Phenix PT-A10 scanners

[edison]

Dream, i totally agree with you but the majority will be in favour of the person who is doing the review no mather of its unethical or not. The majority will say thanks for doing the review then i don,t have to buy them myself to test them , that saves me money and risk.

If the above scanner test is accurate (& no one has indicated otherwise) then what's the problem? It seems to me there's a group of people just waiting to criticise Pangolin at every opportunity. Get over it guys!

If Tom from eyemagic would do a review about pangolin his scanners or bridge from laserwave is doing a review about Kvant then i also would say the same thing. Any competitor that is doing a review about their competitors product is wrong and in my opinion just a shady way of doing bussiness.


This is Bill,s way of "helping the community" What ever he does will be at best interest for his bussiness that,s for sure. The majority will not see it like that of course as they bennefit from it. He is a smart bussinessman i give him that.

It,s easy to think that i,m against Pangolin or bill for that mather but that is not the case. I,m against any form of shady bussines like posting a review about your competitors product or using hobbyists to test your product for next to nothing and save a shitload of money by not having to pay the wages of Professional engineers.

Pangolin products speak for themselves and the quallity is top notch and that is the only reason why i would invest in Pangolin and their products. I have regular contact with several people in the industry and the 506 are performing exactly like they are promised and that is the only thing that counts. That is also the reason why i like to work with STANWAX lasers. Rob his products speak for themselves and you don,t see him doing reviews about competitors their products.

[laserist]

Facts are friendly - if you want to argue facts step up - otherwise sit the f**k down.

[edison]

I,m sure everyone appreciate the facts that are displayed here. Just because the review is convinient for me that doesn,t mean i have to agree with the shady way that is going on arround here. If an independed person with no interest would do a review about the PT scanners then great but a competitor?

Amazing how easy this is accepted arround here.......

Just my opinion go on.....

[norty303]

Where is this mythical person capable of proper testing that is unaffiliated with anyone in the business?
I would suggest that they may not actually exist. Anyone with enough knowledge would have been around long enough to have had involvement with most 'players' in this small pond (to mix metaphors) and therefore could equally be subject to similar criticism. In fact, it'd be almost guaranteed.

[laserist]

You've got nothing except attitude - and when that's all you've got - Sit down!

[JohnYayas]

It's been awhile since I have worked at a company that is policy-oriented enough to have to sit through business ethics training but I do vaguely remember doing so 5 or so years ago. So, when I read the comments here about Bill's review being unethical it got me to thinking... Was his review unethical? First, when it comes to the ethics policy of a company I am not sure what is the law and what is just accepted behavior. But, I did try to find some examples of the business ethics policy that were published on the web. I am posting a section of McCormick's business ethics policy, which you can also find on the internet. I am specifically posting this one because it was the first one I found and it is aligned with the training that I took so it seems to be a common policy.

It is the Company’s policy to compete aggressively for new and existing business based on our superior product quality, innovation, technical competence, marketing support and service, and competitive pricing. Accordingly, false, misleading, or disparaging statements or innuendo about our competitors, their products or their services, or false or misleading statements about our Company and its products and services, will not be tolerated. All comparisons of our products and services with those of our competitors, and all claims about our products and services, must be accurate and factually supported.

Bill's review was definitely factual in nature and I have no reason to doubt what he presented. The only ambiguity might be whether or not the product he was reviewing was the current product being sold but it sounds like it was. Typically something that would be considered unethical would be if Company X said "Company Y's products are junk and the people that work there have no clue." Bill didn't do that. Were there any disparaging remarks? I don't think that there were. At least nothing obvious or obviously tongue in cheek. So, do I think his review was unethical? No, I do not. It does seem somewhat awkward, but Bill immediately points that out with his disclaimer at the very beginning. Of course, this leaves the door open for a competitor to review Bill's galvos but it doesn't sound like he has anything to worry about.

Anyway, if someone continues to think his review was unethical they should post some sort of policy or rule or something that explains why they believe it is. There is nothing wrong with a company reviewing a competitor's products. It happens all the time, especially behind closed doors.

[edison]

Nothing to do about attitude. The fact is that Mr benner is a competitor from the manufacturer of the product that is being reviewed here. Great info but it does look a bit shady to me. That,s all.

Imagine Nike doing a review about shoes made by adidas that would be funny

[laserist]

If you've got something FACTUAL to add DO IT. The alternative is to go away...

[Pangolin]

Hi all,

Thanks for the debate. I think it's been pretty constructive overall.

Since 40K scanners were mentioned (I think implying PT40), that tends to roll the review of the PTA-10 in with the PT40 or perhaps PT-A40 as well. With regard to all of these products, first let me say that they are well made. The parts and craftsmanship are all quite nice. I can not, and did not say anything about that. I think that people get a lot for their money when they buy these scanners. They are among the best-made Chinese scanners I have ever seen. No question about it.

Where I always have a problem is if a company is exaggerating. In the case of these PT-A10s, the web site claimed that the mirrors delivered would be for a 10mm beam, but when we put the mirror set into Solid Works, it showed that they are barely large enough to fit a 10mm beam in the nominal, non-scanned position, and if you actually want to scan, you'd be down to around an 8.5mm beam. THIS INFORMATION IS IMPORTANT TO THE COMMUNITY because if someone really has a 10mm beam they need to move, they would be disappointed with this particular offering.

Omar mentioned that they have larger mirrors and that's great. But I think that needs to be communicated more effectively on the web site.

The web site also says that performance would be better. Omar mentioned something pretty outlandish like 30K at 34 degrees or something (you can find the exact claim in an earlier post). The only thing I can figure is that when they use the ILDA test pattern, they are not looking at the whole pattern and having the pattern really perform as it should (circle in the square). Sure, you'll get *some kind* of test pattern out of the scanners if you project so fast and so wide, but it won't be the ILDA test pattern we know and with all features represented correctly.

So again folks THIS IS IMPORTANT TO THE COMMUNITY!! People may purchase based on words on a web site, and if they do, and if they expect everything to be as specified, they will be disappointed.

The PT40s and also PT-A40s we tested were both tuned to 30K. The projected image was nice, but large signal performance was a bit lacking in my opinion (this is what causes streaking on large projected beam patterns mentioned in other posts). So although they're *called* "something 40" the performance that comes from the factory is actually 30K. Once again, if you project an ILDA test pattern through these scanners at 40K, you'll get *something*, but not a perfect ILDA test patterns with all features perfectly reproduced. Now, I'm sure they can probably be tuned to 40K, but I don't expect an improvement in large-signal performance. And in some sense, I have to wonder if they could be tuned to 40K, why aren't they being delivered that way?

Anyway, I do get concerned with numbers and misconceptions in the marketplace, because people make buying decisions based on what they read. If I say a mirror is "10mm" what does that really mean? If you look on our web site, you'll see that our data sheets show exactly what size beam can be projected through the system and at exactly at what angles. The problem is, sometimes when you tell the truth, it can be underwhelming... Exaggerations sound so much better. So if a potential customer looks at completely truthful and transparent specs and compares them to exaggerated specs, the exaggerating company will always win as long as the price is similar.

That's why we make videos showing the performance that we and actual customers are seeing with our scanners. These same kind of videos can be (and should be) made of other products too. If someone else -- or even Phenix themselves (and in this case Phenix company purposely omits the O) makes videos of their product, then that would be great and I wouldn't have to ;-)

Bill

[flecom]

This is Bill,s way of "helping the community"

out of curiosity what exactly have you contributed?