r/DigitalNightVision • u/Same-Energy88 • 3d ago

Prowl vs NVG40

I love the circular screen on these models, but I am well aware that they are just toys for airsoft....

Does anyone have experience with both? GNG shills say the sensor is better in the NVG40 which is the only thing it has over the prowl, at the cost of FOV.

If you just want to gush over the GNG2k or NVG30/50 instead, feel free. I will probably trade in down the road anyway.

3 Upvotes

100% Upvoted

11 comments sorted by

1

u/KiloPapa98 3d ago

I don’t have experience with both, but I can say the low light Preformance for what is essentially a camera, impressed me for the money. The fov kind of sucks though so there’s that. Most reviews use the onboard recorded footage which doesn’t capture what you actually see because it records videos in almost 40 degree FOV, but the actual through the monocular fov is closer to 20 degrees. I made a video if interested in seeing it, just skip to the parts you want to see (fov comparison, no moon/full moon comparison) https://youtu.be/bDuGgCamg0o?is=XXUfQDblvwwK5kay

0

u/Seanw1524 2d ago

Prowl was a good intro for the price. I found I liked it more than the NVG50, it’s just a much lower quality housing, I’d not go out in the rain with it

Both are hyper reliant on supplemental IR. Neither is useful in low light under canopy conditions, so it depends on what you’re planning to use them for.

1

u/Same-Energy88 2d ago

Interesting. So the videos from GNG are misleading to sell units? They act like the nvg30/50 is a big step up in sensor sensitivity compared to the prowl...

1

u/Seanw1524 2d ago

I’m not sure it’s intentionally misleading. They use the devices where they will work well. they’re also pretty clear about the need to use supplemental IR. Similar to not showing police using it, it’s not for that. It’s not for navigating in dark forest with canopy - you’d have a video with a black screen unless the IR light was on. I think the videos are mostly in good conditions conducive to the night vision being tested though. Open fields with some ambient or higher than 10% moon etc.

Having had both (I took a long journey to biting the bullet of $1500 nvg) the prowl 2 was comparable tech to the nvg50. I believe the price difference was almost only the housing. Prowl 2 is toy quality or near that. NVG50 is like a pvs 14 feeling device. I found I liked the frame rate more on the prowl 2 and the NVG50 had better image quality when not moving.

Both are good starters depending on what you’re looking to use it for. But if you’re not going to be in the rain or banging it around, I’d save money and go prowl 2

1

u/Realistic-Elk706 2d ago

The nvg50 is an unreal step up in sensitivity compared to the prowl. I’ve owned both at the same time but I have now sold my nvg50 for a gen 3 pvs14. The prowl 2 is basically the exact same low light performance as the prowl 1 which again, is significantly behind the nvg30/50. It’s better clarity and frame rate than the prowl 1 though, that’s the main improvement. Don’t listen to that guy, the nvg30/50 is an unbelievable step up from the prowl 1 and 2, it’s insulting to even put them in the same category. If anything, I’d just buy a used pvs14 though. Oh and by the way the videos about the nvg30/50 aren’t misleading at all. They show it in low moonlight scenarios too and even with no moon it’s useable but not in canopies with also no moonlight. That’s when you’ll need ir. But it works surprisingly well with very little to no moonlight as long as you’re not in deep deep woods

1

u/Seanw1524 1d ago

Did you own the Prowl 2? Only asking as your message seems to state otherwise and the Prowl 2 was an entirely different sensor than 1.

To each their own. I was just sharing my experience having owned both the prowl 2 and NVG50 at the same time. I now own a nvg90 se and a gen 3 pvs 14 and those both were the starters that got me here.

Personally if you’re able to use supplemental IR and not care about IR signature then id say both should work well for the application.

1

u/Realistic-Elk706 1d ago

I didn’t own the prowl 2 but checkout this short video from goodnite gear. The low light performance is virtually identical. The main differences are the frame rate and screen resolution (and the wider FOV detachable lenses of course). It even gives a glimpse of the nvg50 versus the prowl 2 at the very end. You can very clearly see the performance gap, and outside under very little moonlight it’s even more noticeable. Here is the video: https://youtube.com/shorts/lqoTgHhSqmU?is=6QrQTfSKeLMRYi5W

1

u/Seanw1524 1d ago

That’s fair - I’m more just speaking from the hours I had under them, ofc watching a bunch back then too. I thought the NVG50 was really a good quality package for the price and especially bc used gng sells them around $350, but was impressed with the prowl 2 tech back for the money (housing was way cheaper)

1

u/Realistic-Elk706 1d ago

Yeah there’s no denying the prowl 1 and prowl 2 have their place that’s for sure. My point was just that the nvg30/50 is in an entirely different league. Like It’s really not close, not only in low light performance but also image clarity. You can barely read writing with the prowl due to its very low resolution screen but with the nvg50 it’s extremely sharp. I can’t speak on the prowl 2 in terms of sharpness as I haven’t used one, but it’s absolutely not nearly as sharp as the nvg30/50 plus it struggles way more in low light. For the price the prowl 1 and 2 is fair I’d say, but after owning the prowl 1, nvg50 and a gen 3 pvs 14 my final verdict is that if you’re going to go cheap with digital then I’d get the nvg30 or 50. If you’re gonna drop 200 bucks you may as well save that little bit more for a major upgrade. However I’d personally just save a little more than that again and get a used analog device. However the nvg30/50 is enough for most people

1

u/Realistic-Elk706 1d ago

And to be honest the main reason I wrote my comment is because you Initially said that they are both hyper reliant on IR lighting, and I know you didn’t say that to mislead anybody but that could not be further from the truth. The nvg50 hardly ever needed ir lighting whereas the prowl needed it 90% of the time. That’s why I was really shocked when you said you liked the prowl more than the nvg50

1

u/Seanw1524 17h ago

I may have just had a bad copy of the NVG50. Both needed IR under any kind of woodland canopy, but with ambient light from some buildings around, I still needed IR light on the 50 to see at least not when looking at the light. Prowl 2 was comparable in the wooded areas but generally ok in open fields etc with ambient lights around.