New EYEMAGIC Scanners EMS7000

[smogthemog]

Gosh Al, you are such a font of knowledge! Where did you gain all this information you hold?
Must have been years and years in the industry? Are you a Laserjockey or a Roadie or something?
Amazing!

[White-Light]

Wow you must be bored....and whereas I don't have any need to justify myself, I will clarify..

Anyone coming here from google, of which there are plenty of new peeps who do without any knowledge or experience, might not realise that the EMS also appear to be at their limits. Equally they may not realise that, the statement about Cambridge, was a pretty bold conclusion ie that because DT's are allegedly clones of CT's, the implication is that EMS should outperform them also. There's absolutely no evidence to support that conclusion and anyone with any experience knows that Chinese alleged clones and CT's generally perform very differently. The problem is people with no experience who come from google might not realise that so in the interests of balance, it is only fair to point out that without a specific back to back test of EMS vs CT, rather than EMS vs DT, you can't make that jump.

Now, back to my electricians weekly.....

[andy_con]

if alan doesn't know it, its not worth knowing!

Gosh Al, you are such a font of knowledge! Where did you gain all this information you hold?
Must have been years and years in the industry? Are you a Laserjockey or a Roadie or something?
Amazing!

[danielbriggs]

[andy_con]

[White-Light]

if alan doesn't know it, its not worth knowing!

Pointing out to googler's with no laser knowledge that a conclusion cannot be justified when based on an assumption, is not being a know it all.

Then again, I kind of knew the fan club would come out when I posted......so maybe I do know everything after all.

[planters]

Without getting into the back and forth above, I'm hoping that someone with a pair of the CT scanners would complete this comparison. Compared to all the technical specifications what it generally comes down to is this; price vs real world performance at middle of the road angles with similar or identical apertures.

I have been impressed with what I have seen from a pair of $180 CN scanners in that they preform pretty well. The same defects as the above comparison can be seen, but to eliminate the defects do I have to spend 10x as much?

[Bradfo69]

I kind of agree with planters. I'm sure there are test frames which show off or detract from certain scanners so arguments can be made across the board. I have PT40's, DT40's, Eye Magic 7000's and CT 6215's. Unless it's super critical or something, the DT's have been fine for me for a few years. Now... maybe in 2019 the only ones still running might be the 6215's but, with price vs real world performance... I do find it hard to justify an extra $1500 at this point in time. Please understand I get the longevity aspect. I get the mission critical "hit an exact spot" 4000x in a row accuracy. But, again, for me, the drunken college girl at her sorority party or the wedding guests dancing underneath the beams don't give a rats behind if they're Cambridge or DT's and, for the price, I can afford to keep a back up set on hand. With CT's, a spare set is a $2000+ sit on the shelf proposition.

There is also the issue of what do you provide based on what the client can afford. I can't get $4,000 per show in my area and afford to run OPSL lasers using $2500 scanners and actually pay them off in the remainder of my lifetime. But, I can pay off a couple 3 watt projectors with DT's in 6 months and begin actually making some money on them eventually. (Well... at least that's the "idea" anyway! LOL)

[planters]

Furthermore, I have three RGB projectors. One with a pair of EMS 4000 scanners and two satellites that each have 30K CN scanners I bought from Omar a little over a year ago. Each satellite produces 9W and I could build another for the cost difference between these scanners and a CT scanner. The premium is disproportional. I'm seriously tempted to buy the 40K version of these scanners, retrofit a higher current power supply and replace the mirrors with some higher performance mirrors from OSLS. I would then see if there is a noticeable difference between the two projectors. If not, no big deal. If so, then replace the other, but to spend $2,600-$4,400 for two high end scanners is just too much.

[buffo]

Without getting into the back and forth above, I'm hoping that someone with a pair of the CT scanners would complete this comparison.

Which set of CT scanners? If you mean the venerable 6800s, that comparison was done at FLEM nearly a year and a half ago, and given the large number of eye witnesses, I'd say the issue is pretty well settled.

However, even if you meant the newer 6215Hs, that too has been done, but you'll need to take Bill at his word when he posted the results in post # 279 in this thread.

As for the larger question of how much money you have to spend to get "good" performance, that all depends on your definition of "good". As you've pointed out, even sub-$200 scanners from China can be impressive on some images.

Personally, I don't feel the increase in quality between the DT-40 wides and the Cambridge 6215hs is worth the exorbitant price difference. From your last post above, it would appear that you agree with me. Others may disagree, however.

Adam