New from X-Laser: X-Beam 2500 for $2500

[AnthonyGarcia]

Just got this email this morning and I actually am impressed. Sure its TTL and 15K scanners, but thats a good amount of safe/American power for that price. Thoughts?

http://x-laser.us/product/x-beam-2500

[Bradfo69]

It's actually 1.6 watts but, I'll testify to the fact that it looks a lot brighter. Dan showed me one at the DJ Expo in Atlantic City they had mounted up in the collapsible grand stands around the arena and it was considerably bright for being only 1.6. Not too far away was an RTI around 4 and a Piko at 13 and the X-Beam was holding it's own. There is a dusting of X-Laser magic going on to make it appear brighter that what it's rated for.

[AnthonyGarcia]

Oh geez I was quick to assume it was 2.5 Watts.... thats kind of misleading. of course anyone who is purchasing will look a bit more into it, and yes they make quality products but still.

[norty303]

Its Laserworld watts it seems.
Althoough there may be very good reasons why its called 2500, it should also be plainly obvious to them how it also could be interpreted.
Given the grief that LW have had over the years for the same thing, you'd think ANY company might want to side step that sort of attention/criticism.

[Bradfo69]

Yes, you might think that based on a model number. However, X-Laser does do an excellent job of maximizing the potential of a projector to make sure you're getting the maximum brightness and, this does blow away a normal rated 1.6 watt projector for beams such as my Kvant Spectrum 1.6. Laserworld TOLD you you it was 3 watts and it was only doing that if you added up the metering of the individual modules on a 72 degree November day when the moon was in a waneing crescent in a year ending with an even number. X-Laser on the other hand never "says" anything about 2.5 watts and states it's 1.6 combined on the spec sheet but, delivers a punch that would lead you to believe it's much higher than 1.6.

[JRGixxerfreaK1]

Sorry not to bash anything because I never owned X-Laser but to be legal in the US I dont see interlock remote, case interlock when cover is removed nor is there shutter,
isnt this required to get it fully legally varianced in the US?

Heres the PDF from X-Laser:


Im sorry and the laser module looks like a generic green module with fan on top and the rest of the module, I could be wrong, please do correct me!

[Bradfo69]

Not necessarily. There are ways around a number of things if the CDRH approves. Case interlocks for example... if you say there are no user serviceable parts inside and plainly label the outside and inside with the warning that removing the cover exposes you to dangerous radiation, and someone needs to get a tool to open the case (no thumbscrews) then you have potentially eliminated the need for an interlock switch. You don't actually "need" a physical shutter but you have to explain what measures or rational you've used to eliminate the necessity for it.

I'm not going to speak for X-Laser but what I can tell you is, they know the regs and follow them. They're spitting distance from CDRH headquarters and interact with them regularly. They're not going to do anything to jeopardize their business.

[tribble]

Wait, 1.6 Joules CW? That doesn't make any sense. 1.5 to 3 mRad?

Why all the hand waving?

[JD3]

Just read a Facebook post from them that states "2.5w of apparent brightness" slightly misleading, and how can you visually tell the difference between 2.1, 2.2, 2.5 etc

[norty303]

It's a load of nonsense because there is no standard for '2.5W of brightness'. All they are saying is that their power density is better due to beam specs, but as we don't know what they are comparing it to, its a meaningless statement.
They've entered the marketing BS end of the industry I'm afraid, and that's sad, given that they were reasonably well respected around these parts (PL).
A manufacturer simply doesn't need to resort to that sort of thing imo, just tell it (and label it, if you must) as it is.