Finally got a Photon 4.6x42s night vision. It's what i will do for now and am happy with it. Question is
when I need to change batteries will it hold zero. I have searched and haven't found any answers

Yes it saves the zero

Also, you have an "X" value and a "Y" value in your scope zero mode. Write those values down once you get the scope zeroed. If you ever want to store the scope without batteries, it will eventually lose zero. Put the values back in the scope and it's back to your zero.

Swap out the stock front lens housing on your XT with a camera lens adapter and use SLR/35mm camera lenses. Do some research and use lenses that work well with the XT, you'll be shocked at the image quality, clarity, and the absence of distortion/artifacts.

Theres a ton of cheap old school camera lenses, they're a dime a dozen. They weren't cheap back in the day before digital photography. And the optics, particularly on high-end camera lenses, are significantly better than a lot of premium rifle scopes.

1000 yards with an XT?....... no prob, with a laser/aspherical lense. If you can light up the target with IR at distance, you can hit it if you've got the skill to make the shot day or night.

Could you elaborate on this a bit or point someone in the right direction who doesn't know much about lenses? This sounds like a very useful/valuable tip. Thanks - Jack

Thanks for the replies. That's interesting about swapping lenses.

Yep you're fine. It's a great little rig for the money. Works very well.

Let's see yours.

X's 2, it definitely sounds interesting. Wouldn't that void the warranty though?

It will not just void the warranty, but completely blow it up!

tag

You can google PhotonXT extreme for conversion information

It's a lot of work and unproven to my knowledge on centerfire rifles larger than 223

Mine has sat in the safe for up to 6 months with no batteries and hasn't lost zero. I never store it with the batteries in it if I'm not gonna use it within the next couple days.

And it should not lose zero, but it is an electronic device and stray electrons seem to do wonky things sometimes. Writing down the numbers is a good idea.

I text them to myself after sight in and then save the text thread, that way I have them with me all the time.

"Lot of work" is a matter of perspective..... if it's a lot of work, youre either doing it wrong, or using a donor scope that's considered a poor choice to use in the first place. You can make the process simple, easy, and repeatable if you approach the project with research, adequate preperation, and common sense. If you lack the ability to think critically or are mechanically disinclined, then yes, you'll struggle. As would anyone who attempts to tackle a technical issue without ability, understanding, and knowledge.


I have no issues with shooting my scopes on 308 caliber rifles, though by design, camera lenses arent designed to mitigate recoil impulse. The can and do fail occassionally, though Ive never seen nor experienced it.

I can remove the stock, OEM objective lens housing from a 4.7 XT and replace it with a lens adapter attached to the front of the scope sensor housing, within 5 minutes.

The 6.5 XT's are significantly more difficult to do. The XT OEM manufacturer apparently addressed concrns by Yukon et. al. due to cannibalization of the market for their high-end magnification XT's by using industrial epoxy to glue the lens fixture and objective lens mounting ring to make removal extremely difficult.

IMHO, the rational is counterintuitive. I'd mod a $499 device bfore doing the same mod to a $699 device. The higher retail cost of a 6.5 vs a 4.7 is marketing upsale due to the perception that the additional magnification offers additional value, hence the higher price point. If a purchaser assume paying a premium for a 6.5 is worth the cost due to an assumption by the consumer that there are other qualities justifying the cost, they're mistaken. Thy're not getting higher quality, distortion free glass, enhanced coatiings, better build quality, or anything of the sort. They're getting the same, cheap, polycarbonate monolithic objective lens that the 4.7 has, albeit with slightly more magnification. They're paying a severfal hundred dollar premium for slightly more additional magnification, nothing more.

A typical 1970's circa M42 mount Canon 105mm lens is exponentially better than the stock objective lens on an XT. It's analogous to comparing a toy or hobby grade big-box store telescope to a researh grade telescope.

So you buy the lens adapter where exactly ?

I bought my adapter from SRB Photographic, in the UK. Don't know if anyone here in the US is making them. Cost, with shipping was about $40 USD. Email them to see if it's in stock at: enquiries@srb-griturn.com.

... that sounds so easy and not a lot of work

Once you buy an adaptor from England what lens do you buy in the US and what F-stop value do you use?

Sorry for the dumb questions but it doesn't seem as easy as some make it out to be

Personally, I know nothing about cameras and f-stops, so I let the guys in the UK do the leg-work on the best combos to use. The consensus seems to favor using a Pentax Super Takumar, with the M42 threads.
A 55mm / F1.8 will give you about 5X
A 105mm / F2.8 will give you about 9X
A 135mm / F2.5 will give you about 12X
A 135 / F3.5 will work, but will only allow about half the amount of IR as a 2.8 allows, so you'll need a really good illuminator. Speaking of which, in the LED category, this is the Best (with a capital B) "850" IR illuminator I've found: http://www.nightvisionstore.co.uk/black-sun-2-b672-67mm-ir-illuminator-c2x18631849
It runs about $105, shipped to the US. They also sell just the BS 2 "pill", if you want to convert something you already own (single battery models only).
For additional reading...
http://www.nightvisionforumuk.com/

Smaller F Stop the better to let maximum light in. Example a 1 lets in more light than a 3.