That 1280 is no joke. I just got an RH25 v2 which I absolutely love! For my specific needs it provides all the identification range I realistically need and I can take it off my helmet and mount in front of my lpvo.
@@4MRRanch I have an rh25. Mine has a a few huge factory problems, especially for the price tag. The compass never worked, it always points west. And something weird with the sensor where about 25% of the screen or sensor is "foggy" it adjusts but it's like the contrast on that portion of the screen is messed up. Just the price you pay for Chinese hardware. I'm strongly considering trijicon if I were to get another.
@@willl4219 I probably could have. Maybe I still can. Just haven't gotten around to it. And it's not that bad. I dont really use any of those features.
It is worth mentioning that the tighter the field of view (larger objective lens usually), the more pixels you will have on a target, so it will look better as you aren't spreading those (finite amount of) pixels over multiple pixels. And of course the higher the magnification, the target will take up more of the screen and thus have more pixels on it (as-well as not zooming in on those pixels to meet the same magnification).
I'm glad you stuck to all ATN as comparing an ATN or a AGM to a flashship model from pulsar or Iray would have really skewed the results as software matters as much as the hardware (in optimizing and such. especially with AI optical enhancement being a thing on these commercial grade thermal units).
These videos really help! I just have a budget starter option 364 sensor now so want to get a 640. Other issue with one I have is the small 19MM lens. It would either be the lens or NetD that's off since I can't see human sized objects at 50 yards. Cows and bigger targets yes.
Great video brother! If you do similar videos in the future I'd highlight the zoom level when you switch between scopes on screen with a highlight. (I know you called it out with audio in the video that they're different but people are dumb/fastforward sometimes :V).
This video just cost me more money, just got off the phone with ATN talking about the Thor 5 and 4 640 res. I have two 384 scopes now and wanted to upgrade, it looks like the 5xd is the way to go. I will have to look at the field of view for the finale decision. Damit.
I think you need to just be realistic about distances you NEED to be able to spot and identify things at.some of these distances weren’t practical but I was curious lol
I agree, the base magnification does make a difference. But I’m working with what I have on hand. I mention that there are differences in base magnification in the intro.
640 does a lot. What this video doesn’t convey is how much the resolution helps with a precise zero. The 1280 can be zeroed very easily due to the amount of resolution
Imo for non moving human recognition 256: up to 200yrds 384: up to 500yrds 640: up to 1000yrds 1280: up to 1 mile So imo 384 is the most practical for 90% of peoples accuracy and ethics. 640 is the most you'll ever need
Correction on NETD values:
BlazeSeeker:
That 1280 is no joke. I just got an RH25 v2 which I absolutely love! For my specific needs it provides all the identification range I realistically need and I can take it off my helmet and mount in front of my lpvo.
I think the RH25 is a solid choice for that kind of versatility. I don’t have one, but may eventually get around to trying it
@@4MRRanch I have an rh25. Mine has a a few huge factory problems, especially for the price tag.
The compass never worked, it always points west. And something weird with the sensor where about 25% of the screen or sensor is "foggy" it adjusts but it's like the contrast on that portion of the screen is messed up.
Just the price you pay for Chinese hardware. I'm strongly considering trijicon if I were to get another.
@@tallspy7150 you should send it back to them. I'm sure they would make it right. I haven't found one issue with my V2
@@tallspy7150 that sucks. can't warranty it?
@@willl4219 I probably could have. Maybe I still can. Just haven't gotten around to it. And it's not that bad. I dont really use any of those features.
Not gonna lie. 384 performed a lot better than I thought it would.
I feel validated in my 640 pick.
1280 is crisp and probably quite the pretty penny.
This 640 impressed me quite a bit.
It is worth mentioning that the tighter the field of view (larger objective lens usually), the more pixels you will have on a target, so it will look better as you aren't spreading those (finite amount of) pixels over multiple pixels. And of course the higher the magnification, the target will take up more of the screen and thus have more pixels on it (as-well as not zooming in on those pixels to meet the same magnification).
Most excellent content, thank you
I'm glad you stuck to all ATN as comparing an ATN or a AGM to a flashship model from pulsar or Iray would have really skewed the results as software matters as much as the hardware (in optimizing and such. especially with AI optical enhancement being a thing on these commercial grade thermal units).
These videos really help!
I just have a budget starter option 364 sensor now so want to get a 640. Other issue with one I have is the small 19MM lens. It would either be the lens or NetD that's off since I can't see human sized objects at 50 yards. Cows and bigger targets yes.
The lens and base magnification plays a big role
Awesome videos brother, keep up the great work
I appreciate the support, thanks for watching
Great video brother!
If you do similar videos in the future I'd highlight the zoom level when you switch between scopes on screen with a highlight.
(I know you called it out with audio in the video that they're different but people are dumb/fastforward sometimes :V).
I appreciate the feedback, I’ll keep that in mind for future videos!
This video just cost me more money, just got off the phone with ATN talking about the Thor 5 and 4 640 res. I have two 384 scopes now and wanted to upgrade, it looks like the 5xd is the way to go. I will have to look at the field of view for the finale decision. Damit.
I have a detailed Thor 5 review. I recommend taking a look to learn more about the potential investment. It’s a solid optic, love the 1280 sensor
I have to admit the 1280 is really impressive at 2 mile. While the lowest resolution is just gone at that mark.
I think you need to just be realistic about distances you NEED to be able to spot and identify things at.some of these distances weren’t practical but I was curious lol
Awesome video
Thanks for watching!
For this to be an accurate comparison you would have to use the same base magnification for each sensor.
I agree, the base magnification does make a difference. But I’m working with what I have on hand. I mention that there are differences in base magnification in the intro.
@ i understand but newbie’s are not going to. I see a lot of new buyers buying low base magnification and higher sensors and being disappointed.
Need to get my nox35 sold and buy something new in a couple years
Thermal tech is advancing super fast, I feel like we will always be left wanting the next best thing
The 35 is super nice. I went smaller with the 18 as I needed a dual band rig.
384 is the minimum for serious work i feel
Agreed, ideally 640 if you can swing it. 1280 is the leading edge of thermal tech
I need to get something soon, anything!😥
Hope this helps you decide on which
Seems like the 640 is the best bang for buck. Interesting how little difference there was between all the units at closer ranges
640 does a lot. What this video doesn’t convey is how much the resolution helps with a precise zero. The 1280 can be zeroed very easily due to the amount of resolution
@4MRRanch great to know
Lens diameter matter quiet a bit as well.
I love my NOX18.
So the 1280 can engage out to 750 and identify out to 1000 maybe 1500.
Yep. Long range thermal hunting is possible with high res sensors
You can probably get away with 640. But the 1280 is obviously better. But it is as far as I can tell from the UA-cam video.
Imo for non moving human recognition
256: up to 200yrds
384: up to 500yrds
640: up to 1000yrds
1280: up to 1 mile
So imo 384 is the most practical for 90% of peoples accuracy and ethics.
640 is the most you'll ever need
I agree with your logic; but keep in mind the more resolution the more precise you can be with zeroing
For taking a shot, you're probably right. For threat detection i would want the best sensor out there.
Thermal needs to get more battery efficient, they eat batteries