Night Vision L3 Unfilmed vs Photonis Echo

[GBMaryland]

Had an opportunity to do a little playing around tonight...

The room in question is actually nearly pitch black to the human eye. There is a blind in the next room and very faint light coming off the white tile.

L3 Unfilmed 2100FOM:

Photonis Echo 2300FOM:

The L3 is better. Not sure it’s $1000 better.

The Echo is definitely darker than the L3. However the Echo has a 35:1 SN and 68lp/mm resolution.

If this had been an Intens tube with a 35:1 SN it would have been indistinguishable. Of course good luck finding one of those…

Seems like a cost effective alternative...

you could get a 35 to 1 L3 tube, but that’s gonna be like $1500 more... And the performance gain would only be somewhat nice not unbelievable

(Thank you Surgeon Shooter!)

 

[NateSavannah]

awesome pics.

 

[LibertyArms]

I feel the L3has an edge in near dark/ no light conditions. The photonis is a little better in brighter areas / suburbs. The photonis is really tough to beat for the money in an situation. Add some illumination and all good.

 

[Lowdown3]

And since it's 2020- don't forget availability issues. Photonis Echo WP units are a lot more available currently than L3 or Elbit systems tube units.

The Echos are a great value for the price- usually cleaner and performing slightly better than the lower spec commercial Elbit tubes.

 

[WhereNow&How]

I think GB Maryland kinda proved a point with his above photos. Yes L3 high spec filmless tubes might see somewhat better in really dark environments and you pay a premium for that slight increase in really dark environments.

But the $64 dollar question is: "is that seeing better" good enough to ever make real decisions when it counts. Probably not, so you gonna have to use an illuminator anyways. Then the Photonis will likely give a better image because of its high light resolution usually being much better than the L3 filmless.

When its truly dark enough for the L3 to see better, it is usually illuminator time for real decisions is my take on the situation. YMMV.

 

[WhereNow&How]

For me, NV is for moving around at night so it does not have to be the best of the best. Thermal, (be it a COTI or helmet mounted Thermal) is for detection and moving around at night, and the Illuminator and NV is for positive ID. YMMV

 

[TNVC_Will]

It ultimately depends on how important it is to you to have every edge/advantage to see in the dark and how important it is to have the clearest/sharpest image possible. And of course what you're willing to pay for it.

These two pics show some of the differences pretty good. Viewing them on a larger screen you can see much more detail with the filmless in the dresser drawers, door knob outline, and bathroom vanity/sink. And that's with 2100 FOM (either 32.8 SNR or 29.17 depending on 64 or 72). A higher SNR will be even better. The Echos work good but they are darker than gen 3 (thin filmed or filmless) which I did not care for personally.

In my experience, the difference can be enough to be able to distinguish/not distinguish if something is a tree/bush/rock or an animal/person/etc. I'm not anti-IR by any means since I'm not fighting bad guys with NV but it's good practice to only use it when you have to and not to rely on it IMO. I prefer using IR as little as possible and I use far less IR with high spec filmless compared to gen 2 Echo or thin filmed gen 3.

If someone doesn't mind using a lot of extra IR, it's worth exploring saving $$ and going with the Sionyx. They work pretty awesome with a lot of IR from what I've seen and it's a cheaper way to get your feet wet in the hobby.

If the Sionyx was available when I first got into NV, I would have bought it instead of the $400 or so I wasted on a gen 1 5x Night Owl, lol.

 

[WhereNow&How]

It ultimately depends on how important it is to you to have every edge/advantage to see in the dark and how important it is to have the clearest/sharpest image possible. And of course what you're willing to pay for it.

These two pics show some of the differences pretty good. Viewing them on a larger screen you can see much more detail with the filmless in the dresser drawers, door knob outline, and bathroom vanity/sink. And that's with 2100 FOM (either 32.8 SNR or 29.17 depending on 64 or 72). A higher SNR will be even better. The Echos work good but they are darker than gen 3 (thin filmed or filmless) which I did not care for personally.

In my experience, the difference can be enough to be able to distinguish/not distinguish if something is a tree/bush/rock or an animal/person/etc. I'm not anti-IR by any means since I'm not fighting bad guys with NV but it's good practice to only use it when you have to and not to rely on it IMO. I prefer using IR as little as possible and I use far less IR with high spec filmless compared to gen 2 Echo or thin filmed gen 3.

If someone doesn't mind using a lot of extra IR, it's worth exploring saving $$ and going with the Sionyx. They work pretty awesome with a lot of IR from what I've seen and it's a cheaper way to get your feet wet in the hobby.

If the Sionyx was available when I first got into NV, I would have bought it instead of the $400 or so I wasted on a gen 1 5x Night Owl, lol.

Biggest edge in the dark to see live critters be it 4 or 2 legged is Thermal hands down. The baddest L3 Super Tube in existence will only see/detect on its best night, less than 10% of what a lowly Breach Thermal will see/detect.

So you can have zero IR emissions at all and you are easily detected via Thermal. The only reason not to emit IR is for human detection. So while in that context, what good does the Super Tube (and not emitting IR) really do you, nothing if Thermal is present.

Next phase is positive ID and when its really dark IR is the only thing that will give you positive ID in really dark conditions. So L3 Super Tubes really don't give you much of any advantage realistically if Thermal is present.

Don't get me wrong, good tube performance is nice up to a threshold, past that, you really are not gaining much other than bragging rights via Data Sheet.

A guy with a used $2,000 Gen 3 Omni 7 tube and a $2,000 Breach is far ahead of a guy with a $20,000 dollar set of Super Tubes (FOM 3500-4000) in a PVS 31 housing IMHO. YMMV.

 

[GBMaryland]

Top echo bottom L3 unfilmed

 

[GBMaryland]

you need to keep in mind that the echo is a 35 to 1 signal to noise ratio tube, with all of the specifics under one (ebi, halo, decent luminous game)

Only the intens or “milspec” 4G is going to have high light mitigation, I believe...

 

[GBMaryland]

These two pics show some of the differences pretty good. Viewing them on a larger screen you can see much more detail with the filmless in the dresser drawers, door knob outline, and bathroom vanity/sink. And that's with 2100 FOM (either 32.8 SNR or 29.17 depending on 64 or 72). A higher SNR will be even better. The Echos work good but they are darker than gen 3 (thin filmed or filmless) which I did not care for personally.

Exactly correct, And the L3 is a 29.8 some thing signal to noise.

The INTENS actually does a pretty good job compared to the echo showing you the details on the dresser.

However it’s pretty clear that it’s a dresser and the echo shows that very well.

However, once again the echo is definitely darker and has a fairly significantly higher signal to noise ratio if apples to apples were being compared. Unfortunately every single manufacture of tubes uses their own definition of signal to noise as opposed to using dB for example...

still the echo does a pretty good job when you compare the pictures I just posted. But that’s not a dark dark environment....

 

[WhereNow&How]

Interesting about the high light mitigation. In the above photos, it appears to be a fair bit of ambient light and the Echo image looks much sharper and cleaner than the L3.

Especially when you look at the leaves of the trees furthest out. The Echo image shows a much cleaner defined leaf image than the L3 unfilmed.

 

[GBMaryland]

Both of the tubes are at their maximum gain....

part of the deal there is at the L3 is noticeably brighter.

Also the camera is actually doing a one second exposure for each of the tubes so we can see just how good they actually look to the human eye.

Let me post the instant pictures.

 

[GBMaryland]

Normal exposure as opposed to long exposure...

 

[TNVC_Will]

Biggest edge in the dark to see live critters be it 4 or 2 legged is Thermal hands down. The baddest L3 Super Tube in existence will only see/detect on its best night, less than 10% of what a lowly Breach Thermal will see/detect.

So you can have zero IR emissions at all and you are easily detected via Thermal. The only reason not to emit IR is for human detection. So while in that context, what good does the Super Tube (and not emitting IR) really do you, nothing if Thermal is present.

Next phase is positive ID and when its really dark IR is the only thing that will give you positive ID in really dark conditions. So L3 Super Tubes really don't give you much of any advantage realistically if Thermal is present.

Don't get me wrong, good tube performance is nice up to a threshold, past that, you really are not gaining much other than bragging rights via Data Sheet.

A guy with a used $2,000 Gen 3 Omni 7 tube and a $2,000 Breach is far ahead of a guy with a $20,000 dollar set of Super Tubes (FOM 3500-4000) in a PVS 31 housing IMHO. YMMV.

I'm fully in agreement, thermal beats NV no matter how great the tubes are for detection (ID'ing some animals too) and for many people thin filmed tube or Echo is more than adequate. I was just pointing out that it's better is all and it's not all about bragging rights.

I don't get nothing from L3 or anyone else saying this, I just like to share, because I used to be in the camp of it's not worth it because it costs too much and doesn't last as long compared to thin filmed,m etc. That was based on what I had been told (almost exclusively by thin filmed guys), saw online, etc. and I never used it before. After I decided to go go for it and bought high spec filmless WP I was seriously pissed that I didn't do it sooner. Keep in mind that I nerd out on NV whereas some guys don't care if it's thin filmed/filmless/ WP/GP/etc. as long as they can see it the dark. This isn't the best example because the differences in performance are much greater but it's like 320 vs 640 for short range. They have the same capabilities in regards to practical use although one is better than the other.

Everybody's needs and wants are unique to them and a lot of this is subjective. Hell, there are guys who prefer a PVS-7 over true binos, lol. I've had guys ask me advice on what to get and I recommended saving money on thin filmed or Echo based on the info they provided. Then later on they decided to go filmless and came back to me saying they wish they did that from the start. I've had it go the other way also. I don't sell gear but I can only imagine the level of frustration that is possible when selling gear, lol.

 

[Lowdown3]

Great comparison pics, thank you! When you factor in the price difference you can understand why the Photonis are so popular.

 

[TNVC_Will]

Exactly correct, And the L3 is a 29.8 some thing signal to noise.

The INTENS actually does a pretty good job compared to the echo showing you the details on the dresser.

However it’s pretty clear that it’s a dresser and the echo shows that very well.

However, once again the echo is definitely darker and has a fairly significantly higher signal to noise ratio if apples to apples were being compared. Unfortunately every single manufacture of tubes uses their own definition of signal to noise as opposed to using dB for example...

still the echo does a pretty good job when you compare the pictures I just posted. But that’s not a dark dark environment....

I'd love to get my hands on an Intens one day to check it out. It's the details on the dresser I was using as an example similar to looking at objects against a mixed vegetation outdoor environment in low light. It's the ability to distinguish the small details against each other that stands out.

I like your backyard picture comparisons but that is a fairly well lit environment.

 

[GBMaryland]

I like your backyard picture comparisons but that is a fairly well lit environment.

Standing behind me is another house that had a single 50 white floodlight pointing in the opposite direction.

The LED lights on the porch directly in front of me that both tubes pick up are literally barely visible to the naked eye.

about 300 yards down there was a 30 W bulb on that deck which is what was lighting up the woods back there for these two tubes.

so while yes there is light, it really isn’t that bright... it’s more so a testament to how good these two tubes are.


in the past I had two Intens tubes...

 

[GBMaryland]

Intens 2300 and 2700 FOM, the later has the blems... normal exposure... gain at 2/3s...

 

[GBMaryland]

L3 Unfilmed M890AVS

Elbit 30SN

Photonis XR5

ICT Thin-filmed EVO (circa 2016)

 

[TNVC_Will]

Nice pics. That M890A really shows how important SNR is whether filmless or not.

 

[GBMaryland]

Daytime

 

[GBMaryland]

does a lot better with 155 mm objective, M890AVS:

but doesn’t compare to a modern intensifier:

 

[TNVC_Will]

Is that an Infinity?

 

[GBMaryland]

Nope...

same tubes you saw from the 14 but in a Franken rig...

 

[GBMaryland]

 

[JonLSU]

I prefer videos than still photos. I’m sure most have seen this one.

Video comparison

 

[GBMaryland]

We would be more than happy to have you compare 10 or so tubes and post videos for us!

 

[JonLSU]

I’d be glad to. You want my address to send the tubes to

photos are great, but you can see in videos how the tubes come “alive” per say and you can get a true comparison

 

[GBMaryland]

So a 35SN tube arrived today, with a decent luminous gain...and all of the specs you’d expect from L3.

it is not a true Photonis killer! It clear the Echos are darker, but they are damn clean you get one with a really decent SN and higher LP/mm.

Oh, and without a doubt the echo also has the diffraction gradient material...

 

[GBMaryland]

 

[GBMaryland]

(Photonis)

 

[MarinePMI]

Can't see crap in the sky at night here, this time of year. That marine layer rolls in like clockwork.

 

[GBMaryland]

In that case I would have to recommend a small rocket with a Photonis intensifier on top of it.... small video trasmitter...

Basically your own regional space program!

SurgeonShoot can help with that... heh

 

[GBMaryland]

Additional L3 unfilmed 35:1 astronomy tube from UNV:

(Computar IR enhanced Lens, Mod3B C-m

Naked Eye:

 

[GBMaryland]

Normal PVS type lens:

 

[LibertyArms]

Good pics above. It is tough to take them with a phone looking through them and yours look better. Back of fence line is about 350 yrds and 650 to the light In the background.

L3 unfilmed,photonis , older gen 3 green

 

[GBMaryland]

Tester images of two lens on ultra low...

trying to find an Intens to put in a Mod3 bravo for comparison

It’s funny because both of these are long exposure images and the computar Ir lens seems to cause that blue corrective look

 

[GBMaryland]

Took these last night with another hide remember playing around with the high spec photonis echo and a couple of L3 unfilm tubes:

(They are all long exposures but we found with the L3 they stay dark and the photonis got bluer... it seems that the brightness of the L3 tubes had a tendency to not require brightness correction with the camera. The photonis Echo is just not bright enough to prevent that. How are they both took some pretty great pictures.)

 

[GBMaryland]

Good pics above. It is tough to take them with a phone looking through them and yours look better. Back of fence line is about 350 yrds and 650 to the light In the background.

L3 unfilmed,photonis , older gen 3 green

I’m beginning to want an L3 unfilmed green phosphor tube with the WP specs..

I like the WP, but my old eyes like the green better.

I can ever get my hands on a really good Intens tube again, I’ll probably go that direction because the brightness is there and the color is just slightly different from L3.

 

[SkyScrapin]

What’s the deal with the computer Lr lens? Have not heard of that before

 

[GBMaryland]

Computar IR lens... 400-1000nm light wavelength lens.

A guy from cloudy nights showed everybody a $1500 lens that he was putting on his night vision devices. What was especially interesting was that when he put it on the tester it was surprisingly clean compared to the standard PVS-14 lens.

I wanted to see if a $300 Japanese version of the same thing would do a better job, and it seems to do a little bit of a better job.

Problem is that it’s not the same focal length so there’s a slight bit of magnification. But even my really old but super clean unfilmed L3 Commercial aviation tube looks a lot better with that lens

 

[Twistid]

Hmm this thread is making me question my TNVC milspec fallout pvs14 order. The Echo looks great and is available right now in a PVS for $2800... Do you happen to have any comparison pics with the elbit milspec fallout tubes?

 

[GBMaryland]

Keep in mind that that is a 36:1 Echo tube with generally high specs.

Compared to the Elbit tubes, this tube is gonna be cleaner... at least compared to most of the Elbit tubes.

We’ve been see huge signal to noise on the Elbit tubes, but also pretty high EBI and halo. Which is a bit of a deal killer...

L3 is the master of keeping those low, and the Photonis stuff tends to be excellent as well.

Elbit has some great tubes, BUT there is a certain amount of rolling the dice with them due to the high EBIs.

 

[thorn653]

I just got one on order from JRH. Talked to Robert today to confirm order.
I'm hoping for decent specs on the Echo tube. My first NV device, super excited to get it.
This thread is great!
It gives me confidence I made the right choice.

 

[WhereNow&How]

I just got one on order from JRH. Talked to Robert today to confirm order.
I'm hoping for decent specs on the Echo tube. My first NV device, super excited to get it.
This thread is great!
It gives me confidence I made the right choice.

Robert is good people, solid products and excellent service.

 

[GBMaryland]

Just make sure that the echo tube you get has a nice high signal to noise ratio…

 

[matman1]

Just make sure that the echo tube you get has a nice high signal to noise ratio…

Do you have a comparison between your super high spec intens tube and filmless/thin filmed in a truely low light condition like starlight with little or no ambient light/light pollution? Also what's the gain on your intens tube?

As I think I've finally found a place with GP intens tubes in stock.

 

[GBMaryland]

Oh yeah!?

The echoes probably don’t have the kind of luminous gain that the intense tubes have, nor do they have the light mitigating power supply as far as I can tell.

once again though, do you want to make sure that I NTENS tube has at least a 30 to 1 singles noise ratio, and a higher than 72 line pair per millimeter set a resolution. By definition it will have a good EBI and a low halo…

 

[matman1]

Good pics above. It is tough to take them with a phone looking through them and yours look better. Back of fence line is about 350 yrds and 650 to the light In the background.

L3 unfilmed,photonis , older gen 3 green

Was the filmless tube not properly focused or something? As it looks allot less sharp than the photonis tube