How do modern Fluke TICs perform? - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / general

author: cejoba
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: December 17, 2022, 10:14:26 am
content: This question is just out of curious, I see few discussions here despite their quantity on ebay.They are almost the same form factor as Flir ix/ex/exx, with various resolution and frame rate available.Since they do not have direct video signal output, I'm not really going to buy one. But I still want to know how good/bad are their image quality?

author: Fraser
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 17, 2022, 11:33:50 am
content: Modern Fluke thermal imaging cameras come from a combination of Raytek and Infrared Solutions knowledge obtained when Fluke bought those companies. As a result Fluke thermal imaging cameras are very good performers. Fluke did not have the knowledge to build thermal imaging cameras so they bought in products and then bought the companies that had been supplying them. A sensible approach if your company has no experience in building such equipment. The down side of owning a Fluke thermal camera is usually its purchase cost and the lack of any research into unlocking the cameras full potential. Just as with FLIR, Fluke elected to build standard hardware platforms, the capabilities of which are set in the cameras firmware. We see the carefully considered hobbling of resolution and sensitivity that was also present in FLIR Ex and Exx series cameras but I have not seen any work on trying to reconfigure the cameras to the full native resolution, or the adding ‘missing’ features from cameras higher in the series.Basically as soon as you put the name Fluke on a product, it becomes expensive and can remain expensive on the used market as there are those users who will prefer to buy Fluke to other brands because of Fluke’s reputation for quality. In fact they are really buying an Infrared Solutions or Raytek camera in Fluke liveryThe early FLUKE VT02 and VT04 visual thermometers are designed and made by British company IRISYS. Fluke ended up buying IRISYS but not for their thermal camera technology as that was pretty basic in modern terms.I own a few Fluke thermal cameras and the build quality is as good as that of FLIR so no problems in that area of the designs. Is there a reason to not buy Fluke thermal camera technology ? Not unless the price is an issue as you will likely pay more for a yellow and grey Fluke than many other brands of thermal camera with similar capabilities.The attached pictures are from a period when Raytek and Infrared Solutions were selling cameras under their own names and in Fluke livery. Once Fluke bought the companies the ‘own brand’ models were discontinued and only the Fluke livery versions continued to be sold.Hope this helps you understand more about Fluke and their thermal imaging products.Fraser

author: Fraser
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 17, 2022, 01:09:07 pm
content: I just remembered, there is a Fluke series of cameras that may be worth avoiding. I have read negative user moments about the Fluke PTi series. They are Flukes response to the FLIR C series. If considering buying one of the PTi series, do your research first.Fraser

author: cejoba
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: December 17, 2022, 01:39:10 pm
content: Thank you Fraser.Those on ebay are actually not more expensive than Flir's, so I wonder why they don't gain the popularity here.And to confirm, modern ones indeed don't have video output like Ex0, right? (I know the older ones like some in your pictures have.)

author: Fraser
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 17, 2022, 02:22:00 pm
content: FLIR became very popular here because many camera platforms used the same firmware format that could be modifiedA new FLIR E4 was affordable and upgradeable to better than E8 specification. The E40 could be upgraded to better than E60 specification….. the rest is history. Fluke cameras were expensive to buy new in 2013 (when the E4 was released) and their firmware is not as friendly in terms of ‘adjusting’ its contents.FLIR = Hack friendlyFluke = Not Hack friendlySimpleComposite video output is one of those ports that appear on certain models of camera and not others. I cannot explain the thought process behind whether or not it is provided. The added video encoder, port etc is an additional cost on the BoM however. Many users of thermal cameras prefer to operate in the digital domain these days so look for Bluetooth and Wi-Fi connectivity rather than a cabled composite video signal of less than optimum image quality. You have to do the research and search the data sheets on a manufacturers series of cameras if you want to find one with a composite video port.Fraser

author: cejoba
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: December 17, 2022, 02:34:24 pm
content: Thanks a lot!Actually it don't have to be composite, any direct output would be good, such as HDMI, it's digital with good picture quality.I just hate wireless or phone driving methods.

author: Fraser
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 17, 2022, 03:05:37 pm
content: I also like a direct video output of some sort. Several of my cameras have S-Video output whilst others have only composite video.Fraser

author: Fraser
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 17, 2022, 03:14:24 pm
content: I have a very nice FLUKE thermal camera that sadly has a dead LCD display panel. I cannot use that camera as there is no remote control capability using a PC and no video output to use with a separate monitorThat camera is just sat in a box awaiting the day that I can find a compatible replacement LCD panel.

author: cejoba
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: December 17, 2022, 06:40:25 pm
content: BTW I feel composite is actually perfect for thermal cameras, which usually not exceed 640x480@60hz. With only two wires it's also easy to modify and connect by hobbists.

author: markb1980
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: December 18, 2022, 06:18:54 pm
content: Quote from: Fraser on December 17, 2022, 01:09:07 pmThat's a very polite way of saying that every other brand offers 2-5x higher resolution, most of them even with faster frame-rates and that for a cheaper price. Even a C5 from FLIR is way cheaper.It's a bit like with the meters - there are much cheaper options out there which offer much better price/performance ratio but Fluke has a great reputation and they have aside the known name also a long term support. This is also good for many companies - people can get over and over the same equopment and they don't need to learn new gear. But in this case this philisophy hurt Fluke - developing a "better" PTi-model out would make the PTi120 obsolete and replacing the model would ga againce their philisophy. My dad lately ordered some spare-parts for pretty old Fluke devices.The higher end TICs are OK in therms of performance and more comparable with FLIR... A TiS60+ and a E8 are basically in the similiar price- and performance-range. The Flir has a narrower FOV and a narrower temp.-range but this are minor details. The images look pretty much the same and the Fluke offers here with a 30Hz frame-rate an advantage over Flir. (As far as I know Flir has the 9Hz limitation because of some export regulations - so no offense here!)Fluke is a major brand and thatfor it's also clear why they don't even try to compete with others like Guide, Infiray or Hikmicro. Except the PTi-series they offer premium products at a premium price like Flir does. If you are as me and you don't care about the brand-name but about the price/performance ratio you should avoir Fluke and also Flir (except you want to go the hacky route).Quote from: Fraser on December 17, 2022, 11:33:50 am... this where only "visual thermomethers" as the Flir TG165 - means they didn't store radiometric data in the images (as you sure know). The first real affordable TIC was to my knowledge the Flir C2. With which was Flirs (cheaper and lower specs) answer to the PTi120.