Night Vision Bering Optics Phenom 384 12µm scanner

[kirsch]

I recently had a chance to test a Bering Optics Phenom 384 12µm scanner. I own and love the Phenom 640, so was excited to see how the 384 stacks up. The best way to describe the Phenom 384 is a Super Hogster in the Phenom's scanner style body for $1,000 less. I had a chance to record some animals at various distances and put together the video below.



Overview: Overall, I am impressed. It is able to detect and identify heat signatures at medium to long distances. For anyone looking for a medium to long range scanner, the Phenom 384 is a great fit. I see hog hunters really liking this scanner for those that need to scan a field and make a PID at longer distances before they begin the hunt. The image isn't as sharp and clear as the Phenom 640 (to be expected) but still is very good for a 384 resolution scanner at more than 30% less cost.

Price: $2,175

Availability: The Phenom 384 is available for ordering at the Night Goggles website, call 909-312-5424, or contact [email protected] to place an order.

 

[remaction]

Kirsh,

I noticed the Phenom 640 FOV shown above is 13x10 degrees. The Bering Optics website shows 17x13. I've noticed this discrepancy in a few different places. Do you know for sure which it is? Did they change from 2x to 2.5x at some point and that causes the FOV difference?

 

[kirsch]

When the Phenom 640 was first released it was 17µm. The 17° field of view and the 2X magnification refers to that version. For about the last year, they moved to a 12µm version. 12 µm is 13° FOV and 2.5 magnification.

Specifications listed on the Bering Optics site is still from the older model. I wish they would change them so there wouldn’t be so much confusion.

 

[remaction]

I just got off the phone with a buddy and we were surmising exactly what you stated above.
Thanks for the clarification.
So, for coyotes, is it worth the extra coin for the 640? I think the FOV is a big deal for me, but I do not have first hand experience.

 

[kirsch]

For most coyote hunters who are calling coyotes, a scanner with a 7.5° FOV is very restrictive. Any scanner is better than no scanner. However, hunt wide-open plains, and it would be too narrow for me personally but I could make anything work in a pinch. So yes, the 640 will have a much better image and have a better FOV. For someone hunting hogs and wants to verify if animals at a distance are hogs or are hunting over a bait pile, etc , the 384 would be ok.

Night Goggles provides free shipping and a discount to Hide members.

 

[remaction]

Good to know. Thanks for the info.

 

[shoots100]

Thanks for the intro.
I was intrigued until I read the 3.5x base mag and the 7.5 x 5.7 degree FOV in the specs, which limits it's use to a very small segment of the hunting community.
For the price, sans the recording feature, you could purchase a Hogster R 35mm and use it as a scanner + scope.
Good to have choices.

 

[remaction]

The Hogster-R 1.4x is on my radar also for the reasons you mention. It would have a bit larger FOV than the Phenom 640 but give up a bit in clarity I'm thinking.

 

[kirsch]

Thanks for the intro.
I was intrigued until I read the 3.5x base mag and the 7.5 x 5.7 degree FOV in the specs, which limits it's use to a very small segment of the hunting community.
For the price, sans the recording feature, you could purchase a Hogster R 35mm and use it as a scanner + scope.
Good to have choices.

Yes or a Hogster 25 which provides a very generous 14.9° FOV. The 35 is 10.7°. What I typically tell people is if the purpose is mainly as a scanner, then go with a 25. If the purpose is mainly as a scope and secondary purpose is as a scanner go with a 35. Along with being dual-purpose, the Hogsters also have a more generous eye relief compared to most scanners. This works very well for people who need to wear glasses while hunting.