forums
new posts
donate
UER Store
events
location db
db map
search
members
faq
terms of service
privacy policy
register
login




1 2 3 4 5  
UER Forum > Private Boards Index > Flashlights, Torches and Light Painting > Fenix TK-40 vs. dodgy 600 lumen subsitutes. (Viewed 12776 times)
Air 


Location: Canada
Total Likes: 65 likes




 |  | 
Fenix TK-40 vs. dodgy 600 lumen subsitutes.
< on 4/6/2010 7:40 PM >
Reply with Quote
Posted on Forum: UER Forum
I've wanted a TK40 for a while, but didn't really feel like shelling out that much money on one item. I've come to conclusion that with this and flash and I achieve what I want and not haul EVERYTHING (garrity, small LED's fluro, headlamp, etc) plus camera gear with me requiring a 40 l pack.

Anyone use the TK40 here (other then JD?)

http://www.fenixta...om/fenix-tk40.html

What if anything have you used as a substitute? I'm curious on run times and connection related issues.




"The extraordinary beauty of things that fail." - Heinrich von Kleist
metawaffle 

King of Puns


Location: Brisbane!
Gender: Male
Total Likes: 19 likes


Purveyor of Fine Lampshades

 |  |  | longexposure.net
Re: Fenix TK-40 vs. dodgy 600 lumen subsitutes.
< Reply # 1 on 4/6/2010 9:54 PM >
Reply with Quote
Posted on Forum: UER Forum
Yeah, I'd skip the cheapies, personally. I have a cheap MC-E light, and like all the cheap lights, it suffers from reliability issues - and it's unregulated, of course. Also, the cheap lights never have reflectors quite the size of the TK-40's, so they tend not to have much throw at all.

If you were considering a light in that kind of price range, though, it might be worth seeing what's happening with these new SST-50 lights that have just started coming out - seemingly much brighter than the MC-Es.

Or, if you have a spare $450, the Olight SR90 Intimidator could be yours, with 2200 lumens output





http://www.longexposure.net
Air 


Location: Canada
Total Likes: 65 likes




 |  | 
Re: Fenix TK-40 vs. dodgy 600 lumen subsitutes.
< Reply # 2 on 4/6/2010 11:27 PM >
Reply with Quote
Posted on Forum: UER Forum
Posted by metawaffle
Yeah, I'd skip the cheapies, personally. I have a cheap MC-E light, and like all the cheap lights, it suffers from reliability issues - and it's unregulated, of course. Also, the cheap lights never have reflectors quite the size of the TK-40's, so they tend not to have much throw at all.

If you were considering a light in that kind of price range, though, it might be worth seeing what's happening with these new SST-50 lights that have just started coming out - seemingly much brighter than the MC-Es.

Or, if you have a spare $450, the Olight SR90 Intimidator could be yours, with 2200 lumens output

http://ep.yimg.com...ket_2100_688074218


Thank you!

I'd love 2200 lumens, but the tk40 seems to be $150 and since the b+d torch is $50 if I can find one with taxes, this can come with me for anything its so small.





"The extraordinary beauty of things that fail." - Heinrich von Kleist
hilite 


Gender: Male
Total Likes: 105 likes


don't destroy my sweater....

 |  |  | https://500px.com/erik_m
Re: Fenix TK-40 vs. dodgy 600 lumen subsitutes.
< Reply # 3 on 4/7/2010 2:07 AM >
Reply with Quote
Posted on Forum: UER Forum
I've used the TK-40, It's good, but it handles a bit weird.




And when you finally disappear, We'll just say you were never here.
Air 


Location: Canada
Total Likes: 65 likes




 |  | 
Re: Fenix TK-40 vs. dodgy 600 lumen subsitutes.
< Reply # 4 on 4/7/2010 10:13 PM >
Reply with Quote
Posted on Forum: UER Forum
Posted by HI-LITE
I've used the TK-40, It's good, but it handles a bit weird.


Is it got a heavy front section? I haven't encountered that with other lights, but I never had a light over $35...

I've decided its my next light . I need to carry less things in the 'bag...



[last edit 4/7/2010 10:16 PM by Air - edited 1 times]

"The extraordinary beauty of things that fail." - Heinrich von Kleist
hilite 


Gender: Male
Total Likes: 105 likes


don't destroy my sweater....

 |  |  | https://500px.com/erik_m
Re: Fenix TK-40 vs. dodgy 600 lumen subsitutes.
< Reply # 5 on 4/9/2010 11:22 PM >
Reply with Quote
Posted on Forum: UER Forum
no, its those sharp edges and the weird funnel-like head on it.




And when you finally disappear, We'll just say you were never here.
Colorblinded 


Location: Rochester, NY
Gender: Male
Total Likes: 2 likes


Armed with cameras.

 |  |  | AIM Message | The Colorblind Photographer
Re: Fenix TK-40 vs. dodgy 600 lumen subsitutes.
< Reply # 6 on 4/27/2010 1:18 AM >
Reply with Quote
Posted on Forum: UER Forum
I've been interested in the TK40 but it doesn't sound like the CRI is going to be what I want for light painting use. Ergonomically it looks pretty good to me but I've yet to handle one.




The Colorblind Photographer
Uzi- 


Location: Central Nebraska
Gender: Male
Total Likes: 9 likes




 |  | 
Re: Fenix TK-40 vs. dodgy 600 lumen subsitutes.
< Reply # 7 on 5/11/2010 9:13 PM >
Reply with Quote
Posted on Forum: UER Forum
I just bought a TK-30 a couple weeks ago it's pretty much the same head and LED as the TK-40 only with different batteries. I run mine on CR123's and get along with it pretty well. It definitely handles different than what I am used to. Getting used to cycling through the modes and remembering which order they where in was a change for me.

Now that I've gotten used to it I like it, but it is still different. Also it doesn't throw quite as much as I thought it would, granted it still reaches out there along ways. Seeing the beam pattern though really makes me want to do some light painting with it since it has less of a hot spot that my other high powered stuff.

I think a TK30-40 would pretty good all around light because it can be super bright if needed or relatively dim with a long run time. I think mine goes to 12 lumen for 90 hours.




Posted by Send4Help
Man... Not even the mods make it to this corner of UER
I feel like I am in ...well... the great plains ;) Posted by willskith Unfortunately, due to overuse of tonemapping, photography was gradually ruined and now stands with halos.
AnAppleSnail 


Location: Charlotte, NC
Gender: Male
Total Likes: 49 likes


ALL the flashlights!

 |  |  | AIM Message | My Flickr Page
Re: Fenix TK-40 vs. dodgy 600 lumen subsitutes.
< Reply # 8 on 5/21/2010 7:00 AM >
Reply with Quote
Posted on Forum: UER Forum
Posted by Colorblinded
I've been interested in the TK40 but it doesn't sound like the CRI is going to be what I want for light painting use. Ergonomically it looks pretty good to me but I've yet to handle one.


How much red and green do you really need?




Achievement Unlocked
Colorblinded 


Location: Rochester, NY
Gender: Male
Total Likes: 2 likes


Armed with cameras.

 |  |  | AIM Message | The Colorblind Photographer
Re: Fenix TK-40 vs. dodgy 600 lumen subsitutes.
< Reply # 9 on 5/22/2010 8:29 PM >
Reply with Quote
Posted on Forum: UER Forum
enough.

anyway...

Just got my Quark AA^2 warm white. Interesting little light. I'm mixed on the control interface but I suppose I'll post my impressions in a separate thread on it later after I've had more time to get a feel for it.



[last edit 5/22/2010 8:47 PM by Colorblinded - edited 1 times]

The Colorblind Photographer
metawaffle 

King of Puns


Location: Brisbane!
Gender: Male
Total Likes: 19 likes


Purveyor of Fine Lampshades

 |  |  | longexposure.net
Re: Fenix TK-40 vs. dodgy 600 lumen subsitutes.
< Reply # 10 on 5/22/2010 9:35 PM >
Reply with Quote
Posted on Forum: UER Forum
Posted by Colorblinded
enough.

anyway...

Just got my Quark AA^2 warm white. Interesting little light. I'm mixed on the control interface but I suppose I'll post my impressions in a separate thread on it later after I've had more time to get a feel for it.


Did you get the tactical or regular?




http://www.longexposure.net
Colorblinded 


Location: Rochester, NY
Gender: Male
Total Likes: 2 likes


Armed with cameras.

 |  |  | AIM Message | The Colorblind Photographer
Re: Fenix TK-40 vs. dodgy 600 lumen subsitutes.
< Reply # 11 on 5/22/2010 11:22 PM >
Reply with Quote
Posted on Forum: UER Forum
Posted by metawaffle


Did you get the tactical or regular?


That one only came in tactical.




The Colorblind Photographer
NotBatman 


Location: MSP
Gender: Male
Total Likes: 443 likes


Secret Cult Member

 |  | 
Re: Fenix TK-40 vs. dodgy 600 lumen subsitutes.
< Reply # 12 on 5/23/2010 2:14 AM >
Reply with Quote
Posted on Forum: UER Forum
Posted by Colorblinded
Just got my Quark AA^2 warm white. Interesting little light. I'm mixed on the control interface but I suppose I'll post my impressions in a separate thread on it later after I've had more time to get a feel for it.


Please do.

I bought a Quark 123^2 a while back (love it!) and have been wanting to get a 123^2 warm for underground pics, but I'm just not sure how to justify it. Hearing that the warms are super OMFGBBQ awesome would help (make my wife frustrated).




I'm a "Leave only footprints, take only pornography" kind of guy, myself.
Colorblinded 


Location: Rochester, NY
Gender: Male
Total Likes: 2 likes


Armed with cameras.

 |  |  | AIM Message | The Colorblind Photographer
Re: Fenix TK-40 vs. dodgy 600 lumen subsitutes.
< Reply # 13 on 6/9/2010 7:48 AM >
Reply with Quote
Posted on Forum: UER Forum
Posted by NotBatman


Please do.

I bought a Quark 123^2 a while back (love it!) and have been wanting to get a 123^2 warm for underground pics, but I'm just not sure how to justify it. Hearing that the warms are super OMFGBBQ awesome would help (make my wife frustrated).


Just updating: I will be creating a post with my reactions to the warm white tactical, but I will wait until I get the neutral white with the regular interface. It'll be a 3 way (kinky!) between the AA2 WW Tactical, AA2 NW regular and my Fenix LD20 (Premium Q5)... and maybe my Malkoff Maglite for giggles... and maybe something else if I'm already at it. We'll see how ambitious I will feel once I get started.

Some people on CPF seem to prefer WW in the outdoors and my casual comparisons to my Fenix to date is that it definitely has its advantages. If you compare the WW to every other LED light you have probably used it will look yellow but if you look at it next to incandescents in tint/color temp it is comparable.



[last edit 6/9/2010 7:48 AM by Colorblinded - edited 1 times]

The Colorblind Photographer
Air 


Location: Canada
Total Likes: 65 likes




 |  | 
Re: Fenix TK-40 vs. dodgy 600 lumen subsitutes.
< Reply # 14 on 6/10/2010 2:05 AM >
Reply with Quote
Posted on Forum: UER Forum
I bought a discontinued NOMA 3W LED even though it takes 2 D batteries( maglite knockoff) . The light has amazing throw but the fill is MEH. Certainly better then my maglite, but I'm going to have to see how it looks on film.




"The extraordinary beauty of things that fail." - Heinrich von Kleist
metawaffle 

King of Puns


Location: Brisbane!
Gender: Male
Total Likes: 19 likes


Purveyor of Fine Lampshades

 |  |  | longexposure.net
Re: Fenix TK-40 vs. dodgy 600 lumen subsitutes.
< Reply # 15 on 6/15/2010 3:37 AM >
Reply with Quote
Posted on Forum: UER Forum
Interesting! Shiningbeam have an MC-E light that takes AA batteries, much like the TK-40. It's obviously a relative cheapie compared to the Fenix, and I wouldn't trust it to survive any better than any other cheap light, but it's interesting to see another AA-powered MC-E out there.

http://www.shining...lestar-Cree/Detail





http://www.longexposure.net
Colorblinded 


Location: Rochester, NY
Gender: Male
Total Likes: 2 likes


Armed with cameras.

 |  |  | AIM Message | The Colorblind Photographer
Re: Fenix TK-40 vs. dodgy 600 lumen subsitutes.
< Reply # 16 on 6/15/2010 5:04 AM >
Reply with Quote
Posted on Forum: UER Forum
Ahh yeah the ITP Polestar. I've seen that one around and mentioned at various places. I don't recall hearing that it bursts in to flames however I also don't recall what the overall comments regarding its quality were either. ITP seems to be reasonably well regarded as one of the budget brands but I can't speak from experience, I just recall stumbling across that one on CPF.




The Colorblind Photographer
Air 


Location: Canada
Total Likes: 65 likes




 |  | 
Re: Fenix TK-40 vs. dodgy 600 lumen subsitutes.
< Reply # 17 on 6/15/2010 1:37 PM >
Reply with Quote
Posted on Forum: UER Forum
Posted by metawaffle
Interesting! Shiningbeam have an MC-E light that takes AA batteries, much like the TK-40. It's obviously a relative cheapie compared to the Fenix, and I wouldn't trust it to survive any better than any other cheap light, but it's interesting to see another AA-powered MC-E out there.

http://www.shining...lestar-Cree/Detail

http://www.shining...com/catalog/a6.jpg


It's basically half the price.

I did take the noma back...it was designed as a MAG LITE knock-off, but without the adjustable beam.



[last edit 6/15/2010 1:37 PM by Air - edited 1 times]

"The extraordinary beauty of things that fail." - Heinrich von Kleist
Air 


Location: Canada
Total Likes: 65 likes




 |  | 
Re: Fenix TK-40 vs. dodgy 600 lumen subsitutes.
< Reply # 18 on 7/14/2010 9:11 PM >
Reply with Quote
Posted on Forum: UER Forum
I finally got around to place an order for the TK-40, and see it has a new incarnation! The TK45..anyone have it here? Its about 100 lumens brighter then the tk40, just kind of looks like an ugly spud.

http://www.fenixta...om/fenix-tk45.html

Meta? Applesnail? Anyone?




"The extraordinary beauty of things that fail." - Heinrich von Kleist
Colorblinded 


Location: Rochester, NY
Gender: Male
Total Likes: 2 likes


Armed with cameras.

 |  |  | AIM Message | The Colorblind Photographer
Re: Fenix TK-40 vs. dodgy 600 lumen subsitutes.
< Reply # 19 on 7/14/2010 10:07 PM >
Reply with Quote
Posted on Forum: UER Forum
Don't think either of them have it but I've heard good things about it overall. I like the switch mechanism on it better, for a light its size having the side mounted switches make sense to me.




The Colorblind Photographer
UER Forum > Private Boards Index > Flashlights, Torches and Light Painting > Fenix TK-40 vs. dodgy 600 lumen subsitutes. (Viewed 12776 times)
1 2 3 4 5  


Add a poll to this thread



This thread is in a public category, and can't be made private.



All content and images copyright © 2002-2024 UER.CA and respective creators. Graphical Design by Crossfire.
To contact webmaster, or click to email with problems or other questions about this site: UER CONTACT
View Terms of Service | View Privacy Policy | Server colocation provided by Beanfield
This page was generated for you in 140 milliseconds. Since June 23, 2002, a total of 740180555 pages have been generated.