Yes, due to the range of dimensional variation we have seen in NV mounts from Wilcox and Norotos, you may experience minor wiggling. Please use a piece of tape (or similar) to shim your RHNO2 for an absolutely perfect fit.

@@noisefighters4168 Thanks for the quick reply

7.5 degrees per side. This typically leads to a 55 degree wide field of view with milspec optics.

@@noisefighters4168 Why did you guys go with 55° over the original up to 75°?

​@@HenrikSherwood In a controlled test environment with milspec optics and L3 intensifier tubes, we have found that anyone can utilize up to 7.5 degrees of panning and observe basically no degradation in resolution in the central, overlapped portion of their view. We used a Snellen eye chart at 20 feet as a simple way to test system resolution in this way. Beyond 7.5 degrees, most people cannot read the same line that they could with their tubes pointed forward. So, I made the call to limit the field of view to prevent professional end users from endangering themselves or others. For hobbyists, it is easy to open up the bridge and grind off the tabs that limit the maximum pan angle. -Neal, owner

@@noisefighters4168 Would grinding the tabs result in a voiding of warranty?

We are definitely not giving these away. Panobridge M1 is actually $500 at the moment, plus $150 more for the thermal monocular adapters. But, the comparable duty-grade, all-metal, and made in USA bridges from Wilcox and KVC are easily $1000+ with the same options. Ours is about half the cost and less than half the weight of those products, and M1 has my patent-pending adjustable field of view mechanism. For those that want the best and lightest metal bridge available, we have a solution with the Panobridge M1. We can't afford to charge less when the value is there, and the profits also allow us to fund the R&D on other (much less expensive products) like the new CliffhangIR rail riser.

@@noisefighters4168 well props to ya'll for expanding the market and offering a cheaper product. I think I speak for many in saying that the NV market is completely bonkers. Prices just don't match the products when compared to other industries.

@@luciuschappell4648 once you’re in, you understand the barrier to entry/RD/cost, it’s a superpower. Other industries aren’t like this one

I’m gonna bet you don’t even have nvg’s, if you did you would know the cost and research that goes into seeing at night.

@@miketurner2945 I have 2 monoculars that this bridge would be great for. Here's an example of what I'm saying: Google a camera gimbal; a complex electronic 3 axis camera stabilizer of metal construction that no doubt cost way more in r/d than this panobridge. It costs $280 from best buy. I understand supply and demand, overseas manufacturing yada yada. What I'm saying is that these markups have to be well over 200%. The entire NV market is absurd because people are willing to pay absurd prices for simple products. Not really the fault of the manufacturers, but the consumers.

Yes

Yes, we plan to, as soon as our lenses arrive.

Whenever you try to film through a PVS-14, it requires specialized video cameras which only capture part of the total field of view. If you take video from separate PVS-14s at the same time, you get two partial captures that do not combine into a full field of view from top to bottom. You can try to merge them together with overlapping centers to show the perceived image that a human would experience with our Panobridge, but resulting video is always cropped because the combination of video clips shows incomplete image information. Basically, the separate cameras only see part of the view through the tube, and combining a partial view with a partial view doesn’t combine to create a whole view.

I do not have any plans at this time. We did, however, announce eventual release of PANOBINO, which is a dedicated binocular housing like a PVS-31 or DTNVS with my adjustable field of view mechanism. We plan to offer a version of that with remote battery capability, in addition to a version that just takes a single CR123A.

@@noisefighters4168 Nice 👍🏽

@@noisefighters4168 Hey Neal - any update on this Panobino??

@@noisefighters4168 any update of the panobino housing?

Hi Carl, thanks for the question. It’s intended for both of those customers. Both my team and some of my dealers have allowed customers to try Panobridge vs dedicated binos like DTNVS or RNVG, and I’ve found very consistently that people will choose Panobridge over those systems when given a full understanding of the capabilities and the chance to actually run the Panobridge in the real world. I know my partner, Nightline, has found the same thing after allowing search and rescue and SWAT teams try it out on actual missions (since their sales guy accompanied them at times). The two things I’d say that are necessary to truly compete with dedicated binos is the NL914C lightweight battery housings that I sell and high-quality lenses. The NL914C housings drop the weight of the system to around 21.3 oz, which is just less than RNVG. Using quality lenses means you won’t suffer from the fisheye effect that cheaper lenses produce, so the wider angle fields of view are comfortable to use. Please do email me at neal@noisefighters.com with other questions. I don’t always see these comments.

No need. Literally just peel off the originals and stick mine on. Takes ten seconds! Thanks for asking, though.

I appreciate the note, Dylan, and look forward to hearing what you think once you have both tubes attached. Regarding Panobino, I do not yet have any news to share, but I do agree that it will present a compelling alternative to GPNVGs for those who do not wish to try dual 14s + Panobridge. Feel free to get in touch via neal@noisefighters.com and we can discuss your idea for testing.

What did you think of the setup?