- compoundsemi.com
- Compare
- H17 2.0 vs Nao LT
Acebeam H17 2.0 vs Petzl Nao LT
What H17 2.0 does better (5) and where Nao LT wins (0) — every spec side by side.
Why is H17 2.0 better than Nao LT?
- Maximum output2,000 lm vs 600 lm3.3×
- Peak beam intensity4,100 cd vs 1,410 cd2.9×
- Beam distance (ANSI FL1)128 m vs 75 m+71%
- Maximum runtime170 h vs 85 h2×
- Weight73 g vs 90 g+23%
Why is Nao LT better than H17 2.0?
Nao LT has no measurable advantages in this pair.
Specifications
Side by side
| Light output | ||
| Maximum output | 2,000 lm | 600 lm |
| Peak beam intensity | 4,100 cd | 1,410 cd |
| Beam distance (ANSI FL1) | 128 m | 75 m |
| Runtime at maximum output | — | 120 min |
| Light source | LED | LED |
| LED & beam | ||
| Number of LEDs | 3 | — |
| Colour rendering (CRI) | 90 | — |
| Colour temperature | 4,000K | — |
| Battery & charging | ||
| Battery | 18350 Li-ion | AAA |
| Number of batteries | — | 3 |
| Battery capacity | — | 1,250 mAh |
| Maximum runtime | 170 h | 85 h |
| Rechargeable | Yes | Yes |
| USB-C charging | — | Yes |
| Charging time | — | 3.5 h |
| Build & durability | ||
| Protection rating | IP68 | — |
| Water protection (IPx) | IPx8 | IPx8 |
| Submersible to | — | 2 m |
| Body material | Aluminium | — |
| Magnetic tail / base | Yes | — |
| Pocket clip | Yes | — |
| Size & weight | ||
| Length / height | 79 mm | — |
| Weight | 73 g | 90 g |
| Modes & features | ||
| Strobe | Yes | Yes |
| SOS / beacon | Yes | — |
| Green / blue / RGB light | Yes | — |
| Motion / reactive sensor | — | Yes |
| Lockout | Yes | — |
