We have a new brochure for the IRI-4010 160X120 thermal camera
The IRI-4010 is on sale for $3299 and we stock these cameras to support fast delivery.
The value of the IRI-4010 is high performance at very affordable pricing.
Financing is also available.
Leslie,
Are all the images in the brochure from the advertised camera ?
Yes.
id be hesitant to say they were 160x120, they are alot clearer more like the 400x360 range. the only way would be to have the original radiometrics sent to verify.
I have a B cam and i never had that clear an image, and now i have a t400 and its night and day the end result.
True
There is absolutely no doubt the images were taken with the IRI-4010, 160X120. As far as I know, IRISYS does not have a handheld camera > 160X120.
We have many images of students taking many images with the IRI-4010 at a recent Level I class of similar quality. We have posted many of these images on our website and YouTube channel.
The 4010 is a very good engineering implementation. Yesterday we had a new customer that previously used a Fluke (I don’t know which model) and he said the image quality of the 4010 was much better.
By the way, the thermal accuracy and sensitivity of handheld thermal cameras from 160X120 to 320X240 or even 640X480 does not change that much, basically from .10C to .05C. Image quality is better but your work is based more on thermal measurements. For general inspection work, a 160X120 will get the job done.
I have seen the IRI-4010 vs. Testo 160X120 side by side many times and the image quality of the former is much better. All cameras with the same sensor format do not have the same image quality. The sensor manf. (e.g. ULIS) will sell different sensor grades. A camera maker may chose to buy a low grade sensor and advertise it as a 160X120 or whatever the format is.
So let me get this right. First, you are stating here the 100% improvement in thermal sensitivity (.1C to .05C) does not change the results much? Secondly, that major manufactures are buying their detectors from ULIS (a division of Sofradir) and that these manufactures buy lower grade detectors and then advertise a higher resolution? Which manufactures exactly are you referring to?
Jason Kaylor – JJ
VP of Specialty Products
877/207-1244
AC Tool Supply](http://www.aikencolon.com/)
Energy Audit
Leslie,
The Pembroke Instruments website shows the same infrared image for their
camera with 640x480 resolution and another with 160x120 resolution.
http://www.pembrokeinstruments.com/images/thermal-13.jpg
http://www.pembrokeinstruments.com/prod-electro-thermal-imaging.php
http://www.pembrokeinstruments.com/_...sheet-2008.pdf
and
http://www.pembrokeinstruments.com/images/thermal-10.jpg
I do not think these two camera resolutions can produce the same quality images
and your ads may be misleading…IMHO. Can you explain this please?
Also… please answer Jason’s question.
Jason-
.05 to .1C is not very much in absolute terms, that is the point. Most home inspection applications can work with .1C or even .2C. I believe BPI/RESNET has proposed .1C sensitivity.
It is known in the industry that ULIS is a major supplier for thermal cameras worldwide. The camera makers (FLIR, Fluke, Testo, IRISYS) usually do not disclose who manf. the sensor or what grade sensor they purchased.
We populate our website with images taken from both the 640X480 and 160X120 cameras we sell. Images that appear on a webpage for decoration purposes should not be mapped to any one camera. Only datasheets and powerpoint presentations should be used for that.
The datasheets and powerpoints should be used to map images exactly to one camera. You are incorrectly mapping an image to a camera. One more time because you seem to need extra explanation: use the datasheets and powerpoints to accurately map images to cameras. Got it?
Leslie,help me out.
Are these pictures on the PDF ,actually from the camera with 160x120 resolution.
[ATTACH]
Yes, those images come directly from IRISYS and were taken with their popular 4010 model.
Thanks for your help.
The latest jpg I just posted came directly from IRISYS or were taken by students using the 4010 camera at our recent ASNT Level I Thermography class.
Looks good for the price.
What would a comparable Flir or Fluk cost for that kind of performance.?
Hi Bob-
A comparable Fluke model would the TiR which I believes sells for about $4500.
Looking at the specs for the TiR (from the Fluke website), http://us.fluke.com/fluke/usen/Thermal-Imaging/Fluke-TiR.htm?PID=56190
Fluke has the thermal accuracy to be 5% or 5C, whichever is greater
IRISYS has 2% or 2C, whichever is greater
The upper temp. of the TiR is +100C vs +250C for the 4010
So the temperature range, accuracy and image quality of the 4010 is a lot better.
The prices I see for the TiR on the web are about $4500 vs our sale price of $3299.
IRISYS differentiates itself mostly by being lower cost. They stay away from teh slick features and focus on what matters: thermal accuracy, sensitivity, range, and image quality.
The TiR does have image fusion and PIP which the 4010 does not but when you get down to it, it is the thermal measurements in the infrared that counts.
The 4010 gets the job down at much lower pricing.
So where are they getting their 320x240 detectors from if ULIS or Sofradir doesn’t make one?
http://www.ulis-ir.com/index.php?infrared-detector=products
http://www.sofradir.com/products/epsilon_mw.htm
So based on the comments of this thread, you are basically calling out the largest IR camera manufacture in the world and the two largest manufactures of test and measurement equipment as out sourcing their IR detectors. Is this correct?
Secondly, the training facility you use is Snell Infrared. John is the author of the Resnet IR standard. In a recent Home Energy Magazine article written by John he expressed the importance of thermal sensitivity in a building diagnostics situation. I am failing to see where your comment of up to .2C @ x is okay for building diagnostics, should be taken as remotely close to accurate. Your provided training front man has published, many times over, the importance of thermal sensitivity for the exact application that home inspectors use IR for.
Jason Kaylor – JJ
VP of Specialty Products
877/207-1244
AC Tool Supply](http://www.aikencolon.com/)
Energy Auditors
Concerning the other thread where you stated picture and picture and fusion ability are simply “bells and whistle” type of features and they can easily be duplicated using a 20mp digital camera. I asked if you have ever done an actual report and an actual inspection because handing a report to a client in full IR usually leads to the IR inspector returning to the property to layout exactly where the images were taken, when repairs are necessary.
I agree that many features added over the years are a bells and whistle type of feature that facilitates the sales of infrared camera systems. A couple of those features I find very useful are pip & fusion (integrated digital camera) and voice annotation. Pip and fusion are more for the client and voice annotation is more for the inspector.
Attached are 4 images. The first is in full IR. It is very difficult to tell what is going on in the image. A good report can overcome that difficulty, but laying out exactly where the thermal exceptions are based solely from the IR image is next to impossible (from the report alone). The next three images make it quite clear as to exactly where these exceptions are located within the structure.
Jason Kaylor – JJ
VP of Specialty Products
877/207-1244
AC Tool Supply](http://www.aikencolon.com/)
Energy Auditors
Jason-
I did not say FLIR and Fluke mostly outsource their sensors. Don’t twist my words.
I said they usually do not state the manf. or grade of the sensor on their camera datasheets. It is known by people who work in the sensor and camera industry (as I have most of my career), that ULIS is a major supplier of sensors worldwide. They sell to camera makers in the USA, quite a bit in fact. What is happening is most camera makers are buying from the same sensor supplier, like most PC’s have Intel onboard.
Regarding temperature sensitivity: my point is for most inspection work, having “only” .1C thermal sensitivity does prevent a proper and accurate inspection from occuring. BPI/RESNET seem to believe .1C is just fine for this type of work. I would advise anyone looking at spending an extra 5K on a camera for an extra .05C in thermal sensitivity to carefully review their set of applications and determine if the need is justified.
**IR Camera - 160x120 resolution = $2714 delivered (Testo 875-1) without fusion
**
IR Camera - 160x120 resolution = $3624 delivered (Testo 875 - 2) **with fusion
The sensitivity is 80 mk (current data from website) Made in Germany
**http://www.testosites.de/thermalimager/en_US
http://www.testo.us/online/embedded/Sites/USA/MainNavigation/SectorsAndProducts/HVACR/Thermal_Imaging/875_881_Building_US.qxd.pdf
**
For our IR students only
and…
IR Training - $450 (limited time)
