Does anyone own this unit or have any thoughts on it? For $2560 this seems like a great deal for a 640 unit. I'm a fan of Pulsar but the comparable XP unit runs hundreds more.

I might add that this is the non LRF unit and the price includes the 5% off coupon offered by this particular dealer.

I have the LRF version.

The image punches WELL above it's weight class.
The controls, minus any tactile references that work with gloves, are intuitive and easy to use.
It's been an exceptional performer and has impressed me when used side by side with a HaloX50 in conditions from great to miserable.

I think any night hunter who doesn't kick in for the LRF version for a measly $300 more is really shooting themselves in the foot.

Thanks for the info. Impressed with the comparison to the Halo. I wasn't sure about how useful the "low light optical detector " would be. The price point for a 640 just looked really good to me.
Probably gonna pull the trigger. Right now I'm using a Pulsar Quantum XD38A which is ok if conditions are good but in high humidity or like last night when a light fog moved it it goes south in a hurry.

The "low light optical detector" without a built in illuminator can be a challenge. It can be more challenging for a manufacturer to include one and have some people try to use it outside of the intended use design perimeters the engineers focused on. The illuminator for someone doing wildlife counts from 50-100yds vs someone trying to spy on dogs at 300+ won't be the same.

If you haven’t already pulled the trigger, this guy is good people and I can get you his number

Thanks Greg but already pulled the trigger. New unit $2500 out the door.

I have yet to buy or use a thermal optic that didn't have one or more boneheaded features. That just seems to be the nature of the industry. That the engineers apparently thought X feature was a good idea, or simply didn't think the problem through completely because of a significant shortcoming of the guys in the white labcoats and pocket protectors not actually go into the field to see how practical the features really are/or and the manufacturer doesn't research the parameters when testing the units in the field, or potentially don't bother with fixing shortcomings discovered, no doubt contributes to bad features making it into finished products.

"Design intent" often has little to do with actual use. How do users know what the design intent is if it is not stated in the advertising or enclosed literature? Maybe I have missed it, but I have yet to see any ads or literature explaining the utility of the non-thermal optical feature. You get some buzz word phrases like "bi-spectrum image fusion" which sounds really high tech, but then as you point out, without an illuminator, what good is that feature going to do for beyond 50-100 yards? I see where it is a "ultra-low light optical detector" feature, which sounds like night vision, digital night vision (CMOS), but nobody has marketed digital night vision that doesn't need supplemental IR illumination for when it is, you know, dark. Plus, there is no place to add on an IR illuminator to the unit to help it work in the dark.
https://www.agmglobalvision.com/agm-fuzion-lrf-tm35-640

Customers can become quite dissatisfied if they believe they can use the non-thermal "ultra-low light" feature like real night vision because AGM and their marketing failed to convey what the engineer design intent for use was.

The unit may work alright as a thermal in the field, but what are the ultra-low light optics and "bi-spectrum fusion" features really doing for hunters if they aren't useful beyond 50-100 yards or when it is actually dark?

It’s not digital night vision. It’s a CMOS sensor with ultra low light capability (a common feature on newer DSLR cameras from Sony). This gives you the ability to use thermal, VISIBLE light spectrum, or to blend the images (not unlike the FLIR ONE I have that attaches to smart phone). The blending technique enhances the definition and detail of the thermal image. What its useful range is, depends on the glass in front of the sensor, not so much the sensor itself. No IR illuminator necessary because it’s not using 850 or 940 NM spectrum light digital night vision devices use.

Also, if you read the page, this device is aimed at applications other than just hunting such as LE work.

Just curious, what sort of sensor do you think is used for digital night vision? The reason I ask is because CMOS definitely IS one type of sensor used for digital night vision along with CCD. https://www.pulsar-nv.com/ltu/en/support/night-vision-technologies/77/

the digital nv on this optic's "fusion" is fix focus at 53yds as I recall. It has the ability to see plenty far out with adequate natural or artificial illumination.

850nm illuminators work but aren't nearly as effective with this camera as it is with a gen3 i2 device.

I recall the published information showing visible spectrum up to 1050nm which is considered "out of band" in the LE/MIL sector, and is what technology is moving towards to reestablish a gap on near pear capabilities.

Currently the OOB illuminators that I'm aware of are restricted by manufacturers (if not also by some obscure government regulation) & I'm not sure on the status for allowed imports. Q2 of 2022 a US manufacturer has stated that they will release a variable output illuminator at or near the 1050nm wavelength. (contradicting information on what the actual will be but both numbers I've read are above 1000nm)

Yes, CMOS sensors are also used for digital night vision. The difference being that for night vision use, they remove the IR filter. On my ATN scope for example, when you switch from day to night mode and vice versa, you can hear the IR filter being moved in and out from the front of the sensor. All sensors can see the IR spectrum, even the old CCD sensors. But for normal photography use, they have to place an IR filter in front of the sensor because that IR will have an adverse affect on daylight photography. It will cause blacks to have a deep purplish appearance for one. In photo lingo, it’s referred to as IR contamination.

Because the AGM literature mentions visible spectrum and doesn’t have a place to mount an IR illuminator as you pointed out earlier, I don’t believe digital night vision is what they have in mind. And if it is being used in an LE surveillance application, that visible image vs. IR or thermal would, IMO help to positively identify suspects being investigated. Since the device does record video, that visible imagery could be helpful evidence for possible court proceedings at a later time.

Well, no, LOL, Relatively cheap digital technology does not currently replicate something like a gen3 i2 device. The combined capability AGM Fuzion is cheaper than most simple Gen 3 i2 night vision devices, so I would not expect the NV component to work as well.

It really just sounds like this is a really nifty thermal that has been saddled with a much less function optical device. Very weird. It adds a bunch of bulk without adding a lot of capability...based on what you are saying.




LOL, I fully understand hog the IR filters work with CMOS. Without the design specs, this is really splitting hairs. If you don't want to call it digital night vision despite it being digital and using the same sort of sensor and seeing in very low light, that is fine, tomato, tomato.

The type of very low light I am referring to is color, not monochromatic like typical digital night vision devices.

So then, would you refer to something like the Sony A7S IV as digital night vision? I sure wouldn’t. It’s just a very high ISO capable sensor that can deliver a COLOR image in near darkness.

It’s not hair splitting, it’s a totally different application.

GNTX
For clarity, The Fuzion CMOS is a black and white image.

Sus, I think we are probably speaking past one another.

I feel the camera/Fusion on this model wasn't intended for night use. I don't speak mandarin but I suspect it was intended for day use where the clarity and definition of the cmos can be supplemented by a thermal outline of heat sources. At 53m the images merge the best. I took some sample fusion and cmos camera video in the open earlier but I'm too wiped to edit it and upload it. I can see it being a pretty decent tool for day hunters in thick cover. It operates similar to a COTI in thermal outline mode.

On the other hand after reading the specs I am trying to come up with the tools that would optimize the "very low light" portion of the camera. Like a Sionix it is not as sensitive to the 850nm spectrum as it is 940nm. Once the Out of band Illuminator options are commercially available i feel it's likely we will see a huge jump in the utility of the cmos cameras in these devises as night observation tools even though they weren't primarily designed for the role.

I got pretty busy with turkey season winding down and the hunter rush at the end so I forgot to post these.

from the top
1, BH 25 yds
2, 35yds buck in Feb (I poo poo guicci color palates a lot but AGM did well with this one)
3, 100yds BH
4, terrain scan in daylight 2x
5, oops rehash of #3
6, 200yds 4x WH
7, another repeat mistake
8, 200yds 8x WH

Just over 30yd with the digital NV camera, no illuminator, night after half moon phase, clear sky.
One pic with NV and the other is the "Fuzion" NV and WH thermal overlay.
With supplemental IR the fuzion image can look more NV apparent. The best illuminator I have found to optimize this NV camera for my count or scouting use is a $30 940 or 850nm amazon special that includes an 18650 rechargeable battery, focusing aspherical lens, push button O/I with diopter power adjustment.
For target detection or filming farther out with the NV you'd want something with more output but for my needs between 30-75yds that cheap amazon light beats the snot out of illuminators that cost 5-15x as much.