Inexpensive LUX meter from China to measure your bike lamp's output

On 2/25/2018 5:32 AM, Sepp Ruf wrote:
Frank Krygowski wrote:
On February 24, 2018 at 10:10:41 PM UTC-5, Jeff Liebermann wrote:

Opinions vary:
- Frank wants brightness limited to avoid blinding oncoming motorists.

Well, that's an oversimplification at best. I don't want to blind anyone,
and I don't want other cyclists blinding me, which has happened many times.
But that calls for lower intensity only above the horizon. Lumens on the road
shouldn't cause that problem. Assuming, that is, they are properly spread. I
think "hot spots" tend to stop down one's pupils and decrease night vision.

Mostly, I object to the claims that something over 200 lumens is necessary.
I've done too much pleasant riding with B&M lights putting out less than 150
properly focused lumens. I think the cries for more are, at best, ill-informed.

However, it recently occurred to me that at this time of year, there might be
some utility to mega-lumen lights. If they were bright enough to melt the snow,
or (on a night like this) to dry the puddled roads ahead of the cyclist,
I might be convinced to use one. We're almost there.

If the current crop of kickstarted U.S. bicycle lighting guys weren't
muscle-car tuners unsafely operating flasherless bicycles inside Kentucky
caves, with their trail beams set quite low, I'd recommend you try swapping
your non-selling Oculoss for a review sample of Outbound Lighting's Focal
Series Road Edition light:
https://www.outboundlighting.com/product/focal-series-road-edition

I am glad to see more people recognizing that round beams are not optimum.


--
- Frank Krygowski