Night Vision NVision vs Trijicon

[WHBD]

I recently sold my previous thermal and was planning on running a Trij MK3 60 or V1 Reap 35. I have used both before many times. The Halo LR had my attention as well, but I have had trouble finding direct comparisons between those and the LR. Does anyone have any advice? It will primarily be used for East Coast predators.
I understand the FOV/base magnification balancing act. Really, i feel like the Reap 35 is not enough mag and the MK3 60 has too narrow a FOV.
Turrets, joystick or buttons are also a wash. I can run any of them.

TY

 

[Night Assassin]

From my understanding the Halos are 1 MOA and the REAP has .02 adjustments.
The housing is Composite on the Halo vs Aluminum on the Reap.
Definitely following as I’m in the same position as you .

 

[wigwamitus]

Here are the "on paper" comparisons I've done in previous posts ...

So the trijicon "lens sizes" are focal length. So assuming the halo "lens sizes" are also focal length (most of the thermal lens size we see are focal lenth) ... we see the halo 50mm list price matches up with the mk3 35mm price ... and half way between the price for the reap 20mm and the reap 35mms.

Whereas the halo 25mm price matches the hunter 19mm price and is $500 lower than the reap 19mm price. So using focal length as a yard stick, the halo list prices buy you slightly more focal length than the trijicon list prices.

Both seem to have pvs-14 eye pieces.
Both have the same 12 micro oasys cores.
The reap weight range runs 16 to 32 oz
The mk2/3 weight range runs 30 to 37 oz
The halo weight range runs 20 to 28 oz
The reaps have a joystick interface
The mk2/3 have a turret interface
The halos have a button interface (and note most of the military thermals I can think of also have button interface)
The new reaps have a verticle battery compartment (mitigate possible recoil issues with inline battery compartments)
We cannot be sure about the halo batt compartment orientation yet
The mk2/mk3 have 3 batts
The reap2 have 2 batts
The halos have 4 batts
All are fixed focus
The trijicons are metal housings
The halos are polymer
the halos optical magnification ranges are 1.75x to 3.5x
the reaps and mk2/mk3s optical magnification ranges are 1.5x to 4.5x

Intangibles
The trijicons (irds) have been in the market for hum 4+ years ... and while n-vision optics is not a new player in the nv/thermal space, these units, making thermals with oasys cores, is a relatively new activity for n-vision optics.
Trijicons customer service is I think better known to the commercial space than n-vision optics. We know trijicon can response to customer issues.
At least within the mk2/mk3 line, there is an upgrade path from the lowest unit, the mk2 19mm to the highest the mk3 60mm ...

==
As to street pricing, the trijicon street pricing is fairly well known to those who pay attention. The n-vision optics street pricing for these new units is unknown, but based on the Atlas street pricing from last year, the discounts were not huge and availability was not plentiful.
Will n-vision optics be ramping up production this year ?
Will demand drive higher production levels ?
Will demand delay the onset of lower street pricing ? (why offer discounts in the face of demand which exceeds supply) ?
Will there be introductory pricing to "buy" market share away from trijicon ?

==

Well those are some thoughts ... the good news is the n-vision optics seem to be trying to enter the commercial thermal field with a strong line up ... oasys cored thermals with pricing which at least at list levels, seems slightly lower than trijicon pricing.

We await further developments !!!

(And I think it is great sign that an n-vision optics person came to visit with us !!!)

 

[wigwamitus]

AND


==
Apr 26, 2019

• Add bookmark
• #2

Image - The whole idea of a thermal "image" being a static, linear attribute, that we can compare between devices, needs to be debunked. I notice the "image" thru the UTC-x changing about 3 times as I do my 360s from my normal coop over-watch set up position. This is due to the nature of the terrain around me. I NUC an average of once every 1.5 360 to compensate as well as adjusting brightness (down) and gain (up) if needed. The vast majority of thermal users I speak with seek the ONE MAGIC SETTING for their device where they can "set it and leave it" ... and in my experience that is an unobtainable quest. You must learn to match the setting to the conditions, continuously, if you want to optimize the image. That said, the bulk of the internals between the Mk3s and the HALOs are the same, the cores, the displays the rear lenses. The front lens goes to the HALO.
Also, looking a pics people make of thermal images may or may not be accurate for comparison purposes. Several years back, when the pulsars first arrived, there was a lot of "debate" about whether the APEX had a better image than the Armasights. I myself compared a Zeus 75mm 30hz to a Pulsar 50mm 50hz and the Pulsar had a lot of "shock and awe" in terms of the image. Especially in the first 2-3 minutes, especially inside 300yds. But as I worked thru a multi-week comparison, I began to be able to split out why these differences existed. Two of the highlights. The pulsars, out of the box, auto nucd and lot in the first few mins, the armasights did not. The FLIR cores in the armsights were purposely tuned to "pop out" the critters ... in essence, by default they were higher contrast, which does NOt bring out the terrain as well. And what folks noticed looking thru the pulsars was how much clearer the trees and such were. So there were reasons for the differences and by adjusting the setups on the devices, you can make them look almost identical. So, it was really more about setup than fundemental differences.
Now with the HALOs a slighly better front lens is a slightly better front lens. But is that a strategic differentiator ? Well, between the mk3 60mm and the UTC-x I can see tiny details at 500yds, like a cow's ear flopping around while she is working on a bale at 500yds in the pouring rain. And the magnification difference, I think, overcomes the lens difference as even the UTC-x cannot see the cows ear on 18x on the day scope, any better than the mk3 60mm on 4x digital (18x net). So, I say no. Does it have a "shock and awe" appeal in some of the pics we've seen? Yes. But we know little about how the settings were optimized on either devices and how much they were nuc'd etc. Hence, looking at pics is not a definitive decision making factor for me. I also note that in one recent sequence of pics posted here, the camera itself was contributing to the image blurryness since it was out of focus. And the same thing happens to me. Thru the lens pics are tough.

Controls - Well here, it will be mostly personal preference, though I find the turret system on the mk3s to be the most fool proof in conditions like -20F where I am wearing thick gloves. The button system on the UTC-x (and same on the HALO) can be used in -20F conditions with thick gloves BUT requires more practice/training.
With any control system, you want to MEMORIZE the options you need to use in the field. You don't want to be reading menus and deciding what to do next. You want to think about the result you are after and pound the necessary buttons (or knobs or joysticks) without thinking. So, once you get to that level. The differences in the control system disappear. The only exception I can come up with is the heavy gloves exception ... and that perhaps the joystick is slightly easier to make a mistake with due to needing precise amount of pressure to activate a change. But I use the joystick, the turret and the button system all multiple times per week and I would consider such differences to be a very minor contributing factor to a purchase decision as they all work and you can learn them all.

History - The HALOs do not have a history in the field yet, since they are new. All new devices generally have teething troubles. But we haven't heard much about such for the HALOs yet. So either they tested the sh^t out of them and they have less. Or the folks that have them so far haven't put them thru enough paces in the field yet to shake out the issue.

Value - If we line up list price and focal length for all the REAPs and the Mk3s and the HALOs .. the "price per focal length" metric goes slightly to the HALOs. But again, I wouldn't make a purchase decision on that. I would pick my focal length based on the terrain I am usually in and the ways in which I am trying to use my device. Like I consider the primary purpose of my mk3 60mm to be a long distance SPOTTER. I just mount it on a carbine so I can shoot if needed. It is a "weaponized" spotter ... but the ability to PID out to 500yds and beyond in terrible conditions, like pouring rain, etc. Is my use case for the mk3 60mm and I'd rather have the extra optical magnification on the front end, than a slightly lower price for a 3.5x unit.

Maintainability - For me an important factor is the ability to keep the units up and working. And here, the HALOs may be equal or superior to the Mk3s/REAP but we do not know. It cannot be known. There is no track record.
I've sent my mk2s/mk3s in twice. Now I was upgrading them, but I also had Trijicon address issues. Working with the same folks both before and after the merger was a plus (unlike the experience with the Armasight/FLIR merger). And expectations on return time to me were set but exceeded in both cases. And the "dead pixel growth" issue I had in the mk2/3 has not returned for me. There are zero dead pixels in my mk3 or patrol and both of them have been used in the field every week for years.

 

[generalzip]

Sure there's good info above but I'm too lazy to read that much haha. I've owned both. I think the NVision HALO LR has the best image of any unit out there. Also 3.5x is like the sweet spot between mag and field of view. 4.5 I'm wanting more FOV. 2.5-3.5x is the sweet spot for most hunting. They are extremely similar units however. I like the joystick on the REAP-IR more, but I like the HALO's weight, battery cap design, battery life, onboard photo taking. The weight is pretty similar between the too. Really The HALO is the better option simply from a price point as well. NVisions CS is very very good. I had a spec of dust fall onto the screen. paid shipping back and forth had it inside of a week.

 

[WHBD]

Hey Wig, I appreciate it! I had already read those posts of yours(I think I read damn near everything you post) in the past and taken them into consideration.
Zip, TY for your time as well! I too prefer the joystick over the turret(I catch a lot of crap about that)but Ive been using buttons for the last 6 years and have no issues with that. Agree 100% on that sweet spot!
The polymer housing is what Im the least enthusiastic about. Well, life is all about compromising. Leaning towards the LR at this point. It'll be sitting on a Fix in 243AI

 

[generalzip]

FWIW the polymer doesn’t show scratches as easier as the aluminum I’ve found. Kind of blends them in. Also makes the unit lighter otherwise. It’s not some shit plastic it’s probably a glass filled nylon or something similar. I think you enjoy the saved money with the LR

 

[wigwamitus]

Well don't forget to checkout the group buy pricing on the HALOs (and the Trij) if you haven't already.

 

[Max_R]

You are correct. HALO and HALO-LR housings are made from 45% glass reinforced, heat stabilized polyphthalamide (PPA). If you look at the thermal expansion coefficient of this material you will find out that it's not worse than 6061T6 Aluminum and it's strength is quite remarkable too.

FWIW the polymer doesn’t show scratches as easier as the aluminum I’ve found. Kind of blends them in. Also makes the unit lighter otherwise. It’s not some shit plastic it’s probably a glass filled nylon or something similar. I think you enjoy the saved money with the LR

 

[deersniper]

LWTS /PAS13 have polymer housings and they are very durable.

 

[Chevoke]

Well don't forget to checkout the group buy pricing on the HALOs (and the Trij) if you haven't already.

I don’t see the group buy for the Halo. Are you aware if it’s Still going on?

 

[Conan]

I’ve got the Halo LR and have used several Trijicons (REAP 35 & IR Hunter 60, all have a great picture but I’ll give the top spot to the Halo. I have owned this scope since they were released, very easy to setup/zero/use. Also, the magnification of the Halo is perfect for the hog hunting that I do. I’ve only had one interaction with customer service and it was great (non-scope related). That being said, I’ve had great service with Pulsar also.

 

[ryu_sekai]

Here are the "on paper" comparisons I've done in previous posts ...

So the trijicon "lens sizes" are focal length. So assuming the halo "lens sizes" are also focal length (most of the thermal lens size we see are focal lenth) ... we see the halo 50mm list price matches up with the mk3 35mm price ... and half way between the price for the reap 20mm and the reap 35mms.

Whereas the halo 25mm price matches the hunter 19mm price and is $500 lower than the reap 19mm price. So using focal length as a yard stick, the halo list prices buy you slightly more focal length than the trijicon list prices.

Both seem to have pvs-14 eye pieces.
Both have the same 12 micro oasys cores.
The reap weight range runs 16 to 32 oz
The mk2/3 weight range runs 30 to 37 oz
The halo weight range runs 20 to 28 oz
The reaps have a joystick interface
The mk2/3 have a turret interface
The halos have a button interface (and note most of the military thermals I can think of also have button interface)
The new reaps have a verticle battery compartment (mitigate possible recoil issues with inline battery compartments)
We cannot be sure about the halo batt compartment orientation yet
The mk2/mk3 have 3 batts
The reap2 have 2 batts
The halos have 4 batts
All are fixed focus
The trijicons are metal housings
The halos are polymer
the halos optical magnification ranges are 1.75x to 3.5x
the reaps and mk2/mk3s optical magnification ranges are 1.5x to 4.5x

Intangibles
The trijicons (irds) have been in the market for hum 4+ years ... and while n-vision optics is not a new player in the nv/thermal space, these units, making thermals with oasys cores, is a relatively new activity for n-vision optics.
Trijicons customer service is I think better known to the commercial space than n-vision optics. We know trijicon can response to customer issues.
At least within the mk2/mk3 line, there is an upgrade path from the lowest unit, the mk2 19mm to the highest the mk3 60mm ...

==
As to street pricing, the trijicon street pricing is fairly well known to those who pay attention. The n-vision optics street pricing for these new units is unknown, but based on the Atlas street pricing from last year, the discounts were not huge and availability was not plentiful.
Will n-vision optics be ramping up production this year ?
Will demand drive higher production levels ?
Will demand delay the onset of lower street pricing ? (why offer discounts in the face of demand which exceeds supply) ?
Will there be introductory pricing to "buy" market share away from trijicon ?

==

Well those are some thoughts ... the good news is the n-vision optics seem to be trying to enter the commercial thermal field with a strong line up ... oasys cored thermals with pricing which at least at list levels, seems slightly lower than trijicon pricing.

We await further developments !!!

(And I think it is great sign that an n-vision optics person came to visit with us !!!)

Whats the runtime with 4 cr 123 on the HALO

 

[Conan]

I get 4+ hrs of continuous use and have never run a new set out in a night (halo 25). Screen brightness will affect run time. If weapon mounted, I recommend just using an external battery (mine is 6400amh anker candybar) and will run for nights on end with my halo 50.