- compoundsemi.com
- Compare
- UC35 V2.0 vs MH25 V2
Fenix UC35 V2.0 vs Nitecore MH25 V2
What UC35 V2.0 does better (0) and where MH25 V2 wins (6) — every spec side by side.
Why is UC35 V2.0 better than MH25 V2?
UC35 V2.0 has no measurable advantages in this pair.
Why is MH25 V2 better than UC35 V2.0?
- Peak beam intensity17,690 cd vs 56,410 cd3.2×
- Beam distance (ANSI FL1)266 m vs 475 m+79%
- Maximum runtime750 h vs 1,500 h2×
- USB-C chargingNo · UC35 V2.0: Yes
- Maximum output1,000 lm vs 1,300 lm+30%
- Battery capacity3,400 mAh vs 5,000 mAh+47%
Specifications
Side by side
| Light output | ||
| Maximum output | 1,000 lm | 1,300 lm |
| Peak beam intensity | 17,690 cd | 56,410 cd |
| Beam distance (ANSI FL1) | 266 m | 475 m |
| Light source | LED | LED |
| LED & beam | ||
| LED emitter | Cree XP-L HI | — |
| LED maker | Cree | — |
| Colour temperature | 5,700K | — |
| Battery & charging | ||
| Battery | 18650 Li-ion, CR123A, AAA | 21700 Li-ion, 18650 Li-ion, CR123A |
| Battery capacity | 3,400 mAh | 5,000 mAh |
| Maximum runtime | 750 h | 1,500 h |
| Rechargeable | Yes | Yes |
| USB-C charging | No | Yes |
| Battery level indicator | Yes | — |
| Also runs on AA/AAA/CR123A | Yes | Yes |
| Build & durability | ||
| Protection rating | IP68 | IP68 |
| Water protection (IPx) | IPx8 | IPx8 |
| Submersible to | — | 2 m |
| Impact resistance (drop) | — | 1 m |
| Body material | — | Aluminium |
| Pocket clip | Yes | Yes |
| Size & weight | ||
| Length / height | 140 mm | — |
| Head diameter / width | 25.4 mm | — |
| Body diameter / depth | 23.5 mm | — |
| Weight | 88 g | — |
| Modes & features | ||
| Switch | Dual switches | Side switch |
| Tactical tail switch (momentary on) | Yes | — |
| Strobe | Yes | Yes |
| SOS / beacon | — | Yes |
| Mode memory | Yes | — |
