Page 35 of 140 FirstFirst ... 2531323334353637383945 ... LastLast
Results 341 to 350 of 1395

Thread: Mitsubishi ML520G71...Red Holy Grail or Flashlight Fail ??

  1. #341
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    MI, flint, farmington hills
    Posts
    569

    Default

    thats a bit far but for what you get its worth every cent. actually after seeing this im going to layout my setup with lots of more room for the reds in case i want to combine 2 reds with correction optics. with that long of a FL could you only need one set of dr.lava lenses? just send them threw the pbs then into them? as long as you use a wave plate right? to keep the beam pattern the same? that could lower the cost a good amount.

  2. #342
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Zweibrücken, Germany
    Posts
    605

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by steve-o View Post
    I'm imagining some people are saying to themselves 100mm?? Damn, that's a mile! no prob . plenty of room in the projector case, y'know.. Attachment 28248
    I'm not happy with the 100mm spacing either but its a usable posibility for a good dual at least and a 4mm x 4mm beam with 0.8mrad divergence for the funds invested is also nothing to sneeze at.
    Well there are still some people working on this so maybe it can get better. I'm still going to try the 8x cylinder setup as soon as I can.

  3. #343
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Zweibrücken, Germany
    Posts
    605

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kiyoukan View Post
    thats a bit far but for what you get its worth every cent. actually after seeing this im going to layout my setup with lots of more room for the reds in case i want to combine 2 reds with correction optics. with that long of a FL could you only need one set of dr.lava lenses? just send them threw the pbs then into them? as long as you use a wave plate right? to keep the beam pattern the same? that could lower the cost a good amount.
    At this point I'm thinking of maybe knifedging a pair before the cylinders and not expanding the beam quit as much (to maybe 1.2mrad) this times 2 then WP/PBSed to maybe get a quad out of this, has to be tested..

  4. #344
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Switzerland
    Posts
    129

    Default

    I got the same diode, packaged in the same ordinary bubble foam! I checked with a high-ohm meter and indeed it is not a conducting ESD safe material... you almost feel the electrons getting rubbed free when the diode pins get inserted into it... sigh....

    Same for the blue Osram diodes they sell.

  5. #345
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Monroe, Mi USA
    Posts
    818

    Default Red Zod Quad

    This MAY be one way to do it ??? IF the LD can be tamed !!
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails ML520G71 Quad V 1.JPG  

    Beam Axiom #1 ~The Quantum well is DEEP ! Photons for ALL !!
    .
    Beam Axiom #2 ~Yes...As a matter of fact...I DO wear tinfoil on my head !!
    .
    Beam Axiom #3 ~Whe'n dout...Po ah Donk awn et !!
    .
    Beam Axiom #4 ~A Chicken in every Pot, and a Laser Lumia in every Livingroom !!
    .
    Beam Axiom #5 ~"Abstract Photonic Expressionism"....is "Abstractonimical" !!
    .
    Beam Axiom #6 ~ "A Posse ad Essea" ~ From being possible to being actual ...is the beam target !

  6. #346
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Cleveland Ohio
    Posts
    2,599

    Default

    looks huge. if the distance from the diode to the first lens is to be 100mm that would make this bigger than my entire projector.

  7. #347
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Athens, Greece
    Posts
    1,930

    Default

    ok, the general idea is that the the people testing this only had lava cylinders available, while a 7x or 8x magnification would be more appropriate.
    so, to counter this, the distance factor is introduced
    with a "proper" set of cyls, the distance should not be 100mm. don't be impatient guys, this is long from over yet
    "its called character briggs..."

  8. #348
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Monroe, Mi USA
    Posts
    818

    Default

    My drawing is just a concept. The distance from knife edge to WP/PBS is shown far to long. I do not have my shorter FL lens ( From Dave ) yet....but I find no difference between 60mm vs 100mm for the divergence. Perhaps with a shorter FL....the 100mm distance would be better ??? Then again...as Mr. Lanek stated......with the higher mag C-Lenses.....things are likely to change again. Fun with Optics !!!

    Beam
    Beam Axiom #1 ~The Quantum well is DEEP ! Photons for ALL !!
    .
    Beam Axiom #2 ~Yes...As a matter of fact...I DO wear tinfoil on my head !!
    .
    Beam Axiom #3 ~Whe'n dout...Po ah Donk awn et !!
    .
    Beam Axiom #4 ~A Chicken in every Pot, and a Laser Lumia in every Livingroom !!
    .
    Beam Axiom #5 ~"Abstract Photonic Expressionism"....is "Abstractonimical" !!
    .
    Beam Axiom #6 ~ "A Posse ad Essea" ~ From being possible to being actual ...is the beam target !

  9. #349
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Posts
    449

    Default

    CDBEAM, assuming you could get bigger lenses, you could put just one pair after the PBS, yes?

  10. #350
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    4,382

    Default

    100mm vs. lugging around a large-frame ion. Hmm.. decisions, decisions ..

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •