activeviii
Well-Known Member
Thank you for the video. Looks very good
InfiRay Finder FH25R Thermal
- Thread starter activeviii
- Start date
They do look good up close, thats my point from my initial post, at a distance there not .
Ian,
Please can you put your comment into context ? At exactly what distance does the RH25R go from having a VERY GOOD picture, to one worse than the Axion XQ38 ?
Anything past 80yds.
Out in the field not looking around buildings and objects, if anyone on here wants to come and see for themselves , I’m all for it ….
Not a problem.
In the new V3 I think I'm correct in saying the E6 Plus is a 35mm lens and the E6 Pro is a 50mm lens.
I used to use the V1 E6 Pro, 50mm with 17 Micron, and that would be the same field of view and magnification as the new 35mm 12 Micron. I found the wide field of view and very detailed image really useful in a spotter as my shooting isn't always at heroic long ranges.
The only things I didn't like about the V1, was the plastic eyepiece window and FLCOS display that would cause ghost images in white hot. This shouldn't be a problem on the V3 as they have a glass window and an OLED display now.
I really like the high contrast 'boosted' image on the Iray for spotting. It picks up even very distant targets instantly. So much so that I have set my Pard SA35 up to the same sort of 'look'.
I hope that helps.
Cheers
Clive
Rewulf
Well-Known Member
I went from an XM 30 S to the FH25R , its not an apples for apples comparison , but the Finder is far superior in image.
It was the size that initially attracted me , I was used to much larger thermals like the XQ and 'turd' shape models like the Hti and Eye series, I wanted something that would fit in a pocket or hang round my neck without dragging my head down !
Im still using the Finder over a year later as my main spotter, Ive looked at others and they just dont tick the boxes on improvement.
Yes I would prefer more base mag than the Finders 1.5x , but this is what makes the image so clear.
The rangefinder isnt the greatest, it really depends what its pointing at reflectively, but I have ranged past 600M , and when it works , its pretty quick, and there is a constant scanning mode.
The battery has never run out on me , its been on for longer than its claimed 6 hours, and even when the icon is empty and flashing red, its never shut down.
Initially , like Ian says , it seemed harsh on my eyes, even on low brightness, there is a fair bit of difference between Pulsars blue colour palette , and Irays grey/brown, I will say I prefer Irays, and after a few outings , the 'glare' didnt bother me any more.
The zoom function goes up in .5 increments, but like all thermals , is digital , and only degrades the image, and this I would say , is the fundamental difference between the Finder and say, an XM or XQ 38, that 2.5 or 3.5 base zoom on the Pulsars gives them a grainy effect that you might think is perfectly OK , until you look through the Finder, one of my perms I can see clearly across a wooded hillside nearly a kilometre across, and have tracked fox, badger and muntjac all the way across to me, I can see cows and sheep at least a mile away, and field mice over a 100 M away.
When I bought it from Mr Ray, I trialled every Xeye he had
(I originally went there to buy an E3max) but to my eyes the Finder was the better thing, even with its puny 25 mm lens.
Yes , an Accolade is better, but they also cost 4 grand, but I paid less than 2 for my FH25 brand new
Would I buy it again , yes , if they bought a newer model out, yes again.
It was the size that initially attracted me , I was used to much larger thermals like the XQ and 'turd' shape models like the Hti and Eye series, I wanted something that would fit in a pocket or hang round my neck without dragging my head down !
Im still using the Finder over a year later as my main spotter, Ive looked at others and they just dont tick the boxes on improvement.
Yes I would prefer more base mag than the Finders 1.5x , but this is what makes the image so clear.
The rangefinder isnt the greatest, it really depends what its pointing at reflectively, but I have ranged past 600M , and when it works , its pretty quick, and there is a constant scanning mode.
The battery has never run out on me , its been on for longer than its claimed 6 hours, and even when the icon is empty and flashing red, its never shut down.
Initially , like Ian says , it seemed harsh on my eyes, even on low brightness, there is a fair bit of difference between Pulsars blue colour palette , and Irays grey/brown, I will say I prefer Irays, and after a few outings , the 'glare' didnt bother me any more.
The zoom function goes up in .5 increments, but like all thermals , is digital , and only degrades the image, and this I would say , is the fundamental difference between the Finder and say, an XM or XQ 38, that 2.5 or 3.5 base zoom on the Pulsars gives them a grainy effect that you might think is perfectly OK , until you look through the Finder, one of my perms I can see clearly across a wooded hillside nearly a kilometre across, and have tracked fox, badger and muntjac all the way across to me, I can see cows and sheep at least a mile away, and field mice over a 100 M away.
When I bought it from Mr Ray, I trialled every Xeye he had
(I originally went there to buy an E3max) but to my eyes the Finder was the better thing, even with its puny 25 mm lens.Yes , an Accolade is better, but they also cost 4 grand, but I paid less than 2 for my FH25 brand new
Would I buy it again , yes , if they bought a newer model out, yes again.
Interesting very… I too preferred the image on the tiny Finder to the image on the max range, but I still stand by my opinion , that the finders had one of the best images up close but the worst at a distance .. in fact I ended up using a pair of old XQ38 LRF accolades myself when we have been out , the image is not as good as the Finder up very close , but at a distance it’s much better, LRF is heaps better and the replaceable battery is a must if I’m in the middle of a dale or moor , I still have every LRF available to compare , I’m sure at some point we will be treated with some real exciting stuff to combine everything with amazing advancements ..I went from an XM 30 S to the FH25R , its not an apples for apples comparison , but the Finder is far superior in image.
It was the size that initially attracted me , I was used to much larger thermals like the XQ and 'turd' shape models like the Hti and Eye series, I wanted something that would fit in a pocket or hang round my neck without dragging my head down !
Im still using the Finder over a year later as my main spotter, Ive looked at others and they just dont tick the boxes on improvement.
Yes I would prefer more base mag than the Finders 1.5x , but this is what makes the image so clear.
The rangefinder isnt the greatest, it really depends what its pointing at reflectively, but I have ranged past 600M , and when it works , its pretty quick, and there is a constant scanning mode.
The battery has never run out on me , its been on for longer than its claimed 6 hours, and even when the icon is empty and flashing red, its never shut down.
Initially , like Ian says , it seemed harsh on my eyes, even on low brightness, there is a fair bit of difference between Pulsars blue colour palette , and Irays grey/brown, I will say I prefer Irays, and after a few outings , the 'glare' didnt bother me any more.
The zoom function goes up in .5 increments, but like all thermals , is digital , and only degrades the image, and this I would say , is the fundamental difference between the Finder and say, an XM or XQ 38, that 2.5 or 3.5 base zoom on the Pulsars gives them a grainy effect that you might think is perfectly OK , until you look through the Finder, one of my perms I can see clearly across a wooded hillside nearly a kilometre across, and have tracked fox, badger and muntjac all the way across to me, I can see cows and sheep at least a mile away, and field mice over a 100 M away.
When I bought it from Mr Ray, I trialled every Xeye he had
Yes , an Accolade is better, but they also cost 4 grand, but I paid less than 2 for my FH25 brand new
Would I buy it again , yes , if they bought a newer model out, yes again.
I use the Finder personally
Image is better than the xq38 axion lrf which I also have trialled for my own unit.
Read this thread a while back and was out tonight.
The hillside at 1700m was crisp and the warm rocks in sharp contrast against the heather.
I don’t use high mag
Can’t see the benefit or need to wind it up to 8x
I could easily ID the two deer 20m and distinguish from two sheep in a plantation at 200+m away
Sheep at 400m
Sheep at 7-800m
The rangefinder is fine.
I have not had it be fussy or unresponsive
It happily pings away and returns hits out to 3-4-500yds(m)
I want this for night work and shots inside 300 for which it works perfectly and is exactly what I need
my only complain is the packaging and button placement
They are not placed intuitively
The unit sits in my hand more comfortably when vertical rather than the horizontal as designed
The size is excellent for my needs
The image/screen could be bigger but it’s a good trade off on the external dimensions
othewise it’s priced sensibly
Image is better than the xq38 axion lrf which I also have trialled for my own unit.
Read this thread a while back and was out tonight.
The hillside at 1700m was crisp and the warm rocks in sharp contrast against the heather.
I don’t use high mag
Can’t see the benefit or need to wind it up to 8x
I could easily ID the two deer 20m and distinguish from two sheep in a plantation at 200+m away
Sheep at 400m
Sheep at 7-800m
The rangefinder is fine.
I have not had it be fussy or unresponsive
It happily pings away and returns hits out to 3-4-500yds(m)
I want this for night work and shots inside 300 for which it works perfectly and is exactly what I need
my only complain is the packaging and button placement
They are not placed intuitively
The unit sits in my hand more comfortably when vertical rather than the horizontal as designed
The size is excellent for my needs
The image/screen could be bigger but it’s a good trade off on the external dimensions
othewise it’s priced sensibly
phillips321
Well-Known Member
Tl;dr Sent back after ~6months as unreliable, the replacement also unreliable, got full refund and bought accolade 2 XP50 LRF
I bought one, used it but it kept crashing. It would often happen and despite returning it mutilple times they never sorted it. The worst thing is it would crash and then take 30seconds or so to get back on, the final straw was when i shot a boar, picked up the FH25R to see where the rest of the group had run but it had crashed, loosing my chance on putting more in the chiller.
The replacement did EXACTLY the same thing within 20 minutes of opening it at home.
The picture quality was good, but the range finder was a complete waste of time, it constantly struggled to pick up objects. Built in battery was also a pain in the backside.
In the end i bit the bullet and bought some accolade 2 XP50s LRF and there's no looking back.
phillips321
Well-Known Member
I mostly echo this ^
The LRF on the finder is a waste of time
The finder picture was nice but the software extremely buggy.
@activeviii I know you're local to me if you want to look through the accolades? Buy once cry once?
activeviii
Well-Known Member
Cheers for info, I can not afford the accolade, it's way above the normal man's allowance.
I think I'll wait for the E6-V3 and see if the bugs have been sorted out. My 30v lite has done me very well over the years. Just be nice to look at a shape and know what it is rather than have to put the NV on to the glow to get the answer
The problem is not the sensor with that unit, its the rest of the guts inside and out.. it's built cheap, same when you come to sell it you will recoup less for it than other brands.. If build quality, replaceable battery, features, software control, residual value when you come to upgrade or sell is not an issue then there worth a look.
Kevgun
Well-Known Member
I have tried the FH25R for a while because I really wanted it to be ranging capable , but the biggest disappointment is the rangefinder itself, hardly ranges at all, tried various different ways but not good, the picture itself is OK, but lost in the tiny display and by the time it's magged up it's to pixelated to be of any use, I'm personally not a Fan of onboard batteries, so that was another minus. I wanted the Accolade Pro LRF, but it wasn't available at the time, So I Purchased the Axion XQ38LRF which the picture is on par with my old XQ50 quantum which I liked, the Rangefinder seems to work better in scan mode if you get yourself really steady Rated at 1000 Yards i have registered 1284 on it, so it's very capable, It also uses the IPS5 batteries which are about the same size as the veritable 18650 battery, so sticking an extra one in your pocket is no problem and a battery last about 6 hours depending if you remember to switch off scanning on the LRF changing the battery in the field can be done even in complete darkness in about 15 seconds. The shape took some getting used to after the Quantum, but now I have the correct neckstrap ( Thanks Ian Blackwood ) things have improved somewhat, so for £2k - ish I fail to see anything better for the Money.
lot of people comparing a £2k item (Finder) to a £4k+ (Accolade pro) item and saying how much better they are....
not really a comparison
not really a comparison
Axion LRF
Better built overall, magnesium housing .
Replaceable battery
100% better and more powerful LRF with true angle distance .
Better long range image .
Finder FL25/FH25R
Better up close image
Smaller unit
Diabolical rangefinder although it does work
Integrated battery,,, urggh
Eye strain eye display with prolonged use
Integrated recording/wifi
Poor long range image, in comparison to all other LRF models available . ..
What I will say, I just looked through both Finder models 250yds down a street and it looks really good, doing this I would pick the Finder if I didn’t know any better but in reality put it out in the field in a lower temperature differential environment and it’s poor and the Axion is better , so is an old Helion XQ38 at range.
All true facts, offer still stands , I’m all for proving my statements in the field , if anyone doubts them and wants to see for themselves..
I think it’s important to put things into perspective, and compare units “like for like”.
first, and foremost, choose a unit to suit the type of shooting, and terrain you’ll be hunting.
Close up, and woodland, a low mag, wide field of view unit is best.
long distance, open field, then you want higher mag, and field of view isn’t quite important.
I shoot mainly woodland, or boar over feed stations, average distance 40-100m.
For the type of shooting I do, I need very low mag, wide field of view, especially when shooting boar, where there may be 10+ animals come out, and I want to view them all, so I can choose which one I want to cull.
the Accolades retail at £4650.00, & have a base mag of 2.5x.
the Axion XQ38 LRF is well priced at £2130.00, but totally useless for me with a base mag of 3.5x !
“Detection range” spec’s, are more for marketing, than practical use. Who on earth needs to spot, or range things at 1000m +, other than people shooting long range vermin, and then, they’d most likely using a far better range finder in the first place !
The best advice anyone can give, is advice that meets the questioners requirements, in this case, I don’t think Pulsar have a suitable unit !
Likewise, I fancied a new thermal sight, for boar shooting. I love the Rico RL42, and rate it very highly, but it’s 4x base mag is useless, and Iray don’t offer a low mag unit, with the picture quality I want, but Pulsar do.
Buy what suits your requirements, NOT just a brand, or a sales pitch !
first, and foremost, choose a unit to suit the type of shooting, and terrain you’ll be hunting.
Close up, and woodland, a low mag, wide field of view unit is best.
long distance, open field, then you want higher mag, and field of view isn’t quite important.
I shoot mainly woodland, or boar over feed stations, average distance 40-100m.
For the type of shooting I do, I need very low mag, wide field of view, especially when shooting boar, where there may be 10+ animals come out, and I want to view them all, so I can choose which one I want to cull.
the Accolades retail at £4650.00, & have a base mag of 2.5x.
the Axion XQ38 LRF is well priced at £2130.00, but totally useless for me with a base mag of 3.5x !
“Detection range” spec’s, are more for marketing, than practical use. Who on earth needs to spot, or range things at 1000m +, other than people shooting long range vermin, and then, they’d most likely using a far better range finder in the first place !
The best advice anyone can give, is advice that meets the questioners requirements, in this case, I don’t think Pulsar have a suitable unit !
Likewise, I fancied a new thermal sight, for boar shooting. I love the Rico RL42, and rate it very highly, but it’s 4x base mag is useless, and Iray don’t offer a low mag unit, with the picture quality I want, but Pulsar do.
Buy what suits your requirements, NOT just a brand, or a sales pitch !
activeviii
Well-Known Member
My needs are rats in barns and around the farms. I just need a glow and movement. The rest the NV will deal with.
Early morning stalking, getting ahead of the deer and wait for the light to come good to shoot, so a bit of distance needed.
Night time I need to work the difference between muntjac, fox and Badger so I don't have a wasted trip into a field full of sheep or cattle.
I have been using the pulsar 30v lite for years and I have got use to it but I'm still getting the wasted trips. Much past 500 then it's a light glow so I'm thinking I'm missing something here.
I do have to walk through woods and darker areas at night so the one thing I don't want is the black out eye. I use red on the pulsar at the momnet and I'm use to it.
My budget will not stretch to high end.
Early morning stalking, getting ahead of the deer and wait for the light to come good to shoot, so a bit of distance needed.
Night time I need to work the difference between muntjac, fox and Badger so I don't have a wasted trip into a field full of sheep or cattle.
I have been using the pulsar 30v lite for years and I have got use to it but I'm still getting the wasted trips. Much past 500 then it's a light glow so I'm thinking I'm missing something here.
I do have to walk through woods and darker areas at night so the one thing I don't want is the black out eye. I use red on the pulsar at the momnet and I'm use to it.
My budget will not stretch to high end.
To be honest, you could get away with a much cheaper thermal, in fact, I'd suggest looking at the Iray SCP19. Its a thermal sight, but is tiny, and would easily work as a spotter too, if you wanted.
It's not the best, but pretty good for shorter distances. Base mag is 2.3x.
Retails at £1200.00, but there are discounts available. It's worth a look.
Similar threads
