Thin filmed vs Filmless white phosphorous.

5RWill

Optics Fiend
Belligerents
Oct 15, 2009
4,861
1,096
219
28
Mississippi
Bluntly, is the filmless worth the extra cash? Figured i'm going to be right there at it might as well buy once cry once. Plan is TNVC regardless. Either the PVS-14 Omni VIII thin filmed or the L3 filmless.
 

crossgun

Sergeant
Belligerents
Sep 2, 2008
296
17
22
N.E. Ohio
Honestly that is hard to say as it is somewhat more of a personal preference. I know the bad part about it is that most of the time you cant compare them side by side. I was lucky enough to get behind many units and I didnt like the brightness of the L3 tubes. I also found them to be very white and not offer the contrast that I was used to in green tubes.

I ended up with Harris WP tubes and am happy with that decision because I knew what I was getting. Best advice would be to get behind them if possible before you buy.
 

Will-1

Private
Minuteman
Jun 18, 2018
76
18
12
L3 filmless WP with good specs is better than thin filmed green phosphor. If you can afford it I recommend to buy it. I’ve used many ITT thin filmed green with specs 64 res and snr between 25-31 for years. Just this year I decided to try L3 filmless WP but only if I got high specs, which I did (72 res 34 snr). I still have ITT tubes, in fact, aviator grade 10160s in an anvis 9 with very clean screen cosmetics. They are excellent tubes but still not as good. I’ve personally never seen thin filmed with specs as high as the L3 filmless posted anywhere.

The L3’s are better than every thin filmed green tube I’ve ever had in all conditions. It’s only on the darkest of nights where the performance is close to the same. I’m no L3 schill, just telling the truth from my experience.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 5RWill

woodlandshooter

Redneck Squad
Belligerents
Dec 7, 2013
48
13
12
It depends.

If the "other guy" is running filmed stuff with illumination, then you would be better off running unfilmed and no illumination.

;)
 

5RWill

Optics Fiend
Belligerents
Oct 15, 2009
4,861
1,096
219
28
Mississippi
L3 filmless WP with good specs is better than thin filmed green phosphor. If you can afford it I recommend to buy it. I’ve used many ITT thin filmed green with specs 64 res and snr between 25-31 for years. Just this year I decided to try L3 filmless WP but only if I got high specs, which I did (72 res 34 snr). I still have ITT tubes, in fact, aviator grade 10160s in an anvis 9 with very clean screen cosmetics. They are excellent tubes but still not as good. I’ve personally never seen thin filmed with specs as high as the L3 filmless posted anywhere.

The L3’s are better than every thin filmed green tube I’ve ever had in all conditions. It’s only on the darkest of nights where the performance is close to the same. I’m no L3 schill, just telling the truth from my experience.
I plan on going WP regardless but I’m wondering if filmless WP is worth it over thin filmed WP?

I looked through my buddies Harris pinnacle green this past weekend. Definitely think at least by looking at pics I’d like WP more. Just seems the contrast is better.

It’s roughly a 500-700 difference between the tnvc units.

Here are the two in question.

 

Will-1

Private
Minuteman
Jun 18, 2018
76
18
12
@5RWill
I’d go filmless if the specs will be higher than than the filmed. Also, the white phosphor color looks different between filmed & non. The filmed is a little darker from what I can tell. Even with the same or similar specs the filmless should be better. I say “should” because I haven’t compared a thin filmed WP.

There’s nothing wrong with thin filmed at all, it’s awesome, but my experience is filmless is better if the extra $ is worth it to you.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 5RWill

5RWill

Optics Fiend
Belligerents
Oct 15, 2009
4,861
1,096
219
28
Mississippi
@5RWill
I’d go filmless if the specs will be higher than than the filmed. Also, the white phosphor color looks different between filmed & non. The filmed is a little darker from what I can tell. Even with the same or similar specs the filmless should be better. I say “should” because I haven’t compared a thin filmed WP.

There’s nothing wrong with thin filmed at all, it’s awesome, but my experience is filmless is better if the extra $ is worth it to you.
I'm back and forth really. Having not seen either i can't really qualify the if the difference is worth it. Going to have sell some stuff to fund this monocular but i'm pretty committed after seeing my buddies pvs-14. Also kicking myself for owning $3000 optics but having not paid more attention to doing this for hogs and coyotes.

What has me coming back to the thin filmed is the extra cash could go towards a helmet/mount and/or a DBAL A3
 

Will-1

Private
Minuteman
Jun 18, 2018
76
18
12
I'm back and forth really. Having not seen either i can't really qualify the if the difference is worth it. Going to have sell some stuff to fund this monocular but i'm pretty committed after seeing my buddies pvs-14. Also kicking myself for owning $3000 optics but having not paid more attention to doing this for hogs and coyotes.

What has me coming back to the thin filmed is the extra cash could go towards a helmet/mount and/or a DBAL A3
If it comes down to having one -14 only vs one -14 with a LAM, I’d choose the -14 and LAM.

If you’re using it mainly for hunting,
honestly you might want to consider a thermal depending on where you hunt. You can find good used ones in that range or new 320 or 384 cores. They compliment each other. so you can add either down the road. Navigate or spot for eye shine with the -14 then go to thermal, or spot with thermal and go to -14 and LAM.
 

The King

Showercookie Monster
Online Training Access
Belligerents
Sep 17, 2004
1,372
859
219
Lambreth, Connecticut
Whole system > one epic item.

I recommend you get a Crye Nightcap and a Rhino II mount off ebay to save money.

If you are doing dangerous operations in vehicles (tactical night driving) get the bump helmet. It can change a hospital level wreck into a walk away wreck. Ask me how that works lol.

Consider an IR only laser, or the stream light TLr-vir-ii. Most find day lasers fucking useless wastes of time.
 
  • Like
Reactions: shoobe01

5RWill

Optics Fiend
Belligerents
Oct 15, 2009
4,861
1,096
219
28
Mississippi
If it comes down to having one -14 only vs one -14 with a LAM, I’d choose the -14 and LAM.

If you’re using it mainly for hunting,
honestly you might want to consider a thermal depending on where you hunt. You can find good used ones in that range or new 320 or 384 cores. They compliment each other. so you can add either down the road. Navigate or spot for eye shine with the -14 then go to thermal, or spot with thermal and go to -14 and LAM.
Gotcha i could technically do both it will just take longer. But saving $500 to put towards a helmet and quality mount is a pretty good chunk of change.

Thermal was the original plan but contrary to what IR defense set out to do it's only gone up in price. Before they sold to trijicon and came out with the MKII and MKIII there was supposed to be a 320x240 hunting variant that was more economically priced. Never saw it. WASP was supposed to come to fruition too, never saw it. One glance at the REAP-IR's rise to $8000 kind of substantiates just that. Ideally i agree a NV monocular and a thermal clip on or dedicated would be the way to go. But

Whole system > one epic item.

I recommend you get a Crye Nightcap and a Rhino II mount off ebay to save money.

If you are doing dangerous operations in vehicles (tactical night driving) get the bump helmet. It can change a hospital level wreck into a walk away wreck. Ask me how that works lol.

Consider an IR only laser, or the stream light TLr-vir-ii. Most find day lasers fucking useless wastes of time.
I'm mainly just looking at hunting. Helmet might be worth it though i will be driving some. Definitely don't need a daytime laser. Ty for the recommendation on the nightcap and rhino II mount i'll look into it.
 

Victor-TNVC

Gunny Sergeant
Commercial Supporter
Belligerents
Aug 5, 2007
1,674
69
154
USA
www.tnvc.com
Hi 5RWill, if your budget allows, you will never be disappointed with the fillmless L3 tubes. In complete darkness, you'll get approx. a 20% increase in performance. Now if most of your NV work is in an urban setting or you plan on using IR lum much of the time, save a few pennies for accessories and maybe some training, and get the thin filmed.

As for color, some say as you just experienced the white has more contrast, many of the Mil folks who spend hours each night behind NODS say the white is more relaxing to their eyes. The sniper types especially in the LE circles as well.

Hope this helps and some great suggestions on this thread as well. PM if you need anytjhing, and thank you.
 

crossgun

Sergeant
Belligerents
Sep 2, 2008
296
17
22
N.E. Ohio
After spending time behind unfilmed WP and owning filmed WP as Will suggested there is a slight color or hue difference. Unfilmed is definitely whiter. Its my understanding that in most cases specs will always appear to be slightly higher in unfilmed because the measurable data doesn't have to pass through the thin film barrier all things being equal.

Your about to spend a lot of money, save till you can get it right vs trying to save a few bucks. Everything NV is just expensive unfortunately.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CBDR

Strykervet

Resident Phoenix Eye and Dim Mak Instructor
Belligerents
Jun 5, 2011
4,274
2,702
219
43
Pierce County, WA
I'd get the filmless WP tube. Wish I had one.

For filmed, I don't think you can beat the Omni7 ITT hand select units, if you can even still get those. They had the thinnest film (like one atom wide?) and best image out of the filmed tubes. They were also completely made in ITT's clean room, which was unique. It's what I have and it's damn hard to beat for a green unit.

But today? I'd call Vic up at TNVC and get that L3 WP filmless tube in a heartbeat. I would mention you should probably get a hand select tube whatever you go with though, I was able to get the specs on mine like I wanted with S/N maxed out along with good resolution.

But really the biggest thing that filmless offers I think is that it can handle recoil and shock better than filmed units can. I know mine is rated to be mounted to a 5.56 but that's it. If you're not mounting to a rifle, film or no film isn't AS big of a deal, not as big of a deal as green vs. WP for instance (which is personal but I've yet to meet someone preferring green over WP for their only unit).
 

5RWill

Optics Fiend
Belligerents
Oct 15, 2009
4,861
1,096
219
28
Mississippi
I've got to sell some stuff first unfortunately but i'm trying to fast track it as soon as possible. I plan to hunt a lot during my break this Christmas and want to be out there thinning hogs and coyotes. Especially the later as they've absolutely decimated our rabbit population. So much that i might be putting a ZP5 up to help with it. $500ish isn't that much in the grand scheme of things so i think i'll just go Filmless. I had a feeling i was going to lean in that direction anyway.

No plans to mount it on a rifle, albeit the rifle i plan to use is running the EXPS 3-4. I'm just kind of, of the mindset that NV nods are for IR laser/observation and clip ons be it NV/Thermal are for shooting. I guess it could be done. This is all new to me as far as hunting at night with NV. Something i've wanted to do for years. I'm assuming given the wind direction i should be able to get relatively close to the intended game. Learning to shoot with the IR might provide some interesting challenges as well.
 

5RWill

Optics Fiend
Belligerents
Oct 15, 2009
4,861
1,096
219
28
Mississippi
So Hogs are hitting our rice currently. I went home last weekend dad and I went out there and got one. Though i couldn't really see him more or less sprayed where i saw movement and heard squealing. Buddy of mine is going to let me borrow a IR Defense MKII and he's talking about writing the thermal off on the farm at the end of the year. It's getting worse every year. Originally he bought those propane cannons for blackbirds, which worked, but they got used it. Might have him on board, i'm curious would i have been able to see the hog 10-15yds into the rice chest high with thermal?

I'm still on board with the monocular which is about to be moving faster than i thought. Another sale or so and i'm ordering.
 

roamin

Private
Belligerents
Jun 11, 2017
376
204
49
but I've yet to meet someone preferring green over WP for their only unit).
I've had an L3 Unfilmed WP tube and I pefer Green over WP. I feel like it's slightly easier for my eyes to pick things up with the green phosphor but then I was blessed with very acute vision which I think is why my eyes don't get fatigued on long stints behind the green phosphor whereas other people's do. So when I bought my 14 a few years ago I went with a green tube which I got good specs on;

S/N 33.9, PC 2543, RES 72, Halo 0.8, EBI 1.3, Gain 69,600 and I'm very happy with it.
 
Last edited:

Evolution 9

Hurter of feelings
Belligerents
Mar 6, 2010
371
137
49
35
Central Idaho
5RWill,

If any tiny little part of the hog would have been visible to you in daylight then yes, thermal would have seen him. If not, no. Thermal doesn’t see “through” anything.

All it takes is a little bit of the animal exposed to show the heat.

My Reap-ir will pick up a half exposed mouse at 90 yards.
 

5RWill

Optics Fiend
Belligerents
Oct 15, 2009
4,861
1,096
219
28
Mississippi
5RWill,

If any tiny little part of the hog would have been visible to you in daylight then yes, thermal would have seen him. If not, no. Thermal doesn’t see “through” anything.

All it takes is a little bit of the animal exposed to show the heat.

My Reap-ir will pick up a half exposed mouse at 90 yards.
I always wanted a reap IR for one of the AR setups but man they never went down in price. Actually when i checked with Trijicon i was pretty surprised at how expensive thermal has gotten. I know it’s continually gotten better with new cores and higher res but we went from like $3500-$6000-$8000 at least in regards to IR defense. I’m hoping we can just write if off. My brother and i would have a blast hunting in the winter.
 

Will-1

Private
Minuteman
Jun 18, 2018
76
18
12
I've had an L3 Unfilmed WP tube and I pefer Green over WP. I feel like it's slightly easier for my eyes to pick things up with the green phosphor but then I was blessed with very acute vision which I think is why my eyes don't get fatigued on long stints behind the green phosphor whereas other people's do. So when I bought my 14 a few years ago I went with a green tube which I got good specs on;

S/N 33.9, PC 2543, RES 72, Halo 0.8, EBI 1.3, Gain 69,600 and I'm very happy with it.
That’s a filmless green tube? One of these days I want to get my hands on a high spec filmless green.
 

5RWill

Optics Fiend
Belligerents
Oct 15, 2009
4,861
1,096
219
28
Mississippi
So rethinking i might have come to a cross roads. Truthfully i still want a PVS-14, i'd rather have the capability of driving and seeing with the eye/head than a scope that i have to shoulder everytime i want to look for something. But looking at a couple of threads the FLIR thermosight pro series is adequately priced and seems to well worth the money, the PTS 233 is $1900ish skimming various sites right now. I'm trying to get dad to write it off (i know) but enough rice goes down in the next week and i bet he'll be taking a hard look at it or just jumping the gun and spending 5k on a good trap. As i said i still want the monocular, granted having both would be ideal, though admittedly i'd prefer a clip on or think i would given the choice.

I saw someone recommend against clip ons for hog hunting. Any idea as to why? Also bering optics has the hogster which NightGoggles caries and supposedly FLIR is coming out with a thermosight C clip on.

So thoughts? Originally when thermal was mentioned both by a friend of mine and in this thread i was just thinking there is no way to feasibly drop 8k on an IR Defense/Trijicon, least not while in Dental School i just don't have the funds or items to sell to generate that kind of cash. That is truthfully is what i've always wanted as far as sights were concerned. Obviously the tradeoffs are likely that thermal is more effective for the intended purpose. But i plan on having both, it's just i think i'd prefer the monocular first.
 

Ravenous

Private
Minuteman
Mar 10, 2019
52
21
12
Depending on how your land looks going straight thermal may be the option. There is always the option of running both NVGs and thermal, but thats certainly going to be cost prohibitive. In regards to your original question with filmless vs thin filmed I would agree with what the experts from TNVC mentioned above. I am behind NOD's a good portion of my life and have had the opportunity to compare thin filmed and filminess side by side on multiple occasions. The thin filmed can be quite impressive when you get behind them but they are definitely a little darker and more blue looking than filmless. The only thing I would remind you is those nights where there's zero lum, the filmless will definitely benefit you.
 

spearknives

Captain
Banned !
Belligerents
Minuteman
Apr 19, 2019
131
153
49
Some Mil guys who sit on NODS for hours on end (longer than I will ever use them) say it's more pleasing to their eyes for long periods with less eye strain. Some say they can see a bit better contrast and in the shadows better. I for one do not see any better in these aspects (never have) with the color alone, but in extremely dark conditions, it's the filmless technology that is the largest improvement over standard film NOT the color. Hope this helps.
 

BigBC

Conquistador
Belligerents
Minuteman
Jun 6, 2019
105
32
34
So-Cal
I don't have any experience with dual nods or helmet mounted units but I found a company called Core Vision Industries (via instagram) that rents out NVs. Might be worth a shot to see if you can rent what you are looking for before buying.