I'm looking at buying my first PVS-14 and kind of leaning towards the L3 white phosphorus filmless. I've found someone who sells them in the Vyper housing with decent specs, around 2200 fom 0.7 halo 0.3 ebi for $4000. Would it be worth it to get a high spec tube say 2900 fom for $4600? What is the real world advantage from having a higher spec tube? Slightly better low light performance? Would the $600 diff be better spent on elsewhere?
-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
Night Vision Is there too high spec for a tube?
- Thread starter Formosan
- Start date
A lot of advantage.
Higher SNR the better imo. other stuff matters if you plan to use it in rural dark environment vs in urban bright environments. Or if you want to use it mounted to a rifle.
I personally, prefer units that perform best without illum in absolute darkness.
Higher SNR the better imo. other stuff matters if you plan to use it in rural dark environment vs in urban bright environments. Or if you want to use it mounted to a rifle.
I personally, prefer units that perform best without illum in absolute darkness.
I was in a meeting with L3 and one of their key Mil reps told me his new 3600 FOM 31's was too damn bright! He wasn't throwing them away though. Lol
Crazy specs from L3 just keep getting better and I hope to be getting a few of their "ultra tubes" for my clip-on. When 35x is just not enough magnification...!
Crazy specs from L3 just keep getting better and I hope to be getting a few of their "ultra tubes" for my clip-on. When 35x is just not enough magnification...!
L3 makes "super tubes" that remove a lot of the "safeties" that make tubes more durable / less fragile. There's no free lunch, but supposedly you can get those 3600 FOM tubes Vic was talking about from L3 (in quantity orders) if you're willing to have no warranty.
Most of us aren't willing to drop >$10K on something with zero warranty out of the gate.
Most of us aren't willing to drop >$10K on something with zero warranty out of the gate.
2200 from/ .7 halo and .3 ebi are excellent specs. it would be pretty hard for you to tell the difference between that and the "2900" fom setup. I have 2600 fom tubes with low ebi, and halo(thanks TNVC). Some of my buddies have 1700 fom tubes with shitty halo, and ebi. Halo is about the only thing that is noticeable unless its REALLY dark. My tubes stand out when it is close to pitch black. Other than that, it is very hard to tell a difference. Sam Houston from TNVC has some videos on youtube under his company silentsolutions. I would highly recommend watching some of those.
Yeah these are what NSF Jojo over on AR15 refers to as OVERCOOKED.
Kinda like running nitrous oxide to your engine. Yeah it will run like hell, but for how long.
Uncle Sugar's pocketbook can stand for replacements, mine can't.
wonder where that "overcook" line is.
in other words is a 3300 fom overcooked and fragile? 3000? 2700?
is it a sliding scale or does it reach a certain point and suddenly become super fragile?
I don't know where that line is but apparently there is one. All my units are in the 1950 to 2000 FOM range and do me just fine.
Point being, head mounted NV is really for moving around and Thermal is for spotting critters, so if I need a longer distance PID I hit it with a Luna and/or 5x magnifier.
My shooting solutions are either MFAL, Thermal or Red Dot (on same gun) so the price for a SUPER TUBE versus what it can really bring to the table for me, is not really worth it from a cost to benefit ratio. I can throw a IR Beam and signature or go passive with no signature. A particular situation dictates which method I would use.
Point being, head mounted NV is really for moving around and Thermal is for spotting critters, so if I need a longer distance PID I hit it with a Luna and/or 5x magnifier.
My shooting solutions are either MFAL, Thermal or Red Dot (on same gun) so the price for a SUPER TUBE versus what it can really bring to the table for me, is not really worth it from a cost to benefit ratio. I can throw a IR Beam and signature or go passive with no signature. A particular situation dictates which method I would use.
For most consumers, Chasing max FOM is a fool’s errand. Sure, if you can get 3K FOM matching tubes relatively easily, then rock on. I’d rather have a 2500 FOM tube today than the promise of a 3000 FOM tube 6 months from now.
Ok, gotta call this more fake news just like the unfilmed tubes degrade after 500hrs, more fragile etc. I personally just got out of a meeting with L3 and the head of their Mil liaisons who conferred with their lead engineer. along with the ETO head scientist. Another words these guys are the tip of their spear in the technical arena.
First off they laughed pretty loudly with the latest rumors they have also heard out there and NO they are NOT telling me something I wanna hear to drum up sales. Bottom line the tubes or no more cooked than the standard tubes but they did go from 5 micron down to a 4 micron channel plate along with some breakthrough material improvements that allowed the substantial jump from 2500 FOM to well over 3000 FOM.
ALL folks at this round table also unequivocally stated the ultra tubes have a 10,000hr life cycle as well with NO hesitation.
Sure hope this clears up the latest rumors and I understand a few won't believe this, but it's ok. The lead folks at L3 would not arbitrarily tell me untruths. I will not debate the rumors and go back and forth, just stating the facts from some pretty higher-ups at L3.
P.S. Oh and yes they have a L3 warranty...
Last edited:
I love it when you TNVC folk chime in. So much misinformation out there by internet smart guys. The whole overcooking claim seemed like forum fodder from the beginning.
Is there any indication in tube model number or any other identifier on the spec sheet for if you have the 5 micron or the newer 4 micron channel plate?
Only thing im chasing around here is as much knowledge as possible on the subject matter. and you guys are the most reliable source around. Thanks Vic!!
Last edited:
Thank you for the kind words. These tubes are not yet available for the commercial market. Their actual part numbers will differentiate these tubes via the spec sheets.
Are these being produced to meet the “Omni 9” standards I saw? Last I heard the Omni 9 minimums were requests and not an official contract standard.
TBH it's getting old preaching the high spec (high SNR with good overall specs) unfilmed WP gospel on the interwebz. Some people are skeptical and think it's hype or a sales pitch which is 100% understandable. I was the same way until I bought it and used it. Many of the guys who are anti have never owned it or maybe they looked through it once or twice and probably at a range or somewhere else with good ambient light in which case it wouldn't look all that special.
Where you live can make a big difference too such as city glow or dark skies, big open fields or desert, etc. Almost all of the guys I've seen who went from average thin filmed to high spec unfilmed have been amazed at the difference. To be fair there have been a few who didn't feel it was worth it however I find that to be rare or they had bought unfilmed with lower SNR.
You have to weed through the BS on the internet because there are closet sellers whether they are private sellers or actual dealers using anonymous user names and then you have associates of dealers or hardcore loyal followers who will predictably always recommend what their preferred dealer is selling. I'm not bashing anybody. Simply pointing that out for some of the clueless out there.
To the OP, there is no such as thing as too high spec of a tube IMO other than the price goes up big time for really high FOM because vendors can charge a premium. If what you mean is, is there a certain point where high high specs start to not matter? I'd say probably yes for the average new user and that'd likely be around 30 SNR with good overall specs regardless of filmed or unfilmed but it's very subjective to the individual. Most new users will find mediocre gen 3 to be amazing. Tubes are unique and weird sometimes so it's possible to have lower FOM tubes that are amazing performers. Unfortunately almost all of us don't have the luxury to look through a bunch of tubes until we find the one we like best, so that leaves deciding based on specs like FOM, if we have the choice that is. Many vendors don't give you the choice or hand select and you get what you get not knowing what you'll end up with until it's in your hands. People never used to be able to request specs from most places but that has changed and I'd like to think it's because of info like this being put on the internet. Most dealers hate it, lol.
When it comes to what a good unfilmed SNR is, my experience so far is that 33+ combined with good to great overall specs is phenomenal. 3000 FOM unfilmed tubes will be absolutely incredible because they'll certainly be 72 res meaning 41.66 SNR! I've never looked through a tube with that high of a SNR but I can say that my 72 Res & 33.9/34.2 SNR unfilmed tubes with good-to-great overall specs are the best looking & performing tubes I've ever had and I've owned quite a few thin filmed tubes ranging from 22-31 SNR with good to great overall specs. My current filmed tubes are L3 M890AV GP with unknown specs and they are awesome other than they streak on light sources. Luckily I don't have many at my property so I'm GTG, lol. They're close behind the unfilmed but the unfilmed even with Anvis objectives on moonless nights are significantly better to me. The best way I can describe it is it's the difference between resolving an image immediately or very quickly versus needing more time to figure out what it is. Especially in a low light environment. Sure, using extra IR, a COTI, etc. solves that but it still doesn't change that the unfilmed is better when it comes to only using NV. It's up to you to decide or figure out if this is important enough to you to spend more $$ on unfilmed.
Where you live can make a big difference too such as city glow or dark skies, big open fields or desert, etc. Almost all of the guys I've seen who went from average thin filmed to high spec unfilmed have been amazed at the difference. To be fair there have been a few who didn't feel it was worth it however I find that to be rare or they had bought unfilmed with lower SNR.
You have to weed through the BS on the internet because there are closet sellers whether they are private sellers or actual dealers using anonymous user names and then you have associates of dealers or hardcore loyal followers who will predictably always recommend what their preferred dealer is selling. I'm not bashing anybody. Simply pointing that out for some of the clueless out there.
To the OP, there is no such as thing as too high spec of a tube IMO other than the price goes up big time for really high FOM because vendors can charge a premium. If what you mean is, is there a certain point where high high specs start to not matter? I'd say probably yes for the average new user and that'd likely be around 30 SNR with good overall specs regardless of filmed or unfilmed but it's very subjective to the individual. Most new users will find mediocre gen 3 to be amazing. Tubes are unique and weird sometimes so it's possible to have lower FOM tubes that are amazing performers. Unfortunately almost all of us don't have the luxury to look through a bunch of tubes until we find the one we like best, so that leaves deciding based on specs like FOM, if we have the choice that is. Many vendors don't give you the choice or hand select and you get what you get not knowing what you'll end up with until it's in your hands. People never used to be able to request specs from most places but that has changed and I'd like to think it's because of info like this being put on the internet. Most dealers hate it, lol.
When it comes to what a good unfilmed SNR is, my experience so far is that 33+ combined with good to great overall specs is phenomenal. 3000 FOM unfilmed tubes will be absolutely incredible because they'll certainly be 72 res meaning 41.66 SNR! I've never looked through a tube with that high of a SNR but I can say that my 72 Res & 33.9/34.2 SNR unfilmed tubes with good-to-great overall specs are the best looking & performing tubes I've ever had and I've owned quite a few thin filmed tubes ranging from 22-31 SNR with good to great overall specs. My current filmed tubes are L3 M890AV GP with unknown specs and they are awesome other than they streak on light sources. Luckily I don't have many at my property so I'm GTG, lol. They're close behind the unfilmed but the unfilmed even with Anvis objectives on moonless nights are significantly better to me. The best way I can describe it is it's the difference between resolving an image immediately or very quickly versus needing more time to figure out what it is. Especially in a low light environment. Sure, using extra IR, a COTI, etc. solves that but it still doesn't change that the unfilmed is better when it comes to only using NV. It's up to you to decide or figure out if this is important enough to you to spend more $$ on unfilmed.
Personally I find the SNR side of the FOM equation to be far more valuable than the lp/r.
I would rather take a 35snr 64lp tube with a FOM of 2240 than a 30snr 81lp (rare I know) tube with a FOM of 2430.
If you’re going to magnify the image, than sure you’ll enjoy the nicer LP, but to the naked eye I think the SNR equates to more visual performance.
I would rather take a 35snr 64lp tube with a FOM of 2240 than a 30snr 81lp (rare I know) tube with a FOM of 2430.
If you’re going to magnify the image, than sure you’ll enjoy the nicer LP, but to the naked eye I think the SNR equates to more visual performance.
So Vic, you jumped on me for simply replying to what Horta stated and what I reported NSF Jo Jo calling them.
Is Horta reporting fake news? Please shed some light on his statement below. It it true or untrue?
Regarding EOTEC/L3 they are a known liar. DOD busted their ass for lying about the Holographic Sights point of aim shifting they tried to cover up from everyone and continued to lie about. So in my world, you lie to me once, I suspect you will lie to me again.
I doubt the engineers would lie. I was just regurgitating some of the same rumors I've heard circulating. Vic has way deeper Deep Throats than I do, so I'd default to his info being more accurate. I'm just an internet hack.
Well its not so much the Engineers lying, its the upper management that makes them sign off and lie that is the problem. People lost their lives here. Classic example of what can happen and often does.
www.npr.org
But still, EOTEC/L3 has a proven record of lying when it suits them.
30 Years After Explosion, Challenger Engineer Still Blames Himself
Bob Ebeling, an anonymous source for NPR's 1986 report on the disaster, tells NPR that despite warning NASA of troubles before the launch, he believes God "shouldn't have picked me for that job."
www.npr.org
But still, EOTEC/L3 has a proven record of lying when it suits them.
Jumped on you? You once told me "you got the blood pressure of a 12-year-old"...So surprised you think that.
Good thing that EO Tech ship has sailed away, maybe you did not know they were sold off? Nor does that EO Tech statement have ANY merit. They EO Tech had nothing to do with the L3 night vision division, nada. They still don't even though they "sell" some L3 NV in limited kit.
No one from L3 has ever lied to me, nor do they have any reason to.
Yeah the point being you selected me out instead of the original source. That's what I was getting at. Selective targeting of people. Huh ?
Thrust me, I can handle it any way it comes.
Thank you for the detailed response. I think i'm beginning to understand what i am in the market for better.
But then last night i came across PVS-14-51 with 51 degree FOV. How come this isnt the standard, 51 vs 40 is quite a significant larger toilet paper roll.
I haven’t used the 51 degree objective lenses myself to say if this 100% the case but trusted sources say the glass has a very noticeable fish eye effect if you’re not perfectly centered. They have also said they produce excessive lens flaring / lasso effects in certain lighting conditions.
Basically, it’s subpar compared to the standard 40 degree Carson and L3 optics. This same lower quality glass is also made in 40 degree versions also so you need to watch out for that too.
10-4 Brother. Wants vs needs. Scan, position & shoot.
It's the robot I tell ya!I doubt the engineers would lie. I was just regurgitating some of the same rumors I've heard circulating. Vic has way deeper Deep Throats than I do, so I'd default to his info being more accurate. I'm just an internet hack.
Shot Show should be a good show to watch come this January.
It's the robot I tell ya!
Shot Show should be a good show to watch come this January.
So I should wait before buying a filmless green tube?
Its irrelevant to the guys on the ground. The issue was vasty overstated. In fact tests since then have show the eotech to perform among the best in paralax shift of ALL RDS. You don't think the R&D departments in the SMU's, the teams or their enablers would know if there was that severe of a performance issue with the eotech. The same guys who are going from 100 degrees up to snow covered mountaintops in less than an hour?
L3 miss led the gov..... just like every other contractor in the US does. The amount of red tape and BS you have to deal with coming from many of these program offices and contracting officers who don't even know what they hell they are procuring. They paid out the settlement and made the declaration for one reason, MONEY. L3/Harris brings in over 10 BILLION a year from government, the vast majority being the US federal government. Paying out $25M to make a problem go away is loose pocket change, and had more to do with keeping the rest of their business in a good light.
L3 also sold of Eotech to private equity firm so they really could care less about something that is like 1% of their business.
And with ALL that being said, SMU's and Spec ops continued and continue to use the Eotech. I guess its really not that much of an issue after all.
And this is all coming from the POV of a former DOD contracting proffesional and current federal contracting professional. As someone who holds contractors feet to the fire on a daily basis, I have a hard time getting upset about it. Neither should you.
No one lost their lives to a Eotech, other than the thousands of indigs/terrorists getting shot in the face at 2 am while they sleep on their dirt mattress.Well its not so much the Engineers lying, its the upper management that makes them sign off and lie that is the problem. People lost their lives here. Classic example of what can happen and often does.
30 Years After Explosion, Challenger Engineer Still Blames Himself
Bob Ebeling, an anonymous source for NPR's 1986 report on the disaster, tells NPR that despite warning NASA of troubles before the launch, he believes God "shouldn't have picked me for that job."
But still, EOTEC/L3 has a proven record of lying when it suits them.
Just about every complex weapon system the US fields has a L3/harris product. Just about every radio in use, is a Harris Radio. Everything from radars, space systems, weapons, communication , optical systems ect.
And after all that shit that went down, SOCOM still awarded eotech another $25m contract in 2018. L O L>
It’s like a marriage. One spouse caught the other in a lie but it was too much trouble to divorce so wifey had to do things she said she wouldn’t do after college to make hubby happy again.
Yeah, it was more than the DOD on their ass. Read the comments in this lawsuit against them from EOTECH/L3 owners.
EOTech Holographic Weapon Sights Class Action Settlement
If you purchased or own certain EOTech holographic weapons sights, you may be entitled to a refund and voucher from a class action settlement.
topclassactions.com
Yeah, I got 35 years of dealing with the DOD also and know the dance well.
That's a pretty bold statement.
"Beginning around 32 degrees Fahrenheit, the sights' aiming dot became significantly distorted, affecting the accuracy of the sight and worsening as the temperature approached -40 degrees, court documents say. At sub-zero temperatures, the distortion of the aiming dot affected the accuracy of the sights by more than 20 inches for every 100 yards, court documents state."
EOTech Breaks Silence over Defective Sights
LAS VEGAS -- EOTech, the maker of a once popular tactical optic, is trying to rebuild customer confidence that was damaged in the wake of a crippling, civil fraud lawsuit over defective rifle sights.
Last edited:
Got my unfilmed l3 WP in and I'm pretty pleased.
Last edited:
Press release from lawyers and public affairs.........They are as honest and reliable as CNN.That's a pretty bold statement.
"Beginning around 32 degrees Fahrenheit, the sights' aiming dot became significantly distorted, affecting the accuracy of the sight and worsening as the temperature approached -40 degrees, court documents say. At sub-zero temperatures, the distortion of the aiming dot affected the accuracy of the sights by more than 20 inches for every 100 yards, court documents state."
EOTech Breaks Silence over Defective Sights
LAS VEGAS -- EOTech, the maker of a once popular tactical optic, is trying to rebuild customer confidence that was damaged in the wake of a crippling, civil fraud lawsuit over defective rifle sights.www.military.com
So why did Delta, Devgru, 24th, RRC (or whatever they are called now) and other JSOC elements run them on and continue to run them on every continent on the planet, knowing they can basically use anything they want....While Big SOCOM bought a huge $25M order (comes out to about 25-50,000 weapon sights of various types, More than one for every trigger puller) in 2018, 3 years after this debacle?
You are trying to make an issue where there is none.
Dealing with DOD and being a procurement professional who lives it everyday are not the same thing.Yeah, it was more than the DOD on their ass. Read the comments in this lawsuit against them from EOTECH/L3 owners.
EOTech Holographic Weapon Sights Class Action Settlement
If you purchased or own certain EOTech holographic weapons sights, you may be entitled to a refund and voucher from a class action settlement.
Yeah, I got 35 years of dealing with the DOD also and know the dance well.
I drove a vette once, A proffesional race car driver it does not make.
So putting aside the L3Harris/EOTech drama, this increase in channel plate density will bump tube resolution I assume? Does it also have any effect on the other specs, or is it primarily juicing up the FoM calculation by going 80, 90, 100 on the res and maintaining high 30s-40s in S:N?
Last edited:
I have not seen a spec sheet with the 81 lp/mm yet. I have seen a few with high SN ratios, like 37+, not that I have much experience though...
For someone that enjoys looking through nice glass and scopes, will there be a discernable difference between two tubes, one with 68LP but on paper is 64LP versus a true 72LP?
"More than one for every trigger puller." Spares for when the others go down?
"You are trying to make and issue where there is none." Thats funny.
Yeah, I have dealt with many, many Contracting Officers for 35 years. That 3 day Contracting Officer Skewl turns out some real professionals.
One had a Procurement Warrant of just over 1 Billion. They plucked her off a Surfboard in Hawaii. She did not have a clue what she was doing and got the Government in a ton of litigation but Uncle Sugar has deep pockets so no sweat off their balls.
Save all that advice for someone who believes it, I know better.
Trying to stay on topic. A 90lp 40 SnR would do it for 3600FoM. But thats meh on 1x devices. Im more interest in Vic's "too damn bright" indirect quote from the L3 rep. The supposed omni IX specifies min 81k gain. Ive yet to see a tube with gain over 69k. If we're at the cusp of seeing such tubes being released, thats a leap in that criteria.
edit: well guess more on topic, not exactly what the OP's asking but good information none the less
Last edited:
Or just keep the one in my Clip-on where I can experiment up to 35x!
That's where this is all at.
Or just keep the one in my Clip-on where I can experiment up to 35x!
Prooooviiiittttt!
Just snagged a brand new WP 14 with a 69,826 Gain and 2829 FOM for $3K.
To me at least, with bad eyes, totally true.
Have used many, but my current personal monocular is very bright, un-noisy, unflawed, etc. but not esp high res (I forget numbers now). Fine for walking, shooting etc even in quite dark conditions (outside of training I have used IR Illum maybe three times) but /sometimes/ when trying to read a map, or a compass, small things aren't readable as they are with other units.
I work around it with no problem (go dim light under cover, have someone else read the map...), but absolutely to I think the point, worth recognizing what your real needs are and not just buying high-FOM for the sake of it or because "better," without understanding what you are getting for that number.
