Many people have probably already heard but this week Pulsar announced the new Axion XQ38 and XQ38 LRF (laser range finder) thermal monoculars. We don't know everything about the monoculars yet, especially, exactly what the image quality will look like but here are the facts we know so far...

Axion XQ38 - $2,499
3.5x base magnification
384x288 core resolution
17 microns
HD AMOLED display
Video recording
Stream Vision app

Axion XQ38 LRF - $2,799
3.5x base magnification
384x288 core resolution
17 microns
HD AMOLED display
No video recording
No Stream Vision app

Preliminary ETA for the first units to hit the US is around mid to late October.

They will use a new removable rechargeable battery pack called the APS5 that appears to have a slightly different style connector than the APS2 and APS3 and it will sit behind a round twist lock battery cap that previous Axion models do not have. Otherwise the units look extremely similar to the current Axions.

The XQ38 dimensions show to be 6.6" long, 1.9" wide and 2.9" tall and 12oz. Alternatively the current XM30S is 5.6" long, 1.6" wide and 2.7 tall and weighs about 9oz. My understanding is the XQ units had to be larger because of the XQ 384 thermal cores.

These models look exciting since the hope and expectation is to gain some image quality improvement over the current Axion XM series. I'm not at all expecting these to be replacements for the Helion yet because I don't expect that kind of image quality but I'm hoping it's a nice step up from the XM models and if so, the price is very attractive.

I already asked the question a couple weeks ago; why is there no video recording and no Stream Vision app on the LRF model and the answer was simply, "price". If they would have included those options the price would have obviously risen and there was clearly a desire to keep the price under $3,000 and to be honest, I don't see the loss of recording and streaming to be a big deal at all. I'm sure some people will wish it was there but if dropping those features keeps the price down on this caliber of a handheld, I'm all for it.

Now the waiting game begins. Hans and I will be reviewing them on The Late Night Vision Show as soon as we get our hands on them, so stay tuned.


- Jason

Thanks for the update Jason. May be time to upgrade from my XD38A Quantum handheld. Interested to see how you would compare the new model to the old 38mm monoculars. I wouldn't care for on board recording since I have it on my XQ50 Trail. Would the LRF on the handheld be the same as the one on the scopes or it that something they cut cost on?

The LRF version sounds really great.

Wow, yet another proprietary and super expensive battery from Pulsar. What is the matter with those people?

My understanding is, the LRF should function like it does on the Trail LRF's for the most part. As soon as I get it in the field, I'll know for sure, but I haven't seen or heard anything that would lead me to believe it's a big step down.




I understand the concern but I believe the proprietary batteries (and internal batteries) by more and more manufactures is a reaction to the public out cry for many years from customers complaining about expensive CR123A batteries, short runt times and bulky and heavy external battery packs. I believe we are going to see more and more scopes move to internal non-removable batteries as well, and no, I don't believe that is a long term good thing. The issue is, most all electronics have gone this way. Remember the days of cell phones and removable batteries? Long gone. Even most laptops no longer have removable batteries. iPads, Kindles, bluetooth speakers, kids toys, everything has gone this direction and I don't see it changing. Again, I'm not saying it's a great thing but there are pros and cons for sure and this is the way the world has moved.

As for the proprietary batteries, I've been told exactly what Pulsar is thinking... here are the options:

A) Make a feature rich scope that uses CR123A batteries and gets 1.5-2.5 hours max per 2 batteries (best case is $3 total for those two batteries but realistically most people pay $4-$6+ for that run time)
B) Use 100% internal batteries and get very long run time but all the concerns we'd both have come into play.
C) Use proprietary removable batteries to get 2x to 5x the run time of CR123A batteries
D) A combo of B & C (ie: Thermions)

There is absolutely no question that the market has spoken and people want B, C or D. Option A isn't even a consideration for the vast majority of users buying a $3,000+ thermal. The biggest customer gripe I hear on a weekly basis from guys who are buying sub-$3,000 scopes or above $6,000 is always the same thing...."I HATE buying those stupid CR123A batteries and I don't want a bunch of wires and a bulky battery hanging off my rifle."

DNS, to be clear, I'm not saying you're wrong, I'm just saying the market has spoken and while people might complain that the Axion only gets 3-4 hours of run time on a charge or that the Thermion only gets 4.5-6 hours of run time, the only reason they are complaining is because the Helions and Trails get 6-20 hours of run time. None of those guys complaining really want to go back to CR123A batteries.

I truly believe this; if consumers in mass get upset enough about internal and proprietary batteries and complain enough and quit buying scopes, the manufacturers will change, but I don't see that happening.

I'm realizing more and more how old I'm getting as the technology moves forward and I left in the dust.haha


Jason