[SteveM]

That's not a laser.

Being an optical designer by trade and having created and assembled lasers myself, I can give a few pointers.

A laser illuminating the subject will be a wonderful help for an AF system. The concept is great, but they did not invent it (I've been using red lasers with hologram tips bought at the dollar store to focus for a long time). Sony also had a red laser AF assist system on their compacts a few years back.

Laser light is not ALWAYS dangerous for human eyes, but if you're not sure then assume it is. Anything above a class I laser will be dangerous at some point, a class III or IIIa will be instantaneously damaging, a class II after a few seconds.

for static subjects, with the camera on a tripod, this would work well. For moving subjects or when the camera is moving, even slightly, it will not work well.

If you're interested in this concept, get yourself a cheap laser pointer sold with holograms (making cute patterns like stars or flowers) and this will help you focus. No need to pay 150$ for a green laser.

I think many aren't comfortable with the use of a laser, but has anyone extended the green light into something more powerful and focused than what is on the camera now but less than a low power laser? It might be a mute point if it only works well for static subjects though. Thanks for the info....

[bdery]

I still wonder about the impact of reflected laser light on the sensor though.

That's insignificant, except (depending on the laser intensity) when reflected on a mirror.

a mute point

you mean moot point? Just to be sure.

but has anyone extended the green light into something more powerful and focused than what is on the camera now but less than a low power laser?

I'm not sure I understand. You ask if, in general, there are light sources more powerful than the green light on your camera, but less powerful than a low-power laser?

If so, the answer is yes and no. The green light is a LED. Just as with any light source, you can make a LED more or less powerful.

You mention "more focused" What makes a laser is not, per say, that it's well collimated (many lasers emit at broad angles). What makes a laser a laser is the amplification process taking place inside it, not the size of the point that it generates.

[SteveM]

Yes moot.... I was wondering what one might use to obtain the benefit of the "pinpoint" product without the negative aspects of using a laser.

[opfor]

Something I saw on another forum last year. "Find an old remote control, have someone change the channel on your subject while you shoot."
Allegedly, digital cameras will see the IR beam from the remote bouncing off objects if they are not more that 10 to 15 feet away. Haven't tried it myself, might be worth a laugh. The other option was to take the LED from a remote and replace the LED bulb in an LED flashlight and use that.

[Ben_Edict]

The problem with the green lasers is, that their wavelength lies within the highest sensibility of the human eye. So even a green laser which complies to regulations will perhaps not cause permament damage to the eye, but it may blind people. This is, why there is at least one case, where somebody was brought to court for blinding an aircraft pilot with a green laser and why this is strongly prohibited in the UK and other countries. Red lasers emit a wavelength where the eye is much less sensitive. Anyway, using a laser for illumination purposes where even a remote possibility exists, that it might get into the eyes of humans or animals is a bad idea.
I have found, that the red AF assist light of my Metz flash guns is fine under most circumstances. And so I guess any beam projector would fit the purpose easily.

[DeadJohn]

Tangent warning.

Google "clark gable laser". Yes, that Clark Gable. You might ordinarily expect a page of hits regarding the laserdisc version of Gone with the Wind, but his grandson did something very stupid with a laser and just got sentenced to 10 days jail.

[Sagitta]

Regarding lasers and sensors...

Lasers can damage your Canon HDSLR camera's CMOS sensor | planet5D - HDSLR community

Granted these are the big industrial light show types, but I imagine you could fry a nice little dot on your sensor from a reflected laser pointer if you were particularly unlucky enough.

[Docrwm]

Regarding lasers and sensors...

Lasers can damage your Canon HDSLR camera's CMOS sensor | planet5D - HDSLR community

Granted these are the big industrial light show types, but I imagine you could fry a nice little dot on your sensor from a reflected laser pointer if you were particularly unlucky enough.

That's what I was talking about in my earlier post. Frankly, any laser could potentially damage the sensory if its focused beam hits it. Dispersed light just doesn't pose the danger of damage to the sensor and so I'm just going to stay away from lasers and dSLRs.

[bdery]

I was wondering what one might use to obtain the benefit of the "pinpoint" product without the negative aspects of using a laser.

One might use a lens.

Something I saw on another forum last year. "Find an old remote control, have someone change the channel on your subject while you shoot."
Allegedly, digital cameras will see the IR beam from the remote bouncing off objects if they are not more that 10 to 15 feet away.

That could work, but IR is near the detection limit of CCDs and CMOS (the ones used for cameras, that is). I'm not sure the gain would be that impressive, and TV remotes are not really powerful light sources.

So even a green laser which complies to regulations will perhaps not cause permament damage to the eye, but it may blind people.

"complies to regulation" does not make sense here There are laser safety standards, and those are used to classify the intensity of a laser. A class I laser is eye safe, a class II is eye safe for brief exposures (less than 10 seconds, or accidental exposure if you will). III and above are not eye safe.

Those norms are defined for specific spot sizes and distances, beam divergences, etc. A laser that is classified as eye safe WILL BE eye safe.

[DaveHolmes]

I carry a torch (in fact sometimes 4 torches, 3 of which with coloured gels gaffer'd on) in my camera bag for those lowlight-focusing issuse (and a bit of painting!)...

Lasers is just a little bit Ronald McPresident for me (If it ain't made in Japan, Thailand or China I don't bloody trust it!!)... I'll use the force (and my torch if need be)

[Ben_Edict]

"complies to regulation" does not make sense here There are laser safety standards, and those are used to classify the intensity of a laser. A class I laser is eye safe, a class II is eye safe for brief exposures (less than 10 seconds, or accidental exposure if you will). III and above are not eye safe.

Those norms are defined for specific spot sizes and distances, beam divergences, etc. A laser that is classified as eye safe WILL BE eye safe.

"Regulations" makes full sense, because it is simply not allowed to sell or buy lasers with an output of more than 0.5 mW in Germany (in the UK the sale is prohibited, but not purchasing one), whatever safety class sticker is put on it. Also, only Class 1 and 2 lasers are legal for private use, anything of Class 3 and above must be declared as a tool and laser pointers do not count as such. German customs will now regularily confiscate green lasers from parcels coming in from China (the usual ebay stuff), because the often exceed this power limit.

One interesting story, by the way: My first eye injury...

Ben