Really cool technology. Will be interesting to see how long to takes for digital night vision to catch up to current standards, especially since it should be so much cheaper
A digital night vision that combines thermal in the same package and gives an aggregate view would be a great tool. If they can get that in a decent package and its less(or the same as) than a pvs14 gen 3 it would be a great competitor especially outside. The biggest advantage of digital is the ability to add information to the screen.
While I doubt that I'll be purchasing one, your descriptions were very informative. Perhaps the manufacturer will take note and make the needed improvements based on your breakdown.
I have the sport which is the $500 version. I bought it because in reviews they say, "Well, if you're just messing around in the woods." Which is exactly what I was doing. I used it as a helmet-mounted monocular to ride my bike around and it worked pretty well. I wouldn't recommend any really bumpy or fast trails though due to the fov and input delay (delay can be reduced to a certain extent by going to 360p). It wasn't able to get usable image with dense canopy, but worked well with high light levels in a field. It gives you a lot more than not having it at all, but it is not at all comparable to good gen 3 tubes, and I would not rely on these for anything fast paced or requiring a lot of head-turning. I'd say you could use it as extremely budget nightvision for observing things, or just to have usable footage at night - not necessarily to record high quality footage. I also recommend getting an IR flashlight / spotlight if you plan on getting a Sionyx.
I would say it gives you 3 things. 1: the ability to record at night on a budget. 2: the ability to use indoors in the dark with an illuminator for use in airsoft or other games 3: the ability to have a potentially somewhat quicker reaction time outdoors under moon light or well lit areas. To explain, in the dark you actually take a much longer time to process what your eyes see. If you have ever tried to catch a ball at dusk, you might know what I mean. While you can still sort of see the ball, its really difficult to catch it because what you see is several dozen milliseconds in the past, so the ball appears to hit your hand well before you expect it to. With the aurora, the image is brightened to arbitrarily high levels so that this effect does not take place, however, the internal latency of the camera may overcome this advantage. In my experience, the aurora does not offer a substantial increase in resolving power in low light situations.
@@sifpaulfernandezthewingchundao I'm glad you bring that up. Yes you'll be able to see the stars very well on clear nights with this. Again, not comparable to gen 3 but I think the night sky is a little more interesting looking not in blue/green monochrome. Honestly you've gotta weigh the novelty and price.
@@sifpaulfernandezthewingchundao Id say so. I've seen all sorts of stuff. I dont think of it as aliens, but with adequate confirmation bias it might help you find what you want. (If you can find the sport on ebay for ~500. That model is discontinued now, and the base model is 2x as expensive).
Staying static or SAR would be good uses for it. Also urban areas it works great. I've moved around with it in the woods which can be a challenge but moving in fields under a full moon is awesome. IR lights are a must for low light. Winter time with a full moon is an awesome time to use jt
This is a fair review. I feel like most people are giving this too much praise or too much of a hard time comparing it to a PVS14. The SAR use is something that I think would be a good role for it
You can modify the Aurora pretty easily to accept other lenses (telephoto, etc.) by removing the front lens & protector. Opens up a few more possibilities for surveillance. A few YT "how to" vid's out there.
My experience with the standard Sionyx is that its roughly anaolgous to early 2000’s russian gen 2 tubes in terms of light sensitivity, with the benefit of not being damaged by light and having colour. Almost all modern Gen 2 tubes and all Gen 3 tubes will outperform them, but they can substitute the most basic Gen 2 devices IMO (Based on my experience with a Sionyx, an ATN monocular and a Photonis Echo Device).
Hey Sam, are NODs a standard equipment for helicopter CCT / EMS? Or is it more of a niche piece of equipment used by services with special considerations (like search and rescue)
One cool thing, and I too am a nerd who enjoys walking around at night looking at things, is most surveillance cameras use IR lights. This shows up IR as another light source, so I can see easily all of the IR cams in my neighborhood and where they are pointed. I am a WFR and do some SNR. This would be great on a night with some moon to give me some additional visual, and I'd totally take it on a call, it is pretty light too and the battery isn't bad.
Hi I know I'll get mocked but I was told to purchase this because I'm a ufo enthusiast... Being the case I don't like the idea of looking through a binocular or telescope style system so is there anything I can attach this to do I can enhance my vision like connect it directly to a portable as I scan the skies or I dunno... a binocular set that my eyes can adapt to???
Thanks for the review. Your opinion meshes with others I've seen. Seems like a good option for urban/suburban where you don't want to be a freak with helmet mounted night vision. As long as there's power, it never gets dark here.
Wow just bought it and not sure if i made a good choice.. I am buying it for UFO hunting and Paranormal investigations, whats your opinion on that for this cam?
Problems now with digital night vision are input lag and battery life. If/when they get those down to at least what a traditional tube device can do, it'll take over.
Whats the latency like? I know you mentioned it but lets say i had a couple ir lights could I be able to see deer or a car infeont of me via the streaming feature in a reasonable amount of time? Just from the little intro i imagine you fly with ir lights to help you see wtf where youre going. I ask because i get "night blind" and also have horrible glare effects that makes it difficult to see at night when driving w/ rain ect. Ive checked out some thermal cameras but the range is obviously very limited (without dumping 50k$) Is there a good compromise a person could use as a driving aid, like i said to see animals/ other vehicles? Or would other vehicles completely white out this type of camera? Or is thermal better for picking up objects and nv better for distinguishing?
Thank thee very much! That is a great work! But I still have a couple of questions: 1. What are the maximum bit-rate and codec available for video recording? 2. Is there any possibility to set the maximum aperture in Twilight mode in camera settings without using a smartphone?
I'm so so glad you made this review of the Sionyx i was going to by the cheapest one they had on sale for $299. ish but im glad i didn't get it!!! because im looking for a good real night vision not with IR i think those suck and are limited. I need something with unlimited distance view. aloso an infrared capability camera with video record and pic capture, so if you know of a good cheap one let me know?
The sionix will work with an IR illuminator and they work as well as pretty much any digital night vision on the market. If you are looking to get into phosphor NVGs you are looking at a minimum of 2k and there arnt many options with recording capabilities built in
I don’t know anything about law enforcement or anything “tactical”, but it looks like a really good option for finding your deer stand at 4am, hiking into camp after sunset, volunteer search & rescue, even just looking around your yard. If the price drops below $300 I’ll be a customer.
PLEASE do not get this for SAR. You would be much much better off using thermal imaging monoculars at that same price point. I owned this device for around a year, and if you want to have better resolving power in the dark, it will not be helpful. Its only moderately useful when paired with an IR Illuminator, but if you are using it for SAR, you may as well get a flashlight, and it will genuinely be more useful because it lacks the low framerate (15-30fps in low light) and motion sickness inducing image delay, not to mention the fact that a flashlight will give you much better field of view and freedom of movement.
Is there something more advanced in terms of resolution with no green overlay? The intended use is for recording videos in low-light conditions for surveillance, but not complete darkness. If there is nothing specifically for this, perhaps there is something I can adapt that has significantly better video quality, which I can somehow implement for recording? Thanks
How much you want to spend? The Sony A7SIII (the camera I shoot my videos on) with an F1.4 lens does an amazing job at low light but you are gonna spend about 5k on it.
@@PrepMedic I've seen some videos about the Sony camera paired with the Laowa 35mm f 0.95 lens. Is it possible to practically see in the dark while shooting a video? I have no budget constraints; I can spend even more if there's something even more practical, fast, and effective available
If you want good quality video without a color overlay it’s about your only option. Now, if you don’t mind a color overlay you can get mounts for phosphor night vision attached to a Sony camera and that will give you high quality results as well.
Finally, a quality review - could I have your opinion for it to use connected to my boat and sending night vision image to a tablet for improved vision at sea - not car speeds!
FWIW, there is a guy on ebay selling a (3D printed?) dovetail mount adapter for this. I have it. It works well enough for me, though I can't comment on how well it might hold up to real field use, my use case is pretty tame. Note the "dovetail mount adapter" still needs a "dovetail mount" to attach to your helmet for those just getting into this. The sionyx works very well/best if you have an IR illuminator and/or IR laser for aiming - i didn't really like it mounted on a weapon, though that might work for hunting from a blind or stand if you just want a video as PrepMedic points out. For home defense or something like that, definitely go helmet mounted with an IR laser on the weapon.
I used to have one of these, owned it for about a year. I want to go ahead and say its useless as an outdoor night vision monocular. To me, its more at the level of a gen 0+. What I mean by that is that it has minimal distortion and color, but if you can't see it with your night adapted eyes, you probably can't see it with the aurora. Like a gen 0 device, in order for it to be of any practical use, it needs an Illuminator. In terms of raw sensitivity, even the cheapest gen 1 that I got for $100 on Amazon beat out the digital sensor on the aurora. Of course, the gen 1 unit suffered from severe distortion, but the aurora suffered from latency and low framerate, so I would say those cancel out. Digital sensors just can not compete with the sensitivity of a chemical photocathode, simply because we can not get the photon detecting elements of a digital sensor to match the density of a homogeneously coated chemical photocathode. I'm sticking to my budget pvs-14 that I put together for $1500. And yes, Its only $500 more expensive than the aurora, but is much more than 4x as good, because it actually works.
Its workable if you have an illuminator and can run it at 60fps. 30fps could be manageable after some practice, but I wouldn't go below that. As I'm sure you are aware, the higher the fps, the lower the exposure for each individual frame. In a reasonably dark scenario where you would want to use night vision instead of just your eyes, the aurora would need to be at ~15fps to produce a usable image. At that fps, even ignoring the input lag, the time between frames is already pretty severe, and I would never recommend trying to walk like that.
Only starlight FPV drone cameras provide NVG capabilities at a true tight budget. A RunCam Night Eagle 3 or Foxeer Cat 3 + monocular display or FPV goggles provide better image quality, better sensitivity, and less latency than the Aurora, at 100 to 130 USD for the total build. You loose the color though, and still nowhere near as good as an analog tube. But quite a fun device for that price
More examples of the actual device's outputs, ideally with a regular daylight camera videoing the scene at same time, please. Everything you said could have taken about 2 minutes at the end . Also: ATN is selling quite good passive thermal devices with 10 hour battery life for same or less than the psionics pro right now.
If they did away with the recoding stuff they could maybe make a working NOD but for now the PVS14 is the best “cheap” choice sadly I tried so many digital devices aand all failed to live up to my expectations(being able to walk around with them)
@@PrepMedic I’m aware and it’s $2500, heavy, requires a battery pack that only run 8hr and still not as good light sensitivity as a PVS14 Gen2+ Photonis that’s 2k or less. Also a single Li AA will get you 50hr of run time.
Much like laser projectors, dash cams and home security cams to a degree, night vision is still not good enough or cost effective at this point to spend the money. I have a thermal camera which is excellent but I probably should keep waiting. Very good review, thank you!
As a wild land firefighter who has experience with this device, it's not really something I would use. We need our hands to cary tools, and our helmets have brims that don't support nvg mounting. Even if this was not an issue, this device just does not have any capabilities that I would not get out of my unaided eyes in ambient light conditions, or a headlamp in low light conditions.
For those who want good empirical/quantitative tests comparing the aurora to other night vision technologies, I can highly recommend these two videos: Aurora vs Gen 2: ruclips.net/video/-vDaVcMUlL8/видео.html Low light test of gen 2 vs gen 3 vs aurora: ruclips.net/video/oO9qLU-JES4/видео.html
This $850 night vison camera was easily outperformed by my Canon R5 DSLR, with the cheap 50mm F1.8 on it in video mode, and that isn't even night vision!! Aurora Pro is honestly a POS for the money, and it certainly doesn't feel like $850, It feels small and cheap. Did you forget that?
This seems like a good alternative to PVS systems in a city environment where they are too sensitive and can be damaged by bright lights. This might work.
so you said you can get a pair of PVS-14 for 2,000 to 3,000 I wouldn't say that's exactly accurate I would say 1,500 to 2,000 is the average price for a pair of PVS-14 from what I've seen now you can get PVS-31 for 2,000 to 3,000 sometimes even 4,000 I would say that's the average price for a pair of PVS-31
You clearly understand not only this equipment, but your audience as well. You answered every question I had about this product. Thank you so much!
Really cool technology. Will be interesting to see how long to takes for digital night vision to catch up to current standards, especially since it should be so much cheaper
Given the evolution of night vision and flashlight tech over the last decade.. I’d bet within 5 years we’re gonna get pretty close.
A digital night vision that combines thermal in the same package and gives an aggregate view would be a great tool. If they can get that in a decent package and its less(or the same as) than a pvs14 gen 3 it would be a great competitor especially outside. The biggest advantage of digital is the ability to add information to the screen.
With regular optical tech, it won't. There are just some issues inherent to digital systems that just make it a poor choice for nvgs.
@@andersson_casa with good thermal, you are just ruining it by adding the digital array.
@@Anna-1917 ping
While I doubt that I'll be purchasing one, your descriptions were very informative. Perhaps the manufacturer will take note and make the needed improvements based on your breakdown.
I have the sport which is the $500 version. I bought it because in reviews they say, "Well, if you're just messing around in the woods." Which is exactly what I was doing. I used it as a helmet-mounted monocular to ride my bike around and it worked pretty well. I wouldn't recommend any really bumpy or fast trails though due to the fov and input delay (delay can be reduced to a certain extent by going to 360p). It wasn't able to get usable image with dense canopy, but worked well with high light levels in a field. It gives you a lot more than not having it at all, but it is not at all comparable to good gen 3 tubes, and I would not rely on these for anything fast paced or requiring a lot of head-turning. I'd say you could use it as extremely budget nightvision for observing things, or just to have usable footage at night - not necessarily to record high quality footage. I also recommend getting an IR flashlight / spotlight if you plan on getting a Sionyx.
I would say it gives you 3 things.
1: the ability to record at night on a budget.
2: the ability to use indoors in the dark with an illuminator for use in airsoft or other games
3: the ability to have a potentially somewhat quicker reaction time outdoors under moon light or well lit areas. To explain, in the dark you actually take a much longer time to process what your eyes see. If you have ever tried to catch a ball at dusk, you might know what I mean. While you can still sort of see the ball, its really difficult to catch it because what you see is several dozen milliseconds in the past, so the ball appears to hit your hand well before you expect it to. With the aurora, the image is brightened to arbitrarily high levels so that this effect does not take place, however, the internal latency of the camera may overcome this advantage.
In my experience, the aurora does not offer a substantial increase in resolving power in low light situations.
Umm would you recommend it to a madman to me who does night sky ufo 🛸 searching?
@@sifpaulfernandezthewingchundao I'm glad you bring that up. Yes you'll be able to see the stars very well on clear nights with this. Again, not comparable to gen 3 but I think the night sky is a little more interesting looking not in blue/green monochrome. Honestly you've gotta weigh the novelty and price.
@@sifpaulfernandezthewingchundao Id say so. I've seen all sorts of stuff. I dont think of it as aliens, but with adequate confirmation bias it might help you find what you want. (If you can find the sport on ebay for ~500. That model is discontinued now, and the base model is 2x as expensive).
@@Anna-1917 hey I really appreciate the response
Staying static or SAR would be good uses for it. Also urban areas it works great. I've moved around with it in the woods which can be a challenge but moving in fields under a full moon is awesome. IR lights are a must for low light. Winter time with a full moon is an awesome time to use jt
IMO, this is a very well-balanced, toughtful review. Thank you! Now I want a Sionyx.
This is a fair review. I feel like most people are giving this too much praise or too much of a hard time comparing it to a PVS14. The SAR use is something that I think would be a good role for it
Nice overview. Once this technology advances a bit more, I’m absolutely going to pick one up.
You can modify the Aurora pretty easily to accept other lenses (telephoto, etc.) by removing the front lens & protector. Opens up a few more possibilities for surveillance. A few YT "how to" vid's out there.
My experience with the standard Sionyx is that its roughly anaolgous to early 2000’s russian gen 2 tubes in terms of light sensitivity, with the benefit of not being damaged by light and having colour. Almost all modern Gen 2 tubes and all Gen 3 tubes will outperform them, but they can substitute the most basic Gen 2 devices IMO (Based on my experience with a Sionyx, an ATN monocular and a Photonis Echo Device).
Gave me all the info I was looking for. Thank you
Hey Sam, are NODs a standard equipment for helicopter CCT / EMS? Or is it more of a niche piece of equipment used by services with special considerations (like search and rescue)
Yes, they are a requirement for any HEMS that does scene flights.
@@PrepMedic yes, but actual night vision devices, not digital garbage.
@@AnonyMous-jf4lclol, insecure
@@chistinelane insecure of what?
@@AnonyMous-jf4lc I'm not talking to you, I'm talking _about_ you, lol.
One cool thing, and I too am a nerd who enjoys walking around at night looking at things, is most surveillance cameras use IR lights. This shows up IR as another light source, so I can see easily all of the IR cams in my neighborhood and where they are pointed.
I am a WFR and do some SNR. This would be great on a night with some moon to give me some additional visual, and I'd totally take it on a call, it is pretty light too and the battery isn't bad.
Do you have any recommendations about which night vision is best for viewing stars / moving objects in the night sky..
I love your channel. Thanks for your reviews.
Not for kicking doors, all I needed to know. Thanks!
You kicking alot of doors these days?
Hi I know I'll get mocked but I was told to purchase this because I'm a ufo enthusiast...
Being the case I don't like the idea of looking through a binocular or telescope style system so is there anything I can attach this to do I can enhance my vision like connect it directly to a portable as I scan the skies or I dunno... a binocular set that my eyes can adapt to???
A good pair of binoculars is better than this any day of the week.
Thanks for the review. Your opinion meshes with others I've seen. Seems like a good option for urban/suburban where you don't want to be a freak with helmet mounted night vision. As long as there's power, it never gets dark here.
Awesome review, honest, pertinent, professional. Thanks!
Wow just bought it and not sure if i made a good choice.. I am buying it for UFO hunting and Paranormal investigations, whats your opinion on that for this cam?
Problems now with digital night vision are input lag and battery life. If/when they get those down to at least what a traditional tube device can do, it'll take over.
What would the Sionyx Aurora Pro be like for viewing the night sky, satellite transits, etc.?
Whats the latency like? I know you mentioned it but lets say i had a couple ir lights could I be able to see deer or a car infeont of me via the streaming feature in a reasonable amount of time? Just from the little intro i imagine you fly with ir lights to help you see wtf where youre going.
I ask because i get "night blind" and also have horrible glare effects that makes it difficult to see at night when driving w/ rain ect. Ive checked out some thermal cameras but the range is obviously very limited (without dumping 50k$)
Is there a good compromise a person could use as a driving aid, like i said to see animals/ other vehicles? Or would other vehicles completely white out this type of camera? Or is thermal better for picking up objects and nv better for distinguishing?
Love your content 🥰🥰
Hey bro. Theres a seller on Etsy that makes a very excellent quality helmet mount for the Sionyx
Thank thee very much! That is a great work! But I still have a couple of questions:
1. What are the maximum bit-rate and codec available for video recording?
2. Is there any possibility to set the maximum aperture in Twilight mode in camera settings without using a smartphone?
I keep wanting to get this but I’m just going to save for the day I can get and have a purpose to get a pvs14.
For someone who wants to gaze at the night sky.Clear night. Will this do the job??.
I'm so so glad you made this review of the Sionyx i was going to by the cheapest one they had on sale for $299. ish but im glad i didn't get it!!! because im looking for a good real night vision not with IR i think those suck and are limited. I need something with unlimited distance view. aloso an infrared capability camera with video record and pic capture, so if you know of a good cheap one let me know?
The sionix will work with an IR illuminator and they work as well as pretty much any digital night vision on the market. If you are looking to get into phosphor NVGs you are looking at a minimum of 2k and there arnt many options with recording capabilities built in
I don’t know anything about law enforcement or anything “tactical”, but it looks like a really good option for finding your deer stand at 4am, hiking into camp after sunset, volunteer search & rescue, even just looking around your yard. If the price drops below $300 I’ll be a customer.
PLEASE do not get this for SAR. You would be much much better off using thermal imaging monoculars at that same price point. I owned this device for around a year, and if you want to have better resolving power in the dark, it will not be helpful. Its only moderately useful when paired with an IR Illuminator, but if you are using it for SAR, you may as well get a flashlight, and it will genuinely be more useful because it lacks the low framerate (15-30fps in low light) and motion sickness inducing image delay, not to mention the fact that a flashlight will give you much better field of view and freedom of movement.
This is the same model as what we use in the military for partial and low light conditions.
On a starry moonless night, walking through the woods, this thing is totally useless. Just turn on your $40 headlamp dingbat.
Is there something more advanced in terms of resolution with no green overlay? The intended use is for recording videos in low-light conditions for surveillance, but not complete darkness. If there is nothing specifically for this, perhaps there is something I can adapt that has significantly better video quality, which I can somehow implement for recording? Thanks
How much you want to spend? The Sony A7SIII (the camera I shoot my videos on) with an F1.4 lens does an amazing job at low light but you are gonna spend about 5k on it.
@@PrepMedic I've seen some videos about the Sony camera paired with the Laowa 35mm f 0.95 lens. Is it possible to practically see in the dark while shooting a video? I have no budget constraints; I can spend even more if there's something even more practical, fast, and effective available
If you want good quality video without a color overlay it’s about your only option. Now, if you don’t mind a color overlay you can get mounts for phosphor night vision attached to a Sony camera and that will give you high quality results as well.
Finally, a quality review - could I have your opinion for it to use connected to my boat and sending night vision image to a tablet for improved vision at sea - not car speeds!
The latency would be fine but I have heard some people say the app is buggy
What size picatinny adapter does it need? Just ordered one after seeing this review!
FWIW, there is a guy on ebay selling a (3D printed?) dovetail mount adapter for this. I have it. It works well enough for me, though I can't comment on how well it might hold up to real field use, my use case is pretty tame. Note the "dovetail mount adapter" still needs a "dovetail mount" to attach to your helmet for those just getting into this. The sionyx works very well/best if you have an IR illuminator and/or IR laser for aiming - i didn't really like it mounted on a weapon, though that might work for hunting from a blind or stand if you just want a video as PrepMedic points out. For home defense or something like that, definitely go helmet mounted with an IR laser on the weapon.
Can you do a review on the recon medical tourniquet
I used to have one of these, owned it for about a year. I want to go ahead and say its useless as an outdoor night vision monocular. To me, its more at the level of a gen 0+. What I mean by that is that it has minimal distortion and color, but if you can't see it with your night adapted eyes, you probably can't see it with the aurora. Like a gen 0 device, in order for it to be of any practical use, it needs an Illuminator. In terms of raw sensitivity, even the cheapest gen 1 that I got for $100 on Amazon beat out the digital sensor on the aurora. Of course, the gen 1 unit suffered from severe distortion, but the aurora suffered from latency and low framerate, so I would say those cancel out. Digital sensors just can not compete with the sensitivity of a chemical photocathode, simply because we can not get the photon detecting elements of a digital sensor to match the density of a homogeneously coated chemical photocathode. I'm sticking to my budget pvs-14 that I put together for $1500. And yes, Its only $500 more expensive than the aurora, but is much more than 4x as good, because it actually works.
does it show stars similar to pvs-14s? Stars were my favourite thing about night vision
Do audits on manufactured consumer products in Mexico
Oh because China is our friend?
Slim chance you'll reply... But, I'm curious about the lag. What are we talking about... Half sec latency or more? Thank you in advance!
Somewhere around 100 milliseconds
Its workable if you have an illuminator and can run it at 60fps. 30fps could be manageable after some practice, but I wouldn't go below that. As I'm sure you are aware, the higher the fps, the lower the exposure for each individual frame. In a reasonably dark scenario where you would want to use night vision instead of just your eyes, the aurora would need to be at ~15fps to produce a usable image. At that fps, even ignoring the input lag, the time between frames is already pretty severe, and I would never recommend trying to walk like that.
Can I get helmet mounts for it
Only starlight FPV drone cameras provide NVG capabilities at a true tight budget. A RunCam Night Eagle 3 or Foxeer Cat 3 + monocular display or FPV goggles provide better image quality, better sensitivity, and less latency than the Aurora, at 100 to 130 USD for the total build.
You loose the color though, and still nowhere near as good as an analog tube. But quite a fun device for that price
Where are you finding FPV goggles under $100? If I can get a decent drone and fpv for that cheap I'm buying immediately.
@@MidnightPanther113 Arris VR-009 are 55 to 70 usd, and work fairly well
Do any of these have true-zoom, instead of just crappy digital-zoom ?
Yooo that’s sick
More examples of the actual device's outputs, ideally with a regular daylight camera videoing the scene at same time, please. Everything you said could have taken about 2 minutes at the end .
Also: ATN is selling quite good passive thermal devices with 10 hour battery life for same or less than the psionics pro right now.
Awesome & Thanks :)
Wait, I know that helicopter! I've worked y'all on the fire side up here in the mountains since y'all got that ship!
I got my Megaorei on sale for under $300
Astro viewing?
Thank you!
If they did away with the recoding stuff they could maybe make a working NOD but for now the PVS14 is the best “cheap” choice sadly I tried so many digital devices aand all failed to live up to my expectations(being able to walk around with them)
They just came out with a new device that is made for helmet mounting and more “operational” considerations.
@@PrepMedic I’m aware and it’s $2500, heavy, requires a battery pack that only run 8hr and still not as good light sensitivity as a PVS14 Gen2+ Photonis that’s 2k or less. Also a single Li AA will get you 50hr of run time.
Much like laser projectors, dash cams and home security cams to a degree, night vision is still not good enough or cost effective at this point to spend the money. I have a thermal camera which is excellent but I probably should keep waiting. Very good review, thank you!
I can see a use in wild land firefighting.
As a wild land firefighter who has experience with this device, it's not really something I would use. We need our hands to cary tools, and our helmets have brims that don't support nvg mounting. Even if this was not an issue, this device just does not have any capabilities that I would not get out of my unaided eyes in ambient light conditions, or a headlamp in low light conditions.
For those who want good empirical/quantitative tests comparing the aurora to other night vision technologies, I can highly recommend these two videos:
Aurora vs Gen 2:
ruclips.net/video/-vDaVcMUlL8/видео.html
Low light test of gen 2 vs gen 3 vs aurora:
ruclips.net/video/oO9qLU-JES4/видео.html
Ill skip for now and wait for the 4K version of that
Not sure you will ever see one tbh. Just a limitation of the technology.
@@DARTHMOBIUS Absolutely true. Still, not convinced it could ever measure up to an analog PC
This $850 night vison camera was easily outperformed by my Canon R5 DSLR, with the cheap 50mm F1.8 on it in video mode, and that isn't even night vision!! Aurora Pro is honestly a POS for the money, and it certainly doesn't feel like $850, It feels small and cheap. Did you forget that?
This seems like a good alternative to PVS systems in a city environment where they are too sensitive and can be damaged by bright lights. This might work.
First. Do I get the night vision as an award🤔🤔😁😁😁
Next to useless in the UK due to flickering on video mode, this is a camera after all.
Here to represent all the 'night vision 101' facebook groups the world has, and say 'No' before they beat me to it.
Not a budget comparison.
ITS WAY OVER PRICED.
so you said you can get a pair of PVS-14 for 2,000 to 3,000 I wouldn't say that's exactly accurate I would say 1,500 to 2,000 is the average price for a pair of PVS-14 from what I've seen now you can get PVS-31 for 2,000 to 3,000 sometimes even 4,000 I would say that's the average price for a pair of PVS-31
1000 dollars isn't "budget" richie !
It is when the next closest alternative is 3k.
@@PrepMedic hmm I was expecting one of those "night vision" sony handycams or the Amazon ones under 250
The difference is this works and those really don’t.
I got a pvs 14 with a gen 2 tube for 1300
And to be honest with you, this works pretty similar to a Gen 2
There is no such thing as color night vision cameras, they don’t exist
You know…. Except for the device shown in this video
It made your co worker look like a demon??? I wish I had a co worker.
Budget? Lord, how much does a non-budget cost? lol
My monocular PVS-14 that I got on sale cost $3500. The Anvis 11s we fly with on the helicopter cost $12,000 a set.
stop trying to look like doc. got dam the flannel shirt and everything.