Thanks for the comparisons. I did some testing of light levels required for min resolution of a target relative to my dark-adapted eye, which required 100 relative "units" (power) of light to resolve the target in center vision (or 25 in peripheral vision). Light levels needed (inversely proportional to sensitivity) were: PVS 14 3rd gen filmless--- 0.6 "units" of light PVS 14 3rd filmed--- 1.0 PVS 14 2nd --- 2.1 Sionyx Pro (7.5 FPS, fully open aperture) --- 20 Sony A7 mark 3 f1.4 1/8 sec --- ~20 Gen 1 f2 --- multiplies light by ~4x, so when looking at the phosphor with center vision--- 25, or looking at phosphor with peripheral--- 6 All tests were done with 4000 K white LED with variable output. Side note: if 920 nm narrow wavelength lighting is used instead of visible, the Sionyx is actually ~ 50x more sensitive than PVS 14 3rd filmless, although the absolute power sensitivity of the Sionyx is not quite as good at 920 nm as it is at visible light.
@@Tattlebot Actually the Sionyx is a silicon sensor. I recently tested to find the Sionyx has almost unchanged sensitivity going from 880 to 980 nm, whereas gen 3 PVS 14 drops by ~ 1000x.
@@Tattlebot I just went and tested an ATN gen2 PVS 14 (40°view) vs AGM gen3 (51° view) vs Aurora vs Opsin with very attenuated 980 nm laser light. The gen 2 is slightly more sensitive (apparent ~2x), but could be partially due to different view width. At 30 FPS, the Opsin is ~100x more sensitive (needs 1/100th of the light for same resolution) compared with gen2, and Aurora is about 1/2 as sensitive as the Opsin.
you can also remove the ir filter from your sensor and your camera will be way more sensitive to ir light. Astrophotographers know this trick. Don't ruin your sensor though, some professionals specialize in this very delicate operation.
A starvis sensor behind a good fast lens should offer similar results, but remember starvis sensors are much smaller than full frame sensors and hence gather less signal overall.
I'm interested, was Mi 11 ultra on street filmed in auto video mode or in night video mode, cause it has quite a huge difference in darker conditions. Better than auto or manual (which is quite the same in max iso). Can't say anything about NVG, cause not own them yet. Otherwise, it's very interesting video without too much water. Thank you.
@@hypemilitaria6447so, it seems it wasn't full potential of that camera. Of course it's not full frame or nvg, but it can see a bit better than in auto.
For detection of living things in the dark, definitely. But for just walking around and navigating, a highly sensitive binocular night vision system may still be better.
Thermal detects but does not identify people due to resolution. Night vision does the opposite. That's why in combination they are worth far more than the sum of each.
Thanks for the comparisons. I did some testing of light levels required for min resolution of a target relative to my dark-adapted eye, which required 100 relative "units" (power) of light to resolve the target in center vision (or 25 in peripheral vision). Light levels needed (inversely proportional to sensitivity) were:
PVS 14 3rd gen filmless--- 0.6 "units" of light
PVS 14 3rd filmed--- 1.0
PVS 14 2nd --- 2.1
Sionyx Pro (7.5 FPS, fully open aperture) --- 20
Sony A7 mark 3 f1.4 1/8 sec --- ~20
Gen 1 f2 --- multiplies light by ~4x, so when looking at the phosphor with center vision--- 25, or looking at phosphor with peripheral--- 6
All tests were done with 4000 K white LED with variable output. Side note: if 920 nm narrow wavelength lighting is used instead of visible, the Sionyx is actually ~ 50x more sensitive than PVS 14 3rd filmless, although the absolute power sensitivity of the Sionyx is not quite as good at 920 nm as it is at visible light.
It seems like there's a sweet spot somewhere in the 900s where multialkali sees what GaAs cannot
@@Tattlebot Actually the Sionyx is a silicon sensor. I recently tested to find the Sionyx has almost unchanged sensitivity going from 880 to 980 nm, whereas gen 3 PVS 14 drops by ~ 1000x.
@@PattyDung gen 2 extends to about that region. Gen 3 has narrower bandwidth but double the efficiency, which is then halved by the aluminum barrier.
@@Tattlebot I just went and tested an ATN gen2 PVS 14 (40°view) vs AGM gen3 (51° view) vs Aurora vs Opsin with very attenuated 980 nm laser light. The gen 2 is slightly more sensitive (apparent ~2x), but could be partially due to different view width. At 30 FPS, the Opsin is ~100x more sensitive (needs 1/100th of the light for same resolution) compared with gen2, and Aurora is about 1/2 as sensitive as the Opsin.
@@PattyDung Carpe Nocturnum has a video of 915 nm and the results are marked.
Excellent video! I’ve been looking for this comparison all day! Thank you
I’m your newest subscriber….
Thanks for the sub! Glad you enjoyed the vid!
Where might one find a Type-85 set? They just look so cool. Are they basically unobtainium?
They used to be everywhere on xianyu but then all the surplus got bought up; so yeah, they're now pretty much unobtainium
you can also remove the ir filter from your sensor and your camera will be way more sensitive to ir light. Astrophotographers know this trick.
Don't ruin your sensor though, some professionals specialize in this very delicate operation.
Thank you for your work! Nice educational video, for sure.
Thanks a lot! Hope to crank more of these out in the future.
How do you find the A7iv performs when recording through the eye piece of a pvs14 directly?
Good comparison, I also deal with night vision
I wonder how a F1.0 with Starvis2 sensor would perform in comparison. Something like a colourvu camera?
A starvis sensor behind a good fast lens should offer similar results, but remember starvis sensors are much smaller than full frame sensors and hence gather less signal overall.
I'm interested, was Mi 11 ultra on street filmed in auto video mode or in night video mode, cause it has quite a huge difference in darker conditions. Better than auto or manual (which is quite the same in max iso).
Can't say anything about NVG, cause not own them yet.
Otherwise, it's very interesting video without too much water. Thank you.
Hi. I recall filming everything in manual mode, hence the insane ISO noise since I cranked the ISO all the way up
@@hypemilitaria6447so, it seems it wasn't full potential of that camera. Of course it's not full frame or nvg, but it can see a bit better than in auto.
@@Солембум That could very well be the case. I've upgraded to the Mi 14 Ultra now and will keep it in mind for future tests.
@@hypemilitaria6447 idk about 14 ultra interface, but in Mi 11 Ultra it's night mode -> and switch from photo to video.
Great video
Thanks!
Id kill for a type 85 set
prison sentence will be longer than you needing work even a minimum wage job to buy a GEN3
So the winner is thermal camera.
For detection of living things in the dark, definitely. But for just walking around and navigating, a highly sensitive binocular night vision system may still be better.
Thermal detects but does not identify people due to resolution. Night vision does the opposite. That's why in combination they are worth far more than the sum of each.
A7s is superior to A7iv
cont click with your tongue please... it does not sound good at all