high under these conditions.
Photo 5
This is the Bodyguard. The higher lumens are clearly evident, as is the lower lux (more "floody" beam pattern) compared to the MD2-M61T. The contrast on target is actually decent but the back splash is ferocious.
Photo 6
Hound Dog 18650 set on low (30 lumens, lux unknown). Contrast on target is excellent, lack of back splash is superb. The highly focused reflector design is obvious, and even at 30 lumens I wouldn't want to be on the receiving end of this light. Time for my eyes to readjust back to ambient was about a second, about the same as the MD2-M361 set to 15 lumens.
Photo 7
Nuke 'em - Hound Dog set to high (29,000 lux). Zero contrast on target, but back splash not overwhelming like the Bodyguard. If a flashlight was the only weapon I had, this would be it.
Note - I had to dial back the exposure on this photo a bit more as the target was completely washed out. Therefore the scene appeared a bit brighter to me than the photo depicts.
Photo 8
This is the Wildcat on high (1,000 lumens/5,200 lux). The low lux to lumens ratio is very evident. Contrast on target is good to excellent, as is the coloring rendering of its 90+ CRI rating. The right tool for this specific task? Probably not...
Conclusions
These are mine for this "staircase scenario";
- With dark adapted vision in dark settings, not a lot of lumens are needed in a stairwell setting. I feel confident I could easily PID a human in Photo 1.
- High lumen levels can reduce contrast, hindering our ability to see detail. Our ability to discern detail based on contrast is well documented by eye sight professionals.
- A more focused beam is definitely preferable in this scenario, especially at higher lumen levels.
- The lower the amount of light (lumens) used for PID purposes, the less time it takes to readjust to ambient light when the light is turned off.
- Back splash is a bitch.
- The hound Dog 18650 kicks ass
I appreciate everyone's comments in this thread. I hope this post reasonably illustrates my own observations.
Last edited by NH Shooter; 08-10-2018 at 08:20 AM.
You should try this on an actual person wearing clothes and holding a weapon. I think losing contrast on a monotone cardboard target is not something that will happen with a live body. Try a worst case scenario for visibility: dark skin tone or gloves wearing a black shirt holding a black gun or black knife in front of their shirt.
As long as the target (cardboard, real person, etc.) remains consistent, the differences illustrated in the photos above remain relevant.
Additionally from this article - https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5384124/
Higher levels of illumination result in pupil dilation, which results in less perceived contrast (less detail). This is consistent with the body of knowledge on human vision and the observed effects in the photos, regardless of the target.Increasing age, small pupil diameter, hyperopia, and photopic conditions were associated with lower contrast sensitivity in healthy individuals. Binocular contrast sensitivity measurements were better than monocular contrast sensitivity measurements in all conditions and spatial frequencies.
I find it kind of funny in these discussions how sure folks are of what their use of force scenario is going to look like. One thing I have found through my years of dealing with this stuff, both personally and investigating others is that none of these things ever seem to be what people think they will be. Looking at the shots from above, photo 6 is what I want. I want to shoot in daylight and assess in daylight as optimal. At night, the goal is to get as close to optimal as possible.
Does everyone need to run out and buy a thousand lumen professional grade light for home defense? No. It comes down to economics and reality of use than performance. I used to regularly recommend lights I would never use to folks because I would rather they had a $100 light than no light based on their actual need. With that said, if money is not a huge issue, I want all the performance I can that gets me close to turning the sun on.
Just a Hairy Special Snowflake supply clerk with no field experience, shooting an Asymetric carbine as a Try Hard. Snarky and easily butt hurt. Favorite animal is the Cape Buffalo....likely indicative of a personality disorder.
"If I had a grandpa, he would look like Delbert Belton".
This.
I can’t predict whom I will encounter in any given scenario during any particular time of day. Therefore I want the tools that allow me to deal with any given problem as optimally as possible given the circumstances.
As far as light goes, that means I want the brightest and simplest handheld that I can easily and comfortably carry in my pocket. As of this writing, that tool is a Surefire EDCL2-T. 5 lumens to start if I only need that, 1,200 lumens instantly available by only pressing a little harder on the tailcap. No clicky nonsense to deal with. Switchback addition incoming as soon as I can get it.
Sent from mah smertfone using tapathingy
Beyond providing enough illumination in a low-light situation to PID a potential threat, anything more is superfluous UNLESS you want to weaponize the light.
Somehow these two concepts/purposes keep getting tangled up here. Neither is wrong but they don't necessarily overlap perfectly either.
Well, it is safe to say that the 1000 lumen X300U is NOT geared to those who have no interest in weaponizing the light ;-)
ETA: What I'm saying is that I don't think anyone is really trying to convince you that you should want or need this, despite taking issue with some of your conclusions.
Last edited by s0nspark; 08-10-2018 at 10:16 AM.
"A man's character is his fate."
Reply With Quote
