Thread: How important LRF in thermal handheld?

I am considering purchasing a handheld thermal and am trying to decide how high up the list of priorities should a built LRF be? Should I sacrifice other specs to ensure the one I buy has rangefinder built. This would save having another piece of kit ( current range finder). How useful would the current range finder be in the dark

Keen to hear your thoughts and experiences
Thanks
Mike

If i could do it again i would go removable battery and LRF

Hamish

Sent from my SM-S911B using Tapatalk

I did think about it when ordering a thermal recently after reading some of the comments on here, but I don't use a rangefinder much during daylight, so would imagine even less so at night. Also, the way I would use the thermal at night would be to sit it out in an area where I expect animals to pop out, so would do all my rangefinding before dark. It depends on how you intend to use the thermal.

There’s too much guesswork trying to estimate range in a thermal monocular or scope. My scope( HIKMICRO th50z 2.0) doesn’t have lrf. My monocular another HIKMICRO ch25 does have lrf. Either one or the other needs to have it. Just leave your regular lrf home. They are only useful after dark if you have your long range torch to light up what you want to range.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I guess it depends what kind of shooting you do. My main use is possum shooting in an area I know well and been doing it there long enough Im familiar with the ranges. So I bought one without a rf on it.

You need it if you’re shooting out to any distance where you need to know range.

Possums in trees - not needed
Rabbits with shotgun - not really needed
Rabbits inside 50 with .22 - helpful
Rabbits 50 to 80 with .22 - much more helpful
Anything past 80 with.22 - needed
Anything past 100 with any calibre - helpful to needed.


I use an old pulsar xq?? from 2016 and a pulsar Telos with lrf. The telos has some great resolution if you want to count the hairs on a rabbit, but it doesn’t completely blow the old unit out of the water. The old one still tells me where animals are and actually has better FOV. The main thing with a thermal is it lets you see more animals, even the cheaper ones are still infinitely better than a spotlight. Higher specs are better but at a rate of diminishing returns and improvement is only by degree. Whereas a built in RF is a fundamental improvement.

A thermal with 20% better picture won’t put 20% more deer on the deck, but you will be able to see them 20% better when you see them.
A built in RF will preclude you having to take marginal shots at unknown distances.

Get one with a RF you won’t regret it ,judging distance is hard in the thermal. Better to have it and not need it then to need it and not have it

Originally Posted by longshot

You need it if you’re shooting out to any distance where you need to know range.

Possums in trees - not needed
Rabbits with shotgun - not really needed
Rabbits inside 50 with .22 - helpful
Rabbits 50 to 80 with .22 - much more helpful
Anything past 80 with.22 - needed
Anything past 100 with any calibre - helpful to needed.


I use an old pulsar xq?? from 2016 and a pulsar Telos with lrf. The telos has some great resolution if you want to count the hairs on a rabbit, but it doesn’t completely blow the old unit out of the water. The old one still tells me where animals are and actually has better FOV. The main thing with a thermal is it lets you see more animals, even the cheaper ones are still infinitely better than a spotlight. Higher specs are better but at a rate of diminishing returns and improvement is only by degree. Whereas a built in RF is a fundamental improvement.

A thermal with 20% better picture won’t put 20% more deer on the deck, but you will be able to see them 20% better when you see them.
A built in RF will preclude you having to take marginal shots at unknown distances.

Like you I have an early xq 28f thermal, it's resolution is more than adequate and as long as it goes I shan't upgrade. I also have a thermion scope with exceptional resolution by comparison, no rangefinder but there is a mil dot in the reticle options and that suffices as a range finder for me

Mine has a LRF but it's not TBR unfortunately, thats probably the only thing i could critique it for.

TBR is a nice to have but not really necessary at realistic hunting ranges say to 300 m it only has a noticeable effect at angles over 25 degrees then it does start to have an effect. A quick reference is 25⁰ 90% of measured range, 35⁰ 80% and 45⁰ 70% and if your shooting down or up a cliff 55⁰ is 50% of the straight line distance. Most people either over or underestimate the angle they shoot at and zero distance has a big influence in that.

LRF on a thermal is a great tool. Helps when outlines are not clear it its a possum at 30m or a deer at 300m, then you can reposition for a better/closer view as required.

Also found it handy first thing in the morning, can get positioned and setup for a shot setup while still dark then wait for first light. Saves movement.

previous handheld didn't have it and I didn't think I'd miss it.
When I got my new one with LRF and removable battery. So much better.

Thanks all for your wisdom and advice the sacrifice to get a lrf in the two models I am comparing is a change from sub 20 NETD to one with 35 NETD but has a LRF think that’s a sacrifice I am willing to make. Especially given not that long ago sub 40 was as good as it got.
Mike

I don't have LRF but i reckon it would be handy in helping the shooter (we work in tandem mostly) be sure he's looking at the same spot in uniform scrub country.

Originally Posted by Echo2012

I am considering purchasing a handheld thermal and am trying to decide how high up the list of priorities should a built LRF be? Should I sacrifice other specs to ensure the one I buy has rangefinder built. This would save having another piece of kit ( current range finder). How useful would the current range finder be in the dark

Keen to hear your thoughts and experiences
Thanks
Mike

Get a LRF buy once cry once, but and here's the but. You don't have always sacrifice specs/performance, if you want a work around here are some pointers.
The LRF is a real advantage but NETD is not the be all and end all neither are pixels but they are a performance indication for sure.
I would recommend looking at a low base magnification unit something around 1.5 to 2 power this allows you to identify hazards and terrain more easily and it allows rapid scanning and faster target acquisition in the dark.
A base mag of 3.5 or more can be a total PITA. Avoid it if you can in a hand held. In a scope it's a different matter I won't discuss that here.
Low NETD is a good guide to performance but it doesn't mean too much until conditions deteriorate most thermals detect, identify and recognise just fine until the weather packs in then a low NETD will perform better.
More pixels means better resolution but if you want higher magnification in more open country then every time you double the magnification you half the number of pixels you can use.
Some thermal units come in high base magnification because they provide better resolution for less cost but the downside is loss of performance with scanning and terrain recognition.
My work around in the early days was using the PIP and a graduated reticle in the PIP of the scope. Check if your hand held has a PIP and some sort of reticle or stadiometric range guide (pulsar do and so should others)
Most of my deer I shoot under 100 meters I used picture in picture (PIP) till I got LRF.
I would run the PIP at 6 power and the base at 1.5. I knew from experience that if a reds brisket covered 3 hashes on the PIP it was under 200 meters. If your handheld has something similar it will work as a rough range finder too.
This technique won't work on rabbits because their size varies so much.
Hope this helps.
Edit to add your going to keep that thermal LRF hand held in your vehicle everywhere you go and it'll replace your current range finder 90% of the time but keep in mind no Germanium lens likes being pointed directly into the sun, ever.