TritonTr196 Posted December 3, 2017 Share Posted December 3, 2017 45 minutes ago, MIB said: Not, not quite the same thing. A person has the opportunity to show nothing and say nothing and be left alone. It's not 'til you say you have something and refuse to show it that the critters come out of the woodwork. MIB Correct. It's the ones that does boast they've done this or have that but never show anything. But it's kinda rare someone doesn't say something even if they don't have anything to show, it's just a human trait to want to fit it until they get called out for it, then it's play the pity victim game. I'm just an observer here, Personally I wouldn't waste my time calling someone out. If someone talks to much smack with never anything to show, I just disregard anything they have to say on the subject. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NathanFooter Posted December 3, 2017 Author Share Posted December 3, 2017 I believe this is the wrong thread for the discussion of photo/video acceptance or talk on those who make claims. This thread was intended to discuss equipment and strategic implementation. Please start a new thread for anything off the main topic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norseman Posted December 3, 2017 Share Posted December 3, 2017 Found these, way cheaper than lume cube. https://www.ebay.com/itm/Zoom-Light-360-Rotatable-LED-Headlamp-Light-for-DJI-PHANTOM-4-4PRO-4-Mode/311991696834?hash=item48a4277dc2:g:AGkAAOSwZC1Z9uNA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wiiawiwb Posted December 3, 2017 Share Posted December 3, 2017 (edited) The images I saw of humans walking in a store using FLIR 640 were very compelling. You could see layers of hair. If someone is fortunate enough to get a sasquatch up close using Pulsar or FLIR 640, it might provide some details that will be very interesting ti see. Edited December 3, 2017 by wiiawiwb 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wiiawiwb Posted December 3, 2017 Share Posted December 3, 2017 (edited) Note the detail using this Pulsar 640 from 40 seconds on: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HF0-gzm8ju4 At the same distance, if this were a sasquatch, rather than a cow, the detail would be breathtaking. Edited December 3, 2017 by wiiawiwb Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SWWASAS Posted December 3, 2017 BFF Patron Share Posted December 3, 2017 (edited) wiiawiwb: Only the long membership forum members will appreciate that the images presented are cows. At least none were the flying variety in this video. Of course if you imaged a BF with the scope, cows might be a possible skeptic identification. But the better the resolution the harder it is to explain away something. Edited December 3, 2017 by SWWASAS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NathanFooter Posted December 4, 2017 Author Share Posted December 4, 2017 That is an impressive unit, Pulsar has come a ways in the past few years. The extended B-Pack is awesome for all night observation, 16 hours of power is great. I hope the file system for video recording is continuous and has at least 16 GB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wiiawiwb Posted December 4, 2017 Share Posted December 4, 2017 I believe the Pulsar XPs have 8GB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TritonTr196 Posted December 4, 2017 Share Posted December 4, 2017 If they don't reach out to least 75 or 100 yards with that kind of resolution and detail, you're just wasting your time and money. Is there anymore videos of the pulsar at those ranges because that 30 yard video isn't very impressive? My flir 640 is the bomb at 100 yards. Well worth the entire year I had to save my change for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wiiawiwb Posted December 4, 2017 Share Posted December 4, 2017 (edited) Which specific FLIR model are you speaking of? Edited December 4, 2017 by wiiawiwb Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TritonTr196 Posted December 4, 2017 Share Posted December 4, 2017 (edited) 54 minutes ago, wiiawiwb said: Which specific FLIR model are you speaking of? The flir scout 3 640. I'm wondering about the distance quality on the pulsar compared to the scout 640. Edited December 4, 2017 by TritonTr196 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wiiawiwb Posted December 4, 2017 Share Posted December 4, 2017 (edited) I'll look but I in my opinion at thermals below $5,000, the Pulsar will beat the FLIR every time if you match them by spec. I found the image of Pulsar Quantum Lite XQ23V, at 388x244, was competitive with the FLIR Scout III 640. That Pulsar unit has the flat lens versus the convex lens found on the Helion line. These two units above were viewed at a Cabelas store. I went to another dealer in northern Georgia (I was visiting the area) that had the FLIR Scout 3 640 and the Pulsar Helion XP28 a 640 unit. No comparison in my opinion. The XP28 has a frame rate of 50hz vs 30hz with the FLIR. That will provide for a slightly better picture when the subject is moving. Also, the Pulsars have an AMOLOD display versus LCD with the FLIR. I find the AMOLOD clarity better. I'm also told the former performs significantly better at temperatures below 32F. The Pulsar XP series has interchangeable lens so you can buy the XP28 unit then buy the XP50 lens separately. I don't believe you can do the same with the FLIR. To answer your question specifically, at the 100 yards the FLIR image would be viewed at it's native (optical) magnification which is 1x. At 100 yards the Pulsar XP28 native magnification is at 1.4. So at any distance, the image of the Pulsar is 40% larger which would provide more detail. In order for the FLIR 640 to provide a larger imagine size similar to the one seen on the Pulsar, the FLIR would then go to a digital zoom of 2x which would downgrade the image quality. All things being equal (lens quality and shape), you will see an image more clearly with a unit that has a higher native magnification (Pulsar XP28) than a unit that has a lower native magnification (FLIR Scout 3 640). This is simple pixel math and explains why many people buy the Pulsar XQ50 (384x288) vs XP50 (640x480). The XQ50 has a native magnification of 4.1 compared to the XP50 of 2.5. If the sasquatch is at 100 yards, the image on the screen will be a hair small and you'll want to digitally zoom. Once you zoom in digitally with XP50 you've downgraded the picture quality of the 640 unit to nearly a 384 unit. You've paid a premium price for a 640 which is wasted. The same concept applies when comparing the FLIR to the Pulsar. I have no horse in this game as I don't own unit a thermal yet and am critically analyzing them before I buy. The two reasons I would always buy a Pulsar over a FLIR below the $5,000 price point is the AMOLOD screen was much clearer to my eyes than the LCD screen and the Pulsar has a higher native magnification. Edited December 4, 2017 by wiiawiwb Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NathanFooter Posted December 4, 2017 Author Share Posted December 4, 2017 Does the Pulsar have manual focus ? If so that may be the reason for distant subjects being less clear in a few of the videos. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wiiawiwb Posted December 4, 2017 Share Posted December 4, 2017 Yes, I believe all the Helions have manual focus. The XP Helions models are the only ones to have the quick-swap lenses. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TritonTr196 Posted December 4, 2017 Share Posted December 4, 2017 4 hours ago, wiiawiwb said: These two units above were viewed at a Cabelas store. I went to another dealer in northern Georgia (I was visiting the area) Did you go to the Cabelas in Fort Olgethorpe in northern Georgia? Just outside of Chattanooga? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts