-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
Night Vision SOK's TigIR Z6+ Initial Review + Video
- Thread starter SkyScrapin
- Start date
Never. Just as a photo platform. Never shot it on the SCAR.
Actually, I’ve never shot any of my NV/Thermal on the SCAR. But it’s long monolithic rail makes for great photos.
@Conqueror
Actually, I’ve never shot any of my NV/Thermal on the SCAR. But it’s long monolithic rail makes for great photos.
@Conqueror
@TheHorta roger. I have a shorty suppressed SCAR I would really like to use at night but Andres made it pretty clear that I was on my own if it broke. They said they tested one to like 150 rounds on a SCAR and it was fine but they had no idea if 500 or 1000 would kill the Tig and I don't want to risk that much moolah. I guess when my xELR comes I could probably use that since it's 50cal rated but that will negate the compactness.
- Nov 3, 2010
- 9,880
- 20,912
For what they cost I oughta be able to shoot one out of a SCAR and have it be fine.
The Space Shuttle Challenger was also rated to go to the Moon by some of the best Engineers in the world.
That did not turn out so well either.
Take away: proceed with extreme caution.
Any hint from Andres on if they would make a focusable version of this? I absolutely love the form factor and weight.
It does a ton for its size because it’s a dedicated clip on which is what interests me. This type of optic would pair very well with a 1-8 or March’s new 1.5-15 FFP or DFP
It does a ton for its size because it’s a dedicated clip on which is what interests me. This type of optic would pair very well with a 1-8 or March’s new 1.5-15 FFP or DFP
I doubt it. I think they buy the entire core from FLIR, not sure they could integrate a focus system without starting to build their own cores. I like my Tig a lot for 0-250yd hunting, it takes more mag than a Voodoo or RH25 and isn’t all that much heavier. I’ve been considering selling it but only because I kinda wanna try a helmet-mounted monocular.
When I commented above I didn’t realize the horizontal FOV for the TIG is 8deg. I’d love a 10-12 deg unit that would be happy in front of a 8-10x day optic. Should allow for a smaller objective and maybe smaller overall unit…
I certainly think so. The Tig is a lot smaller and lighter. The Steiner’s only real advantage is I think it has manual focus and costs less. On a hog hunting AR I’d much rather walk around with the Tig than the Steiner on my gun.
I should have been more specific, size and weight aside, is the performance worth ~$5k more than the C35?
I mean, that's a bit of a tricky question. Does a SkeetIR-X perform all that much different from a Nox18 that costs half as much? Not really; you're paying a substantial portion of the price premium precisely because it's smaller and lighter (yeah and with a different FOV I realize). Same reason shaving off another 8oz for a Voodoo-S costs you another $6k over the Tig. So I think at least a good chunk of the Tig's price over the Steiner is that it's a lot easier to actually use in the field as opposed to the brick-like 35+oz C35.
I've never used a C35 so I can't share firsthand knowledge. I do know the Steiner units had good image quality on 1x. The Tig has some of the best digital zoom I've ever used; their AI algorithm really seems to do a good job making the picture look good. Overall I doubt the image quality alone is worth the $5k premium though. If you're only shooting prone or off a bench, the C35 is probably great. But if you're gonna walk around innawoods with it then getting a lighter unit is worth it 10x over.
I've never used a C35 so I can't share firsthand knowledge. I do know the Steiner units had good image quality on 1x. The Tig has some of the best digital zoom I've ever used; their AI algorithm really seems to do a good job making the picture look good. Overall I doubt the image quality alone is worth the $5k premium though. If you're only shooting prone or off a bench, the C35 is probably great. But if you're gonna walk around innawoods with it then getting a lighter unit is worth it 10x over.
Recently picked up a TigIR-6Z thermal. I've looked at it through my Vortex 1-10, NX8 4-32, Now I got all setup to mount to my 7-35 ATACR. Me thinks too much magnification??? I can't get a clear picture through the scope in all zooms & parallax adjustment. Any suggestions?
Attachments
I found the sweet spot on that thing is like 4x (used a 3-15x50). Nothing you can do to get it to work with a 7-35 IMO..
Works on 7 power, view across the lake from me. I'm sure it'll be better at night...Maybe it needed to warm up to outside temp??? Initially it looked as if one of the lenses were fogged. 76F inside the house, 95F with 78% RH outside. I need more time with the scope. I'd like to get the image clearer/crisper.
Attachments
Last edited:
Yes it will work. It will only degrade with more mag. It's really up to you on what is bearable..
Oh brother......you're going to be disappointment. That unit us blurry at ANY zoom level.
All depends on your price range man and if younare dead set on a clip on. For a large scope like that, you're going to need a low FOV milspec clip on to support a higher bottom end magnification level.
Seriously? I used @wigwamitus' unit in front of a couple different scopes for a few hours and found it absolutely delightful, out to a bit past 8x IIRC.
Not trying to start a fight; I'm just interested in opinions on a great clip on thermal that doesn't cost $12,000+. I'd like the ability to use increased magnification along with clarity. Already own PVS-27's, 14, & 31's
So the LPVO will allow you to use wider FOV clip ons without cutting into the image resolution. My favorite civi clip on thus far has been the Super Yoter C for price to performance ratio.
But for your ATACR and your NX8......those are high bottom end magnification scopes. If you want a clip on that supports that high of bottom end mag without losing resolution, you're going to pay at LEAST 16k on a Theon xELR with a 5.3⁰ FOV...and that's just for NX8. For that ATACR, you won't find a thermal with FOV low enough to support that level of magnification with full image res until you drop 75k+ on a FLIR HISS XLR or an INOD BLK III (2.6 and 3.6⁰ FOV respectively).
Civi clip ons don't typically have the big ole germanium lenses with low FOVs that you seek, that's just a sad fact ma dude.
I had a tigIR and I hated it. The unit was blurry at any distance and was absolutely donkey stomped by units like the UTC X (and others like it). I wrote tons on it if you look at my retrospective posts.
Here's a visual of what several different units (the display you would be zooming into with your day optic) would look like to your eye at 1x optical on your day scope.
Attachments
When I had the TigIR 6z & Rusan adapter on the 4-32 NX8, I had a "far away rectangle" looking through the eyepice, with the ATACR, I had over a full field of vision that chopped off the top left & top right lettering after auto collocation. No matter what I did the view didn't change; parallax knob, power lever, mounting onto the sunshade, etc...
Well yeah because a UTC and a Tig are not in the same park.. Tig were supposed to be competitors to thermals like the Hunter Mk2s etc.. Not a UTC..
It.....was suppose to be a "UTC Killer". If you don't believe me, look up everything that was claimed on it in the forum about 2 years ago. Also, what you just listed are dedicated thermal scopes........so no, you are objectively incorrect here.
The issue with the tig was a lack of manual focus and what I think was a crappy parallax on the eye piece (making it blurrier with increasing magnification).
Let me rephrase. To people that don't know a lot about thermals the IR hunter scopes are not dedicated scopes. They can be used as clip-ons although they aren't 99% of the time so i will concede to you on that end but the TIG was supposed to be in that realm of the markets as a clip-on.
Does that make more sense..? Backwoods bubba joe doesn't know shit about the specs of thermals or NV. They see the price points and think that the TIG is a better version of something like the IR series clip-ons and scopes. That is all I was trying to say.
Again, that was still a mostly dedicated scope. The 6z+ was a full Clip on with optical demag, and was advertised from multiple outlets to be a competitor for the utc x. I had an X, was told this was better, and it was not even close. It was the Magnum opus of failure as a long range clip on in my eyes, and the entire reason why I started down the rabbit hole of clip on thermals and bringing in "through the scope" photos of every unit I have owned/used since on multiple forums.
I feel for you man but whoever told you that was a moron and if it was people here they are stupid as well..
I dunno what y’all are talkin’ bout. My 6M was excellent. I know there was talk of serious variations in the 6Z+ CIV units, but the M was right there at UTC performance. Only issue was fixed objective. Otherwise it was actually BETTER than the UTC because of 16650 support, internal mechanical shutter, the still-awesome flip cover, the crazy compact size, and a handful of other coof features and mounting options.
Dats my story, an Imma stick to it.
Dats my story, an Imma stick to it.
Yours was special unit with a different eye piece
.I’ve used my Tig up to 20x. Completely disagree that it’s “blurry at any magnification.” It suffers beyond 250yds due to the fixed focus but not due to poor optics or bad eyepiece.
The reason why I disagree with that, is that even close up my unit would get exponentially blurrier with increasing magnification. With all of the other units, they would pixelate out...but stay sharp. That wasn't the case with the tig, so that tell me the image focus and the eye piece were the issue. This is something I talked about at length with Joe and Preston @SOK with when I had my unit. I heard some of the later units didn't have this issue due to Andres instituting a "double collimation" on the eye piece...whatever that means lol.
I have the TigIr 6M from The Horta and it's great, very good for 200yds to 400yds...I will note, changing color palates helps clear it up to a degree I haven't understood yet. For 6x to 8x, it's the sweet spot..but for wider FOV, I find myself grabbing my Voodoo S. If I never had bought the voodoo, I'd be perfectly happy with the Tig.
Never looked thru a 6z tho and Horta did say there is a difference between the 2. Form factor, Tig did great, I just wish it had a focus so I could clear up closer images.
The voodoo S really is the best "do all" unit out there. I was use to the very fine, detailed image that milspec BAE units provide...so I was quite disappointed when the tigIR didn't provide that experience. Perhaps I'm jaded.
Believe me, I believe they purposely make these with a short coming somewhere to keep us buying the shit...to the point my next might be the Voodoo M...I'm not buying anything less as of now
Believe me, I believe they purposely make these with a short coming somewhere to keep us buying the shit...to the point my next might be the Voodoo M...I'm not buying anything less as of now
I get what you mean,
Reality is products such as thermals are made with specific criteria for a specific end user, usually a government entity.
The commercial space may or may not get access to those products, and civ input isn’t a thing.
In some cases, the government requirements hit a home run and everyone benefits. It’s rare.
Voodoo-M and it’s variants have a lot to offer. It’s a well thought out design. Manual focus. Collimation. Demagnification. Sensitivity. WMLRF integrations.
ETA: Thermals are like golf clubs to golfers. You can absolutely put with a driver, but it’s far from the best option. Every thermal had a place no matter how niche.
Similar threads
