Should work fine for a weapon with minimal recoil like a 5.56 or 6.5G AR though, correct?

Yes, 556, 300 BLK, or 6.5 Grendel would be fine.

But .308 would not be good even though it can handle to recoil.

Thanks. That's sounds great!

Must have

Good. I have 556 and 300. I want to get into 6.5G, I have no intention of getting back into .308.

That's what I did. Sold my AR10, built my Grendel and now NV. You won't ever go back - although the cost of game is much higher with Grendel ($85 c) min per rd

I hold on to my Grendel brass for reloading Barnes 100 TSX and Hornady 123 SST.

Do they still sell sst's going forward? I'm starting to see the ELD's replacing the SST and AMAX line.

Does the silent shutter work better on the q14B vs the Q14? my Q14 had to be refreshed manually every 3-5 min for the 1st 15min

Plinking ammo (pig killin ammo) is $0.23/rd.

The groups are pretty wide I heard tho with wolf. And it's steel - is it worth the risk of barrel damage? Ive got a JP match light contour

The Wolf 100 gr.  is reliable but basic blasting ammo not sub-moa stuff, but real cheap.

SSTs work real well on hogs and dogs as does the Barnes 100 and 120, I like the handloaded Barnes TSX 100s the best.

Just did a mag Dump on a sounder tonight with handloaded Barnes 100 gr TSX from 12" 6.5 Grendel SBR @ 150 yards.




Now all I need is a Q-14B.

Holy hog Willie!! How far were these shot? I'm surprised the Grendel could work well as an SBR given the velocity loss. How much suppression are you seeing with the can? Still waiting for my omega.

I just saw hat the Armasight website now has this baby on sale and in stock - is this part of the new RX series or just an old Zeus with a boson interior?

http://www.armasightstore.com/thermal-rifle-scopes/flir-thermosight-pro-1-5-6x19-30hz-thermal-weapon-sight-with-boson-320x256

Grendel SBR works fantastic as does the .30 cal Harvestor can, rings steel with authority out 300 yards.


The proof is in the pudding!

Is this it? Or an older version or something?
http://www.armasightstore.com/thermal-rifle-scopes/flir-q14-b-tim-320x256-30hz-thermal-imaging-monocular

Just looking for a specs list. Will be buying from TNVC when they stock it. Hopefully you guys will be stocking the various mounts for helmet/weapons as well?

Interesting. It says in stock. That's contradictory from what everyone here's been saying.
It does list a boson core..odd.

I asked, they said July

With the cost difference between steel and brass, you'll save enough to buy a couple more barrels.

Anyways, enough thread jack! Can't wait for this Sight!!!

Shooot, at that price.... I'd almost rather have that sight than the Q14...

Based purely on your personal experience - would you say the q14b 320 at 30 hz performs better (image quality wise) than a 50 hz xp50? Thanks!

So I was looking at the "FLIR Thermosight Pro 1.5-6x19 30Hz Thermal Weapon Sight with Boson 320x256" on armasightstore and noticed that they use 2x CR123A batteries. Any chance that you can use 18650 batteries with this? If not, will they have a model that does?

That 9.1mm will be perfect for a helmet mount detector!

Yes sir!  Can't wait, im on the tnvc list!!!!

Perfect short range hog scope too...

I found the data sheets for the new boson cores on flirs website that includes many lens sizes and fov for them.

The 9.1 mm should be 24°

Where did you see that info?

This page doesn't even show a 19mm or 50mm that's being pictured (screen shot) above. 

Thanks. 

Edit: Rats, (see TNVC above) I was hoping for something more current. 

Boson

That 640 will be KILLER in a TWS scope and Clip-on!

Looks awesome!  If it'll handle 6.5 grendel, it should handle 6.8 don't y'all think?

I don't know. It just looks blurry to me. It has been a bit since I've rocked a 320 sensor, but that looks about the same as my old Therm-App. The 320 lacks the fine detail, which is to be expected from a 320 sensor. The detail in the hair the grass, the tire treads just pop with the higher res sensor. I'm sure the Q14B is solid and the price seems great, but I just don't see how this is as good as some 640 devices unless they were the older FLIR line rocking the non-OLED displays.

Q14B - 19mm 320 12um.


Q14B - 50mm 320 12um.


Vs:
IR Patrol M250W 640x480 - 12um BAE Sensor

It is always great fun to compare a cheap 320 core kit to an expensive 640 core kit, even when the 640 kit costs 3-4X more than the 320 does.










The incredible hardware and software refinements on the new FLIR Boson cores put them in a class of their own, especially with the discrete high powered image processing chipset. A lowly 320 core is nothing to sniff at even if you might be a thermal snob. In the above case the dead hogs did not know they were killed by a 320 or 640 sensor.

Technology is ever evolving be it BAE, FLIR or ULIS cores. Being a brand new design 12 micron core plus the newest software I'm sure the boson 320 systems are pushing the limits for 320 class performance right now. That said the above pictured boson is still a 320 core, not a 640 core so I really just expect some nice improvements clarity and feature wise over some of the other other 320 class cores out there at this time.  I think asking it to out perform a current production  BAE/FLIR/ULIS 640 core may be a bit to much to ask.

 For me the real story is the price point these systems can now be offered at. It would incredible to believe just two years ago if someone told me what was to come price wise.

Talk is cheap :) I'm ready to get my hands on these systems :) There's a lot that goes into the best overall performance from LCD/OLED quality,lens quality,wiring and etc etc. Even the best core made is only as good as the display your eye views.

Signature worthy material right there. Where's the like button?

I need to start eating more blueberries to get my rods and cones acclimated :)

Are there any fake pixels generated going from 320 core to 1280 display?

Regardless, The photos and videos do look great. I'm sold. 

What are "fake pixels" - pixels artificially generated to fill gaps that are inadvertently generated when the image advances from one stage to the next?

I never could wrap my feeble mind fully around what was being reported, but it came up when we were discussing some other non-flir unit with a better display one time.

Perhaps this would be a good time to have those in the know rehash it for us?  Oh yeah, and something about somebody's Johnson?

Vs Q14 640

going by my 640 Q14 the Q14B is a very close to what I'm seeing through my 640 especially in less than perfect conditions and with only a slight degradation in resolution. On top of that I will get better image processing, better display, no manual refreshes every few minutes and at a price more than 2.5 x cheaper. I for one can't wait to get one!

Let's do it.
I'm ready.

I owned the Q14 640. The image quality was great and that picture through the eyepiece really doesn't do it any justice since the camera is killing it. I would love to compare the 320 Q14B to the older 640 Q14 side by side.

For the record, I didn't make the claim that this 320 Boson device was as good as most 640 cores. I was merely posting pictures indicating that I don't see any evidence of that - I also have not had one of these in-hand to actually view.

I didn't slam the device, and I'm sure it is great for a 320 device at the 2k mark. I think it looks good at its price point and I am currently in the market for a handheld spotter, so I've been following this thread. Even if the image quality isn't as detailed as some of the 640's out there, that isn't a deal breaker for me. It was just a bold claim that I am not seeing evidence of now that pictures are being posted. They look fuzzy to me like most 320 images do. If the software is great, that really does have a huge positive impact, because the software on the original Q14 that I owned was terrible.

I have no skin in the game - I was merely asking questions and pointing out that the quality on this looked to be about the same as what I was getting out of my old Therm-App (384 x 288 sensor), which wasn't bad, but that is a $900 device - granted the usage on it is fairly limited since it has to be tethered to a display device and was only 9hz.

I am mostly on the fence between this Q14B and something likely in the Pulsar lineup. FLIR has been great with support on any device for which I am the first / original owner, but I won't buy used FLIR/Armasight gear any more because they simply won't support it. I know this is a non-issue for many, but what value is there in a 10 year warranty on something, when the industry changes frequently and I am moving through devices so quickly that the warranty coverage dissolves after I own it. At 2K, that is less of a concern, but it is still a concern because it impacts resale when I want to upgrade to say... the Q14B 640.  

Do you know if the warranty stance is going to change since it seems like these are primarily aimed at the consumer market?

"Fake pixels"

If the detector320x240 "made up of individual sensors 1x1" will multiply into the pixels of the display then no fake pixels (interpolated) are needed. They are not really fake they are just assigned a value based on the real data around them.

IE 320 sensors H to be displayed on 1280 H  then you just have times 4.
The display ratio old school tv's 4:3 square-ish new tv's 16:9 letterbox.
So 1 sensor will control 4 pixels on the display, 320 sensors times 4 = 1280H
240 sensors times 3 will be 720V,  1280Hx720V display.

So each sensor will control 4 pixels, now you won't get 1280H worth of information.
But jedi mind tricks come into play.

Since you only have 320H sensors to expand, but with post video processing the image can be sharpened and detail added which appears to upscale the image to a higher resolution. Flir's DDE for example will sharpen the image.
The video from the boson appear to be soft and blended, but raising the level of dde if user can change it,will sharpen the image. Similar to the focus on the BAE cores, not really a focus but a detail enhancement. Calling it a focus keeps it away from calling it digital detail enhancement "which it is", which FLIR has patented the term DigitalDetailEnhancement-DDE and I am sure the processing pattern that takes place.

So a lower number of sensors can appear to look like a higher number of sensors with good post processing.

Keep in mind the size of the sensor (detector pitch) and the focal length of the lens will determine the resolving power.

A 12u sensor will resolve smaller objects then a 17u sensor, or a 25u sensor with the same lens.

So if a single 1x1 12u sensor with a 50mm lens can't see a nickle at 100yds then having 640 of them with the same lens 50mm won't see it either.  The resolving power is the smallest object the sensor can see.
Hopefully FLIR will post some technical specs that include resolving power like the tau2 cores data sheets.


It's funny how digital cameras CCD's got smaller the amount of sensors were not reduced, but were increased.
From .3Mpixel to 1 MP then 3MP then 5MP then 20MP. If a detector could now be made to fit in a 1/8 inch of space with 640 sensors why not fit 1280 of them on the same space the old detector used with the same lens and just have 4x the detail on the screen. I guess that's the next move

If this was already covered, I did not see it so please point me there.

How are you night-hunters who already have NVDs planning to integrate this device into your routine?

Hard_ware. 

Thanks for this explanation. So would it be fair to say the following is also true about the Q14B:

But the way you explained it doesn't really sound like a negative? And depending on the power of the processor and software may even be desirable?

For the record, I am thrilled to know that FLIR is now using a better display to match their potentially superior core processor. 

Thanks. 

I conjecture that I will custom build a rig to get the Thermal Monocular over the opposite eye of the PVS-14. That way I can flip it up and sight with the PVS-4 or energize the laser for use with the PVS-14. I will probably try a bunch of combinations to see what works best.