[404mm]

$1200 is a lot, and it would be a straight dealbreaker to me as well. But I also noticed it draws 580W, which is a lot too.

Besides not wanting to waste the money, I doubt the lamp will last 5 years (not 5 years of projected use of XX minutes per day…). 580W converted to heat on a small disk will take its toll.

[SPICLK2]

~100 lumens per watt is rather poor, especially given the cost. It's the same as a standard LED lightbulb, and that includes the miniature AC voltage converter.

150lm/w would make it at least a cut above domestic lightbulbs.

200lm/w would make it a premium product.

[antonok]

fwiw, LEDs with higher CRI will generally be less power efficient, so the premium category has a 3-way tradeoff between brightness, power, and color quality. It's common for high efficiency LED lightbulbs to be much worse at illuminating red objects.

[user_7832]

> ~100 lumens per watt is rather poor

Is it, though? Most of the LEDs I've seen are very similar, and lower temp LEDs are slightly less efficient. If it were 60lm/watt I'd be a bit surprised, but 100lm seems pretty typical. Maybe not "well engineered", but average. (Which, with all due respect to the founder, seems the quality of the product.)

[ortusdux]

The 'wasted' electricity is turned into heat, which should be welcome by their target customer base.

[the_arun]

It is way too expensive for me as well. Yeh, world's brightest lamp is costliest to buy & maintain.