Pulsar Axion XG35 Compact user experiences?

[webley701]

Does anyone have experience of both the relatively new Pulsar Axion XG35 Compact & the existing Axion 2 XG35?

The Axion XG35 Compact has a 640x400 display whilst the Axion 2 XG35 has a larger 1024x768 display. I’m wondering if the smaller display of the compact model is in practice at much of a disadvantage compared to the Axion 2 display.

 

[mealiejimmy]

I have two pals who both had Axion XG35 LRF thermals
Neither has then now - both changed for HIK Condor CQ35/CQ50
Both got fed up with the net curtain effect image typical on virtually all Pulsar thermals

Cheers

Bruce

 

[dlz90]

Does anyone have experience of both the relatively new Pulsar Axion XG35 Compact & the existing Axion 2 XG35?

The Axion XG35 Compact has a 640x400 display whilst the Axion 2 XG35 has a larger 1024x768 display. I’m wondering if the smaller display of the compact model is in practice at much of a disadvantage compared to the Axion 2 display.

The display is more than adequate for use it's wider picture letterbox style if that makes sense, I have used many different pulsars from the xq38f to the helion pro, yes it's display smaller than the 1024/768 but I actually prefer the much smaller axion compact it's perfect for hunting and gets the job done no worries.

Even in terrible weather conditions it will identify the target at range it's very good all round but it's small size making it really good.

Yes it's got the curtain effect to a degree but in actual use you well I don't notice it at all it just works, the ergonomics are fantastic it's really well built like all pulsar units and will last and last pulsar are tough tried and tested hunting thermals.

D

 

[Dari]

Does anyone have experience of both the relatively new Pulsar Axion XG35 Compact & the existing Axion 2 XG35?

The Axion XG35 Compact has a 640x400 display whilst the Axion 2 XG35 has a larger 1024x768 display. I’m wondering if the smaller display of the compact model is in practice at much of a disadvantage compared to the Axion 2 display.

I have tested Axion XG35 Compact for a month. Its main advantage against other similar models is in its compactness.

It really fits into any pocket.

Display resolution is 640x480. I didn’t feel bothered with screen size. It is so close to your eyes that it is more than big enough.

But those terrible thin lines that seems to be Pulsar’s trademark are awful, especially at the beginning. After a while, you will get used to it.

Regarding picture quality, I haven’t seen any difference to previous XG35 LRF model. Due to “Pulsars lines” on screen, it is actually better when watching videos on smartphone or computer screen.

I was able to see roebuck antlers at 100m and even with NETD “only” <40mK, device performed well in fogy conditions, when I adjusted signal amplification and contrast.

If you are looking at something really compact and actually not very expensive, it might be perfect for you.

I believe it is the cheapest 640/35mm monocular at the moment. And also, the most compact.

 

[dlz90]

Regarding the pulsar lines net curtain effect I find it gets better when the device is warmed up it's worse on startup, maybe that's just my interpretation.

But I find when actually viewing a heat source deer or whatever the lines net curtain goes away, again maybe that's just what I see.

Image is IMHO excellent and nothing to worry about, for me it's a tool for a specific purpose and for that it's brilliant.

Also as I've mentioned on other threads the pulsar build quality and robustness is top notch, they are virtually indestructible units this I feel is for me at least the is the most important factor, hunting in all terrains and conditions is very tough on gear.

D

 

[webley701]

Thanks to all for their thoughts & advice, it’s appreciated.

The handiness of the original Axion 2 & new ‘compact’ is a real attraction to me as it promotes always having it available as something which can be put in a pocket when even just taking a walk. To quote the probably apocryphal ‘press photographer’ when asked what his best camera was - his reply - “the one in my hand at the time”.

Ok, there’s more to consider than pure handiness but given the good Pulsar build quality my chief reservation was the smaller display which it appears isn’t really an issue in practice.

On a more general point - I’ve not noticed the ‘net curtain effect’ so far (albeit based on very limited experience), but thinking about it, I’ve only ever looked through Pulsar instruments which were fully warmed up, either owned by friends or at shows.

 

[Foxyboy43]

Hmmm.
I can’t speak for the XGs but I have had the 35XQ for a while now - stunning bit of kit and brilliantly portable be it on a lanyard or in a breast pocket. It just works and has fantastic detection over distance. God forbid but if I lost it I would buy another one.

 

[Jelen]

I bought a Helios 2 XP50. Then I bought a XG35 for the LRF.
I just use the XG35 now as the image is -to my eyes- near enough the same, but it is much more ergonomic to hold and more easily pocketed.

 

[bullet chucker]

I upgraded over a short time from an Axion 30 to the XG35 better picture more detail over further distances, my test was with the 30, a cat or fox walked across the road, I could not be sure what it was? Part ex to the XG35 within weeks.

BC.

 

[Dickie]

If you're not in a rush see if there are any demo evenings coming up in your area where you can look through several makes and their options in your budget and take it from there.

 

[GPCBILL]

I had an XG35lrf and after being out for a session with @mealiejimmy who had a Gryphon i decided to chop my XG in for the CQ50L. The image on the XG was very sub par, in fact @mealiejimmy thought my unit had the 384 sensor rather than the 640 as the image was so bad.

That was my second pulsar but I wouldn't go back.

Cheers

Billy