What scope you going to try next?

Just got tracking from Pulsar that a shipment of Pulsar Thermion XP50 1.9-15.2x42 Thermal Riflescopes are on the way into us.

http://www.predatormastersforums.co...=showflat&Number=3246864#Post3246864

On another forum in a galaxy far far away....

This user states Pulsar stayed in an email to him that the Thermion XQ50 DOES NOT have the new ‘2’ (40 mK) core

Still Waiting On My Trail 2 XP50LRF

We've got 3 left

I believe that to be true because Pulsar (the factory in Europe) took the 40mk comments out of the specs on their website a couple months before the Thermin XQ's were released. To be quite honest, I feel it's doesn't matter at all since no one would know unless Pulsar told us. The image quality on the XQ beats the XM, hands down, no questions asked, so we got the improvement promised, it just didn't have the obscure specs under the hood we thought it did. Until Pulsar brought up the mK ratings in January, essentially no one outside of the manufacturers, knew what it was or cared. I think it's fine that it's a specification we're all more familiar with now but I think what we're seeing is what many of us have been preaching for a long time....you can't judge scope by the specs alone. There are so many variables including quality of the parts, display screens, thermal cores, objective lenses, germanium lenses, eye piece lenses and one of the biggest, the quality of the firmware running the thermal core.....there is so much that goes into a scope that specs alone don't tell the whole story. That doesn't mean they aren't important, they are a great baseline but Pulsar proved with the new XQ's that you can make a 17 micron optic look better than a 12 micron optic and they are running the exact same brand thermal core at that.

On a side note, the AGM Asp's are 35mK and they look really good, especially for the money but they don't quite meet the image quality of the Pulsar Helion XQ's at 50mK. Otherwise, they have very similar specs. Again, this just shows that there is so much that goes into these optics that most of us (chiefly me!) will just never understand.

Jason

Hey Jason -

I understand the many issues in your business (Industry) with how units perform and what specs they show on paper.

I’ll have to respectfully disagree with your points on the XQ50 and new sensor systems by Pulsar - I don’t mean to disagree as a personal affront to you or Pulsar - my position of disagreement is from the perspective as a buyer (end-user)

Simply put, what I spend my $ 3799.00 on, I expect to perform as stated to the specs and perform inline with those specs. Early adopters usually have it toughest when product specs are unknown or shift at the last minute and that’s just part of being an early adopter.

My disagreement with your comments are on the aspect that the new sensor specs are “obscure” and that we wouldn’t know as end-users had Pulsar not stated their new specifications.

An image boost tweak through firmware to an existing core is much different than a new core with better themal sensitivity and it’s videos such as the ones below that illustrate an apparent and marked difference in the sensor.





After watching and rewatching this video - 100 times out of 100 - I’m spending my $ 3799 on the new sensor being that folks can buy early models of the scopes from old stock on hand (in circulation/inventory) for the same price...

This to me is just all part of being an informed customer/buyer and not so much about the challenges that manufactures , vendors, dealers, have in relating specs to real world performance.

I’m fairly certain that if you put an older core “series 1” scope and a “series 2” scope In my hands I wouldn’t need a spec sheet to tell that one gives a better image than the other.

After 4 hunts with my XQ50, having owned mutiple APEX, and used multiple Series 1 pulsar thermals I could tell I wasn’t getting any image improvement. This wasn’t sitting right with me based on some of the SHOT show chatter and current ads on some websites indicating the XQ50 has the newest core.

That would be correct, the only sub 40mK sensors will be in all the 2’s. (The Helions 2’s, Acolade 2 and Trail 2’s) I’ve looked though them before and there is quite a difference close up seeing the details and not just outlines like a lot of thermals in the market. Not sure if they advertised that the XQ50’s would have that sensor or not.

Doug,

The confusion enters with the Thermion, the units you listed are outlined as Series 2 sensors on Pulsar’s website :

https://www.pulsar-nv.com/glo/blog-...-unprecedented-thermal-sensitivity/2173/

While the Thermion isn’t named or listed on this Pulsar Blog update if you click through the specs pages on Pulsar’s website you’ll find that the < 40mK core is listed for the Thermion XP38 and XP50.

All of this was coming to light around SHOT 2020 when Pulsar also revealed “New” models of Thermion XQ38 and XQ50 would be released and that is where the cart got a little ahead of the horse with regards to it having the Series 2 sensor.

Which recently was revealed the XQ Thermions do not .

Pig Popper, no problem and I don't take anything personally from you, I know you have the best intentions and I respect your opinions. This is a friendly discussion as far as I'm concerned. I also don't want this to look like I'm blindly standing up for Pulsar or any other company. I do believe Pulsar made the mistake of giving information early on that later changed, just as they said in that email you referenced in that link to the other forum.

I should also admit, I'm slightly confused at what you mean by "series 1" and "series 2" and showing the videos etc. I'm just not quite following which particular model scopes you think look better or don't look better.

My point about the mK rating is simply that before January of this year, I'd never heard any thermal manufacturer tout that millikelvin rating and quite honestly, I'm not sure I'd ever even seen it listed as a line item on a spec sheet for a thermal scope. To this day, I have no idea what the mK rating is on the BAE 12 micron core that Trijicon and N-Vision use in their optics which are undeniably the best thermal optics on the US market. This discussion of mK ratings amongst thermal end users is new and to my knowledge is started in January with the new push by Pulsar. I don't mean to to say it doesn't matter at all, but it's sort of like 12 microns vs 17 microns, it's important on paper and not something that I'd totally dismiss but what I really care about is what the image looks like through the eye piece. The FLIR PTS233 was 12 microns while the Pulsar RXQ30V is 17 microns. In my opinion the RXQ has a slightly better image quality than the PTS233 and even if that point is debatable, everyone would agree that they are darn near the same. My point is, we all know that 12 microns is better than 17.....but is it? There are so many other factors that come into play and pulling that one spec out of the hat isn't a fair way to judge a whole optic. So in the end, all I ask is, what does the image quality look like through the eye piece? mK rating improvement or not....has the image quality improved over the previous model?

My answer to that is, the Thermion XQ 17 micron is hands down a better image quality than the previous Thermion XM 12 micron sensor. The XQ shows more detail than the XM and it's very clear when they are put side by side. It is, without any question an upgrade from the XM. That is what was promised by Pulsar and I believe the evidence shows that is what was delivered. If you're talking about something different then I'm very sorry for going off on rabbit trail because again, I might not be following your comments exactly as intended.

I would reference this video by Col. Chester Cupp as to the improvement between the Thermion XQ50 3.5x and the previous Thermion XM38 4x (with the latest firmware updates). Full disclosure, Col. Cupp is my prostaff writer. He purchased the XM38 from me for his own personal scope last year when it was released and this year he purchased the XQ50 from me after testing it because of what he believes is a large image quality update. He made this video to show the improvement and he made every attempt to adjust the settings to where both images looked as close to the same as possible. In other words he didn't manipulate the videos as some video creators have done in the past and I'm sure we've all see somewhere or another.



At the end of the day, I hope this helps explain my thoughts and comments that I originally made above.

- Jason

Hey Jason, its all good - glad we can discuss and have different positions and understand why each of us takes the position we do on things.

Series 1 = Gen 1 = scopes with original series sensor

Series 2 = Gen 2 = '2' in the model name by Pulsar = <40mK cores

I wasn't really ever debating which scopes looked better across models, rather I was strictly looking at what the image improvements were within a model consistent with the videos above where Gen1 and Gen2 sensors of the Accolade, Helion, and Trail were compared side by side.

In my original posts when I give a little of my personal history ahead of the launch of the XQ50 Thermion, I stated that I wasn't impressed by the image of any of the recent models of Pulsar scopes - they didn't seem to out class my APEX XQ50, at least not enough for me to justify spending 4k or more to upgrade.

I'm sure I'd feel differently if I looked through a Gen2 Trail or Thermion but that ship has sailed for me - I go hunting tonight with my new scope which, to your point, I couldn't even tell you what NeTD rating it has

I forwarded this thread to my Pulsar Tech rep and he just replied:

“Everything Jason posted was correct. Anything with a 2 designation will have the new 35mk sensor. The Thermion XQ's don't currently utilize a 35mk sensor, but probably will eventually, when the sensor manufacturer gets production up to full capacity on those.”

Thanks, in my opinion that will be a VERY solid unit when and if it ever gets produced....

A Thermion XQ50 (3.5x native mag) with a Gen 2 "Series 2" <40 mK sensor for 3799.00 would be an awesome value (bang for the buck).

It looks like I will wait a bit to purchase a XQ50. After spending $3795 on a FLIR 536 that went tits up 4 times in 18 months, and finally getting a refund, I am what you might call "gun shy" . Time to get back to lighting dogs and hogs up with a light and hope my wife doesn't find the mason jar hid the $3795 in.

To further confound things, I believe the Pulsar Thermion XP-50 will have the < 40mK sensor, too, and despite lacking the “2” moniker.

M

Correct. All Thermion XP units from at least January 1, 2020 have the 40mk sensor in them according to Pulsar.

Jason