Telos disappointment.
- Thread starter k80ush
- Start date
Three modes normal-high-ultra , normal will always show more target detail, increasing the contrast also makes the normal mode more punchy, although some prefer the high mode, as this is the supplied mode as default. There is a smoothing filter, I would always turn this off, in fact, it's a stupid setting ON some models, the Pulsar models do not use excessive denoise so have slight amount more grain affect, but show more detail, it should have been left as the previous image boost mode, when people instinctively put this on, some put the smoothing filter on, which reduces sharpness, leave it off !
You have to remember that 12 micron has more detection range than 17 micron ... The problem with 12 micron is its nowhere near as sensitive without applying software filters and denoise to smooth the image out, this then makes a cartoon style image and makes background terrain look like fluffy clouds...Although on the flipside you can ID fuirther out the animal against an equivalent lens size 17 micron. The other issue with 12 micron is a massive reduction in field of view especially with a 50mm-12micron-640px under 50 yds they are not pleasurable to use when locating and picking up, just a pain, thats why 35mm-12micron-640 is a better option for FOV.
17 micron using larger pixels and with an 18mk rating will pull the finest of details out of the overall image, meaning objects that are difficult to render, like hedge detail, tree detail, etc that. has a very lower temperature differential , it will also work in high humidity that again affects the overall scene, 12 micron is a inferior compared to 17 micron in these conditions, last there is no lag on these units panning, and the field of view for spotting and locating is far easier as 17micron-640px-50mm is the perfect combination to retain this.
Another skew for people is on a good day/night 12 micron looks great, even some of the poor ones, because conditions are in the sensors favor... take them out on a bad night against a Thermion XQ50 Pro, Thermion 2 XP50, Helion 2 XP50, Telos XP50 and you will see the difference, in normal use I would use normal/rocks 95% of the time, in harsh conditons bumping up to High/Forest modes as required..
I've made up some test rigs for scopes, so I can show images, videos , I can try and mount some tripod adaptors to compare because I have all these mentioned scopes at hand...
Do you want a proper comparison ?
Yes please.
I can only speak as I have found this week (up to 85% humidity).
We have tried every setting on the unit. Smoothing filter on/off. All three sensor settings, contrast high/low……brightness high/low and the image given on the animals is not crisp or detailed, however the trees and background do seem clear.
The field of view is a great advantage on close range scanning, but any time saved scanning over 100 yards is instantly lost waiting for the animal to move before IDing it.
Last edited:
82-85% is average for this time of year, moving forward, so a normal night..
12 micron the image will appear sharper of an animal outline at a longer range than 17 micron with equal sensors and focal length lenses, thats a given because the detection range on 12 micron is higher but it has draw backs as mentioned.
ColinBr
Well-Known Member
I have to say that the Hik FQ35 my mate has and I tried is every bit as good as my Mergers.
In fact I wish the deal with these and the Alpex together for just over £2k was available when I was in the market, rather than the Mergers and Alpex I bought separate at a far greater price.
In fact I wish the deal with these and the Alpex together for just over £2k was available when I was in the market, rather than the Mergers and Alpex I bought separate at a far greater price.
On a good night yes, on a bad night no....plus the merger has a different viewing experience from the dual display, the Merger is a superior product without question. BUT its a binocular, you would be best to compare against the Helion Pro monocular, which again is more money but I would say superior. Don't get me wrong the Falcons are good for the money they cost and the design is much better than the previous generation for sure..
That deal is on the 384 FH models not the FQ35 640 though models Colin.
I’ve just spent the week on Arran with my FQ35 in mostly bad weather. Mate had a Helion XP50. At no point did I feel undergunned or regret my purchase. The best spot was a deer at 1.2km away and ended in a successful stalk. Couldn’t be happier. My only gripe is the battery life, but they’re cheap so I just carried 3 spares.
I was tempted to wait and save for the Telos but very glad I didn’t. Nearly twice the costs and I can’t see it being twice as good.
I was tempted to wait and save for the Telos but very glad I didn’t. Nearly twice the costs and I can’t see it being twice as good.
They are very good
I was going to buy one but I had a look through a fh35 and thought it would be fine for my needs. The fq35 has the bigger sensor with lower base mag and wider field of view but I found out from Bruce that once I increased the mag on the fq35 to match the mag on the fh35 the image's on both units would be identical.
I have an FH35 also.
I had the FQ50 and it was wow but not as portable as the 35
The fq 35 wasn't an option yet when I bought mine
Just compared a Telos XP50 to a Falcon FQ35 , the Telos pulls out more detail allround in the scene, without any doubt, as to be expected.
What are you getting for the extra £1000 on the Telos
Rubberised alloy more durable hard wearing shell
Wireless self contained chargeable battery, battery can be charged anywhere with USBC no docks required
True <18mk NetD sensor - better poor weather performance
Smooth incremental zoom ring
Faster refresh rate, zero lag
Upgradable options, like sensors, LRF, multi-spectral option , so you could fit an XL sensor instead of selling and paying outright again or add an LRF instead of a full new unit,etc at a cost..
Again don't get me wrong the Falcon is a good unit for the money 100%... it would be my choice if choosing a Hik from all the HikMicro spotter options ...
If I had to choose anything on the market currently to use myself, in terms of best image, field of view and performance it would be the following..
Merger XL50 - Outstanding Image ( Yes I kept one myself ! )
MergerXP50 - Telos XP50 - Helion 2 XP50 Pro - Premium Allround Performance
Falcon FQ35 - Best Value
What are you getting for the extra £1000 on the Telos
Rubberised alloy more durable hard wearing shell
Wireless self contained chargeable battery, battery can be charged anywhere with USBC no docks required
True <18mk NetD sensor - better poor weather performance
Smooth incremental zoom ring
Faster refresh rate, zero lag
Upgradable options, like sensors, LRF, multi-spectral option , so you could fit an XL sensor instead of selling and paying outright again or add an LRF instead of a full new unit,etc at a cost..
Again don't get me wrong the Falcon is a good unit for the money 100%... it would be my choice if choosing a Hik from all the HikMicro spotter options ...
If I had to choose anything on the market currently to use myself, in terms of best image, field of view and performance it would be the following..
Merger XL50 - Outstanding Image ( Yes I kept one myself ! )
MergerXP50 - Telos XP50 - Helion 2 XP50 Pro - Premium Allround Performance
Falcon FQ35 - Best Value
See Post No 4 here:
Thoughts on Infiray Gemini
Hi Just wondered what people’s thoughts were on yet another newbie?
www.thestalkingdirectory.co.uk
There a Pulsar video showing how they mould the 2 different plastics together during manufacture
Jeff8861
Well-Known Member
I might will have a look at them and the Telos thanksGo for it..
50% more cost, not double... for a larger lens, host of design features, upgradable, so future proof and true netD sensitivity sensor.
Similar threads
