New EYEMAGIC Scanners EMS7000

[Solarfire]

Regarding the swisslas pic, I would agree, it's clear that the X axis scanner is not running fast enough to keep up, however the Y axis scanner is. Regarding the picture that you linked to from buffo's review, actually, that is doing 50K at 6.5 degrees just fine, the circle is being drawn correctly. There are other concerns in the image though, such as the ringing on the middle horizontal line on the left side. I see this as a problem. While I don't fully understand why this is happening, I've seen this problem on quite a few scanners from China. This can also be seen on the 4 short horizontal lines below the square.

DZ you’re missing the point. The point is both of the scanners mentioned here don't meet up to what they claim, but in both cases they have been proclaimed as acceptable. The reason I even got into this discussion was due to the fact that this thread was turned into a Pangolin propaganda thread, if you can’t put the spotlight on your own product just take it off of the competition. So obviously my posts took some of the wind out of these sails and now that it’s gotten quieter here, for pretty obvious reasons, we are going over to hairsplitting. Besides that, there’s still no one posting any challenging pictures of their ultra-mega scanners???? Like I said, “If you can’t put the spotlight on your own product, take it off of the competition”.

[White-Light]

Yes, I’m aware of how the ILDA frame should look ideally. So if you look at this scan in this link (page bottom) of the ILDA frame scanned by a set of CT6215s then they are obviously also not meeting up to spec since the circle is not touching the square left and right and that @ 58kpps 8°.

Ct's are specified to 7.5° at 60K. That extra 1/2° could make the difference or it could just be the X scanner isn't tuned properly to 60K.

That pattern looks pretty much textbook to me that slight X difference aside.

So take your pick of scanners and show me the ILDA frame @ 60kpps 10° then we’ll discuss the results again.

There's no scanner company I know of other than maybe EMS (not seen the claims myself) that allegedly claims 10°. As I said above Cambridge claim 7.5° for their scanners.

I believe the ILDA test specifies 7-8° for 60K.

[DZ]

There's no scanner company I know of other than maybe EMS (not seen the claims myself) that allegedly claims 10°.

Here you go: http://www.eyemagic.gr/downloads/ems-7000.pdf

Says it's the fastest scanner on planet earth. I think it's great if it's true, just haven't seen the proof yet.

I think the ringing are mirror resonances which happem with too thin mirrors. Especially chinese scanners often use very thin mirrors as a cheap way to reduce inertia and increase scan speed. But if the mirrors are too thin they can bend resonantly and lead to such oscillations.

Interesting, guess I didn't think about that but perhaps that could be the culprit!

[Solarfire]

Ct's are specified to 7.5° at 60K. That extra 1/2° could make the difference or it could just be the X scanner isn't tuned properly to 60K.

That pattern looks pretty much textbook to me that slight X difference aside.


There's no scanner company I know of other than maybe EMS (not seen the claims myself) that allegedly claims 10°. As I said above Cambridge claim 7.5° for their scanners.

I believe the ILDA test specifies 7-8° for 60K.

The scan speed is @ 58kpps @ 8° tuned by swisslas, so I take it this is the optimal tuning with these parameters BUT when hairsplitting not up to par..

[Solarfire]

Here you go: http://www.eyemagic.gr/downloads/ems-7000.pdf

Says it's the fastest scanner on planet earth. I think it's great if it's true, just haven't seen the proof yet.




Interesting, guess I didn't think about that but perhaps that could be the culprit!

DZ, I'm currently busy retuning just to satisfy your perception of what’s necessary to pass the holy grail scanner test, the one and only ILDA frame. Stay tuned, get tuned, or what ever…

[DZ]

DZ, I'm currently busy retuning just to satisfy your perception of what’s necessary to pass the holy grail scanner test, the one and only ILDA frame. Stay tuned, get tuned, or what ever…

My perception? IT'S AN INDUSTRY STANDARD, geez! Why rate lasers in mW? Why not just say this one is bright, this one is brighter and this one is really freakin bright! Anyway, if you have a better way of measuring scanner performance, by all means, submit it to ILDA. Maybe you can come up with the next generation ILDA test pattern, ya never know!

[Solarfire]

My perception? IT'S AN INDUSTRY STANDARD, geez! Why rate lasers in mW? Why not just say this one is bright, this one is brighter and this one is really freakin bright! Anyway, if you have a better way of measuring scanner performance, by all means, submit it to ILDA. Maybe you can come up with the next generation ILDA test pattern, ya never know!

Relax, it wasn’t meant bad dude, just came over wrong. But any way here a picture of the current setting, these scanners appear to have a sweet spot between 60 and 64kpps, the scan was too slow before, I upped the scan rate to 64kpps. I’m going to start working my way down until the spot is hit. I don’t have any more time now but I’ll pick up here tomorrow. You also have to get the feel on how to adjust these.

You got to admit, I’m walking it in there, just a little to go and it’s going to be over 60kpps @ 10°, yeah buddy!

CT Killers?

[dzodzo]

So take your pick of scanners and show me the ILDA frame @ 60kpps 10° then we’ll discuss the results again.

i tried to fiddle with CT6125H in the kvant but i'm not able to get good result with 60k and 10 degree angle, either the circle is outside the box or rest of the image is not blanked correctly, i will try tomorrow down in the kitchen since for 1,7 m distance it's only a 60cm image so it's hard do distinguish the detail, will also try lower angles (at longer distance, say 5 meters) and let you know

[norty303]

Surely if the circle is outside the box, then you could go faster still?

[dzodzo]

yes but then the circle begins to look distorted so i guess that's not good as well