IR Hunter MarkII to date
- Thread starter rgilbert
- Start date
Overall, Panasonic, Energizer, and Duracell (no particular order)...Surefire not tested, but is made by Panasonic here in the US as are most other US brands (based on what I have found online).
http://www.powerstream.com/cr123a-tests.htm
Thanks Brian, I have tried the Duracell AA and they are crapolla, panasonic makes great 18650 and I never have a problem w the energizer. I think surefire are rebranded as far as I know they do not mfg batteries or much of anything.
Yeah, I have heard less than glorious things about Duracell. Energizers work well for me as do the Panasonics and Surefires. I know there are some folks that swear by Surefire, but I can't tell that they were terribly impressive. They are fine, but not as amazing as often claimed.
Funny, I have bought duracell from big box retailers and bulk online, I am finding them loose in a battery holder so they are narrower around as well as a tad shorter. They would not work at all in the X-Sight. I have also found that some with good dates were running 1.4-1.38 instead of 1.5v, I am through w them.
With thermals there are many factors to determine magnification/detail, but the best/simplest way to compare thermals is to just go by the FOV and Resolution. The smaller pitch cores require a smaller lens for the same performance. You really are getting something for free here in terms of the size of lens needed for a given result as the manufacturers shrink the sensor size.
For the same reason, if you look at 320 vs. 640 cores in the same device using the same tech in the core, the 640 cores are necessarily larger than the 320's. That means you need a much bigger lens, just to get the SAME magnification on the 640 unit as a 320 one. Without a larger lens, in addition to the higher res core, you are only buying wider FOV.
Here is an example:
1.) IRH mk2 35mm 640 x480 12um 12 deg FOV (2.5x)
2.) FLIR RS64 35mm 640x480 17um 18 deg FOV (1.1x)
3.) FLIR RS32 35mm 320x240 17um 9 deg FOV (2.2x)
4.) FLIR RS64 60mm 640x480 17um 10 deg FOV (2.1x)
Edit to add:
5.)W1000-9 100mm 320x240 ??um 9 deg FOV (3x)
(I dont know this sensor pitch, but it's probably 30+)
The only advantage of #2 over #3 is wider FOV in 1x. When you hit 2x ezoom, you get the same specs as #3 (9 deg FOV (2.2x) @ 320x240). #4 is double the price of #3. Number #1 isnt.
A 12um BAE core device with a 100mm lens would be about 8x with a very narrow FOV. It would be awesome for longish range but almost useless at 50yds with running pigs and there would be no way to "zoom out" from that. A 60mm lens 12um core would give about the same magnification and FOV as your 100mm unit.
There are other things that come into play, but you can go by the FOV and Resolution and really should ignore the lens size. As you can see comparing #1 & #2, if you are looking at lens size and resolution only, you get very different performance.
Last edited:
The 35mm, 60mm, etc specs above are focal length. The F-number (F-Stop/F-Ratio) is lens diamter/focal length. This will give you an idea of how "bright" a lens is. Basically a larger diamter lens with the same focal length will gather more "light" than a smaller diameter lens with the same focal length. I dont see the lens diameter very often in specs on thermals, but the F-number is sometimes given.
TEXASLAWMAN
Lone Star Boars Owner
LSB TURKEY BUZZARD PRESERVATION SOCIETY
SUS VENATOR CLUB
LoneStarBoars Supporter
All I know is a bigger lense = I can see better in bad conditions. I keep hearing people say the new cores do not need the bigger lense but from what I have seen I am not convinced yet.
DaveABQ
Albuquerque, NM
One thing I notice it seems in most of the videos on YouTube of the mark ii is that the detail of the animal or other objects doesn't show the temperature range difference detail.
A hog in black hot is all black vs other cores where they show the hotter and colder parts of the hog like if it was in mud or water. Maybe I haven't watched enough videos lol.
A hog in black hot is all black vs other cores where they show the hotter and colder parts of the hog like if it was in mud or water. Maybe I haven't watched enough videos lol.
I should have my first opportunity to do a lot of back & forth b/t my FLIR HS-307 65mm and the IRD mk2 35mm I picked up recently. Conditions will probably be crappy this weekend. The FLIR is older tech, 27 um I think, but the lens is awesome. I'll report back.
I've never had a change to use any of the Armasight gear, but they look great in your videos!
TEXASLAWMAN
Lone Star Boars Owner
LSB TURKEY BUZZARD PRESERVATION SOCIETY
SUS VENATOR CLUB
LoneStarBoars Supporter
Well I can tell you I have use the 100mm w1000 all the pro line from 30-100mm some thorns the L3 Mtm LWTS, and looked 42mm Apollo 75mm Zeus flir rs. In good conditions it's not that noticeable but when the conditions sucked there is a very noticing difference in detection with lense size. Now after saying all that I may prove myself wrong afrer playing with the ir hunters. But that is not the reports I am getting from users. For everyone's pocket books sake I hope I am wrong!
Keep in mind the video output that gets recorded is of lesser quality than what you see through the viewfinder. With a regular digital camera, the picture you see on the back screen is a scaled down jpg of the image saved to the card. Similar thing here, the video output is a reduced quality image compared to the "actual" image.
Right, but this doesn't address the issue DaveABQ, an experienced hunter/videographer, is noting. We all expect to see through the tube an image that is better than YouTube videos, and for those of us who produce videos, what comes out on video is a relevant part of the scope package. DaveABQ is thinking/indicating that there may be a deficit in the video out capability on the MKII.
This is a possibility, or it could be the DVR setting or something. I really dont know. An iPhone held up to the scope is certainly far from an ideal recording setup, but look how drastically better the video gets doing just that at 3:15 in this video. Live in person, it looks much better than even the iphone part, so that is the upside.
Last edited:
Aren't those videos relative ?
If the DVR limits what you actually see as a YouTube video aren't the limiting factors the same regardless of the brand of thermal device?
Thanks
If the DVR limits what you actually see as a YouTube video aren't the limiting factors the same regardless of the brand of thermal device?
Thanks