PLEASE HELP THERMAL QUESTION!!!!!!!!!!!

[Steven]

As the title says I need some help with what direction to go here. I am building my hog set up and have decided to go with the POF REVOLUTION .308 AR for the rifle, I was going to go with a 6.8spc until I found the POF and cant complain about 7.2lbs for a .308 should make a great gun. Now onto the main subject that I need help with as for Thermal Scopes I have it down to 3 scopes I believe that I like.

The first is
1. ATN THOR-HD 640 2.5x-25x-50mm-30hz I think?
2. PULSAR TRAIL XP50 2x-13x-50mm-50hz
3. ARMASIGHT ZEUS 640 3x-24x-75mm-30hz

I have thought about the ARMASIGHT ZEUS-PRO 640 4x-32x-100mm-30hz but it is alittle more than I am wanting to spend on a scope, unless it is really worth it not sure the difference with a regular ZEUS vs PRO?

So to all the people that have had the chance to use any of these what one would you recommend me to go with I am very new to the thermal scopes so all the help I can get would be very much appreciated, THANKS!!!!!!!

 

[FrankT]

nothing wrong w the Trail and when the new Armasight core comes out it will be the best out there, but may be a bit of a wait, ATN would be my last choice to the point of not thinking about it.

 

[wigwamitus]

Agree, I had a THOR HD 19mm back in November and had to send it back. Screen was 100% white on black hot, regardless of any settings and that was just one of the issues. It was an unfinished thing.

As far as image, the Zeus standard 3x 75mm wins in my experience from your list.

The Trail is "new and cool" so way ahead in that department.

 

[slim_shady]

I have a zues 336 42mm a buddy has a 32 trail. The pulsars cost less but the zues will offer a much better image. I wish a had waited and saved the extra coin to get the 75mm. If your spending that kind of coin I'd seriously consider the ir hunter mkIII. After watching Brian's videos its clearly the best image for the money.

 

[Hard_ware]

Here is what the MKIII looks like thru the lens.
100yds to power pole and 300yds to stadium lights.
Set the settings to 1080 for best video.

 

[slim_shady]

Yep best image for the money.

 

[Steven]

I have looked at the MKIII just a lot of coin to swallow, what is the difference with the Zeus and Zeus Pro

 

[der Teufel]

Yep best image for the money.

I might make a slight distinction here …
The IR Hunter MKIII 60mm seems to have excellent image resolution. Whether it's the best image for the money might be subjective. There are other options that provide good image quality for less money, and in terms of 'value for money' they might be considered a better 'deal'. That is, they offer a pretty good image for less money.

Yeah, we're kind of arguing semantics here, rather than technical issues.

Having said that, I'm considering getting a MKIII 60mm unit myself, because it does seem to be the 'top of the line' item.

 

[Steven]

I think for me its down to the Trail XP50 and the Trijicon IRMK3-35mm there is a big price difference so I need to look for into it and maybe test some out. I like the IRMK3-60mm but I think for my hunting I do it will be to much Magnification and the FOV will be to small. 95% of all my shots are 50-150yards most being in the range of 30-75yards. I do like the Zeus but have been told by many that the XP50 is pretty damn equal, its a tough one for me because I do like the clear image but how much more clear it is over the XP50 VS the $3,000 price tag above it not sure if that's worth it to me.

 

[der Teufel]

… not sure if that's worth it to me.

And THAT is the real decision factor. How much (image) quality do you NEED, and what are you willing to PAY for it?
The basic discussion in these cases is not just Quality but Value. Value can be subjective, and different users will assign different values to various features.

Good Luck in your quest for the best value scope.

 

[FrankT]

going to record? the Trail does that, the Trij does not without more equipment

 

[Steven]

Idk at first I didn't think I would but the more time I think about it it would be nice to record. I think for the money the XP50 is best bang for your buck, and the battery life is about double that of the Trij.

 

[Hard_ware]

Yep, a costly pill to swallow. But looking thru it puts a smile on my face , I work with electronics and image capture and processing everyday . And damn the picture blows me away. Is it needed NO, many other units have great images and nice built in features that are very nice. But so far they don't give me the damn that looks bada$$ clear. I would get rid of all my other thermals before parting with the MKIII . Really want a M300w just can't afford it as family comes first, and probably be that way for years to come, unless I win the lotto then Trijicons for all LSB members

Only thing is I don't play the lotto.

 

[Steven]

Hell the M300W is cheaper than the MK3, well 60mm one anyways.

 

[wigwamitus]

<<what is the difference with the Zeus and Zeus Pro>>

I've owned both ...

The Zeus 75mm, 3x, 640(30) is lighter and smaller.
The Zeus pro 100mm, 4x 640(60) has a set of fancier reticles that provide some support for longer distance shooting. And it is rated for .50BMG recoil, which the Zeus Std is not.

I think I had one of the "earlier" ZP 100s and even though the software was upgraded to the latest and greatest, I'd say the Zeus Std had a clearer image. Armasight told me that was because of the 60hz. So they said the 60hz version of the ZP 100 was actually less clear than the 30hz version. Well I had the 60hz version.

So, anyway, based on my experience with them, for hunting, I would rather take the 75mm 3x, because it had a clearer image AND because it has less magnification. The primary reason I sold the ZP 100 was because 4x magnification was too much magnification for me when hunting. One night was I out there with 2 coyotes one to the West and one to the East ... I could hear them within 200yds, but I was swinging the gun around trying to get them in my sights and by the time I did they were headed away ... then I think if I was in a field of multiple sounders swinging the gun around looking for the runners after the first volley, I might not see one running in on me. So for hunting, I would much rather have the 35mm Mk3 or equivalent ... 3x magnification max for hunting for me. The vast majority of my shots have been under 100yds, at that distance 1x is plenty of magnification, 2x might be perfect, 3x is the max.
Now in open country, like I've been in around Wichita Falls, a lot of magnification is useful for long distance spotting. So the M250XR would be great as a spotter. But I'd rather have less magnification on the gun scope unless I was mostly shooting over 100yds. So I see the 60mm Mk3 as carrying the LR spotter on the gun. But if I was going to do that, I'd want at least one other team mate to have less magnification to improve team chances to get any hogs running in.

The ZP100 is good for LR target shooting, say out to 500yds on heated steel, using the "mil-box" reticle. The Zeus Std can do that, but holding for wind with the Zeus std has to be done by judging off the target.

Comparing ZP100 to Mk3 35mm ... once we saw 40+ hogs at 1200yds heading in a line ... and we switched guns back and forth to compare the images and it was the same ... both devices were on black hot and both were on 2x digital. So effectively the ZP 100 was 8x and the Mk3 35mm was 5x, but as to clarity, the images were the same. This was May around Wichita Falls, so not crazy humid.

My Mk3 35mm is my "go to" scope for night hunting.

I've thought a lot about "upgrading" to a 60mm ... that would provide a better LR spotting capability ... and I might do it one day ... but for my use cases it still seems like having wider FOV trumps having more magnification.

If price is an issue, get a mk2 35mm, or even a mk2 19mm. You can upgrade either to the mk3 35mm or the mk3 60mm. You can get in to the BAE core and spread out your spending by upgrading later. They all have the same core and display.

 

[Steven]

Well I think after talking to some good people on here I am going to get the XP50 Trail and take the money I save and buy a Modern Outfitters MC6 6.8spc

 

[Curly Shuffle]

IR Hunter MKII and call ******** *******************. THERMAL THERMAL!!

 

[Steven]

IR Hunter MKII and call ******** *******************. THERMAL THERMAL!!

May be right I might have to look at those, I wasn't since they had the MK3's

 

[Drift]

Me ,I think the Pulsar is "good enough". I don't see the need to spend more $. But it is true that the more you spend the better the technology is. The Armasight is a hog killing machine.

 

[Hard_ware]

Hell the M300W is cheaper than the MK3, well 60mm one anyways.

Yep but like I said I won't part with the MKIII, I am too lazy to walk hundreds of yards to get PID on a critter. I have a franken battery pack that uses swappable dual 18650 batts and clips on the MKIII and I can run it all night no problem. I just whip out the MKIII and see it's a jack rabbit at 400yds, or no it's a cottontail, or using the radius LRF it's cattle 1400yds away.
Keep in mind the areas you hunt will dictate what will be of best use to you. Only reasons I would like the m300w is to use for walking around vs my flir franken binoculars. The image quality from the IR hunter unit is much much better and PID can be made easier. I can still spot jack rabbits 400yds away with the binos, I just can't PID them with the binos. Now with the hunter getting shot mistaken for a hog the PID issue is getting a lot of attention.

A good all around setup would be the m300w with a 3x lens so you can scan off the rifle then attach it when targeting and use the 3x lens when needed for PID. If I didn't hunt open fields that would be the setup I would use.