Thermal monocular

[ND308]

For the lads that have played with thermal - I am looking around 1000-1500 for a thermal monocular. Currently between Zeiss (mainly because I have a couple of Zeiss bits), Pulsar and HIK.
Any advice would be thankful
Will be used for spotting foxing and for a bit of help on deer in wooded areas.

 

[baguio]

A second hand XQ38F would be a very good buy.

 

[Flash G 74]

Hello, As above, There is one on Pigeon Watch for sale ?

 

[User00048]

For the lads that have played with thermal - I am looking around 1000-1500 for a thermal monocular. Currently between Zeiss (mainly because I have a couple of Zeiss bits), Pulsar and HIK.
Any advice would be thankful
Will be used for spotting foxing and for a bit of help on deer in wooded areas.

Blackwood Outdoors have Infiray Finder FH35R V2 brand new for £1400... the spec on those is better than anything else you can get new for the money and you get a warranty (wherever used it can be wobbly terms) and that's a fact. No other brand will give you 640 and rangefinder for that money and If you don't believe me, speak to Ian Blackwood himself, who tests all the brands and names. I myself have been using thermal of different brands in the field since 2016, just as a someone who does foxing and stalking.

This is because it's 640 resolution and has a rangefinder, anything else new for that money will be 384 or 320, so half the detail/more blur to what youre looking. Good magnification, good Net D - so heat shows well, the lower the NET D number, the higher the sensitivity.
The competition from Hik on that would be the Condor CQ35L Pro at around £1900, basically same spec on paper and you won't see a great deal of difference by eye. Pulsars competition on that would be a Axion 2 XG35 lrf , £2600.. I love those units myself and have a Pulsar bias as they are high quality and honest products but is it worth another £1200 over the Infiray, I say no.
The Infiray also has a F 0.9 35mm lens, the other two have F 1.0. Technically the F0.9 lens let's in more heat radiation.

Whatever you do, Ignore Zeiss altogether, you are only paying for the name. The specifications of the technology you pay for, is less money with competitors that know the technology better and they have been doing it longer. They aren't bad but you pay more for no reason. I do love Zeiss scopes, they are great at optics but they just jumped on the band wagon for the money when it comes to thermal imaging.

I hope that helps.

 

[User00048]

Infiray Finder FH35R V2 Thermal Monocular

The InfiRay Finder FH35R V2 thermal monocular offers high-resolution 640px imaging, F0.9 35mm lens, and long-range detection, ideal for outdoor pursuits.

www.blackwoodoutdoors.co.uk

 

[ND308]

Blackwood Outdoors have Infiray Finder FH35R V2 brand new for £1400... the spec on those is better than anything else you can get new for the money and you get a warranty (wherever used it can be wobbly terms) and that's a fact. No other brand will give you 640 and rangefinder for that money and If you don't believe me, speak to Ian Blackwood himself, who tests all the brands and names. I myself have been using thermal of different brands in the field since 2016, just as a someone who does foxing and stalking.

This is because it's 640 resolution and has a rangefinder, anything else new for that money will be 384 or 320, so half the detail/more blur to what youre looking. Good magnification, good Net D - so heat shows well, the lower the NET D number, the higher the sensitivity.
The competition from Hik on that would be the Condor CQ35L Pro at around £1900, basically same spec on paper and you won't see a great deal of difference by eye. Pulsars competition on that would be a Axion 2 XG35 lrf , £2600.. I love those units myself and have a Pulsar bias as they are high quality and honest products but is it worth another £1200 over the Infiray, I say no.
The Infiray also has a F 0.9 35mm lens, the other two have F 1.0. Technically the F0.9 lens let's in more heat radiation.

Whatever you do, Ignore Zeiss altogether, you are only paying for the name. The specifications of the technology you pay for, is less money with competitors that know the technology better and they have been doing it longer. They aren't bad but you pay more for no reason. I do love Zeiss scopes, they are great at optics but they just jumped on the band wagon for the money when it comes to thermal imaging.

I hope that helps.

Really informative and great learning for me, I’m completely new to thermal so need all the quality advice like that

 

[Blackwood Outdoors]

Blackwood Outdoors have Infiray Finder FH35R V2 brand new for £1400... the spec on those is better than anything else you can get new for the money and you get a warranty (wherever used it can be wobbly terms) and that's a fact. No other brand will give you 640 and rangefinder for that money and If you don't believe me, speak to Ian Blackwood himself, who tests all the brands and names. I myself have been using thermal of different brands in the field since 2016, just as a someone who does foxing and stalking.

This is because it's 640 resolution and has a rangefinder, anything else new for that money will be 384 or 320, so half the detail/more blur to what youre looking. Good magnification, good Net D - so heat shows well, the lower the NET D number, the higher the sensitivity.
The competition from Hik on that would be the Condor CQ35L Pro at around £1900, basically same spec on paper and you won't see a great deal of difference by eye. Pulsars competition on that would be a Axion 2 XG35 lrf , £2600.. I love those units myself and have a Pulsar bias as they are high quality and honest products but is it worth another £1200 over the Infiray, I say no.
The Infiray also has a F 0.9 35mm lens, the other two have F 1.0. Technically the F0.9 lens let's in more heat radiation.

Whatever you do, Ignore Zeiss altogether, you are only paying for the name. The specifications of the technology you pay for, is less money with competitors that know the technology better and they have been doing it longer. They aren't bad but you pay more for no reason. I do love Zeiss scopes, they are great at optics but they just jumped on the band wagon for the money when it comes to thermal imaging.

I hope that helps.

Thanks for that

Yes it's hard to not look at the V2 Finder for this money, in terms of specification and features at £1399.95 .

Also the Condor CQ35L is a popular choice too, although a chunk higher RRP than the above. If you don't need an LRF you can save £200 on a Falcon FQ35 over the Condor.

Pixfra 625 is decent price, but again not touching the Finder in terms of what you get for £££

Other options are part ex and some refurb stuff..

I have a Helion XP50 that I haven't got round to listing to add, probably around the £999 mark. Also I have a chunk of refurb stuff coming soon to add. Plenty of choice out there...

 

[Cyres]

Bruce has commented on here several times that with Zeiss your paying for the name and there are far better and cheaper options available.
You should also look at Pixfar thermals they are within your price bracket.
D

 

[Jammy-landy]

Right in your price range for a top level thermal with LRF!

Thread 'Pulsar XQ35 Pro Still Brand New'
For Sale: - Pulsar XQ35 Pro Still Brand New

 

[User00048]

XQ35 is a 384p unit. Not to be confused with an XG35 which is a 640 unit. Both priced differently new, with the XG35 being more expensive and a better image. The Infiray gives an image similar to the XG35.

Pixfra are relatively new to the market. I would view them as similar to earlier Thermtec models in terms of spec. Value for money but still not the value you can get with that Infiray model, as you won't get the LRF and even with a 640 unit by Pixfra, like Ian says, you get what you pay for. I would put Thermtec in that box too but I've only tried stuff from upto 2021/2022-ish, so I can't comment on the latest.

With stuff by Pixfra and atleast earlier stuff by Thermtec (as I've only tried earlier Thermtec stuff, in this case a v1 Cyclops 635 35 Net D 640 monocular unit) . Animals etc can look good up close but the further out they get, they look more and more "blobby" and you don't get a defined outlines.
So in my opinion the listed detection range isnt that accurate or useful because your actual identification range is much lower (it will always be lower in all units compared to detection but in this case, a lot) I believe it's due to the sofrware/firmware and using a form of denoise to compensate for the lower quality hardware and clean up the image better.. smoothing etc.
All thermal units do have this, they all have firmware and updates and settings to increase image quality and fix niggles... Chinese made units more than others but in this specific case, its overused and the side effect of that affects the image in this way. I think both Ian and MealieJimmy have discussed this before too.

The way I noticed this the most is with the earlier Thermtec v1 Cyclops 635, it actually had a manual setting for denoise numbered 0 to 5. (Normally this isnt the case and it just is the image, it's automatic with perhaps the option of a smoothing option to increase it a little) On 0 the image was very grainy and distracting but looked more natural in one way, on 5 animals looked what others have described before as "cartoony" it's un-natural. I kept it on 2 or 3 for a best of both scenario. I believe that without this programming/denoise on these Chinese units, you may get a better idea what the true NETD is of the unit (how heat sensitive it actually is) as I also think this software can also artificially make the heats look brighter than they are? I could be incorrect on that.

The Pulsar XP50 Ian is talking about is an older unit and is of course used but they are great and as it's 17um (not 12um) and a 50mm lens not a 35mm lens.. you will find it fairs okay in adverse weather as well as giving a large field of view with a low Base magnification. It's an early 640 (it's the first generation of the top of the range of the Pulsar Helions) but still hold up and on a budget if wanting to spend less, it's a good unit. Especially useful for woodland or open field spotting. I would take it over any 384 or 320 12um unit.

 

[Mossy]

Lots of second hand pulsar xp 50 about now for the money you want to spend. They are all you need for spotting,great bit of kit

 

[Smellydog]

I just got pixfra a635 and it's very good.
I like the denoise function.
I've had to turn the brightness right down though.

It's good how these devices are improving but with their original purpose in mind, they all work!
Getting all crossed up with each ones attributes over another can make one frightened of losing out!
Short of a base mag choice go with the highest censor you can afford.
Then look at the other functions and rule out what you may want or not want.

 

[bgkahuna]

I have a Axion 2 XG35 LRF, its a great handheld unit with a good image. I am going to change it for another pulsar without the LRF as I now have LRF on my bino's + I found the LRF on the Pulsar quite tricky for woodland stalking as it was very sensitive to branches and cover in a way that the binos dont seem to be