THERMAL MONOCULAR SIDE BY SIDE VIDEO IR-PATROL M250, Q-14, PROMETHEUS

[TEXASLAWMAN]

Posted this in the original thread also but for google search sake created its own thread. JFYI the ir patrol has degraded image when using the video out port so added a little bit onto the end using a camera behind the screen. Conditions were very warm and humid mostly during the rain.

 

[dax2323]

Used Q14 last night... Worked well with the headgear.

 

[TEXASLAWMAN]

Used Q14 last night... Worked well with the headgear.

Does yours have the spots at start up is that what you were talking about? Do the go away? This one starts out looking ok but as it warms up and you nuc it the image drastically improves. Which is not a problem since I leave my monocular turned on the whole time I'm out just curious.

 

[dax2323]

Mine doesn't go away.... Almost looks like a watermark

 

[wigwamitus]

Used Q14 last night... Worked well with the headgear.

Did you have a pvs-14 on the other eye? Did you try to look through both at the same time?

 

[dax2323]

No... Don't have a mount and don't really wanna try that...

 

[chthump]

Know for the bad part, cost of units?

 

[TEXASLAWMAN]

Did you have a pvs-14 on the other eye? Did you try to

I do it all the time by just holding the thermal up to my other eye make like a picture and picture tv for me. Most of the time I just close one eye and switch back and forth that way.

 

[wigwamitus]

... I do it all the time by just holding the thermal up to my other eye make like a picture and picture tv for me. Most of the time I just close one eye and switch back and forth that way. ...

Ditto on hold it up ... and the "pic in pic" image ... but I was wondering if the q-14 beside the pvs-14 is any better? (a) it should be hands free and that would be better ... always can find a use for another hand ... and (b) if the images match up close enough they might even line up almost exactly. My "pic in pic" images don't at least for me because I can't get the center line of the apollo along the same center line as the pvs-14 ... relative to my MKIEBs.

The manual nuc for either q-14 or ir-patrol seems like a steep hill to climb, especially if they are two handed processes ... one hand on the button the other hand covered the lens ...

 

[TEXASLAWMAN]

Well if you can't get it holding it anywhere you want how do you think mounted to a helmet with limited movement will work?

 

[wigwamitus]

Because I think the apollo is wider than the pvs-14. With two pvs-14s in dual mount I can get the two 14s aligned with my eyes to where I see good circles through both mounted on the helmet. So with the q-14 with smaller form factor, about the same as pvs-14, mounted on helmet, maybe things will be better.

 

[TEXASLAWMAN]

I do not think it's going to work like you think it will. May work better for you than me everyone's eyes are different.

 

[JPK]

Those who have tried a helmet mounted thermal monocular and a PVS simultaneously for make shift "fushion" pretty uniformly say it doesn't work in so far as being able to cross country or even walk uneven fields or trails safely.

A common if not uniform comment is that the thermal with PVS leads to "brain overload."

Where I am still hoping the Patrol or the Q14 might shine is in a bridge mount like the Mod Armory which allows each unit to swing to the side independently, so you could switch from PVS to thermal quickly, or perhaps even use the units simulateously in some circumstances in the case of the 1x Q14.

At this point, given the pricing, the 300 Patrol's function as a clip on and the battery life (absent the battery pack,) I am favoring the 300 Patrol.

I am trying to set myself and my son up for predator hunting and some hog hunting, and to do it as economically painless as possible. Right now -subject to change by the moment it seems- it looks like two PVS 14's and one 300 Patrol, with one PVS and the Patrol seeing double duty on a weapon. I also have a Photon XT, which is very workable when hunting from a stand or predator set when an IR source is employed (but stand choice and set ups are limited because of the need to select sites where IR reflection from brush, tall grass, limbs, etc, is limited.)

If the budget wasn't a major consideration then four PVS's, two Q14's and a pair of Zeus's or 35mm Hunter MKII's would seem to do the trick!!! At $40k!!!

JPK

 

[chthump]

Looks like the IR Patrol, (in the video) suffered from burn in, on a shooting stick, or the other mono's are picking it up?

 

[wigwamitus]

Well I haven't seen any reports from anyone who has tried them side by side yet. Maybe I missed them! **** posted some vague comments, but I was looking for a detail report like we are getting here.

I have tried Apollo 336(42mm) and PVS-14 side by side while holding the Apollo and that "works" just fine. Sometimes I close one eye to help concentrate brain on image from one device, sometimes not. Sometimes I specifically try to see the merged image, and as TLM says it is "pic in pic" because the images (inputs and outputs) are not the same size.
I'm not up to the level of "thinking" the q-14 (or patrol) will work a certain way if dual mounted, just up to the "hope" level. Until someone tries it and reports, I don't have any data upon which to base a "think it will work" type of thought.
But regardless of whether the images match up, it is still useful to have both images available. I saw a deer once with the thermal and then looked at it immediately with the 14 and realized it was much closer than I thought when looking at it with the thermal.
I don't see any particular need to flip one out of the way, I can close eye if needed. When I go out walking and holding the Apollo up to right eye with 14 on left eye. Sometimes I close an eye, sometimes I don't. Sometimes I lower the Apollo, sometimes I don't. But I'm also hoping the hands free aspect of q-14/ir-patrol will be of benefit. If I carry the trigger stick with one hand, I'd like to have the other hand free for the rifle. Can't have too many free hands!
The report that bugs me the most about the q-14/ir-patrol so far is the "not hands free NUC" process. It even sounds like it is a 2 hand process: 1 hand covering the lens, other hand pressing the nuc button. That might be a show stopper for me. In which case, dropping back to something like the x320 for the thermal scanner might be indicated. It would certainly feel better for the pocket book! I guess I'd better check out the x320 nuc process.

 

[TEXASLAWMAN]

Looks like the IR Patrol, (in the video) suffered from burn in, on a shooting stick, or the other mono's are picking it up?

Yes the patrol requires you to cover the lense but has no lense cap so you hold your hand in front. I noticed it had lost some resolution and nuc'ed it must have not covered it all the way.

 

[JPK]

The advantage of swinging one out of the way is not to have to look through both, or to alternatively close one eye and to still have two hands free.

Re reporta that side by side simultaneous use dosn't work, Sky Pup, **** and others are very adamant, and with the coming of the Patrol have been vocal. Many comments on AR15.com and Predator Master. I think Aaron chimed in with similar comment as well.

Re the NUC, there is a Butler Creek lens cap that fits the Patrol, can't recall which size. Still requires a hand to flip it down. Also, importantly, all reports are, with both the Patrol and the Hunter MKII, leaving the unit on through a hunt - as opposed to turning it on for final approach - leads to substantially less frequent NUC requirements. I'd bet there is a cap that fits the Q14 as well.

Re manual NUC, no weapon mounted mil spec thermal has an auto NUC, they are ALL manual, the reason given that an auto NUC at the wrong time can undue a shooter. For those with the Hunter MKIIs it just doesn't seem to be an issue, at least once the user surrenders to leaving the unit on from beginning of hunt to tend. Same wrt the mil spec FLIRs and L3's. I am not sure if any military thermals have auto NUC.

JPK

 

[TEXASLAWMAN]

The advantage of swinging one out of the way is not to have to look through both, or to alternatively close one eye and to still have two hands free.

Re reporta that side by side simultaneous use dosn't work, Sky Pup, **** and others are very adamant, and with the coming of the Patrol have been vocal. Many comments on AR15.com and Predator Master. I think Aaron chimed in with similar comment as well.

JPK

Skypup / **** are one in the same basically. But many people have told wiggy the same thing he seems intent to see it for himself lol

Re the NUC, there is a Butler Creek lens cap that fits the Patrol, can't recall which size. Still requires a hand to flip it down. Also, importantly, all reports are, with both the Patrol and the Hunter MKII, leaving the unit on through a hunt - as opposed to turning it on for final approach - leads to substantially less frequent NUC requirements. I'd bet there is a cap that fits the Q14 as well.
JPK

My point is the patrol should have came with a lens cap, all the other units did. The MTM, Patrol, and Q14 all required manual nuc. I was responding to the ghost image in the first clip I either had a gap in my fingers or did not cover the bottom portion of the lens when nuc'ing. My error but I still think it needs a lens cap out of the box.

Re manual NUC, no weapon mounted mil spec thermal has an auto NUC, they are ALL manual, the reason given that an auto NUC at the wrong time can undue a shooter. For those with the Hunter MKIIs it just doesn't seem to be an issue, at least once the user surrenders to leaving the unit on from beginning of hunt to tend. Same wrt the mil spec FLIRs and L3's. I am not sure if any military thermals have auto NUC.

JPK

W1000 constantly re nuc'ed its self. As for the auto nuc on the armasight scopes it informs you that it is going to happen and you can cancel it. But it takes a second or less at tops and does not interfere with any shooting, also the manual nuc does not require you to cover the lens. After using the W1000 and the Armasight scopes I find the IR hunters process of closing the lens cap, nuc'ing, then re-opening lens cap to be annoying. For someone who only ever shoots the IR line Im sure it will seem normal. But you lose sight picture completely.

These are small annoyances nothing to not buy or use the scope for the IR Hunter and Patrol both are excellent units for hunting, I really do not think you can go wrong with any of the top brands right now if all you are doing with them is hunting.

 

[JPK]

I'm with Wiggy on at least trying to walk around using thermal. According to SP, you are heading for disaster trying it. He actually "recommends" having an ambulance standing by. Looking at his photos you gotta wonder if tennis might be on the strenuous side for him though. **** seconds his comments, but I take them with a grain of salt, or maybe a pound. I suspect they don't want to piss SP off and want to sell true Fushion devices.

Yes, both the Patrol and the Hunter really ought to come with a cap. Thankfully Butler Creek fills the blank.

IIRC, none of the current weapon mounted military thermals I have read up on do auto nuc. The FLIR T's don't and I don't believe the LWTS does either. Perhaps the change because of the reason given? For my use, hunting and scouting, perhaps a business use as well, I would prefer the option of choosing either auto or manual, with an internal shutter I think. Remembering to nuc the device, especially early on, has got to be a pita.

I wish the Q14 was clip on capable and half or two thirds the price.

JPK

 

[wigwamitus]

dup