- Joined
- Dec 21, 2008
- Messages
- 1,223
- Points
- 0
Re: Jayrob VS. LarryFDFW AR lens VS. Aixiz standar
My own personal opinion, being the owner of JayRob's lens, is that although I can live with the so-called splash (maybe better described as the crystal's byproduct) the first one of you three to arrange for a group buy wins. After all, who will be willing to pay up to $30 more for a maximum of a 5% increase in total o/p power?
p.s. Here are some key notes I mined a while back from Igor's GB thread. The last three in the list were the final choices. From those, he settled on #2 because although #3 was more powerful, it was less "clean"... NA data is available below too.
_________________________________________________________________
Just to clear one thing up. There won't be two types of coatings. We could afford two types with any of the first six lenses, but not with these. Luckily these have a broadband coating, which is very good at just around 405nm and 660nm. I did a comparison with a lens coated specifically for 405nm, and there is less than one percent of a difference, resulting from the difference in reflections.
So the broadband is more than just good enough, especially since as it is, the lens brings more of an increase than expected. When i thought the number would be under 20%, 0.8% more could bring it a bit closer.... But we are over 20% even for diodes with the lowest losses in acrylics.
And if one lens can do both, it's both cheaper, less complicated and more practical for everyone...
So we will have one universal lens instead of two. There is no need to specify the coating, because the best lens so far comes with a 400-700nm coating. Basically, everyone just needs to figure out how many they want. They will work with any visible wavelength diode, reducing reflections to less than 1% on average and even less with reds and blu rays...
--------------------------------------------------
It's been like this..
Manufacturer 1:
- v1 - the original custom lens, 30 pieces - FAIL - spherical abberations
Manufacturer 2:
- Doesn't even pick up the phone anymore unless caught off guard, in which case they say "next week".
"Manufacturer" 3:
- v2 - first custom lens rescue attempt, 2 samples - FAIL - bubble gum lens?
- v3 - second rescue attempt, 2 samples - WORKS! Oh wait, no it doesn't? Wait, now it does? - FAIL - astigmatic lens/low quality
At this point i realized i was relying too much on too few manufacturers, and went nuts, and started searching for other options, by writing and calling more than ten new manufacturers.
I found:
"Manufacturer" 3's actual manufacturer:
- v4 - third resue attempt, one sample - FAIL - this is a lens? :-/
- v5 - fourth rescue attempt, one sample - FAIL - this was the first lens that was scratched before i got my hands on it, seems like it was made like this :-?
- v6 - fifth rescue attempt, one sample - FAIL - could almost work, has holes in the beam, quality too low
From the whole bunch v3 and v6 were the best, and yet they were horrible... :'(
v1 was and still is the highest quality lens (precision machined lens), but it's spherical, and as such useless for us.
Here end the cheap lenses.
Luckily i also found:
Manufacturer 4:
- wanted to send representatives from France and Germany for a tour of my company, and to convince me to buy quality lenses at 68 EURO each for one piece and 40 EURO each for up to 500 pieces. They said we could talk about the price, once we get to larger quantities. They just didn't seem to understand that 250 pieces is a HUGE quantity for us... But i did get some usefull info.
Manufacturer 5:
- Lens #1 - WORKS!
- Lens #2 - WORKS even better!
- Lens #3 - increases the power the most, but has gaps in the beam - probably rejects from the high quality version. Not suitable for our needs, luckily this one was free. They were probably hoping that we don't need quality and that they could sell their rejects. The quality version costs twice as much as the first two of their lenses.
So we are now actually at lens 7-9, and v7 (Lens #1) & v8 (Lens #2) are the best so far.... The latter increasing the power the most.
We will go with the 8th custom lens attempt, for max power and thinnest beam. But i am hoping i can also order some of the first lens, because it makes a "cleaner" spot, due to the medium NA clipping the ugly edges of the fast axis, and creates a "fatter" beam..
Lens #2 will bring out all there is, so the spot shape will depend ONLY on the diode output shape. It's the only way to get all the power out, and means, that diodes with a weird shape output will create weird shape spots... As diodes get better, so will the spots..
It is usual in pointers to go for a lossy option, such as clipping the output with a low NA of the lens, to make the spot rounder, cleaner and prettier.
- An AixiZ lens for example actually makes a pretty nice, rounded off spot, due to the low NA of 0.3...
- Lens #1 creates a flatter spot, but still with a slightly rounded off fast axis, because the NA is 0.4.
- Lens #2 has a NA of 0.55 and brings out the entire output and creates a spot in the same shape.
--------------------------------------------------
These [last three lens samples] are high quality precision grade aspherics. Unlike all the others, these were designed for laser diodes. They even have diode window thickness compensation! Other than collimating the beam, their shape also undistorts the spherical abberations caused by the diode window! These are diffraction limited lenses! Lenses where the size of the foused spot depends only on the wavelength! These are lenses, that could write a disk!
--------------------------------------------------
And finally, a nice synopsis:
NA
Lens #1: 0.40
Lens #2: 0.55
Lens #3: 0.60
FL
Lens #1: 6.30 mm
Lens #2: 4.56 mm
Lens #3: 4.02 mm
Coating
Lens#1: 405nm and 660nm
Lens #2: 405nm and 660nm
Lens #3: 408nm
Power Output Improvement (Based on a 6x diode and Aixiz acrylic lens)
Lens #1: +16.6 %
Lens #2: +24.2 %
Lens #3: No Data
Power Output Improvement (Based on a high wavelength PHR diode and Aixiz acrylic lens)
Lens #1: +17.5 %
Lens #2: +26.0 %
Lens #3: +26.0 %
Focusing and Burning (Data still to be properly valuated)
Lens #1: Good?
Lens #2: Some focusing and burning - less than a long FL?
--------------------------------------------------
I showed Igor pics of my 6x with the 405-G-1 yesterday and he told me it looks exactly like his top-power lens. That is why in his GB Igor wanted to go for a compromise in raw power vs. clean power.jayrob said:
My own personal opinion, being the owner of JayRob's lens, is that although I can live with the so-called splash (maybe better described as the crystal's byproduct) the first one of you three to arrange for a group buy wins. After all, who will be willing to pay up to $30 more for a maximum of a 5% increase in total o/p power?
p.s. Here are some key notes I mined a while back from Igor's GB thread. The last three in the list were the final choices. From those, he settled on #2 because although #3 was more powerful, it was less "clean"... NA data is available below too.
_________________________________________________________________
Just to clear one thing up. There won't be two types of coatings. We could afford two types with any of the first six lenses, but not with these. Luckily these have a broadband coating, which is very good at just around 405nm and 660nm. I did a comparison with a lens coated specifically for 405nm, and there is less than one percent of a difference, resulting from the difference in reflections.
So the broadband is more than just good enough, especially since as it is, the lens brings more of an increase than expected. When i thought the number would be under 20%, 0.8% more could bring it a bit closer.... But we are over 20% even for diodes with the lowest losses in acrylics.
And if one lens can do both, it's both cheaper, less complicated and more practical for everyone...
So we will have one universal lens instead of two. There is no need to specify the coating, because the best lens so far comes with a 400-700nm coating. Basically, everyone just needs to figure out how many they want. They will work with any visible wavelength diode, reducing reflections to less than 1% on average and even less with reds and blu rays...
--------------------------------------------------
It's been like this..
Manufacturer 1:
- v1 - the original custom lens, 30 pieces - FAIL - spherical abberations
Manufacturer 2:
- Doesn't even pick up the phone anymore unless caught off guard, in which case they say "next week".
"Manufacturer" 3:
- v2 - first custom lens rescue attempt, 2 samples - FAIL - bubble gum lens?
- v3 - second rescue attempt, 2 samples - WORKS! Oh wait, no it doesn't? Wait, now it does? - FAIL - astigmatic lens/low quality
At this point i realized i was relying too much on too few manufacturers, and went nuts, and started searching for other options, by writing and calling more than ten new manufacturers.
I found:
"Manufacturer" 3's actual manufacturer:
- v4 - third resue attempt, one sample - FAIL - this is a lens? :-/
- v5 - fourth rescue attempt, one sample - FAIL - this was the first lens that was scratched before i got my hands on it, seems like it was made like this :-?
- v6 - fifth rescue attempt, one sample - FAIL - could almost work, has holes in the beam, quality too low
From the whole bunch v3 and v6 were the best, and yet they were horrible... :'(
v1 was and still is the highest quality lens (precision machined lens), but it's spherical, and as such useless for us.
Here end the cheap lenses.
Luckily i also found:
Manufacturer 4:
- wanted to send representatives from France and Germany for a tour of my company, and to convince me to buy quality lenses at 68 EURO each for one piece and 40 EURO each for up to 500 pieces. They said we could talk about the price, once we get to larger quantities. They just didn't seem to understand that 250 pieces is a HUGE quantity for us... But i did get some usefull info.
Manufacturer 5:
- Lens #1 - WORKS!
- Lens #2 - WORKS even better!
- Lens #3 - increases the power the most, but has gaps in the beam - probably rejects from the high quality version. Not suitable for our needs, luckily this one was free. They were probably hoping that we don't need quality and that they could sell their rejects. The quality version costs twice as much as the first two of their lenses.
So we are now actually at lens 7-9, and v7 (Lens #1) & v8 (Lens #2) are the best so far.... The latter increasing the power the most.
We will go with the 8th custom lens attempt, for max power and thinnest beam. But i am hoping i can also order some of the first lens, because it makes a "cleaner" spot, due to the medium NA clipping the ugly edges of the fast axis, and creates a "fatter" beam..
Lens #2 will bring out all there is, so the spot shape will depend ONLY on the diode output shape. It's the only way to get all the power out, and means, that diodes with a weird shape output will create weird shape spots... As diodes get better, so will the spots..
It is usual in pointers to go for a lossy option, such as clipping the output with a low NA of the lens, to make the spot rounder, cleaner and prettier.
- An AixiZ lens for example actually makes a pretty nice, rounded off spot, due to the low NA of 0.3...
- Lens #1 creates a flatter spot, but still with a slightly rounded off fast axis, because the NA is 0.4.
- Lens #2 has a NA of 0.55 and brings out the entire output and creates a spot in the same shape.
--------------------------------------------------
These [last three lens samples] are high quality precision grade aspherics. Unlike all the others, these were designed for laser diodes. They even have diode window thickness compensation! Other than collimating the beam, their shape also undistorts the spherical abberations caused by the diode window! These are diffraction limited lenses! Lenses where the size of the foused spot depends only on the wavelength! These are lenses, that could write a disk!
--------------------------------------------------
And finally, a nice synopsis:
NA
Lens #1: 0.40
Lens #2: 0.55
Lens #3: 0.60
FL
Lens #1: 6.30 mm
Lens #2: 4.56 mm
Lens #3: 4.02 mm
Coating
Lens#1: 405nm and 660nm
Lens #2: 405nm and 660nm
Lens #3: 408nm
Power Output Improvement (Based on a 6x diode and Aixiz acrylic lens)
Lens #1: +16.6 %
Lens #2: +24.2 %
Lens #3: No Data
Power Output Improvement (Based on a high wavelength PHR diode and Aixiz acrylic lens)
Lens #1: +17.5 %
Lens #2: +26.0 %
Lens #3: +26.0 %
Focusing and Burning (Data still to be properly valuated)
Lens #1: Good?
Lens #2: Some focusing and burning - less than a long FL?
--------------------------------------------------
