FLUX beamo 30W vs FLUX beamo II 30W
| Laser | ||
| Type | CO2 Laser | CO2 Laser |
| Wavelength | 10,600 nm | 10,600 nm |
| Optical Power | 30 W | 30 W |
| Performance | ||
| Work Area | 300 ร 210 mm | 360 ร 240 mm |
| Max Speed | 18,000 mm/min | 45,000 mm/min |
| Focus | Manual | Autofocus |
| Features | ||
| Enclosure | Yes | Yes |
| Air Assist | No | No |
| Rotary Compatible | Yes | Yes |
| WiFi | Yes | Yes |
| Camera | Yes | Yes |
| Physical | ||
| Approx. Price | $1,690 | $2,200 |
| Release Year | 2019 | 2023 |
| Weight | 10.5 kg | 11 kg |
Pros & Cons
FLUX beamo 30W
What we like
- Compact enclosed design โ safe for home and office use
- Built-in camera for visual material positioning
- Polished Beam Studio software โ fully offline, no cloud required
- WiFi, USB, and Ethernet connectivity
- Expandable with rotary and autofocus add-ons
Watch out for
- Small 300ร210mm work area
- Manual focus standard (autofocus is a paid add-on)
- No built-in air assist
- Class 2 only (lid switch) โ not as safe as newer Class 1 models
- Slower than newer FLUX models at 300mm/s
FLUX beamo II 30W
What we like
- Class 1 fully sealed enclosure โ safer than original beamo
- 8MP HD camera for precise material placement
- Built-in autofocus โ no manual focus needed
- Optional CMYK color printing module โ unique in this class
- 750mm/s โ 2.5ร faster than the original beamo
Watch out for
- Currently Japan-market focus; limited global availability
- Higher price than the original beamo
- CMYK printing module sold separately
- No built-in air assist
- 30W limits maximum cutting thickness
Compatible Materials
FLUX beamo 30W
WoodAcrylicLeatherCardboardFabricPaperRubberFoamGlass
FLUX beamo II 30W
WoodAcrylicLeatherCardboardFabricPaperRubberFoamGlass
The FLUX beamo 30W costs $1,690 (23% less) than the FLUX beamo II 30W, which is priced at $2,200.
Both machines share the same 30W optical power rating.
The FLUX beamo II 30W offers a 27% larger work area (360 ร 240 mm vs 300 ร 210 mm).
The FLUX beamo II 30W has a 60% higher maximum speed (45,000 mm/min vs 18,000 mm/min).