DNT 225R?
- Thread starter kenbro
- Start date
I have one on my air rifle. I was ratting and saw a fox at about 50 yards so i used the scope to check it wasn't a farm dog.
In my personal opinion. It is not ideal. It will do the job, but I think the lens is too small and it is too focus fussy. OK if the fox is 100 yards away and mooching, put not great if it is moving constantly and you are having to keep focusing.
But I am a bit picky about the like, so I would go for the 635 for foxing.
I have made mention on another thread that I think the next big upgrade will be when they figure out how to focus both nv and thermal at the same time with one lever. I find that annoying. 1st world problems I guess.
In my personal opinion. It is not ideal. It will do the job, but I think the lens is too small and it is too focus fussy. OK if the fox is 100 yards away and mooching, put not great if it is moving constantly and you are having to keep focusing.
But I am a bit picky about the like, so I would go for the 635 for foxing.
I have made mention on another thread that I think the next big upgrade will be when they figure out how to focus both nv and thermal at the same time with one lever. I find that annoying. 1st world problems I guess.
Freeforester
Well-Known Member
The boffins would be dealing with two distinct ‘light/heat’ frequencies, and calibration would be required to maintain some semblance of resolution, which may or may not be achievable via autofocus plus calculations ongoing; fine if it works for sure, but could be a bit more power hungry on the battery and a bit more spendy?
kenbro
Well-Known Member
Back to the LEP.
KB.
Freeforester
Well-Known Member
No problem with the glass and the LEP, assuming the glass is sharply focused already, then you can concentrate on the sharpness of the thermal picture, which of course is passive.
I was more thinking about something similar to how you set up binoculars for the eyes, then have one central wheel to focus.
No idea if it would work, but that was my idea. Must patent it quickly.
How are you lads using these's thermal?night vision rifle scopes vermin shooting ?
I would have thought that spotting the quarry with the thermal part first, then id-ing it and shooting it with n/v would get the best out of such a unit ?
With what i see on y-tube -----it seems than people just seem to be using the larger screen to shoot with n/v ? ------have i got this wrong because if so, i just don't see what the advantage of the thermal is doing, and your paying a lot more money for it.
Dave (warbucks)
I would have thought that spotting the quarry with the thermal part first, then id-ing it and shooting it with n/v would get the best out of such a unit ?
With what i see on y-tube -----it seems than people just seem to be using the larger screen to shoot with n/v ? ------have i got this wrong because if so, i just don't see what the advantage of the thermal is doing, and your paying a lot more money for it.
Dave (warbucks)
kenbro
Well-Known Member
Spot with a thermal spotter then choice of thermal or NV to take the shot.
Spotting with the sight isn’t the best idea.
I’ve had some expensive thermal kit but still at times thought it would be nice if I’d had NV stuff with me instead of thermal, just on odd occasions.
Kb.
With the thermal set at min zoom and the nv zoomed in you can aquire the target quickly with the thermal in the big screen and identify 100 % with the nv in the pip.
It also gives you the possibility of just using the thermal to shoot should you have driven 60 miles into fog and the nv was useless with a fox looking at me 30 yards away.
No it is not necessary, but, it is a nice to have. And for the price it is great on rats.
It also gives you the possibility of just using the thermal to shoot should you have driven 60 miles into fog and the nv was useless with a fox looking at me 30 yards away.
No it is not necessary, but, it is a nice to have. And for the price it is great on rats.
It depends on what you mean by medium range? I have the 335R and the thermal -when slightly zoomed in- is OK for precise shooting to 100m at small stuff. Forget the thermal if you fully zoom out as it's just a mess of pixelation. But that is me, other people may not be as particular.
I use it as described by Singing Stalker above. I have seen videos of the 225R and they are not as good as my 335R.
I don't believe there is any cost effective way to keep both the optical and thermal images continuously in focus
Different wavelengths, different sensor sizes and different focal length lenses
Cheers
Bruce
Different wavelengths, different sensor sizes and different focal length lenses
Cheers
Bruce
7Miller
Well-Known Member
A mate runs the 225R on his 243 and uses the thermal to locate only, but then uses the digital day/night to actually shoot with.
He has clearly identified and shot foxes out to 150m and daytime deer out to 120m.
I run the 635R and the thermal is far superior as is the digital day night.
I do not use the thermal to shoot with but again, it's to get on to target quicker once things have been spotted with the hand held thermal.
Would I buy it again? Likely not, I'd more likely get the 335R and save myself the best part of £700 as the digital is the same as the 635 but the thermal is better than the 225R
He has clearly identified and shot foxes out to 150m and daytime deer out to 120m.
I run the 635R and the thermal is far superior as is the digital day night.
I do not use the thermal to shoot with but again, it's to get on to target quicker once things have been spotted with the hand held thermal.
Would I buy it again? Likely not, I'd more likely get the 335R and save myself the best part of £700 as the digital is the same as the 635 but the thermal is better than the 225R
Similar threads
