Performance comparison for Barnes model 12-1000, Exotech model 100, and Ideas Inc. Biometer Mark 2

Results of tests show that all channels of all instruments, except channel 3 of the Biometer Mark 2, were stable in response to input signals were linear, and were adequately stable in response to temperature changes. The Biometer Mark 2 is labelled with an inappropriate description of the units measured and the dynamic range is a inappropriate for field measurements causing unnecessarily high fractional errors. This instrument is, therefore, quantization limited. The dynamic range and noise performance of the Model 12-1000 are appropriate for remote sensing field research. The field of view and performance of the Model 100A and the Model 12-1000 are satisfactory. The Biometer Mark 2 has not, as yet, been satisfactorily equipped with an acceptable field of view determining device. Neither the widely used aperture plate nor the 24 deg cone are acceptable.