Quality of Image

[darrohn801]

Below are a couple of videos from last night hunting. The scope must have been put on in a different spot because it was shooting high all night. This is video from an armasight zeus 640 42mm at about 100 yards for each fox. I'm trying to see if this is about par for video at something like this at that distance? These were digitally zoomed in to 8x so I understand there will be some pixelation.

I am seriously considering switching over to the IR defense MKII after seeing the clarity in my IR patrol. Anyone have any thoughts on the clarity difference between the two scopes? Any suggestions to sharpen up the image on the armasight?

164844 (online-video-cutter.com).mp4

151936 (online-video-cutter.com).mp4

 

[keatonskidmore]

You say you understand there will be some pixelation. But do you understand what it's doing when it zooms? It cuts the image in half pretty much. 640 at native magnification. Then 2x zoom cuts that to ~320. 4x even further and so on and so on. 8x zoom is around ~100p on resolution. So when you zoom in it degrades the image considerably. The IR defense model won't fix that unlesss you get the 60mm IR hunter 3. Which has 4.5x native magnification I believe. But in that size you could switch to the Zeus 75mm 3x or the Zeus pro 100mm 4x.

Also as a side note those looked a little further than 100 yards. More like 150-200. Just from my guessing and me using my 640 42mm last night to shoot hogs and a coyote.

 

[darrohn801]

You say you understand there will be some pixelation. But do you understand what it's doing when it zooms? It cuts the image in half pretty much. 640 at native magnification. Then 2x zoom cuts that to ~320. 4x even further and so on and so on. 8x zoom is around ~100p on resolution. So when you zoom in it degrades the image considerably. The IR defense model won't fix that unlesss you get the 60mm IR hunter 3. Which has 4.5x native magnification I believe. But in that size you could switch to the Zeus 75mm 3x or the Zeus pro 100mm 4x.

Also as a side note those looked a little further than 100 yards. More like 150-200. Just from my guessing and me using my 640 42mm last night to shoot hogs and a coyote.

I understand it is a digital zoom which gives it the pixelation, just wondering if the images I"m seeing are on "par"for the equipment I have and if other devices like the MKII or even the 75mm would compare or if I can do some adjustments to get an even clearer picture. You are probably right I would guess 150 yards for the shots sounds reasonable. So hard to tell at night and through a thermal scope but I am familiar with the area in the day so I have a pretty good idea.

I guess my main point too was that the IR patrol with a 19mm lense seems to produce such a more clear image than the zeus with a 42mm lense. That is why I was curious about going to the MKII 35mm lense for people who have used them. The 75mm or 100mm zeus may be a good option too.

 

[Brian Shaffer]

For a given resolution, magnification, and micro pitch, a larger lens will tend to do better than a smaller lens.

IRD scopes tend to run a smaller micron pitch which means you can get a better image out of a smaller lens.

Generally speaking, the higher the resolution, the better image.
The greater the native magnification, the better the image.
The lower the micron pitch, the better the image.
The larger the lens, the better the image.

Then there is the firmware as well.

Also note that generally speaking, the larger the lens, the heavier the scope and often the more expensive the scope as the lens is a major component cost.
If the native magnification is too great, the scope may not be as useful.
As of yet, I have never heard of too much resolution, LOL.

 

[theblakester]

Your Zeus 640 has a 17 micron core (2017 flir/armasight are starting to use their own 12 micron cores). It also has a native magnification of 2x. The MKII 35 has a 12 micron core (better) and a 2.5x. So it starts out zoomed in a little more and with a little more clarity.

 

[darrohn801]

Your Zeus 640 has a 17 micron core (2017 flir/armasight are starting to use their own 12 micron cores). It also has a native magnification of 2x. The MKII 35 has a 12 micron core (better) and a 2.5x. So it starts out zoomed in a little more and with a little more clarity.

That makes sense. Have any of you used the magnifiers that go on the IR patrols? Does this act like a true magnification like you would get on a 3X lens?

 

[theblakester]

Never used one but I believe it is supposed to

 

[keatonskidmore]

You also need to take into account the cost of a patrol and a zoom lens vs the cost of a better Zeus or as flir is going to call them R series or something like that. Is the $1500-2000 price difference worth the minimal gains? Sounds like you just want one with a little more magnification.
Plus the IR defense has some trade offs like having to Nuc with the lens covered and a few others. Your Zeus you have now has excellent clarity on close to medium range stuff because of the wide field of view. If you want something for further range I'd look into a larger lens and more native magnification.

And maybe zero your scope in better lol.

 

[keatonskidmore]

Just realized you said you already have a patrol. My bad lol.
They definitely have more detail but I think I can spot better at longer distances with the Zeus scopes.

 

[Bacon8tor]

You can send your Zeus in and have them put the 3x lens on it. Don't know how much that costs though.

 

[TEXASLAWMAN]

Flir will all be 12 micron from now on. Armasight always used the best lenses now with the combo of the new 12 micron core. The slight resolution edge IRD had won't be there anymore. I'll have to watch your video when I have better cell service but you are shooting at 80 resolution any scope will look bad in my opinion. 640 optical, 320 2x, 160 4x, 80 8x.


If you are wanting to shoot foxes at 100 yards you chose the wrong thermal, one with higher magnification would be better. Even at 3x hogs look smallish a fox is much smaller.

 

[darrohn801]

Flir will all be 12 micron from now on. Armasight always used the best lenses now with the combo of the new 12 micron core. The slight resolution edge IRD had won't be there anymore. I'll have to watch your video when I have better cell service but you are shooting at 80 resolution any scope will look bad in my opinion. 640 optical, 320 2x, 160 4x, 80 8x.


If you are wanting to shoot foxes at 100 yards you chose the wrong thermal, one with higher magnification would be better. Even at 3x hogs look smallish a fox is much smaller.

Thanks for the feedback. What would you suggest for Fox and coyote hunting out to a couple hundred yards? I think I'm either going to upgrade to the Zeus 75mm or hunter mkii. Also, do you know when the flir optics will start being released with the 12 micron sensor?

 

[Drift]

I would love to hear how the 12 micron core compares to last years 17 micron one.

 

[cincoranchhntr]

Reading this discussion makes me glad I have spent the time to put together my homemade IR setup. I can zoom right in on a hog at 150 yds with clarity in total darkness and pop him as if it were mid day. I feel vindicated, thanks.

 

[darrohn801]

Reading this discussion makes me glad I have spent the time to put together my homemade IR setup. I can zoom right in on a hog at 150 yds with clarity in total darkness and pop him as if it were mid day. I feel vindicated, thanks.

Why don't you post some videos and make us all jealous? So far you have talked a lot but shown nothing. The thing you are forgetting is finding the animal first and you will find way more animals with thermal than night vision.

 

[TEXASLAWMAN]

Reading this discussion makes me glad I have spent the time to put together my homemade IR setup. I can zoom right in on a hog at 150 yds with clarity in total darkness and pop him as if it were mid day. I feel vindicated, thanks.

Thermal way outperforms night vision in 99% of situations, darrohn just chose a 2x magnification scope for a job requiring more magnification.

 

[keatonskidmore]

Thermal way outperforms night vision in 99% of situations, darrohn just chose a 2x magnification scope for a job requiring more magnification.

Especially digital night vision..

 

[JPK]

We kill a lot of fox and some coyote (because we don't have that many coyotes around) with a Pulsar 50S, which is native 2x, and with an IR Defense MK II, with 2.5x native. 2-2.5x is plenty of magnification for fox at 100yds, even raccoons or opossums, without digital zoom. 2x digital zoom can be useful though. Mostly, we just let them come in further, which they ware wont to doof you are using a caller, so we are more often shooting fox close. Coyotes might average near 100yds. Not infrequently double or triples on fox.

The problem with more native magnification is that it provides less field of view. Less FOV = less fox killed and particularly less multiples, in my experience.

The image in your first video - before magnification - suffers from the FLIR washout, which is intrinsic to their view of proper software buffering/processing. But no 640 unit, let alone a lesser resolution unit, looks good past 4x, imo.

I don't know what bullet you are using, but something softer, more explosive might be warranted. You clearly hit that second one, and he was leaving a blood trail, but though the shot was, imo, a little low, he should have keeled over.

The magnifier lenses available for the Patrol are NOT colimated and will shift POI unpredictably!!! They are for scanning NOT shooting. (As told to me by multiple sources.)

Thermal is better than Gen 3 NV almost all of the time, digital NV 100% of the time. There are plenty of cobbled together digital NV set ups using "remote" monitors. Every guy I know who has gone that route ends up with thermal, except one guy who ended up with Gen 3. I started with digital NV and found it intriguing, but very limiting. Quickly moved on to Gen 3 and thermal. Thermal rules. It will make Gen 3 obsolete in a few years, I think. Maybe not filmless white phosphor though.

JPK

 

[TEXASLAWMAN]

Night vision will not be obsolete until thermal can see through glass.

I prefer 3x for shooting within 100 yards but 5x for the longest shots. With night vision or thermal the 2x units just seem to make a target at 50 yards look like 100 yards away to my eyes at least.

 

[robininni]

Night vision will not be obsolete until thermal can see through glass.

I prefer 3x for shooting within 100 yards but 5x for the longest shots. With night vision or thermal the 2x units just seem to make a target at 50 yards look like 100 yards away to my eyes at least.

What 640 thermal scopes have 5x mag? I see the IR Hunter Mark3 60mm has 4.5 but man is it pricey. ATN, which I know you don't care for, has the Thor 640 HD 5x 100mm but I doubt it is really 5x based upon the FoV they give for that scope. Zeus 640 Pro 100mm says 4x but is really 3.5x if you look at the specs and the Zeus 640 75mm which says 3x is really 2.7x.

So it seems, from what I have found, that in the 'reliable' 640 class the Mark3 60mm, which in my opinion just costs one too many appendages, is the only thing that approaches 5x as a single thermal scope solution. Is there another choice I missed or is 5x or more only achievable with a clip on thermal scope?