Night Vision hunting Thread

[RMW]

I’d go with the PTS 536. Everything I’ve read on the 736 is that it’s a little to much zoom and limited FOV

So are you saying the 536 is better than the pulsar xd50? I’ve got a pulsar xq38 trail and wanting a clearer picture.

[kkp005]

I’ve never looked through a 536. I think it really depends on where your going to be hunting. I personally wouldn’t want the zoom of the 536 for the type of hog hunting I do....now if I mainly hunted coyotes then the 536 / 736 would be a viable option. All the videos I’ve seen on the 536 & 736 have been remarkably crisp...

[kkp005]

I’d hit up Jason from Outdoor legacy on here. He’s got experience with just about all of them. He will shoot you straight and give honest feedback on what would be best for your application

[Russ81]

So are you saying the 536 is better than the pulsar xd50? I’ve got a pulsar xq38 trail and wanting a clearer picture.

For longer shots the 536 is better. If you want clearer picture for hogs then the trail XP38 has better resolution then the XQ


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Outdoor Legacy]

Only looked thru one “lower end” thermal
But my question is for old guys that need reading glasses.
Does the thermal picture require reading glasses if you need them to read like I do.
I had difficulty making sure I was seeing hogs not deer or cows.
By the way, one if the most exciting hunts of my life.

Thanks

BP

BP,

I don't wear glasses so I can't speak for certain but you should be able to use the rear eyepiece focus and ensure the display screen is focused to your eye. At that point, using the front objective lens focus, you should be able see and ID as well as someone without glasses. On the other hand, if you can't get the display screen focused to your eye, then yes you'd probably need to wear your glasses and then focus it in. But at the end of the day, glasses or no glasses you've got to get the display focused for your needs.

Also, depending on what thermal you used, it can be harder or easier to get a positive ID on animals. It also depends on the yardage. Some thermal optics might only be good for ID'ing out to 200-225 yards, while others might be good at 300+ yards. All good thermals can detect the animals at VERY long ranges but that doesn't mean you can tell if it's a cow or a hog.

Hope that helps!

Jason

[Outdoor Legacy]

Going to purshase another thermal. For 75-200 yd shots what would be best? Pulsar xd 50 or flir Pts 736

Out of curiosity, what scope do you have now? It might help with some comparisons.

I've used all these scopes in the field so I'll chime in my 2 cents and maybe it will help a little. The XD50 was discontinued a couple years ago but it was replaced with the upgraded Apex XQ50 and that might be what you're talking about. Or are you talking about the Pulsar Trail XQ50? If you're looking at an older XD50, I would hold off because the quality of the XQ50 for the money is hard to beat. No matter which XQ38 you're looking at the image quality and magnification is the same, so I'm going to roll with it.

I would definitely stay away from the PTS736 for any shots under 150 yards. It's 6x magnification and it is great for LONG range but terrible for shorter range stuff. The 736 has a 16ft horizontal field of view at 100 yards. Yes that's right, 16 ft. for 200+ yard stuff the 736 is THE way to go but it's just way too much magnification for the shorter range stuff.

The PTS536 is a much better option but even it isn't great at the sub 100 yard shots. The FOV on it is 24ft at 100 yards. The image quality on both the 536 and the 736 are the best in any of the standard (sub 640) resolution scopes. The reason is the large 50mm and 75mm objective lens's on those scopes and the new 12 micron Boson core. With that said, I still wouldn't make this decision based on image quality, I'd make it on magnification.

The XQ50 is 2.8x and it's going to be excellent at 75-175 yards and 200 yards is doable, especially with Pulsar's picture in picture function. The FOV at 11o yards is 56ft. That's a huge difference compared to the 536. You just can't discount FOV for night hunting, especially at sub 150 yard ranges. The image quality is great on the XQ50 but it's slightly less than the 536 but again, I'd make this decision based on the magnification and FOV you need.


I think the 536 and XQ50 are you two best bets for the yardages you are looking at and they are the same price.

If you're interested, I've got them all in stock (Trail XQ50, Apex XQ50, PTS536, PTS736 and more) and have some free accessories that I throw in with all of them.

Feel free to ask any questions.

Jason

[Big pig]

Thanks, Jason
Still the most exciting hunt I have had in a long time.

BP

[RMW]

Out of curiosity, what scope do you have now? It might help with some comparisons.

I've used all these scopes in the field so I'll chime in my 2 cents and maybe it will help a little. The XD50 was discontinued a couple years ago but it was replaced with the upgraded Apex XQ50 and that might be what you're talking about. Or are you talking about the Pulsar Trail XQ50? If you're looking at an older XD50, I would hold off because the quality of the XQ50 for the money is hard to beat. No matter which XQ38 you're looking at the image quality and magnification is the same, so I'm going to roll with it.

I would definitely stay away from the PTS736 for any shots under 150 yards. It's 6x magnification and it is great for LONG range but terrible for shorter range stuff. The 736 has a 16ft horizontal field of view at 100 yards. Yes that's right, 16 ft. for 200+ yard stuff the 736 is THE way to go but it's just way too much magnification for the shorter range stuff.

The PTS536 is a much better option but even it isn't great at the sub 100 yard shots. The FOV on it is 24ft at 100 yards. The image quality on both the 536 and the 736 are the best in any of the standard (sub 640) resolution scopes. The reason is the large 50mm and 75mm objective lens's on those scopes and the new 12 micron Boson core. With that said, I still wouldn't make this decision based on image quality, I'd make it on magnification.

The XQ50 is 2.8x and it's going to be excellent at 75-175 yards and 200 yards is doable, especially with Pulsar's picture in picture function. The FOV at 11o yards is 56ft. That's a huge difference compared to the 536. You just can't discount FOV for night hunting, especially at sub 150 yard ranges. The image quality is great on the XQ50 but it's slightly less than the 536 but again, I'd make this decision based on the magnification and FOV you need.


I think the 536 and XQ50 are you two best bets for the yardages you are looking at and they are the same price.

If you're interested, I've got them all in stock (Trail XQ50, Apex XQ50, PTS536, PTS736 and more) and have some free accessories that I throw in with all of them.

Feel free to ask any questions.

Jason

Sorry meant to say the pulsar trail xp50 vs the flir pts 736. I have the pulsar trail xq38 now but looking to upgrade. Most of my hunting has been on our turf farms where pigs have been doing lots of damage. A lot of the fields are 2500ft in length by 1-2 miles wide so it’s pretty open and hard to sneak up on. I have watched a ton of yalls YouTube videos and love the insight that you and Hans give. I will be buying from you just want to make the right decision. Thanks!

[RMW]

.

[RMW]

.

[RMW]

Ttt

[Outdoor Legacy]

GOOD GRIEF that's some major damage!! Dang man that's terrible.

Ok so back to the drawing board.... If you own the XQ38, then you absolutely don't want to go to the XP50, it's only a 1.6x and you're wanting to shoot/see further, so that's really a step in the wrong direction. While it is a 640x480 resolution, you'll be all the way down to 320x240 as soon as you double the magnification up to 3.2x using the digital zoom. I love my XP50 but it is definitely not a long range optic.

The XQ50 is a logical choice, but honestly, if you already own the XQ38, you'll be disappointed at the gains you receive with the XQ50. While the 2.8x is more than the XQ38's 2.2x it's just not a big enough bump to justify you buying a whole new scope. I really think you'll need to jump way up in magnification and go with the PTS536 to see real benefits.

If you didn't already own the XQ38 I might look at this differently but let me put it like this. If I handed you an XQ50 tonight and you looked through it 400 yards across a field, I'd be shocked if you could tell me if it's a XQ38 or XQ50 without having the other one to compare it to. Does that make sense? To really get some gain and help in reaching out and touching those hogs you're fighting on those big fields I think the PTS536 is the answer. It's not going to be great at the sub 100 yard shots but it's going to be awesome for everything further than that.

Here is the good news.....tomorrow morning Hans and I will be releasing this week's The Late Night Vision Show podcast and we compare the XQ50 and PTS536 side by side. I'll post the link tomorrow.

Jason

[RMW]

GOOD GRIEF that's some major damage!! Dang man that's terrible.

Ok so back to the drawing board.... If you own the XQ38, then you absolutely don't want to go to the XP50, it's only a 1.6x and you're wanting to shoot/see further, so that's really a step in the wrong direction. While it is a 640x480 resolution, you'll be all the way down to 320x240 as soon as you double the magnification up to 3.2x using the digital zoom. I love my XP50 but it is definitely not a long range optic.

The XQ50 is a logical choice, but honestly, if you already own the XQ38, you'll be disappointed at the gains you receive with the XQ50. While the 2.8x is more than the XQ38's 2.2x it's just not a big enough bump to justify you buying a whole new scope. I really think you'll need to jump way up in magnification and go with the PTS536 to see real benefits.

If you didn't already own the XQ38 I might look at this differently but let me put it like this. If I handed you an XQ50 tonight and you looked through it 400 yards across a field, I'd be shocked if you could tell me if it's a XQ38 or XQ50 without having the other one to compare it to. Does that make sense? To really get some gain and help in reaching out and touching those hogs you're fighting on those big fields I think the PTS536 is the answer. It's not going to be great at the sub 100 yard shots but it's going to be awesome for everything further than that.

Here is the good news.....tomorrow morning Hans and I will be releasing this week's The Late Night Vision Show podcast and we compare the XQ50 and PTS536 side by side. I'll post the link tomorrow.

Jason

Awesome I will be tuned in! Another question I have is about the reliability and customer service of Flir, my Pulsar has been bulletproof not so sure about the Flir products?

[Russ81]

@RMW why are they hard to sneak up on in the sod fields? I’m in the same boat with hay meadows and pastures and with a XQ50 I can spot them far enough out to hop off the buggy and get up close to them.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[RMW]

@RMW why are they hard to sneak up on in the sod fields? I’m in the same boat with hay meadows and pastures and with a XQ50 I can spot them far enough out to hop off the buggy and get up close to them.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I use to sneak up on them with no problem, but now they have been educated. If they see lights from my truck or ranger coming down the main road they move out quickly, I think they can hear me also coming down the gravel road because I’ve tried turning off my lights. Now I haul *** towards them in my truck and shoot out my window. I’ve tried waiting on them before dark but you might sit 3-5 hours before they come out. I like to go every night and make my rounds and kill a few.