940nm IR and PVS-14

6mm06

6mm06

Well-known member

Test, Part 1:

The moon finally cooperated and last night allowed me to do some testing with the 940nm spot light and Vic's Gen 3 PVS-14. I tested the outfit last night, five days after the full moon, in the field above my cabin. The night was relatively dark and cloudy, though there was some ambient sky light, but not a lot, and the area was open.

Tonight is darker and I tested the PVS-14 and 940nm behind my house, along a path in the woods. There is a canopy of trees overhead, so the woods was very dark.

My testing involves two separate nights and two separate conditions, from open field and sky, to woods under a canopy of trees.

First, a bit of information of my setup.

I tried the bullet camera behind the PVS-14 but could never seem to get a good focus. I was using a 16mm lens and decided that it was too much magnification, so I purchased a 2.8mm lens to try. It did adjust better than the 16mm, but still was not what I was hoping for. As a result, I ended up taking still shots through the lens with my digital still camera.

Here is how I rigged up the PVS-14 initially with the bullet camera behind it. I attached a picatinny rail to an old rifle stock I have had lying around for years. That allowed me to hold the monocular in place for photos. I only wish the bullet camera would have seen better to get video. Though the video camera didn't work well, I was still able to use the picatinny to mount the PVS-14, and I hand-held my digital still camera behind the ocular.









I set an old mail box post out in the field, and mounted the 940 spot light onto it.








This is the daytime view of the field from my position. Keep in mind the yardage as you view the photos.






This first photo shows the PVS-14 using only ambient light, no illumination. Even though the night was relatively dark,
the PVS-14 was still able to see pretty darn good.






This one shows yardage - ambient light






These next photos are with illumination from the 940nm spot light, in progression as I attempted to get the beam adjusted properly.
The light is too powerful for up close, from 15-20 yards or so. As well, the light doesn't really throw a strong beam at any great
distance, though it does help illuminate better. Basically it gently illuminates shadows. You can see the progression as I turn the
light upward. The distant yardage becomes a bit more illuminated and the shadows are gone.










This next two photos show a 75 yard view, with ambient light only and then with the area illuminated. Compare that to the original
with ambient light and you can see there is a slight difference.

Original, ambient light only





75 yard site illuminated






Conclusion:

The 940nm does help somewhat in the open field. The illumination provided was not drastic and wouldn't win any awards, but did offer a slight increase in brightness
and helped eliminate shadows or darker areas.

The light requires just the right adjustment as to keep from over-illuminating closer ranges. For close range bait hunting coyotes or hogs, and adjusting the light prior to hunting, I think it would work well enough and would be stealthy.


 

Test, Part 2:

Tonight I did another test since the sky is darker. There were a few stars out, but they didn't seem overly bright. The results were not near as good as last night.

Then, I did a different test of the PVS-14 and the 940nm spot light that has 196 LEDs. I tested the units behind my house, along a path in the woods.
The night is very dark, though I can barely see a star or two. The woods offers a lot of darkness due to the canopy of trees overhead.

This is where the PVS-14 and the 940nm light came together as a team. I was very surprised and cannot believe what a difference the light made.
It was drastic compared the the subtle difference in the open field.

This first photo is with ambient light only. It was very dark in the woods.






And this is with the 940nm spot light. Wow. What a difference.






Yardage






My thoughts are that the PVS-14 and the 940nm spot light could make a great combination in dark quarters and up to 100 yards.
It would work great for a bait hunting, though I'm sure some light would be lost when the PVS-14 is placed behind a daytime scope.
Perhaps an Eotec might be the ticket here.

The good thing about the 940 light is that it is pure stealth. I can see no visible glow from it at all.

I wish I could post photos larger than this, but I can't seem to get it done. Regardless of the size photo I upload to Photobucket,
it seems to cut the size down when I post it. I must be doing something wrong since others have posted larger photos, so if anyone knows how
to do that, please advise me.

Last but not least, below is a photo I did initially when I received the PVS-14 from Vic. There was quite a bit of ambient light,
partial moon and stars. This was in my back yard again, under tree canopy and no illumination. With some ambient light, the
PVS-14 is really great.

You will see slightly to the right of center, two black squares. The first one (lower one) is an archery target at 55 yards.
The one above it and further out is at 94 yards.






Special thanks to Vic at TNVC for the loan of the PVS-14 for testing.

I hope this review has helped in some good way.



 
Sure appreciate the effort you've gone to to provide this information. It is good info. Thanks.

I plan to mount a pvs14 behind an Eotech and now I think I'll use one of my 940nm lights with it.
 
For me, no matter what the IR Illuminator wavelength, it is always best to have a Spot instead of a Flood lens systems as the Flood disperses the beam too much and always blows out the ground in front of you.

With a Spot lens or adjustable focus concentrator like a TorchPro or SPIR, you can eliminate the ground wash out from the extraneous IR photons.
 

Norbs, thanks for redoing some of the photos.

Skypup, you are right about flood vs. spot. The only problem with the 940 spot light is that "it is what it is" and there's no adjustment.

1lobo, which 940 light do you plan to use? Be sure to post some results of that.

 
6mm, we cannot thank you enough for the extensive test with those 949nm LED's. Other folks should also note how ambient light, moon, skyglow etc. really effects IR light especially at 940nm.

Great report as I never have tested 940nm LED's in a fixture such as your setup. We've tested plenty of 940 illuminators, but not this type.

Vic
 
Most excellent post Mr 6mm!

I have a pv14 on the way and you research helps us all with our different setups in different everything!

Thanks for you help and results.....
 
6mm, This was a great review and thank you for all that you have done for this forum. When you post such projects it gives everyone a different perspective on the equipment they are using and may want to use in the future. I noticed you had the 940nm mounted on the post between 4 1/2 feet to 5 1/2 feet at my best guess-tamation. On the open field photos it showed a lot of wash out up close.
Would it have been better if the 940nm was mounted higher, say 7 or 8 feet and adjusted more to the open field than up close and low ? My other question is how do you think this 940nm would work with a Photon XT ? I was thinking about using a magnetic base and mounting it on top of a SUV that is completly camo'd out to break up the outline when parked. I love the idea of the complete stealth mode of the 940nm and think this just might work but I would like your opinion or maybe DoubleUps imput on such an idea. Thanks Bob
 

Robert, thanks for the good words. I don't know much but I'm learning as I go.

Yes, I agree that the light would probably have been better up higher. Actually the post I keep it mounted on at the bait site is high, but for testing in the field I didn't have (and didn't want to purchase) a pole just for that test, so I used the mail box post that I already had. I did have to angle the light up quite a bit to keep from getting wash-out at closer ranges as you know.

As to the 940nm with the Photon, for the life of me I cannot remember if I tested the Photon when I had it, with the 940 or not. I don't specifically remember that I did. If I did and if it had worked well, I think I would have remembered. So, in honesty I cannot answer your question.



 
6mm, I looked back at all your post and found nothing in writing or video that shows the XT & 940nm. So I think you have not tried this combo. If a man could get a little distance, say max 150 yds it could be worth a try. Here in Washington it is all open country. Bob
 

Bob, I can say for a fact that the 940nm won't work at a distance with the home-made bullet camera job. However, when I place the 940 light close to the bait site, like 20 yards away and I sit back in the cabin at 60 yards, I can see enough to shoot.

The bullet camera sees very well with the 940 light and the 16mm lens only, but when placed behind a daytime scope, it doesn't.

The Photon is very light sensitive from what I observed with it, but still I think the 940 spot light will not throw a useable beam very far. That's just my guessing at the moment. Would be nice if it did.

 
I've tried a 940nm t20 type light with the Photon, and it did not work well for me. I was more successful with an 850nm IR source. I am going to try that light with the PVS-14 and see if it will help it on dark nights. Seems the Photon doesn't like the 940. It seems to me that different systems respond better to their own particular bandwidth. Does anyone know if any of the manufacturers publish their most effective source frequency?
 
1lobo, I have the T20 in 850nm and I was not looking at the use of a 940nm T20. I was looking at 6mm's 196 LED 940nm IR spot light which I think would throw much more light than a single T20 940nm light. If each sytsem responded to a certain band width why would Sightmark place an inferior 810nm on the XT instead of a adjustable 850nm which works better by everything that I have read. It seem some new devices coming on the market are not given enough trial & error before being offerd to the consumer. So far with the Photon XT it has only needed small adjustments to make it better for the consumer and that is very lucky for us. Just look at all the problems that ATN is having with the new digital scope that they pushed to the market before it was ready. Bob
 
David, here is what the 27 watt IR LED 850nm Larson Electronics on my UTV looks like from the cab using a PVS-14 ITT Pinnacle GENIII:


Cattle%20Pasture%20Road%20850nmB.jpg



Powerline3.jpg



I am able to drive around and navigate using it at night with no problem.....or sit in the cab and snipe out vermin a long ways out!
smile.gif
 
That is a pretty bright source Skypup. You are blessed with a good piece of equipment there. It looks like it really gives a lot of reflected light in the near field. A really strong IR spotlight would be pretty handy with NV as long as you didn't have to be in the bushes.
 
Originally Posted By: robertjay531lobo, I have the T20 in 850nm and I was not looking at the use of a 940nm T20. I was looking at 6mm's 196 LED 940nm IR spot light which I think would throw much more light than a single T20 940nm light. If each sytsem responded to a certain band width why would Sightmark place an inferior 810nm on the XT instead of a adjustable 850nm which works better by everything that I have read. It seem some new devices coming on the market are not given enough trial & error before being offerd to the consumer. So far with the Photon XT it has only needed small adjustments to make it better for the consumer and that is very lucky for us. Just look at all the problems that ATN is having with the new digital scope that they pushed to the market before it was ready. Bob

Hi Bob,

I've got a Photon XT and the on board illuminator really works well. It just doesn't have the wattage that a T20 does. I use both with mine, but the on board has the best light. If it had more wattage, it would use the scope batteries more, so I guess it was a trade off. I suspect that the closer the frequency gets to visible, the better for the scope. I definitely agree that the digital offerings need more trial before being released. Doesn't seem like the digital manufacturers really understand the market. I think the most likely manufacturer tested make of scope in the digital arena is the digisight. The new one looks to be pretty nice and the rangefinder on it is a nice touch.
 
My onboard IR on the Photon is good to about 75 yds on a dark night, but of course more moon increases that somewhat. The T-20 takes the shooting ability out to farther than I would care to shoot at night. I have killed coyotes and cats at over 240 yds with the T-20, but can see deer in the field at over 400 yds even on a dark night. That's a pretty long night time shot in my opinion. Obviously a more powerful onboard IR is going to consume more internal battery power. The T-20 is pretty small and lightweight and gives all the light I need in fact I usually run mine on only 50% power. It would have been nice had Sightmark kept the hookup for a battery pack on the 4.6 XT but that may come back in some latter iteration.
 


Write your reply...
Back
Top