How we scoreBlogAdvertise
html›body›main#compare1,338 models · updated Nov 10, 2026
  1. compoundsemi.com
  2. Compare
  3. EC50 III vs PD35 TAC

Acebeam EC50 III vs Fenix PD35 TAC

What EC50 III does better (3) and where PD35 TAC wins (1) — every spec side by side.

Acebeam EC50 III
Acebeam · 2018EC50 III
9.4Score
3 advantages
Higher score
vs
Fenix PD35 TAC
Fenix · 2018PD35 TAC
8.2Score
1 advantage≈ $70
7.9Brightness & throw4.3
9.7Battery & charging9.5
7.3Build & durability9.4
5.9Features5.9
Dimensions

Size comparison

EC50 IIIPD35 TAC
40 × 13225.4 × 137
EC50 IIIPD35 TACDifference
Length / height132 mm137 mm−5 mm
Head diameter / width40 mm25.4 mm+14.6 mm
Weight120 g88 g+32 g

Drawn to the same scale from the official dimensions (front and side).

Why is EC50 III better than PD35 TAC?

  1. Maximum output3,850 lm vs 1,000 lm3.8×
  2. Maximum runtime1,200 h vs 140 h8.6×
  3. Beam distance (ANSI FL1)326 m vs 200 m+63%

Why is PD35 TAC better than EC50 III?

  1. Weight120 g vs 88 g+36%
Specifications

Side by side

Fenix PD35 TACFenix PD35 TAC≈ $708.2
Light output
Maximum output3,850 lm1,000 lm
Peak beam intensity—10,000 cd
Beam distance (ANSI FL1)326 m200 m
Light sourceLEDLED
LED & beam
LED emitter—Cree XP-L
LED maker—Cree
Number of LEDs1—
Battery & charging
Battery26650 Li-ion18650 Li-ion, CR123A
Maximum runtime1,200 h140 h
RechargeableYesYes
Build & durability
Water protection (IPx)IPx8—
Submersible to2 m—
Body materialAluminium—
Size & weight
Length / height132 mm137 mm
Head diameter / width40 mm25.4 mm
Weight120 g88 g
Modes & features
Brightness levels—5
StrobeYesYes
SOS / beaconYes—
ColoursBlack—
To compare: 0up to 4 models
Compare