Baronvonrort wrote:The best solution for those with $$$ might be a roof rack mounted thermal hooked up to a laptop with mouse for scanning then taking the shot with rifle mounted thermal scope.
https://www.flir.com.au/applications/marine/
Blr243 wrote:Thanks for that. I learned a couple of things. I will keep spotting with my thermal binos but once within 50-75 metres I’m going to experiment with my currently inactive n v scope it’s got a pretty good Illuminator mounted on it. ...if I can clearly identify my target and make nice accurate ethical shots I will pursue it a bit to see how it goes ..... if it gives me any grief I will resort back to my current set up
Blr243 wrote:Beware. Thermal hunting is an addiction that does not stop once the scope has been bought . It will make you hunt more , more expense , more wear and tear on your car , buying more car tyres , more time off work away from family and friends ......something often overlooked is that if u were to hunt with a bunch of mates in summer that don’t have thermal gear , they will be hunting in the heat , morning and arv ....while they sweat away , u can lay back in a chair under a shady tree and drift offf to sleep ....then once the sun is down u will have ten hours of cool to hunt in. And u will shoot most of the pigs then go back to camp to sleep again. Then your mates will wander off into the heat again looking for pigs but they won’t see any because you already shot them all last night. .....I have shot 97 this year and I hope to make it 150 before the year is done .....downside is I’m so broke from all this hunting and not doing much work
xDom wrote:I posted a while back that after a fair bit of home work, I bought a cheapie "Night Tech" Thermal imager. It was always gonna be a toe in the water for me, so far I've been quite impressed. I have been reading more about them since and this is a run down on what I've picked up.
There are quite a few specs that need to be taken into consideration before buying a thermal spotter, without knowing the basics you could easily drop a large amount of dosh on something that's gonna disappoint. These are some of the ones I know about.
Imager Resolution: This the amount of thermal capturing "units", called microbolometers that are contained within the imager sensor. The lowest resolution that's seems to be acceptable is the 320x240. The next up from this is 384x288 ( what my unit has ) and after that is the 640x480. The higher the resolution the better the captured image detail.
Refresh rate: This is the amount of times a second the viewer will display a new image. A higher refresh rate gives a smoother view of the heat sources movements. Really you don't wanna go below 25 HZ as the human eye can then detect the break in images. There are some cheap units that run a 9Hz refresh rate which would give an extremely chunky view of what's happening.
Lens Size: This is the physical size of the germanium lens with in the unit. The larger the lens the further the imager can detect a heat source, there is, however a trade off. The larger the lens the smaller the field of view, also costlier. Generally for spotters, the larger field of view is preferred while on a scope the opposite is true.
Display Resolution and type: This is the details on the actual display that can be seen with the eye. It is referred to in pixel quantities. For example the Pulsar XM38 has a 1024x768 AMOLED display. This is considered to be quite high. Once again the higher the resolution the better the detail of the heat source that is captured by the imager.
Pixel Size: The size of the pixels contained within the sensor. Smaller the better. 17um seems to be the accepted with 12um being a step up on some of the Pulsar Axions.
Detection distance: This figure will be given and it needs to be taken with a grain of salt. How it is determined is by the distance the given object will be detected by one imager pixel. So that figure of say 900m for a man size object would probably be halved to give a useful sort of image. There is the ID distance and the detection distance. The detection distance is the distance that you will see something where the ID is where the object can be ID'd.
These figures all contribute to the quality of the viewer. They need to be considered in conjuction with one another. There are certain models that have a lower image sensor resolution yet compensate for it by higher display resolution and smaller pixel size. If you take a look at the monocular that's shown on this page:
https://www.nighthunter.com.au/thermal- ... hd-25-lite
This is the model I went for. It's a common body shape that's used in a lot of different viewers that are manufactured under different brand names eg, Night Tech, Pearl, Guide, Stag, IMax and Iray being a few of them. If you want to go for a known and respected brand eg Pulsar, you wont get the same level of specs for a particular price point than if you go for one of the, can I say " knock off ", brands that I just listed.
On the other hand there are some cheap units that come from respected brands that offer extremely low level specs ( to the point of almost being useless). The Leupold Tracker is probably the best example. If you want get into thermal at entry price point then I feel you're much better going for one of the "knock off" brands.
If you don't mind spending big then by all means go for the premium brands. I know my next purchase will be a Pulsar ( XQ38f ) a way down the track though.
After all this, I'll say that my budget handheld thermal is awesome, it makes hunting so much more enjoyable and I use probably 3 times a week.
Blr243 wrote:I do mostly walking with my thermal gear but when I’m temporarily mobile because of bigger distances I have to cover I greatly favour my quad rather than my hilux. ( the cold tortures me in winter but at least I don’t have a windscreen in the way. ... I tried a thermal bino on top of my dog cage that sits at the back of my quad .. it sent a wifi signal to my iPad that I had mounted up front so I could see it at all times ... but I found that as I was driving slow and quiet with not even my red head lights on, it was easier to simply hold the binos in my left hand and scan like that, stopping for a better and more stable look when required. Then when game is identified I know I can rely on the silent approach on foot. I would dismount with binos and rifle and walk into the wind towards my target/s I am so incredibly lucky that this 8-10 sq kilometres of farming land is s o incredibly flat with not a single ditch or watercourse to run into. If it were not for the occasional tree or pile of logs I could drive it in the dark safely blindfolded. The flatness also suits my bipod / prone shooting position .. there’s never even a slight mound of earth in the way .....I just need to win lotto so I can hunt there for a week every month
Stix wrote:Hey-ya Brinny...
Nice to hear you've got that Pulsar stuff sorted...
Im as envious of your set-up & opportunities as i am keen to see some results...
Nice stock on the rig--plain, but nice...many Sako's have plain & boring bit of walnut, but for a plain one, that does look good...
(I still havent fired mine...not one shot... ).
I have to say & ask...it looks 'ding' free...how do you achieve that with a night time rig...?...I realise using thermal you'd often avoid the situation of having to rush in getting the rifle out the window, but still id expect the odd knock here & there, & that looks as if its never been bruised...
TassieTiger wrote::allegedly:xDom wrote:I posted a while back that after a fair bit of home work, I bought a cheapie "Night Tech" Thermal imager. It was always gonna be a toe in the water for me, so far I've been quite impressed. I have been reading more about them since and this is a run down on what I've picked up.
There are quite a few specs that need to be taken into consideration before buying a thermal spotter, without knowing the basics you could easily drop a large amount of dosh on something that's gonna disappoint. These are some of the ones I know about.
Imager Resolution: This the amount of thermal capturing "units", called microbolometers that are contained within the imager sensor. The lowest resolution that's seems to be acceptable is the 320x240. The next up from this is 384x288 ( what my unit has ) and after that is the 640x480. The higher the resolution the better the captured image detail.
Refresh rate: This is the amount of times a second the viewer will display a new image. A higher refresh rate gives a smoother view of the heat sources movements. Really you don't wanna go below 25 HZ as the human eye can then detect the break in images. There are some cheap units that run a 9Hz refresh rate which would give an extremely chunky view of what's happening.
Lens Size: This is the physical size of the germanium lens with in the unit. The larger the lens the further the imager can detect a heat source, there is, however a trade off. The larger the lens the smaller the field of view, also costlier. Generally for spotters, the larger field of view is preferred while on a scope the opposite is true.
Display Resolution and type: This is the details on the actual display that can be seen with the eye. It is referred to in pixel quantities. For example the Pulsar XM38 has a 1024x768 AMOLED display. This is considered to be quite high. Once again the higher the resolution the better the detail of the heat source that is captured by the imager.
Pixel Size: The size of the pixels contained within the sensor. Smaller the better. 17um seems to be the accepted with 12um being a step up on some of the Pulsar Axions.
Detection distance: This figure will be given and it needs to be taken with a grain of salt. How it is determined is by the distance the given object will be detected by one imager pixel. So that figure of say 900m for a man size object would probably be halved to give a useful sort of image. There is the ID distance and the detection distance. The detection distance is the distance that you will see something where the ID is where the object can be ID'd.
These figures all contribute to the quality of the viewer. They need to be considered in conjuction with one another. There are certain models that have a lower image sensor resolution yet compensate for it by higher display resolution and smaller pixel size. If you take a look at the monocular that's shown on this page:
https://www.nighthunter.com.au/thermal- ... hd-25-lite
This is the model I went for. It's a common body shape that's used in a lot of different viewers that are manufactured under different brand names eg, Night Tech, Pearl, Guide, Stag, IMax and Iray being a few of them. If you want to go for a known and respected brand eg Pulsar, you wont get the same level of specs for a particular price point than if you go for one of the, can I say " knock off ", brands that I just listed.
On the other hand there are some cheap units that come from respected brands that offer extremely low level specs ( to the point of almost being useless). The Leupold Tracker is probably the best example. If you want get into thermal at entry price point then I feel you're much better going for one of the "knock off" brands.
If you don't mind spending big then by all means go for the premium brands. I know my next purchase will be a Pulsar ( XQ38f ) a way down the track though.
After all this, I'll say that my budget handheld thermal is awesome, it makes hunting so much more enjoyable and I use probably 3 times a week.
Nice write up - I’m not in the market not want for a thermal at this point in time, but I’ve learned a lot from your post. Cheers.