varuscelli

Great information in post 49, Zero_Enigma. Thanks for sharing your souce and price findings.

varuscelli

My comment here is not related to the Allbattery cells in question, but does bring up one point I want to comment on in using the Fenix L2D combined with the TwoFish Lockblocks and using standard rechargeable batteries (in my case, either Energizer 2500mAh or Duracell 2650mAh).

One thing I really like about the setup on the bike is how easy it is to change the batteries (without unmounting the light). Unscrew the back of the light, tilt the light backwards a bit by giving the light/mount a slight backwards twist on the bar, and tap the light gently (if a tap is needed at all, depending on the angle to which you've tilted the light) -- and the batteries slide right out. Slip in fresh batteries, tilt the mount/light back into position, replace the end cap and you're off.

socalrider

the all battery cells are 3.0v while the aw cells that the fenix-store sells are 3.7v.. Big difference in terms of performance between these cells.. It like comparing alkaline vs lithium cells.. You will get better burn time with the 3.7v cells.. Both chargers work fine.. I actually use the little nano charger, it takes longer to charge a 3.7 cell but it is a gentler charger and will help extend the longevity of your cells..

here is a comparison shot of using a p2d in turbo mode.. 3.0v cells - 16 minutes while the aw 3.7 cells - 47 minutes.. 3x the burn time.. Huge difference..

https://lights.chevrofreak.com/runtim...%20-%20max.png

JeffB502

Zero: It's actually cheaper if you put the 4 cells and the charger in your shopping cart separately on the website, with the current sale prices on the individual cells and the charger. I own 8 of the Tenergy batteries at this point. 7 slide in and out smoothly with plenty of space, 1 rubs slightly on the inside of the flashlight but not enough to prevent it from sliding in and out, albeit a bit slower than the others. A while back when I was still using my 2xAA Mag Lite with the Nite Ize 3 LED drop-in I bought some cheap AA NiMH batteries at the local hardware store. They wouldn't even fit into the light. I simply removed the outside wrappers from them and they slid right in...I'd assume this would work with the Tenergys but I haven't tried it so I don't know for sure.

JeffB502

socal: I guess I'm not too sure about the 3v vs. 3.7v thing...maybe I'll have to pick up a couple of the AW ones and check it out since I already have the AW 3.7v charger with the spacers for the rcr123a's. My thinking was that a 900mAh battery would last longer than a 750mAh battery regardless of the voltage, but I could have very well been wrong. That and I assumed the p3d was initially designed around operating on 3 volt primaries, and I was worried about possibly generating extra heat by putting in extra unneeded extra voltage. I was probably wrong about that.

With 2 3.0v 900mAh rcr123a's I've found my runtime with the P3D CE to be somewhere around an hour on turbo, but like I said I only ran them down all the way once. That was on a night where I was doing some errands in addition to my normal commute. It was only the 2nd or 3rd time I had used the batteries as well. I'm not sure how Li-Ions are as far as being broken in like Niterider claims is necessary for their NiMH batteries. I'd do a runtime test in my house, but I don't want the thing to overheat without cold night air moving over it...maybe I'll have to go for a long night ride sometime soon and time it out.

socalrider

yes there is a difference between the 3v and 3.7v cells.. Many flashlights cannot use 3.7v cells because they will overpower the circuit and basically destroy your flashlight.. The fenix lights all have buck circuits which allow you to use the higher power cells with no problems..

Turbo mode is to be used sparingly in normal circumstances with the p3d flashlight.. It even mentions it in the info that comes with the light.. If you are using as a bike light, the cool air helps keep the heat down on the light.. I have had no problems running in turbo mode for over 1 hour..

MBurke

Great thread and light set up. I have gotten into buying the Fenix lights also after getting suggestions of this site and some of the posters in this thread. I have a P3D and love it. I have gotten a lot of bike rides out of just my first set of Energizer primarys. I just run my light on High and that is more than enough light for me. I also have a L2D for my wifes bike light. I think they are the best choice for the money and performance... they are extremely bright lights. You could also go with this package
https://www.fenix-store.com/product_...a5ad142ef59830

Thanks
Mike

ps. be careful though....this flashlight thing is addicting. : )

varuscelli

Here's something folks might find of interest. I decided I wanted to try and do some other night photos with the Fenix L2D lights, and to do it I attached a small monopod as a crossbar to one of my tripods and attached the lights to the monopod. The monopod is almost the exact diameter of the ViewPoint spacebar, so the TwoFish Lockblocks attached readily to the monopod. Height of the monopod as attach (via Velcro strips) to the tripod was matched to the height of the bike handlebars. This allowed me to carry the tripod and camera out to do test shots without having to use the bike or other separate, makeshift stand for the lights. (Many other things could be used as the crossbar to mount the lights -- a large dowel, the sawed-off handle of an old broom, a small section of PVC pipe, etc.) A few new night shots to follow in another post.

socalrider

Yes lights can e very addicting, the next thing you know each time a new model comes out you have to have it.. The light I am looking at right now is the elektrolumens fire-lion.. 5000+lux at close to 400 lumens and 2hour + burntime.. It is under 5 inches in length, you a hair taller than a p3d..

https://elektrolumens.com/FireLion/FireLion-III.html

varuscelli

I love the fact that actual flames come out of the front of this light. Too cool...

(I don't believe in disclaimers, so I'm gonna read right past theirs.)

varuscelli

A few photos taken using the tripod setup in my last post. Camera and Lens = Canon 1D Mark II and EF16-35 f/2.8L Lens.

Edit: All photos taken with lights in turbo mode.

16-35mm Lens at 16mm, F2.8 at 1/2 second
Left Photo One Light, Right Photo Two Lights




Far Corner of House 50 feet, Far Fence 80 Feet
16-35mm Lens at 35mm, F2.8 at 1/2 second
Left Photo One Light, Right Photo Two Lights




Approx. 40 Feet from House
16-35mm Lens at 16mm, F2.8 at 1/2 second
Left Photo One Light, Right Photo Two Lights

jebejava

Gawsh, a Canon Digital Pinhole lens! Sure has the pinhole camera look to those pics!

As far as I can see from the pictures, there still seems to be a strong hotspot with the two light straight ahead mount setup. I don't really know what it's like in real life and if it's objectionable or not.
Referring to the earlier discussion about angling the lights for better beam spread, there might be a good and fairly simple to fabricate solution in the thread about the Dinotte website, post #3. The poster has lights mounted on yokes. This can give you 2-axis movements.

Regarding a helmet mounted light, I have never tried it but have wondered if it will blind someone you are looking directly at. This seems to be quite a possibility with a very bright, focused beam like the Fenix. I guess the solution is just to be judicious about turning off the light when you are talking to the ossifer who's just about to ticket you for exceeding the night time speed limit?

varuscelli

OK, I'll admit it. I did the first two shots with the new digital pinhole camera by Canon, touted as "The World's Most Advanced Pinhole Camera -- And Its Most Expensive..."

(Actually, that's the kind of effect you get with an exceptionally wide-angle lens like a 16mm. (However, even that one is actually about a 20.8mm in standard 135mm equivalent, as the digital camera I use has a 1.3 lens multiplication factor on the digital side. But still, that's pretty wide compared to most photos you'd see. But also, that means that to the human eye, the light actually covers a broader span than is perceived in those first two photos. Ultra-wide-angle lenses can often fool the final audience, if you know what I mean.)

The hot spot in the middle is not NEARLY so strong looking to the human eye, nor is the light fall-off to the edges as radical. It's actually all very nice and very smooth and very easy on the eye. It's just one of the aspects of beam shots where it's very difficult to emulate with a digitally captured image what the human eye actually perceives. (At least, that's the way I'm finding it to be.) In fact, for any photos of any given light, I don't know if there's a way to show the light how the eye sees it (because of the human eye's dynamic ability to adjust to light in a way that a still photo can't emulate). We can show relative shots comparing one light to another or effects of one versus multiple lights or a light at different power levels, but I think the eye is going to see it better than the camera can show it every time. What looks very hot in a photo will look right to the eye, unless it's truly an exceptional hot spot. And, what looks dark in a photo will often be not quite so dark to the human eye (those borderline areas of light fall-off.) What it comes down to (to me) is that I don't think we can do most lights justice in still photos. That, or I'm not practiced enough at this kind of photography to get those kinds of results. But I think there are true limitations in what we can show in a static photo where the scene is essentially averaged out. But I'm working on it, and if there's a better way to show this stuff, I'm going to try and find it (it's got my curiosity up now).

I actually tried some angling of the lights and found the results disappointing. I thought the overall light was much better when the lights were angled as much as possible to the same spot or one light was set to shine a bit in front of other (rather than separating the beams). Just my personal take, though. In fact, so far I have found it better to leave one light on the handlebars and one on a helmet, reason being that you can consciously direct the helmet light to the middle or to the sides, as needed. That is, if you need to do a look-off to one side or the other (and no longer are looking toward the middle) you have helmet light where you need it. You need it back to the middle when you're looking to the middle, and when you look there...there it is, added to the light that's already there from the handlebar light. But what I will have set up soon is two on the handlebars and one on the helmet (I have a third light on the way).

Personally, I think there's a very real possibility of being unsafe with bike lights. Seems like there's often a fine line between being seen and being a visual menace yourself if not conscientious about how your lights are used. But these Fenix lights are nothing compared to what some people have out there, so I dunno. I just think we all have to be conscious of where we are pointing the lights and put ourselves (mentally) in the other person's position. Car lights are brighter in general, but bike lights are much more erratic in direction (especially helmet lights), and while that movement of helmet lights can certainly serve to draw attention to the rider, it could also perhaps contribute to unsafe situations when pointed right into someone's eyes. Just my thoughts...

Zero_Enigma

BTW is that 3hr run time for the P2D from personal experience or are you going by the specs?

socalrider

the p2d runtime is from experience.. This is using primary cells and running in high mode.. You have to buy good cells, I use either surefire or titanium cells.. the best price for ti cells is amondotech.. If you run in turbo mode you will most likely get just over an hour.. I use my helmet light more for being seen and seeing through corners..

https://www.amondotech.com/index.asp?...ROD&ProdID=490

they are 1.00 each + shipping..

Sir Bikesalot

I notice you're getting much better ground illumination with your lights mounted to the tripod. Perhaps because they're lower than they would be on the handlebars? If this is the case, maybe mounting the lights to each end of the fork would be the ideal placement.

varuscelli

Let's see...just to make sure I'm clear on what you're asking, you mean better ground illumination than in my initially posted images back in post number 21 of this thread? If that's what's being compared, it's likely because I had the lights in those photos pointed more straight-away and less at the ground than they should have been pointed (in the "driveway/cars/garage" and "side of house across driveway" photos). In the last set that I posted (across all grass and toward front of house/front door), I had the lights pointed in a slightly more realistic riding configuration (angled slightly downward). Maybe that's what the perceived difference is... (?)

On the tripod, I tried to mount the lights as close as I could to their actual working height on the handlebars. I think I was not more than an inch or so off, so I'm pretty sure that's not it.

Yeah...I'm betting it was the angle of the lights in the first set of photos as being more straight ahead than slanted slightly downward as they should have been.

Sir Bikesalot

Ah, ok thanks. I was thinking about the height thing since I had just moved my halogen lamp further down the stem the night before and got much better ground coverage. Considering the hot spot of the L2D, I bet you would also see an improvement mounting them lower.

varuscelli

That's interesting. I've seen some scattered photos where people have done just that (lights mounted somewhere lower on the forks), but haven't really read anything extensive about the effects of mounting the lights lower. I've even seem some mounted so low that you'd think the shadow created by the front tire might be a distraction. (I think in your previous post you were suggesting mounting the lights at the top of the forks, maybe one on each side (?)). But, I might just give that a try and see what it looks like. Certainly won't hurt to experiment with it as long as I can get a secure attachment and good angle for the lights (since lockblocks like I'm using don't seem to allow too much extra adjustment/play...).

Zero_Enigma

Varus: How long does it take to remove the flashlight from the helmet and bars? Also how long does it take to put both on? I'd like to know my vunerability/exposure time when off the bike taking that off.

Is it a fast as fastex buckles for on/off? Thanks mate.

Sir Bikesalot

As a start, try rotating the viewpoint spacebar so that it's hanging down below the handlebars and then mount the lights in that position. It's only a couple inches but should make a noticeable difference.

oso

I have a similar setup. I use two lockblocks on the handle bars with Fenix P3Ds. (2xCR123). It's very easy to remove these. They are fixed using two velcro strips. One around the handle bar, the other wraps around the light.

I also affixed the lockblock to my Giro atmos helmet and I use a Fenix P2D (1xCR123). Also simple to add and remove.

varuscelli

Pretty fast. Probably not as fast as some kind of innovative, mechanical quick-release system might be...(as a photo guy, I'm sort of accustomed to mechanical "quick release this" and "quick release that" for a lot of my camera gear, which spoils you after a while -- but is of course more costly in most cases). And of course Velcro in that context is a form of quick release -- just more obnoxious sounding...

But, I'd say to remove both lights from the bike (whether removing the lights from the lockblocks and leaving the lockblocks attached or removing the entire lockblock with light still attached to the lockblock), the most time you'd need is about 10 seconds (again, to remove two lights -- about 5 seconds per light, max). In either case, you have to release only one Velcro strap for each light or for each lockblock. I suppose with a bit of practice and "speed" as the intent, you might get it down to around 3 seconds per light (at a guess).

Putting both back on really takes no more time than taking them off, but you might need an extra second or two (perhaps) to adjust the angle of the light again.

And if I'm picturing fastex buckles correctly (plastic clip style?), then no. The Velcro release would not, I don't think, be as fast (if I'm correctly envisioning what you're asking).

varuscelli

I received some Bikeblocks from Fenix-store.com yesterday and did some photos comparing them to Lockblocks. Those are posted to my web page (as linked in my signature, below).

Here are a couple of samples for anyone who might be asking themselves, "Gee, I wonder what a Lockblock looks like next to a Bikeblock?" and thinking, "I wish someone would post a few comparative photos so I don't have to suffer mental anguish from obsessively thinking about it."

In the first photo (left) the Lockblock in on the left side of the photo and the Bikeblock is on the right. In the next two photos, the Bikeblock in on the left and the Lockblock is on the right. (Visually confusing, I know.)



Many more to see on the site, for anyone interested.

DodgeRam

So which do you perfer and why??