What's the rundown of this versus the Q14b for specs? I'm very interested in a unit like this but I need to detect coyotes at 500yds or more. I love the REAP-IR for what I do but I'd like something a bit cheaper.

Given the equations used to calculate detection distance, I don't think the PTS233 or Q14b will be sufficient "to detect coyotes at 500yds or more".

Which raises the question, why, other than cost, would you want another thermal if you have a REAP-IR that does what you need?

Sorry. That was kind of misleading, I don't own a reap ir, but have had half a dozen nights behind one and it's a great unit for my purposes. I detected a coyote at 1k yards and called it straight in. So I know it's good for over 1k yard detection. I'm not expecting that with these smaller units bit having 500yd detection would be nice. I drive the exterior of my fields at night, and it's 450yds to the pivot, so being able to see a whole field by circling it is necessary.

I currently own a pvs14 and have IR lights on my side by side, but it's not ideal for animal detection. I almost ran over 2 coyotes the other night because they ran across the road in front of me, but I didn't know they were there until they hit the road. So I'd like a smaller thermal unit for scanning/shooting. Shots would be less than 200 but detection needs to be 500.

How many 12 µm pixels would it take to see an object 12 in.² at 500 yards? 

Or asked another way, How much real estate does one 12 µm pixel view at 500 yards? 

Using the formulas, an object 1 foot wide by 1 foot high (what I presume you meant by "12 in.²") would be in detection range at 250 yards for a 320x240.

From personal experience and based on reviewing videos from a wide variety of thermal sights by multiple manufacturers, I would suggest the actual number is slightly lower at 200 yards.

I would also observe that I have on multiple occasions missed seeing a smaller critter at the edge of the sensor array when I had a larger one centered in the viewfinder.  I routinely record video and reviewing the video later on a 50" plasma has been when I discovered what I missed. It's a version of "target lock" I and others have experienced with optical sights where one person sees something the other "locked" person missed.

So using that same math, what's the detection range of the reap ir? Because like I said, I've spotted a coyote at 1k yards with it with no problem. Not doubting what you're saying at all, but you seem to have a formula figured out, so swap the unit specs with the reap ir specs and see what it'll do on paper.

Should be twice that distance for the 1 foot by 1 foot (square) object. 

Coyote being a litte bigger from its smallest viewing profile to a good bit larger when viewed broadside.

Edit: Your lens size may become a factor too. Is the reap a  12 µm 19mm lens also? 

Around here it's either a deer or a coyote, and by the way it was moving I was positive it was a coyote. I understand that doesn't mean it was a positive ID, and I wouldn't take a shot until I did positive ID the animal. But that small heat signature was enough to make me try to call and give it a whirl. So that small bit of moving heat at 1k was perfect, so if this new unit can do the same thing at half the distance, i'll consider that good enough for me.

So would you say this unit at 500 is equal to the reap ir at 1000? Or is it not as simple as a 2 to 1 ratio?

It was a 35mm 2.5x optical zoom. 640x512, 60hz, 12 micron.

SkyPup, I find it highly unlikely that the ~$2k 320x240 Boson cored optics will have resolution "just as good" let alone in the same ballpark as the as the 1024x768 T1K. We utilize very high performance thermals at work and I assure you, not even the Trijicon lineup comes close at 3-4x the price of this PTS233. It's a tech forum; let's keep it realistic.
WHBD

I never could figure out how to make the calculation. (I'd love for someone to take the time to illustrate an example for us by the way.)

The 35mm lens unit unit used should obviously result in more magnification. 

Some quick back of the cocktail napkin figuring: 

 35mm 640 12 µm equal 1000 yards. (Your #)
 35mm 320 12 µm should equal 500 yards.

Hopefully; 19 mm 320 12 µm won't cut that distance and a half again?  But it may come close?

The 320X240 12 micron Boson cores optics I've used in various thermal devices are simply amazing, so much so that the 640 core Bosons coming out next year will be about on par with the image produced by my FLIR TK1, in fact most likely the Boson core will better at longer ranges as the TK1 does not excel much past 200 yards even with a 75mm lens on it.

How do I know for sure instead of someones hypothetical opinion, simple - I am using them.?

Are four pixels the minimum needed for some sort of basic detection? 

 I can't remember what was discussed a while back? 

Thanks. 

Is that because the sensor is larger and would require a larger lens to produce the same field of view and magnification that we're used to seeing with in our hunting units? 

thanks. 

That is part of the equation, the other part is the F-stop focal length distance of the lens on a technical scientific instrument like the TK1 is not designed for long range depth of view, it has a very very narrow focal depth at <100 yards, maybe about two feet deep, less further out you go. I have hunting videos of hog kills with it at 200 yards that absolutely suck, it is a precision scientific instrument, not a field instrument for hunting.

So yes, even my $2,200 FLIR Boson 320 12 micron  Thermosight is much better for any and all hunting applications than my $85,000 FLIR TK1 is.

The 320 Boson core  Thermosight also has a reticule and is much more accurate at night too!

Another one of the many reasons why the FLIR Boson core is much better than a High Resolution FLIR TK1 Scientific thermal camera is the intergrated high speed dedicated Intel Movidius video microprocessor inside the Boson microbolometer.

As you can easily see in this photo I took with the FLIR TK1, there is a temperature map on the right side of the photograph, in this case it is in Centigrade instead of Fahrenheit since I had not set the default boot to Fahrenheit when I took this photo:





Here is the same TK1 thermal photograph after I have adjusted the temperature range gradient to only map my specific temperature designations instead of the entire ambient temperature range and changed from Centigrade to Fahrenheit..





Maybe some of you can now see what I am getting at?


The TK1 has TRUE RADIOMETRIC individual pixel thermal recording, every single pixel in the microbolometer is mapped and data logged constantly to represent every single pixel in the array's actual temperature. This creates a huge metafile file associated with each photo or video as it is logging massive amounts of data all the time, all of which is subject to adjustment and scrutiny by the end user for purposes of scientific/industrial research and developmental analysis of the data. No consumer oriented thermal device has this capability besides the new FLIR Stage III Lepton Pro core which was released to the public last week as the FLIRONE PRO model smartphone thermal.

With true radiometric measuring, I can easily adjust the presented picture image to only include those temperatures in-between the temperatures I choose and ignore all the other temperatures. Which makes for amazing clarity and detail since the microbolometer pixels are only functioning within the temperature constraints that I set. The Boson core microbolometers can also record true radiometric as well if programmed too.

However, the video processing of the radiometric thermal camera heat sensitive pixels in the microbolometer is a different story that is restricted to the read out circuits timing which is different than the microbolometer recording bandwith data bus out speed is. FLIR uses a propriety video processing software structure that records as a .csq file with the locked metadata from the radiometric recordings.

The propriety .csq radiometric video processing is 100% incompatible with a normal .mpeg video output and the video processing is entirely different.

So, with true radiometric data video recording, you do not just turn on the recorder and download in from the camera and upload it to You-Tube to impress everyone with your thermal video kills, you can only do that with a much more lossey .mpeg video output.

But since the Boson is capable of recording true radiometric thermal just like the Lepton is, I sure would like to see this implemented into a Boson consumer end-product like the Boson Thermosight TWS once the video processing is worked out to a higher level like it has on the Lepton.

Just another in a long line of awesome thermal updates for the BOSON cores ahead.....

Says who? Do you have that in writing from FLIR or are we cleverly misleading again? You know the PTS233 will get such an update?

-Stooxie

Hmmmm, you demanding that you want your copy notarized?

What's the Horizontal and Vertical FOV in degrees of the REAP-IR?

What f-stop is the lens? I thought narrow focal depth equaled lower f-number just like what the boson will be equipped with?

thanks. 

3.5

It would be nice to designate a range of temperature that you're looking for two better isolate your specified targets.

 I know I would like that feature. 

LOL, everything technical I post anytime anywhere is a major issue for this guy, just ignore it.

Advertised as 12 degree, I don't know anything more specific past that.

The TK1 is a scientific/industrial research thermal video camera with a completely and totally different lens system with an integrated 850nm IR high accuracy range finder and electronic auto-focusing, nothing anywhere near like any consumer oriented Boson lens system.

I ordered a bunch of optics a few years back from Optics Planet......I ordered a less expensive magnifier from them that was advertised as an add on purchase for the Eotech that was part of my order. They didn't line up, it was too high above site picture to use. I called and they sold me a different mount for it, not really a cheap mount, and it was on back order. When it finally came it was too low to use. I thought I could return them at this time. To my surprise I could not. They would not let me return the magnifier, stating it was out of the excepted return period, but I could return the mount. My intitial purchase from them was a little north of $3000 if I remember correctly for Burris, Aimpoint, and Eotech products. Needless to say I was mad. I kept the products and gave them away to people who could use them over some time after that. I wouldn't do business with them again it the products were free because their customer service just plain sucks no that experience has kept me from using them since then. Buyer beware!

Thanks. Are there half pixels or do you round up to four? 

How large of a viewing area does four 12 µm pixels see at 250 yards? 

And to further complicate this portion of this discussion:

Does the four pixel viewing area size change regardless of whether a 320 or a 640 12 µm core system is being utilized? 

Ok thanks. 

Calculation says 500 yards

Personally, I'd be happy if you, as the OP, introducing this optic in this thread, lead the discussion.

So far your input has been pretty damn informative and to the point.

Tit for tat among thermal SME's is not going to sell this thing. Clear, informative answers to the more layman among us has been helpful and I appreciate you input. (And that of some others who've made it a point to stay on subject in a similar manner.)

+1

I didn't see this in the specs, but does it have a one shot zero type feature..

So in theory, a coyote at 1k yards with the reap ir and a coyote at 500yds with this new flir will look similar on the screen?

Question for Tom or Victor: can I download the video from my PTS233 and play it on my computer with zero hassle? Can I upload the video to YouTube and text it to my friends? Based on a few semi-coherent sentences in all of the egregious sesquipedalian loquaciousness posted above, it appears that this is not possible.

So newb question but, in your opinion, does this mean that pulsar & ATNs claims of anywhere from 800-1400yds of detection on "big game" is bogus???  Or would this new FLIR be able to accomplish the same thing on a heat signature that is much bigger than said coyote?

Also how much closer exactly given good conditions for PID?  200yds, 250???

And just for fun, are thermals like this even better in winter conditions where there is a very large temperature variation between animal and terrain?  Does detection/ID distance improve, or is it more a function of core/optical setup?

Imagine that: a simple response.  Thank you, sir.

Thermal Newb here, a little confused about the intended/preferred application of the PTS233.

Obviously, the picture in OP has it configured as a rifle scope, and I read "rated to .308 (wonder if that includes the optic-killing SCAR 17)."  But in a youtube video, from "Lone Star Boars" IIRC, the guy keeps referring to the PTS233 as a great thermal monocular to complement your PVS-14 and "thermal scope."  What type/cost of "thermal scope" is he implying?  Something higher end with more magnification?  Like a FLIR RS series?

Is this PTS233 a great spotting monocular masquerading as a budget thermal rifle scope? Or a legitimate rifle scope with decent range?

Converting pixel values to temperature is not a simple task.  Without advanced radiometry features (inputs for emisssivity, target distance, atmospheric conditions, a temp sensor mounted on the lens, etc.), any temperature measurement will be inaccurate.  I'm sure SkyPup's T1000 has these features.  I think what is really desired is to be able to tune the AGC range for specific pixel intensities.  This is also somewhat diffcult because as the camera temp drifits around on an uncooled VOX system, so do pixel values.  The range would need to be continuosuly updatede for the image to be useable in a dynamic environment.

NGI_Tom will have to answer your first three questions.

With regard to winter, it would be better phrased as winter provides the optimum conditions for thermal and that heat and other environmental factors degrade performance.  I've seen videos shot at a wind chill of -15 F where the image is razor sharp.

Correct, for a consumer orientated thermal weapon scope to incorporate these features entirely would require emissivity settings (not hard to do), an IR ranging laser (not hard to do), and a temperature sensor for the lens (not hard to do), and a barometric sensor (not hard to do) which would raise the product price into the premium thermal weapon scope market for the discriminating thermal enthusiasts that really is invested in utilizing thermal in the field. Which is someone like me, who would gladly pay for these added features.

However the video processing of the data stream would be another matter with the large volume of metadata being mapped continuously to each thermoresistor. The T-1000 is recording 1.5GB of thermal video per mintue and the hardware to handle that data stream is more of a problem in a tiny lightweight core like the Boson's.

It would be easier and cheaper to allow adjustments to the AGC settings and the new Boson Thermosight TWS production model does incorporate this feature into the menu settings.

I will say that the FLIR Thermosight Pro video processing firmware is superb with the Intel Movidius video microprocessor. So much so that the video is better than my $10,000 FLIR mil-spec 320 core T-50 with a 60mm lens, even though my 7 year old T-50 has a hardened core for certified .50 cal recoil and a 60mm lens.

The video image is the best I've ever seen in any 320 core thermal at this price point, offering much greater power and performance than anything in its class.