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

[Solarfire]

That very interesting. Hadn't noticed you measured the raw output. I can't get my meter that close with my set-up. I only have one diode to test at the moment. This tells us... either one of our measurements is wrong or, more than likely, the divergence is very different from diode to diode.

I don't have a 4mm optima to test with. I assumed the performance would be similar to the G2 lens.

I use Daves mounts with the diode installed pointing out the back which makes it possible to get close enough (4-5mm) to measure the raw output, it also depends on the thermopile head used. I always want to know the raw output power of the diodes I use in order to get accurate loss information of the optical components in the beam path. I also look at the raw beam pattern to pre select diodes for a symmetrical beam profile and illumination. In some cases I even found contaminated exit windows (with the 445nm diodes) which would have been baked in if run at full power.

I'm pretty sure there may be bigger deviations to be expected what the raw divergence of the FA and SA is concerned. Like the 445nm diodes these are also Lo-Fi.

I like that adjusable diode mount you got there, that's pretty much a must with a 3.1fl lens. Where did you get that?

[logsquared]

I like that adjusable diode mount you got there, that's pretty much a must with a 3.1fl lens. Where did you get that?

Thanks. I built it this morning. Here is another pic showing the diode holder sitting on top. It works really well. The slots in the diode holder let you turn the diode in case it got pressed in out of alignment. The 4-40 set screws allow X and Y movement. I think I am going to make a small run of them. Anyone interested?

[Solarfire]

Thanks. I built it this morning. Here is another pic showing the diode holder sitting on top. It works really well. The slots in the diode holder let you turn the diode in case it got pressed in out of alignment. The 4-40 set screws allow X and Y movement. I think I am going to make a small run of them. Anyone interested?

Well you got my attention! I'm interested.

[Stoney3K]

hmm are olike already using these diodes ?? maybe
http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/200mW-635n...item2a144317cd

Wouldn't really surprise me. They could sell these modules with a 1-on-1 straight swap from Nichia 445 diodes to these Mitsubishi diodes and get them out the door. Not even necessary to change the set current on the driver...

[CDBEAM]

Thank you Solarfire and Logsquared. I have also trialed the good Doctor Lava's C-Lenses and concluded they WORK. .82 mRad.....with about 3% optical loss....I really could not ask for more....well 3mm at aperature would be nice too...but 5mm is what ya get. So....let's say we SLIGHTLY overdrive these....mmm...maybe to 600mA....400~450mW out the business end....not bad !!!
No crazy optics.....(1) Aspherical, (1) Plano Concave and (1) Plano Convex.....There ya go...Close enough for Jazz !! Possible good enough for beam shows...especially if one uses 40K scanners with mirrors that take 5mm beams. I will post some pics when I get a cylinderical lens mount machined up.
Thanx fer watchin !!

Note: Possible a dual set-up with a waveplate + PBS ?????

CDBEAM

[dave]

Nice work guys

I'm still thinking the HL63133's are a better choice. When you take into consideration the extra time spent messing around aligning a cyl lens pair, I think they come out on top... Only my thoughts, each to their own

[Solarfire]

Nice work guys

I'm still thinking the HL63133's are a better choice. When you take into consideration the extra time spent messing around aligning a cyl lens pair, I think they come out on top... Only my thoughts, each to their own

I don’t know Dave… How much do those Opnext cost? 170mW before optics? So far I only tested up to spec sheet values (max 400mA) and that already brings > 280mW (Optima + lava cylinders). There’s quite a bit of headroom left there (next series of tests). Sure the Opnext has the better beam specs and more diodes can be combined then with these, but surely a quad with a usable beam can be expected with these (beam aperture ≈ 4.5mm x 4.5mm @ <1.5mrad) max power still remains to be seen. The cylinders need to have a higher magnification than the lava cylinders.

@CDBEAM
With what collimator did you get 0.82mrad with? It must have been a long FL.

@logsquared
What’s the magnification on the cylinders you used?

[CDBEAM]

SF...I used a 405-G-2.........O-Like glass had more transmission loss. Will there be a more optimal cylinderical lens choice for this diode than Dr.Lava's ?
CDBEAM

[Solarfire]

SF...I used a 405-G-2.........O-Like glass had more transmission loss. Will there be a more optimal cylinderical lens choice for this diode than Dr.Lava's ?
CDBEAM

Hmm.. I haven’t tried the 405-G-2 lens, I assumed the divergence would/should be about the same as the Optima lens since the specs (except AR coating) are about the same. That would make a divergence of 0.82mrad pretty much impossible unless this is half angle? I’m going to have to try that later. Yeah.. the O-Likes are no good for these.

With the Optima lens or better said with a 4mm fl lens the magnification of the cylinders would need to be somewhat higher than the lava lens.

[CDBEAM]

SF.. I used pseudonomen137's mRad Calculator ...plugging in 0 feet @ 5mm and 13 feet @ 8.25mm....and out pops .82 mRad... so...beats me ?? See pic