Hikmicro Condor CH35L
- Thread starter K_h
- Start date
For the difference in price I would go for the 640x480 model, its not that much more and a jump in image quality..
I would love to but sadly the difference in price is too much.
Given that it’s your first thermal, I would hold back and save up another £200 or so to get the 640 x 480 version.
There is nothing worse than buying something, then realising that you should have spent slightly more to get the better version.
It ends up costing you more in the long run!
Absolutely, but sometimes budget comes into it, although CH and CQ pricing is so close, it's a no brainer imho.
Totally agreed.
The resale price advantage of the CQ model over the CH would more than justify the marginal additional cost imho.
There was originally a wider margin between H and Q models in the HikMicro range, but with other 35mm 640 models coming out at competitive prices... Hik reacted and adjusted the prices to suit, which resulted in the price of the FH/FQ CH/CQ range in 35mm being very close.... So I would choose the 640 model everytime as it's much better value for your ££ over the 384 models in the same range.... IMHO
What difference would I see if comparing a Falcon FQ35 with a Condor CQ35 particularly in woodland.
None, the only difference between the Falcon and the Condor is that the Condor has an LRF
Both devices use the same lens, sensor, electronics and display, so the image is identical
Cheers
Bruce
Both devices use the same lens, sensor, electronics and display, so the image is identical
Cheers
Bruce
Thanks Bruce. I'm looking to upgrade from my first thermal, a Pulsar Quantum XQ38, which is still excellent at spotting heat sources, particularly in woodland. I also own an Iray FH35R which produces a sharper, more detailed image than the Quantum but isn't quite as good at picking up glimpses of heat in woodland. I would like the LRF option hence my question about the Condor. In your opinion is there anything out there that I should be considering?
The Falcon has a white image hue, the Condor has a slightly sepia hue using the same image mode, also the Falcon display look larger in comparison to the Condor display.
In 50mm models the Falcon has a F0.9 stop lens, the Condor has a F1.0 lens.
I noticed this when I compared my falcon fh35 to my mates condor ch35 .
I preferred the whiter image on the falcon but maybe thats because I'm used to it.
Hi Ian. What is the difference between an F0.9 lens and an F1.0 lens? I've looked at the specs on your website. It shows that the Falcon FQ models have slightly less optical mag than the equivalent Condor CQ models. I'm assuming that results in the Falcons having a wider field of view. This would be an advantage to me when scanning in woodland. However 50% of my shooting is on agricultural land where the slightly higher mag of the Falcon FQ50 would help ID. I notice that the Falcon FQ50 has 2.6x optical mag. How much would this be a disadvantage in woodland? If using a Falcon FQ35 could I use 2x digital zoom to help with ID or would the increased pixilation reduce the quality of the image? I like the idea of having LRF but can live without it if a particular model of thermal suits me best. Thank you
The difference between an F0.9 lens and an F1.0 lens (of the same focal length) is that the F0.9 lens will have a slightly larger diameter and therefore allow more thermal radiation to reach the sensor
The F number of a lens is it's focal length divided by it's diameter.
So, a 50mm F1.0 lens will have a diameter of 50mm (50/50) and a 50mm F0.9 lens will have a diameter of 55.5mm (50/0.9)
There will be no difference in magnification or field of view, but the thermal with the F0.9 lens will be slightly more sensitive to differences in temperature
Cheers
Bruce
The F number of a lens is it's focal length divided by it's diameter.
So, a 50mm F1.0 lens will have a diameter of 50mm (50/50) and a 50mm F0.9 lens will have a diameter of 55.5mm (50/0.9)
There will be no difference in magnification or field of view, but the thermal with the F0.9 lens will be slightly more sensitive to differences in temperature
Cheers
Bruce
Ah thanks for that. So the falcon FQ50 with the F0.9 lens should be slightly better a catching glimpses of heat in the woods. However how much of a disadvantage would the 50 be when scanning compared to a 35?
In woodland I'd very much favour the wider field of view of the 35 over the very slightly better temperature sensitivity of the 50
Cheers
Bruce
Cheers
Bruce
0.1 F-stop will be minimal difference in reality, you probably would not even notice it..Hi Ian. What is the difference between an F0.9 lens and an F1.0 lens? I've looked at the specs on your website. It shows that the Falcon FQ models have slightly less optical mag than the equivalent Condor CQ models. I'm assuming that results in the Falcons having a wider field of view. This would be an advantage to me when scanning in woodland. However 50% of my shooting is on agricultural land where the slightly higher mag of the Falcon FQ50 would help ID. I notice that the Falcon FQ50 has 2.6x optical mag. How much would this be a disadvantage in woodland? If using a Falcon FQ35 could I use 2x digital zoom to help with ID or would the increased pixilation reduce the quality of the image? I like the idea of having LRF but can live without it if a particular model of thermal suits me best. Thank you
FQ50 is better for foxing...
FQ35 better allrounder and lower cost...
Similar threads
