35mm or 50mm thermal??

[Tom102938]

Hi all,

So currently I am using a 50mm objective lens on a old pulsar thermal and looking to upgrade.

I am just wondering what the general consensus is with regards to 35mm and 50mm.

I shoot woodland and open field (I am looking to become a sole shooter of some more open hill). Some woodland is quite spacious, other bits are pretty much that thick a thermal wont see through it.

I am currently looking at a HikMicro Condor or Falcon. Would like one with a LRF and need to weigh up the options on a 35mm or 50mm objective lens.

Any help would be appreciated.

 

[One on top of two]

I have the condor 2.0 CQ50L and I’m very happy with it. Most of my shooting is very open though.

 

[jthyttin]

You can tell the exact model of your current device, so it's easy to calculate the FOV and how much more detail you'd see with a given new unit.

 

[Tom102938]

You can tell the exact model of your current device, so it's easy to calculate the FOV and how much more detail you'd see with a given new unit.

The model I have now is the Pulsar Quantum XD50s

 

[Pellet Pinger]

Can throughly recommend the Condor i went with the 35 as my shooting is mixed woodland and open fields foxing.
The wider fov is helpful at closer range in the woods and it hasn’t been found wanting foxing.

 

[wytonpjs]

50mm all the way!

 

[jthyttin]

The model I have now is the Pulsar Quantum XD50s

So the sensor is 384x288 and 17 micron/um. Current crop is 12um, so basically 35mm 384x288 sensor is equivalent to your old device by Field of View. Since the number of pixels is same, the theoretical detail is also same. But new sensors are much more sensitive so the picture you see is better, especially in bad conditions (high humidity etc). To quantify this, comparing side by side you might say new one has 2x or 3x better image (?)

Also the Chinese thermals have software that makes the image more "punchy" compared to Pulsar. Looks better and cleaner, but you lose some detail (now were comparing to contemporary Pulsar, compared to your old unit the image is superior in all ways). There are differences among (Chinese) manufacturers, and usually in spotter "punchy" is kind of good thing (compared to sight, where you'd like details). You might lose something in "the lay of the land" i.e. you won't see subtle differences like rising and declining land so clearly (planning approach, judging backstop etc)

If you move to 50mm but keep 384 sensor, you will lose about 1/3 of the view but gain further 50% detail over 35mm (or put another way, 50mm can see same stuff at 50% longer range). If you upgrade to 640 sensor, you gain about 70% FOV.

So:

- if you're happy with current FOV, 35mm 12um 384 will match it
- 50mm 12um 640x512 will have even 20% wider FOV
- if you want detail, are on budget and can sacrifice FOV, 50mm 12um 384x288 will have 2/3 of your current FOV

All the options will give you vastly better detail/image, and 50mm will better the 35mm by 50%.

 

[GBR66]

Can throughly recommend the Condor i went with the 35 as my shooting is mixed woodland and open fields foxing.
The wider fov is helpful at closer range in the woods and it hasn’t been found wanting foxing.

Thats whai have, with the higher resolution sensor - fantastic device and FOV feels just right.

 

[Pellet Pinger]

Here’s a direct comparison of the FOV of the 35 vs 50.

 

[Edinburgh Rifles]

35mm for me
Lower base mag and much wider FoV over larger heavier lens - that and the £400 saving......


If of interest we have:

Ex Demo CQ50 1.0 boxfresh £1500 (Originally £2199)
Brand New CQ35 1.0 £1500 (£1799 RRP)
Brand New CQ35 2.0 £1900 (£2100 RRP)

 

[Tom102938]

Just purchased the HikMicro CQ50L.

Got too much of a good deal with it.

Thanks all

 

[Pellet Pinger]

Just purchased the HikMicro CQ50L.

Got too much of a good deal with it.

Thanks all

You won’t go wrong with that, bloody great thermals whichever one you go with