Side note about a "darker" vs "brighter" tube. If you spend a lot of time running nvg, especially with a monocular, you'll actually want to run your gain as low as you can almost all the time. Natural night vision still goes a long way even in overcast conditions in the middle of nowhere, cranking up your gain wrecks that. Run low gain unless you're trying to identify something far away and your eye can still make out shapes around the sides of the tube and its easier to walk. Crank up the gain and you get really bad tunnel vision.
As someone who owns a Photonis echo PVS-14 i can say very easily its performed excellent in all conditions i can think of from moonless overcast woods walks to very urban lighting around the house.
@@iSmxtty What you're referring to is SNR, (signal to noise ratio) all NVGs will have that grain in the image, if your SNR spec is higher, there will be much less. There's a lot of resources where you can learn before you buy Also, NV almost always looks a LOT better in person than on camera
@iSmxtty This video in particular makes nv look really bad, Ultimate Night Vision and custom night vision have good videos on what it actually looks like
I have literally immersed myself in every YT source on NV.... THIS IS BY FAR... THE MOST IMPACTFUL AND WHAT I REALLY WANTED TO KNOW... IN ONE CLIP. Outstanding performance gentlemen! ( my brain was so cluster forked... that I stopped the path towards purchase... in the first 2 yesrs... ), KUDO'S to you both. My utmost need is thermal right now... I live in N.E. Oklahoma and the last 3 to 4 years... the environment on the 5300+ acres we cover is the most extremely rich target environment... in 40 years... second only to a particular producing fruit tree orchard ( 2100 acres ) that every time I've been ( it's over 450 miles to get there... ) we run out of ammo and it has taken 13 workers 12 hours to gather our bounty... Appreciate you my friend, Seth
@@RDT_IR nightvision and thermal 💪🏻 we just received another shipment of weapons mounted thermal units and handhelds. More coming in the next two weeks. You should check the site out and see what’s up 💪🏻
I recently ordered a pvs-14 with the Photonis tube. I was worried I made a mistake but after watching a few videos I'm glad I went with them. Seeing you put up all three images I prefer the Photonis. It seems like it has better depth and contrast where he Harris WP is brighter but seems washed out. Honestly haven't ran NVD's since 04'-06' when I was rocking PVS-7's.
Good stuff I never knew about. They just issued stuff and I used it and handled it like a red headed step child. Now I'm retired and looking to get a set for myself I nearly sh*t myself seeing how much they are. I've use the pvs7 and pvs14 and love the pvs14
Excellent video with great info. Anyone considering buying NV, this video has invaluable info and these guys are giving great advice. Thanks guys. Star rating for this video: 87x.
I bought an echo PVS-14 and I am very happy with the performance. I also have an Iray MH25 thermal I'm planning to run as a bridge. I think the thermal will make up for any lack of the Echo in extreme darkness. Unfortunately my PVS-14 had some contamination in the eye piece and I had to send it back for repair. I should get it back tomorrow.
Military doesn't request spotless tube.. there are two standards that they created for that... ground/mil spec and aviation spec. A ground/milspec spot spec allows for max 4 spots greater than .003” per tube with no spots in zone 1 greater than .003”. Within this max of 4 allowable spots, there can be no more than 3 spots in zone 2 or 3 in one tube. Like every spot spec, spots equal to or smaller than .003” are acceptable in any zone and do not count as spots. Aviation spot specs were created at the request of the military to have cleaner tubes for their strict aviation needs. An aviation spot spec is max 3 spots per tube which are only allowable in zone 3. With no allowable spots greater than .003” in zone 1 or 2 the aviation spot spec is best for those who need the cleanest tubes possible.
It's awesome how other companies are giving a more affordable opportunity to purchase NVG's to people. Used to be $4,500 - $6,000 with few brands to choose from.
@@Flexapr Idk what all those lame symbols are, but hope you enjoy Ukraine becoming " Russia , West ". Zelenskyy was given a choice by Russia, capitulation or annihilation. He chose the ladder, and armed his civilians and forced them to fight. Condemning them all to die. What a shame.
can you advise me please ... I want to use a PVS-14 with a 3x to spot and confirm quarry after finding it with thermal .... Sometimes due to conditions thermal cant tell you what it is at 300 yards plus ... So I want to be able to see and identify out to 400 yards but with the aid of an IR . Can you tell me which unit would work best for me ? Greg
A photonis tube will not compare to an Elbit or L3 tube in terms of low light performance. It is not a minimal difference either. If you're using your night vision under heavy canopy, overcast conditions, a new moon, or some combination, an unfilmed tube will run circles around a photonis tube or even a thin filmed tube. I've used them all in these environments. And as of now, we see large drops of L3 and Elbit tubes every month or so. Even PVS31A lead times have come down to a few months through many dealers. I would have led with the line about high light environments personally, in a city type environment you do have an advantage with photonis tubes due to the hypergating technology. And obviously if you're gonna use suplemental IR it doesnt really matter what tubes you have but at that point you're basically using a flashlight. This isn't 2004, it's very easy and cheap to see IR now. I wouldn't assume bad people can't see your light show. Are the photonis tubes trash? Hell no, but let's not pretend like you dont get a very real performance increase with the more expensive stuff. As always, mission dictates gear requirements.
Are these the ECHO+ tubes? Because 2200 FOM for ECHO tubes usually is only on the plus models. By the way, 4G is also a good option, it's mil-spec so no spots at all.
Nothing wrong with Photonis I'd take Elbit xlsh over them though. Also I'd say EBI and Halo are more important than FOM. If your out in the sticks, woods, no moon you'll want the lowest EBI you can. If your in more of a city setting alot of street lights (light pollution) your going to want a lower halo or your going to be dealing with a lot of bloom.
The photonis tubes have had some of the most consistent, high tier specs out of all the tubes we play with. We are out in the sticks killing critters, driving, navigating in all conditions and we have yet to find a situation where the Photonis would leave us out to dry. They are definitely one option of many and one people should consider without internet bias.
@Photonis Defense, Inc. no need to travel to PA I own your echo tube in a pvs-14 I also have a pvs-14 with Elbit xlsh wp and a set of RNVGs with L3 wp tubes. I said your tubes where fine I just prefer the Elbit tubes over yours. I also prefer the L3's over the Elbits, but your talking triple the price.
Photonis is not Gen 2. As far as performance, most of the 1800 Min FOM tubes are well over 1800. Yes, they are very good performers, very clean and clear tubes, perfect budget option. You won't regret it.
That’s a lie, photonis is absolutely gen 2. It just has auto-gating, which was invented post-gen3 and can be added or older gens. It’s very well made gen 2, it’s easitly the best performing and highest developed gen 2. But it’s still gen 2. Saying it’s not gen 2 is just a straight up lie
@@PhotonisDefenseNightVision “photonis is not gen 2 as most people out there think of it” is a very different statement from “photonis is not gen 2”. One is true, the other is false. And knowingly making false statements is called lying. Note the words that came out of your mouth were different than TA targets, cause you didn’t want to lie like they did. You’re right the generation classification thing isn’t as useful as it once was, and photonis making gen 2 tubes that handily out preform the earlier iterations of gen 3 is certainly the reason for that. And specifically photonis gen 2 has some attributes that are better than current gen 3. Like your auto gating, high light performance, and out of band sensitivity. But let’s not pretend like the only advantage to current gen 3 is higher gain lol. Come on, let’s be real. Current thin filmed an unfilmed gen 3 from Elbit and L3 simply preform better in the lowest of lighting conditions, which is the entire point of night vision. I’ll grant that the difference isn’t huge, and when you’re not beyond the failure point in lighting photonis has very clean and clear image resolution. But at the end of the day photonis will stop being able to resolve an image before elbit thin film, and elbit thin film will stop being able to resolve and image before L3 unfilmed. Even if the photonis has higher numbers on its spec sheet than the elbit, and even if the elbit has high numbers on its spec sheet than the L3. This is simply the way that it is, and what I’m saying is true. But again granted, the difference isn’t huge. For most people photonis is probably good enough. Especially urban and suburban users, saving a little money and going with photonis is probably the right play. But if you live out in the sticks, with thick woods, and throw cloud cover into the mix, you’re probably going to be disappointed if you buy photonis. Let’s be real, if even YOU the guy running the photonis UA-cam channel. Had to go do some important night op in the forest or jungle in the middle of nowhere, and you had to pick from photonis or L3 unfilmed. You would take the L3 every time. But again I’ll grant, if you had to do the same thing in an urban or suburban area you’d probably take photonis, and I probably would too.
@@PhotonisDefenseNightVision unfortunately i live on the west coast, in the thick woods with constant cloud cover lol, or else I would bring my unfilmed tube and play. But I already know that more gain doesn’t enable you to see definition better, hell glass quality in your housing plays a bigger role than that. I prefer manual gain specifically to be able to turn it down, cause gain doesn’t boost clarity. It’s only brightness. Hell even in some cases the numbers on your spec sheet don’t translate very well to how well an image can be resolved. This is one of the points i granted to you about photonis, they produce extremely clean images, even despite what the spec numbers and generation may convey. But when we’re talking about the breaking point of lighting, where a device will stope resolving a usable image. The biggest determining factor is the technology being employed. And that tier list goes photonis, thin filmed, then unfilmed in the lead. Again, granted the difference isn’t huge. But current photonis will stop resolving an image due to lack of available light a little bit sooner than current thin filmed elbit or L3. And current thin filmed elbit or L3 will stop being able to resolve an image slightly before current L3 unfilmed. If you need something that will go the furthest possible without supplemental light then unfilmed is the best option. But again. The differences aren’t huge, and most people don’t need to min/max to achieve this specific characteristic. So most people are probably totally fine going with photonis or elbit. And for the price a photonis tube is probably going to have a more clear image than whatever the closest price elbit tube can produce. I’m really not trying to knock photonis or talk unfilmed up, I’m really trying to stress that these differences are not big. But they are differences none the less. And when taking about $3-10k pieces of electro optics and the long bouts of research people do to try to figure it out, we have plenty of time to talk about the fine nuances. I actually think a clean image is more important than high numbers on a piece of paper. I didn’t think fine detail or spots in your tube were a big deal until I got into it and found out I really hate spots and crisp clean detail helps a ton in noticing things. I think most people should learn what the technology limitations are between the 3 top options, pick the lowest on that’s good enough, and the max out in image cleanliness and and clarity. I bet for a lot of casual users that’s going to put them into the photonis camp. But it’s still not “not gen 2” like TA said. And it’s also not “just as good” at seeing in the pitch dark. If you need the most break neck low light performance you can get, unfilmed is simply the best. And sometimes you can get commercial spec elbit thin film for cheaper than photonis that will see a little bit better into the pitch dark but with a less clean and clear image. They’re all slightly different, each with their own cost/benefits, and people really want to know what those benefits are in order to make the right cost/benefit analysts. But also at the same time all 3 of them are extremely good and viable, so you’re probably not going to be upset any way you go lol
@@PhotonisDefenseNightVision yeah “unfilmed” would be more accurately described as “less film”. The ion barriers were introduced in gen 3 tubes because GaAs was effectively “too good” at electron conduction and was rapidly burning tubes to death in the early development of gen 3. So the ion barriers were implemented to nerf the efficacy of GaAs. Then as time and development continued they improved the ion barriers to make them as thin as possible so it would still offer protection, but without nerfing the whole system too badly. This is where the term thin film comes from, and why current gen 3 is substantially better than early forms of “thick film” gen 3 (plus other components improvement in manufacturing). But this made the switch (and improvement) from gen 2 multi alkaloid to gen 3 GaAs (gallium arsenide) alkaloid less substantial in practice that it was supposed to theoretically give on paper. So many years later, the US military requested that L3 and elbit develop gen 3 that could not just thin, but remove some of these ion barriers from gen 3 in order to get the full theoretical performance boost from GaAs, and that would become the new gen 4 if they were able to succeed. With L3 eventually figuring out the secret sauce to achieve this, and elbit not necessarily failing, but deciding to put their efforts into improving manufacturing techniques to squeeze as much performance out of thin film as possible. But since there’s only two gen 3 NV developers/designer/manufacturers and the US military needs them both to exist. Upon L3 succeeding to develop what the military would call gen 4 and elbit failing but also coming out with super high performance thin film. The military decided to scrap the idea of giving L3 unfilmed the new gen 4 monicker, and deciding to implement them both. Getting extremely good thin film from elbit at a lower cost to issue to grunts, and the higher performance and more expensive “would’ve been gen 4” L3 unfilmed to elite forces under JSOC. Keeping both other their NV developers alive and useful. Re-cap. Gen 2 uses a multi alkaloid material as its primary conductor of electrons through the tube, which has a certain amount of resistance and thus electron loss (electrons are the lifeblood of NV image intensification). The move from gen 2 to gen 3 was the implementation of GaAs instead of multi alkaloid as the primary electron conductor, which has effectively no resistance and no electron loss. But this turbo charge of performance had to be unfortunately mitigated with ion barriers, which over time and development would be thinned for even better performance in later gen 3. Ultimately culminating in L3’s success in fully removing the now “thin film” barrier and being able to mostly take advantage of the true potential GaAs was always meant to unlock. Achieving the goal set by the DOD for what should have been gen 4. As well as elbit also making huge strides in thin film technology in the process, similar to the way photonis has been able to make huge strides in developing gen 2 tech into something that blows the doors off previous gen 2 and even being able to stand toe to toe with current gen 3. So yes you are absolutely right in saying gen 2 is the only true filmless NV tubes currently. But only because it never needed it in the first place. Which isn’t a bad way to go about it. Going back to pre GaAs and souping it up to avoid the negative repercussions of these ion barriers obviously was a smart play by photonis, and that’s probably a major contributor to why they get such clean and clear images, but also explains why they fall a little shorter of thin film and unfilmed in the pitch dark image generation department. It is these technological differences between the 3 that makes the small difference in their performance characteristics. Sure the numbers do mean something, but the real driving factor in what separates them is these technological differences. It’s why you can go buy 3000fom elbit thin film, but you probably can’t find an L3 unfilmed tube with performance numbers like that. But also why a 3000fom elbit thin film tube will perform similarly to a 2376fom L3 unfilmed tube (and will cost about the same). The lower numbers in the unfilmed tube are boosted by the evolution of the technology in it. And it’s also why a 2000fom photonis tube will probably have a more crisp and clean image than both of them, but with less (not a lot, but less) light boosting performance. The numbers don’t quite add up when comparing the 3, and the performance doesn’t quite add up 1:1 when comparing the 3, because of the differences in technology being employed between them. Which is why I stress people really shouldn’t get wrapped up in the spec sheet numbers when deciding on what NV to buy. Learn the technological differences and thus their minute performance nuances that come from it. Then get the nicest one from that category you can reasonably afford.
While shooting at night wearing a head mounted PVS-14, will it get damaged if I use my weapon mounted IR/Visible laser designator pointing at a target downrange? I feel like what's keeping me from buying one right now is the thought of it being "too sensitive" to many different variables.
If you have a really bright laser and point it at a really reflective surface up too close, it is possible. But really only if you hold still and stare at it for longer than you should. Think like setting your device on a tripod so it’s still and likewise with the rifle and leaving them there for a little while. It’s really unlikely but if you’re doing filming from a tripod it COULD happen. If you’re using it like a human that isn’t perfectly still and you run into a situation where your laser is cranked a little too high and pointed at a reflective surface that’s a little too close. What will happen is you’ll see a little faint black streak left over after the brief over exposure. This happens quite a lot and it will fade away after 10-20 seconds like it never happened. It’s not something to be alarmed about but it’s a good warning that you’re starting to breach the “too bright” boundary. And this can help you gauge the brightness of things you want to limit exposure to in the future. You really just want to limit exposure time in one particular point in the screen. The brighter something is, the less time you want that bright light sitting stationary in the tubes image. Long winded way of saying don’t fuckin worry about it and with most things that are indeed too bright you’ll see a little bit of non damaging non permanent burn in beforehand. Except some things like a full power laser being pointed directly into the tube, that level of high pinpoint brightness can instantly cause permanent burn in.
So I’m new to this…. Looking to pick up a setup, are there lots of manufactures out there? I see AGM, ATN, superior tactical, Tech…. Are they all the same?
Many people are utilizing similar or the same components. So it comes down to using a reliable, trustworthy source. Also, sending your money to companies effecting change in culture matters! So if you’re ready for a PVS14, we’d love to chat and help you out with that. Info@tatargets.com is our email to get that conversation started.
@@TATargets I heard some people complaining (I think garandthumb may have mention it also) that the mawl causes flickering with Photonis tubes. I haven’t tried them out so I’m curious as they are definitely more affordable. I have several Mawls on my “GO-TO” rifles and was looking to step up the amount of night vision I have for loaning to friends if they don’t have any.
@@clarkv3rd yeah but that alternate setting is just a lower power setting from what I understand. I don’t want to bump the power down on a civilian unit anymore than it already is.
13 minute video plugging photonois tubes Doesnt once mention the fact that they are gen 2 tubes - and entirely different technology - with different lifespans. Doesnt mean its a bad deal, just curious that this isnt mentioned at all. I'd say whatever if photonis hit me up tho :D
1. Photonis technology does not fall into the specifications of any Gens. Put theses tubes up against L3 or Elbit and most people will fail to tell them apart. 2. We are not bought by Photonis, we genuinely run them in our personal lives as well. We believe there is a huge misunderstanding about them so that is why we speak on them.
@@TATargets Read photonis' own pdfs. They use an entirely different sensor design. Any information about this design is HARDLY as well known, tested, used, or adopted - as the thinless and other STANDARDIZED offerings you pretend "are barely better". Again, i'd shill for whoever sent me stuff. Certainly better than the nightvision i dont have.
@@TATargets a little snippet from their own documentation/spin "In 2001, the United States Government concluded that the “Generation” indicator of an Image Intensifier sensor (or night vision I2 device), be it Gen 2, Gen 3 or whatever, was not a determinant factor in an image intensifier’s performance" What this is padding, is the fact that its closer to a gen 2 tube design than a gen 3. They claim "See the govt says generation doesnt have anything to do with quality" And then they play the other side by saying "its 4G" - despite it being closer to gen 2 sensor technology than any new advancement past gen 3 sensors. Im not certain, but i'd imagine things like sensor lifespan would also push it into these generation catagories. Again, per their own documentation "All Photonis 4G tubes have expected lifespan greater than 7500 hours" Gen 1 - ~1000 hour life span Gen 2 - ~2500-5000 hour life span Photonis - ~7500 hour life span Gen 3 - 10,000+ hour life span (supported by MILLIONS of use cases over DECADES) There - i've provided more actual information about night vision in your comment section than you did in your own product showcase.
Forgot to add, the shock rating at 500g is more than three times greater than that for G3 which is ~ 75g and the image alignment is significantly better. Think in terms of balance of performance.
@@PhotonisDefenseNightVision okay so why is there conflicting information on the life span of your tubes. Your own companies PDFs state one number, and vendor information states another. Are you saying that photonis gen2 tubes all last 10,000 hours? It is quite strange wording "if the government wants tubes that last 10,000 hours we make (tell them) them tubes that last 10,000 hours." How does one test this by the way? Are you literally running multiple units for 416 days? Is anyone?
Not necessarily, but it depends on what you want most. For most people and most “regular” uses, Photonis will check every box. The big benefit of the elbit will be the higher gain. Often, 1900 Min FOM tubes will fall higher than that. If that extra $600 means you can’t fit a mount and helmet into your budget now, then the Photonis would be better. Much of this decision comes down to being able to get a complete system (nods, mount, helmet, optic, IR illuminator) so you can function at night.
@@WilldaBear higher gain isn’t the only thing that separates them. Data sheet spec’s aren’t equal across different generations of NV. Unfilmed gen 3 is 15-20% higher performance than thin filmed gen 3, and thin filmed gen 3 is like 30-40% higher performance than gen 2, with EQUAL specs. The big 4 specs most people list will tell you a lot about image quality, but they don’t convey how deep into the shadows and darkness that the device can resolve a useable imagine from. The biggest factor in determining that is the technology being used and the sophistication/quality of the manufacturing of that technology. With ample light they will all perform about the same. It’s when you get into very low light and deep shadows that the differences come out. Even if you were to compare an old OMNI gen 3 to a newer one, the specs won’t tell you everything. Cause between the early omni contract tubes and the current ones, both Elbit an L3 have made advances in their ability to MFG the components of gen 3 better. More sensitive photocathodes, more holes in the micro channel plate, thinner film etc. So and omni 4 tube with the same specs as an omni 8 tube will see dark worse than the 8, just cause they’ve gotten better at making the same tech. I’m not here saying that old omni 4 thin filmed, or photonis gen 2 is bad or anything. They actually quite good. But they’re simply aren’t better. I guarantee if you put a 1500FOM Elbit thin filmed up against a 2400FOM photonis, the Elbit will be able to resolve a higher quality image in deep shadows than the photonis. It won’t be a huge difference, but you will indeed be able to see into see more into darker areas. But in the better lit areas where they can both see just fine, that higher FOM photonis tube will produce a higher quality image than the low spec thin filmed. But again, not by a huge amount. Photonis and old gen 3 are really good night vision. But newer gen 3 and even more so unfilmed are simply better. If you can get a new comspec gen 3 for about the same price or slightly more than photonis, you should do it. Even if it’s “lower spec” than the photonis. If you just can’t find thin film for similar cost or really can’t swing the couple hundred extra bucks, then photonis will serve you just fine. But if your problem is photonis ships in two days and thin filmed ships in 6-12 weeks and you just can’t handle waiting and that’s the deciding factor. Then quit being so low impulse control.
Yeah, um, we know you're selling Photonis tubes and that's all you can get hold of in bulk. I've seen the difference between gen 3 tubes in the military and what photonis is capable in low light. There's no way I would choose the photonis. They just can't match a good Elbit tube in low light. Low light situations where bad guys may have NoDs as well isn't the place you want to use an active IR source. Unless you want to die.
Compare them side by side. I have a VERY similar spec Echo and Elbit thin filmed. There's VERY little difference between the two. Unfilmed L3s definitely gather light better though. But between Elbit and an Echo? I'd take an Echo every day of the week just for the screen cosmetics and mixed light performance alone. Take a course where you're mixing near complete darkness and utilizing white light under nods as a failure drill and you'll see a huge difference between Echos and Elbit - in favor of the Echos.
Why are you guys not telling everyting about this units? Like if it's a filmsless if more resistant to shocks, because it doesn't have that thin film... I have L3 tubes white filmless and love them, I got two of them and might get another one for my wife...just get the L3 people, don't buy junk
We have all the available tubes. Photonis are not junk. If you want sketchy L3 tubes that don’t meet milspec… be our guest. Because that’s what’s available currently.
The Photonis tubes are significantly more shock resistant than either Elbit thin filmed or L3 unfilmed. The unfilmed L3s still have a film, it's just way thinner than the thin filmed tubes.
A dual Photonis setup is far better than a single L3 filmless. Youll be hard pressed to find an owner of an L3 that will admit it, likely because they spent so much more.
Currently L3 tubes have massive lead times and the ones we’ve run were not the same quality/clarity of past L3 tubes. The Photonis tubes are excellent, clear, and amazing autogating. Clarity on well lit nights (moonlight) Will, in most cases, be better in Photonis than L3.
@@TATargets I personally value night vision more on a poorly lit night than a well lit night. Especially if you might encounter a tree canopy. With the proliferation of night vision I don’t want to be forced into using an illuminator to navigate in those conditions either.
@@tylerz28 in the situation your describing, that L3 will be so noisy you’d need secondary IR anyway. We have all the tube options, we’re speaking from experience
@@TATargets maybe if your SNR is less than 20 or something. My unfilmed L3s are both 35 SNR and I most definitely do not need IR on a no moon night or under a canopy. I’m just not sure I agree with the advice that’s being given here. Photonis tubes may be the cheapest and easiest to acquire but that does not make them the best.
You sound like one of those weekendgunnit idiots who's got maxed out credit cards to flex on social media. Fact is you'd get smoked by some dude with an Anderson AR and a helmet mounted Sionyx if shtf 🤣
Side note about a "darker" vs "brighter" tube. If you spend a lot of time running nvg, especially with a monocular, you'll actually want to run your gain as low as you can almost all the time.
Natural night vision still goes a long way even in overcast conditions in the middle of nowhere, cranking up your gain wrecks that.
Run low gain unless you're trying to identify something far away and your eye can still make out shapes around the sides of the tube and its easier to walk. Crank up the gain and you get really bad tunnel vision.
As someone who owns a Photonis echo PVS-14 i can say very easily its performed excellent in all conditions i can think of from moonless overcast woods walks to very urban lighting around the house.
Can I ask a question looking to get my first does it have that grainy picture or is that just bc of the camera interference?
@@iSmxtty What you're referring to is SNR, (signal to noise ratio) all NVGs will have that grain in the image, if your SNR spec is higher, there will be much less. There's a lot of resources where you can learn before you buy
Also, NV almost always looks a LOT better in person than on camera
@@HenrikSherwood thanks
@iSmxtty This video in particular makes nv look really bad, Ultimate Night Vision and custom night vision have good videos on what it actually looks like
I have literally immersed myself in every YT source on NV.... THIS IS BY FAR... THE MOST IMPACTFUL AND WHAT I REALLY WANTED TO KNOW... IN ONE CLIP. Outstanding performance gentlemen!
( my brain was so cluster forked... that I stopped the path towards purchase... in the first 2 yesrs... ),
KUDO'S to you both. My utmost need is thermal right now... I live in N.E. Oklahoma and the last 3 to 4 years... the environment on the 5300+ acres we cover is the most extremely rich target environment... in 40 years... second only to a particular producing fruit tree orchard ( 2100 acres ) that every time I've been ( it's over 450 miles to get there... ) we run out of ammo and it has taken 13 workers 12 hours to gather our bounty... Appreciate you my friend, Seth
Cluster forked is right. I backed off buying nvg too. One guy says this other guy says that.
Completely agree. Photonis tubes, especially the Echoes, kick ass. A PVS14 with an Echo tube is a steal for the performance.
For sure. Grab one through us and it has a 10 year warranty too 💪🏻💪🏻💪🏻
@@TATargets Didn't realize you guys were selling NODs now! That's rad. PS Love your ADAPs
@@RDT_IR nightvision and thermal 💪🏻 we just received another shipment of weapons mounted thermal units and handhelds. More coming in the next two weeks. You should check the site out and see what’s up 💪🏻
I recently ordered a pvs-14 with the Photonis tube. I was worried I made a mistake but after watching a few videos I'm glad I went with them. Seeing you put up all three images I prefer the Photonis. It seems like it has better depth and contrast where he Harris WP is brighter but seems washed out. Honestly haven't ran NVD's since 04'-06' when I was rocking PVS-7's.
Anyone looking to order night vision and gear buy from these guys. They work with you and go above and beyond.
Good stuff I never knew about. They just issued stuff and I used it and handled it like a red headed step child. Now I'm retired and looking to get a set for myself I nearly sh*t myself seeing how much they are. I've use the pvs7 and pvs14 and love the pvs14
Photonis equipment is on Mars... Not sure how people can call them garbage.
Excellent video with great info. Anyone considering buying NV, this video has invaluable info and these guys are giving great advice. Thanks guys. Star rating for this video: 87x.
I have used night vision for some time and own PVS-7B/14's I found this very informative.
I went a cheaper route and got a green phosphor PVS14 from JRH. Honestly, I prefer green over white. Couldn't be happier.
Sincerely appreciate what you’re doing! Thank you!
I bought an echo PVS-14 and I am very happy with the performance. I also have an Iray MH25 thermal I'm planning to run as a bridge. I think the thermal will make up for any lack of the Echo in extreme darkness. Unfortunately my PVS-14 had some contamination in the eye piece and I had to send it back for repair. I should get it back tomorrow.
Sounds like a solid setup! We love bridging thermal and NV.
Have you got the setup? That’s what I plan on doing eventually
@@taylor3880 Yeah. I do wish that the Iray could be ran in fullscreen with 1:1 zoom and had a little faster refresh rate.
Military doesn't request spotless tube.. there are two standards that they created for that... ground/mil spec and aviation spec. A ground/milspec spot spec allows for max 4 spots greater than .003” per tube with no spots in zone 1 greater than .003”. Within this max of 4 allowable spots, there can be no more than 3 spots in zone 2 or 3 in one tube. Like every spot spec, spots equal to or smaller than .003” are acceptable in any zone and do not count as spots.
Aviation spot specs were created at the request of the military to have cleaner tubes for their strict aviation needs. An aviation spot spec is max 3 spots per tube which are only allowable in zone 3. With no allowable spots greater than .003” in zone 1 or 2 the aviation spot spec is best for those who need the cleanest tubes possible.
This makes sense. I didn't know that. Mine came with one tiny black dot in "zone 2". Quality NV is a true game changer.
It's awesome how other companies are giving a more affordable opportunity to purchase NVG's to people. Used to be $4,500 - $6,000 with few brands to choose from.
We’re connecting people with all forms of solid gear. Prices are definitely more reasonable on nightvision now 👊👊
Agreed! And FYI, Russia 🇷🇺✝️🙏🏻💪🏻 > Ukraine 🇺🇦✡️🏳️🌈🏳️⚧️💩✊🏿!!
😜👍🏻🇺🇸
@@Flexapr Idk what all those lame symbols are, but hope you enjoy Ukraine becoming " Russia , West ". Zelenskyy was given a choice by Russia, capitulation or annihilation. He chose the ladder, and armed his civilians and forced them to fight. Condemning them all to die. What a shame.
@@yakivpopavich What an idiotic take. If Nato invaded Russia would you say it's Putin's fault that Russians are dying for not surrendering?
I myself is a katod 1pn138 guys, very lovely product.
Great video guys. Thanks.
12:14 Okay, you convinced me 100%.
price has apparently gone down and availability up since this video. just picked up a filmless 2500+ fom for $3700
Tube its self or the whole unit
can you advise me please ... I want to use a PVS-14 with a 3x to spot and confirm quarry after finding it with thermal .... Sometimes due to conditions thermal cant tell you what it is at 300 yards plus ... So I want to be able to see and identify out to 400 yards but with the aid of an IR . Can you tell me which unit would work best for me ? Greg
had to type very specific search to get to this video i have never seen
Great information and break down. Thank you
Thanks for watching!
great video as always. I'm excited to buy some thermal through you guys in the near future
Check out our new brand/channel. Just type in “Arkayne Co” in UA-cam search bar 💪🏻👊
A photonis tube will not compare to an Elbit or L3 tube in terms of low light performance. It is not a minimal difference either. If you're using your night vision under heavy canopy, overcast conditions, a new moon, or some combination, an unfilmed tube will run circles around a photonis tube or even a thin filmed tube. I've used them all in these environments. And as of now, we see large drops of L3 and Elbit tubes every month or so. Even PVS31A lead times have come down to a few months through many dealers.
I would have led with the line about high light environments personally, in a city type environment you do have an advantage with photonis tubes due to the hypergating technology. And obviously if you're gonna use suplemental IR it doesnt really matter what tubes you have but at that point you're basically using a flashlight. This isn't 2004, it's very easy and cheap to see IR now. I wouldn't assume bad people can't see your light show.
Are the photonis tubes trash? Hell no, but let's not pretend like you dont get a very real performance increase with the more expensive stuff. As always, mission dictates gear requirements.
thank you for the great info🎉
Knowledge is power.
Absolutely. Thanks for watching!
What's the manufacturer's name of the best pvs 14 in this video? The guys said it so fast and I want to know more about it.
Are these the ECHO+ tubes? Because 2200 FOM for ECHO tubes usually is only on the plus models. By the way, 4G is also a good option, it's mil-spec so no spots at all.
4g is elbit or l3 price
I’m very much considering the Photonis Echo PVS-14 that is currently on USNightvision for around $2600. Should I get this?
Get it from us and you'll have a 10 year warranty.
@@TATargets interesting, ive been on the fence too. That 10 year warranty sounds excellent.
Nothing wrong with Photonis I'd take Elbit xlsh over them though. Also I'd say EBI and Halo are more important than FOM. If your out in the sticks, woods, no moon you'll want the lowest EBI you can. If your in more of a city setting alot of street lights (light pollution) your going to want a lower halo or your going to be dealing with a lot of bloom.
The photonis tubes have had some of the most consistent, high tier specs out of all the tubes we play with. We are out in the sticks killing critters, driving, navigating in all conditions and we have yet to find a situation where the Photonis would leave us out to dry. They are definitely one option of many and one people should consider without internet bias.
Like they said, its available. A lot of dealers are pushing photonis right now because its easy to get a hold of to sell. Its a gen 2 tube
@Photonis Defense, Inc. no need to travel to PA I own your echo tube in a pvs-14 I also have a pvs-14 with Elbit xlsh wp and a set of RNVGs with L3 wp tubes. I said your tubes where fine I just prefer the Elbit tubes over yours. I also prefer the L3's over the Elbits, but your talking triple the price.
So would a photonis pvs 14 with a FOM of 1800 be a good beginner option? Yours had like 2200? Is 1800 just too low for a gen 2 photonis?
Photonis is not Gen 2. As far as performance, most of the 1800 Min FOM tubes are well over 1800. Yes, they are very good performers, very clean and clear tubes, perfect budget option. You won't regret it.
That’s a lie, photonis is absolutely gen 2. It just has auto-gating, which was invented post-gen3 and can be added or older gens. It’s very well made gen 2, it’s easitly the best performing and highest developed gen 2. But it’s still gen 2. Saying it’s not gen 2 is just a straight up lie
@@PhotonisDefenseNightVision “photonis is not gen 2 as most people out there think of it” is a very different statement from “photonis is not gen 2”. One is true, the other is false. And knowingly making false statements is called lying. Note the words that came out of your mouth were different than TA targets, cause you didn’t want to lie like they did.
You’re right the generation classification thing isn’t as useful as it once was, and photonis making gen 2 tubes that handily out preform the earlier iterations of gen 3 is certainly the reason for that. And specifically photonis gen 2 has some attributes that are better than current gen 3. Like your auto gating, high light performance, and out of band sensitivity. But let’s not pretend like the only advantage to current gen 3 is higher gain lol. Come on, let’s be real. Current thin filmed an unfilmed gen 3 from Elbit and L3 simply preform better in the lowest of lighting conditions, which is the entire point of night vision. I’ll grant that the difference isn’t huge, and when you’re not beyond the failure point in lighting photonis has very clean and clear image resolution. But at the end of the day photonis will stop being able to resolve an image before elbit thin film, and elbit thin film will stop being able to resolve and image before L3 unfilmed. Even if the photonis has higher numbers on its spec sheet than the elbit, and even if the elbit has high numbers on its spec sheet than the L3. This is simply the way that it is, and what I’m saying is true. But again granted, the difference isn’t huge. For most people photonis is probably good enough. Especially urban and suburban users, saving a little money and going with photonis is probably the right play. But if you live out in the sticks, with thick woods, and throw cloud cover into the mix, you’re probably going to be disappointed if you buy photonis. Let’s be real, if even YOU the guy running the photonis UA-cam channel. Had to go do some important night op in the forest or jungle in the middle of nowhere, and you had to pick from photonis or L3 unfilmed. You would take the L3 every time. But again I’ll grant, if you had to do the same thing in an urban or suburban area you’d probably take photonis, and I probably would too.
@@PhotonisDefenseNightVision unfortunately i live on the west coast, in the thick woods with constant cloud cover lol, or else I would bring my unfilmed tube and play. But I already know that more gain doesn’t enable you to see definition better, hell glass quality in your housing plays a bigger role than that. I prefer manual gain specifically to be able to turn it down, cause gain doesn’t boost clarity. It’s only brightness. Hell even in some cases the numbers on your spec sheet don’t translate very well to how well an image can be resolved. This is one of the points i granted to you about photonis, they produce extremely clean images, even despite what the spec numbers and generation may convey. But when we’re talking about the breaking point of lighting, where a device will stope resolving a usable image. The biggest determining factor is the technology being employed. And that tier list goes photonis, thin filmed, then unfilmed in the lead. Again, granted the difference isn’t huge. But current photonis will stop resolving an image due to lack of available light a little bit sooner than current thin filmed elbit or L3. And current thin filmed elbit or L3 will stop being able to resolve an image slightly before current L3 unfilmed. If you need something that will go the furthest possible without supplemental light then unfilmed is the best option. But again. The differences aren’t huge, and most people don’t need to min/max to achieve this specific characteristic. So most people are probably totally fine going with photonis or elbit. And for the price a photonis tube is probably going to have a more clear image than whatever the closest price elbit tube can produce.
I’m really not trying to knock photonis or talk unfilmed up, I’m really trying to stress that these differences are not big. But they are differences none the less. And when taking about $3-10k pieces of electro optics and the long bouts of research people do to try to figure it out, we have plenty of time to talk about the fine nuances.
I actually think a clean image is more important than high numbers on a piece of paper. I didn’t think fine detail or spots in your tube were a big deal until I got into it and found out I really hate spots and crisp clean detail helps a ton in noticing things. I think most people should learn what the technology limitations are between the 3 top options, pick the lowest on that’s good enough, and the max out in image cleanliness and and clarity. I bet for a lot of casual users that’s going to put them into the photonis camp.
But it’s still not “not gen 2” like TA said. And it’s also not “just as good” at seeing in the pitch dark. If you need the most break neck low light performance you can get, unfilmed is simply the best. And sometimes you can get commercial spec elbit thin film for cheaper than photonis that will see a little bit better into the pitch dark but with a less clean and clear image.
They’re all slightly different, each with their own cost/benefits, and people really want to know what those benefits are in order to make the right cost/benefit analysts. But also at the same time all 3 of them are extremely good and viable, so you’re probably not going to be upset any way you go lol
@@PhotonisDefenseNightVision yeah “unfilmed” would be more accurately described as “less film”. The ion barriers were introduced in gen 3 tubes because GaAs was effectively “too good” at electron conduction and was rapidly burning tubes to death in the early development of gen 3. So the ion barriers were implemented to nerf the efficacy of GaAs. Then as time and development continued they improved the ion barriers to make them as thin as possible so it would still offer protection, but without nerfing the whole system too badly. This is where the term thin film comes from, and why current gen 3 is substantially better than early forms of “thick film” gen 3 (plus other components improvement in manufacturing). But this made the switch (and improvement) from gen 2 multi alkaloid to gen 3 GaAs (gallium arsenide) alkaloid less substantial in practice that it was supposed to theoretically give on paper. So many years later, the US military requested that L3 and elbit develop gen 3 that could not just thin, but remove some of these ion barriers from gen 3 in order to get the full theoretical performance boost from GaAs, and that would become the new gen 4 if they were able to succeed. With L3 eventually figuring out the secret sauce to achieve this, and elbit not necessarily failing, but deciding to put their efforts into improving manufacturing techniques to squeeze as much performance out of thin film as possible. But since there’s only two gen 3 NV developers/designer/manufacturers and the US military needs them both to exist. Upon L3 succeeding to develop what the military would call gen 4 and elbit failing but also coming out with super high performance thin film. The military decided to scrap the idea of giving L3 unfilmed the new gen 4 monicker, and deciding to implement them both. Getting extremely good thin film from elbit at a lower cost to issue to grunts, and the higher performance and more expensive “would’ve been gen 4” L3 unfilmed to elite forces under JSOC. Keeping both other their NV developers alive and useful.
Re-cap. Gen 2 uses a multi alkaloid material as its primary conductor of electrons through the tube, which has a certain amount of resistance and thus electron loss (electrons are the lifeblood of NV image intensification). The move from gen 2 to gen 3 was the implementation of GaAs instead of multi alkaloid as the primary electron conductor, which has effectively no resistance and no electron loss. But this turbo charge of performance had to be unfortunately mitigated with ion barriers, which over time and development would be thinned for even better performance in later gen 3. Ultimately culminating in L3’s success in fully removing the now “thin film” barrier and being able to mostly take advantage of the true potential GaAs was always meant to unlock. Achieving the goal set by the DOD for what should have been gen 4. As well as elbit also making huge strides in thin film technology in the process, similar to the way photonis has been able to make huge strides in developing gen 2 tech into something that blows the doors off previous gen 2 and even being able to stand toe to toe with current gen 3.
So yes you are absolutely right in saying gen 2 is the only true filmless NV tubes currently. But only because it never needed it in the first place. Which isn’t a bad way to go about it. Going back to pre GaAs and souping it up to avoid the negative repercussions of these ion barriers obviously was a smart play by photonis, and that’s probably a major contributor to why they get such clean and clear images, but also explains why they fall a little shorter of thin film and unfilmed in the pitch dark image generation department. It is these technological differences between the 3 that makes the small difference in their performance characteristics. Sure the numbers do mean something, but the real driving factor in what separates them is these technological differences. It’s why you can go buy 3000fom elbit thin film, but you probably can’t find an L3 unfilmed tube with performance numbers like that. But also why a 3000fom elbit thin film tube will perform similarly to a 2376fom L3 unfilmed tube (and will cost about the same). The lower numbers in the unfilmed tube are boosted by the evolution of the technology in it. And it’s also why a 2000fom photonis tube will probably have a more crisp and clean image than both of them, but with less (not a lot, but less) light boosting performance. The numbers don’t quite add up when comparing the 3, and the performance doesn’t quite add up 1:1 when comparing the 3, because of the differences in technology being employed between them.
Which is why I stress people really shouldn’t get wrapped up in the spec sheet numbers when deciding on what NV to buy. Learn the technological differences and thus their minute performance nuances that come from it. Then get the nicest one from that category you can reasonably afford.
While shooting at night wearing a head mounted PVS-14, will it get damaged if I use my weapon mounted IR/Visible laser designator pointing at a target downrange? I feel like what's keeping me from buying one right now is the thought of it being "too sensitive" to many different variables.
If you have a really bright laser and point it at a really reflective surface up too close, it is possible. But really only if you hold still and stare at it for longer than you should. Think like setting your device on a tripod so it’s still and likewise with the rifle and leaving them there for a little while. It’s really unlikely but if you’re doing filming from a tripod it COULD happen.
If you’re using it like a human that isn’t perfectly still and you run into a situation where your laser is cranked a little too high and pointed at a reflective surface that’s a little too close. What will happen is you’ll see a little faint black streak left over after the brief over exposure. This happens quite a lot and it will fade away after 10-20 seconds like it never happened. It’s not something to be alarmed about but it’s a good warning that you’re starting to breach the “too bright” boundary. And this can help you gauge the brightness of things you want to limit exposure to in the future. You really just want to limit exposure time in one particular point in the screen. The brighter something is, the less time you want that bright light sitting stationary in the tubes image.
Long winded way of saying don’t fuckin worry about it and with most things that are indeed too bright you’ll see a little bit of non damaging non permanent burn in beforehand. Except some things like a full power laser being pointed directly into the tube, that level of high pinpoint brightness can instantly cause permanent burn in.
Do you have pvs 14 available today?
We sure do, we have a bunch in stock at the moment that you can find here arkayne.com/product-category/hard-goods/night-vision-optics/
Thales makes NVG for main battle tanks. French is fine.
So I’m new to this…. Looking to pick up a setup, are there lots of manufactures out there? I see AGM, ATN, superior tactical, Tech…. Are they all the same?
Many people are utilizing similar or the same components. So it comes down to using a reliable, trustworthy source. Also, sending your money to companies effecting change in culture matters! So if you’re ready for a PVS14, we’d love to chat and help you out with that. Info@tatargets.com is our email to get that conversation started.
I have nighvision in my possesion. I wanted to mount it to a helmet. Didn't think i'd need 3 seperate $80 plus mounts. RIP.
If you have NV I can't imagine another 100 bucks would kill lol
Only 80?
You must be cheaping out
Wilcox g24 500 dollars and their j arm is 250
Cool tshirt. Do you follow DBG?
Hey guys...good video How about a video with the Shell kit?....I would be open to talk.....Carson Industries....
"quit buying guns, get a night vision"
Mount on rifle?
Is anyone having issues with their Mawls or any other full power IR laser/illuminators when using the photonis tubes?
What do you mean by "issues"?
@@TATargets I heard some people complaining (I think garandthumb may have mention it also) that the mawl causes flickering with Photonis tubes. I haven’t tried them out so I’m curious as they are definitely more affordable. I have several Mawls on my “GO-TO” rifles and was looking to step up the amount of night vision I have for loaning to friends if they don’t have any.
@@URBANAMERICANTAC the fast autogating of the photo is tubes causes flickering. Pretty sure it’s fixed by using alternate setting on mawl
@@clarkv3rd yeah but that alternate setting is just a lower power setting from what I understand. I don’t want to bump the power down on a civilian unit anymore than it already is.
@Photonis Defense, Inc. sounds good.
13 minute video plugging photonois tubes
Doesnt once mention the fact that they are gen 2 tubes - and entirely different technology - with different lifespans.
Doesnt mean its a bad deal, just curious that this isnt mentioned at all. I'd say whatever if photonis hit me up tho :D
1. Photonis technology does not fall into the specifications of any Gens. Put theses tubes up against L3 or Elbit and most people will fail to tell them apart.
2. We are not bought by Photonis, we genuinely run them in our personal lives as well. We believe there is a huge misunderstanding about them so that is why we speak on them.
@@TATargets Read photonis' own pdfs.
They use an entirely different sensor design. Any information about this design is HARDLY as well known, tested, used, or adopted - as the thinless and other STANDARDIZED offerings you pretend "are barely better".
Again, i'd shill for whoever sent me stuff. Certainly better than the nightvision i dont have.
@@TATargets a little snippet from their own documentation/spin
"In 2001, the United States Government concluded
that the “Generation” indicator of an Image
Intensifier sensor (or night vision I2 device), be it
Gen 2, Gen 3 or whatever, was not a determinant
factor in an image intensifier’s performance"
What this is padding, is the fact that its closer to a gen 2 tube design than a gen 3. They claim "See the govt says generation doesnt have anything to do with quality"
And then they play the other side by saying "its 4G" - despite it being closer to gen 2 sensor technology than any new advancement past gen 3 sensors. Im not certain, but i'd imagine things like sensor lifespan would also push it into these generation catagories.
Again, per their own documentation
"All Photonis 4G tubes have expected lifespan greater than 7500 hours"
Gen 1 - ~1000 hour life span
Gen 2 - ~2500-5000 hour life span
Photonis - ~7500 hour life span
Gen 3 - 10,000+ hour life span (supported by MILLIONS of use cases over DECADES)
There - i've provided more actual information about night vision in your comment section than you did in your own product showcase.
Forgot to add, the shock rating at 500g is more than three times greater than that for G3 which is ~ 75g and the image alignment is significantly better. Think in terms of balance of performance.
@@PhotonisDefenseNightVision okay so why is there conflicting information on the life span of your tubes. Your own companies PDFs state one number, and vendor information states another.
Are you saying that photonis gen2 tubes all last 10,000 hours? It is quite strange wording "if the government wants tubes that last 10,000 hours we make (tell them) them tubes that last 10,000 hours."
How does one test this by the way? Are you literally running multiple units for 416 days? Is anyone?
Would you say the THIN filmed Elbit that's 1900+ FOM worth the extra $600 compared to the Photonis?
Not necessarily, but it depends on what you want most. For most people and most “regular” uses, Photonis will check every box. The big benefit of the elbit will be the higher gain. Often, 1900 Min FOM tubes will fall higher than that. If that extra $600 means you can’t fit a mount and helmet into your budget now, then the Photonis would be better. Much of this decision comes down to being able to get a complete system (nods, mount, helmet, optic, IR illuminator) so you can function at night.
@@TATargets Great points, thanks for helping me narrow down my choice!
@@WilldaBear higher gain isn’t the only thing that separates them. Data sheet spec’s aren’t equal across different generations of NV. Unfilmed gen 3 is 15-20% higher performance than thin filmed gen 3, and thin filmed gen 3 is like 30-40% higher performance than gen 2, with EQUAL specs. The big 4 specs most people list will tell you a lot about image quality, but they don’t convey how deep into the shadows and darkness that the device can resolve a useable imagine from. The biggest factor in determining that is the technology being used and the sophistication/quality of the manufacturing of that technology. With ample light they will all perform about the same. It’s when you get into very low light and deep shadows that the differences come out. Even if you were to compare an old OMNI gen 3 to a newer one, the specs won’t tell you everything. Cause between the early omni contract tubes and the current ones, both Elbit an L3 have made advances in their ability to MFG the components of gen 3 better. More sensitive photocathodes, more holes in the micro channel plate, thinner film etc. So and omni 4 tube with the same specs as an omni 8 tube will see dark worse than the 8, just cause they’ve gotten better at making the same tech.
I’m not here saying that old omni 4 thin filmed, or photonis gen 2 is bad or anything. They actually quite good. But they’re simply aren’t better. I guarantee if you put a 1500FOM Elbit thin filmed up against a 2400FOM photonis, the Elbit will be able to resolve a higher quality image in deep shadows than the photonis. It won’t be a huge difference, but you will indeed be able to see into see more into darker areas. But in the better lit areas where they can both see just fine, that higher FOM photonis tube will produce a higher quality image than the low spec thin filmed. But again, not by a huge amount. Photonis and old gen 3 are really good night vision. But newer gen 3 and even more so unfilmed are simply better. If you can get a new comspec gen 3 for about the same price or slightly more than photonis, you should do it. Even if it’s “lower spec” than the photonis. If you just can’t find thin film for similar cost or really can’t swing the couple hundred extra bucks, then photonis will serve you just fine. But if your problem is photonis ships in two days and thin filmed ships in 6-12 weeks and you just can’t handle waiting and that’s the deciding factor. Then quit being so low impulse control.
👍
Or a helmet?
You guys need to do your commentary indoors. The bug sounds are very distracting.
Yeah, um, we know you're selling Photonis tubes and that's all you can get hold of in bulk.
I've seen the difference between gen 3 tubes in the military and what photonis is capable in low light. There's no way I would choose the photonis. They just can't match a good Elbit tube in low light. Low light situations where bad guys may have NoDs as well isn't the place you want to use an active IR source. Unless you want to die.
LOL cool story. We have all options on tap. People just can’t fathom that Photonis is a great option for many people. But hey, you do you.
Compare them side by side. I have a VERY similar spec Echo and Elbit thin filmed. There's VERY little difference between the two. Unfilmed L3s definitely gather light better though. But between Elbit and an Echo? I'd take an Echo every day of the week just for the screen cosmetics and mixed light performance alone. Take a course where you're mixing near complete darkness and utilizing white light under nods as a failure drill and you'll see a huge difference between Echos and Elbit - in favor of the Echos.
Arkayne is selling Chinese garbage for the same price as I can get US made gear and more than I can get photo is tubes assembled n the US?
@@marcuse7322 Arkayne is our company, don’t spread bad opinions
L3 filmless 14s are not 5500 lol
Why are you guys not telling everyting about this units? Like if it's a filmsless if more resistant to shocks, because it doesn't have that thin film... I have L3 tubes white filmless and love them, I got two of them and might get another one for my wife...just get the L3 people, don't buy junk
We have all the available tubes. Photonis are not junk. If you want sketchy L3 tubes that don’t meet milspec… be our guest. Because that’s what’s available currently.
@@TATargets echo tubes literally are milspec fall outs lol. Sound logic guys.
The Photonis tubes are significantly more shock resistant than either Elbit thin filmed or L3 unfilmed. The unfilmed L3s still have a film, it's just way thinner than the thin filmed tubes.
TONBO IMAGING is best in the world used by all the special forces around the world especially US and ISRAEL
Something about a photonis that just feels hardy. Just sayin
Photonis is definitely hated on for no good reason, it is a great option right now for those who are looking to get NV.
too much talking not enough tubes.....wasted video
you got ratioed there is more views the subs on you channel
A dual Photonis setup is far better than a single L3 filmless. Youll be hard pressed to find an owner of an L3 that will admit it, likely because they spent so much more.
Are you actually saying you think a gen2+ tube is better than the current socom tube?
Currently L3 tubes have massive lead times and the ones we’ve run were not the same quality/clarity of past L3 tubes. The Photonis tubes are excellent, clear, and amazing autogating. Clarity on well lit nights (moonlight) Will, in most cases, be better in Photonis than L3.
@@TATargets I personally value night vision more on a poorly lit night than a well lit night. Especially if you might encounter a tree canopy. With the proliferation of night vision I don’t want to be forced into using an illuminator to navigate in those conditions either.
@@tylerz28 in the situation your describing, that L3 will be so noisy you’d need secondary IR anyway. We have all the tube options, we’re speaking from experience
@@TATargets maybe if your SNR is less than 20 or something. My unfilmed L3s are both 35 SNR and I most definitely do not need IR on a no moon night or under a canopy. I’m just not sure I agree with the advice that’s being given here. Photonis tubes may be the cheapest and easiest to acquire but that does not make them the best.
You mean Poortonis? haha nice try
You sound like one of those weekendgunnit idiots who's got maxed out credit cards to flex on social media. Fact is you'd get smoked by some dude with an Anderson AR and a helmet mounted Sionyx if shtf 🤣
I prefer the Photonis. Has a better contrast for me.