LED Headlight Conversions

[peterk9]

The magic of a camera and exposure needed to capture light. We all (those who have/had halogens) know their performance is not nearly as generous as his demo photo.

That could be. I've not experienced the Ford Halogens first hand. Thanks.

Peter

 

[1995E]

So I did a road trip of around 1,200 miles to Miami Florida. I replaced my HIDs with the 2500 lumen fanless LEDs. Put some dust covers on. Stayed on all night. If it can make another all night driving run, then I can confirm these fanless LED bulbs are reliable enough and their heatsinks work fine. Seems like it already.

I really recommend these over HIDs because you don't have to worry about ballasts, wiring harness, or turning them on and off multiple times a day.

 

[champco]

Yes
The ISO of these new digital cameras is amazing. To put it into perspective for the unknowing. The common ISO/ASA of 35mm film may have been 100ASA or 200 ASA. You paid a premium for 400 ASA film which gathered light better/faster.

10000 ASA never existed. This "film" speed allows light to be recorded which our eye's cannot perceive.

Until I took the LED pics and compared I was unaware of the results of the first set of pics.
Without enough light the autofocus will not perform as well, to get the detail needed of the street and roadsides. The focal length is limited. The aperture setting dictates the depth of field meaning the distance where things are in focus. I needed it all to be in focus in low light as well as not have camera shake cause blurring, which happens if the shutter speed is slow.

Probably the pics could be doctored by someone who knows Photoshop well.

 

[champco]

That could be. I've not experienced the Ford Halogens first hand. Thanks.

Peter

Important to note I was stopped for the photo's. At 60 MPH on a dark road you are over driving the visibility of the low beams.

 

[ac130j]

That could be. I've not experienced the Ford Halogens first hand. Thanks.

Peter

The stock halogens really, really suck. I bought HIDs day 1.

 

[GBot]

Yes
The ISO of these new digital cameras is amazing. To put it into perspective for the unknowing. The common ISO/ASA of 35mm film may have been 100ASA or 200 ASA. You paid a premium for 400 ASA film which gathered light better/faster.

10000 ASA never existed. This "film" speed allows light to be recorded which our eye's cannot perceive.

Until I took the LED pics and compared I was unaware of the results of the first set of pics.
Without enough light the autofocus will not perform as well, to get the detail needed of the street and roadsides. The focal length is limited. The aperture setting dictates the depth of field meaning the distance where things are in focus. I needed it all to be in focus in low light as well as not have camera shake cause blurring, which happens if the shutter speed is slow.

Probably the pics could be doctored by someone who knows Photoshop well.

It would be better if you set your camera in full manual mode with your lens' auto focus ring disabled (you can use auto focus to find the correct focus setting, then flip the switch on the lens to manual focus). I don't think Photoshop would be helpful.

The camera's software is programmed to adjust for optimal exposure, meaning before and after will look as identical as possible. Locking the ISO isn't enough, because the camera will just give the dimmer bulbs a longer exposure time, assuming the aperture stays the same.

No pressure to redo your photos, and I'm sorry if it sounds like I'm complaining. But for anyone wondering, these photos are not going to accurately show diffences in real world brightness between the two lighting systems.

At least I'm highly certain this is what's occurring, but could be wrong. If the EXIF data for each of the photos was available we could say for sure. Bottom line though, if ISO, exposure, and aperture settings are not identical between before and after shots, the results will be misleading.

 

[champco]

It would be better if you set your camera in full manual mode with your lens' auto focus ring disabled (you can use auto focus to find the correct focus setting, then flip the switch on the lens to manual focus). I don't think Photoshop would be helpful.

The camera's software is programmed to adjust for optimal exposure, meaning before and after will look as identical as possible. Locking the ISO isn't enough, because the camera will just give the dimmer bulbs a longer exposure time, assuming the aperture stays the same.

No pressure to redo your photos, and I'm sorry if it sounds like I'm complaining. But for anyone wondering, these photos are not going to accurately show diffences in real world brightness between the two lighting systems.

At least I'm highly certain this is what's occurring, but could be wrong. If the EXIF data for each of the photos was available we could say for sure. Bottom line though, if ISO, exposure, and aperture settings are not identical between before and after shots, the results will be misleading.

Thanks Gbot for your ideas. I have had this camera for a couple years now and am still in a learning curve. My other camera was a Olympus OM-1 so you can see how there is a difference. This camera is by far the most technical device I have ever owned. I still am learning as I use it. The manual mode is still a bit beyond me but I do understand what you posted. The trouble is even as this was a quiet back road, I still had three vehicles come up behind me between the first and second pic. PITA.
I may be able to post the data. It is same. I am wondering if I can use the camera to modify the before pictures.

 

[GBot]

The manual mode is still a bit beyond me but I do understand what you posted.

You can "cheat" to find the right settings.

Review the halogen/before photos in your camera. You may have to press the info button once or twice to see what settings were used. Make note of those settings, then use those settings to take new photos with the LEDs in.

If it works the way I think it will, the before photos you posted here should still look pretty good, whereas the LEDs should look bright to the point where the photo is overexposed and details such as trees may be whited out.

This assumes that you have the LEDs in and don't want to take new "before" photos.

If you are willing to do what is admittedly more work for you but should give more accurate results, do the steps in opposite order; take photos in auto or P mode with LEDs in until you find results that most closely represent what you see in real life. Then make note of those settings, swap the halogen bulbs in, and take new "before" shots using those new camera settings.

In this case we should see LEDs with "real life" brightness, then halogens which are much dimmer, represented by an underexposed photo.

No pressure, I know this is labor intensive. But if you feel like experimenting with your camera this would be a thoroughly educational exercise.

Photography is a great hobby and there is a LOT to learn. Way more than most people realize. I never really appreciated professional photography until I got my own DSLR and realized how much goes into a great photo.

The 70D is on the short list of cameras I want to get to replace the ancient Rebel XT that I still use... Don't laugh, I still enjoy it

 

[champco]

GBot

I still have the original settings for both before and after. I know in photoshop if a pic is "burned" from over exposure due to ISO settings they can be darkened.

I may fool around with the photo's to see if I can simulate reality on the two before pics. Changing bulbs is out of the question.

Using the auto/P settings called up the flash.

The best thing about the 70D is it's movie function. You can make HQ HD movies just pick a lense.

If I were you with your experience I would go full frame like a 7D Find a good used Body and save money. Your lenses should work. Me I am delving into the macro world and wireless flash.

 

[1995E]

I currently have the Diode Dynamics 35W 6000K HID kit. The kit is good. I keep the headlight switch on Auto. I had to install a 10 second delay relay for the bulbs to fire up consistently. So now I have a delay when the lights auto turn on in low light conditions. When I have the fogs on they fire immediately (LED), then 10 seconds later the HID headlights fire. (Yes, I know using fogs unless necessary is not legal in some areas) It all works O.K., but the 10 second delay brings out the OCD in me...

Out of curiosity I ordered these 40W 6000K LED bulbs. i.e. instant on.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B019GWOF12?psc=1&redirect=true&ref_=oh_aui_detailpage_o00_s00

They claim 4800 LM per buld. That should be comparable to the HID, I think. I will compare against the HID when they arrive and I get them installed them in a few days.

Have any results yet for your LEDs?

 

[MtnCar]

Have any results yet for your LEDs?

Yes. I have been running the LEDs for about a week now. I do like them. The color is about the same as my 6K HIDs, maybe slightly whiter. The LEDs are slightly less bright, but still very bright. The beam pattern seems well dispersed. Overall I am happy with the LEDs and think they offer a good option to HID.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B019GWOF12?psc=1&redirect=true&ref_=oh_aui_detailpage_o00_s00&tag=viglink20460-20

 

[croll326]

Do the LED's throw light similar to HID's? I'm worried it would get washed out not too far from the vehicle.

 

[Sgt1411]

Interesting headlight testing by IIHS

http://www.leftlanenews.com/iihs-tests-headlights-only-prius-v-earns-good-rating-91379.html

 

[GBot]

Interesting headlight testing by IIHS

http://www.leftlanenews.com/iihs-tests-headlights-only-prius-v-earns-good-rating-91379.html

Source of the study below. Very interesting results. I wonder how we could apply their methods to get the best/safest headlights on our Explorers.
http://www.iihs.org/iihs/sr/statusreport/article/51/3/1

The only Ford/Lincoln vehicles tested were classified as "marginal." Glad to see attention to this issue from a legitimate source.

 

[1995E]

Here is a picture of my 9005 LED 2500 lumen LED bulbs when it's very dark. I haven't aimed them. Low beam:

Edit: Why are my images rotated? They aren't when I have them on my computer.

 

[peterk9]

Another member had the same issue with the rotation. I just set my monitor on its side to view them.

I copied yours, rotated them right 90 degrees and resized to 300 X 400.

Peter

 

[mikejsmith1985]

Want to start by thanking Peter for educating me earlier today. I found out my OEM HIDs are not in fact HIDs at all and there are halogens behind the projector lenses, I've read through this thread and I've placed an order for the OPT7 LED bulbs. I like the simple install of LEDs and I feel like installing the balasts in HID kits rarely end up looking as clean as I would like.

I own a 3D printer and plan on using a flexible filament to print custom dust boots for a really clean install. I'll post pics of the printed boots for reference, although I'm not sure how long they can holdup to the temps in the engine bay. May not be a long term solution.

 

[SurrealOne]

Yes. I have been running the LEDs for about a week now. I do like them. The color is about the same as my 6K HIDs, maybe slightly whiter. The LEDs are slightly less bright, but still very bright. The beam pattern seems well dispersed. Overall I am happy with the LEDs and think they offer a good option to HID.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B019GWOF12?psc=1&redirect=true&ref_=oh_aui_detailpage_o00_s00&tag=viglink20460-20

Question
has anybody done this install and what was needed to do the install? is it PnP?
And will it work on my 2014 Ex SPT?

 

[MtnCar]

Question
has anybody done this install and what was needed to do the install? is it PnP?
And will it work on my 2014 Ex SPT?

it is PnP. I have switched back to HID.

 

[mikejsmith1985]

it is PnP. I have switched back to HID.

Can you share your deciding factor to go back to HID?