WHICH LASER LENS IS BEST? | 2" VS 4" LASER LENS COMPARISON 

I have just ordered next to the 2" which came with my CO2 laser I will try it and report back

@@bacsijancsi nice

@@MakerExperiment :-) Sorrily my laser uses the smallest lens size 12mm and I even cannot buy a 1,5" lens, 2" is the smallest, with the 2" I got about 7mm distance from the surface of the material with the 4" I think it will be about 2" more than that... theoretically :-)

Thank you. I try my best to be clear, concise, and most importantly accurate in the information I give.

I’m glad it is helpful. I will look into the DPI video.

From my experience I would not go more that 300dpi with a 1.5 lens, I was able to get good clarity both photo and text, I used to make necklaces engraved on maplewood with coat of arms for different countries 2" to 4" sizes, every little detail was there nothing was lost, 600dpi is a waste of time imo unless your making a huge image

I’m glad I could help.

I try my best. Thanks for watching.

Thank you for watching!

Good info. I've been thinking of picking up a 1.5 to experiment with higher detail. Interesting on the glass tube. I've never seen one in person (consumer model that is). Sites always talk about how the beam is continuous. I used to work on medical equipment, including surgical lasers. The CO2 surgical lasers had glass tubes, but they were much more robust than consumer models. The tubes were larger. I'm going to bet the power supplies on the consumer lasers are to blame for the up and down. Power output on the surgical laser was steady, which is obviously something you want when you're pointing it at someone's insides. Foot switch activated. Just point the red dot and press. Focal length was huge. I can't remember how long the laparoscope was, but it was more than 12", and the focal spot was a bit further than that. I'd love to see a metal tube CO2 surgical laser today.

@@ChipLinck RF lasers are leap years ahead of glass and yes alot has to do with power supply, RF is just direct on off power none of that wave stuff, its able to engrave accurate and precise even if the material isn't completely flat, the tube lasers are wishy washy, yes the get the job done but its not as clean as the RF, I guess that's why they cost so much, also far less time fiddling with mirrors and focus length and cleaning this and that, I also waste a ton of material with the glass machines, have to run jobs 2-3 times before it cuts through

​@@farouqiamin7894Also glass tube have better cutting properties than rf. Also difference in engraving quality is minor. Rf just not worth the money if you need simple engraving and not ultra small logo which you barely can even see with naked eye

Thanks for watching!

If the center of your cup on the rotary is wider than the top or bottom, I’d focus to the outer edges making sure the center won’t get hit by the laser head. If you don’t focus to the outer edges, it won’t engrave all the way through. That being said, being too close in the center could have a similar issue. It really depends on the cup and tinkering to find the best results.

I’ve never done that to be honest. If you’re just engraving and the 2” lens clears everything, I would try that one.

Thank you!

I don’t work from a script so I may have.

That’s good. I usually just use the standard that come with it unless I need a lens for specific usages.

Thank you!

Thank you!

I did some discussion on it. The 4” lens makes a bigger spot size. In my opinion, you may be able to cut with a 4” but you typically get a better finish with a 2” because it has a smaller spot size. I hope that answers your question. In the end, the 4” lens claims to be better for cutting but in my experience it depends on the material.

I have a much easier time cutting 1/2" wood with the 4" lens vs the 2" lens. Since getting the 4" in hand, I haven't used the 2" at all. For what I engrave, it works perfectly, and cutting is much quicker and cleaner on the 4" lens. This is on a Fusion Pro48 though, so results may vary on different machines. My auto focus works the same between 2" and 4" lenses on this machine.

@@JMackin1016 glad you’re having a good experience. I am surprised that autofocus works without setting it for each lens.

@@MakerExperiment on the Fusion Pro48, when you look on the lens tube, the 2" lens is near the bottom of the tube, and the 4" lens is near the top of the tube. They moved where the lens is placed inside the tube, so that your auto/manual focus works the same across all lenses.

@@JMackin1016 ah okay. They didn’t do that for the Fusion edge. That makes more sense now.

I have to use a marking spray for stainless steel. I’d have to look up settings but they’re on the spray manufacturers website as recommendations.

At some point I will try. I need to make some funds to do that one.

It came with my machine.

I’ll take your opinion into consideration. I will say that I’ve had varied results with manufacturers lenses but much better results with some manufacturers than others.

@@MakerExperiment I find your observation interesting. Having noticed differences in performance from different manufacturers, have you never been curious enough to investigate why the differences? Is it material quality or lens geometry? I also note that you are using an Epilog machine for your tests. Although it's a CO2 laser, it is an RF laser source. This means it will never be an efficient cutting beam because it will have passed through a beam expander to control 7 or 8 millirads beam divergence. That causes suppression of peak intensity and it is intensity (not power) that is required for efficient cutting. I have both glass tube and RF machines and there is a chasm in cutting performance. You note the different cutting performance on 1/2" acrylic but offer no explanation as to why.... are you not curious about such anomalies? Best wishes Russ

@@SarbarMultimedia I am curious. With everything I balance, I have a very finite amount of time that I can use for this stuff and I just haven’t had the time to investigate it further. I’m always interested to know why, I just don’t always have the time to do it. It’s on my ever growing list of things I want to do.

@@MakerExperiment I can see you are a busy guy and I fully understand your dilemma. I bought my machines as a retirement activity with no intention of revenue generation. I soon found out that there was a huge amount of misunderstanding, myth, ignorance and outright fraud in this non-metal cutting branch of laser technology. Thus with the luxury of a wide engineering background, and no time or financial pressures, I have been fascinated by decoding the many technically misunderstood aspects of this technology. It has taken me 3 years to fully decode how lenses work in conjunction with a laser beam and its been a bit of an eye opener, because even the lens manufacturers do not understand the way that laser beams exploit weaknesses in spherical lens geometry. After all (as most of them say) they design and make high quality products in accordance with well established optical laws, they are not USERS of the lenses. Their claims are based on theory and not practice.. As I mentioned in a previous comment, take a few moments and fire a focused beam at thin card to see how simple it is to prove their claims wrong. Please be assured I am not criticizing any of the great work you are doing. Best wishes Russ

@@SarbarMultimedia according to Epilogs specs (help pages) the spotsize on the 2" lens are from 0.004" to 0.007", so I wouldnt say that it would be impossible :) But of course that's not 0.0017" But to the naked eye, it wouldnt matter much :) What Trevor does, is give some good tips and advice for his lasers, while you work on your Co2 lasers (and RF) and help people with those 😁 You've helped me a few times in the past, before I got my Epilog machine 😁

I’m aware of what you focus to. The point I was making is the travel of the head extended past the diameter of my box and will cause the lens to crash into it. Therefore, focusing the material at the bottom of the box will make the lens carriage hit it. Is it possible with experimentation and messing up and hitting it a lot along the way, sure, but most people will cause more damage.