Night vison scopes

[Harley469]

You really get what you pay for in the world of night optics. I started out about 7yrs ago with an ATN and it was "ok", but was really only good out to about 100yrds. I looked through my buddy's 3rd generation Armasight clip on, and it was like turning on the light switch. Of course that was a $3000 optic. Anyway, about a month ago I bought a 5th generation ATN day/night scope for my crossbow. I had read horror stories online about it but figured I could just return it if it didn't work. Sure enough, when I tried to update the firmware it bricked it and ATN asked me to send it to them. I simply sent it back to Amazon for a refund. I doubt I will go with another ATN optic again. In your price range, the 4th gen ATN day/night scopes seem to be pretty stable. You could try one of those.

 

[Felonious]

.... Can anyone explain the basics about what you guys are seeing and explain it in more detail for us old novices? Ty

The darker and colder it gets, the more effective Flir becomes.

 

[Shorty]

Very cool…ty

 

[bronko220002]

View attachment 40627

View attachment 40628

View attachment 40629




The darker and colder it gets, the more effective Flir becomes.

I can get my Wraith HD to show in green like above or violet/blue and also black and white looking exactly like the thermal images above. I like the B&W image the best because it gives more contrast. Agreed the Wraith is not the best but it is economically priced and good enough for the minimal use I'll be giving it.

 

[Felonious]

I can get my Wraith HD to show in green like above or violet/blue and also black and white looking exactly like the thermal images above. I like the B&W image the best because it gives more contrast. Agreed the Wraith is not the best but it is economically priced and good enough for the minimal use I'll be giving it.

I actually don't have any traditional night vision, I found it kind of pointless to own a FLIR and a night vision scope, especially considering that you can't hunt anything after sunset here without special permission anyway.

Like other people said above, I would more than likely use the FLIR to do the initial scanning, then switch to something else once I found my target. The thermal imaging systems required on long-range scopes are way out of my price range. Heck, some of the good ones cost more than my vehicle.

 

[hornclayton]

I can get my Wraith HD to show in green like above or violet/blue and also black and white looking exactly like the thermal images above. I like the B&W image the best because it gives more contrast. Agreed the Wraith is not the best but it is economically priced and good enough for the minimal use I'll be giving it.

try the pard 007sp lrf clip on for the price of a sightmark. you wont be dissapointed. i got a 5k thermal and i still use the pard clip on

 

[bronko220002]

try the pard 007sp lrf clip on for the price of a sightmark. you wont be dissapointed. i got a 5k thermal and i still use the pard clip on

Clay, I checked the price of that and its twice as much as what I paid for my Wraith HD

 

[bluebanana]

My understanding is that the resolution of IR NV is much better than thermal so you get a much improved image with the former. Thermal is more expensive and yet more pixillated. IR NV is now up to 4K so that is where I'll be heading.

 

[Hausser1]

I have tried all three (Notice I said three).
Infra Scope
Thermo scope.
Infra with camera.

ATN scope runs 1k dollars.
Thermo scope runs 1k+ dollars.

the BIGGEST problem with BOTH of these scopes,
is night blindness. You are looking through a lens,
and your eyeball dilates to compensate for the intensity
of the light coming through the lens.

When you come off the scope, you are totally blind
in that one eye. It is (for me) a real pain in the rear.
Both of these scopes have their advantages. Both
have their disadvantages.

The IR scope works great for all kinds of situations,
but it is only REALLY good out to about 100 to 150
yards. Yes, you can go further with better IR light,
but past 100 to 150 yards is quite a shot for me.

The Thermo Scope is good to about the same
distance for a safe shot. You can actually go out
much further than 150 yards with Thermo, but then
the objects become so small that it is hard to aim.
You can identify objects that far with Thermo.

Thermo also is kinda funny on showing heat. Animals
with lots of fur do not show up as good. you see their
legs, head, and body parts without fur or less fur.
A Armadillo you can see easily for miles it seems like.
Coyote's will not show a full body at times, unless it is
a little closer than 150 yards.

The Third one....
The one I enjoy using.... It is about 1/5 to 1/10th the
price and cheaper, depending upon the night vision scope
you are looking at.

It attaches to your scope on your gun. There is no sighting
in, because it uses your scope on your gun. It is a IR scope
that uses a screen on the gun. The screen does not blind
you by making your eyes dilate. The screen is adjustable in
brightness. This setup is what i use most of all. the only
thing that you have to get use to, is aiming via a screen instead
of a scope or iron sight.

Good post. TY

 

[hornclayton]

Clay, I checked the price of that and its twice as much as what I paid for my Wraith HD

649? your wraith was 325?

 

[bronko220002]

649? your wraith was 325?

Ok not exactly twice as much. But it is $573 and the Wraith was $399 so a pretty big difference for me.

 

[hornclayton]

digital night vision is better in brush a lot of the time just to not hit objects in the way that thermal may miss like tree limbs. The Ir light is invisable to animals mostly and it illuminates their eyes. tru night vision or analogue is a light intensifier not a digital image like a tv screen in digital versions but its way way more costly. Analogue night vision can run without Ir light and be invisable to others who also may have it but if its digital then its 100% dependent on ir light which will look like a spotlight to anyone else with night vision. The important aspect of thermal is resolution on base power if its not a clip on. For example a dedicated thermal scope with a base magnification of 2 with 640 res will be 320 at 4 power which is the next zoom it hits and 110 if you zoom again which means the image will be a blob that is unidentifiable. If you start with a 4 power base mag in 384 res then your at the same place but without a low power wide field of view. So the point of that is that picking the proper base mag in thermal for the purpose is critical.

 

[DavidAR10T]

$450 @ Palmetto State. Primary Arms had the mini for $350 till they sold out.
Still almost $700 everywhere else.

SIGHTMARK WRAITH 4K MINI 2-16X32

 

[Felonious]

I think it's also worth mentioning that comparing traditional night vision too forward looking infrared is like comparing apples to oranges.

FLIR works just as well during the daytime as it does at night, and completely obliterates any type of natural camouflage. Night vision just makes night look more like day, so anything well camouflaged would still not be as visible. Both definitely have their uses, but they are too completely different technologies with different functions. FLIR is terrible at showing backgrounds, and if I had to walk around in the dark, I would much prefer traditional night vision. If I was looking for something alive, FLIR would be my choice.

One of the really cool things about FLIR is the ability to follow tracks in the snow. It snowed here for the first time in a while, and it was the first time I had the monocular while it was it snowed here. Any footprints, no matter how small (even mouse tracks) show up on thermal, even if they were made a long time ago, The ground and the snow are different temperatures, so depending on the thickness of the snow and pack, it will show a different color. It makes tracking incredibly easy, even if there's fresh snow on top of the original tracks. I had fun last night walking around in the woods following deer tracks, it was like following little orange dots the whole way, looking at the tracks with a flashlight, I would have lost them numerous times.

Two different tools, for two different jobs. Both have advantages and disadvantages depending on what your intention is.

 

[hornclayton]

I think it's also worth mentioning that comparing traditional night vision too forward looking infrared is like comparing apples to oranges.

FLIR works just as well during the daytime as it does at night, and completely obliterates any type of natural camouflage. Night vision just makes night look more like day, so anything well camouflaged would still not be as visible. Both definitely have their uses, but they are too completely different technologies with different functions. FLIR is terrible at showing backgrounds, and if I had to walk around in the dark, I would much prefer traditional night vision. If I was looking for something alive, FLIR would be my choice.

One of the really cool things about FLIR is the ability to follow tracks in the snow. It snowed here for the first time in a while, and it was the first time I had the monocular while it was it snowed here. Any footprints, no matter how small (even mouse tracks) show up on thermal, even if they were made a long time ago, The ground and the snow are different temperatures, so depending on the thickness of the snow and pack, it will show a different color. It makes tracking incredibly easy, even if there's fresh snow on top of the original tracks. I had fun last night walking around in the woods following deer tracks, it was like following little orange dots the whole way, looking at the tracks with a flashlight, I would have lost them numerous times.

Two different tools, for two different jobs. Both have advantages and disadvantages depending on what your intention is.

I actually think using thermal scanners to track a wounded animal should be legal, just because of the ethics of recovery. I know its a slippery slope but its the same with dogs. Technically a using hunting dogs for blood trails is illegal but almost know one would ever get turned in for that.

 

[hornclayton]

I actually think using thermal scanners to track a wounded animal should be legal, just because of the ethics of recovery. I know its a slippery slope but its the same with dogs. Technically a using hunting dogs for blood trails is illegal but almost know one would ever get turned in for that.

I meant to include in oregon with that

 

[bronko220002]

Well I'm down in Florida for the rest of the winter and won't get a chance to play with it.
But I did find out that I can sight it in on one rifle then save the setting and switch it to another rifle and sight it in for that one and, supposedly, switching them back and forth

 

[GBG]

Do any night/thermal vision manufacturers offer factory support after the warranty period? I don't mean free of charge, I'm very willing to pay for repairs to a good product if the service is available.

 

[Felonious]

Do any night/thermal vision manufacturers offer factory support after the warranty period? I don't mean free of charge, I'm very willing to pay for repairs to a good product if the service is available.

The USB dust cover broke on my FLIR brand monocular, they immediately sent a repair shipping label and took care of it. FLIR (or whoever owns them) is a massive company with clients in military and law enforcement, their technical support is actually quite good.

 

[Felonious]

I actually think using thermal scanners to track a wounded animal should be legal, just because of the ethics of recovery. I know its a slippery slope but its the same with dogs. Technically a using hunting dogs for blood trails is illegal but almost know one would ever get turned in for that.

Where I am, it's illegal to be in possession of both hunting equipment and thermal or night vision. The way I read it, I should be able to put my weapon back in the car or house, and then go track.

But I do agree 100%, using night vision and thermal to locate wounded animals is more than ethical.