What do you think about the Nokta/Makro Invenio ?

[Kemper]

It looks to me like it sucks and is just a gimmick for people that like to play with detectors. Like the Dankowski followers. But they don't even seem to be too interested in it and they like to kiss up to manufacturers just like their leader.

The imaging system on this detector does not seem like a technical advance that is worth showing. But you are the tech guys over here so you surely keep up with the latest so-called tech,so what do you think ?

[Skippy]

It looks like the sort of equipment that may be useful to archaeologists, but it is expensive and unnecessary for most detecting hobbyists.
It's good that Makro/Nokta ( and others, like OKM ) are working on such innovations, it may ultimately benefit us in future, particularly if the cost comes down.

[Andi68]

Nokta / Makro are from Turkey?

kt, you mean, they are no good?

[Andi68]

I never buy such a device

[RS_Phil]

I have Macro JeoHunter and really bad Md's.

[Carl-NC]

Some of their models have achieved a decent reputation, like the Racers, Impact, and Kruzers. Some have been largely gimmickry, like the Jeohunter. My only personal experience is with the Racer (not bad) and one of the Fors (horrible ergonomics). No idea about the Invenio. Might be a useless gimmick, might be useful for some applications (as Skippy suggested) but not likely for the average detectorist.

[kt315]

we need more depth on gold.

[Andi68]

More depth on gold-LRL

[kt315]

somebody found the gold in China https://www.liveleak.com/view?t=a8NM1_1536797155

[Kemper]

Some of their models have achieved a decent reputation, like the Racers, Impact, and Kruzers. Some have been largely gimmickry, like the Jeohunter. My only personal experience is with the Racer (not bad) and one of the Fors (horrible ergonomics). No idea about the Invenio. Might be a useless gimmick, might be useful for some applications (as Skippy suggested) but not likely for the average detectorist.

But the Racer,Impact and Kruzer haven't been shown to have any technical advantage over what was already available. The companies that make these new products don't show what advantage they have over others, technical or otherwise. Those that may be capable of showing whether or not there is a technical advantage are not much help. Most recent machines to come out are being marketed by using people on youtube or forums ect. Yes, these machines have achieved a " decent reputation" as you put it but that is saying nothing helpful to the person that may want to move up to a better detector.

I have purchased a Nox because I believe it has been shown to have an advantage in target separation. I haven't seen anything else in the last several years that seemed to be worth moving up to from those that have been around a lot longer. There is no qualified independent reviewer of these machines that doesn't have a financial tie to the manufacturer that I know of.

[Carl-NC]

All kinds of companies put out all kinds of products all the time. None of them are obligated to show that a product is any better than anything else, caveat emptor all the way.

[Kemper]

All kinds of companies put out all kinds of products all the time. None of them are obligated to show that a product is any better than anything else, caveat emptor all the way.

ca·ve·at emp·tor
ˌkavēˌät ˈem(p)ˌtôr/
noun
noun: caveat emptor

• the principle that the buyer alone is responsible for checking the quality and suitability of goods before a purchase is made.
  
  The buyers of metal detectors, for the most part, have no opportunity to check them out before purchasing. Even if they did ,they would not know the quality and suitability of the product in comparison to what they already have.
  That is the problem- No qualified person reviewing these products and showing the difference. Lots of unqualified people giving opinions and that is who the manufacturers seek to push their product. Dankowski may be qualified and able to show how the Equinox,for example compares, but he is not allowed to because of an agreement with the manufacturer. He certainly has the right to make that choice but is of no help to the average detectorist that could use the information.
  
  
  To further express my point- The spokesperson for Nokta/Makro just stated on a forum " ..once it is in the hands of the user, you can decide for yourself whether you want it or not. " Too bad a person can not decide if they want it or not before purchasing.

[Carl-NC]

In today's mail-order economy, returning an item is a mouse click away. "I didn't like it" is good enough to get an RMA and return shipping label. And there are a few avenues where you can try out a detector.

I think Dilek's comment was meant to be more general: "Once we release the product, consumers will decide if it is worthy." That is true of any consumer product.

If you don't like the way things are, then change it. Create a detector review web site and start writing test reports. Although sitting on a forum and complaining, and expecting someone else to do the work you're asking for, is certainly the American Way.

[Skippy]

How about making a review of your new Equinox, Gary K. ? Once you have a decent number of hours on it, and have seen the good and not-so-good aspects, an unbiased opinion would be interesting.

[kt315]

How about making a review of your new Equinox, Gary K. ? Once you have a decent number of hours on it, and have seen the good and not-so-good aspects, an unbiased opinion would be interesting.

do new review. we need new cosmic noise in our Galaxy Milky Way. ML needs in additional profit.