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

[andyf97]

skeptics have to try my suggestions then will no longer be skeptical.

I have some little odd thought going on, these diodes seam to be a little orange especially in DTRs Videos, has anyone got a spectrometer to check one.

I am wondering if these are really a Mitsubishi part. Can anyone clarify this 100%.

[badger1666]

if it's a Mitsubishi part then it should have the 3 diamond logo etched on the back by the pins
as far as i am aware

[LaNeK779]

I know it is a long shot, but does anyone have access to ZEMAX software???

i wrote edmund an email and they were kind enough to respond proposing a prism pair.
When i told them that prisms won't cut it, they told me that there are ZEMAX files of their GRIN lenses available and maybe i should try to simulate the setup

so... does anyone have access to ZEMAX?

( http://www.zemax.com/ )


on a second note, is there any sort of freeware optics design software??? something like the SNLO?
anybody knows what all these are about?? http://www.optenso.com/links/links.html#ldio

[kiyoukan]

KEEP UP THE GOOD WORK !

Maybe this is an option for make it smal and round.
this is a 635nm diode and make a good round dot!
Attachment 28041

I would love to see that with some pics of it in action.
i know beam folding is hard as it seems no one like to do it.
But that looks perfect! more pics!

[planters]

I think we should stop working quite so hard on this. In the long run the diode has become less expensive and is now more attractive, but if we have to compensate for its limitations with expensive or cumbersome corrective optics then we are no longer looking at a game changing solution. Collimation and beam expansion of a given magnification by any means will probably produce a similar product ie near field beam area multiplied by xy divergence. Instead, I would look at the 836 diodes or cooling for wavelength shifting ( it works ) or maximizing the acceptance area of the scanner. Look at my thread or nudge B. Benner re his soon to be released scanners. If the 635nm wavelength is important then expand the beam a lot and conventional optics should do well.

[andyf97]

Planters, I know its Friday night at least in Europe but what the hell are you going on about. It's a thread to promote your friends scanners now ???

The word has spread already about this new diode, the diode has proved to be better than any other on the market and even with the cost of corrective optics. You will see a lot of producers will start to use these diodes if not already.

[edison]

I will try them for sure Because i have my own stacking system and the diode is a 5.6mm can diode i can fit them when i know wich lens to use.

I will try some different lenses like the roithner 27A lens when i have some diodes .

[taggalucci]

I believe this is a worthy cause if, and only if you can demonstrate a similar or better power density and similar or better divergence to the Opnext for less total cost including combining optics and mechanics.

If you can only achieve a fat beam with these, even if you have big scanners, that's not going to compete with power-dense, tight, small-divergent beams. So surely the aim should be to get the power density up with the divergence low. If this can't be done to match or better the Opnexts for less money then what's the point?

[planters]

Andy... easy there friend. No offense meant so please accept my apologies if any taken. I disagree that it has been established that these are better than any on the market. They are substantially different in their output and lens requirements and so it is interesting to pursue this route as you have and I look forward to your results. But you will need to better define your optics so others can duplicate as well as add additional knowledge. We can't claim what the cost of the corrective optics is if we don't know the prescription or the source.

I did enjoy a few conversations with Mr. Benner (president of Pangolin) and was favorably impressed with his description of the development work they are doing on an improved actuator (read galvo motor). But, I can't claim he is my friend. I bring this up because like you I am interested in improving the performance of our projectors and I believe that we should keep an eye on the relative cost/ease of each approach. And if the lens component becomes difficult then why not look at the scanner etc.

[andyf97]

I do this for my use, I would not be wasting my time if the cause was not worth it.

These diodes are pushing at least 500mW without problems, now lets settle with 500mW at 60 ish dollars + estimated correction 100usd is a hell of a lot cheaper than using three opnext that run at around 100usd each which still need knife edging and optics. whats that ? 3 x 100usd for opnext + around 100 for lenses and mounts.

G71 cost for 500mW = 160 usd
Opnext cost for 500mW = 400usd