- compoundsemi.com
- Compare
- E28R V2.0 vs Angel Eyes E200
Fenix E28R V2.0 vs RovyVon Angel Eyes E200
What E28R V2.0 does better (4) and where Angel Eyes E200 wins (0) — every spec side by side.
vs
5.0Brightness & throw3.4
8.2Battery & charging5.4
7.2Build & durability7.8
5.9Features5.9
Why is E28R V2.0 better than Angel Eyes E200?
- Beam distance (ANSI FL1)273 m vs 118 m2.3×
- Peak beam intensity18,630 cd vs 3,480 cd5.4×
- Battery capacity3,400 mAh vs 1,400 mAh2.4×
- Maximum output1,700 lm vs 1,650 lm+3%
Why is Angel Eyes E200 better than E28R V2.0?
Angel Eyes E200 has no measurable advantages in this pair.
Specifications
Side by side
| Light output | ||
| Maximum output | 1,700 lm | 1,650 lm |
| Peak beam intensity | 18,630 cd | 3,480 cd |
| Beam distance (ANSI FL1) | 273 m | 118 m |
| Light source | LED | LED |
| LED & beam | ||
| LED emitter | Luminus SST-40 | — |
| LED maker | Luminus | — |
| Number of LEDs | — | 47 |
| Colour temperature | 6,500K | — |
| Battery & charging | ||
| Battery | 18650 Li-ion, CR123A | — |
| Battery capacity | 3,400 mAh | 1,400 mAh |
| Maximum runtime | 260 h | — |
| Rechargeable | Yes | Yes |
| USB-C charging | Yes | Yes |
| Charging time | — | 0.8 h |
| Battery level indicator | Yes | — |
| Build & durability | ||
| Protection rating | IP68 | IP68 |
| Water protection (IPx) | IPx8 | IPx8 |
| Body material | — | Aluminium |
| Magnetic tail / base | Yes | Yes |
| Pocket clip | Yes | Yes |
| Size & weight | ||
| Length / height | 121 mm | — |
| Head diameter / width | 26.5 mm | — |
| Body diameter / depth | 22.5 mm | — |
| Weight | 128 g | — |
| Modes & features | ||
| Brightness levels | — | 4 |
| Stepless (ramping) brightness | — | Yes |
| Switch | Side switch | — |
| Strobe | Yes | — |
| Red light | — | Yes |
| UV light | — | Yes |
| Lockout | Yes | — |
| Mode memory | Yes | — |
