Military cowers in SuperVision goggles
Posted on Apr 13, 07 12:24 AM PDT
Your Comments
Comments will be published immediately if you use a Disqus, Facebook or Twitter account. Anonymous comments will be moderated.
Legacy Comments
By PI , 09/07/08 10:53 AM (CommentID #770728)
I have owned a high end ITT Gen 3 scope (paid $4500 for it) and was not impressed. It was used for surveillance work and mounted to a Sony Handycam. In order to get zoom capability, I mount a 75mm to 300mm lens on the front which gave me 3-8 magnification. This made the whole device about a foot long, and when mounted to the camcorder about 18" long! This will very unwieldy. It also took way too long to adjust the camcorder to shoot with and focus: you had to adjust the camcorder, adjust NV diopter, adjust zoom optical lens...by that time the subject was gone! I wound up selling the Gen III and went to just using the Sony Handycam with an IR laser illuminator. Works better for capturing images and shots don't get missed. This viewer (SV), from the specs, seems to work on the same principle....like a camcorder's CCD with zoom capability (optical zoom would be better than digital zoom) but with a hi-res monitor for viewing...like a Sony camcorder but without the recording capability. I think they are on the right track, if they put in an IR illuminator for long range viewing (preferably a laser IR with variable spot to flood) and have a way to record the view with an onboard memory stick card or video output capability, then I will buy one! Until then, it just isn't a significant improvement or difference over the Sony camcorder/IR illuminator configuration to justify buying it. I'll wait for the next generation version to see if the bugs have been worked out, but they are on the right track. Hope you are reading this Xenonics.
By no one , 04/04/08 4:46 PM (CommentID #610306)
this is a night vision devise. Using it in sunlight would have damaged and probably cause malfunction at night
By Nighthunter , 16/02/08 4:45 PM (CommentID #490680)
I purchased one of these "night vision" gadgets a few weeks ago and am completely unsatisfied with it. It has a hard enough time producing an image in complete sunlight, and only a fuzzy image in bright moonlight. The video Xenonics has on their website must have been extremely altered/enhanced, because there is no way this piece of junk could have seen anything at night. Save your money and purchase a Generation 1 night vision device before you waste your money on this poor quality, unreliable junk. Xenonics should have called it the day vision device, since it is useless any other time than in full sunlight.
By SVlover , 04/12/07 9:21 AM (CommentID #383952)
No, I don't and never have worked for SuperVision. You are correct however, I haven't spent 3X's more on 'real nightvision', but than again I don't plan on going on any military "Special Ops" missions. I'm just a regular guy who enjoys outdoor sports/hunting activities. I wonder what the incentive is for people who have never even used SuperVision, to post reviews as though they have?
By someone , 01/12/07 5:46 AM (CommentID #381145)
and the people who make positive comments about supervision are probably working for supervision or they never used a real night vision device.
By someone , 01/12/07 5:46 AM (CommentID #381144)
and the people who make positive comments about supervision are probably working for supervision or they never used a real night vision device.
By someone , 01/12/07 5:43 AM (CommentID #381141)
lol no ccd can have better light amplification than gen3 :) i have seen the videos. there was two guys detected from far away. in gen3 view it was pitch black. if the scene is pitch black in gen3 view how could these two guys see each other. (cause gen3 is 1000 times better than dark adapted eyes) if the scene is pitch black on gen3 then you are in a bunker or a cave! so if it was that dark they could not have seen each other with their natural sight. BEWARE! this is an expensive toy i refuse to believe that its even as good as gen2 when it comes to light amplification. in a dark forest, without ir light : you will se NOTHING!
By Doc , 08/11/07 11:59 AM (CommentID #355986)
I paid 1149.00 for mine. After I demoed 1,2,3 generation in various configurations this is the nightvision that I was sold on. Take it from a hunting geek - keep your eye on this product.
By SVlover , 16/10/07 9:10 AM (CommentID #336316)
SVOwner, no Gen 3 nightvision device works without some ambient light source or IR illuminator. It is designed to be used in low-light, urban areas, where there is plenty of ambient light sources. "Looking into the shadows" suggests that there is plenty of ambient lighting available or shadows wouldn't be occuring, and by the way in this environment traditional Gen 3 (PVS-14)is rendered useless because this ambient lighting causes a 'white-out' or 'blooming'. Additionally, it's strength is it's zoom capabilities to 300 yards, a strength you only tested "out to 75 yards". Test it again at 300 yards, this time in an urban area after dark, the gain functions will truly allow you to 'see into the shadows'. I use mine for observing deer at dusk/dawn to evaluate and determine the 'trophy' status of all bucks walking along or into a field by my deer stand and it works wonderfully! I have never used traditional Gen 3 and I'm not about to pay over 3 times what my SuperVision device cost just to 'compare'.
By SVOwner , 16/09/07 1:34 PM (CommentID #303096)
Forget the price for a moment, lets talk performance.
IF, IF, IF, IF you have and don't mind using an IR lightsource this device produces a clear sharp image out to 75 yards. Could be more and most likely is but I was using the IR from a Gen 1 unit as a flashlight and that's it's limit.
Another HUGE drawback is the white on black image. All NV devices affect organic night vision to some extent but this thing leaves a white square over that eye for at least 5 minutes.
The gain adjustment is light-normal-dark. Not exactly an opportunity to fine tune. At any rate I couldn't see squat through anything other than normal no matter the conditions.
As for use with no IR source don't make me laugh. It is useless. The only way you can "see into the shadows" is if you're Carnac.
So my conclusion is this was a very bad investment. I would have been much better off investing the same amount a decent Gen 2 or maybe 3 and purchasing several IR light sources that I can place around my property and control remotely.
My theory is I live in a remote area and my opponents would be casual looters in the event of a catastrophe. Hurricane for instance. I don't expect them to come with ANY NV capability.
Considering price, capability, blinding after image and so on I rate this unit a 3 out of 10. Not too good when the $139 Gen 1 gets a 2.
Do not buy,
By SVOwner , 15/09/07 1:44 PM (CommentID #302207)
I bit and forked over $1,100. Been 150% humidity and haven't put it to a true test YET.
I will say that thus far I am unimpressed in the extreme.
Tonight I will do comparison. I have $139 Gen1 mono for side by side and I've used latest military but don't own. Should be able to give decent review tomorrow.
By nvphoto , 17/07/07 8:52 PM (CommentID #247940)
Nice little unit, only one problem,...IT DOES NOT WORK IN THE DARK!!! it needs an infrared illuminator just like a Sony nightshot camcorder. check out the "IGEN 20/20" same thing for $450.00 there is no comparison to GEN III night-vision scopes,the company has changed the description of Supervision from "night vision scope" to "low light viewer" to avoid litigation. krugstoneco is a company insider pumping the stock.
By Vedel , 06/07/07 2:51 PM (CommentID #233992)
This product is so good, it's sick! $1400 is a STEAL. I have seen GenIII that isn't this good for anywhere from $2600 to as much as $7000! And as for trivial, if you don't know the applications for night vision and how critical it can be.. don't bother to learn. You don't need it anyway. Comparing nightvision's usefulness to a PS3. WTF
By Billy the mountain , 29/06/07 7:38 PM (CommentID #226158)
This sweet little unit is so far above and beyond 3rd gen it is unreal. The price is Killer! you could easily blow 5k on some 3rd gen gear and have nothing like the quality of this unit
By krugstoneco , 16/04/07 7:42 AM (CommentID #142276)
Although the product is superior to current military Gen 3 devices, the military is not the target market. The device is designed for security, observation, law-enforcement and outdoor recreation. Not too many people in these fields wear helmets, nor would need it mounted as a scope. The 380K pixels should be more than adequate for displaying intended images, its not for creating artwork!
By Reaper , 13/04/07 9:42 PM (CommentID #139794)
I suppose the high price tag mentioned here targets the consumer market, as it is many people are already uncomfortable forking out $599 for a PS3, let alone a $1,399 for something as trivial as a pair of night vision goggles.
By DR , 13/04/07 2:21 PM (CommentID #139619)
"...biggest drawbacks to the SuperVision night goggles at the moment would be its inability to be mounted onto a helmet or gun..."
Really? Its a simple structural modification that is needed, the functionality of the device is would not be hampered or impeded if mounted.
"...the prohibitively high price tag of $1,399..."
This is nothing compared to the Military;s ANVIS-9s.
Really disappointing review... please do your research.
Featured Posts
Top Stories
Nvidia fighting Intel with...humor?
Brainwave Sofa knows what you are thinking
Windows 7 smashes Microsoft sales records
Motorola Droid Review
Dell Adamo XPS hands-on and final pricing
eStarling 802.11n Touchscreen Connected Frame
Bring TIM targets business meetings
Novation Launchpad unveiled
Microsoft Courier user interface in action
Advertisement
