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

[andyf97]

I think I read that they are the same emitter size.. wow 0.5W per diode. When are they due out? Anyone know? Prices?

How much did these ML520G71 come at?

I've been so dam busy that I missed this thread until now.

[andyf97]

When I worked on the 500mW ML520G72 I had some cool test lenses made that might just cut it for the ML520G71 as we got pretty close with the ML520G72.

Anyone got a pair to send me to check?

[Solarfire]

Would it not be better to start first by reducing the beam size of each diode without thinking too much about final divergence, combine a few of them, then align and telescope them all after?

From what I've seen and tested so far, I don't think we are going to get much smaller than 0.5mm x 4.0mm @ the collimator aperture without the divergence getting to bad to correct afterwards; this is with the Optima 4mm FL collimator. logsquared did some testing with a Thor labs coli with a f=3.1 mm, NA=0.68, but he didn’t mention any aperture beam sizes. With an f=3.1mm lens things get pretty fiddly, plus not to forget the higher costs what lens and hardware is concerned.

[andyf97]

From what I've seen and tested so far, I don't think we are going to get much smaller than 0.5mm x 4.0mm @ the collimator aperture without the divergence getting to bad to correct afterwards; this is with the Optima 4mm FL collimator. logsquared did some testing with a Thor labs coli with a f=3.1 mm, NA=0.68, but he didn’t mention any aperture beam sizes. With an f=3.1mm lens things get pretty fiddly, plus not to forget the higher costs what lens and hardware is concerned.

So what was the best optics combination you found and let's say at 10 meters what was the line or spot dimensions with those optics and what was the emitting dimensions.

The thread is too long to go over every message but a quick look at your findings, you got similar results to the far worse ML520G72 diode with the custom optics I had made so I am wondering what results we would get by applying this custom lens to the better spec ML520G71.

I don't do calculations, I work on how it looks and power losses so in my mind if you have a better spec diode that I was testing and I was getting very close, this optic might just resolve the problem.

[Solarfire]

So what was the best optics combination you found and let's say at 10 meters what was the line or spot dimensions with those optics and what was the emitting dimensions.

The thread is too long to go over every message but a quick look at your findings, you got similar results to the far worse ML520G72 diode with the custom optics I had made so I am wondering what results we would get by applying this custom lens to the better spec ML520G71.

I don't do calculations, I work on how it looks and power losses so in my mind if you have a better spec diode that I was testing and I was getting very close, this optic might just resolve the problem.

See posts 40 & 69, the Optima (f=4mm) collimator gave best results with lowest loss, >94% throughput. The drlava cylinders aren’t quit up to the task giving 1.7-1.9mrad, you would need a 5X cylinder telescope to get results under 1mrad and have an aperture of about 2.5mm x 4mm. On the lava the cylinders there was only 3% loss. After optics I had 185mW @ a conservative datasheet 400mA.
That’s the short story..

[andyf97]

See posts 40 & 69, the Optima (f=4mm) collimator gave best results with lowest loss, >94% throughput. The drlava cylinders aren’t quit up to the task giving 1.7-1.9mrad, you would need a 5X cylinder telescope to get results under 1mrad and have an aperture of about 2.5mm x 4mm. On the lava the cylinders there was only 3% loss. After optics I had 185mW @ a conservative datasheet 400mA.
That’s the short story..

Am lost already, if you start with a 2.5mm x 4mm at 1.7mrad and add a x5 telescope you will have a massive beam or did I not understand you..

[aijii]

the question is andy, do we all want to wait around for 6 months again ?

[andyf97]

the question is andy, do we all want to wait around for 6 months again ?

HAHAHAHA. Still waiting over a year for your solution to red.

I was trying to help here like I tried before.

I will order some diodes to test and see what happens. If the results are ok I will post the data for all, not keep it secret for my own benefit.

[Solarfire]

Am lost already, if you start with a 2.5mm x 4mm at 1.7mrad and add a x5 telescope you will have a massive beam or did I not understand you..

That was misunderstood, the Optima collimator gives a beam size @ the aperture of < 0.5mm x 4mm with a divergence > 8mrad. Corrected with drlavas cylinders the aperture is 1.5mm x 4mm with a divergence of 1.7-1.9mrad. Corrected with a 5x cylinder telescope the aperture will be about 2.5mm x 4mm with a divergence of about < 1-1.2mrad.

[andyf97]

That was misunderstood, the Optima collimator gives a beam size @ the aperture of < 0.5mm x 4mm with a divergence > 8mrad. Corrected with drlavas cylinders the aperture is 1.5mm x 4mm with a divergence of 1.7-1.9mrad. Corrected with a 5x cylinder telescope the aperture will be about 2.5mm x 4mm with a divergence of about < 1-1.2mrad.

I see, so its almost a workable solution. Just expensive.

Your results are very similar to what I was getting with the ML520G72, I guess this is due to the broad stripe. The specs are better but still its broad. I will have to get a test diodes and run it on this test rig I made for the ML520G72 just to see how it looks.

So to understand if you used a 10x telescope you would get an approx 5x8mm beam at 0.5mrad and without DRlavas lenses you would have a flatter beam like 2.5mm x 8mm?.