NV scopes

Printable View

Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

01-03-12, 18:57
BigNog

Quote:

Originally Posted by Robssrt-4

Exactly the kind of answer i was looking for. Thank you very much fpr the help.

If you're running anything like a PVS-14, it may be what you want to hear but it will burn an image into your tube.
01-03-12, 19:32
High Tower

Quote:

Originally Posted by Robssrt-4

I would like either option. price range below $1000 if even possible. I have both aeotech and an aimpoint HWS so doesnt have to be standalone. eotech is XPS 2.0

Getting a nice set of night vision for under a grand may be difficult. I would definitely want to check out the optic before buying.

I know there is a company or three that rebuilds NV, but I'm not sure on the quality.
01-04-12, 18:01
SMETNA

YMMV, but I've been checking out the ATN Night Arrow series scopes. Gen 2+ and 2x, 4x, or 6x magnification. Weather resistant. $1400 - $1800 depending on model
01-04-12, 18:11
Robssrt-4

Quote:

Originally Posted by SMETNA

YMMV, but I've been checking out the ATN Night Arrow series scopes. Gen 2+ and 2x, 4x, or 6x magnification. Weather resistant. $1400 - $1800 depending on model

Nice i will look these up awesome info man.
01-05-12, 10:20
JSantoro

Quote:

Originally Posted by Robssrt-4

I would like either option. price range below $1000 if even possible.

Not likely to happen, and get much of the capability you profess to want.

A current, unmagnified PVS-14 with a GenIII tube, presuming a new or well-maintained device, presuming a skilled user, presuming ideal illumination (half-moon, no clouds, no light pollution from cities and the like), will net the user the ability to reliably detect a human form to about 150m. Establish PID to take a shot? 65m. Point being, one should be realistic about what these devices are actually capable of.

A PVS-14 costs about $3k. These cheeseball devices being bandied about....yeah, they can work, and cost less, but they're mostly marketed to folks who have, for whatever reason, decided that they HAVE to have passive night-vision capability....not to provide a quality device. You'd better be prepared to treat them like a Fabrege egg, because their durability sucks nuts. Again, one should be realistic.

If one chooses to NOT use an NV-compatible optic ICW whichever NV device you go for, you are knowingly and deliberately risking damage to your intensifier tube that will absolutely end up costing you either the cost to repair/replace it or the cost of another device.....and for what? False economy, that's what. Something that appears to work isn't the same thing as not frying the I-tube. That's not smart shopping, that's being a cheapskate who doesn't understand the difference between price and cost. They aren't the same thing.

This is practically gospel: If your primary sight does not have an NV capability (i.e., intensities specifically designed and purpose-built to be used ICW NV devices), using the lower settings of a non-NV-capable device may look just fine to you, but WILL damage your tube. Period. Nobody needs to convince anybody of the facts for them to remain facts.
01-05-12, 10:38
kartoffel

Excellent point about intensifier tube damage, JSantoro. I really wish NV was more affordable, but in the mean time I get to go to trade shows and play with FLIR, so I can suck it up.

Oh, and this is very true: http://terminallance.com/2010/02/12/...-full-of-shit/
01-05-12, 10:42
Robssrt-4

Quote:

Originally Posted by JSantoro

Not likely to happen, and get much of the capability you profess to want.

A current, unmagnified PVS-14 with a GenIII tube, presuming a new or well-maintained device, presuming a skilled user, presuming ideal illumination (half-moon, no clouds, no light pollution from cities and the like), will net the user the ability to reliably detect a human form to about 150m. Establish PID to take a shot? 65m. Point being, one should be realistic about what these devices are actually capable of.

A PVS-14 costs about $3k. These cheeseball devices being bandied about....yeah, they can work, and cost less, but they're mostly marketed to folks who have, for whatever reason, decided that they HAVE to have passive night-vision capability....not to provide a quality device. You'd better be prepared to treat them like a Fabrege egg, because their durability sucks nuts. Again, one should be realistic.

If one chooses to NOT use an NV-compatible optic ICW whichever NV device you go for, you are knowingly and deliberately risking damage to your intensifier tube that will absolutely end up costing you either the cost to repair/replace it or the cost of another device.....and for what? False economy, that's what. Something that appears to work isn't the same thing as not frying the I-tube. That's not smart shopping, that's being a cheapskate who doesn't understand the difference between price and cost. They aren't the same thing.

This is practically gospel: If your primary sight does not have an NV capability (i.e., intensities specifically designed and purpose-built to be used ICW NV devices), using the lower settings of a non-NV-capable device may look just fine to you, but WILL damage your tube. Period. Nobody needs to convince anybody of the facts for them to remain facts.

You are completly right. i have been doing more research since i first posted this thread, and tube damage is going to happen with a non compatible HWS. I think i will save some cash and opt for the more expensive high end quality NV scope. Thanks for the input.
01-05-12, 10:45
Robssrt-4

Quote:

Originally Posted by kartoffel

Excellent point about intensifier tube damage, JSantoro. I really wish NV was more affordable, but in the mean time I get to go to trade shows and play with FLIR, so I can suck it up.

Oh, and this is very true: http://terminallance.com/2010/02/12/...-full-of-shit/

^^^^LOL. Great comic.

Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page