Armory Sponsor
Posted: 4/26/2013 5:40:10 PM EDT
|
I have a PVS 14 coming soon, and I noticed that when folks post their spec sheets, you see some at 72 instead of the 64 LP.
I believe 64 is the minimum spec, but does it hurt performance if you get the lower value instead of the higher? Or all new tubes in Omni 8 specs going to be 72? |
|
I have four ITT PVS-14s, none of them are 72 lines of resolution and they all are outstanding, you'd be lucky to get a 72 line unit randomly unless you specifically paid for a 72 line hand picked unit from someone.
One friend does have a 72 line unit with a S/N ratio of 30.5, so they are out there, just pretty rare. ITT NIGHT ENFORCER NEPVS14-17 OPMOD PVS-14 DOM TNVC PVS-14 Thom TNVC PVS-14 Luminous. 2224 2469 2355 2471 Radiant. 250 277 254 266 Halo max. 0.94 0.82 0.90 0.92 EBI phot max. 0.93 1.77 1.45 1.86 2x10-6 fc (K) max. 70509 77902 57047 57543 Resolution center min. 64 64 64 64 FOM. Max. 1785.6 1772.8 1881.6 1804.8 Signal to Noise min. 27.9 27.7 29.4 28.2 Tested: JAN 12 2012 MAR 1 2012 Jan 28 2013 MAR 8 2013 |
|
Quoted:
Unless you fine tune the focus, and pay close attention to detail you probably won't notice the difference. I have a72lp/mm and it is a bit clearer. The zoom lens well give you the most range with best id possible with little difference between the two +1 you're searching for threats and navigating- not finishing furniture. Mine is "just" a 64lp/25.xx S/N but I've been out in the desert with mine enough times to know it would be a RIDICULOUS advantage in low-light, open field conditions against those without it. It occurred to me when I was driving home that using white light to navigate makes everything not in your cone of light pitch black. Using a NVD not only gives you 100's of yards of useful vision it leaves your other eye functional in low light. I didn't even need the NVG to keep my footing most of the time on rocky terrain. |
|
The way I see it, lines of resolution used to be an important spec when we lived in the gen2 world. When specs were 24-32 LP/mm, or 32-48, etc. Going from <32 lp/mm to 52+ is HUGE, and makes all the difference. 64 is in my mind a nice balance point between effectiveness and expense.
Like S/N, you need enough to get the job done, not as much as is humanly possible. At a certain point you have to pay through the nose for minimal gains. If I were doing a lot of NV photography, with magnified optics, maybe I would pay for 72. If I were going to pay through the nose for a nice soec, i'd want as much signal to noise ratio, personally. |
|
72 lp/mm is the next step up from 64 lp/mm on the 1951 air force test chart. This means that 64 lp/mm tubes are between 64 and 71lp/mm and if you tested the entire batch that produced some 72 lp/mm tubes, you'd probably find most are up around 70 lp/mm anyway, but that's still written down as 64 lp/mm because that's how the test and measurement works. The gap between modern tubes isn't that high. Unless a batch is made with 72 lp/mm as the baseline for the milspec, there's very little to gain here looking for a tube that did measure 72 lp/mm... So the metric really doesn't have a lot of importance for anyone for any purposes, other than to show it exceeded the 64 lp/mm base spec. S/N is still the singularly most useful metric for an indication of real-world performance. Regards David
|
|
What value would be an acceptable S/N value, and what would be an excellent one? I'll post my data sheet when I get it, as I am assuming(I didn't ask TNVC) that each new PVS-14 package comes with one.
I am in the 1 to 3 week time frame for delivery, at leased based on the estimate they gave me in wait time. My how time drags....... |
|
As SkyPup mentioned, I have a pretty nice unit that has 72 lp and a S/N over 30. The unit is awesome to use, but I also occasionally use and peer through SkyPup's PVS-14's. I think where my unit is noticeably different is in the amount of scintillation that occurs on very dark nights when you turn the gain up higher. This, of course, has nothing to do with the lp. So I wouldn't be quite so hung up on that.
I've been in England for almost 2 weeks and am currently suffering MAJOR NV withdrawal. Although after seeing the HUGE almost full moon last night, it made me feel good to know I wasn't missing out on a very dark night in Florida. See ya soon SkyPup! |
Yep! When its full moon I prefer to wait for a night with little moon or heavy cloud cover. Coyotes with small amount of moonlight can see like daylight. Could not get a couple of yotes to get closer the other night it was too bright out. The boogy man likes moonless nights 
|
|
Quoted:
Yep! When its full moon I prefer to wait for a night with little moon or heavy cloud cover. Coyotes with small amount of moonlight can see like daylight. Could not get a couple of yotes to get closer the other night it was too bright out. The boogy man likes moonless nights High five for the new moon here as well. |
|
I agree with having better luck getting coyotes to come in when there is no moon. With that being the case, am I missing out by not having a PVS-14 with better specs? My signal to noise is 24 however I do have the 72 LP that you all were talking about. It is a Night Optics NO-PVS-14-3GA with a Pinnacle tube. If I upgrade to a unit with something like a SN of 27 would I see a substantial performance difference on dark nights? I am almost always using an IR light either helmet or weapon mounted.
Here is the tube sheet: 
|
| I would not spend the money. On moonless nights I use a IR light which makes a night to day improvement. The IR light will out perform any superspec tube with no IR help. So any money spent for a slightly higher s/n would be wasted,(unless you could do it for no $$$ out of pocket). I noticed the higher spec tubes have scintillation( the small sparklies that my first tube didn't have both were 27.6 & 27.8 SN ) the one with 72lp/mm has them but is a tad sharper. |
|
Quoted:
I agree with having better luck getting coyotes to come in when there is no moon. With that being the case, am I missing out by not having a PVS-14 with better specs? My signal to noise is 24 however I do have the 72 LP that you all were talking about. It is a Night Optics NO-PVS-14-3GA with a Pinnacle tube. If I upgrade to a unit with something like a SN of 27 would I see a substantial performance difference on dark nights? I am almost always using an IR light either helmet or weapon mounted. Here is the tube sheet: http://i1307.photobucket.com/albums/s599/tkp401119/PVS-14tubespecs_zps819b7176.jpg The specs (other than res) for that tube seem a bit on the low side. Definitely wouldn't have passed the current OMNI VIII milspec in certain criteria. I've always thought lower PCR numbers translate into lower EBI. I guess not in the case of this particular tube. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
I agree with having better luck getting coyotes to come in when there is no moon. With that being the case, am I missing out by not having a PVS-14 with better specs? My signal to noise is 24 however I do have the 72 LP that you all were talking about. It is a Night Optics NO-PVS-14-3GA with a Pinnacle tube. If I upgrade to a unit with something like a SN of 27 would I see a substantial performance difference on dark nights? I am almost always using an IR light either helmet or weapon mounted. Here is the tube sheet: http://i1307.photobucket.com/albums/s599/tkp401119/PVS-14tubespecs_zps819b7176.jpg The specs (other than res) for that tube seem a bit on the low side. Definitely wouldn't have passed the current OMNI VIII milspec in certain criteria. I've always thought lower PCR numbers translate into lower EBI. I guess not in the case of this particular tube. Where was it deficient? Wouldn't all current factory tubes have met the omni 8 specs by the date this was tested? |
|
Quoted:
Where was it deficient? Wouldn't all current factory tubes have met the omni 8 specs by the date this was tested? See table of OMNI Specifications http://www.ar15.com/archive/topic.html?b=6&f=18&t=335323 Not true at all regarding all current factory tubes meeting the milspec. The tube in question here would be considered a fallout tube. ITT sells these tubes to the commercial market because it cannot be installed in a AN/PVS-14, since it didn't meet all the requirements. |
| So based on that it does not meet the milspec minimum, but does that really translate into that much real world loss of performance? Since buying that unit last year I am more educated on what a top performimg unit looks like spec wise, but I have not seen a very good comparison of a unit like mine and a unit with a SN of 29, etc. I guess I am asking if it is worth the hassle of selling this unit and buying a hand select one that has better specs? FYI, I mainly use this for driving my jeep around the ranch helmet mounted, finding good fields for calling coyotes, and shooting within 200 yards. Thanks for the help. |
| So based on that it does not meet the milspec minimum, but does that really translate into that much real world loss of performance? Since buying that unit last year I am more educated on what a top performing unit looks like spec wise, but I have not seen a very good comparison of a unit like mine and a unit with a SN of 29, etc. I guess I am asking if it is worth the hassle of selling this unit and buying a hand select one that has better specs? FYI, I mainly use this for driving my jeep around the ranch helmet mounted, finding good fields for calling coyotes, and shooting within 200 yards. Thanks for the help. |
| Sn should be 25+ for omni VIII min specs, but keep in mind FOM is what's exportable is graded by 1400+ non exportable unless waived by DTSA. Your FOM = 1735.2 which is better than a 64 lp/mm tube meeting minimum omni vIII specs. 64x25=1600 FOM. So losing 8lp/mm but gaining .9 SN is not a trade off I would trade for to be able to say it meets omni vIII specs. I would keep the 1735 FOM tube. |
|
Quoted:
So based on that it does not meet the milspec minimum, but does that really translate into that much real world loss of performance? Since buying that unit last year I am more educated on what a top performing unit looks like spec wise, but I have not seen a very good comparison of a unit like mine and a unit with a SN of 29, etc. I guess I am asking if it is worth the hassle of selling this unit and buying a hand select one that has better specs? FYI, I mainly use this for driving my jeep around the ranch helmet mounted, finding good fields for calling coyotes, and shooting within 200 yards. Thanks for the help. Yotes got nothing on you if you get a good illumniator. I'd spend less time hand wringing over your tube and more figuring out how to rig your Jeep for IR floods  .
|
|
Adding IR to the jeep is definitely on the to do list. Right now I'm running an ATN IR-450 helmet mounted and a Torch Pro on the gun. The IR-450 works pretty well though since the jeep is open air, but floor lights would make it much easier to navigate on roads with pot holes.
I still wish somebody would give me a definitive side by side comparison of a tube like mine and a high spec tube on a dark night. It hasn't prevented me from doing anything hunting wise, but I'm just curious more than anything since I have never seen a high spec tube in person. Essentially, everyone says gen 3 is better than gen 2 and the pictures make that obvious. However, people also drool over high spec gen 3 tubes but I have not seen any direct comparisons to middle of the road gen 3 tubes. |
|
Quoted:
Adding IR to the jeep is definitely on the to do list. Right now I'm running an ATN IR-450 helmet mounted and a Torch Pro on the gun. The IR-450 works pretty well though since the jeep is open air, but floor lights would make it much easier to navigate on roads with pot holes. I still wish somebody would give me a definitive side by side comparison of a tube like mine and a high spec tube on a dark night. It hasn't prevented me from doing anything hunting wise, but I'm just curious more than anything since I have never seen a high spec tube in person. Essentially, everyone says gen 3 is better than gen 2 and the pictures make that obvious. However, people also drool over high spec gen 3 tubes but I have not seen any direct comparisons to middle of the road gen 3 tubes. Meh- the sensitivity is a bit low. My tube is pretty high (TNVC shout out  ) but I need to use active IR to get a good read on subjects/targets beyond 50 yards anyway. Let me put it this way- if you have to turn up the gain to the point where the static is pissing you off you could do better. If not, then don't worry about it.
|
Armory Sponsor