Guys, I'm gonna make a final decision on my first NOD. After a lot research, besides according to my budget (under 6k) and my personal preference of binos, I am looking into the Armasight BNVD Gen2+ HD.
The first question is should I choose white phosphors over tradition green? I've heard the image sharpness of GPT is even better than WPT at same specification. What I am looking is a Russian Gen2+ HD tube, its not a Gen3 or US products, so what's the real performance of this WPT? Does it worth 500 bucks more than green?
Besides the tube type, Armasight BNVD also comes with 2 different FOV, 40 and 51. If I have to choose between 40 WPT or 51 Green, what will you choose and why? (Because they are in same price and both are Erkan Gen 2+ tube I believe).

Overall, if the 40 WPT is better, how about it compared to 40 Green? (Back to first Q)

Really appreciate your guys time & help!

IMHO for 6K I'd shop around since there are better deals for US made units. As for WP vs GP it's a matter of preference on which you like better, for me GP is works well and is not worth the extra money to upgrade.

How did you come to prefer binos vs a monocular? What units have you tried to get to that point? What is your biggest desire in the set up? Resolution? Low light performance? High light performance? With or without an illuminator? Walking? Driving? Hunting? Rural, suburban, or urban use? What is your laser/illiminator budget? Is it part of your $6,000 budget? What are you going to use for headgear, shroud, and arm?

If you are spending that amount of money, I would stay away from Russian stuff.

For 6k, you can get the Night Vision Inc RNVGs with WP Dep/ Hybrid Photonis tubes. I've got a set, and to my eyes, the image quality is on the same level as my PVS 14 with Omni 7 tube from TNVC was, and the WP, to me, gives it a much better overall image.

Ding ding ding ding. Or two pvs-14’s and spend 5k and have a grand leftover.

No way I’d buy gen 2 stuff at tgat price point.

I really dont like the armasight/flir gen2+ wp tube i have FWIW... maybe the gen3 versions are better.

Agreed

Thx!What a precise&complete advise.
I will go with 40 FOV Green and save me hundred bucks. Appreciate!

thx for reply. Yes if its 6k or more, a US made nod is a better option. But consider its the ceiling of my budget, and obviously 5k is not able to get a quality gen3 bino, I would rather choose a 4k gen2+. Extra budget could get a battery pack or just saved it for gen3+ tubes.

Looking cool does matter. LOL
I've got the helmet, l4g24 and peq. But the budget may need include a battery pack, and the gen2+ HD should be enough for shooting in the field. So probably under 5k is a more precise description of my budget.

For me, looking cool is great but I can say there is no way I'd trade my very high spec PVS14 for some low res and dim Gen 2 duals. Utility wins over looking cool every time IMO. Just remember, you need an IR laser and FOR SURE an illuminator if you are going Gen2 so budget for it accordingly. My PVS 14 set up and ancillary gear ran me in that vicinity price wise, but duals would have WAY worse stats. I had actually never seen an L3 filmless 2400+ FOM unit before I bought mine and I can say its far enough ahead of the generic 1800 FOM 64lp/28 snr/<1.25 halo/<2.5 EBI pinnacle tubes I had used that I dont think I could ever go back now. A Gen 2+ 800-1000 FOM ~51lp/~17 snr tube would just seem like a cheap toy in comparison. If I were you, I'd really try to compare a Gen 2+ and a L3 filmless before making that leap. You get WAY WAY better performance for enough less to afford a quality laser too for the same price if you go L3 PVS14 instead of duals. Or at least get Gen3 green thin filmed tubes for the duals. If you dont have at least 64lp and 28 snr, you will ultimately just want to buy better quality later anyway. And for me, I much prefer the white phosphor. A friend likes green so much he put a green filter on a his M18 thermal. Only you can decide what you prefer for color. It really is preference. 51 deg FOV makes Gen 3ook like Gen 1 with the heavy distortion. You only get so much brightness and resolution and putting that to an extra 11 degrees is just counter productive. Image quality trumps all for me.

Dude, take my advice, the RNVGs with the Dep / Hybrid tubes are going to be the best you can get for under 6k. They're listed at 5750 on NV Incs website. I've got some, and they're fantastic.

There is plenty of utility in the better Gen2+ models, though I of course agree modern Gen3 blows them out of the water when it gets dark. I have no idea what Armasight uses in their HD Gen2+ models, but I guess the specs are higher than what you wrote. I could be wrong, but given they have cheaper options available and that ~17 SNR tubes are pretty much on the low end of the Gen2+ spectrum, I doubt the pricier models are that low in specs.

Like talked in another topic, good Gen2+ gives much of the same practical usefulness that a Gen3 does with possibly a good bit lower in price, especially if the housing is cheap too (and some cheap housings and optics are good actually).

Let's review this quote in a few years

So far from comments it'd seem the Armasight 51deg optics are not upto the job, but there are others that do 51 and 60deg optics that don't have the same characteristics. The loss of resolution happens that's true and no way around it. But given quality glass, it shouldn't be more than ~20%.

Turn it the other way around, would you rather run 32deg FOV with 20% more resolution that you have now?

The 40deg FOV is an old standard from the 90's or maybe even from 80's when ANVIS first came out. The tube resolutions back then was nowhere near where they are now, even with the lowest spec Gen2+ you can buy new. There was some slides in some presentation of L3 making a wide FOV bino too and that was 55deg per eye, 70deg horizontal due to the sides having "toe out", but still retaining a central 40deg wide full stereo overlap portion.

Good advice right here.

if I was spending 6k I would definitely get gen 3. I believe you can get new  ITT Gen. 3 auto gated pinnacle pvs14 for less than $3000.
2 of those plus bridge mount.

I found the specs for the highest end Gen2 tubes in the Armasight BNVD... 55lp or better, 24snr or better. So 1300+ FOM or better. If you could get guaranteed ~62lp and ~27snr you'd have something usefull. Somehow,  I doubt you will get that in both tubes. I would still not buy anything that expensive sight unseen to see if YOU think its good enough. If its good enough for you, thats all that matters. I guess its like any optics, some people get annoyed by imperfect glass, others cant tell a Swarovski from Simmons. The second group tends to be much happier since they are not always broke.

@MrJonesandMe are these the ones you’re talking about?

https://www.nvincorporated.com/product/ab-nightvision-rnvg-black-dep-photonis-hybrid-blem-spec/

Yup I have the DEP RNVG too and for the price so far I am happy. Mine are almost blem free and clear. I have been putting them up against two current Harris anvis and they are doing much better than the anvis so far. Not as good as high spec L3 Filmless but at the price point I’m happy with the DEP. I probably will be getting L3 in the future but this is a big step up from the filmed gen 3 I have been using.

Yep, those are it. I have the non blem version.

I agree with all of what great308 has to say. For the money, they’re great. L3 filmless would be marginally better, but for my use, and the extra cost, not worth it to me.

Wow, the Echo tubes are really priced good if I am getting this right. If the body is 1500, lenses 200 a piece (or are both body & optics less?), then it leaves only 1850 per tube not including the labor costs.

Edit: the price wasn't 6k like my blind eyes saw, somewhat less. Would then leave only 1650 for the tubes a piece. Obviously as they are blem spec a lower price is to be expected.

I’m planning on doing a comparison post of the DEP tubes I have against 2 current issue Harris anvis goggles and a filmed ITT pvs14 I have. Waiting till this weekend so we have no moon to get some better low light stuff use.

What kind of specs are we talking, you can PM me if necessary.

don’t want to derail this post so delete or ignore it.

My new dep tubes beat my Omni 7 tubes, even in almost pitch black, which we’re very nice. Specs on new dep tubes are 66 lpmm 31.3 snr, 64 lpmm 30.5 snr

Well, as long as the end users are happy and they are not mil/leo where certain things really matter.. That's good I guess.

The DEP initial marketing kick turned into a hype feedback loop and very successfully so, props to them Now looking back they nailed it with first touting how awesome INTENS is, then waiting while some got to play around with INTENS tubes, probably stocking up "failed" tubes, and then with almost zero marketing come out with that stock to give people what they've been so curious about. The first INTENS + Hyper / Vyper housing + glass combos were reeally expensive, but now getting a piece of that tech is affordable.

I am of course mostly a bystander here wondering the toys you play with as the same stuff is not available here, especially at those price points. I'd be all over a $1650 blem Echo if the specs are otherwise the same as regular Echo just more blems.

I wish you could speak out more. You've hinted at a lot of things like the glass used on some builds and obviously how the Echo's aren't performing to the Omni 8 level. Nor 6 or 7 probably. INTENS is supposed to do that, not Echo, and surely not the blem ones. In the end it seems, at least as long as the hype circle is going around, that any of that doesn't matter. While on the other hand every other thread is about tube specs and how you should have at least 35 SNR to really see in the dark.

I have no deep knowledge of bulk pricing over there when it comes to anything, but I find it hard to believe the price drop is just because of RNVG being cheap and/or the DEP tubes being that cheap while still beating say Omni 5. More grounded reviews are surely happening when the hype tones down a bit. I for one am mildly pleased at the fact that Photonis can actually compete over there at all. It's the first time I've seen it happen, though that's not very long anyway. Still reading old stuff it seems it still is the first instance of this happening.

Just hype up Russian WP tubes with cheaper optics and NGI will jump to the next level

I didn’t bring it up. Just stating what I observe. What’s really interesting is how you guys don’t sell those so you tend to down play them. At least it seems. Everyone, everywhere else (and in this forum) love them. No, interesting is things like how much the MAWL is hyped. The best, brightest illuminator. Nothing else close. But that’s not my experience.  Not of others either.  For pure power the d2 is right but there. Same with the L3 WP filmless tubes. Are they better? Sure. But I’ve yet to see anyone say they blow Omni 8 or intens out of the water. And the ones I’ve looked through sure haven’t.

And let me know when you can get those, brand new, for $2500. As of right now the minuscule difference in performance in all but a few supertubes doesn’t warrant the extra $500(L3 thin filmed) or extra thousands to me or most people.

And I’ve looked through some L3 filmless WP. Great. Just not blow me away, pay extra $1500 great.

This isn’t an indictment or jab at you. But between what you and Murtis said It’s like everytyelse I’ve seen in life. The perspective changes depending on where/who you are. Like the saying one mans terrorist is another mans freedom fighter.

Not to be a Dick by why are you even speaking on the subject?  You haven’t looked through all of these (save for maybe a few you somehow got your hands on).  You technically shouldn’t have ever looked through any gen three tube if ITAR serves me correctly.

My echo tubes best out my very good Omni 7 tubes. They curb stomp Omni 5 tubes. While I haven’t seen thousands I’ve seen enough and talked to others who have seen lots and lots.

There is no hype behind $2500 new 14’s. Just awesome performance at an awesome price.

Those are very nice stats for the money.

No offense taken, and I too am interested in the Echo tubes as they are starting to be available here too. But that comment was mostly regarding what Vic said. Originally posted in this thread about the optics if I remember it right.

I've been watching the development around Echos (and INTENS obviously) and it's been pretty much positive all around. But from anything I've seen in comparisons and user reviews, I've yet to see any good evidence they are up there with reasonably closely priced US Gen3. This is my interpretation of the subject and true I have a very limited experience compared to almost any of you guys writing here. In my view what seem realistic comparisons the INTENS is closely matched with thin film in probably just about any light levels, except very high light where the resolution stays better. Most of the Echos seem to have low gain compared to thin film or other Photonis offerings. Some are way low. But again I have not seen through one (Echo) so there's that.

Being in Finland ITAR does not restrict me in any way looking through or even owning Gen3. It only applies if I would be in the US, or if I was trying to illegally export ITAR items out of the US. Or share restricted info which I doubt I know/have that much at all.

For the price it does seem the performance is great no doubt. Though I still stand behind my view. Just a while ago similar spec Gen2+ was not viewed that good in comparison to thin film. Of course they were more expensive unless you got a super deal used. $2500 for a good performing mono is great no way around it. Compare that to prices just two years ago and the possibilities are scarce.

I can see this shaping the view on Gen2+ generally and also possibly specs. Just now at the moment it seems the viewpoint has shifted toward Echo being the clear cut winner unless you want the absolute best low light performance. I foresee it balancing when the hype dies down. Not saying the hype is all bad, but I would still call it hype. It's all new, good performing affordable filmless WP that is not Gen3.

Edit: also in my comment I was wondering on the price of the tubes whether they can be that low. Seems they can if there is a mono available at $2500 assuming that's a PVS-14 that should cost at least $600 retail for the housing & optics. I don't know how much the performance/characteristics of the optics actually differ because my exposure to different 14 flavors is pretty limited. Also this glass subject is not spoken here almost at all. Some ANVIS vs 14 comparisons have been around, but that's about it, and there's so many ANVIS glass variants and manufacturers that one pair isn't telling the whole story anyway. What I know is the prices do differ on optics. How much exactly that I don't know, only what I can guess from bundled prices. Also you rarely see a vendor telling the manufacturer of the 14 housing or optics, but you can guess some of it by looking at how it looks on the outside.

Edit2: out of interest, do you have the gain specs for your Echo (non-blem I assume) tubes?

Where are these $2500 white phosphor DEP PVS14 sold? I see $2600, not $2500.

When do specs matter? Or do they even matter because L3 are superior regardless of specs even if they are lower?

Maybe I’m wrong but I always though specs were what told you if a tube was going to perform or not.

Don't get me wrong, I love the fact Photonis is coming up with this affordable line of good performing tubes. What I have my suspicions on is the marketing side of things, plus I don't believe it if I hear Echo's beating rather new thin film tubes without some sort of evidence. In your case with those specs, especially if you have good gain values too, then yeah, L3 has to give in. There is just something that does not match if you compare the Cj7hawk INTENS vs thin film comparisons with around the same FOM. They were pretty much identical in image. Maybe Photonis is getting manufacturing nailed down better and better, but I doubt there's been that big of a jump that the Echo line would match what INTENS was just a while aback.

So far what specs I have read you guys ending up with gain is the spec that is the most different from INTENS or from thin film for that matter. EBI probably being the second. Of course there's other specs they don't tell us like nothing about the photocathode (it's spectral response seems kinda important because that's one of the big things talked from marketing perspective, but 4G is all I've seen as a spec and that's it). Not sure how much that would give more insight on performance as it's not very comparable with Gen3 numbers.

I will love Photonis even more if the pricing in EU for the Echo line will be anywhere near as good as you guys have it. Highly doubt a blem spec will come out here as there is the Echo and then Echo+ which already gives quite much room for blems for the former.

I digress.... get what makes you happy and that’s that.

What negativity towards 4G?

There's none in this thread at all that I can see... Seems to me from reading through the posts that everyone in this thread is a fan of the technology. What is in dispute are claimed and stated performance levels.

This is a technical forum, so it's pretty normal for people here to question vague claims - Anyone who has been here more than a year usually knows that people aren't very good at estimating "darkness" and can be off by three orders of magnitude without even realizing it. That equates to about a 0.1% reliability in accurately estimating low light levels when comparing technologies. Those with experience can sometimes bring that closer to within 10%, but without instruments to measure it, it's very difficult.

People like Murtis and Vic (TNVC) have spent years studying the technology to the point they can analyze performance in photographs from key features even when the specs aren't present.

And what Murtis said is functionally correct. The biggest difference between Echo and Full-spec L3 or INTENS is the gain. But because the ABC setting is within the same range as Gen3, this isn't going to be obvious until you get into ultra-low-light situations, such that the gain itself is no longer sufficient to maintain full screen brightness. Under these conditions, the differences will be more readily apparent.

But that's not negativity. That's just technical discussion.

David.