I talked to Jason at Outdoor Legacy Gear. He said to meet my criteria, Thermion XG 50 LRF

https://www.eurooptic.com/Pulsar-Thermion-2-XG50-LRF-Thermal-Riflescope-PL76554.aspx

NETD, mK<40 Lower sensitivity.

I think the NETD / pixel size question is kind of a tradeoff, but the base magnification of 3x vs. 2x makes the XG pick better for your uses. Just my opinion, though. I am no expert on this stuff.

Mil is a requirement for him. Maybe someone can explain to me why it matters in a thermal scope using a ballistics calculator whether it's Mil or MOA.

It doesn't matter to most people.

I've fired about 100,000 rounds using a Mil scope. I've got DOPE memorized.

On your day optics, Mil is easier to use due to wind hold.

5 mph, 3 or 9 o'clock to the shot. 7mm-08

MOA
200 1/2
300 3/4
400 1
500 1 1/4
600 1 1/2
700 1 3/4
800 2

7 mph, add 50% to ^^those values. 10 mph, double ^^those values

Mil
200 .1
300 .2
400 .3
500 .4
600 .5
700 .6
800 .7

The same multiplication happens. That's why I use Mil scopes only. Read the wind, make a decision and get a shot out quick before the animal moves.

It’s the language he speaks. He isn’t interested in another language. As an American, I understand.

Makes perfect sense for you. 95% of my shooting is at night and when the sun goes down in Louisiana the wind most of the time isn't an issue. Where you hunt is a whole new ballgame. You can put in temperature and elevation in the IRAY ballistics app but not wind speed and direction.

I've owned two Pulsar scopes and they were trouble free. Good luck with whichever scope you decide on.

Trying not to get too technical. 'NETD / pixel size question'. Smaller sensor should cool faster and give higher resolution. You can't 'see' anything cooler than the sensor temp. That is why they 'NUC'. Makes a new 'cold' level for the sensor (electronically). You'll see that if you don't NUC and look at same scene for a while. You get a ghost scene. I understand why JG wants Mil Dot - just don't think it makes a difference as he won't be shooting much over 200 with IR for targets legal to nite hunt in Texas. For the oled display, a 640 sensor has to 'fake' another pixel to be the SAME brightness in a 1280 display. So digital mag 'pixelates' what you see. More oled pixels, more pixelated. Worst project I had was BLIP for the Sunspot telescope.

Through years of shooting hand loads, in the day time, and in all weather. If we are staying 600 yards and less, elevation corrections are what they are. Weather it is 20°F or 100°F.

I shot a PRS match in College Station with some Louisianans. And had an absolute blast with them!

They asked me how I was managing this wind. I said "Wind? This is only about 10 mph. This ain't no real wind." They certainly weren't used to even that much. I told them about western Oklahoma and the Texas panhandle. They said it sounds terrible.

You don't read so well do you?

I can see up to 500 yards from my front porch. I can see 4000 yards on my friend's ranch. Coyotes and hogs are legal to shoot 24/7/365

JG, yes I can read. It's just a different game with IR. Good luck.

The "NETD / pixel size question" was a reference to the fact that the XG50 has a 12 micron sensor and a NETD < 40 mK spec vs. the XP50 has the 17 micron sensor with a NETD < 25 mK spec. A bit of a tradeoff between the two, as I see it.

Either one has a sensitivity of less than a degree F. Only effects clarity for our purpose.

They got their < and > mixed up, I think, but the meaning is still fairly clear. A lower NETD number means greater detail via greater sensitivity.

I would think if you threw out the invite

Someone with a XG LRF would come out and shoot with you for the day so that you could be sure that the scope is going to meet your needs

This forum has a lot of thermal shooter who might be willing to make the drive and watch a master shooter work the range . . .

Nice talking to you, glad I could help, I think this was the link to the website you meant to post.....


https://outdoorlegacygear.com/products/pulsar-thermion-2-lrf-xg50-3-24x-thermal-riflescope


Jason

Oops.

LOL!!

Jason at Outdoor Legacy, am I correct in my assessment about the tradeoff between the lower NETD figure (<25 mK) and the 17 micron sensor in the XP50s? I'm looking at it from the standpoint that 25 x 17 = 425 VS. 12 x 40 = 480. Is that a valid way to compare the potential difference in performance between the XP50s and XG50s?

I would prefer to buy from you. If I can get it just a little more than dealer pricing at Euro Optic. I don't have that privilege on your website.

JG, this might be interesting for you. Look at the end where he's shooting steel @ 400+ yds. It's a pretty high end IR scope we can't get here yet.
https://youtu.be/7UlSGYPxvLk

This is very confusing and really not as cut and dried as we'd all like it to be. I'll do my best to see if I can shed any light on it. To be honest, I've never seen that math equation but it's interesting for sure!lol Also a quick side note there is so much confusion around NETD ratings and those specs are not all measured equally from thermal manufacturer to manufacturer. There is sensor level NETD and system level NETD. Expect to see and hear more very interesting information in the coming months on that. Ok back to the question at hand.

There is really so much more to these sensors that good old boys like me can't quite grasp. That's why one thermal manufacturer could have a 640x480 12 micron sensor and another manufacturer can as well but the image qualities can be drastically different. Even taking it a step further, two scope companies can use identical sensors from the same manufacturer but have very different images due to the software they are running. Lots of technical stuff that's over my head!

I don't think these things fit into the tight little boxes that we want them to and I know that frustrates so many people. At the end of the day there is a couple things that stand out to me.

First, base magnification of the scope is the over arching and most important spec that matters for me. As in the XP50 and XG50 example above, the very slight image quality difference really means nothing for my making a recommendation because I would never recommend the XP50 2x to someone just because it might have a 5-8% better image quality in bad conditions, when they actually NEED the 3x base mag XG50 for their hunting needs. We all say that we want the "best image quality" but if that was really all there was to it, there'd only be 2-3 viable scope options at one time on the market. There is just so much more. Choose your magnification needs first, everything else comes second, even the resolution.

Second, it really all comes down to what the scope's image quality ACTUALLY looks like with the naked eye. Not what the specs say, not what the video on youtube looks like, not what it looked like in the gun shop/gun show, or looking down the street or across the parking lot. What does it really look like in a dark field at night looking 300+ yards at animals in both good and bad conditions. That's where the rubber meets the road and where the specs no longer matter.

Now I know the next comment from many people is "yes but I don't have access to every thermal scope to look at side by side." Correct. That's why we've made it our mission to do that for our customers because they can't. Just 2 weeks ago on both a rainy and misty nasty humid night and a good night, we had over $100,000 worth of scopes from all the major manufacturers testing them all out side by side by side. We can tell you how they all truly compare to each other and we just did this as a refresher for our memory while training a newer employee. We hope that the people that call us for this information understand the time, energy, money and effort we put into this to be able to answer those questions over a phone call and in turn choose to buy from us and not from a dealer who can't offer them all that hands-on info. There are some other great dealers out there doing the same thing and we hope they thrive and prosper as well for their hard work and dedication

I know that doesn't really answer your question directly but I hope it explains why it's really hard if not impossible to do so.

Thanks,

Jason

Thank you very much for taking the time to lay this all out.

One reason I asked this question is that I bought a Thermion XG50 (640, 12 micron, NETD < ??? ) a couple of years ago that failed on me and Pulsar said it could not be fixed. They sent in its place a Thermion 2 XP50 Pro, which costs quite a bit more than the discontinued XG50 but has the 17 micron sensor. I was put off by that and talked to a few people about it, and I think I even spoke with you briefly. In the end I had to just take everyone's word that the scope I received back was superior to the one I sent in. Since I have worked in the electronics field for almost 50 years, I kinda naturally try to figure these things out for my own understanding but with your explanation above, I now see that there are just way too many data points and the performance of a thermal optic just can't be calculated---at least not on the consumer end of things. What you say is "it must be seen to be appreciated."

Again thanks for the effort.

What's your top 3 scopes for the money right now say 2.5-3x.

'25 x 17 = 425 VS. 12 x 40 = 480.' NOPE. NETD is like HP ratings in auto ads.
Read this.
https://www.flir.com/discover/cores...ity-of-Thermal-Imaging-Cameras-Modules/. IIRC, FLIR was a combo of TI (MOD) and Hughes after the MK68 IR scanner contract.
As Jason stated, 'what you see is what you get' and my posting of 400+ yds target shooting. To get around the 'marketing' of IR stuff I've watched a lot of live vids on https://www.predatormasters.com/forums/
I gotinterested a few yrs ago, got an ATN scanner to see what it's about. Then went with the Rattler that does what I need. What you need may be different. As for waranty, 5 yrs is probably where we upgrade anyway. Reliability and durability are what we want. Better peformance just costs more.

Your posting is of no interest to me and I am not asking you for any answers.

Just posting stuff for those that might be interested. Whatever.