New Ultra-Compact Thermal Weapon Sights!

Originally Posted By: devildoggHey kirsch have you checked out the hogster beast? Kinda thinking I need something new. I believe you are referring to the Bering Optics Hogster-R 50. I have not, but have one being shipped to me as we speak. Bering Optics is sending me a Beast-R 50mm, a Hogster-R 25mm and a new 640x480 monocular called the Prodigy 640 to do some testing and reviews. As soon as I have tested and have some video reviews, I will post them here.
 
It is because it is so new. If you want one, Tom at Night Goggles can get them. I would assume, Bering will get them on their website soon as well.
 
Korey,
You mention switching from a scanner to back on the weapon for a sight. My question is have you tested to see how well it returns to zero after doing that?
 
I am not using it on my coyote setup at this time. My Flir PTS536 is on my main coyote gun so I can record my hunts. However, what I have been doing is I have my Hogster-R 35mm on my .17HMR. I use this for squirrel and rabbit control in my backyard. I have taken it off more than a dozen times and put it back on, and have shot 6+ animals with it, and it was always on. These are 50 yard shots not 200 yard shots, but I never zeroed my scope again and it is still doing great. When I take a hunting partner along, it takes less than a second and it is off the gun and I let my hunting partner use it as a scanner. I have no worries when I put it back on my .17 HMR again, so fairly confident it holds zero well for a stock QD mount.
 
Originally Posted By: DarknightThat 25 mm model might be a good replacement for my old hd19a to scan for coyotes. I'll be curious how yours holds up in those subzero Dakota temps. The Hogster hasn't gone through official cold weather testing from Bering Optics below 14F.

However, I ran a cold weather scenario on my Hogster-R 35mm this morning. This is not an official test or a stamp of approval by Bering Optics. The temp this morning was -16F. I took the scope from the house, and placed it outside and turned it on. When I went back out to check it after about 5 minutes, I was a little concerned as there was some artifacts on the screen. I NUC'd it and they went away. I proceeded to check the scope every 5 minutes up to 52 minutes and the artifacts never showed back up and the scope worked. For me, a long stand would be 30 minutes plus maybe a 5 minute walk both directions would put me at 40 minutes. I went to 52 minutes just in case. The batteries didn't do very well at -16, but that is to be expected. In reality, this is probably twice as long as I would sit on a coyote stand in these kinds of temps but it still worked. One quick test doesn't certify anything, but it gives me more confidence in using it in colder temps.
 
Korey,

When you talk about artifacts, I am thinking gliched pixels on the screen? Also, I keep seeing that term "NUC" and I'm curious if that is some kind of degaussing effect?
 
Originally Posted By: Vance I keep seeing that term "NUC" and I'm curious if that is some kind of degaussing effect? All thermals are required to NUC. Here is one definition from the Internet: NUC are non-uniformity compensation (NUC) coefficients which are factory-calibrated to maintain high image quality on thermal cameras. The coefficients comprise a NUC table and generally work within a specific subset of the total operating temperature range. Is it the same as degaussing, no, but the end result is similar.

Many older thermals required the user to cover the objective to NUC the device. Thankfully, most of the newer models now have internal shutters so this is no longer necessary. If your image on the screen ever looks odd, such as distorted or has odd spots, a NUC is the first thing to do. Some thermals have auto NUC, while some thermals like Pulsar have auto, semi, and manual. Some users like the ability to NUC when they want so it doesn't happen during the shot. The longer the thermal takes to NUC (for instance Pulsar is really long while the Flir PTS series is super fast), the more the manual feature may be necessary. Thermals typically NUC quite often when first started up, but this process lengthens out as the thermal is on.

Originally Posted By: VanceWhen you talk about artifacts, I am thinking gliched pixels on the screen? Yes, there were some random spots visible on the image. It kind of looked like the screen had ice crystals, but as I said the NUC cleared it right up. This isn't something I would worry about as all of my thermals at some point have had an odd looking screen that simply required a NUC. I probably caught the scope right before it was about to NUC. I didn't type that information to scare anyone about the usage in cold weather. More so, if you see the same thing, manually NUC the scope. It is simply a quick press of the last button on the Hogster scope.
 
Back
Top