ATN 4K 5-20x / Pard008 comparison by Bruce
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 31 ธ.ค. 2024
- A few weeks ago I visited Bruce (UK NV Forum’s NV Guru @Phoenix), to film him talking us through his new purchase: a secondhand ATN X-Sight 4K 3-12x. He was going to supply me some footage filmed on it of day and night pest control, but his plans changed…
1. He and @Sauer had a good laugh while out bagging bunnies, but the language would have been a bit ripe for TH-cam.
2. He decided to trade it in and get a new ATN X-Sight 4k 5-20x, to make a better direct comparison video beside his Pard008.
This video starts with my intro + Bruce talking us through pros and cons of the 3-14x X-Sight 4K, then from @16:23 (after a brief explanatory explanation by me) -he films a direct comparison by day and night, with both his Pard008 and brand new ATN 5-20x on his allow plate.
The subject is his neighbour’s ridgeline 100yards away, including the specific detail of the ventilation tile.
PLEASE WATCH THIS VIDEO IN FULL-SCREEN, TO APPRECIATE THE FULL EFFECT OF THE COMPARISON. Both scopes were recording in full HD (1,920x1,080 or 16:9), though as you’ll see from my explanation, I corrected the Pard’s footage to 1,440x1,080 or 4:3, as the eyepiece displays in 4:3.
We hope you find this interesting, we certainly did!
Airgun forum NV section: www.airgunforu...
Airgun BBS NV section: www.airgunbbs.c...
#PARD008, #ATNX-Sight, #ATN5-20x, #Impartialreview, #directcomparison ,#IndependentReviews, #HonestReviews, #TechnicalReview, #DayandNightpestcontrol, #RussDouglas222, #DisabledReviews, #DisabledGunReviews, #UKNVforum
I should point out that my comments regarding the colour rendition and contrast being better on the PARD than the X Sight were based on what I was seeing through each scopes display. That does not come across in the video. On the the video, the colour and contrast appear very similar. However the difference is sharpness is very obvious
Bruce McPherson Firstly I apologise for my previous comment about you guys doing a Bias review I have since removed my previous comment and apologise to both. You do provide very good videos. I agree ATN is a bulky heavier unit and lacks colour contrast compared to the Pard. Other than this I've had no issues with my ATN 3-14 pro other than the mounts where I fitted the Hawke alternatives successfully and to the effect that these mounts lowered the scope for a more comfortable cheek weld. I believe when doing firmware updates to these units it's important to use a good quality SD card formatted on the scope and then the files copied onto it by a computer. Small SD card contacts can easily be touched by the fingers and one should mindful not touch the contacts. My ATN is fitted to a rifle with a heavy barrel and laminated stock so the whole outfit is a lump to lug about and the Pard would help reduce the weight. On the other hand the weight adds to shooting rest stability, I in most cases shoot on a converted small tripod with a cushioned saddle (a good DIY jobbie), so a bit of extra clutter to drag about but it's worth it to sit and shoot comfortably. My Pard is mounted to a lighter rifle and agree it's a big weight saver. The Pard is a lovely unit but it also has its Quirks, the Manual is next to useless the buttons are fiddly with 'Short press or Long press' and a bit more of a learning curve to get use to. As for cross hair centering the ATN is spot on compared to the Pard. Pard should get things dead right out of the box from the word Go especially in the word of CNC machining, we should not be using shims and other additional expensive fixes or bodges to substitute the Pard mounts. The Pard mounts are a bit finicky and the rifle bolt can foul the dovetail clamp so the unit has to be mounted get the bolt clearance and mounted to its last 3 holes to just about get the right eye relief. The ATN has similar issues with the Hawke mounts where the bolt can foul the rear mount that's probably why ATN supply very high mounts. Now everyone needs adjustable combs fitted to get a good cheek weld LOL? The Pard height is higher than ATN with the Hawk mounts. Adding various combinations of various engineered after market mounts do appear to affect the Pard scope height although in most cases I'm against spending money on expensive alternatives just to get the cross hair in the middle. The picatinny inserts to convert to centre the dove mounts are a good fix and well worth it and are cheap to buy of off Flea Bay. Keep up the good work with the videos. It would be good if you can do full tutorial to supplement the Awful Pard manual. ATN do need to step up to the challenge of the Pard, I'll be keeping my ATN it's been a good 'heavy' reliable scope so far and the contrast could be better (comparing Apples to Apples) with it quirks. Best regards to you Both. Paul
@@paulec5864 Paul, thank you for the kind words - it's greatly appreciated - and somewhat unusual in the toxic world that is known as TH-cam comments.
I have written a manual for the 008/008LRF that is an improvement on the original.
contact me on bruce@mflservices.com and I'll send you a copy
@@paulec5864 Thanks very much for that.
Since we did this 100% honest review I've learned some folk have bought perfect ATNs and some shoddy ATNs (like this? 🤷🏻♂️), so clearly ATN have their own quality control issues.
We all know folk who've had issues with the Pard mounts, hopefully the (two) upcoming aftermarket adjustable alternative designs will be available very soon. 🤞
Cheers. Russ
Are there any adjustments that could have been made to improve the picture quality of the ATN, night or day? Contrast, brightness, focusing of the front or rear focus rings?
@@timgreen3770 The brightness of the display can be adjusted. There is no contrast adjustment.
The objective lens can be focussed depending on target distance, and was correctly focussed for the distances shown in the video. The ocular can be focussed to suit the users eye sight, but obviously that does not show in the video
Good vid, many thanks. I note that every video you produce puts pard008 at the top....I had one not the lrf btw...found it great on air rifle but had to frequently check zero...I wouldn't fancy it's chance of surging if the owner had a fall as we often do when out at night...My new pulsar Digex on my 204 is imo best I've owned so far..needs little and sometimes no IR. It also fits the rifle better than the rest..
Thanks Phil, well the Pards are certainly not perfect, with not the best quality mounts (leading to zeroing issues for some folk), plus the compact size + lack of internal shielding gives interference on audio of recorded videos (once battery gets down to one bar).
Bruce was honestly hoping for good things from the 5-20x ATN (hence shelling out for it), but he was sadly disappointed. 🤷🏻♂️
I'm hoping the Sightmark Wraith 4k will turn out to be a great scope, just hope it's not too long before we can get hold of one. 🤞
All the best, cheers. Russ
Excellent review , thank you 👍
I'm interested in getting nv for my super ten fac and was deliberating what to get , love the fact that the x sight redirects the reticle when using the rangefinder ,
Thanks Steve, yep if you checkout a channel like ARPC (@Air Rifle Pest Control) or @Wolverine Vermin Hunting, you'll see Jonny & Garry using theirs to good effect.
Bruce's 3-14x worked well but the higher-spec 5-20x annoyingly crashed a lot.
Cheers. Russ
@@RussDouglas222
Thanks for your reply ,I watch the lads all the time exalent channels and very informative and sometimes amusing ,
Excellent video!! Can you tell me a little bit more about that custom illuminator? It is very interesting indeed. Thanks.
Thanks very much David, do you mean the one Bruce introduces @05:33? Its creator "@some bloke" can be found here on the UK NV forum: www.nightvisionforumuk.com/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=2731
I'm sure he'd be able to answer any more detailed questions on it there?
Thanks for watching, cheers. Russ
@@RussDouglas222 Thanks! I will look him up.
@@davidausterman5915 I've heard back from @some bloke that he doesn't sell these illuminators, he said he felt "...Homesafety have done a much better job"...
And to read more about Homesafety and their VCSEL illuminators, the relevant thread is here (started by Bruce himself), hopefully with ALL the info you could want: nightvisionforumuk.com/viewtopic.php?f=31&t=23562
Cheers. Russ
ATN looks sharper , but probably down to individuals eyes . Great video . You guys certainly love the Pards . Each to their own . I like the concept of a regular scope , regular eye relief . Weight with modern tripods is somewhat irrelevant imo . God be with the days we lugged LightForce and battery packs about 😂😂 I'm looking at getting the Wraith 4k , looks the business .
Bruce is now 100% thermal-only for night shooting & I love the Pards because they're so much lighter than many alternatives.
Weight's certainly not irrelevant for those of us with limited mobility: a heavy rifle's a no-go for me (being on crutches), never-mind lugging a heavy rifle combo around plus a tripod to mount it on!
I'd love to review the Sightmark Wraith 4K Max, as that does indeed look a sweet piece of kit for rimfire use.
Cheers. Russ
@@RussDouglas222 certainly weight 8s an issue on crutches 👌 Thermal has to be the way but unfortunately very expensive . Certainly the choice out there is vast you guys go along way to sifting through it . I use a copy of the Pard 007 called Westhunter , can't fault it . My only gripe on rear add-ons is head position . Doesn't suit me . But each to their own . Keep up with the great videos very informative 👌👌
@@backpackingireland8624 Thanks we'll do our best -another three-way thermal comparison video being filmed this week, using the latest kit. 👌
Cheers. Russ
Good job admirable friend your dedication thank you for sharing brother👌👍✌️😁
Just returned my ATN 4K after only one week as it shutdown twice and having to keep the on pressed down for a eternity to reboot it wasn’t for me
Nightmare! Was that a Wraith 4K, or a 4K mini?
Thanks for watching, cheers. Russ
@@RussDouglas222 ATN 4k …should just sticking with my pard from now on
Not bad !! I will have it pard
Thank you @RussDouglas 222, I have learned a lot from your rigorous testing videos, and thanks to the users and netizens who have followed, you are real gentlemen, full of rigorous scientific spirit, seeking truth from facts and judging things, providing a valuable guide for newbies, thanks again have a nice day！
Thanks, I refrained from buying an ATN 4k and went for the PARD instead
Hope you have a lot of success with it.
Cheers. Russ
Russ, what is your level of satisfaction with the Pard 008?
@@onedrop7967 It's very high, the Pards aren't perfect but they're compact and light plus full HD, which means everything to me. 👌
Thanks for watching and all the best for a happy and healthy 2021.
Cheers. Russ
Brilliant comparison and has changed my mind 180-degrees about the ATN.
I'm not familiar with Pard. What's the price comparison of the ATN to the Pard? Thanks
Both are made in China, but the Pards are significantly smaller and lighter, with built-in IR illuminators.
The ATN 3-14x & new Pard008S (6.5x-13x) are both around £600, the ATN 3-13x with ABL LRF is around £1k, while the new Pard008S-LRF (with built-in ballistic calculator) is £900.
I'd choose the Pard every time, even just to keep things as light and compact as possible.
Thanks for watching, cheers. Russ
great review - thanks for this. Will there be a PARD Thermal in the pipeline ?
Our pleasure Gary.
Hmm Pard Thermal is already out, I/we already reviewed the Pard SA-series (series is three models SA18 to SA35, also inc' LRF versions), with the PARD SA25 Thermal riflescope, there's already a four-part review on my channel...
1/4 th-cam.com/video/MEUvxL6Y4rk/w-d-xo.html
2/4 th-cam.com/video/RBQmI8G_ZdQ/w-d-xo.html
3/4 th-cam.com/video/QbtS8Wp6x6k/w-d-xo.html
4/4 th-cam.com/video/btcyPmws_NA/w-d-xo.html
Cheers. Russ
Cracking review Russ and Bruce, lets be honest the Pard picture is better than the 4K which is a shame as the 4K does have some good points but i will be sticking to the 008 LRF as i to have considered buying a 4K over the last few months
Thanks Simon, you and me both -though I'm also really keen/interested to see how the new Wraith 4K will compare at some point. 🤞
Obviously it has no LRF, and the existing Wraith has (for me) a too-chunky reticle, but hopefully that can be improved-upon at some point via a firmware update. 🤔
Cheers. Russ
How bad does ammunition within a mile probably in the house
You win the award for this month's "most nonsensical ?!?!? comment". 🧐🤷🏻♂️
Hi Russ,, someone mentioned u might be able to help,, I had the atn xsight 11 and upgraded to the pard nv008 with lrf so on my first hunt after shooting my crossbow twice,, all the functions froze,, the screen was still working but all functions and buttons even compass on top was froze,,, I love it so much but very unhappy right now that I may have to put my atn back on!!! Thank you
Hi Michael I'll help if I can, sorry to hear your 008LRF failed you.
I don't know why that would happen but I'd suggest re-loading the firmware to kinda reboot it.
If you have the latest 008LRFP (1024x768 display) then you'll have to contact your retailer, or ask on the UKNV Forum someone there can probably help you (www.nightvisionforumuk.com/viewforum.php?f=3).
But if you have the 008LRF (800x600 display) drop me an email to russ.douglas222@gmail.com and I'll forward you a copy of the firmware with instructions.
You'll need a MicroSD card, ideally 16GB or 8GB in size (i.e. less than 32GB if possible), to install the file I send you.
Cheers. Russ
Forgot to say. That deadpan Kermit HELLO at 00:56 killed me.
I like to think I did a decent Kermit impression when I was a kid, then my voice broke - but I'm tone-deaf so don't recognise my own voice anyway (shrugs).
Cheers. Russ
In this video it's clear that the Pard has a much sharper image. What was the result after the trade? Is Pard still the best choice? Thanks
Hi Mark, Bruce obviously simply got unlucky and purchased a poor quality ATN scope, so he returned the 5-12 and is still using either his Pard or his own thermal scope.
If the ATN had been better quality he'd have used its higher mag for rimfire shooting, as per his original plan.
Cheers. Russ
@@RussDouglas222 thanks Russ. I was going for the ATN but now I’m not sure anymore...
@@TheVerspagets It's clear from this honest comparison you either get lucky with the ATN scope quality-wise, or you don't. But the ATN being than double the weight and size of the PARD (and more expensive), made my own mind up.
I just wish Pard would bring out a ballistic calculator firmware update for the 008LRF, or at least a FFP reticle option (which the ATN already has).
Cheers. Russ
@@RussDouglas222 yes I agree, the atn has some fine futures like the wind function, de ballistics etc
@@TheVerspagets I like the ATN's LRF-linked ballistic calculator and low minimum mag for close-up work, but its size/weight and the quality control lottery of whether you get a fully functioning one or not are huge problems.
Cheers. Russ
I cant find the Pard on Amazon. Asking from Texas. I'm curious how much of a beating it would take mounted on a .308 M1A? I dont have much use for an air rifle but they look nice . that thing would just irritate a 400LB boar.
You have to basically order from Pard themselves, its shipped free from China. I have footage from one on my channel if you care to see. (Hunting/pest shooting) I absolutely love the 008lrf.
Its rated beyond .308 I believe. 5000j or something you can do the conversion.
@levi huebner You could ask SportsmanGunCentre (the UK distributors) via email: info@sportsmanguncentre.com
I know folk use them on 6.5 Creedmoor, so I believe it should be ok on .308"?
Thanks for watching, cheers. Russ
@@RussDouglas222 Good for 3687FPE according to Pard.
Are there any adjustments that could have made the ATN picture quality better, night or day? Such as brightness, contrast, focusing of either the front or rear focus rings?
Wrong thread.
I think it would be fair to say that whether you have an X Sight 3-14 or a 5-20, there is no magnification you can set either of those scope at and get an image that's sharper than the PARD
Both these are much clearer than my pard nv008lrf i purchased a few weeks ago. Any idea why?
Hmm nope (sorry Tim I just reread and realised what you meant 🤦🏻♂️), if your Pard's worse than the ATN here (which was obviously from a substandard batch) maybe you got a duff Pard?
If you think so return it to your retailer, or post-lockdown you could try it alongside another Pard to do a direct comparison first to be sure?
My apologies for misunderstanding the first time.
Cheers. Russ
Yes I mean what I see through my pard screen is more grainy than your videos you post.
@@timgreen3770 Hmm that sounds odd, all I do is de-stretch recorded footage from 1,920x1,080 to 1,440x1,080 (4:3), but it shouldn't look particularly grainy.
Indoors in barns (short range) it can sometimes look almost sparkly clarity-wise, from the VCSEL IR.
Is it a new 008LRFp?
Cheers. Russ
@@RussDouglas222 brand new. And sparkley might be a more accurate description. I've ordered a stronger ir to see if that improves the clarity. I saw your demonstration of the different irs with the pard.
@@RussDouglas222 I haven't used it indoors in the dark.
I'd like to see a comparison of this ATN 4K against the Sightmark 4K max when it gets to UK. Any chance of that?
You and me both Fred, we're hoping to get a Wraith 4K soon/ASAP for review.
Bruce returned this (obviously poor quality) ATN 4K after this video, but if we can get/buy a Wraith 4K we'll try to borrow an ATN 5-20x for a side-by-side review. 🤞👍
Cheers. Russ
I have all three ATN x sights all fitted to 223 22 17 hmr all of which I find spot on.
The 4k has frozen on me a few times but since down loading the program from ATN to sort this out
my night shoots have been without problems.
I did try the Nite sight but it just didn't feel right. so for me Im a great fan of the ATN scope.
Next up maybe the Thermal?
Thanks Colin.
Thermal's a definite game changer whether spotting vermin in barns or fields, though outdoors some conditions (e.g. cold mist) kill all but the best kit.
Expensive but well worth it if you can afford it. 👍
Cheers. Russ
Nice image quality on the Pard, just a shame it has such a lousy mounting position in comparison to the 4k!!
I guess you prefer a traditional scope shape, unlike the reach-back style of the Pard and Wraith scopes?
Cheers. Russ
hi russ, love your imformative videos been watching some time now, could i ask a question>??? due to watching your videos i opted for the pard008 LRF
my problem is with it some days i turn it on to take it out to quickly shoot a rat spotted on security camera and the zeroing had shifted completley to the left or right, have you had problems with this?
or any idea how i can fix it?
Hi Tommy, thanks very much!
Hmm I've not had this happen but occasionally hear from someone who has.
Providing it's not the latest 008pLRF model, then if you drop me an email to RussDouglas222@gmail.com I can forward you a copy of v1.25 firmware, with instructions to instal it (you'll need an 8GB or 18GB MicroSD card (i.e.
@@RussDouglas222 thank u so much mate will do it when on a computer, legend x
I am looking at getting the PARD for my Blaser 300 WIN MAG, when reading the Recoil rate it only goes to .308 cal. I have also seen where it says it can handle up to 5000 Joules which a 300 would be slightly less than. I want to know if I should get this NV if it can handle the recoil. I also shoot it with suppression so it would further reduce the recoil. Thoughts.
Hi troy, this is beyond my experience so I'd suggest you ask fellow shooters/Pard users somewhere like the UK Night Vision forum: www.nightvisionforumuk.com/viewforum.php?f=3
Good luck, cheers. Russ
Hello sir modl pard do you have an automatic ballistic for distance? For example, at a distance of 50 meters, zero at different distances (100 meters, 150 ....) automatically calculates the distance or we have to use the data
You just asked the exact same question after one of my Pard SA45LRF thermal scope review videos, so I gave you a detailed answer there. 👍
Cheers. Russ
@@RussDouglas222 Hi, the new nv008s lrf model has been introduced, but what is the difference between the two different prices of $ 999 and $ 649?
@@parsasharahi4469 I assume one will be for the Pard008S, and the other for the Pard008S-LRF.
Cheers. Russ
What i’ll never understand is why they don’t orientate the sensor with the longer side vertically. That would allow more margin for elevation correction than windage, which is what you want, one would think.
Ah but that would significantly reduce the left-right visibility, whereas elevation correction can be accommodated by an adjustable MOA rail or even shimming.
Cheers. Russ
RussDouglas 222 A single eye has a close to 1:1 aspect ratio of its field of view... if the screen in the viewpiece is also close to 1:1, there’s nothing lost (or not much lost) in the visibility department.
Elevation correction does not only mean permanent correction via shimming or MOA rails, it also means adjusting the elevation for shooting at range - granted, something i don’t think anyone will do with a pard or atn. Point is, ATN is already cropping the image severely to center the reticle, but they’re leaving most of the ”margin” so to speak in the windage axis, which just doesn’t make sense, unless the only purpose of the scope is sharing photos and videos on facebook and such ;)
Interesting, I have had 6 ATN 4K PRO 5X20 Scopes fail in 8 months, freezing up, blank screens, crap on lenses, poor image quality , black circles on display in night mode, pixelated screen and the list of problems goes on & on, worst scopes I have ever owned. Had 2 ABL range finders fail as well .CRAP.
Sorry to hear that.
From reading all the feedback we've had on this video and various forum posts (e.g. UK NV forum), it seems some people get lucky and buy a top-quality ATN scope, while others have no end of issues. They must have serious QA/QC problems in some of the factories that make their scopes, while others are problem-free?!?
Thanks for your feedback, cheers. Russ
I have numerous issues with this comparison video, but possibly the most misleading section was the roof line clarity side by side segment, you have one unit with an optical magnification of 3x and another unit with an optical magnification of 8x, you then digitally zoom the 3x magnification unit to match the FOV of the 8x magnification unit, so just to be clear the image given by the Pard is at this stage purely optical while the ATN is half way through its digital zoom range, in what world was this a fair comparison? any unit would struggle with this handicap! also as the ATN was a second hand unit it would have been nice to know if the firmware had been updated to the latest version, as I am sure your Pard would have been.
Yea i do admit the ATN is heavier then the Pard but the ATN is a much beter scope. you can hit any target at just about any distance with the range finder , that will auto ajust you cross hairs. When the Pard gets that feature & remains light weight i will proberly purchase one. But ATN is too heavy.
Aye Greg but the ATN is clearly only a better scope, if you're lucky and buy a good one - Bruce bought a duffer (likely just down to poor factory quality control), as could anybody.
Thanks for watching, cheers. Russ
Good review, Xsight too heavy, image quality not as good as the Pard and crashing continuously (have heard a few people having problems with it). So it's a no brainer which one to go for. Thanks Bruce
I agree, the xsight is so heavy ! I did have have the ABL also, and it is just too heavy. I do like the ballistic calculator though !
If you're not going to use the rubber eye piece could I buy it from you?
Hmm I never thought of whether it can be detached/reattached (without ruining it) 🤔, do you want it for a Pard or another scope?
Cheers. Russ
@@RussDouglas222 it's for my 4k pro I lost my one when I was out at night.
Not the first,but the most authoritative comparison👍👍👍👍👍👍👍
Thanks very much Alan.
Cheers. Russ
GREAT VID GUY'S, WOULD BE NICE IF THERE WAS AN ALL NEW PARD 007 WITH A BUILT IN RANGE FINDER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! MAYBE ONE DAY SOON!??DO YOU HAVE ANY INFO ON ANY EXTRA'S/UPGRADES BEING DONE FOR THE PARD 007?? PLEASE. MICK FROM SURREY.
The PARD NV008 LRF has a built in rangefinder, but not a ballistic calculator
Sorry Mick I've not heard of Pard having any plans for an 007LRF, there's the new version with an Amoled screen and I've seen photos of another version with twin battery compartments, but no LRF.
Cheers. Russ
Excuse-me but the sale of ATN X-Sight 4K 3-12x is permitted in UK?
Yes. 👍
Yes I have to agree, the Pard is a clear winner. The only thing that lets the pard down is that cheap cast alloy mount. I've bit the bullet and bought a solid steel QD blaser base and I'll be using that going forward.
Sounds good, hope you can show us how this looks? Other fully adjustable mounts are on their way (two that I know-of), watch my channel for an exclusive reveal ASAP.
Cheers. Russ
@@RussDouglas222 I will when they open the rifle ranges in the year 2050.
@@mchughcb For all our sakes I hope it's quicker than that! =:oO
Good review, but a couple of points that have been made in the comments, I agree that the scopes should have been compared at base mag with no digital zoom.
I believe you state Bruce that the sensor on the atn is 4K but the image produced is clipped to hd to maintain centralised reticle which I believe is the same as the pard viewed screen res.
Before you start using the atn digital zoom the images on the screen clearly show that both scopes are at the same mag but the field of view of the atn is greater than the pard due to the different aspect ratios of the sensors so the use of digital zoom is incorrect, the images at the start of the comparison are identical you can see that the ridge tiles are the same width before digitally zooming.
The viewers comments about use of digital zoom I feel are correct. And besides why would you wish to degrade one scope image artificially and not the other?
The comments about contrast, and colour in particular, are subjective as you point out so they are not a reason for choosing one scope over the other without viewing them both yourself as a buyer.
I find the greater contrast more tiring to view at night. And I believe, though I could be wrong, that the atn contrast can be changed.
When I compared both devices at the same time and same location I found that the pard suffered a jittering image when panned and the atn not so much especially when compared in night mode - you made no mention of this.
Despite my criticisms above I did enjoy the review.
I have an atn 5x20 and yes it is (very) heavy but with the abl rangefinder added it is a deadly combination especially at night. I chose it because I find the non-standard mounting system of the pard compromising, along with the eye relief. It always looks like an add-on, not like the atn.
The atn battery lasts a very long time but if you should be north of the arctic circle in winter on a week long hunt you can attach a battery pack to the scope using the supplied lead and either charge or use or both. I think that comparison is spurious.
I have found that poor quality sf cards do cause issues in the atn but with a good one and the latest software it is fault free.
I think that both devices have their own merits and are much closer in terms of pros and cons than might be perceived in your review.
So, ultimately anyone in the market for one should review both and best at night, to make their own minds up because the image quality is difficult to split.
Keep up the good work.
ATB
Morning Jeremy (Russ here), one big thing I've learned from this comparative review and the comments, is despite the price, there are clearly 'good' batches of ATN scopes and 'bad' batches. You wouldn't accept that with your new Chinese-made iPhone, nor should you with a NV scope.
Bruce paid good money and perhaps simply got a bad one, but that makes it especially realistic - as you or I could get the same.
We publicised this video on several forums and on the UKNV Fourm thread, one user replied "...As an aside the local gun shop where I live does not sell the ATN 4K in 5-20 as they have had too many returned due to malfunctions/defects."
So ATNs are made in China (just like Pards) and there are clearly still some batches with major issues.
Thanks for watching and for your comments.
Cheers. Russ
Actually I did buy a new iPhone and it failed after 9 months. However, I didn’t right off the product because I got a dodgy one. Yes, there have been serious issues with ATN and their product release and support. There is no excuse, but they seem to be doing their best to fix that and their product range has some very interesting examples of hi-tec kit. I don’t think Pard are without fault (pun accepted) in their support and product consistency. However, ATN’s current and future performance should not be overly blighted by the past - they are a successful company.
Keep doing what you guys do please, the content will always raise comments and that surely means you’re ‘on the money’ 👍
ATB
@@jeremymoss1117 Sorry I missed your original reply. At the start of the video when both scopes are at base magnification, the field of view of the ATN is wider than the PARD. That has nothing to do with the aspect ratio of the displays. Field of view can be mathematically calculated from the physical size of the sensor and the focal length of the objective lens.
The sensors in both scopes are of similar size, but the focal length of the objective lens in the ATN is considerably less than in the PARD and it's that shorter focal length objective lens which gives the wider field of view.
Although calculation of the overall magnification requires knowledge of the size of the near eye display and the focal length of the lens used to magnify the image from the display to a size which makes comfortable viewing for the human eye, it's the size of the sensor and the focal length of the objective lens which play the largest part in setting the base (optical) magnification of a digital scope
ATN needed updating to 2.20 firmware
Could be (I don't know what firmware was on it when Bruce bought it), but the fact remains it wasn't fit for purpose when sold - which is why he wasn't satisfied and got a refund.
Cheers. Russ
Can’t agree with just rimfire, 3-14 no issues on a .223/243..out to 150/200 on foxes..
Good to hear that, though you do have to get lucky and get a decent unit (going by user comments including on the forums), unlike the clearly substandard scope Bruce paid good money for. 🤷🏻♂️
Cheers. Russ
on the video where you zoom in on the air brick it looks like you have not vocased the atn and that why it looks rubbish
It was actually focused as well as we could, it just wasn't a great scope I'm afraid. Perhaps poor QA/QC on the production line(?) 🤷🏻♂
Thanks for watching, cheers. Russ
Hi Bruce and Russ, unfortunately some people are just plain rude lads.
I appreciated this video and the time it took for both of you to put it together along with all of your other content.
Unfortunately their doesn't appear to be any video's available to view from your keyboard fanboys.
Nothing explaining or indeed showing us their findings for us to compare with or to comment on.
Plenty of guff but no content to view.
Keep up the great work lads it's really informative and very much appreciated and don't rise to it!! 😉👍⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐
Thanks Clive, I'm letting Bruce answer technical queries as he tested the 5-20x while I was away south helping my folks.
All the best, cheers. Russ
Seems the Pard kills the ATN almost hands down..
Yep pretty much, and the Pards just got even better with the release this year of the new Pard008S-LRF: lower profile redesigned body, and onboard ballistic calculator!
Thanks for watching, cheers. Russ
Pard Versus Sightmark Wraith Russ.
Paul that would be the next great 100% honest video comparison, followed by the new Wraith 4K - hopefully we can borrow a Wraith and then (once available) a Wraith 4K, to do exactly this.
I've started watching some Wraith 4K videos by @Pig Popper TX, it looks a great piece of kit. My only concern thus far (from what I've seen of the 4k) is the reticle still seems overly clunky / not fine enough, plus it's obviously missing the built-in LRF.
Cheers. Russ
Love your vids Russ, and Bruce is a good edition for the vlogs
@@paulmaddison2507 Aye he's a legend, just over thirteen months since I started recording his review thoughts & experiences for my channel; what a star!
Cheers. Russ
3x14 are better for air rifles with a dead zone of say 60 meters, 5x20 are better at longer range , saying that the pard is my choose , no problem better for me
How are they on the same mag when the xsight is showing more mag isn't it showing more field of view than the pard not less mag
I believe Bruce counted the ridgebands while looking through the eyepieces, I've since corrected the ratio on the Pard footage.
Once any individual object is the same width on-screen in the upper and lower views, the magnification will be the same.
Cheers.Russ
Increasing magnification reduces field of view and decreasing magnification increases field of view.
Making the field of view the same for both scopes is the only fair way to compare the image each produces
But if you turn up the mag on the xsight so they are the same the picture on the xsight isn't going to be as good as the pard
The sensor in the X Sight has 4 times as many pixels as the PARD (3864x2218 in the X Sight and 1920x1080 in the PARD)
When you use x2 digital zoom you reduce the number of pixels being used to create the image by a factor of 4 (half as many in the horizontal axis and half as many in the vertical axis).
So, an X Sight 4k pro 5-20 with the magnification set at x10 (which is the base mag of 5 multiplied by digital zoom x2) uses 1932x1109 pixels to create the image - that's slightly more than the PARD uses on it's base magnification, but close enough not to argue about.
The comparison was done with the X Sight at x8 and at x8, the X Sight uses more pixels to create the image than the PARD, which would imply that the image on the X Sight should be better, but that is clearly not the case, the image on the PARD is better.
Maybe if ATN increased the base magnification of the X Sight to the same as the PARD, the image would be the same or better, but that's not how it is and the bottom line is that when both scopes are set to the same magnification, the image on the PARD is better
Review Hunting Flying Fox / Kalong with Air Rifle cal.177 Scope PARD NV 008LRF
th-cam.com/video/qljGCisl8O8/w-d-xo.html
Got both on different rifles pard wins hands down
That was our conclusion too, though obviously Bruce was unlucky and bought a duff/poor quality ATN scope - that's obviously the risk buyers take, which is obviously very disappointing considering the price.
Cheers. Russ
The pard is not that good I sold mine because because it has noises that come through on the video.
The ATN was out of focus! So not a true test. The ATN is more user friendly even more so using the ABL range finder. I am a pest controler so I range the animal and the ATN moves the cross hairs and the animal rolls over. Not a true test. Please try harder!
I've always made it clear in my Pard reviews that audio interference is picked-up on video recordings once the battery gets down to one bar; but batteries are lightweight and cheap - so I carry spares.
Bruce simply bought a faulty ATN, as many, many others have done (going by the forums, video comments and several RFDs now refusing to sell them because they have so many returned with faults). It was a very true test as anyone can buy a good ATN or a faulty ATN.
I'd love the Pards to have a ballistic calculator, but that benefit's not worth me buying a scope that's double the size and double the weight of an 008LRF. Portability is everything for me.
Cheers. Russ
You discredited yourself when you zoomed in the 4k to 8x to make it a side by side comparison, you cannot do this with a digital scope. Zooming it in effectively halves the image quality for every 2x magnification. You're comparing a digitally zoomed in optical to a base magnification of approx 8x. Sorry but you cannot call that side by side. You also then lose all the benefits of the FoV of the lower magnification, something that is incredibly important when shooting in the field, especially at sub 100 yard distances.
🙄 BRUCE zoomed-in to get the best comparison of the two scopes, he probably hoped (in addition to the 4K assisting centring the reticle during zeroing 👍) -that some of the "4k" would be used to improve the quality during zeroing; it presumably doesn't.
Cheers. Russ
RussDouglas 222 if you don’t understand the technology then you shouldn’t be doing reviews on it. Every digital scope on the market has digital zoom which degrades the quality every time it’s zoomed in. You are not comparing apples for apples when one is at 8x digital zoom and the other at 8x base mag.
Not true - when the X Sight is in x8 magnification it is still using more pixels to create the image than the PARD on it's base magnification
According to ATN, the sensor in the X Sight has 3864x2218 pixels, while the sensor in the PARD has 1920 x1080 pixels
If the base magnification of the X Sight is doubled (x10) it will then be using 1932x1109 pixels to create the image - which is more than the PARD.
The X Sight was at x8 magnification because at the level of magnification, the field of view of each scope was the same and true comparison of their images could be made.
At x8 the X Sight is using 2415x1386 pixels to create the image and the image was not as sharp as the PARD.
Look at the start of the daytime video - the X Sight is at its base magnification, with a wide field of view and the level of detail is not as good as the PARD
The comparison can only be done this way because overall magnification in a digital scope also depends on the size of the display and the focal length of the optics used with the display to create an image which can be viewed comfortably by the human eye.
@@brucemcpherson8832 Again your lack of technical understanding is incorrect. The scope doesn't change the number of pixels that it uses to create the images, it zooms in on the original image and for every zoom (6x,7x,8x) it halves the # of available pixels every single time, therefore your image is comparison is close to 429x246. This is evident if you continue all the way to 14x where the image is unusable. You cannot compare a zoomed in image which is degraded as soon as you start to zoom to any base magnification image and call it a comparison. Furthermore, you noted that the contrast was better in your pinned post on the PARD but that doesn't show up on the video, by your own standards you cannot make comments like that, you can only assess what has been captured as you also didn't note "as base magnification the 4k has a sensor of 3864*2218 but can only record at 1080p and therefore the image you are seeing at base mag does not compare to what is seen through the screen".
Again, total lack of transparency and technical appreciation. I am not bagging the PARD btw, its a fantastic unit, but you have not done a fair side by side comparison and have totally comprised your integrity given your vested interest in this.
Also I'd LOVE to see you shoot a 30-06 with your eye up against the PARD Bruce......