Has anyone bought NVGs from Will's Optics before? (https://willsoptics.com)

Are they a legit company and good warranty?

I can't answer your question. What I CAN tell you is that I just bought a sweet WOWP/PVS-14 Photonis 4G ECHO White Phosphor Gen3 Auto-gated Night Vision Monocular from them for a great price on sale and they added at no charge, a USGI 3X magnifier press on lens, which the website didn't even mention. The sale (bought mine on 6/22/2018) isn't on right now but the price was $500 less than it shows on the site and the 3x magnifier I've priced all over the web sells for around $450 most places so my deal was pretty nice. There was some delay after I ordered and when I emailed, they responded that the tubes they had just gotten were not up to their standards so they sent them back. The PVS-14 I ordered arrived 7/6/2018. It is really nice. Came with a spec sheet for the tube too. Viewing through the tube there are only two small black specks visible; one in zone 1 and one in zone 3 which is excellent. I flew with ANVIS 6 in the Army that had many black specks visible but were still serviceable for flight. After 17 years in the military using and flying under NVGs, I may not be considered and expert, but I damn sure have experience with NVGs. Three things I absolutely love about the Photonis tube: 1) Black and white is way better to my eyes than green, 2) the manual gain freaking rocks, and 3) the lower price. If research on some of the forums you'll find people claiming the Photonis tubes are not Gen 3 tubes and maybe technically they aren't because the generations have to do with the manufacturing process itself. But here's the deal, the tube auto-gates, filmless, has a S/R of 29.6, resolution is 69 ll/pm, has a bright light cutoff, automatic bright control, etc. In other words, as far as I'm concerned it is a Gen III tube. The specs are comparable to the specs listed for Omni VII/VIII that I could find. All I can say is they treated me well and I'm psyched over the quality of the PVS-14 setup and the Photonis tube.

Carl is an outstanding individual/company and I would not hesitate to do business with him.

+1. This needs to be fully understood - PHOTONIS tube photocathodes have electron affinity - this is the difference between Gen2 and Gen3.

Though I get where the sentiment comes from in that there's not a lot of difference between the top Gen2 and Gen3 tubes.

Well they are neither GEN2 nor GEN3 as they have yet to be given a designation by any US Military Night Vision labs.
They are at present being evaluated by US Military and have gotten very good response and are referred to as Hybrid.
The manufacturer states that they are not GEN2 as their photocathode is doped in a new proprietary manner much different than GEN2 or GEN3.
We wont get into an argument or discussion about proprietary information we cant comment in depth on and we prefer to let the product speak for itself and stand on its own merit.
FYI GEN3 GaAs PC's also come in an electron affinity to take advantage of wider spectral response ;)
We love GEN3 L3 image tubes as well as Photonis DEP image tubes, they are all great performers and stand on their own individual merit.
Buy what ever one you want to buy they are both outstanding products.

I guess your heart is in the right place, and everyone loves L3 and PHOTONIS tubes... The Second Generation of tubes, however, is well defined.

There is no question that these tubes are second generation. PHOTONIS say they are Gen2. The NVESD say they are Gen2. They head guy from RDECom said they were Gen2 when we sat down a couple of years ago while he was in Australia and had this conversation and talked about how Gen3 was no longer able to adapt to out of band threats due to the physical characteristics of the Gallium Arsenide tube which is probably why the US military are buying them... (note, the US Military don't buy ECHO. They only buy 4G or INTENS AFAIK )

Little known fact: PHOTONIS make some rocking Gen3 photocathodes too. They have mastered it to the extent that it's reasonable to say they are one of the two top producers of the technology. They just don't sell Gen3 IITs.

Now if you're talking about Indium Gallium Arsenide tubes, well, yes, I suppose they have indium, but it's not exposed to the vacuum, so regardless of the mechanisms of the indium, there's no vacuum band for the electrons from the indium to cross. If you have knowledge of the mechanism for low-powered electrons moving between the indium and the gallium arsenide, well, that sounds interesting and I've never heard anyone talk of it before, so by all means, lead that technical discussion.

Generations talk of technology types, not performance levels. 4G is a performance level. NOT a technology. Echo tubes are not 4G tubes. They do not meet the full requirements to be a 4G tube. They are not INTENS. They come in ECHO and ECHO+ but they are still usually exactly the same technology as you'll find in a 4G or an INTENS tube. Same photocathode, same MCP, same screen. That's why they are so good.

Echo are basically the tubes that didn't make the grade.

But it's more useful to refer to them as 4G tubes - that can be more easily understood.

Regards
David.

We sat down and talked with Photonis DEP the other month and they squarely stated that these are not GEN2 or GEN2+ and are waiting for designation and at present called Hybrid.

SO.........

We are very well aware of that and wide spectrum glass is currently being addressed.
Just because it isn't optimized for it doesn't mean it dosen't benefit by the image tube having that ability, it just means its not getting every opportunity it can.
There is glass that does and we sell that, just seems that most are happy with the outstanding performance they get from the DEP Echo tubes and the 4G Intens in the value platform of the PVS-14.
Even customers that buy Echo equipped goggles utilizing AVS objectives that have the most band filtering are amazed at the performance they perceive beyond what they had previously.  
I guess the lucky ones are the ones that buy the right glass.
You would be surprised at the amount of Echo's that sell to LEO and MiL

And yes if you want to creep in the dead black with no ambient light whatsoever and the inability to use an IR illuminator or designator then the L3 20UM,20UA,22UM,22UA high spec Military(UM= Unlimited Military)  and Aviation (UA=Unlimited Aviation) grade Image tubes would be your logical option albeit the bank account needs to be there to support that purchase as well.

All very nice image tubes that build very nice systems that perform very well.

Just wait until someone gets SWIR Covert lased and doesn't see it with their GEN3 NVG but the guy with the wide spectrum does.

Are you actually selling Echo to .mil? I know they get sold a lot to LEOs and are specifically intended for that market - especially Echo+, but .MIL are usually reticent to buy tubes that don't meet their minimum specifications.

As for SWIR covert lasers... Most would be around 1550nm, and shouldn't really be all that detectable with IITs. Likewise, it's possible to make covert lasers for 4G and Echo, as well as covert illumination and beacons that SWIR isn't optimised to detect and Gen3 has almost no detection capabilities for. The US tends to use lasers around 1064nm, so it's a bit different, but most foreign forces would use 1550nm for SWIR.

PVS-14s will work with ECHO tubes, but that opens them up to LEO type countermeasures as well, that don't affect Gen3, but will almost cripple effective response for anyone using 4G.

it's a very complex and dynamic relationship between all of the technologies. Many balances and counterbalances to consider.

Though if you're a prepper, 4G/Echo would give you a significant advantage in terms of evasion capabilities to avoid detection while using active systems.

Sorry to the OP for derailing the discussion a little. I had a look at the site. I don't have any prior experience with them.

Though my first thought is their motto seems to translate as "Be dominated by the night"... Which is a bit weird, since usually night vision is supposed to be the other way around, or maybe my latin is just crap, and it is, but shouldn't they use those words the other way around?

Aside from a few technical errors on their website, it's really hard to judge a book by it's cover. If their advertised systems are correct, they should probably be supplying datasheets with their echo systems. Has anyone bought one who can confirm what the specifics of their purchase were in terms of performance?

Thanks
David.

Yeah I was thinking the same about the OP
Apologies for the derail.

Photonis and L3 both have their spots and both are fine image tubes , I cant knock either of them for any reason and I cant see why anyone would?? Love them both.

FYI NVESD has not designated them.

Photonis DEP does not call them GEN2.

They perform fine with any optics, just better with some, none are detrimental to the performance of either 4G or ECHO , AVS cuts out some spectrum for lighting packages and other glass we sell and have a large stock of are void of filtering and allow the ECHO and 4G to perform at its upmost levels.

I cant tell you how many customers have been on the fence and tried Photonis DEP Echo and did their own comparison to the exiting OMNI 7 or OMNI 8 tube equipped device they bought from some other seller. We have even had several customers buy a PVS-14 to try it out and see what the hype is and they get back to us after they get it and rave and buy another. LOL

All I can do is tell you how happy they look and how fast they snap up the ECHO and say i want this one. These aren't repair guys or salesmen , these are military special forces guys that spent time behind the glass and LEO's that are on teams and they know what they want. Oh and we get our fair share that want to spend $10K+ on a L3 2500+ FOM Military tube equipped 72lpmm at 36SNR also, just not as often.

Nice chatting David

OP apologies again for the derail of your post.

Call the vendor up that you are asking questions about , drop them and email or text and talk to them and see what they know or have , then call another and do the same , try several sellers , outlets , distributors of L3 and Photonis DEP.

No need to rush into a commitment or sale.

Plenty of reputable distributors of quality night vision out there , take your time, don't fall for any rush , this is on sale now your going to miss out. There is always stock in reputable distributors inventory and they can always get more.

Go with who you feel comfortable with, let them earn your sale.

Have a nice evening everyone!

Thought I'd throw my two cents in here as a user and not a seller so I don't have anything to gain from any of the technical arguments about whether or not a Photonis Echo is technically a Gen 3 (it is not but only because the U.S. Army hasn't designated it as such). As a former Test Officer with the U.S. Army Test and Experimentation Command (TEXCOM), Aviation Test Directorate (AVTD), at Fort Hood , Texas, and a UH-60 Blackhawk pilot for 17 years, with a few hours flying under NVGs from 1986 through 2004 under my belt, everywhere from ROK to Bosnia to Iraq, I can tell you that the Photonis Echo PVS-14 is better than the ANVIS I flew with. Of course, my last flight was 14 years ago so not sure what they're flying with today. I do have enough time under NVGs to know a good sight picture through the tube when I see it. We all could argue (uh, discuss intelligently) as to the merits of the technicalities of the labels, but the ol' test officer in me tells me that if a tube meets or exceeds the specifications of the better Gen 3 class tubes, then they must be doing something right.

For example, the specs on the Photonis Echo PVS-14 tube I just received are: FOM: 2004, Maximum Output Brightness: 4.9, Luminance Gain: 8600, Resolution: 69 lp/mm, EBI: 0.13, SNR: 29.05, HALO: 0.79Useful Cathode Diameter: >17.6mm. So to me, whether Gen 3 or not is irrelevant (unless I was purchasing under a strict government purchase contract where it would HAVE to be technically a Gen 3). I can see that the measured specs are as good as most Gen 3 tubes advertised, and I know what I can see through the tube. I also know from looking through the tube that the manual gain is "kick ass". It's unfilmed auto gated, has auto brightness control, bright light shut off, manual gain, and the clearest picture through the tube I've ever seen (in person). I'm in hog heaven and happy I bought this one. And what is really great is that its white phosphor instead of green, so that's a plus. I didn't know whether or not I would like the white phosphor or not but I'll tell you, I sure wish I had tubes like this when I was flying! So the battle of the generations may rage on but I'm one happy Photonis tube user and as long as I feel I spent my hard earned cash on something that is worth what I paid, I am happy.

Is it the best of the best of the best tube out there? Obviously not. Do I feel like I spent too much for a tube that doesn't meet my expectation? Hell no. I am super psyched with this tube and if I get another NVD in the future, I'll probably get another tube as close to this one as possible. I mean hell, I can only find two small black specks: one in zone 1; and one in zone 3. I would have gotten in a knock down drag out over a tube like this back when I was flying around with the ANVIS/HUD.

Sorry for the multiple posts but "new accounts" (so it says) aren't allowed more than a certain number of characters...I guess I'm still "new" as this is only my 5th post in 4 years and 4 of them are on this one topic. I usually just read a lot and not post.

Thanks for reading.

Thanks for your post, from your back ground, experience and service will help myself and others make informed decision about how we send our hard earned duckets....

Hi Lonewolf1369, welcome to the forum.

2nd Generation tubes have the following characteristics -
a) Alkali Metal Photocathode.
b) Microchannel plate

The NVESD designated these tubes about 50 years ago - but if you have additional knowledge about what specific characteristic of this tube mean it's not second generation, please let me know which characteristic it is.

It's important to realize that ALL of the PHOTONIS second generation tubes are well and truly within the Gen3 performance envelope and this has been the case since the SHD-3 and XD-4. The gap was eliminated with the XR5 in 2002. It's also important to understand why even the top filmless Gen3 tubes can't meet the 4G performance specification since INTENS.

It's possibly more important to remember that the echo is a low-cost tube intended for specific civilian applications. Yes, fantastic performance. But it's not an INTENS.

Nice specs on your tube too. :)

David.

Thanks David for your technical input! When I was doing testing on equipment for the Army (none of my testing was specifically night vision) my role was as an Operational Test Officer as opposed to a Technical Test Officer. Our tests were set up around user testing and feedback from the troops we were with when conducting the test. I think what has piqued my interest so much in the night vision world is 1) I spent a lot of time under googles and 2) the incredible advances that have happened since 2004 when I stopped flying.

Even with the upgrades in Gen 1 product "tweaking" Armasight has done an incredible job with their Spark Core model. I was blown away by the difference between my first Gen 1 under $200 purchase (I know it's crap but my first civilian NVD and I wanted see the low end before increasing my investment) and the Spark. Huge difference. 72 lp/mm and a very clear picture. You still need IR supplement as it's still Gen 1 but wow. And the stuff nowadays is just incredible.

I spent a bit of time analyzing the Spark CORE and giving it a review at the time. It was a normal Gen1 inside with a power supply attached.

I'm not sure what they did - maybe a tweaked photocathode, but it was rather impressive for a non-fiber-plate Gen1. System gain was around 100x - quite substantial for a Gen1. Focus was OK too, and distortion wasn't that bad. I guess that's what 20 years of Gen1 manufacture in Russian achieves. But in the end I had to admit it could perform similarly to a PVS-14 on the lowest gain setting ( which is also around 100x ). I still remember being surprised at that.

It sounds like you've had an incredible career. It will be good if you can mix in some of that experience in the forum threads - :)

David

Thank you David. I don't mind lending experience if it helps folks decide what they want or need based on user input. I usually shy away from discussions about technical superiority of products between sellers as a lot of that is marketing hype.  But yes, I experienced the same thing you stated about the Spark. When I compared it with my new PVS-14 (minimum gain), on a very dark, overcast night, I couldn't see much difference. But on the PVS-14, once I started applying the manual gain, it was like turning on an IR floodlight on the scene. All of a sudden there was no comparison as there's no adjustment on the Spark. I think with the Spark I read somewhere that they installed an MCP and that's what gave it the clarity.

Some of the forums I visit have a lot of folks getting into heated debates about stuff. Guns and ammo like who has the best .308 rifle or whether the king of long distance rounds is the 6mm Creedmoor or the 6.5mm. I don't get into those as once someone has their mind made up about there favorite whatever, there's plenty of evidence they can throw out either way. I'm more into helping someone decide whether the jump from a $399 NVD to a $3,000 NVD is really what they want. And some have already decided, they just want a little reassurance from folks that have used both.

David ,

They aren't GEN2 , don't know why you keep saying that?
Echo is not a civilian application i2 , although it is being used extensively by civilians.
Generations description doesn't apply to these tubes until a generation is given to them and at present they have been called a hybrid tube.
4G has its parameters that make it a 4G and INTENS is a 4G that meets INTENS minimum parameters, Echo has its minimum parameters it has to meet. It can be something as simple as current draw, max halo , minimum resolution regardless of lighting conditions that move it from one category to the next, IE: the Echo must maintain a 55lpmm minimum resolution in all lighting conditions or it isn't a Echo and a INTENS must maintain a 57LPMM resolution in all lighting conditions.

Don't sell the Echo short , it is a phenomenal tube and will serve the community well.

You would be surprised at the response and positive reception they receive from unbiased reviews.

PS
These are not GEN3 nor are they GEN2 as I stated before and I don't know why it was advertised as GEN3 WP , has anyone heard anything on the GEN3 description? I think it might just have been a typo making a web page listing by Wills Optics

Is the discussion whether it's Gen2 or not based on the material the photocathode is made of?

I have been in the belief it is still multi-alkali, and "just" has that interesting structure to help capture longer wavelength photons. That belief/assumption is based on the fact that there is such a structure and that the gain values are not that much different from XR5 which definitely fits the Gen2 category.

There's not as much difference between an XR5 and an INTENS as you might imagine.

Both are multialkali

I'm not selling the Echo short. As I said, they are amazing tubes...

But I've been speaking to PHOTONIS about this very subject just last week.

Advice from PHOTONIS is not to push them into the markets where a higher spec tubes is called for - eg, where INTENS or other NL6 tubes are required, or professional use.
PHOTONIS have also told me that these ARE a civilian application tube, and ECHO+ should be supplied to Police and for non-Military government applications.
PHOTONIS also advise they are not suited to binocular applications, though with careful selection might still be usable for this application.

So this isn't my take on this subject. I'm just repeating what PHOTONIS have said.

I don't know what the OP wants to do with his tubes. Is he a LEO? Civilian? Professional? This would all affect which tube I'd advise him to go for - It would be unethical for me to advise a LEO to go for an ECHO instead of an ECHO+ if he wanted a non-milspec tube.

Now, there's a possibility that there may be a different marketing strategy in the US and this accounts for different opinions. Can you clarify the Z-number of the particular Echo's we're discussing here? ECHO is an entire family of tubes... Well, two families of tubes.

Thanks
David.

We just left meetings and total different story than your broadcasting.

We have active LEO and operators that use our Photonis Echo white and green phosphor tubes and say how well they work in low light no moon scenarios and say they can’t wait for a full moon night to use them.

Sure they aren’t going to have that reach into the absolute dead dark that GaAs PC i2’s have, that’s why we offernthe L3 unfilmed White Phosphor ,  however those i2’s also wash out and drop to high 30’s lpmm to low 40 lpmm in high light resolution while Echos and INTENS stay above 55lpmm , very little degridation of resolution in varying light levels with crisp clear clean image quality.
It’s a fine balance between all those factors that the Echo excels at. The 4G INTENS even better.

People notice and their friends talk, one by one they try the Echo and don’t buy the koolaid talk.

All are great tubes and deserve their own space and can’t understand why anyone would try to dissuade someone from one or the other ??

That i the case then you have no real reason to be selling any autogated tubes. Check the patent. The reason for the invention of autogating was so that high light resolution would be preserved. Not to prevent damage from over exposure to light. As autogated tubes are not immune to damage from overexposure.

Haha poor OP still trying to find out if Wills is a reputable shop as we bicker back and fourth , again sorry for the side chatter OG OP

Very aware of how NV works and why we use it. Been in this field a long time.

Yeah we might move more L3 and Photonis than you think and usually only order unfilmed and high spec 20UM/UA and 22UM/UA.

L3 provides 2 year warranty standard as does Photonis.

We just try to provide high quality for all customers and what customers want and with the tubes they are presently raving about everytime we make a sale, and like to offer customer options

No worries

??
Exactly

How did we get to autogating from ECHO?  I think it's time I broke out another discussion thread.

Anway, Autogating was originally developed to minimize ion strike damage to filmless tube photocathodes. It had other benefits, but I believe that was the original reason that the concept was developed. Though PHOTONIS do actually do a lot of research in adapting it.

There's patents about that also... It actually gets the positive ions to tunnel back out of their impact craters before they can do as much permanent damage by poisoning the photocathode.

OK, I need to set the technical record straight on one very specific factor you keep quoting before people start to believe you. I'm actually kind of worried that you don't know this already if you're supplying LEOs, let alone that the more this conversation progresses, I'm concerned that you're not even offering ECHO+ to LEOs.

Limiting resolution at >200 lux = 50 lp/mm (autogating mode) - From the ECHO and ECHO+ Performance Specifications.

This data is for the most advanced ECHO+ for law enforcement purposes. PVS-14 WHITE. But all of the other specs for all other echo's are the same. If you've been telling your customers that your tubes are a minimum of 55 lp/mm high light, without supply a datasheet stating otherwise, then you might want to let them know what it really is. Otherwise they might feel you've been misleading them.

Now light is kind of relative. In the open city, the illumination rarely gets to the low levels Vic talks of... But inside buildings, through open doorways and windows it's darker. Well into the sort of light levels Vic is talking about. Under these situations, the light can reach NL6, even if it's within just a small area on an otherwise brightly lit screen.

Unfortunately, for law enforcement officers, many of the threats they face seem to come from within these dark, hidden areas. Bad guys seem to instinctively hide in the shadows and this works well for them. What is needed is night vision that can see into these dark areas, though I will qualify that this isn't necessarily the case for all LEOs and some night vision is better than no night vision. This is the difference between ECHO+ and INTENS. INTENS is really good for peering into dark areas.  Depending on where and when this NV will use should affect which tube you recommend to your customers.

Now, as for PHOTONIS recommendations - What's different between EHCO and ECHO+ ?

Answer: Blemishes.

ECHO has roughly twice the spots allowable compared to ECHO+. This is something that does affect LEO use. Black spots can lead to incorrect interpretation of movement when looking at specific detail. That's a distraction and in Zone1, ECHO allows spots up to .23 (medium) millemeters while ECHO+ limits this to spots under .15 (Tiny) millimeters which are barely noticeable. Keep in mind that spots under half this size don't even count.

This is why PHOTONIS don't recommend ECHO for LEO purposes.

Seriously, they are almost the same price. Just switch to ECHO+ for LEOs. Your customers will appreciate your efforts to protect their lives.

David.

WRONG!!!!

Autogated was wholly designed and implemented to maintain resolution in high light scenarios. When the ion barrier was removed to increase resolution and lessen halo the tubes experienced some early failure with ion bombardment occurred. The compilation of of the unfilmed and autogating power supplies worked well and so they perfected the autogating filmless tube and today you have the L3 unfilmed tubes with outstanding contrast and clarity in extreme low light that filmed tubes cannot touch.
Filmed tubes just cant approach the "looking through glass effect" that filmless tubes like L3 and Photonis providing higher resolution, clarity and lack of noise allowing for unrivaled contrast and performance.
White Phosphor is the latest technological advancement in image tubes. These filmeless tubes provide greater detail, clarity and 15-20% more light transmission than standard filmed or thin filmed P43 green phosphor tubes.
US SOCOM and JSOC have chosen the white phosphor unfilmed tubes as their new standard and are exclusively taking delivery of WP i2's.

Your specs are off , Im looking at a CURRENT Photonis ECHO Specification sheet calling out the ECHOs minimums and Limiting res at center minimum and limiting res at >200 lux is much more than your stating and I would elaborate more however by mutual understanding the data on the paperwork is not authorized to third parties without written consent. Maybe you have different ECHO spec for NON USA market? And spots specs are off also, many of them are clean and clear some have some specs all micro.
Echo allowable
Z1 one spot .00295 allowable ( rare occurrence in Z1)
Z2 one spot .009 , 2 spots .005
We have sold hundreds of Echo tubes equipped in goggles and monos in 2018 alone and haven't had any complaints and just rave reviews.
You really need to allow people the truth and stop spreading untruths with out basis.
The Photonis Echo is a Fine image tube that has been reviewed by teams and units , hunters and others and received rave reviews.

Oh My...

You might find this interesting reading... https://www.ar15.com/forums/armory/Generation_4___Filmless____The_untold_story___/18-340139/

It's a little dated since there was not a lot of availability of Filmless Gen3 at the time. But it still explains a lot of what you've misunderstood.

And since it's not relevant to historical posts, the "Looking through glass" effect is based on high relative S/N. It was originally used to describe various optimal settings of the gain control on the PVS-14 way back when they were all around Omni IV level and filmless didn't exist. Also before PHOTONIS produced suitable tubes that had EGAC. The "Looking Through Green Glass" effect is possible on all manual gain PVS-14's.

HAHAHA

Are you the same guy that did the wiki post about filmless being fragile image tubes???

This is entirely possible that different tubes exist within the US, and I did rely on datasheets that are already in the public domain.

But... Seriously, saying you can't reveal what the actual datasheet says about high light resolution, because of needing written consent.
Meanwhile the Wills Optics site states sloppy stuff like;
FOM: 1800+SNR: 28-30
Resolution: 64-72 lp/mm
High Light Resolution(299 lux): 55 lp/mm
Opertaional Time: 10,0000 hours
Halo: .7-1.0
EBI: <0.25

But *you* can't talk about it when I produce actual stated figures from a data sheet, other than to say I'm spreading an Untruth.

Meanwhile, I did ask you what Z-number you were talking about, but it's looking like you don't even know what a Z-number is in relation to echo tubes, and I don't think you've ever heard of Echo Plus. But somehow my referring to openly available data published by the manufacturer is "spreading untruths" or maybe that was a typo and what you really meant to accuse me of spreading was an inconvenient truth.

I have never once disrespected ECHO tubes. I have never once suggested they weren't incredible performing tubes for the price. I have never once suggested that you were deliberately misinforming people. I only said that the official datasheets for ECHO don't match what you're saying and unless a specific datasheet says otherwise, but hey, you called me a liar.

So whether or not Wills Optics and, in fact, yourself, is a good seller seems to come down to whether their posted information bears any resemblance to the stated datasheet.

Here it is, for everyone to see.
https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/3019/2174/files/184-7378A0.pdf?13427654106197727272 -

This is the ZW0973D - It's the ECHO Plus. This is the PVS-14 style datasheet for White phosphor tubes.

It's the tube you're supposed to be selling to LEOs. If you're a legitimate seller.

What does it say?
PHOTONIS sheet
FOM - 1800 plus - Accurate
S/N Min 25 - Not even close
Min Res 57+ -  Not even close
High Light 50lp/mm @ 200 - Not even close
Hours (not specified)  - But seriously against 100000? Still not even close
Halo Less than 0.95 - In the ballpark

So out of 6 performance criteria, one is accurate, one is ballpark, 4 aren't even close.

Based on this, I'd say Wills Optics is probably not the sort of place you want to trust with the kind of money they are asking for this system.

NOW... Mr Ownnight, I think you owe me an apology. Whether you're able to step up to the mark and admit I was correct about the official global specs or not will define whether you're an honorable seller or not.

However, if you want people to place any credibility in you at all, you probably need to provide official datasheets. I understand about confidentiality. There's a LOT about PHOTONIS I simply cannot say without having them vet it first.

But since you have talked about it, then you need to understand that if you're going to argue that the facts show someone is a liar,  as you have done with me, then you either make sure you have the facts at hand, or if you don't, then you need to do the right thing in the first place and keep them to yourself.

As it is, I didn't lie. There are no untruths. Be clear on that. Whether or not you're being cavalier with the truth now depends entirely on whether you can present the datasheets to back up what you say.

Wow you flew off the handle quick on that one!! Easy tiger !! Some of the info you provide isn’t the information I have been told by people that work for the companies and business partners we deal with.

You data is off, and I don’t work with Wills so don’t know anything about that.

All I know is I signed legal papers and the paper I’m holding in my hand says

“Property of the group
Reproduction or disclosure to third parties, in any form whatsoever in any form not allowed without written consent. “

Mr Ownnight isn’t about to “bite the hand” so you will just have to wait.

As for your “I haven’t” blah blah blah , you both have talked down about a fine image tube while touting another for what reason I cannot comprehend.

As I have stated before both L3 and Photonis make fine image tubes and they both have there attributes. I’m not going to get all childish throwing out nonsensical verbage  so people think this or that, what I decimate is long time knowledge from dealing directly with manufacturers of the product on a first person basis doing business with them and others in the industry that actually manufacture the product.

All I can think is because your not in the USA you must be quoting different specs or maybe older than the current Photonis ECHO image intensifier specification sheet, it’s not a tube data sheet , it the manufacturers specification sheet.

No worries , I’m comfortable where I stand and wish you the best.

You accused me openly of spreading untruths. Did you think I wouldn't challenge that? What did I say that wasn't true? So far everything I've said has been proven.

I signed legal papers too. And if I couldn't prove that ECHO+ spec sheet showed 50lp/mm @ 200lux without breaking that agreement, I never would have corrected you in the first place. I wouldn't have even mentioned it. Let alone you're only talking about ECHOs and not ECHO+.

If you have a datasheet that shows 55 lp/mm then you've already disclosed it twice in this thread, so don't act all butt-hurt that I've asked you to prove it's veracity. I'll tell you what - tell me the publication number of the datasheet you "can't disclose" and I'll request a copy from PHOTONIS and check it. If it supports what you say, then I'll come back here and say it and acknowledge your figures. The publication number itself isn't confidential.

The little flag next to my name confirms I'm not in the US.

The OP wanted to know whether the supplier in question was a good supplier. Given that they appear to be misstating their specifications, I'd say that they are probably not a good choice of vendor. I find those vendors that need to rely on questionable specifications that seem to indicate higher levels of performance than they should be usually make poor choices for suppliers.

David.

Yes you did actually talk about something with untruths or errors of factual data and the wrong facts and appear to be really arrogant and place a lot on a market and technology and your info isn't current or the same info as the market we deal in, And nothing you have said has been "proven" as your data isn't the same as my data and what data is disclosed to me is different data than what is disclosed to you.

Different sides of the pond I guess?

I don't need to prove anything to you, My facts are 100% factual and current. It is very reckless on your part and not doing anyone any good, to talk about a product you are not fully versed in. You have made reckless comments about a product, a few companies and misled anyone viewing this thread that hasn't the ability to question what you say.
My information is current and factual, I only base my comments company data.

The equipment we sell to LEO, MIL, FR and Civilians is far superior to the specifications you have been rambling on about, your data regarding the equipment we sell is flawed and therefore your comments are not applicable to what we provide to the market.

Best Regards

Clearly PHOTONIS' data isn't the same as your data. That much you are absolutely correct about. But it's not out of date.

If there's something specific you felt I said that was in error, bring it up. Otherwise, suck it up.

Sure, there is a possibility that you have a product datasheet that shows differences in your product. Maybe DEP/PHOTONIS in the US have a different product line - They make some awesome product and have some really smart people working for them and it wouldn't be the first time they did something like that. Maybe that sheet hasn't been published openly yet, and that's not impossible. It's plausible even.

But when offered a chance to have that support your argument, you ran away from it. I don't know why you're hiding from the truth, but it's clear you are. If you really believe that there's a product spec out there that supports you, all you need to do is tell me the number and I'll ask for it. I think what you're truly afraid of is that if you do provide a publication reference, that I really can get hold of a copy and review it. I probably can.

But the offer is still open. Make sure it's for a ZW tube... PVS-14 style. Echo or Echo+ is fine.

Your insults are pretty childish, but then I don't really know how old you are, so maybe that's a bit unfair of me to point out.

And if you like ECHO, Have a look at INTENS.

Wow

Have fun and wishing you the best

Soooo is wills G2G these days?

https://www.nbcconnecticut.com/news/local/Stolen-Military-Equipment-Ends-With-Arrests-59271997.html

Vendors be like trolling the op's thread and taking it all OT...

As for Will's... there were stories going around about selling goods that essentially fell off a truck, but I am not sure how much truth there is to that, but that rumor was enough to steer me away in the past. Maybe someone here knows the truth behind that story?

At any rate, every time i have spoken to them, they were friendly and knowledgable. They just haven't had anything priced low enouh to where i just had to have it.

I'm going to try to bring this back to topic (poor Will's Optics probably has no idea all this is going on in this thread about them ).So as an operational user, I see specs as just a starting point. The other peices to this equation are the quality of the glass lenses the tube is installed in and the individual end user's eyes. That's the only way to get the "full" Monty so to speak. And I can only talk about the specific PVS-14 I purchased from Will's Optics (see how I linked this back?).

So, there you guys have it.
And I think the reason my tube is an Echo and not an Intense is because of a small black speck in zone 1, a smaller speck in zone 2, and a smaller speck in zone 3.
What says the gang?