- compoundsemi.com
- Compare
- L19 2.0 vs TK22 TAC
Acebeam L19 2.0 vs Fenix TK22 TAC
What L19 2.0 does better (2) and where TK22 TAC wins (3) — every spec side by side.
Dimensions
Size comparison
L19 2.0TK22 TAC
| L19 2.0 | TK22 TAC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Length / height | 163.8 mm | 154 mm | +9.8 mm |
| Head diameter / width | 60 mm | 40 mm | +20 mm |
| Body diameter / depth | 25.4 mm | 26 mm | −0.6 mm |
| Weight | 205 g | 156 g | +49 g |
Drawn to the same scale from the official dimensions (front and side).
Why is L19 2.0 better than TK22 TAC?
- Beam distance (ANSI FL1)1,080 m vs 540 m2×
- Peak beam intensity291,600 cd vs 72,900 cd4×
Why is TK22 TAC better than L19 2.0?
- Maximum output2,200 lm vs 2,800 lm+27%
- Weight205 g vs 156 g+31%
- Maximum runtime47 h vs 49.5 h+5%
Specifications
Side by side
| Light output | ||
| Maximum output | 2,200 lm | 2,800 lm |
| Peak beam intensity | 291,600 cd | 72,900 cd |
| Beam distance (ANSI FL1) | 1,080 m | 540 m |
| Light source | LED | LED |
| LED & beam | ||
| LED emitter | Luminus SFT-40 | Luminus SFT-70 |
| LED maker | Luminus | Luminus |
| Colour temperature | — | 6,500K |
| Battery & charging | ||
| Battery | 21700 Li-ion | 21700 Li-ion |
| Maximum runtime | 47 h | 49.5 h |
| Rechargeable | Yes | Yes |
| USB-C charging | — | Yes |
| Build & durability | ||
| Protection rating | IP68 | IP68 |
| Water protection (IPx) | IPx8 | IPx8 |
| Size & weight | ||
| Length / height | 163.8 mm | 154 mm |
| Head diameter / width | 60 mm | 40 mm |
| Body diameter / depth | 25.4 mm | 26 mm |
| Weight | 205 g | 156 g |
| Modes & features | ||
| Switch | — | Tail switch |
| Strobe | Yes | Yes |
| Green / blue / RGB light | Yes | — |
