Sofirn IF22A vs Sofirn LT1S
Quick take: The Sofirn IF22A is brighter (2,100 vs 500 lm); the Sofirn IF22A throws farther (537m vs 49m); the Sofirn LT1S runs longer on high (5 vs 1.5 hrs).
| Spec | Sofirn IF22A | Sofirn LT1S |
|---|---|---|
| Price | $32 | $32 |
| Rating | — | — |
| Type | Thrower | Lantern |
| Lumens | 2,100 lm | 500 lm |
| Candela | 72,000 cd | 600 cd |
| Beam distance | 537m | 49m |
| Runtime | 1.5 hrs (high) | 5 hrs (medium) |
| Battery | 21700 | 21700 |
| LED | SFT-40 6500K | Samsung LH351D (mixed CCT) |
| Beam type | Throw | Flood |
| Modes | Ramping + Stepped | Ramping |
| UI | Anduril 2 | Anduril 2 |
| IP rating | IPX8 | IP67 |
| CRI | 70 | 95 |
| Weight | 5.5 oz | 4.5 oz |
| Dimensions | 5.2 x 1.6 in | 4.8 x 1.8 in |
| Warranty | 1 Year | 1 Year |
What owners report
Sofirn IF22A
- ✓Around 300 m of usable identification range from a pocketable body
- ✓Excellent interface — moon and turbo shortcuts, lockout, momentary moon from lockout
- ✓SFT-40 behind a TIR gives a clean pencil beam with little wasted spill
- ✓Doubles as a power bank
- ✓Performance per pound is the best in the catalog at this reach
- ✗Runs hot — around 70°C — despite the stated thermal regulation
- ✗Output oscillates during turbo and high rather than settling cleanly
- ✗Some early units over-charged their cells; check voltage after the first charge
- ✗Fussy about cells: unprotected flat-top 21700 or protected button-top 18650
- ✗Cool, low-CRI SFT-40, which is the trade for the throw
Sofirn LT1S
- ✓Collapses flat into a disc — genuinely packable for backpacking
- ✓Keeps the warm-to-cool colour temperature mixing
- ✓Runs on a single cell rather than four
- ✓Good build quality with even anodising and no sharp edges
- ✓Balances brightness, runtime and pack size better than most lanterns
- ✗Dropped Anduril for a Sofirn-designed interface, which enthusiasts consider a downgrade
- ✗No built-in hanging hook — you'll want to add a carabiner
- ✗IPX4 only: fine in rain, not for kayak camping or a real soaking
- ✗Single cell means much shorter runtime than the four-cell LT1
- ✗The later Pro variant was poorly received