Native (base) Magnification

wiiawiwb

New member
I'm still struggling a tad with the effect of the base magnification when choosing a thermal spotter. I understand that clarity depends on the number of pixel units and how they are magnified.

If I'm looking to use the thermal spotter in close (woods as opposed to expansive field), a wider FOV is helpful. I keep telling myself that if all things are equal between two thermal units, I should choose the one with the lowest native magnification. Now, I can't explain why I think that which means I'm no longer confident it is even true.

If I was comparing the Pulsar XQ23V (base mag of 1.8) to a Helion XQ30F (base mag of 2.5) what does the difference in native magnification mean to its effectiveness?
 
Your answer is in your statement that you will be scanning in close woods. In my opinion neither of those units will best suit your needs. Something with 1x native you suit you better, and still allow you to spot animals at over 500 yds.

Following is a review I did between my Pulsar HD19A and an XQ23V. The video pretty much shows the difference between the sharper image of the 19 compared to the 23. As stated in one of the responses I made on the video, the 19 has a convex objective while the 23 has a flat objective. I found the objective focus on the 23 did very little and I never could get the image beyond fuzzy. The 23 has some great features, but they are nullified by the fuzzy image. Consequently I sent mine back and kept the 19 which I've had for almost 3 years.

 
Base magnification is the magnification provided just by the lense. The additional magnification, or digital zoom is provided by software. Since digital is just expanding pixels, resolution is lost as magnification increases. The FOV in base magnification is going to depend on the size and magnification of the lense.
 
With thermal, you really need to decide which is most important, field of view or magnification. You kind of have to choose one or the other. Where I hunt, it's wide open expanses where you can see for several hundred yards. Sometimes miles. So I sacrifice FOV for magnification. We also don't have Hogs here. So my primary use is coyotes and fox. Smaller targets. Magnification again is more important to me than FOV because of my quarry and the terrain I hunt. If I lived in Florida, my needs would be the exact opposite. Hope this helps.
 
Great video comparison there DoubleUp. The HD 19A looks pretty darn good. I was impressed with Weekender's unit he loaned me for a trial. Looks like the 23V, while it has added features as you mentioned, just isn't as clear as the 19A. I like "clear" every time. Fuzzy just doesn't cut it. Considering magnification, I can see how one unit might be preferred for one hunter while the other might work better for another. As Tom mentioned, the 23v would probably work better for the open terrain where he hunts, while many eastern hunters may like the 19a better, depending.

Seems it's sometimes difficult to get things right with scopes. Newer models offer some great improvements while sacrificing other important things. You would think that manufacturers would take what's good about a product and just build on that without losing the good in the older models. Losing proper focus / clarity is not a good thing in my book.



 
I would buy a Trijicon patrol 100 or m250. Purchase the 2x magnifier and have the best of both worlds. The same thing can be done with the helion and it’s interchangeable lenses.
 
Originally Posted By: kyle crickenbergerI would buy a Trijicon patrol 100 or m250. Purchase the 2x magnifier and have the best of both worlds. The same thing can be done with the helion and it’s interchangeable lenses.


This...
smile.gif
 
Here is a video put out by Pulsar showing one of the Quantums. They don't say what model it is.

I was drawn to this particular video because it takes place in the woods. It is very clear both at base magnification and with digital zoom.

Can anyone identify what model this is?


 
Last edited:
I just went thru this delima. I had an IR Hunter 35mm with a FOV of 12 deg and 2.5 optical. I hunt coyotes and hogs but very few large sounders. I wanted more optical mag for finer details on my target so I traded in for the IR 60mm with 7 deg FOV and 4.5 optical mag. This turned out perfect for me as a rifle scope but scanning with it became problematic with the narrow FOV so I need a handheld scanner. After trying quite a few units I went with the 1x mag 640 core patrol 250 for its small size and ability to mount on a helmet. To me anything more than 1x defeats the purpose of being a scanner. Use the scanner to detect and the rifle scope to ID. My 2 cents.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top