Night Vision / Thermal Optics

[CodeBlue]

Does anybody know the best night vision / thermal optics to use that is under $700?
Is it the Sightmark 4K Mini?

 

[BackFromDC]

That's a pretty small budget, I think most thermal/NV-bros try to spend around a few grand. I've heard OK things about ATN, seen some Sightmarks around and people seem to like them. I personally don't care much about the big brand names because besides Pulsar they're all made in China.

 

[Ark]

There isn't anything at that price range.

It's like asking the best AR-15 under $100.

 

[ZurokSlayer7X9]

So the first thing is there is a difference between Night Vision and Thermal in their advantages and disadvantages, but there are also different types of Night Vision. All of this will depend on your mission and what you want to do with the device. Hunting yotes, night hiking, surveillance, concerned citizen prepping for an invasion from Mars?

When it comes to Night Vision, there is Digital and then there is Analog Intensifiers. Digital Night Vision is effectively an Infrared camera with an IR floodlight or flashlight. They can vary in quality from cheap "Spy Kids" toys to more advanced rifle scopes with huge flood lights mounted on them. Security cameras and trail cameras also fall under this category. Analog Intensifiers, which is what the military use, use some sort of science magic to intensify and amplify ambient light. The picture has no latency and the device doesn't give off an IR signature (unless you shine an IR illuminator, it will pick it up as well), and these are usually more desired.

Thermal is a different beast, and is usually a form of digital camera with special lens coatings to detect a specific wavelength of infrared, the frequency and wavelength emitted from thermal radiation. IMO Thermal is way better except for battery life and mounting options, as well as seeing through glass.

An entry level PVS-14 Analog Intensifier will cost in the ballpark of $3,500, and will go to around for $5,500 for a nice hand picked white phosphor tube. Dual tubes are somewhat more expensive and will typically be over $10,000. Also keep in mind that the mounting hardware is also expensive, unless you're okay with just the cheap plastic "skullcrushers" that come with the unit.

Thermals were typically more expensive than Night Vision, however there are some options that are lowering the entry price. An ATN Thor LT can be had for around $1,500, and gives a decent picture. I once saw a mouse @ 150 yards at 2:00 in the morning with one. Just keep in mind the battery will last maybe an hour and a half. All better options, like FLIR, EOTech, etc., will be somewhat more.

I don't have a lot of experience with Digital Night Vision. You can get Night Vision binoculars for around $300, and they are better than nothing, but are very limited in a hunting/concerned citizen applications. Not only that, it pretty much looks like a Broadway spotlight viewed from a distance by any other IR device.

 

[OZZY.40]

I have a Wraith 4k mini. It’s nice for hunting at night from a stationary position out to a few hundred yards. You can’t move around with it because of its low refresh rate. If you need to dispatch coyotes or other nocturnal critters, it’s perfect; but you could mistake your neighbors German shepherd for a coyote at 200 yards. If you want something to compete with analogue NV, keep saving. The digital stuff is getting better but those products are just as expensive as a PVS-14 and weigh more due to the battery they need.

 

[sheepdog697]

Does anybody know the best night vision / thermal optics to use that is under $700?
Is it the Sightmark 4K Mini?

What are you trying to do? Digital night vision is in this price range but performance is lacking compared to analog.

Thermal is key for detection 100% no comparison. Analog night vision is great for anything "dynamic"

Most digital night vision require some type of IR illuminator to do anything beyond dusk.

I have elbeit white phos tubes in a dual setup and they are fantastic, but that would be significantly above that budget.

I sold a ton of "safe" guns and collectibles that i never shot to get into night vision and thermal.


Here is my opinion for minimums at either:
2500 can get you into a used pvs14 setup (analog night vision monocular, helmet, mount)
2k can get you into a decent thermal probably 384 resolution

Heres a few 640 res images from my RH25 for fun.

 

[CodeBlue]

So the first thing is there is a difference between Night Vision and Thermal in their advantages and disadvantages, but there are also different types of Night Vision. All of this will depend on your mission and what you want to do with the device. Hunting yotes, night hiking, surveillance, concerned citizen prepping for an invasion from Mars?

When it comes to Night Vision, there is Digital and then there is Analog Intensifiers. Digital Night Vision is effectively an Infrared camera with an IR floodlight or flashlight. They can vary in quality from cheap "Spy Kids" toys to more advanced rifle scopes with huge flood lights mounted on them. Security cameras and trail cameras also fall under this category. Analog Intensifiers, which is what the military use, use some sort of science magic to intensify and amplify ambient light. The picture has no latency and the device doesn't give off an IR signature (unless you shine an IR illuminator, it will pick it up as well), and these are usually more desired.

Thermal is a different beast, and is usually a form of digital camera with special lens coatings to detect a specific wavelength of infrared, the frequency and wavelength emitted from thermal radiation. IMO Thermal is way better except for battery life and mounting options, as well as seeing through glass.

An entry level PVS-14 Analog Intensifier will cost in the ballpark of $3,500, and will go to around for $5,500 for a nice hand picked white phosphor tube. Dual tubes are somewhat more expensive and will typically be over $10,000. Also keep in mind that the mounting hardware is also expensive, unless you're okay with just the cheap plastic "skullcrushers" that come with the unit.

Thermals were typically more expensive than Night Vision, however there are some options that are lowering the entry price. An ATN Thor LT can be had for around $1,500, and gives a decent picture. I once saw a mouse @ 150 yards at 2:00 in the morning with one. Just keep in mind the battery will last maybe an hour and a half. All better options, like FLIR, EOTech, etc., will be somewhat more.

I don't have a lot of experience with Digital Night Vision. You can get Night Vision binoculars for around $300, and they are better than nothing, but are very limited in a hunting/concerned citizen applications. Not only that, it pretty much looks like a Broadway spotlight viewed from a distance by any other IR device.

Thank you so much for all this great information. This will be my first night hunt in south Texas for javalina Will Boar.

 

[CodeBlue]

Looks like for my budget on my Springfield AR-10 .308, I have been sent an Arken Zulus HD 5-20R to try it out for 2 weeks. I will let everyone know.

 

[BAgun]

I'm kind of torn on what to go with. Thermal or NV? I'm only going to use it for targets or zombie apocalypse, civil war which ever comes first. Mainly just for fun. Any suggestions? I've seen several AGM NV and Thermal in the $1000 dollar range. Is thermal really that much better then NV? Or vise versa?

 

[CodeBlue]

I'm kind of torn on what to go with. Thermal or NV? I'm only going to use it for targets or zombie apocalypse, civil war which ever comes first. Mainly just for fun. Any suggestions? I've seen several AGM NV and Thermal in the $1000 dollar range. Is thermal really that much better then NV? Or vise versa?

Well, here is one article that really helped me decide on where to spend my money.
This article is from TiborasurusRex
Hope this helps.

 

[Ark]

I'm kind of torn on what to go with. Thermal or NV? I'm only going to use it for targets or zombie apocalypse, civil war which ever comes first. Mainly just for fun. Any suggestions? I've seen several AGM NV and Thermal in the $1000 dollar range. Is thermal really that much better then NV? Or vise versa?

Analog NV is MUCH more generally useful than thermal. Thermal can't really see in the dark the same way, and is not as useful for positive identification.

 

[indyjohn]

Analog NV is MUCH more generally useful than thermal. Thermal can't really see in the dark the same way, and is not as useful for positive identification.

That is a very interesting perspective. Makes me rethink my thermal snobbery.

 

[Ark]

That is a very interesting perspective. Makes me rethink my thermal snobbery.

NV plays better with magnification, since the intensifier tube has unlimited resolution. I can clumsily hold a standard binocular tube in front of my PVS7 and see fine. Shooting with magnified rifle scopes isn't as easy, though single or dual tubes can shoot passive through an unmagnified dot or holo.

What thermal dominates at is detection. If a target is not emitting any visible light or active IR illumination, they are not any easier to distinguish under NV than in the daylight. At high enough resolution and close enough range, thermal can identify targets, or at least distinguish human from animal. But at long range, it's just a white pixel, and digital zoom won't help you. The guy with the NV can, maybe, apply some magnification and check it out.

Ideally you want both, but NV has a much wider buffet of uses if right now you have neither. IMO the real money is in operating in teams of two and utilizing both for observation, detection, and ultimately engagement.

 

[ZurokSlayer7X9]

I'm kind of torn on what to go with. Thermal or NV? I'm only going to use it for targets or zombie apocalypse, civil war which ever comes first. Mainly just for fun. Any suggestions? I've seen several AGM NV and Thermal in the $1000 dollar range. Is thermal really that much better then NV? Or vise versa?

This is my philosophy when it comes to the different use cases for NV's and Thermals for hunting vs. potentially going against an adversary. Digital NV is great for hunting and other "civilian" uses, however I would not advise Digital for a potential force on force scenario (civil war, alien invasion, etc.). The reason is that a Digital NV typically relies on an IR floodlight, also known as Active Illumination, to be able to see in complete darkness. It also acts as a giant beacon for any IR capable device. Analog Intensifiers on the other hand are passive in their illumination technique. While they cannot see in complete darkness like Digital, they will not give any light signature (assuming your eye cup is properly seated).

My uncle and I tested this, while he went out into a dark forest with his NV binoculars, I could see him a mile away through the trees with a PVS-14. I however was completely invisible to him and was able stalk him within a few yards before he heard me. Now to be fair, Digital NV will still be a game changer and give you a massive advantage against the unprepared and those who don't have IR devices.

When I got into this rabbit hole, I started with an entry level AGM Gen 3 Level 1 Green Phosphor PVS-14. It's not a handpicked Level 3 White Phosphor, but it is still an amazing device that has amazed family and friends, assisted during power outages, searched out things that went bump in the night, found a few lost trail cameras, and found the lost cat or two. It wasn't cheap, however it represents a massive force multiplier. To be honest, if forced to choose, I'd rather have and entry level AR paired with a PVS-14 than a high dollar AR only.

Thermal is absolutely terrifying what it can bring to the table, however like what was mentioned above, NV is more general purpose than Thermal devices right now. After that long winded response, if it were me, I would save up for an Analog NV Device. I've never had any buyer's remorse over my NV's. If that's impossible however, Digital NV is eons better than nothing.

 

[ZurokSlayer7X9]

NV plays better with magnification, since the intensifier tube has unlimited resolution.

So not to be a Denny, but intensifier tubes do indeed have limited resolution, it's just handled differently than digital resolution. An analog intensifier gives an image of so many lines per millimeter. These images are made from hundreds of thousands of little fiber optics that flip the image right side up. Most have around 50 to 64 lp/mm (lines per millimeter), though that depends on the make and model.

With that being said, that's still a heck of a lot of resolution, and magnification will definitely work better either in front or behind the intensifier.

 

[Ark]

So not to be a Denny, but intensifier tubes do indeed have limited resolution, it's just handled differently than digital resolution. An analog intensifier gives an image of so many lines per millimeter. These images are made from hundreds of thousands of little fiber optics that flip the image right side up. Most have around 50 to 64 lp/mm (lines per millimeter), though that depends on the make and model.

With that being said, that's still a heck of a lot of resolution, and magnification will definitely work better either in front or behind the intensifier.

Interesting. Obviously it's much different image performance if you're intensifying an image after it passes through a magnifier, versus magnifying the image from an intensifier tube. I know there are some clip on NV devices meant to run in front of an existing scope on a rifle, but I'm not familiar with their actual performance or how they affect zeroing. The dedicated night scopes with intensifier tubes and magnification lenses all built in were more popular.

Clip on thermal on the other hand just seems cludgey as hell. I do not understand using your ACOG or whatever to magnify an LCD screen with an off-center digital reticle theoretically zeroed using targets you can't see detail on.

 

[ZurokSlayer7X9]

Interesting. Obviously it's much different image performance if you're intensifying an image after it passes through a magnifier, versus magnifying the image from an intensifier tube. I know there are some clip on NV devices meant to run in front of an existing scope on a rifle, but I'm not familiar with their actual performance or how they affect zeroing. The dedicated night scopes with intensifier tubes and magnification lenses all built in were more popular.

Clip on thermal on the other hand just seems cludgey as hell. I do not understand using your ACOG or whatever to magnify an LCD screen with an off-center digital reticle theoretically zeroed using targets you can't see detail on.

I don't get zooming into an digital display either. A magnified optic before the intensifier would give magnification without any issues, however you have to take into account the drop in light intensity. That is at least when I tried it, the image was somewhat darker, though I may have just not been holding the binoculars right.

 

[Ark]

I don't get zooming into an digital display either. A magnified optic before the intensifier would give magnification without any issues, however you have to take into account the drop in light intensity. That is at least when I tried it, the image was somewhat darker, though I may have just not been holding the binoculars right.

Maybe if you're by yourself, your rifle has a bolted on LPVO or something, and you just want quick and dirty thermal capability without changing weapons? It's an awfully niche use case for what those things cost.

I'm more on board with the "thermal support rifle" concept. Just pick a dude in the squad and make him carry the rifle with the big, dedicated thermal optic on it. He can sleep in the Humvee during the day and stay up at night, screw that guy.

 

[ZurokSlayer7X9]

Another benefit for analog night vision, had a bad storm roll over tonight. The PVS-14 made it easier to see the clouds and our surroundings while we stood outside and looked for funnel clouds like a bunch of Midwesterners.

 

[BR8818]

Another benefit for analog night vision, had a bad storm roll over tonight. The PVS-14 made it easier to see the clouds and our surroundings while we stood outside and looked for funnel clouds like a bunch of Midwesterners.

Haha, never thought of spottin naders at night with em.