Thread: Pard vs Pulsar

Hi everyone,
I was reading this thread because I was searching for opinions regarding Pard vs Pulsar. My thanks to those who have contributed and thus helped me in a small way.

The discussion about moisture ingress caught my eye.... I think what might be overlooked is that IP67, or whatever water/dust rating the unit had, does not prevent air entering and leaving. I work as a Technical Investigator in the rail industry and we see "waterproof" equipment with moisture in it quite often. It happens because air can get in or out unless it is hermetically sealed. Air can carry moisture with it via humidity etc. Once inside, temperature/pressure changes will then allow it to condense, leaving water inside an otherwise "waterproof" container. Small periods of exposure to moist air don't normally cause a problem, but the effect can cause problematic levels of water to enter something if it is exposed to a damp environment for a prolonged period where temperature fluctuations like the daily cycle can force air in and out in order to equalise the internal pressure. As an example, my father once left a Rolex watch in a field (while he was moving an electric fence for the farmers out there). He found it several months later, but there was condensation on the inside of the dial, despite the watch being water resistant to several 100 metres.

Closer to the subject, do people believe Pard when they quote a sensitivity of <25 mT for their 640x480 sensor? I've read literature from Pulsar claiming that <25 mT for such a small pixel size, 12 micrometres, is not possible consistently in a production environment. I wondered whether guys who have actually used the Pard 640x480 , 25mT devices have been impressed with the picture quality? (my dilemma is the Pard TA62 35mm vs the Pulsar Axion 2 XG35).

Thanks

Originally Posted by leechpool

Hi everyone,
I was reading this thread because I was searching for opinions regarding Pard vs Pulsar. My thanks to those who have contributed and thus helped me in a small way.

The discussion about moisture ingress caught my eye.... I think what might be overlooked is that IP67, or whatever water/dust rating the unit had, does not prevent air entering and leaving. I work as a Technical Investigator in the rail industry and we see "waterproof" equipment with moisture in it quite often. It happens because air can get in or out unless it is hermetically sealed. Air can carry moisture with it via humidity etc. Once inside, temperature/pressure changes will then allow it to condense, leaving water inside an otherwise "waterproof" container. Small periods of exposure to moist air don't normally cause a problem, but the effect can cause problematic levels of water to enter something if it is exposed to a damp environment for a prolonged period where temperature fluctuations like the daily cycle can force air in and out in order to equalise the internal pressure. As an example, my father once left a Rolex watch in a field (while he was moving an electric fence for the farmers out there). He found it several months later, but there was condensation on the inside of the dial, despite the watch being water resistant to several 100 metres.

Closer to the subject, do people believe Pard when they quote a sensitivity of <25 mT for their 640x480 sensor? I've read literature from Pulsar claiming that <25 mT for such a small pixel size, 12 micrometres, is not possible consistently in a production environment. I wondered whether guys who have actually used the Pard 640x480 , 25mT devices have been impressed with the picture quality? (my dilemma is the Pard TA62 35mm vs the Pulsar Axion 2 XG35).

Thanks

The Chinese have well and truly slotted into first place in regards to thermal sensors. I wouldn't be too concerned about what Pulsar claim is possible. Instead spend time comparing products side by side in various conditions and draw a conclusion from what you see.