thermal scope for hogs

[Mick45]

I recently read a magazine article about hunting feral hogs with thermal imaging rifle scopes. In the accompanying photo's the hogs appeared amazingly lit up, and easy to see at night, much better than any night vision unit I have used. Maybe not so sporting, but the hogs can be very destructive to crops, land and landowners, and the extra meat would be donated to feed the poor.
Anybody know anything about this? What is a good commercially available brand? Are they affordable? Priced similarly to the good night vision? They look expensive. Any info or suggestions would be helpful. Thanks, Mick

 

[NOLAEMT]

I do know that they are very expensive, in the multi-thousand dollar range. but they do work, and work well.

 

[MtnCreek]

Anybody know anything about this?
Above my pay grade.
What is a good commercially available brand?
ATN makes thermal. I've used their NV and it seems to be really good product.
Are they affordable?
Not for me.
Priced similarly to the good night vision?
You can get a good NV for around $2,000. I think thermal starts at about 5 times that.

 

[MachIVshooter]

Are they affordable?

If you consider $10,000-$20,000 affordable for an optic, then yes.

For most of us who work for a living? Not hardly.

Thermals are really neat, got to play with them a little. But definitely not needed for pig hunting. A $500 gen I+ NVRS will do just fine; I went with the ATN Mk390. You don't need to be able to see the individual hairs at 50 yards to hunt pigs, and it's not like they're stealthy animals. Skittish and mostly noctournal, yes, but easily detected when present (unless you're stone deaf).

 

[Double Naught Spy]

The cheapest thermal rifle scope I have seen runs about $12K. That doesn't mean that it is one of the better ones, however. I read a neat review sometime back noting that for hunting purposes, the detection range of the scope runs 2-3 times the sighted shooting range.

The problem with buying NV gear and thermal gear is that there really aren't too many places where you can go and try out the gear before you buy it. Sales folks will show you images from what things look like in the scopes and you can see some vids online, but these usually don't include any problems and the situations are favorable to the scopes. Also, nobody talks about misidentifying animals with thermal vision which can be a problem.

Where thermal will be superior to regular night vision is in the woods. Running Gen I-III will often require using an IR illuminator and every branch and leaf will reflect light back into the scope. Think of it like trying to take a picture of your dog at night with a flash camera and your dog is hiding in the bushes. You will get a great shot of your bushes in the foreground and the overexposure of the leaves will hide the dog behind them. This isn't a problem for thermal. On the downside, however, is that thermal may cause you to not realize that there are obstructions between you and the prey that your shot may impact first. Things like tree limbs that are ambient temperature become virtually invisible except for when the prey is behind them and essentially backlighting them to show that there is as obstruction.

I have two ATNs, one Night Optics, and now one Pulsar Digiscope N550. My initial testing of the Pulsar puts it at better than my 2 Gen II+ scopes and it is not as recoil sensitive and many less expensive NV riflescopes. None of my scopes will handle anything over .308 other than the Pulsar and it is on my .45-70. The nice thing about it over other night vision is that it will work in the daytime. It isn't a great daytime scope, however, but will work nicely from predusk to post dawn lighting. Of course, a thermal scope will as well.

 

[Flintknapper]

+1 on the Pulsar Digisight.

I think you’ll see digital more and more in the future. If you are used to NV…then digital takes a little getting used to….but “for the money” you get a lot.

http://www.pulsarvision.com/digital...s/23-pulsar-digisight-n550-pl76311-76311.html

MAIN FEATURES:

• Digital Main Menu
• Manufacturing Employs Carbon Plastic and other Modern Technologies
• Flip up Objective Lens Cover
• Self contained and External Power Supply
• Video Input / Video Output
• Built in IR Illuminator with Shield Blind
• Separate Adjustment of Brightness and Contrast
• User Choice of the Display's Glow Color
• Low Battery Indication
• Fine Image Quality and Resolution
• Highly Sensitive CCD Array
• User Choice of the Reticle Shapes
• Switchable Sum Light ™ Signal Processing Program
• Mini USB Slot for Downloading into the Device’s Memory Additional Aiming Reticles of User's Own Configuration
• Water Resistance
• One Shot Zeroing
• Large Eye Relief (67 mm)
• Built In & External Power Supply
• Built in Clock
• High Contrast Function
• Resistant to Bright Light Exposure
• Accurate Internal Front Lens Focus Adjustment
• Ergonomic Design and Intuitive Easy to Use Interface
• Remote Control with Secure Attachment
• Additional Weaver MIL STD 1913 Rail for Accessories

 

[MachIVshooter]

Also, nobody talks about misidentifying animals with thermal vision which can be a problem.

On the downside, however, is that thermal may cause you to not realize that there are obstructions between you and the prey that your shot may impact first. Things like tree limbs that are ambient temperature become virtually invisible except for when the prey is behind them and essentially backlighting them to show that there is as obstruction.

Thermal isn't FLIR; You don't just see blurry outline images of things with temperature differentials like the predator; The image resembles NV, but B&W instead of green. It is quite easy to tell what you're looking at, and whether or not there are small obstructions.

 

[Double Naught Spy]

Thermal isn't FLIR;

Okay, so what is the difference between thermal and FLIR other than FLIR being a trademarked brand name of thermal scope? Thermal scopes see infrared radiation. FLIR sees infrared radiation.

Videos on Youtube of thermal hunting show numerous examples less than great resolution and obstructive vegetation that is unclear.

 

[Flintknapper]

No difference, "FLIR" is simply Forward Looking.

What you can see and at what distance is determined by several factors.

Also, its important to understand the difference in the "terms" (Detection, Recognition and Identity) when speaking of IR units.

http://www.flir.com/uploadedFiles/ENG_01_howfar.pdf

The usefulness of IR and how well it might perform for your intended purpose will vary substantially with what type (and size) lens your unit has, atmospheric conditions, etc....

I don't even need IR to "recognize" the outline of a couple of dogs at 10 feet, I can do that with a single candle held at arms length.

Put them out at 200 yards, using an IR unit with a 50 mm lens and throw in some light fog. Suddenly you've got two blobs out there that could be dogs, might be hogs, calves, not really sure.