Home › Models › Thermal monoculars › Compare

Pulsar Axion XM30F vs Pulsar Telos XQ35

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.

Pulsar's entry-level 320×240 thermal monocular: 30 mm F1.2 lens, 3x base magnification, APS 3 swappable battery, IPX7, 310 g.
no live Amazon listing tracked
The 384×288 Telos: 35 mm lens, 3x base magnification, 1024×768 display and the big 6,400 mAh LPS 7i battery in the upgradeable Telos body.
no live Amazon listing tracked

Specification side by side

Pulsar Axion XM30FPulsar Telos XQ35
TechnologyThermalThermal
Sensor320×240384×288
Pixel pitch12 µm17 µm
NETD≤50 mK≤25 mK
Lens30 mm35 mm
Magnification3–12x3–12x
Digital zoomup to 4xup to 4x
Detection range1,300 m1,300 m
Field of view7.8°10.7°
DisplayAMOLED 640x400AMOLED 1024x768
Recordingphoto and videophoto and video
Wi-Fi / appyesyes
Battery lifeup to 7 hup to 8.5 h
BatteryAPS 3 removable Li-ion 3200 mAhLPS 7i removable Li-ion 6400 mAh
Weight310 g570 g
Water resistanceIPX7IPX7

Sources: Pulsar Axion XM30F (spec page); Pulsar Telos XQ35 (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: Pulsar Axion XM30F · Pulsar Telos XQ35 · 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