NEW Pulsar Thermion Thermal Rifle Scopes and Axion Thermal Monoculars!

N

NGI_TOM

New member
The Eagle has landed...



Click here to see Pulsar's thermal product line
thumbup.gif

 
I'm a little confused about the binoculars. It says it has a built-in laser range finder, but the description says it's stadia metric. So, which is it? Laser? I'm interested. Stadia metric? I already have that garbage on my thermal.
 
Originally Posted By: Rookietjx2I'm a little confused about the binoculars. It says it has a built-in laser range finder, but the description says it's stadia metric. So, which is it? Laser? I'm interested. Stadia metric? I already have that garbage on my thermal.

Which binoculars are you referring to?
 
Tom or anyone else that can just clear this up for me. I’m new to the thermal game and just picked up a helion and love it. Now I am planning on picking up a thermion, unless they come out with a good clip on thermal before next season. My question is how does the new base mags on the thermions really effect FOV. My hunting partner has a trail xq38 and I do not want anything with less FOV than that. We are usually shooting at 100-150, with the rare 200 yard shot. Will the XM 30 give me roughly the same FOV and clarity that the trail xq38 does now? Or would I still be better off going with the XM 38? Thank you for your time.
 
Originally Posted By: BmelvinMy question is how does the new base mags on the thermions really effect FOV. My hunting partner has a trail xq38 and I do not want anything with less FOV than that. We are usually shooting at 100-150, with the rare 200 yard shot. Will the XM 30 give me roughly the same FOV and clarity that the trail xq38 does now? Or would I still be better off going with the XM 38? Thank you for your time. Pulsar has their specs on their website at the following Page. When on this page, Select Models and you can see the specs of each scope.

Thermion XM30: 3.3x base mag: FOV 7.3x5.5
Thermion XM38: 4.2x base mag: FOV 5.8x4.3
Thermion XM50: 5.5x base mag: FOV 4.4x3.3
Thermion XP38: 1.5X base mag: FOV 16.3x12.3
Thermion XP50: 1.9X base mag: FOV 12.4x9.3

Trail XQ38: 2.1x base mag: FOV 9.8x7.4
Trail XQ50: 2.7x base mag: 7.5x5.6
[Trail XP38: 1.2X base mag: FOV 16.3x12.3
Trail XP50: 1.6X base mag: FOV 12.4x9.3

I highlighted the models you asked about. From these specs, it is showing the FOV for the Thermion XP and the Trail XP stayed the same. For the XM models, they have much higher base mag and smaller FOV. I can only assume this had to do with the move to a 12 micron core vs the 17 micron core of the Trail XPs. Bmelvin, to answer your questions based on these specs. The XM30 has the largest FOV of the XM series but still less than the Trail XQ38. It is almost the exact same FOV as the current Trail XQ50. If you want at least as large FOV in the Thermion line, you would move up to the Thermion XP series.

I am shooting a Flir PTS535 this year. It has a 4.5° × 3.5° FOV so almost identical to the new Thermion XM50. It was very different at first, but I have grown to really appreciate that zoom. However, the Pulsar benefits from having PIP in comparison to the Flir so many would argue that much base mag probably isn't necessary.
 
Originally Posted By: KirschOriginally Posted By: BmelvinMy question is how does the new base mags on the thermions really effect FOV. My hunting partner has a trail xq38 and I do not want anything with less FOV than that. We are usually shooting at 100-150, with the rare 200 yard shot. Will the XM 30 give me roughly the same FOV and clarity that the trail xq38 does now? Or would I still be better off going with the XM 38? Thank you for your time. Pulsar has their specs on their website at the following Page. When on this page, Select Models and you can see their specs of each scope.

Thermion XM30: 3.3x base mag: FOV 7.3x5.5
Thermion XM38: 4.2x base mag: FOV 5.8x4.3
Thermion XM50: 5.5x base mag: FOV 4.4x3.3
Thermion XP38: 1.5X base mag: FOV 16.3x12.3
Thermion XP50: 1.9X base mag: FOV 12.4x9.3

Trail XQ38: 2.1x base mag: FOV 9.8x7.4
Trail XQ50: 2.7x base mag: 7.5x5.6
[Trail XP38: 1.2X base mag: FOV 16.3x12.3
Trail XP50: 1.6X base mag: FOV 12.4x9.3

I highlighted the models you asked about. From these specs, it is showing the FOV for the Thermion and the Trail stayed the same. For the XM models, they have much higher base mag and smaller FOV. I can only assume this had to do with the move to a 12 micron core vs the 17 micron core of the Trail XPs. Bmelvin, to answer your questions based on these specs. The XM30 has the largest FOV of the XM series but still less than the Trail XQ38. It is almost the exact same FOV as the current Trail XQ50. If you want at least as large FOV in the Thermion line, you would move up to the Thermion XP series.

I am shooting a Flir PTS535 this year. It has a 4.5° × 3.5° FOV so almost identical to the new Thermion XM50. It was very different at first, but I have grown to really appreciate that zoom. However, the Pulsar benefits from having PIP in comparison to the Flir so many would argue that much base mag probably isn't necessary.


Kirsch thank you very much. That was exactly what I was looking. You da man
 
Buongiorno a tutti. L'altra notte ho messo alla prova i 2 top di gamma della Pulsar, che utilizzano lo stesso sensore microbolometrico non raffreddato ad alta definizione (640x480 pixel con dimensione di 17 micron/pixel) e la stessa ottica al germanio (con lunghezza focale di 50 mm) :
1) il binocolo termico da osservazione Pulsar Accolade XP50 LRF (che ha ingrandimento minimo 2,5X e telemetro notturno/diurno incorporato) e 2) il cannocchiale termico da puntamento Pulsar Thermion XP50 (che ha ingrandimento minimo 1.9X).
Ovviamente il binocolo Accolade è favoloso, nettamente superiore e permette di vedere bene anche qualche dettaglio ed è particolarmente adatto per le osservazioni di lunga durata. Il cannocchiale Thermion è fantastico, ottimo per il peso, il design, la velocità di accensione e di ingaggio del bersaglio, ma ha un campo visivo troppo ampio che impedisce di focalizzare bene un obiettivo e vederne i particolari oltre 100 metri. Il Thermion XP50 va benissimo per la caccia notturna vagante, invece per la caccia da appostamento fisso, con l'utilizzo concomitante di una termocamera da osservazione, penso che sia meglio sacrificare l' alta definizione del Thermion XP50 e utilizzare invece il Thermion XM50 che ha media definizione con 320x240 pixel (ma un sensore nuovissimo con 12 micron/pixel) ed ingrandimento minimo di 5,5X che permette tiri notturni long range.
Potete vedere le differenze in questi 3 video :

Pulsar Accolade XP50 LRF

Pulsar Thermion XM50

Pulsar Thermion XP50

Scusate eventuali errori di grammatica, sintassi ed ortografia del traduttore google.

Goodmorning everyone. The other night I tested the top 2 of the Pulsar, which use the same high-definition uncooled microbolometer sensor (640x480 pixels with a size of 17 micron / pixel) and the same germanium optics (with a focal length of 50 mm):
1) Pulsar Accolade XP50 LRF thermal observation binoculars (which have a minimum magnification of 2.5X and built-in night / day rangefinder) and 2) the Pulsar Thermion XP50 thermal target riflescope (which has a minimum magnification of 1.9X).
Obviously the Accolade binoculars are fabulous, clearly superior and allow you to see some details well and is particularly suitable for long-term observations. The Thermion spotting scope is fantastic, great for the weight, the design, the speed of ignition and engagement of the target, but it has a field of view too wide that prevents to focus well a lens and see its details over 100 meters. The Thermion XP50 is fine for wandering night hunting, instead for hunting from fixed stalking, with the concomitant use of an observation camera, I think it is better to sacrifice the high definition of Thermion XP50 and instead use the Thermion XM50 which has medium definition with 320x240 pixels (but a brand new sensor with 12 micron / pixel) and a minimum magnification of 5.5X that allows long range night shots.
You can see the differences in these 3 videos:

Pulsar Accolade XP50 LRF

Pulsar Thermion XM50

Pulsar Thermion XP50
Sorry for any translation errors, grammar, syntax and spelling of the google translator
 
I think guys need to think of the xp lines as upgrading to the option of splitting the base mag down one more time and gaining fov vs just gaining clarity. Using thermal is all about seeing, to me it only make sense to be far and wide if your gonna see.
 
Last edited:
The new trend of more magnification and less field of view leaves a lot of hunters out. Not everyone has the wide open plains to hunt. Try the new 3.5 to 5x models in the thickets of Virginia, Kentucky, Arkansas and a number of other places all across the country and see how well you fare. I would gladly settle for a 17 core Apex XQ38 (which I currently have and even find it too much at times with 2.2x) over the latest models. I know the Trails have less magnification, but I don’t want to hock the farm in order to get one. These toys are not cheap.l
 
Hunting with thermal really is cheap comparatively speaking. Easy to access land to hunt as oposed to deer hunting where you about have to own it then all the food plotting equipment. Then theres drag racing Ive been down that road. Trailer alone was as much as a gun, optics, tripod and call. Just a little bit more to go 1st class. That is if a scope with slight poi shift is 1st class
unsure.gif
 
Last edited:

I guess it’s all in the eyes of the beholder. To me and many, if not most others, it’s a high priced game. But that’s another subject. Point remains that the “relatively cheap” and more affordable (as far as thermal goes) scopes (talking Pulsar since that seems to be the one most common and discussed) are going to more magnification and less field of view, and also less eye relief. That doesn’t leave guys who hunt tight quarters and with a tight budget with much option if they want a Pulsar. Maybe / hopefully Pulsar will at some future time, produce an affordable, lower magnification scope and monocular for hunters with varying needs, and maybe even reverse the current trend and increase the eye relief a bit. Even ATN paid attention to hunter concerns and increased eye relief on their new models.

 
Lots of options out there boys. I have a scanner that is 1x & one that is 1.8x. My thermal scope is never off of 6x. I wear glasses & my eye glasses rest on the eye pieces of all three. I have no problems spotting or shooting coyotes. But that's just me.
 

Which Pulsar scanner and rifle scope do you have, Old Cat? Sounds like they are pretty good with magnification and eye relief.

As to eye relief of rifle scopes, my Pulsar Apex XQ38 requires a snug fit of my eyeglasses against the ocular but I can see OK with the 67mm relief. I wouldn’t want less. Field of view is 9.8. The new Thermion XM38 is 50mm eye relief and fov is 7.3 degrees. In contrast, the new ATN Thor 4 scopes are 90mm eye relief. ATN listened to hunters as mentioned by their new CEO at the Shot Show. I am assuming eye relief comparison between Pulsar and ATN are the same with measurement. Would be nice if Pulsar hears these concerns and responds accordingly as well.

Pertaining to scanners, the discontinued Pulsar HD19a monocular had a 20mm eye relief. Great for eyeglass wearers. The Pulsar Helion XQ28F had a 16mm and the new Axion XM30 is 14mm - big difference.

The only point I have been trying to make is that Pulsar has lessened eye relief, and increased magnification thereby lessening field of view. I wish they would reverse that trend in the more affordable scopes (like the Apex and HD19a products). All things being equal, and without having tested every model personally, I can only assume by Pulsar’s own specs that the new models could pose problems for (1) guys who hunt closer quarters and (2) guys who wear eyeglasses. If it works well as you mentioned then I and a lot of others are happy to hear that. I guess I personally won’t really know if it works well for me without testing them, which is difficult to do. Thanks for the input.

 
Originally Posted By: BmelvinTom or anyone else that can just clear this up for me. I’m new to the thermal game and just picked up a helion and love it. Now I am planning on picking up a thermion, unless they come out with a good clip on thermal before next season. My question is how does the new base mags on the thermions really effect FOV. My hunting partner has a trail xq38 and I do not want anything with less FOV than that. We are usually shooting at 100-150, with the rare 200 yard shot. Will the XM 30 give me roughly the same FOV and clarity that the trail xq38 does now? Or would I still be better off going with the XM 38? Thank you for your time.

The Trail XQ38 has a 9.8 degree FOV. The widest FOV in the Axion line is 7.3 degrees.

https://www.pulsar-nv.com/glo/products/33/thermal-imaging-riflescopes/trail

The FOV needed is determined by the range and type of hunting you do.

For scanning I personally would not go any lower than 12 degrees. When you are scanning the main goal is detection and the tighter the FOV the more animals you will miss seeing. On top of that you will have to move your head back and forth more to cover everything which will be more tiring and the motion will possibly get you busted by coyotes on a bright moon night.

For shooting you need to tailor the FOV to your hunting also. If you are a long range one shot and done hunter then you can get by with a tighter FOV and the higher magnification will give you a positive ID at longer ranges. If you are stalking 40 hogs in a peanut field with a 25 round mag then a wide FOV is critical for tracking and leading running hogs. Also if you are hunting hogs in a tight setup in thick woods or grass a wide FOV gives you more of a chance to find hogs that might charge in your direction after the first shot.

As a side note. Even though you cut your pixels in half each time you zoom you have that option. If you purchase a unit with too much lens and high base magnification you are stuck with the tight FOV.

If I was in the market for a new scope at a good price I would go with the FLIR PTS233. It has a 12 degree FOV and a 12 micron core (better image detail). It's light enough to use as a scanner if you wanted to use it that way. You can get a DLOC mount for it that would be perfect for changing from a shooting unit to scanning unit. Just get a picatinny rail with a 1/4x20 tap on it and screw in a camera handle with a lanyard.

https://tnvc.com/shop/tripod-picatinny-rail-adapter/

https://www.ultimatenightvision.com/FLIR-PTS-QD-Mount-p/dloc-pts.htm

If I was in the market for a new scanner the Pulsar Accolade LRF XP50 looks like a player.


 
Last edited:
Buongiorno
Originally Posted By: Ernest49Buongiorno a tutti. L'altra notte ho messo alla prova i 2 top di gamma della Pulsar, che utilizzano lo stesso sensore microbolometrico non raffreddato ad alta definizione (640x480 pixel con dimensione di 17 micron/pixel) e la stessa ottica al germanio (con lunghezza focale di 50 mm) :
1) il binocolo termico da osservazione Pulsar Accolade XP50 LRF (che ha ingrandimento minimo 2,5X e telemetro notturno/diurno incorporato) e 2) il cannocchiale termico da puntamento Pulsar Thermion XP50 (che ha ingrandimento minimo 1.9X).
Ovviamente il binocolo Accolade è favoloso, nettamente superiore e permette di vedere bene anche qualche dettaglio ed è particolarmente adatto per le osservazioni di lunga durata. Il cannocchiale Thermion è fantastico, ottimo per il peso, il design, la velocità di accensione e di ingaggio del bersaglio, ma ha un campo visivo troppo ampio che impedisce di focalizzare bene un obiettivo e vederne i particolari oltre 100 metri. Il Thermion XP50 va benissimo per la caccia notturna vagante, invece per la caccia da appostamento fisso, con l'utilizzo concomitante di una termocamera da osservazione, penso che sia meglio sacrificare l' alta definizione del Thermion XP50 e utilizzare invece il Thermion XM50 che ha media definizione con 320x240 pixel (ma un sensore nuovissimo con 12 micron/pixel) ed ingrandimento minimo di 5,5X che permette tiri notturni long range.
Potete vedere le differenze in questi 3 video :

Pulsar Accolade XP50 LRF

Pulsar Thermion XM50

Pulsar Thermion XP50

Scusate eventuali errori di grammatica, sintassi ed ortografia del traduttore google.

Goodmorning everyone. The other night I tested the top 2 of the Pulsar, which use the same high-definition uncooled microbolometer sensor (640x480 pixels with a size of 17 micron / pixel) and the same germanium optics (with a focal length of 50 mm):
1) Pulsar Accolade XP50 LRF thermal observation binoculars (which have a minimum magnification of 2.5X and built-in night / day rangefinder) and 2) the Pulsar Thermion XP50 thermal target riflescope (which has a minimum magnification of 1.9X).
Obviously the Accolade binoculars are fabulous, clearly superior and allow you to see some details well and is particularly suitable for long-term observations. The Thermion spotting scope is fantastic, great for the weight, the design, the speed of ignition and engagement of the target, but it has a field of view too wide that prevents to focus well a lens and see its details over 100 meters. The Thermion XP50 is fine for wandering night hunting, instead for hunting from fixed stalking, with the concomitant use of an observation camera, I think it is better to sacrifice the high definition of Thermion XP50 and instead use the Thermion XM50 which has medium definition with 320x240 pixels (but a brand new sensor with 12 micron / pixel) and a minimum magnification of 5.5X that allows long range night shots.
You can see the differences in these 3 videos:

Pulsar Accolade XP50 LRF

Pulsar Thermion XM50

Pulsar Thermion XP50
Sorry for any translation errors, grammar, syntax and spelling of the google translator
 
Il binocolo termico Pulsar Accolade XP50 LRF è eccezionale e nettamente superiore rispetto a qualsiasi altro strumento di osservazione notturna. Pensate che la mattina del giorno di Natale ho voluto accontentare 2 amici cacciatori e siamo andati a testarlo verso le 9 del mattino sul Parco del Fiume Brenta. Abbiamo visto le lepri sul terreno arato anche a 300 metri di distanza. Con il binocolo tradizionale non le vedevano, perchè si mimetizzavano perfettamente. Non convinti, hanno camminato per oltre 200 metri, ( infangando le scarpe da Messa di Natale), finchè non hanno fatte scappare le lepri... Vi racconto questo aneddoto per farvi capire anche le potenzialità diurne di questo strumento. Potete fare lunghe osservazioni notturne senza scompensare la vista, cosa che succede con le termocamere monoculari. La batteria dura 7 ore e se colleghi il dispositivo con wi-fi ad un mini-tablet, vedi ancora meglio i particolari. Infatti, con lo zoom digitale, l' immagine sgrana meno anche perchè penso che arrivi direttamente dal sensore al monitor del mini-tablet "saltando" gli oculari del binocolo. Io l'ho provato più volte di notte da un appostamento alto in Croazia e vedevo ben oltre i 1800 metri dichiarati nelle specifiche. Ho visto volpi, sciacalli, tassi, cinghiali, caprioli, un'infinità di lepri, anche ricci e topi e persino i fagiani dormienti sugli alberi per essere al riparo dai predatori notturni. Invece il cannocchiale termico Pulsar Themion XP50 francamente mi ha un po' deluso. Ha troppo campo visivo, ha un ingrandimento di base di soli 1,9X, quindi non si vedono bene i particolari del bersaglio a cui vuoi tirare anche zoommando. E' sicuramente un dispositivo fantastico per chi ha solo questo strumento per osservare e per tirare e va a caccia vagante in spazi stretti, cioè essenzialmente per fare il bracconiere notturno. Non va bene per tiri notturni Long Range da appostamento fisso (la volpe più vicina era arrivata a 190 metri...). Adesso vorrei testare il Pulsar Thermion XM50 che monta un sensore nuovissimo (con dimensioni di 12 micron/pixel) a media definizione 320x240 pixel, e 5,5X di ingrandimento minimo. Al momento però, ritengo che il migliore cannocchiale termico da puntamento sia l'Atn Thor 4 640 4X-32X che ha un'ottica con focale da 75 mm... ma costa una cifra assolutamente assurda .... 7690 € di listino........
Scusate eventuali errori di traduzione, di grammatica, sintassi ed ortografia del traduttore google
The Pulsar Accolade XP50 LRF thermal binocular is exceptional and clearly superior to any other night observation instrument. Do you think that on the morning of Christmas day I wanted to please 2 hunting friends and we went to test it at 9 am on the Brenta River Park. We saw the hares on the plowed land even 300 meters away. With traditional binoculars they didn't see them, because they were perfectly camouflaged. Unconvinced, they walked more than 200 meters, (muddy Christmas shoes !!!), until they ran away the hares ... I'll tell you this story to make you understand the daytime potential of this device. You can make long nocturnal observations without disrupting the view, which happens with monocular cameras. The battery lasts 7 hours and if you connect the device with wi-fi to a mini-tablet, you can see the details even better. In fact, with the digital zoom, the image shells less even because I think it comes directly from the sensor to the mini-tablet monitor "jumping" the binocular eyepieces. I tried it several times at night from a high stakeout in Croatia and I saw well over the 1800 meters declared in the specifications. I have seen foxes, jackals, badgers, wild boars, roe deer, countless hares, even hedgehogs and mice, and even sleeping pheasants on trees to protect themselves from nocturnal predators. On the other hand, the Pulsar Themion XP50 thermal telescope frankly disappointed me. It has too much field of view, it has a basic magnification of only 1.9X, so you can't see the details of the target you want to shoot even zooming. It is certainly a fantastic device for those who have only this instrument to observe and to shoot and go hunting in tight spaces, that is essentially to do the night poacher. Not good for long range night shots from fixed stalking (the nearest fox had reached 190 meters ...).
Now I would like to test the Pulsar Thermion XM50 which has a brand new core (with a size of 12 micron / pixel) with a medium definition 320x240 pixel, and 5.5X of minimum magnification. At the moment, however,
I think the best thermal rifle scope is the Atn Thor 4 640 4X-32X which has a 75 mm focal length lens ... but it costs an absolutely absurd figure .... € 7690 list price. .......
Sorry for any translation errors, grammar, syntax and spelling of the google translator
 
THERMAL RIFLESCOPE PUSAR vs ATN

PULSAR

MEDIUM definition 320x480 pixel 12 micron/pixel PRICE

Thermion XM30: 3.3x base mag: FOV 7.3x5.5 2800 $
Thermion XM38: 4.2x base mag: FOV 5.8x4.3 3300 $
Thermion XM50: 5.5x base mag: FOV 4.4x3.3 3800 $

MEDIUM definition 320x480 pixel 17 micron/pixel

Trail XQ38: 2.1x base mag: FOV 9.8x7.4 3300 $
Trail XQ50: 2.7x base mag: FOV 7.5x5.6 3800 $

HIGH definition 640x480 pixel 17 micron/pixel

Thermion XP38: 1.5X base mag: FOV 16.3x12.3 4500 $
Thermion XP50: 1.9X base mag: FOV 12.4x9.3 5000 $

Trail XP38: 1.2X base mag: FOV 16.3x12.3 4500 $
Trail XP50: 1.6X base mag: FOV 12.4x9.3 5000 $

ATN

MEDIUM definition 384x288 pixel 17 (?) micron/pixel

Thor 4 384 1.25x base mag: FOV 16x12,5 2000 $
Thor 4 384 2.0x base mag: FOV 12x9.5 2700 $
Thor 4 384 4.5x base mag: FOV 6x4.7 3200 $
Thor 4 384 7.0x base mag: FOV 5x3.8 3500 $

Thor HD 384 9.0x base mag: FOV 3x2.4 4000 $

HIGH definition 640x480 pixel 17 (?) micron/pixel

Thor 4 640 1.0x base mag: FOV 32x25 3500 $
Thor 4 640 1.5x base mag: FOV 24x19 4000 $
Thor 4 640 2.5x base mag: FOV 12.5x9.7 4300 $
Thor 4 640 4.0x base mag: FOV 8.3x6.2 4800 $

Thor HD 640 5.0x base mag: FOV 6x4.7 5000 $

Hello 6mm06 ! Maybe you don't need it

"I don’t want to hock the farm in order to get one"

choosing the best cost-performance ratio ........
 
Back
Top