- compoundsemi.com
- Compare
- E12 V3.0 vs WF05E Intrinsically Safe
Fenix E12 V3.0 vs Fenix WF05E Intrinsically Safe
What E12 V3.0 does better (4) and where WF05E Intrinsically Safe wins (1) — every spec side by side.
vs
2.3Brightness & throw2.2
9.4Build & durability9.5
5.9Features5.9
Dimensions
Size comparison
E12 V3.0WF05E Intrinsically Safe
| E12 V3.0 | WF05E Intrinsically Safe | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Length / height | 81.5 mm | 134.5 mm | −53 mm |
| Head diameter / width | 19.3 mm | 19 mm | +0.3 mm |
| Body diameter / depth | 17.4 mm | 14.9 mm | +2.5 mm |
| Weight | 54 g | 37 g | +17 g |
Drawn to the same scale from the official dimensions (front and side).
Why is E12 V3.0 better than WF05E Intrinsically Safe?
- Maximum output200 lm vs 85 lm2.4×
- Peak beam intensity1,520 cd vs 730 cd2.1×
- Beam distance (ANSI FL1)78 m vs 54 m+44%
- Maximum runtime100 h vs 80 h+25%
Why is WF05E Intrinsically Safe better than E12 V3.0?
- Weight54 g vs 37 g+46%
Specifications
Side by side
| Light output | ||
| Maximum output | 200 lm | 85 lm |
| Peak beam intensity | 1,520 cd | 730 cd |
| Beam distance (ANSI FL1) | 78 m | 54 m |
| Light source | LED | LED |
| LED & beam | ||
| LED emitter | Luminus SST-20 | Cree XP-G2 |
| LED maker | Luminus | Cree |
| Colour temperature | 4,000K | — |
| Battery & charging | ||
| Battery | AA | AAA |
| Maximum runtime | 100 h | 80 h |
| Rechargeable | No | — |
| Build & durability | ||
| Protection rating | IP68 | IP68 |
| Water protection (IPx) | IPx8 | IPx8 |
| Body material | Aluminium | — |
| Magnetic tail / base | Yes | — |
| Pocket clip | Yes | Yes |
| Can tail-stand | Yes | — |
| Size & weight | ||
| Length / height | 81.5 mm | 134.5 mm |
| Head diameter / width | 19.3 mm | 19 mm |
| Body diameter / depth | 17.4 mm | 14.9 mm |
| Weight | 54 g | 37 g |
| Modes & features | ||
| Brightness levels | — | 3 |
| Switch | Tail switch | Rotary / scroll wheel |
| Mode memory | Yes | — |
| Colours | Black | — |
