So actually I took a series of photos of my own light set-up with a couple different models of Sony digital cameras, using both the MTBR settings of "ISO 100, f4 and 4 seconds", and my own settings of "ISO 100, f4 and 1 second". And then I took another set with, of all things, my iPhone 4, which has an excellent reputation for reasonable reproduction. Those results were extremely close to the manual settings on the Sony of "ISO 100, f4 and 1 second". If anything they were slightly darker. The biggest advantage is I can post those immediately - the Sony versions will have to be processed and reduced in size before the site will accept them.
My own interest in a lighting system started last year and I was most interested in effective coverage as I planned on riding both off-road and on-road occasionally in less than ideal circumstances. So I contacted a few companies in the USA and tried out several lens formats. Different lenses disperse or focus the light differently and adding more power doesn't change the coverage - just the intensity.
So this is a P7 with a 15 degree spread.
Which is representative of a lot of 900 lumen bike lights and flashlights and is NOT what I wanted to drive behind. It has reach but very limited spread. Exposing the photograph for 4 seconds makes it much more impressive on the screen, but not in real life. Adding identical multiple lights just puts more light in the same limited area.
And this is a P7 with a 35 degree spread
Which is representative of some other 900 lumen bike lights and flashlights and is still not what I wanted to drive behind. It has less reach and more spread but still not enough. Once again, exposing the photograph for 4 seconds makes it much more impressive on the screen, but still a wanna-be in real life. Adding identical multiple lights still just puts more light in the same limited area.
And this is a P7 with a 15/45 degree spread
Which looks like a real loser if you only go by first impressions. (Actually an extended exposure looks really great - but what you'd see in a four second exposure is what I want in real life).
Thing is - it has pretty good reach and spread - it just lacks intensity because that same 900 lumen output is spread over a much wider area. So lets stack a few and see what happens:
This is a light bar made from 4 of those 15/45 lens configurations. They fit together just like Lego.
Now THAT'S a light I wanna drive with! Hmmmm .... looks just like a single with a 4 second exposure - except that it isn't! Yeah - 4 of these draw 40 watts combined, but I can still get 4 hours from a couple batteries the size of an iPhone.
And reach is pretty good - those posts on the RHS are 10 feet apart, and the lighting is very representative. In fact the dark areas are actually darker than reality.
And this is why I don't understand the need for separate settings for tail lights:
Aren't they both in the same picture?
I deliberately shot some street lights and /or traffic lights in these photos to give a relative reference for reality in case the camera settings weren't enough for some people. And yup - all these shots were taken at the same settings, and pretty representative of what I was looking at.
My own conclusion after looking at the photos posted on the MTBR reviews is that this lighting system has more output and is more effective than a Lupine Betty .... and cost less to boot.