I recently came across a thermal imaging camera that I really don’t like. It’s partly about the image quality, and much more about different user experience factors.
In order to provide helpful feedback to the company, I whipped out my favorite thermal imaging camera for a quick comparison, and aimed them both at an electrical circuit breaker panel box.
It then made sense to me to reach for every single thermal imaging camera at my disposal for an even wider comparison. I’ve been meaning to do this for a while, and finally had a good reason to do so.
Advertisement
There are a few “imaging thermometer” devices that I can’t find at the moment, but the one I did find and use should give you a good indication of what you can expect from similar tools.
See Also: Difference Between Thermal Imaging Camera and Imaging Thermometer?
All images are straight out of their respective cameras, with the only editing being for size and highest quality jpeg conversion. Images are in the order of least expensive product to most expensive.
Rainbow color palettes were used where possible.
Seek Thermal Smartphone Modules
This is from Seek Thermal’s Android smartphone module.
Price: $249 for the standard module, $299 for the extended range module
Advertisement
Available for iOS and Android.
Buy Now(via Amazon)
Flir TG165 Imaging Thermometer
Flir’s TG165, which I reviewed last year, is designed to pinpoint trouble areas for temperature measurements. It’s not a true thermal imaging camera, but can provide far more insight than a simple IR thermometer.
Price: $400
Buy Now(via Amazon)
Flir C2 Compact Thermal Imaging Camera
The Flir C2 is a pocket-sized and relatively affordable thermal imaging camera. It came out earlier this year, and although engineered with an 80 x 60 px sensor, Flir’s MSX image contrast enhancement technology does a great job of raising the image quality.
Price: $699
Buy Now(via Amazon)
Flir E4 Thermal Imaging Camera
I bought my Flir E4 last year and used the community enhancement to unlock the full higher resolution of the built-in sensor. It ships as an 80 x 60 pixel device, but the conversion instructions were simple and allows the E4 to create images with 320 x 240 px thermal resolution.
Price: $995
Buy Now(via Amazon)
This is a reminder that you can’t always trust what you see on camera. If my hand wasn’t in the frame of this image, then the reflection on the panel would have stood out a lot more against the background.
Even in complete darkness, infrared light emitted from your body and other heat sources with bounce off of reflective objects. This can give a false sense that something is hotter than its surroundings when it’s not.
Fluke TiS10 Thermal Imaging Camera
The Fluke TiS10 is a 80 x 60 px thermal imaging camera.
Price: $1200
Buy Now(via Amazon)
Milwaukee Thermal Imaging Camera (M12, 160 x 120 px resolution)
Milwaukee has 2 thermal imaging cameras now – the original M12 model, and a new 7.8KP thermal imaging camera that’s coming out soon. This is the original, with 160 x 120 px resolution. The new model has a 102 x 77 px sensor.
This image was taken using Milwaukee’s BETA firmware, and about a half hour after the others, which is why the breaker pair on the lower right side of the panel looks different.
Price: $2500
Buy Now(via Home Depot)
Fluke Ti110 Thermal Imaging Camera
Fluke’s Ti110 is a somewhat different beast than the other models, and has video recording capabilities and smooth lens focusing. Like the Milwaukee model, it features a 160 x 120 px thermal sensor, but software-wise it’s much more sophisticated.
Fluke’s IR Fusion feature in this model creates a somewhat blended image, with the full thermal resolution image being nested at the center of a visual image for easier guidance.
Price: $4500
Buy Now(via Amazon)
Flir E60 Thermal Imaging Camera (pre-MSX)
I was able to borrow a Flir E60 a couple of years back, before it was equipped with Flir’s MSX image enhancement technology. At the time it did offer WiFi tablet connectivity, but was a little buggy and deleted some images.
Even so, the E60, a 320 x 240 px device, delivered phenomenally good thermal image quality. While I had the good thinking to take an image of the circuit breaker panel, I used the “iron” palette instead of rainbow.
So… I opened up Flir Tools, their free software, and changed the color palette to rainbow:
This image is not straight out of the camera, but uses the same thermographic data, and so it would have appeared like this if I used the rainbow palette instead of iron at the time of image capture.
I also captured an image with high contrast rainbow palette setting.
Price: $6995
Newer E60’s offer built-in MSX image enhancement technology. Since I returned this loaner sample years ago, I can’t show you what the image of a new E60 would look like.
Buy Now(via Amazon)
Conclusion
My goal here was to show what you could expect to see at different thermal imaging camera image resolutions. The more you spend, the more you get, with respect to thermal sensor size and also built-in features. But you can still get respectable image quality and useful features for under $1000.
Pablo
The new FLIR One is a pretty good alternative to the Seek, they quadrupled the resolution in the newest one. You can spot quite a bit of smoothing, but is still rather functional.
You can find some examples on Instagram.
https://instagram.com/explore/tags/flirone/
Stuart
I figure that the Flir ONE should produce image quality comparable to the C2, or maybe just a little lower.
Jimmie
Wow. Talk about a huge difference between what’s advertised and what you actually get. Take a look at the ceiling image on Seek’s website accompanying the description of “Seek Compact” and then compare it to the quality of the breaker image above. Is this a case of misleading marketing?
Stuart
If you compare it to the Fluke TiS10, which is a thermal-only image, there’s some difference in image quality, but not very much. I’d say the Fluke is much more sensitive with higher resolution, and with a better colorizing algorithm.
The Seek works better when there’s a larger temperature difference.
Jimmie
Hi Stuart. Sorry about the late reply. Once the holiday buzz dies down, how about doing an article where you look at the Seek (maybe side-by-side with the FLIR One?) in more depth?
I’m still having trouble wrapping my head around the image quality differences between the circuit panel image you made with your Seek camera and the slick marketing images and videos on Seek’s website (IIRC, one was of a room with fluorescent lights in the ceiling, another was a street-view of a house; both were clear and very detailed). It’s hard to believe they used the same camera.
Chris
I’ve got a couple questions on the seek. I noticed that the color palette you used is different than the rest of the cameras. Was that intended?
Is the seek you used the fixed focus? It appears the base model now has adjustable focus ring like the xl.
I’m looking at a seek now because they have it marked down 25% until Monday so it’s 186 for me. So i’m hoping you are able to comment before then.
Any chance you’ll reveal who upset you?
Fluke - Dan Wright
Thank you ToolGuyd for your diligence! Your product reviews are a valuable service to everyone. We (Fluke) agree on the importance of image quality. More news on that soon!
Mike
Are the company logos actually on the screen of the device itself? If so, that is really obnoxious. Display space is at a premium on small screens and wasting it for the company’s vanity is unforgivable.
Stuart
Flir: No option to remove, but it looks more discrete on the screen.
Fluke: Off on one, On on the other but with option to remove it or upload custom logo.
Milwaukee: Not shown on screen.
Mike
Thanks. My company isn’t looking to replace ours any time soon but when we do I’ll keep this in mind. I don’t know why things like this bug me, but it really bothers me when companies stick their logo in every conceivable place on their product. If doing so has an effect on function, like blocking part of the screen, it might be the one thing that makes me buy one product over another.
Stuart
I can definitely understand that.
In these cases, the on-screen logos don’t seem to impede functionality at all. On-screen, the branding is very inconspicuous.
If you tell me which of the above brands or products you’re interested in, I can take a photo of the screen for you.
Mike
I very much appreciate the offer, but it isn’t necessary. By the time I ever get approval to puchase another one these models will be obsolete.
Bob
I have had the seek thermal for over a year. Love it. Especially when winter hits I can find every spot my house is leaking. Its not “AMAZING”, but it does the job pretty well. Especially for the price paid. I also had some heating trouble with forced hot water boiler that I figured out using my seek thermal. Paid for it right there by not needing to call a boiler technician.
J.J. Bromenshenk
The accuracy of FLIR One and SEEK is best at close ranges. They have a definite use, but even the sales techs will acknowledge that these cameras are intended more as a commercial for better grade cameras. They do have the advantage of being able to use some of the phone/tablet visible digital camera functions such as video.
The C2 appears to be a better, more ruggedized option, and if you have to buy or phone or tablet like an ipod, the cost is comparable. Best deal is the original Flir One if you have an i5 phone, and the form factor is better for a working tool