CNI vs. DL, a tough decision for 589nm.

[trencheel303]

Shame yellow lasers are so expensive, even with a discount its still over 500$ thats just too much for a unstable laser i guess yellow lasers will never be mass produced like 532 right ?

Have you seen a 589 portable operating? They are not as "unstable" as you think. Well pardon me - mine isn't, and I believe it's typical of the DL 589s that weren't faulty. I can bung a video on youtube if anyone wants to see.

 

[GR3EN]

Any estimates on the output? I usually compare to my other lasers for a decently accurate output.

difficult to guess on estimate on output since my other lasers are far beyond the power level it is expected to be at. I had it smoke a dark brown piece of nylon polyester type material from about an inch and a half away. I just got my payment to go through for a laserbee so I will have more definitive results once it arrives.

I love watching it warm up. Mode hops them bam like it almost doubles in brightness.

 

[Atomicrox]

Have you seen a 589 portable operating? They are not as "unstable" as you think. Well pardon me - mine isn't, and I believe it's typical of the DL 589s that weren't faulty. I can bung a video on youtube if anyone wants to see.

Many of them are very unstable, even the overspec ones - just watch Smeer's video. Almost all of them mode hop as well, and output varies enough to be visible on the beam.

The truth is that buying any DPSS laser is a gamble, but the price tag on the 589's makes it very risky.

TBH I'm not sure I'll ever gamble again on an expensive DPSS. But I'm pretty sure if I ever decide to gamble it won't be with a company that treats their unhappy customers like DL does.

 

[trencheel303]

At the risk of repeating myself here (or perhaps it was in the other thread) - sure, the laser seems unstable when obsessing over an LPM graph. But in visual output, a little flickering or variation in power is hard to visualise unless you sit the laser very still and watch it. I don't see why this is such a hard issue to grasp - if you stare at an LPM graph any DPSS portable is going to be somewhat like this. Switch the LPM off and start enjoying the laser.

 

[NightExplorer96]

From what I have learned they're very inefficient and only 3% for 589. Compared to 30% for 532. And I believe it's a bit more complicated than just frequency doubling as with 532. I see 589's is kind of a high maintenance complicated girlfriend that's super hot. Lol. It's more amazing that we even have them available at all.

Yeah haha. I don't know anything about the physics behind lasers, I just enjoy the photons :wave:

What I know is the following:
532nm: All you are doing is taking a 808nm diode and changing it to 1064nm, then doubling it to 532nm which is a little more complicated then a diode laser but when it comes to other DPSS wavelengths this is pretty simple.

589nm: This is on the other hand is pretty difficult(im sure more difficult DPSS wavelengths exist). You are taking a 808nm diode and having it pass through a crystal to laser at both 1319nm & 1064nm then double both, combine them and make 589nm. This is pretty much the most generic version, I have no clue how the rest works

-Alex

 

[olympus mons]

You are taking a 808nm diode and having it pass through a crystal to laser at both 1319nm & 1064nm then double both, combine them and make 589nm. This is pretty much the most generic version, I have no clue how the rest works

-Alex

Keebler elf magic

 

[starlight]

Yeah haha. I don't know anything about the physics behind lasers, I just enjoy the photons :wave:

What I know is the following:
532nm: All you are doing is taking a 808nm diode and changing it to 1064nm, then doubling it to 532nm which is a little more complicated then a diode laser but when it comes to other DPSS wavelengths this is pretty simple.

589nm: This is on the other hand is pretty difficult(im sure more difficult DPSS wavelengths exist). You are taking a 808nm diode and having it pass through a crystal to laser at both 1319nm & 1064nm then double both, combine them and make 589nm. This is pretty much the most generic version, I have no clue how the rest works

-Alex

Forgive my arrogance but I've never understood the "doubling" of frequency when it seems the number has been cut in half NOT doubled. Is math reversed in the light/laser world? Is subtraction addition and vise versa? I mean in the 589 explanation you say double them then combine the and come out with a much smaller number. Forgive me my understanding is so screwed up I can't figure this out.

 

[clansley]

Forgive my arrogance but I've never understood the "doubling" of frequency when it seems the number has been cut in half NOT doubled. Is math reversed in the light/laser world? Is subtraction addition and vise versa? I mean in the 589 explanation you say double them then combine the and come out with a much smaller number. Forgive me my understanding is so screwed up I can't figure this out.

I'm assuming it is double the frequency which may cause the number (wavelength) to half. i.e. some relationship between frequency and wavelength.

Here's a page showing the relationship: Wavelength to Frequency Formula | Frequency to Wavelength Formula | Formulas@TutorVista.com

 

[starlight]

Always answers to my question on LPF :thanks:

 

[mortuus]

At the risk of repeating myself here (or perhaps it was in the other thread) - sure, the laser seems unstable when obsessing over an LPM graph. But in visual output, a little flickering or variation in power is hard to visualise unless you sit the laser very still and watch it. I don't see why this is such a hard issue to grasp - if you stare at an LPM graph any DPSS portable is going to be somewhat like this. Switch the LPM off and start enjoying the laser.

You may be right, but what im saying is that for me personally im not ready to give that kind of money in the near future, if i would id probably buy a different wavelength that is more stable and not as temp sensitive, same with 532nm, not like i cant live without a yellow laser for now. But yes the color is interesting and exotic for sure.

And yes please post a video do a mini review maybe or so

 

[NightExplorer96]

Forgive my arrogance but I've never understood the "doubling" of frequency when it seems the number has been cut in half NOT doubled. Is math reversed in the light/laser world? Is subtraction addition and vise versa? I mean in the 589 explanation you say double them then combine the and come out with a much smaller number. Forgive me my understanding is so screwed up I can't figure this out.

Hey starlight,

I think when people refer to doubling it means cut in half, yes. As said before I know pretty much to nothing in the physics department so my knowledge is very limited. Basically:

Doubled= Cut the wavelength in half.
1064nm--->532nm
1342nm--->671nm


-Alex

 

[clansley]

Err, no. When people say frequency doubled they mean doubled. But it will half the wavelength.

Hey starlight,

I think when people refer to doubling it means cut in half, yes. As said before I know pretty much to nothing in the physics department so my knowledge is very limited. Basically:

Doubled=Half'ed
1064nm Doubled=532 since 1064/2 is 532.
1342nm Doubled=671 since 1342/2 is 671.


-Alex

 

[NightExplorer96]

Err, no. When people say frequency doubled they mean doubled. But it will half the wavelength.

Thank you for correcting me clansley, I wasn't sure if that was correct I'll fix it haha.

-Alex

 

[spaceman]

If i may:

Frequency refers to how many times per second a full wave passes given point.
The unit of frequency is 1/s and is called a Hertz.

Naturally, since the speed of the wave is constant (c), the higher the frequency the shorter the wavelength must be. Does that make any sense?

 

[starlight]

If i may:

Frequency refers to how many times per second it takes for a full wave to pass a given point.
The unit of frequency is 1/s and is called a Hertz.

Naturally, since the speed of the wave is constant (c), the higher the frequency the shorter the wavelength must be. Does that make any sense?

makes perfect sense if I think sound but not light

 

[spaceman]

makes perfect sense if I think sound but not light

Well I should finish.

Frequency is related to wavelength via:

velocity(c in this case) = frequency * wavelength


solving for frequency we have:

frequency = velocity(c in this case) / wavelength

so wavelength is now in the denominator

they are inverseley proportional....cutting the wavelength in half will double the frequency.