C50 Pulsar Digex NV unit

[The Singing Stalker]

Thanks for that Review, I am trying to decide whether to buy one or go thermal. Got the money for one but not necessarily the other. Lol.
i did look at the weight at that is the only think that puts me of at over a kilo. That is a chunk of weight.
decisions decisions.

 

[gixer1]

Thanks for that Review, I am trying to decide whether to buy one or go thermal. Got the money for one but not necessarily the other. Lol.
i did look at the weight at that is the only think that puts me of at over a kilo. That is a chunk of weight.
decisions decisions.

I’d go digital every time for the rifle…thermal for spotting.

 

[Westley78]

Not sure about where the night/day mode switch is located as I found myself accidentally changing it when looking through the scope trying to adjust the focus but time will tell and I don’t see it being a major issue.

The twilight mode is located just in front of the focus ring and from memory has a half moon symbol.

I agree with your review: excellent scope just a tad heavy.

 

[Miki]

What experience are you casting that opinion on Bruce?
The "I am an expert, and even looking at a scope I can tell it's rubbish" opinion?
<snip>

That was uncalled for Mr Washing Machine, complete load of unnecesary froth IMO..

 

[Westley78]

I’d go digital every time for the rifle…thermal for spotting.

100% thermal is great for locating but will not give you a positive id as you are looking at a heat source whereas with NV you have visual ID before you pull the trigger so no margin for error.

 

[mealiejimmy]

Thermal can and does give a positive ID on a target when used correctly
Someone with experience in thermal imagers and using a suitable device can positively identify fox size targets at ranges as far as is every likely to be needed for a safe and humane shot
I agree that NV can provide a more detailed image of a target, but it's not necessary to see the whiskers on a fox, to know it's a fox.

Cheers

Bruce

 

[Westley78]

Most people can id a target with an average thermal 95% of the time so i am sure that a top of the range thermal scope will greatly assist with this.

For me I t’s not a point about ‘seeing the whiskers on a fox to know it’s a fox’ but I prefer a visual assessment as to whether the shot is safe as you can’t see obstructions or asses backstop with a thermal image.

I am sure others will disagree, which is fine, a lot of it will be down to your situation and personal preferences, this is just my opinion of what works best for me…

 

[gixer1]

The twilight mode is located just in front of the focus ring and from memory has a half moon symbol.

I agree with your review: excellent scope just a tad heavy.

sorry - I meant not sure about the logic of the positioning of the day/twilight switch as it can be changed by accident when reaching for the focus ring - but it’s not a big deal.

 

[Kevgun]

100% thermal is great for locating but will not give you a positive id as you are looking at a heat source whereas with NV you have visual ID before you pull the trigger so no margin for error.

Thought the same thing until I tried the Senopex A7, I could positively ID Foxes out to 700 Yards, best there is for ID

 

[gixer1]

Thermal can and does give a positive ID on a target when used correctly
Someone with experience in thermal imagers and using a suitable device can positively identify fox size targets at ranges as far as is every likely to be needed for a safe and humane shot
I agree that NV can provide a more detailed image of a target, but it's not necessary to see the whiskers on a fox, to know it's a fox.

Cheers

Bruce

Bruce, sorry - but I disagree in this instance, as I have said before that’s fine in flat grass fields and if something is moving but when something is bobbing about in a stone covered plantation or lying still it’s not as cut and dry. Regardless of how good a thermal is you are looking at heat signatures, not detail. It’s amazing how a silhouette can rapidly change to be something different.

I’ve looked through many thermals and digi’s and it’s far easier to spot on a NV - it’s not an experience thing alone - plenty of 30+ year keepers on here that have shot more foxes than most have had hot dinners that agree! And some have used thermals and NV for years, in one case using Starlight scopes in N.I when there was more on the line than just missing a fox!

 

[Westley78]

.

 

[Westley78]

Thought the same thing until I tried the Senopex A7, I could positively ID Foxes out to 700 Yards, best there is for ID

I am not surprised, at £3k you would expect it to be exceptional.

What’s it like assessing the foreground and backstop?

 

[gixer1]

Most people can id a target with an average thermal 95% of the time so i am sure that a top of the range thermal scope will greatly assist with this.

For me I t’s not a point about ‘seeing the whiskers on a fox to know it’s a fox’ but I prefer a visual assessment as to whether the shot is safe as you can’t see obstructions or asses backstop with a thermal image.

I am sure others will disagree, which is fine, a lot of it will be down to your situation and personal preferences, this is just my opinion of what works best for me…

Agree Westley. I can’t think of many occasions I couldn’t ID through NV however I can think of plenty of times I have sat in a vehicle for 20-30 mins with a friend looking through a thermal with us saying “that’s got to be a fox….nah, it’s a roe…no, badger…”

 

[Ttocs]

I’ve been using a Helion thermal spotter 5 or 6 nights a week for getting on 5 years now - I get withdrawal symptoms if its not pressed to my face at night.
I can identify something that looks like a fox at 300 or 400 yards and more in good conditions. However, if you shoot somewhere where there could be a small dog with a bushy tail eg colly running around, I’d use NV before you pull the trigger on it. I’ve had occasions where I’ve had stationary a fox at sub 100 yards that I couldn’t clearly identify until I looked through the NV and many other likely animals that weren’t a fox.
Thermal scopes are great - the low mag and high contrast are very appealing for their rapid target aqisition and their totally covert too. However, NV is cheaper and if you can see the target you can usually clearly identify it. I don’t think I shoot any less foxes with a NV scope over the potential of a thermal scope - I may even shoot more as it removes any doubt on many occasions where I’d have needed to observe the target for much longer to determine exactly what it was if using thermal alone. If I did switch to a thermal scope, I’d carry a NV spotter to use in conjunction with my thermal spotter for those occasions when I’m not 100% on what I’m looking at.

NV scopes are a significant step up from Lamps; spotting with a thermal is a huge leap (game changer) from a lamp or NV spotter; but the move from NV scope to thermal scope is, in my opinion, a step sideways in most circumstances.
Thermal rifle scopes definitely have their place but don’t feel your missing out if you don’t have one.
N

 

[Westley78]

this is it in a nutshell….

“I don’t think I shoot any less foxes with a NV scope over the potential of a thermal scope”

 

[gixer1]

this is it in a nutshell….

“I don’t think I shoot any less foxes with a NV scope over the potential of a thermal scope”

I will say if I only used a NV and not in combustion with a Thermal spotter that may be the case, you may not spot a fox now and then when initially looking for it - but most folks I know use a thermal spotter with a NV.

 

[Westley78]

Surely even if you had a top of the range Thermal scope you’d still want a Thermal spotter otherwise you will be waving a rifle around trying to acquire your target?

On that basis I think ttoc’s point is still valid in that you won’t shoot more with a Thermal scope than you will with a NV scope at 1/3 of the cost.

 

[BenBhoy]

The main whinge if I had to come up with one is the weight - when I picked up the box I asked Colin if he had put a couple of bricks in it!! When I opened up the packaging there are cases and extra cables etc so I though “ah, that’s what it is”….it isn’t - it’s a heavy lump for a scope

Thats exactly what's putting me off too mate. Just taken one digital scope off my set up as too heavy. Will need to hold one before I commit to buying.

 

[SussexSteve]

Thanks for that Review, I am trying to decide whether to buy one or go thermal. Got the money for one but not necessarily the other. Lol.
i did look at the weight at that is the only think that puts me of at over a kilo. That is a chunk of weight.
decisions decisions.

I've just gone back to a C50 after a few years with top end thermal. It's a really good piece of kit, so good in fact my blaser scope stayed in the cupboard. I wouldn't entertain thermal unless it was a senopex or Tceptor or a secondhand wt1 75-3.

 

[BenBhoy]

Surely even if you had a top of the range Thermal scope you’d still want a Thermal spotter otherwise you will be waving a rifle around trying to acquire your target?

On that basis I think ttoc’s point is still valid in that you won’t shoot more with a Thermal scope than you will with a NV scope at 1/3 of the cost.

The only disagreement I'd have is, and we've all had this- spot it with thermal, turn on nv get behind rifle... "where the f**k did it go" see it in thermal, searching about for it with nv. Not every time but it does happen.