Night Vision Scope
#3
I would 10/10 recommend you to use Sightmark Wraith. Upgrade the IR and you’ll have more than enough “light” to shoot 700 yards.
You will definitely want a scanner of some sort. Thermal if you can afford, I can’t so I use a Sightmark signal 320rt night vision monocular.
You will definitely want a scanner of some sort. Thermal if you can afford, I can’t so I use a Sightmark signal 320rt night vision monocular.
#4
If you go with the ATN Xsight II you will need this kit to go with it. I don't even put internal batteries in it. It will eat them in about two hours.
Check this Gun Trusted site that will help to take decision whcich scope will good for you.
Check this Gun Trusted site that will help to take decision whcich scope will good for you.
#5
Spike
Join Date: May 2022
Posts: 10
I currently own a FLIR thermal, an AN/PVS-4 3rd gen, a MK7900 3rd gen ATN and a Pulsar digital. Not a fan of thermal, although the new stuff has gotten a lot better. You can see animals that you otherwise might not with thermal, but that don't necessarily mean you will get to shoot them.
I prefer my 3rd gen night vision with an illuminator. They don't give that away either, but it works flawless.
I have to say though that I am very impressed with the digital Pulsar. If it existed back when I started I probably would prefer it and for the initial layout of cash I definitely would have at least bought it first. You pretty much see the same as 3rd gen NV, but without the green tint.
Biggest advantage besides the reasonable price is the fact that it has higher magnification capability. Hard to zoom up even 3rd gen much over 4 or 5X because the screen gets "grainy". My digital goes up to either 15 or 20X and still looks pretty good. Still uses an illuminator to make their eyes shine. I cant really say about toughness and longevity...I have not had this digital for as long as I have had my NV. Coming up on 20 years of great service.
One final thing, the NV is pretty simple, the digital does a lot I don't need it to do and is complicated. In our modern gadget age some folks like that...I don't particularly need to go back to school to learn to use a scope!!!!
I prefer my 3rd gen night vision with an illuminator. They don't give that away either, but it works flawless.
I have to say though that I am very impressed with the digital Pulsar. If it existed back when I started I probably would prefer it and for the initial layout of cash I definitely would have at least bought it first. You pretty much see the same as 3rd gen NV, but without the green tint.
Biggest advantage besides the reasonable price is the fact that it has higher magnification capability. Hard to zoom up even 3rd gen much over 4 or 5X because the screen gets "grainy". My digital goes up to either 15 or 20X and still looks pretty good. Still uses an illuminator to make their eyes shine. I cant really say about toughness and longevity...I have not had this digital for as long as I have had my NV. Coming up on 20 years of great service.
One final thing, the NV is pretty simple, the digital does a lot I don't need it to do and is complicated. In our modern gadget age some folks like that...I don't particularly need to go back to school to learn to use a scope!!!!
#6
Spike
Join Date: Jun 2022
Posts: 19
Despite the fact that the newer materials are much better, thermals are not my favorite. Infrared cameras can help you find animals you wouldn't otherwise find, but that doesn't mean you can always take pictures. not. The biggest advantage besides affordability is the increased magnification.
#8
Spike
Join Date: Jun 2022
Posts: 19
I have a FLIR Thermal, 3rd Gen AN/PVS-4, 3rd Gen MK7900 ATN, and Pulsar Digital. Despite the fact that the new material is much better, thermals are not my favorite.If it was there when I first started, I probably would have preferred it.