Thought I would relate my experiences with ATN Thor HD, 19mm, 1.25x, 384(30)
==
Sent this email to ATN on 11/17/2017
==
Sent this message to ATN this morning after spending a couple of hours out last night messing around with new ATN Thor HD, 19mm, 1.25x, 384(50). At an MSRP of $1,999 and a street price of $1,800 or less (I've seen the monocular version on Midway for $1,310) this device could be a market shifter. But given the apparent issues I am hung up on, I would say this unit is not there yet. I think these units use the same cores as the Pulsars, but the pulsar's image are way better, which is disappointing. Maybe ATN can "fix" these units and gain some market share. That would be a good thing for them.
==
ATN Thor HD 19mm, 1.25x, 384(50)
White Hot ... overall impression of wash out symptoms, too much white every where, especially, when looking up. Have tried adjusting contrast (1-5) and brightness (1-5) and no joy.
Black Hot ... can get no image at all period. I am prompted to NUC, which I do, but no image. Adjusted contrast and brightnesss, no joy. Also tried adjusting "thermal sentitivity" from "low" (default) to "medium" also no help. Can see no image with Black Hot, only solid white screen.
Diopter - seems to work fine, was able to get clear sharp reticle.
Focus - seems to work fine - but image remains a little bit fuzzy even with much focus adjustment. Beyond 100 yds, very fuzzy, regardless of focus adjustment.
Zero. Zeroed at 25yds with primos gen2 trigger stick. Was getting quarter inch groups, but regarding windage, I am either on the left edge of the handwarmer or with one click on the right edge of the handwarmer. The click sensitivity seems to be about 1 inch. We need under half inch (half MOA at 100yds would be nice).
==
My use case: I was hoping to use this mostly on .22LR to replace Q-14, 19mm, 1x, 640(30), which I want to use on helmet. Currently using ODIN, 17mm, 1x, 320(30) on helmet. The ODIN has a much clearer image than the Thor HD, 1.25. I was hoping the Thor HD 1.25x would be better. I have had four different pulsars (xd38a, xd50a, xd50 and xd75a) over the past year using I think, the same core as the ATN HD 1.25x and those scopes have great image, better than Armasight and almost as good as IRD (I have IRD Mk2, 35mm, 2.5x, 640(60). But the Thor HD 1.25x image does not rival any of the other thermals I've had (Amrasight Apollo, 42mm, 1x, 324(60), Zeus, 75mm, 3x, 640(30), Zeus Pro, 100mm, 4x, 640(60)). I want to use the Thor HD, 1.25 on the .22lr for "Coop Defense" knocking off coons, opossums, etc. running around our chicken coop at night. The Q-14/.22lr combo has done a great job of that over the past year. But given the fuzziness, the washout, the lack of black hot and the lack of click sensitivity when zeroing, I do not think I would want to use the Thor HD 1.25x. I would be too aware of these combination of shortcomings. Hence I would like to return the Thor HD 1.25x for a refund and ponder what direction to go in next. The attempt to put out a sub $2,000 scope that is actually usable for hunting is a noble one, but don't think the Thor HD, 1.25x is there yet.
Suggested improvements:
01 - Contrast - make it easier to adjust contrast with less button clicks
02 - Brightness - make it easier to adjust brightness with less button clicks
03 - Increase the click sensitivity of the reticle clicks, half inch per click at 100yds would be nice.
04 - Get black hot working
05 - Reduce washout in the image
06 - enable easy switching between black hot and white hot with less button clicks (when doing target ID, toggling between black and white hot, is a normal activity)
07 - Reduce fuzziness in the image - if Pulsar can do it - so can ATN. Check out the Pulsar HD19A handheld spotter. You guys should be able to equal or exceed that unit.
==
Thanks
Joe Wilkerson
xxx
yyy