- compoundsemi.com
- Compare
- PD35 V2.0 Digital vs TK25
Fenix PD35 V2.0 Digital vs Fenix TK25
What PD35 V2.0 Digital does better (3) and where TK25 wins (0) — every spec side by side.
vs
4.9Brightness & throw4.8
9.6Battery & charging8.9
8.7Build & durability5.4
5.9Features5.9
Dimensions
Size comparison
PD35 V2.0 DigitalTK25
| PD35 V2.0 Digital | TK25 | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Length / height | 138 mm | 143 mm | −5 mm |
| Head diameter / width | 25.4 mm | 40 mm | −14.6 mm |
| Weight | 88 g | 156 g | −68 g |
Drawn to the same scale from the official dimensions (front and side).
Why is PD35 V2.0 Digital better than TK25?
- Maximum runtime430 h vs 110 h3.9×
- Weight88 g vs 156 g+77%
- Beam distance (ANSI FL1)250 m vs 225 m+11%
Why is TK25 better than PD35 V2.0 Digital?
TK25 has no measurable advantages in this pair.
Specifications
Side by side
| Light output | ||
| Maximum output | 1,000 lm | 1,000 lm |
| Peak beam intensity | 15,620 cd | — |
| Beam distance (ANSI FL1) | 250 m | 225 m |
| Light source | LED | LED |
| LED & beam | ||
| LED emitter | Cree XP-L HI | — |
| LED maker | Cree | — |
| Battery & charging | ||
| Battery | — | 18650 Li-ion |
| Maximum runtime | 430 h | 110 h |
| Rechargeable | — | Yes |
| Battery level indicator | Yes | — |
| Build & durability | ||
| Protection rating | IP68 | — |
| Water protection (IPx) | IPx8 | — |
| Body material | — | Aluminium |
| Size & weight | ||
| Length / height | 138 mm | 143 mm |
| Head diameter / width | 25.4 mm | 40 mm |
| Body diameter / depth | 23 mm | — |
| Weight | 88 g | 156 g |
| Modes & features | ||
| Brightness levels | 5 | — |
| Switch | Dual switches | — |
| Strobe | Yes | — |
| Red light | — | Yes |
| Colours | — | Black |
