50mW 405nm in Dilda V2 host

I picked up this one and a few other cheapies from Focalprice recently. There were no reviews on this one, so I foolishly took a chance and added it to the cart. After a month, it shows up. Looks exactly like your average Dilda V2. It came with a set of batteries that are not clearly marked as rechargeable or primary, so I pop them in and start playing. Right away, this guy was burning pretty quickly, so I expected that I had been given a 'hot' sample... Perhaps to be sure that the first review would be a positive one?

I put it on the LPM and measured a steady 58mW. It's not as high as I expected based on the burning capability, but it's still above spec... that much from Focalprice is amazing in itself. Combine overspec output with seemingly good build quality and a really cheap price.. maybe a little too good to be true?

The lens on mine does a great job of focusing the beam down to a pinpoint. Better than the V1 by far in regards to focus. To give a good idea about high tightly it focuses, this laser burns just as fast (maybe a little faster sometimes) as my red dilda v1 (202mW) and this guy only makes 58mW. It seems pretty amazing. I hope the rest of them that they sell are on the same level as the one that I got.


vendor/sku: fuckallprice LP228B
Price: $33.31
Rated output: 50mW 405nm
Measured output: 58mW
Power: 2x CR2
Included: pen style box, laser, 2x CR2 batteries

Pros: Overspec, inexpensive, assembled well, good focus and burning capability, faintly visible beam in darkness

Cons: Unknown if included batteries are rechargeable or primary






Overall thoughts: The host & focus ability is what makes this laser a success. It's great that mine is overspec, but we have no way of knowing if this will continue. If the rest of them do come out the same as this one, I think it's a very strong value for someone looking for a budget burner, or budget BR.


Edit: I found batteries that look exactly the same on a different website. They are claiming them as rechargeable. yay!

Why does the 3rd picture not have any burn marks on it, but the second one does?

The third picture was taken after the other pictures. Those heavy burn marks are actually from a 12x BR, unrelated to this laser. I did not mean to hint that those marks were caused by this laser, but I guess that's what some folks will probably think. Oops on my part.

The third pic has very small burn marks caused by the reviewed laser, just nothing close to the damage done in the second pic by the 12x.

I'll go take a new picture, without the burnt background to avoid that potential confusion..