User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 9/11/2014 9:19:12 AM EDT
There have been some interesting topics recently on digital technology, I just throw this out there as a illustration to go along with my thought: When will digital surpass Gen 3 in low light environments and how much will it cost? The image is from IR Defense, I believe they debuted the Intevac digital architecure at SHOT SHOW 2014 but since I wasn't there I cannot say for sure. It may have debuted at US Nightvision's booth. You might see it again at SHOT 2015..... If the digital scope wasn't reliant upon active IR and seemingly provided an image with more detail would you pay 3, 4 , 5, 6 thousand dollars for a weapons optic? Interesting times in digital right now - - - I would love to get some in-scope time on a system like this and see what it can do. HTXH |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/11/2014 9:27:30 AM EDT
[#1]
Seeing how the reticle is photo shopped in on the gen 3 picture, and there are some other issues with that picture, I would be a little skeptical of it actually outperforming the gen 3. It will happen sooner or later though. I would love to get behind it as well.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/11/2014 9:58:53 AM EDT
[#2]
Who knows what kind of exposure values were used to take that picture, they could have been collecting light data for several minutes with some HUGE lense. or what the form factor of the device that took it. it could have come from a device wheeled in on multiple hand trucks for all we know, technology demonstration prototypes and such.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/11/2014 10:06:23 AM EDT
[#3]
Don't always believe what you see posted on the internet.
http://www.atncorp.com/x-sight-night-vision-rifle-scope-5-18x |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/11/2014 10:22:14 AM EDT
[#4]
I'm highly skeptical to put it lightly. That's a pretty terrible representation of what a Gen 3 tube looks like. I could take a better picture with my iPhone. I would guess that the pictures were taken under very bright conditions since there are no visible stars and there would be significant sky glow with the cloud cover directly over a populated area.
The only way I could imagine Gen 3 looking like that under those conditions is if the sky was so bright that the autogating completely dimmed down the image causing the foreground to look significantly darker. That and the photographer probably had to drop the exposure time way down in order to prevent the sky and city lighting from washing out half the image. I think they should send a unit to me and I will do a completely unbiased comparison under different ambient light levels 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/11/2014 10:39:23 AM EDT
[#5]
Undoubtedly a shady advertising angle. That is about as poor a gen3 representation as one could use. If a company needs to utilize devious advertising practices, what does that say about the product, the people selling it and their opinion of the consumers intelligence level? No thanks here.
 ETA: I looked back but couldn't find the thread but is this the same company that had an advert at this years SHOT calling their technology "Gen 4" that does not exist? I remember the photos were black and white like this. Like a highly detailed thermal image.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/11/2014 10:42:24 AM EDT
[#6]
Exact same image with different color. Look at the clouds, they're in the same position even. Probably faked.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/11/2014 10:44:49 AM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Exact same image with different color. Look at the clouds, they're in the same position even. Probably faked. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/11/2014 10:57:09 AM EDT
[#8]
Here's an example of what it looks like when bright lights cause an autogated power supply to dim down the image:
Here's what it looks like when you pan away from the bright light source: 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/11/2014 11:00:15 AM EDT
[#9]
Skeptisim is a companion to transition (change).
It isn't a matter of iF digital will perform as good or better than Gen3 but rather when and at what cost. ;) |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/11/2014 11:12:04 AM EDT
[#10]
Quoted: http://i932.photobucket.com/albums/ad162/hunttxhogs/IRD-NS-Banner-16_zps90cf3972.jpg There have been some interesting topics recently on digital technology, I just throw this out there as a illustration to go along with my thought: When will digital surpass Gen 3 in low light environments and how much will it cost? The image is from IR Defense, I believe they debuted the Intevac digital architecure at SHOT SHOW 2014 but since I wasn't there I cannot say for sure. It may have debuted at US Nightvision's booth. You might see it again at SHOT 2015..... If the digital scope wasn't reliant upon active IR and seemingly provided an image with more detail would you pay 3, 4 , 5, 6 thousand dollars for a weapons optic? Interesting times in digital right now - - - I would love to get some in-scope time on a system like this and see what it can do. HTXH OK, some points on spotting fakes... 1. Lights bright enough to light up the surrounding area, but not cause any HALO??? There's the first clue... 2. Albedo in the trees all wrong - both are sensitive to IR light, but the trees are darker in the Gen3 than the sky.. 3. Noisy gen3 image, yet no ion strikes? 4. Sky is super bright, yet doesn't wash-out the Gen3, which maintains incredible contrast. 5. UFO is only seen on right hand side of digital image ( just above horizon level ). Clearly, this is evidence of extra-terrestrial digital technology outperforming 3rd generation photoshops... Whoever faked this needs to go talk to the experts at ATN and learn how to fake images properly, with bobcats and sunglasses and stuff... I'd say ATN's photoshops were at least 5th generation... Or it might be genuine with a Gen3 Omni I tube with a very bad case of shading, and zoomed like crazy or similar... David
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/11/2014 11:12:41 AM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Skeptisim is a companion to transition (change). It isn't a matter of iF digital will perform as good or better than Gen3 but rather when and at what cost. ;) When I said I was skeptical, it was really just a tactful way of stating that I think these pictures are a gross misrepresentation of the current level of performance of one, if not both, of these two technologies. When? My guess is 2024
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/11/2014 11:14:14 AM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Skeptisim is a companion to transition (change). It isn't a matter of iF digital will perform as good or better than Gen3 but rather when and at what cost. ;) Digital is already better than Gen3. And has been for a few years ... No idea of the cost. But some of the high resolution SWIR sensors would make every night look like a full-moon night... And they can already detect single photons - which is the upper boundary of Gen3 tubes...I doubt we'll see much of it for a while... David
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/11/2014 11:38:41 AM EDT
[#13]
5. UFO is only seen on right hand side of digital image ( just above horizon level ).
Clearly, this is evidence of extra-terrestrial digital technology outperforming 3rd generation photoshops... Whoever faked this needs to go talk to the experts at ATN and learn how to fake images properly, with bobcats and sunglasses and stuff... I'd say ATN's photoshops were at least 5th generation...
I noticed that UFO in there too, really a poor attempt at fooling the masses, perhaps by the extraterrestrial aliens that are piloting that UFO? |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/11/2014 2:54:40 PM EDT
[#14]
A little search fu and I found these digital goggles from the same manufacturer. Anyone want to get them and give a review? lol.
http://www.intevac.com/intevacphotonics/dnvg/ Spec sheet for it here: http://www.intevac.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/Digital-Night-Vision-Goggle-Datasheet.pdf Older model Digital Image Intensifier spec sheet: http://www.intevac.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/E3010M-Datasheet2.pdf The version used in the Apache Helicopter: http://www.intevac.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/Apache-Camera-Datasheet.pdf Looks like the next 5 years are going to be interesting for us all. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/11/2014 4:38:55 PM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
A little search fu and I found these digital goggles from the same manufacturer. Anyone want to get them and give a review? lol. http://www.intevac.com/intevacphotonics/dnvg/ Spec sheet for it here: http://www.intevac.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/Digital-Night-Vision-Goggle-Datasheet.pdf Older model Digital Image Intensifier spec sheet: http://www.intevac.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/E3010M-Datasheet2.pdf The version used in the Apache Helicopter: http://www.intevac.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/Apache-Camera-Datasheet.pdf Looks like the next 5 years are going to be interesting for us all. Well, certainly sounds interesting. Hopefully they put more effort into the technology than they do their marketing materials. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/11/2014 6:40:43 PM EDT
[#16]
that image of the "3rd gen" looks more like what I see with my 1st gen stuff.
the only way I could make my pvs14 image look like that was if I turned the gain completely down 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/11/2014 7:20:16 PM EDT
[#17]
I don't see the flying pigs in the image....
Benny, it is not just the active IR dependency, but also the lack of realtime response that differentiates your beloved digital from time proven analog. Please remind us which manufacturer that you are employed by? |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/11/2014 7:28:34 PM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Well, certainly sounds interesting. Hopefully they put more effort into the technology than they do their marketing materials. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: A little search fu and I found these digital goggles from the same manufacturer. Anyone want to get them and give a review? lol. http://www.intevac.com/intevacphotonics/dnvg/ Spec sheet for it here: http://www.intevac.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/Digital-Night-Vision-Goggle-Datasheet.pdf Older model Digital Image Intensifier spec sheet: http://www.intevac.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/E3010M-Datasheet2.pdf The version used in the Apache Helicopter: http://www.intevac.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/Apache-Camera-Datasheet.pdf Looks like the next 5 years are going to be interesting for us all. Well, certainly sounds interesting. Hopefully they put more effort into the technology than they do their marketing materials. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/11/2014 8:40:09 PM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Exact same image with different color. Look at the clouds, they're in the same position even. Probably faked. Not going to argue if real or fake but you do realize that they could have two cameras set up right next to each other. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/11/2014 8:41:19 PM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I don't see the flying pigs in the image.... Benny, it is not just the active IR dependency, but also the lack of realtime response that differentiates your beloved digital from time proven analog. Please remind us which manufacturer that you are employed by? I don't think civilians are going to need instantaneous "realtime" response from their digital sights for the majority of shooting scenarios, I believe hundreds of pigs have already died which reflect current digital tech effectiveness in the field. Lesser IR dependence will only sweeten the pot and obviously it will enhance the capability of the products. I have a daytime job that is in no way related to NV and I serve as a ProStaff member of Sightmark and Pulsar, the ProStaff is non-compensatory. I think I should probably add this to my profile here so that you'll remember going forward 
You'll be reading less from me in the near term as I have some other projects which are going to occupy my time, will you miss me? 
HTXH |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/11/2014 9:25:14 PM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I don't think civilians are going to need instantaneous "realtime" response from their digital sights for the majority of shooting scenarios, I believe hundreds of pigs have already died which reflect current digital tech effectiveness in the field. Lesser IR dependence will only sweeten the pot and obviously it will enhance the capability of the products. I have a daytime job that is in no way related to NV and I serve as a ProStaff member of Sightmark and Pulsar, the ProStaff is non-compensatory. I think I should probably add this to my profile here so that you'll remember going forward
You'll be reading less from me in the near term as I have some other projects which are going to occupy my time, will you miss me?
HTXH Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I don't see the flying pigs in the image.... Benny, it is not just the active IR dependency, but also the lack of realtime response that differentiates your beloved digital from time proven analog. Please remind us which manufacturer that you are employed by? I don't think civilians are going to need instantaneous "realtime" response from their digital sights for the majority of shooting scenarios, I believe hundreds of pigs have already died which reflect current digital tech effectiveness in the field. Lesser IR dependence will only sweeten the pot and obviously it will enhance the capability of the products. I have a daytime job that is in no way related to NV and I serve as a ProStaff member of Sightmark and Pulsar, the ProStaff is non-compensatory. I think I should probably add this to my profile here so that you'll remember going forward
You'll be reading less from me in the near term as I have some other projects which are going to occupy my time, will you miss me?
HTXH I ride my quad in the dark without any active IR using a PVS-14, so yes realtime response is indeed real. It is good that you candidly express transparency regarding your "ProStaff member" affiliation with two digital device manufacturers. While conveyed as non-compensatory, is it reasonable to assume that you are provided devices for T&E free-of-charge? Think about the classic Consumer Reports analogy. Don't get me wrong, your input has typically been very insightful, and should you elect to discontinue participation in this forum, it would surely be missed. That said, it would be difficult to characterize said input as entirely unbiased or impartial based upon your own acknowledgement of manufacturer affiliation. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/11/2014 9:50:33 PM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I ride my quad in the dark without any active IR using a PVS-14, so yes realtime response is indeed real. It is good that you candidly express transparency regarding your "ProStaff member" affiliation with two digital device manufacturers. While conveyed as non-compensatory, is it reasonable to assume that you are provided devices for T&E free-of-charge? Think about the classic Consumer Reports analogy. Don't get me wrong, your input has typically been very insightful, and should you elect to discontinue participation in this forum, it would surely be missed. That said, it would be difficult to characterize said input as entirely unbiased or impartial based upon your own acknowledgement of manufacturer affiliation. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I don't see the flying pigs in the image.... Benny, it is not just the active IR dependency, but also the lack of realtime response that differentiates your beloved digital from time proven analog. Please remind us which manufacturer that you are employed by? I don't think civilians are going to need instantaneous "realtime" response from their digital sights for the majority of shooting scenarios, I believe hundreds of pigs have already died which reflect current digital tech effectiveness in the field. Lesser IR dependence will only sweeten the pot and obviously it will enhance the capability of the products. I have a daytime job that is in no way related to NV and I serve as a ProStaff member of Sightmark and Pulsar, the ProStaff is non-compensatory. I think I should probably add this to my profile here so that you'll remember going forward
You'll be reading less from me in the near term as I have some other projects which are going to occupy my time, will you miss me?
HTXH I ride my quad in the dark without any active IR using a PVS-14, so yes realtime response is indeed real. It is good that you candidly express transparency regarding your "ProStaff member" affiliation with two digital device manufacturers. While conveyed as non-compensatory, is it reasonable to assume that you are provided devices for T&E free-of-charge? Think about the classic Consumer Reports analogy. Don't get me wrong, your input has typically been very insightful, and should you elect to discontinue participation in this forum, it would surely be missed. That said, it would be difficult to characterize said input as entirely unbiased or impartial based upon your own acknowledgement of manufacturer affiliation. They also make day scopes, lasers, binoculars, etc BUT my interest is predominately in the night vision arena by choice and specifically in digital as I have some experience with computers, networking, audio and visual equipment etc. I've been an open book and I haven't monetized ANY of my youtube content, T&E is hardly free - think of the gas, hours of my time spent afield not to mention lease fees ammo costs etc - I am probably in the RED but I like being asked for feedback and seeing the results come to fruition such as with the next version of the Sightmark Photon (XT) it is going to surprise a lot of people. I don't drone on and on about digital nor do I push hard the manufactuers that I ProStaff for - I came to this forum before I was any of that, heck this thread is regarding a digital tech by one of their competitors so I'll just stop the explanation there. I will say the innuendo and insinuations of who is who and for what they stand is pretty high in this sub forum right now and I will tell you as I have told others privately, and put this in BOLD and share it with whom you wish. I want no part of the vendor wars, it isn't what I came here for and I won't pile on as I see many others do and this will be the one and only time I address it openly. Now back to Digital Delights and shooting pigs with what is currently available on the market. HTXH (BennyBone) |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/11/2014 11:21:59 PM EDT
[#23]
Guys, I think you all need to come to the realization that marketing people for various companies do not have the same hard on for only posting photos taken through the eyepiece like we do and that it isn't the end of the world when they post pics meant for illustrative purposes only.
The picture above may not fall into that category, but I'm just trying to make the the point. We get way snarky in here over pics being "real" or not when no one has made the express claim that they are.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/15/2014 4:06:51 PM EDT
[#24]
Getting back track with the OP opening post. He knows and so do others I have kept a very keen eye on Digi type devices every since I did that exhausting SuperVision review several years ago. Their shareholders wanted to hang me from the gallows after that one.
 One thing that device had that no one has duplicated yet (commercial market anyhow), was the OLED at 1024 x 768. It was THAT good. That was the sole reason it was priced so high along with the almighty profit dollar to their share holders at that time.
Getting back to the topic at hand. First off, I am NO PhD and I never claim to be an expert on how things are designed with complex devices such as these. Presently INTEVAC's ICE 10 = to 20LP / ICE 11 (= 49 LP) actually use a Photocathode without the MCP (low noise/miniscule halo) with a digital output enabling true fusion when used in conjunction with a thermal sensor. I know these are VERY complex systems I am describing and technically I know just enough only to have worn a few in my past travels and see some pretty significant results. I can tell you the Mil folks are using this upper end technology and incorporating them into systems and the future is changing rapidly. CJ7Hawk is correct in his statement as well about "digital" which is misleading when talking about this particular company product. When I describe relationship to what we know as Generation 2/2+ in line pair is not the real story as with these devices having a digi output are able to interpolate the image and do all sorts of image enhancements, so I don't think of it as a apples to apples comparison between NV and Digi. In fact I hate using the word Digi to describe what we are seeing with INTEVAC's technology that actually use a photocathode, they are not a CMOS type system at it's core. IMHO opinion, the progression of what we're seeing is VERY profound and the path of this technology is what we saw in the Gen 0 to Gen 3 era. This technology is taking that same path and presently it's up to the Military to call it what if officially wants, Gen 4 etc. One thing is for sure, there is not much left to enhance with image intensifier devices as we know it (it has reached it's design limit IMHO) and the future is exciting.
Vic |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/15/2014 7:21:07 PM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Getting back track with the OP opening post. He knows and so do others I have kept a very keen eye on Digi type devices every since I did that exhausting SuperVision review several years ago. Their shareholders wanted to hang me from the gallows after that one. One thing that device had that no one has duplicated yet (commercial market anyhow), was the OLED at 1024 x 768. It was THAT good. That was the sole reason it was priced so high along with the almighty profit dollar to their share holders at that time. Getting back to the topic at hand. First off, I am NO PhD and I never claim to be an expert on how things are designed with complex devices such as these. Presently INTEVAC's ICE 10 = to 20LP / ICE 11 (= 49 LP) actually use a Photocathode without the MCP (low noise/miniscule halo) with a digital output enabling true fusion when used in conjunction with a thermal sensor. I know these are VERY complex systems I am describing and technically I know just enough only to have worn a few in my past travels and see some pretty significant results. I can tell you the Mil folks are using this upper end technology and incorporating them into systems and the future is changing rapidly. CJ7Hawk is correct in his statement as well about "digital" which is misleading when talking about this particular company product. When I describe relationship to what we know as Generation 2/2+ in line pair is not the real story as with these devices having a digi output are able to interpolate the image and do all sorts of image enhancements, so I don't think of it as a apples to apples comparison between NV and Digi. In fact I hate using the word Digi to describe what we are seeing with INTEVAC's technology that actually use a photocathode, they are not a CMOS type system at it's core. IMHO opinion, the progression of what we're seeing is VERY profound and the path of this technology is what we saw in the Gen 0 to Gen 3 era. This technology is taking that same path and presently it's up to the Military to call it what if officially wants, Gen 4 etc. One thing is for sure, there is not much left to enhance with image intensifier devices as we know it (it has reached it's design limit IMHO) and the future is exciting. Vic Some very interesting technical input - thanks Vic :) I wasn't aware of the performance difference between models. But I will expand on what you said as it's easier to understand in a different context. Let's say a tube has a limiting resolution of 64 lp/mm, then over 18mm, we can assume that it has a maximum of 2200 or so pixels side to side... Let's call it 2000 to round it off. This is similar to a HD screen (1920x1080). The main problem is at these levels, the maximum contrast is just 3% and is at the absolute limit of human perception - Basically we see pixels like that as grey. Even if we drop the resolution down to around 800x600, about the resolution of an old PC, we still can't get tube technology to provide any better contrast than 40%... So the fine detail contrast is lost as a consequence of tube technology. To get anywhere close to 100%, resolution has to drop as low as 2 lp/mm... However, digital doesn't have this limitation... So a 1080p ( 1920x1080 ) based system would have 100% MTF at the full resolution - meaning they are only limited by the quality of the glass used with them, and you can spot fine detail easily... In fact, even a 1024x768 resolution model with good glass could theoretically outperform a 72 lp/mm tube in terms of visible fine detail... Don't forget image intensifier tubes are image tubes - exactly what they used to use in old studio TV camera's back in the 60's... Remember what the old quality was like? The B&W stuff? The true difference between an image intensifier tube and an advanced digital system is on the order of the difference between old CRT TV's and modern digital ones... The gulf is that wide. Regards David
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/16/2014 12:21:36 PM EDT
[#26]
As time moves on and technology advances I can see a time in the future where digi will be on par if not better then tubed nv.
For example the new Sony A7s CMOS full frame sensor ( that thing has a massive ISO ) even in video mode, this is today's tech albeit its a $2000 camera body..... But give it 2-3 years from now it will cost $5-600 as something else will of surpassed its tech. Look at thermals and how far they have come..... Look at the last 10-15 years at what's now available. Some examples of what this sensor can do without any IR http://youtu.be/XgbUgNiHfXM http://youtu.be/a1W-bPyYR0k Time will see where it all ends up, as the X sight and "there new sensor" its funny that the same sensor has been in use in CCD cameras for awhile now, ( I'm talking CMOS sensor" not the other sensors and stuff they have stuffed into it. For its money, if it equals the performance of the N750 then ATN have a winner, yukon/photon/Sightmark would have to come out with something better and or drop the price on there n550 and 750 line to compete, then the likes of the Armasight drone would have to come into play etc. All these hold ups with it coming to release, might have something to do with the Russia and Ukraine debacle as both ATN and Armasight have optics made in Russia, China also I'm led to believe. Anyway back to the subject, give it time I think Digi will start to out perform the tubed NV, there down side is Battery life, they suck the hell out of the juice. As a head mountable unit, for walking ATM .... No I don't see digi out performing a tubed monocular any time soon. Digi still have a very narrow Feild of view, only time will tell. The last few years have come a long way in Night Vision .... It's only going to get better with time..... Well for you yanks anyway, for us Aussies..... Not so much for us to look forward too. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/16/2014 12:22:18 PM EDT
[#27]
Please delete this post, I got a double post, Sorry... My fat fingers typing on the mobile :)
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/16/2014 1:36:53 PM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Who knows what kind of exposure values were used to take that picture, they could have been collecting light data for several minutes with some HUGE lense. or what the form factor of the device that took it. it could have come from a device wheeled in on multiple hand trucks for all we know, technology demonstration prototypes and such. Yep. Without knowing the shutter-speed, that image tells you two things: Jack, and sh*t. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/17/2014 1:17:20 AM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Getting back track with the OP opening post. He knows and so do others I have kept a very keen eye on Digi type devices every since I did that exhausting SuperVision review several years ago. Their shareholders wanted to hang me from the gallows after that one. One thing that device had that no one has duplicated yet (commercial market anyhow), was the OLED at 1024 x 768. It was THAT good. That was the sole reason it was priced so high along with the almighty profit dollar to their share holders at that time.
Getting back to the topic at hand. First off, I am NO PhD and I never claim to be an expert on how things are designed with complex devices such as these. Presently INTEVAC's ICE 10 = to 20LP / ICE 11 (= 49 LP) actually use a Photocathode without the MCP (low noise/miniscule halo) with a digital output enabling true fusion when used in conjunction with a thermal sensor. I know these are VERY complex systems I am describing and technically I know just enough only to have worn a few in my past travels and see some pretty significant results. I can tell you the Mil folks are using this upper end technology and incorporating them into systems and the future is changing rapidly. CJ7Hawk is correct in his statement as well about "digital" which is misleading when talking about this particular company product. When I describe relationship to what we know as Generation 2/2+ in line pair is not the real story as with these devices having a digi output are able to interpolate the image and do all sorts of image enhancements, so I don't think of it as a apples to apples comparison between NV and Digi. In fact I hate using the word Digi to describe what we are seeing with INTEVAC's technology that actually use a photocathode, they are not a CMOS type system at it's core. IMHO opinion, the progression of what we're seeing is VERY profound and the path of this technology is what we saw in the Gen 0 to Gen 3 era. This technology is taking that same path and presently it's up to the Military to call it what if officially wants, Gen 4 etc. One thing is for sure, there is not much left to enhance with image intensifier devices as we know it (it has reached it's design limit IMHO) and the future is exciting.
Vic I remember all that and they wanted you drawn and quartered !! You singlehandedly destroyed their dreams of night vision bliss (and lots of profit). I am surprised you are still with us after that. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/17/2014 2:04:50 PM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I'm highly skeptical to put it lightly. That's a pretty terrible representation of what a Gen 3 tube looks like. I could take a better picture with my iPhone. I would guess that the pictures were taken under very bright conditions since there are no visible stars and there would be significant sky glow with the cloud cover directly over a populated area. The only way I could imagine Gen 3 looking like that under those conditions is if the sky was so bright that the autogating completely dimmed down the image causing the foreground to look significantly darker. That and the photographer probably had to drop the exposure time way down in order to prevent the sky and city lighting from washing out half the image. I think they should send a unit to me and I will do a completely unbiased comparison under different ambient light levels +1 on analysis. I've seen the same thing with low clouds / fog with light pollution. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/17/2014 2:37:34 PM EDT
[#31]
Quoted:
http://i932.photobucket.com/albums/ad162/hunttxhogs/IRD-NS-Banner-16_zps90cf3972.jpg There have been some interesting topics recently on digital technology, I just throw this out there as a illustration to go along with my thought: When will digital surpass Gen 3 in low light environments and how much will it cost? The image is from IR Defense, I believe they debuted the Intevac digital architecure at SHOT SHOW 2014 but since I wasn't there I cannot say for sure. It may have debuted at US Nightvision's booth. You might see it again at SHOT 2015..... If the digital scope wasn't reliant upon active IR and seemingly provided an image with more detail would you pay 3, 4 , 5, 6 thousand dollars for a weapons optic? Interesting times in digital right now - - - I would love to get some in-scope time on a system like this and see what it can do. HTXH I saw the video demonstration of this at US night visions Shot Show booth. They didn't have any units to demonstrate and was all just a video. The staff assured me it was ground breaking technology (heard that many times before)... So I listened to the whole sales pitch and watched the video. I think they dug around to find the lowest most horribly performing Gen 3 tubes for the video. I instantly thought Super Vision part two. One of those things I take with a grain of salt until I can get one in my hands for an honest test. Until then I will just watch. I ain't going to be the guinea pig though.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/17/2014 3:02:39 PM EDT
[#32]
I was at the ARFCOM night vision get together in North Texas.
There was some VERY nice digital night vision scopes that definitely were on par with gen 3 NVD.s And they had a few extra features. Some REALLY good stuff being developed right now. TXL |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
