texashuntingforum.com logo
Main Menu
Advertisement
Affiliates
Advertisement
Newest Members
Josh-04512, dblmikeusa1, Hog-Pro, 4Notch, Niknoc76
72042 Registered Users
Top Posters(All Time)
dogcatcher 110,795
bill oxner 91,416
SnakeWrangler 65,517
stxranchman 60,296
Gravytrain 46,950
RKHarm24 44,585
rifleman 44,461
Stub 43,848
Forum Statistics
Forums46
Topics537,778
Posts9,729,041
Members87,042
Most Online25,604
Feb 12th, 2024
Print Thread
Thermal 384 vs 640 #9006838 02/17/24 02:03 AM
Joined: Mar 2018
Posts: 148
Klinker Offline OP
Woodsman
OP Offline
Woodsman
Joined: Mar 2018
Posts: 148
Looking at my first thermal scope. Considering AGM Adder, InfiRay Bolt and Pulsar Thermion 2 (all tube-style scopes).

I understand the concept of resolution degrading once you move (up) from the base magnification.

So my question is, at the base magnification (let's say that is 3x), is 640 noticeably "better"?

Or is it more that you buy 640 to get better resolution as you go UP from base magnification?

Last edited by Klinker; 02/17/24 03:09 AM.
Re: Thermal 384 vs 640 [Re: Klinker] #9006891 02/17/24 03:44 AM
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 35,117
B
Brother in-law Online Content
THF Celebrity
Online Content
THF Celebrity
B
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 35,117
Yes

I like my bolt 2

Re: Thermal 384 vs 640 [Re: Klinker] #9007518 02/18/24 03:02 PM
Joined: Apr 2019
Posts: 1,104
Wilson Combat Online Content
Boar Meister
Online Content
Boar Meister
Joined: Apr 2019
Posts: 1,104
The main thing is to pick a scope with a base magnification that is adequate for most of what you will do with the scope. Digital enhancement of the magnification DRAMATICALLY reduces the resolution. As an example, I've got a older Thermion XQ50 (384) with 4x base magnification and I've got the new latest greatest Thermion 2 XP50 Pro (640) with 2x base magnification. If I bump the magnification of the XP up to 4x the image quality isn't any better than the XQ 384 on 4x. For the spot and stalk hog hunting I do a 3-4x base is the best choice. I haven't had any issue shooting running hogs in a field with 3-4x. When I use the XP is typically shoot stationary shots with the picture in picture 4x.

The Pulsar Thermion 2 XQ50 Pro is a very good DO ALL scope with a 3x base magnification.

Re: Thermal 384 vs 640 [Re: Wilson Combat] #9007593 02/18/24 06:16 PM
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 8,235
Double Naught Spy Online Happy
THF Trophy Hunter
Online Happy
THF Trophy Hunter
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 8,235
Originally Posted by Wilson Combat
The Pulsar Thermion 2 XQ50 Pro is a very good DO ALL scope with a 3x base magnification.


3x does seem to be about the most optimal base mag going for digital sights. You go below 2.5x and a lot of people are saying they want more. You go above 3.5x and people are claiming they can't shoot anything inside 100 yards because the FOV is too small.

Ideally, you want maybe 2.5x and 8k (7680x4320) worth of digital zoom because 640x480 doesn't for a very good image after 4x in most cases.


Hogdalorian - Si vis pacem cum sus, para bellum.
My Videos https://www.youtube.com/user/HornHillRange
Re: Thermal 384 vs 640 [Re: Klinker] #9007647 02/18/24 08:48 PM
Joined: Sep 2022
Posts: 450
D
duffas Online Content
Bird Dog
Online Content
Bird Dog
D
Joined: Sep 2022
Posts: 450
[Linked Image]
Maybe this will show another problem. Hot spot is a handwarmer behind a 1" square hole (100 yds, ignore readout). It's NOT square in the pic! Hot stuff tends to bloom so object 'definition' is a little difficult. Gets worse with more digital mag. and really hot target. Yes, FOV is reduced by the digital mag. All mag steps are x2.
better shot, feeder and salt block, 100 yds.
[Linked Image]
Both are Rattler 640 base mag.


Last edited by duffas; 02/18/24 09:10 PM.
Re: Thermal 384 vs 640 [Re: Klinker] #9007873 02/19/24 05:15 AM
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 637
Outdoor Legacy Offline
Tracker
Offline
Tracker
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 637
To answer your question, a good 640 resolution optic with a 3x base magnification will be significantly crisper and clearer than a good 384 resolution optic at 3x optical magnification. You just have so many more pixels providing your eye with so much more information and this is especially noticeable when looking at animals are further ranges. It doesn't mean everyone needs a 640 optic but there is no debating, the image quality is going to be noticeably better.

Feel free to give us a call if you'd like to discuss optics. We're happy to help you narrow it down based on your hunting situation and needs. We hunt with every single optic we sell and we can compare them all for you and quickly help you narrow down the list. We'd love to have your business.

- Jason


Outdoor Legacy - Owner
The Late Night Vision Show - Co-Host
[Linked Image]
Night Vision, Thermal & Accessories
OutdoorLegacyGear.com
(877)350-1818


Re: Thermal 384 vs 640 [Re: Klinker] #9008017 02/19/24 04:47 PM
Joined: Sep 2022
Posts: 450
D
duffas Online Content
Bird Dog
Online Content
Bird Dog
D
Joined: Sep 2022
Posts: 450
Good response Jason, thanks. I just posted images to show there are additional 'effects' to consider. Shots show brightness and contrast set low to prevent night blindness. And the red X obscures the target at base mag, I think I gut shot the hog that nite. Was 2x larger than the hot salt block, partially obscured by tall grass. As to FOV, cut the 2nd pic to the lower left quarter for twice mag.

Re: Thermal 384 vs 640 [Re: Klinker] #9020617 03/17/24 02:37 PM
Joined: Feb 2015
Posts: 458
V
VAFish Offline
Bird Dog
Offline
Bird Dog
V
Joined: Feb 2015
Posts: 458
If you can afford 640 get it, but if your choice is between a 3x 384 and a 1x 640 the 384 ( at a lower price most likely ) would be my choice.


"If your plan is for one year, plant rice.
If your plan is for ten years, plant trees.
If your plan is for one hundred years, educate children."
-- Confucius
Previous Thread
Index
Next Thread

© 2004-2024 OUTDOOR SITES NETWORK all rights reserved USA and Worldwide
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.3