Request for information on thermal imagers. (1 Viewer)

[Andy Lakin]

I have been interested in getting one for a while but haven't a clue what to get.The tech specs mean nothing to me so any pointers would be much appreciated. I'f anybody has used a particular model please give a short review. My dad goes rabbit shooting at night and says that he had 41 Woodcock just in 2 fields the other night so it shows what is out there (not hunting them just observing). He was also saying that he was blown away with the ability to pick out small mammals I.e mice etc over a decent distance and also watch bigger mammals up close without disturbing them.Has anybody used them for detecting cryptic species such as Long Eared Owls to find them without disturbing them?

There seems to be a vast difference in price levels, am I right in thinking that you need to be spending around £2000 for something decent? There was a review of one in a recent edition of Birdwatch (will have to look the model up) ive saved a YouTube video about it but haven't had the time to watch it yet. Any feedback gratefully received. It seems that if these become more widespread it may reveal a lot more birds of certain species.
Cheers Andy

 

[Jacana]

The West Midlands Ringing Group pioneered these methods. They have lots of information on their website which could help you get started:

Thermal Birding | WMRG | West Midlands Ringing Group | Thermal Imaging

WMRG are a national award winning group for innovative ornithology. They pioneered thermal technology for bird surveys and are specialists utilising this to survey farmland to create baseline data for ELMS. They continue to develop the use of this technology and sharing it world wide.

www.westmidlandsringinggroup.co.uk

They did a recent Twitter thread on different makes and models too:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1613266314658717713

 

[jurek]

Review of PULSAR Helion-2 XP50 thermal monocular – Mammal Watching

www.mammalwatching.com

Night vision equipment for mortals

Looking for advice on night vision equipment which is practical to use in the field and still within a price range of a normal birder. So far, I did not bother with night vision equipment, because I thought that it is - too expensive - field of view is very small compared to binoculars, so...

www.birdforum.net

 

[Mike Crawley]

I was going to mention the West Midlands Ringing Group. Had a fascinating chat with one of their members at Birdfair last summer, about thermal imaging to help ringing Common Snipe and Jack Snipe.
They shared a large tent/small marquee with the Pulsar folks. Obviously it was a spanking hot so no chance to look at/through the equipment

 

[edenwatcher]

Just been out this afternoon finding a day roosting woodcokc 50m from home. Impossible to find without the imager hidden in a gorse filled ditch. Will post some woodcok photos later. I use it on my WeBS count to find jack snipe/snipe.
After dark various mammals close to home including badger.
Yet to find a roosting owl with it, but mean to have nother go soon.
It works best on cold cloudy days.

Rob

 

[Farnboro John]

Just been out this afternoon finding a day roosting woodcokc 50m from home. Impossible to find without the imager hidden in a gorse filled ditch. Will post some woodcok photos later. I use it on my WeBS count to find jack snipe/snipe.
After dark various mammals close to home including badger.
Yet to find a roosting owl with it, but mean to have nother go soon.
It works best on cold cloudy days.

Rob

Not usually in short supply!

Which one have you got Rob?

John

 

[edenwatcher]

Not usually in short supply!

Which one have you got Rob?

John

Cheapest Pulsar Axion model (XM22).

Rob

 

[Owene]

This one at nhbs seems miles cheaper than most but nhbs usually stock good stuff. Anyone got any experience of it.

 

[Andy Lakin]

Thanks for the replies.

 

[Mysticete]

I'd also be curious how useful the NHBS Monocular is. Feels like most decently reviewed models when I was looking some years back cost more $2000. Would be nice if they started getting into the "expensive but doesn't require selling your kidney" price range.

 

[Farnboro John]

I'd also be curious how useful the NHBS Monocular is. Feels like most decently reviewed models when I was looking some years back cost more $2000. Would be nice if they started getting into the "expensive but doesn't require selling your kidney" price range.

Just what are kidneys going for in the states these days?

John

 

[opisska]

We have been putting available information into the thread linked by Jurek above. Overall the important point is that judging the capabilities of different models requires either long-term experience or immediate comparison in one place. Otherwise it's very difficult to compare because conditions, methods of use and individual preferences make a big impact. I think eventually as more people get those, there will be more immediate comparisons. Nowadays it's not very common to meet another thermal owner in the field, but I am pretty sure this is gonna change quite quickly. It's getting mainstream.

 

[pppppvvvv]

I have the Pulsar axion key xm22. ~£1000, when I bought it.
It is amazing, it would feel very strange going out birding without it nowadays.

I get most use in daylight hours. I'm not sure any living creature evades me nowadays, which can take away a bit of the fun , the challenge definitely isn't the same!

I'm pretty sure we should be looking at cheaper, not more expensive models to that.
For birding, there is absolutely no benefit in being able to record what you are seeing, no benefit in the heat trace being sharper, wider field of view is debatable as you tend to sweep, see something warm blooded and then try to find it with torch and/or binoculars in order to identify.

Even that "cheap" nhbs one has wi-fi streaming which is of debatable use! so there is another feature you could lose.

Swappable batteries are vital. I'd avoid anything with the battery built in.

The question is, how cheap can we go for comparable performance, at which point every birder could be going out armed with one.
(Or when will they be built into binoculars, pressing a button overlaying the thermal image onto your binocular view. That will be really cool)
Unfortunately, I don't have that answer, but I wouldn't be surprised if a £500 model without any of the bells and whistles would be just fine.

 

[Stonefaction]

That TD210 could more or less be connected to a Nightfox Cub IR monocular relatively easily* to give a binocular like appearance, allowing you to switch from thermal to infrared just by opening/closing one eye.

* something solid to keep the two a nose-width apart, held in place by a few elastic bands, would probably work well enough.

 

[Mono]

If you are using a thermal imager to find things to look at with normal optics then the cheaper end of the market will be fine. If you are using a thermal at night to look at things with then more thermal pixels are better. When looking at individual models it is important to note if more money is actually buying you more sensor pixels or just more bells and whistles; bluetooth, video recordings, digital zoom etc.

 

[pppppvvvv]

And equally important is that the view, as well as picking out heat, can make out foliage and twigs, branches etc.
Especially in daytime, they are of little use showing you birds sitting in the open that you can see anyway, but they will find birds and mammals that are well camouflaged. You really need the perspective in terms of where it is in relation to a twig or post. Going from the thermal image to binoculars isn't easy, unless you can say it is in the fork of branches or beneath the tallest tree etc.

I don't know if this would get even harder with a cheaper model.

(And if you previously thought there are a lot of Woodpigeons around.. trust me, that's about to get 10 times worse!!)

 

[opisska]

Well this thermaling for birds during the day must be a specifically UK thing, mainly due to the specifically UK weather Thermals are pretty much useless when Sun is shining, because that creates more contrast than living animals. A forest through which Sun shines is a kaleidoscope, there is nothing to see. Also one look into the Sun with the scope and it's probably fried? That having said, it has been of enormous help to us in tropical rainforest on cloudy days. Literally changes the game.

 

[Mysticete]

Well this thermaling for birds during the day must be a specifically UK thing, mainly due to the specifically UK weather Thermals are pretty much useless when Sun is shining, because that creates more contrast than living animals. A forest through which Sun shines is a kaleidoscope, there is nothing to see. Also one look into the Sun with the scope and it's probably fried? That having said, it has been of enormous help to us in tropical rainforest on cloudy days. Literally changes the game.

I've heard of people using thermal scopes at least in the early morning to locate antpittas and tinamous in rainforest settings in places like Ecuador and Costa Rica. So I think the birding applications are a bit wider than often considered for the devices.

 

[opisska]

Yes that's what I am saying in the last sentence! The people you heard doing it in Costa Rica may have been me, I think I wrote about exactly that

 

[jurek]

If you are using a thermal imager to find things to look at with normal optics then the cheaper end of the market will be fine. If you are using a thermal at night to look at things with then more thermal pixels are better.

Actually, more pixels mean you can locate an animal from a longer distance, or animal partially hidden in the grass, bushes etc. For example an owl roosting in the tree, with just part of its wings and tail visible. More info in the threads I linked above.