Comparison between Regular NBZ and NBZ UHS

After yesterday’s my announcement, I had some questions from the current NBZ users. So I made the comparison to clarify the things. The left is a regular NBZ while the right is a UHS.

• First, take a look at each parallel light. UHS is originally more shifted at the longer wavelength side. This is the key and why UHS is more optimized for RASA and HyperStar. Faster optics, more blue shift. So UHS is designed to be perfect when the more blue shift occurs.
• This is the comparison of each transmission rate.

• From these data, what we can see are NBZ is more ideal for regular F2 optics or slower while NBZ UHS is more optimized for RASAF2 or faster. Especially UHS gives most benefit to HyperStar users.
• But keep in mind, you lose signal more and more thru UHS at F4 or slower optics. So if you are looking for one piece solution even if you own such a high speed optics, a regular NBZ is highly recommended. Meanwhile if you seek for the best possible performance with RASAs and HyperStars, UHS is the best choice.

BTW, these blue shift data is the computer simulation. But the original curves (measured with the parallel light) are the ones actually measured from the real production unit. So I’m sure these should be quite close to realistic. I also make clear here IDAS inspected and measured piece by piece with one of Cary’s top-of-the-line spectrophotometers. This is why IDAS is able to provide highly reliable products to you. Please keep in your mind as well.

~ by tedishikawa on July 7, 2021.