Review on 🔥 Seek Thermal Revealpro: The Ultimate Ruggedized, High Resolution Thermal Imaging Camera by Carlos Alston

I may update this review if anything changes, but I need to let people know that I will be ordering this camera for the fourth time in a couple of weeks and am looking for a good example. I'm an engineer, I understand how to test these things and I can tell you they're everywhere. precision calibrated thermometer in the environment. The Raytek ST-60 has been my workhorse and has never let me down in spot thermography. The emissivity was adjusted to 0.97 to match the Seek camera. Sample B is the second replacement purchased after Seek reported that the camera tolerance is +/- 5% at most, Sample A is consistently 10+% lower or worse. Example B is completely unsuitable for the temperature. Unfortunately, the IR lens came out of a sealed, pitted box. Maybe Seek will consider this an acceptable damage or coverage anomaly, but for $500 I'm not exactly thrilled. So I ordered another one, assuming sample A was a godsend and sample B was a typically good unit. If it weren't for the lens damage I'd be over the moon with Specimen B. Specimen C - Trying to get everything B has (ie accurate temp readings) except for the stupid scratched lens. Unfortunately the lens is perfect, but again the temperature readings are pathologically low at 45 degrees, again giving an error of +/- 10% or twice the Seek spec. Not that I particularly care either, but the flashlight's LED emitter is crooked, which seems pretty lame. I'm EE, we make tons of electronics, it's not hard to align things like that to some extent, the error here is much bigger. I ordered copy D and I hope Revain doesn't. Without tagging me, A was returned as Seek recommended. Given the COVID-19 issue, their customer support is slow, and since I'm throwing them away on credit cards, I don't mind chewing on devices because everyone has legitimate issues. I'd really appreciate it if B didn't have a scratched lens as it's about as perfect as you can get in terms of accuracy. I should also note that sample C is significantly louder than B on flat field measurements. Something is wrong with these search engines, maybe a bad batch of calibrations or something.