- compoundsemi.com
- Compare
- E30R vs PD35 V2.0 Digital
Fenix E30R vs Fenix PD35 V2.0 Digital
What E30R does better (2) and where PD35 V2.0 Digital wins (3) — every spec side by side.
vs
4.2Brightness & throw4.2
5.4Battery & charging9.7
9.7Build & durability8.8
7.9Light quality7.9
5.9Features5.9
Dimensions
Size comparison
E30RPD35 V2.0 Digital
| E30R | PD35 V2.0 Digital | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Length / height | 99 mm | 138 mm | −39 mm |
| Head diameter / width | 25.4 mm | 25.4 mm | = |
| Body diameter / depth | 21.5 mm | 23 mm | −1.5 mm |
| Weight | 51 g | 88 g | −37 g |
Drawn to the same scale from the official dimensions (front and side).
Why is E30R better than PD35 V2.0 Digital?
- Maximum output1,600 lm vs 1,000 lm+60%
- Weight51 g vs 88 g+73%
Why is PD35 V2.0 Digital better than E30R?
- Maximum runtime70.5 h vs 430 h6.1×
- Beam distance (ANSI FL1)203 m vs 250 m+23%
- Peak beam intensity10,300 cd vs 15,620 cd+52%
Specifications
Side by side
| Light output | ||
| Maximum output | 1,600 lm | 1,000 lm |
| Peak beam intensity | 10,300 cd | 15,620 cd |
| Beam distance (ANSI FL1) | 203 m | 250 m |
| Light source | LED | LED |
| LED & beam | ||
| LED emitter | Luminus SST-40 | Cree XP-L HI |
| LED maker | Luminus | Cree |
| Battery & charging | ||
| Battery | 18650 Li-ion, CR123A | — |
| Battery capacity | 3,400 mAh | — |
| Maximum runtime | 70.5 h | 430 h |
| Rechargeable | Yes | — |
| Magnetic charging | Yes | — |
| Battery level indicator | Yes | Yes |
| Build & durability | ||
| Protection rating | — | IP68 |
| Water protection (IPx) | — | IPx8 |
| Pocket clip | Yes | — |
| Size & weight | ||
| Length / height | 99 mm | 138 mm |
| Head diameter / width | 25.4 mm | 25.4 mm |
| Body diameter / depth | 21.5 mm | 23 mm |
| Weight | 51 g | 88 g |
| Modes & features | ||
| Brightness levels | 5 | 5 |
| Switch | Side switch | Dual switches |
| Strobe | Yes | Yes |
