I still find it expensive for a thermal imager. I personally bought a Chinese Guide PC210 for €216 shipped, and that includes 21% VAT, for a whole unit and not just a sensor. For another €15 I got a ZnSe lens for macro use.
Not only is it cheaper, on paper it's also much better:
- 45 mK vs 50 mK thermal sensitivity
- ±2 °C or ±2% vs ±10°C or ±10% accuracy
- 256x192 vs 160x120 resolution
- 25 vs 8.7Hz framerate
- -20 to 550 °C vs -10 to 450 °C range
The kicker is that (being European) I can't even get a FLIR equivalent to some of these specs, as they would violate ITAR export restrictions.
Separately, there's a notion of purchases large enough you have to plan for them. $523 is a few weeks of pay for some people even in the US. The headline is set up to suggest a low-cost (because it's DIY) relative to the status quo of devices an average student couldn't really buy to tinker with. The result is more expensive than an off-the-shelf thermal camera I bought awhile ago without substantially better features (other than tinkerability).
You are right, there are cheaper solutions like smartphone addons, but as a standalone thermal imager including display, storage, etc., there are not many options that are less expensive and provide the same flexibility in terms of open-source software and hardware. This is a comparable all-in-one device from FLIR itself: https://www.amazon.de/FLIR-89401-0202-C5-Kompakt-W%C3%A4rmeb...
atoav|2 years ago
Context matters and thermal imaging is very expensive usually.
Goz3rr|2 years ago
Not only is it cheaper, on paper it's also much better:
The kicker is that (being European) I can't even get a FLIR equivalent to some of these specs, as they would violate ITAR export restrictions.hansvm|2 years ago
rittermax|2 years ago