Home › Models › Thermal monoculars › Compare

AGM Taipan TM25-384 vs Pulsar Axion Compact XG35

Two thermal monoculars compared on the makers' own figures. Rows in bold are where they differ; a dash means that maker does not publish the figure.

AGM's first-generation 384×288 pocket thermal with a 25 mm lens, 50 Hz, 7.5-hour battery and IP67 body; discontinued in favour of the Taipan V2.
no live Amazon listing tracked
A 640×480 sensor in Pulsar's smallest body: 35 mm lens, 12.5° field of view, 64 GB memory, APS 3 battery, 300 g without battery.
no live Amazon listing tracked

Specification side by side

AGM Taipan TM25-384Pulsar Axion Compact XG35
TechnologyThermalThermal
Sensor384×288640×480
Pixel pitch12 µm12 µm
NETD≤35 mK≤40 mK
Lens25 mm35 mm
Magnification2.5–20x2.5–20x
Digital zoomup to 8xup to 8x
Detection range1,180 m1,750 m
Field of view10.5°12.5°
DisplayLCOS 1280x960AMOLED 640x400
Recordingphoto and videophoto and video
Wi-Fi / appyesyes
Battery lifeup to 7.5 hup to 7 h
Batterybuilt-in Li-ionAPS 3 removable Li-ion 3200 mAh
Weight313 g300 g
Water resistanceIP67IPX7

Sources: AGM Taipan TM25-384 (spec page); Pulsar Axion Compact XG35 (spec page). Detection ranges are for a 1.8 m object under each maker's own test conditions and are not directly comparable between brands.

Full pages: AGM Taipan TM25-384 · Pulsar Axion Compact XG35 · all thermal monoculars in stock today

Specifications are the manufacturers' published figures. Prices are Amazon.co.uk at our last daily check. As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases. More