Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 11

Thread: anyone heard/tried these "AL" scanners?

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    Moscow
    Posts
    41

    Default anyone heard/tried these "AL" scanners?

    EDIT: The way some of the members here have desperately tried to identify my location and nationality for whatever reason they believed was needed for by asking an admin to check my profile logs and researching me by the content of my posts has been very creepy and unnecessary. So bye.
    Last edited by dream; 04-28-2016 at 16:27.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    East Sussex, England
    Posts
    5,245

    Default

    I think if i was buying a GS projector now, I'd be inclined to buy it without scanners and fit my own PT-A40. Known quantity and all that.
    Frikkin Lasers
    http://www.frikkinlasers.co.uk

    You are using Bonetti's defense against me, ah?

    I thought it fitting, considering the rocky terrain.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    East Sussex, England
    Posts
    5,245

    Default

    Bang for buck, PT-A40 is better than DT40, and is only just more expensive than DT30, so if they can supply them fitted, I'd be doing that.
    Aside from anything, Lightspace/Phenix don't appear to be going away any time soon, but who knows where 'AL' will be in 3 years time, if anywhere.
    Scanners can move on to newer projectors so its worthwhile spending on something with some longevity both in terms of reliability and being able to get more of the same in a few years time.
    Frikkin Lasers
    http://www.frikkinlasers.co.uk

    You are using Bonetti's defense against me, ah?

    I thought it fitting, considering the rocky terrain.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Barcelona, Spain
    Posts
    439

    Default

    I tested AL-30K, it performs close to PT-40K. However my DT-40 PRO obviously is more accurate on graphics and have more angle. IMO you will be happy with AL-30 for beam shows and decent graphics if budget is priority. But not at high angles, otherwise circles becomes 'ovals'

  5. #5
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Barcelona, Spain
    Posts
    439

    Default

    just saying AL-30K performs CLOSE to PT-40k, not better

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Langhus - Norway
    Posts
    345

    Default

    I have a few sets of the AL-25 as the pricetag is extremly favourable. I have not invested time and effort into finetuning the set, but for my use, they are good enough "out of the box"

    As jors say, the scan angle are not great. I have put them side by side to some PT-30, and to my eye there are not big difference using QuickShow/FB3 for graphics.

    For beams, there are no noticable difference.

    I have had the AL scanners for a 18 months, used a few hours every month. So far, so good, but i am in no position comparing quality ragarding lifespan to other scanners.

    So as for "bang for the buck", AL scanners are a great deal.

    What i don`t like, is the cables that comes with the AL scanners. Cheapo Cheapo, superfragile, and handle with care.
    __________________________________________________ __________

    More projects than time available.
    More projects started than finished.
    More money spent than earned.
    More failure than success.
    Just got to love lasers!

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    East Sussex, England
    Posts
    5,245

    Default

    Also, lets be clear about which PT's we're talking about.

    I was talking about the PT-A40, not the PT-40k. The A40 is 'better' than the 40k (width, bigger mirrors same speed), so if the AL-30k performs 'close' to the 40k, then the A40 sounds like a clear winner.
    Frikkin Lasers
    http://www.frikkinlasers.co.uk

    You are using Bonetti's defense against me, ah?

    I thought it fitting, considering the rocky terrain.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Barcelona, Spain
    Posts
    439

  9. #9
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    1 hr from everything in SoCal
    Posts
    2,605

    Default

    I've had two sets of PT-40s. Both times, I was disappointed. I switched to DT-40s and have had no issues. No free lunch. You get what you pay for.... I haven't tried the PT-A40s so I can't speak for them but I am done with chivos.
    Those who fail to grasp art are the ones who criticize it.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    1 hr from everything in SoCal
    Posts
    2,605

    Default

    One set was from Meierlight and another set was from Phenix. Both sets had horrible linearity and exhibited really bad ringing. Granted, my DT-40s have a ringing problem too but it is nowhere near as bad as the PTs. With the set from Phenix, as the bearings "loosened up" from use, the tuning started to shift and needed constant babysitting. The other set had sat, unused, for a while (about 2 years) and one of the galvos seized up completely when I went to use them again. The PT-40s are nice at first, inexpensive and they perform, but over a short period of time, things just fall apart. It is entirely possible that I have had two lemons but I just don't see it. If I were a pro and doing gigs for money, I wouldn't even risk it. Cambridge, EMS, Pangolin or even G-120s would be my only choices.

    In my experience, buying cheap has always been an expensive lesson. Just my $.02.
    Those who fail to grasp art are the ones who criticize it.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •