hairball

Let's see some pictures in the sunlight.

balbs

Even the WL v1 is brighter than MTEC v2.1.

Howitzer

Again, from my own photos... I can't see that as being true. To me, the only thing that is truly brighter is modifying the whole enclosed light and installing the Orion kit as seen below on Rizbel's:

balbs

I'm going by my own picture I posted on the 2nd page of this thread showing both the MTEC V2.1 and WL V1 installed side by side. That picture shows the WL V1 as slightly brighter than the MTEC V2.1. So basing that on the OP's pictures from least to brightest it would be MTEC V2.1, WL V1, WL V2...at least for me it is.

nomis_nehc

To be honest, from the pictures, the differences are very trivial guys. Realistically, in person or driving by on the street, you cannot tell a damn difference.

Fact of the matter is that plug and play options for pre-LCI is just weak for daylight function. The pictures on angel eyes are just about never accurate and portray them brighter than they actually appear. That's why HID and Orions are not photogenic at all. (Which is also why when Rizbel originally posted his Orion pics, I was stunned because his pics actually did a really good job to illustrate Orions reflectively)

Also, just to point out, and this should be obvious enough, the pictures that Socal29 posted was all in the shade, so obviously the camera, especially if the setting was set to auto, it likely auto-focused on the angel eyes hence the bright look.

Tomorrow, I am going to have a few cars in. If the guys that come by overlap, maybe I can take pictures of what original Orion v2, multi-colored Orions, Mtec v2.1, and HID angel eyes look side by side.

We actually took pictures of Orions next to HID AE's today. And I believe Remuse will probably put up some pics. Interesting tidbit, there appears to be a new revision of the LCI headlights, as we found Remuse's LCI headlights (internals) rather different that what we've worked with in the past.

socale39

^^^ nomis_nehc,
The pictures I took were the best representation given the amount of reflection I had from the house and other surrounding elements. If you look in the background, it was an extremely bright day and the sun being directly over head would have made it nearly impossible to get an accurate picture of the angel eyes. I can honestly say that I have more photos that make the angel eyes "appear brighter" but after reviewing them, I can say these were the most accurate. Oh and BTW AUTO was off and shuter speed was appropriate. Based on what I've seen on this board, it seems almost everyone posts pictures of AEs with low shutter speed making them appear brighter. This is likely because of the auto function being used on a point and shoot.

Here's an example:

socale39

The only real way to tell the difference is to take a photo of both installed, on the same car, to get an accurate measure of which is brighter.

Either way I was extremely please with the build quality of the WeissLicht AEs and last night they looked even better!

Cal@Jlevi SW

+1. It's really hard to get accurate pictures of any Angel Eye upgrade (ie: what they look like in person with your own eyes).

But in any event, glad you're happy with the WeissLicht !

theXman

Thanks for sharing the photos, socale39.

But I'd like to see a side by side comparison between WeissLicht and Mtech (or other brands) with shot taking by same camera under the same outdoor lighting condition. It's hard to tell with individual photos where there are many variables affecting the outcome.

Locust83

x2 Would love to see Mtec V2 vs WeissLicht V2 side by side