Pulsar Merger LRF XT50 unboxed and field tested

[@jimwood]

Wow they look a cracking bit of kit, and that stabilisation feature will be very useful 👍

[@mrspeakman4021]

I will never be able to buy a pair of these, but it is a dream 😊

[@thomasjacksltd]

I'll post some more videos for you, to help with your dreams! 😴

[@mrspeakman4021]

@@thomasjacksltd Lmao thank you 😌

[@neurobook]

How are the batteries? I have the XP 50 and they could be better, much better. Are the batteries the same? Otherwise I’m looking to upgrade.

[@thomasjacksltd]

You should be getting up to 9hrs on your XP50 before you need change batteries. I believe that's significantly longer than its main competitors (who give battery life for using all the spare batteries they supply with it). The XT50 is up to 8hrs, because of the larger sensor and display. Just remember battery performance in any product will be impacted to some extent by the outside temperature.

[@GGGGGGGGGG96]

Its very nice but for this price I would choose the hikmicro habrok hx60l which provides much more features.

[@billyyoung1630]

Hikmicro Habrok Pro has the same resolution, with a visible light 4k camera for dual use, and also has the electronic image stability that Pulsar is claiming to be unique to them only, to top it off they're advertising

[@TFSimple]

I agree. Leaving the price to the side, the

[@thomasjacksltd]

We can't find anything to indicate the Habrok has image stabilisation: It's not in the spec sheet for the product, it's not on Hikmicros website, I also just watched a few reviews for it and no one mentions it. Yes there's a difference in price but if you want the best thermal... you get what you pay for.

[@thomasjacksltd]

​@@TFSimple There's a big difference: Habrok:

[@Countryoutdoorsmankeith]

BillyYoung i have been to a Demo recently in the SW of england and looked though both of these units and others, as I was questioning the same, as I am looking to upgrade from my Accoldaes XP50s, but there is a Big Diference between the units Habrok pros and Mergers, I firstly looked at the habrok, as there stand was as less busy at the time, yes the habroks feel like a normal pair of binos and yes it has Thermal, day, night, etc, But boy are they heavy! I thought what a unit to have all these features in... BUT! when you actually look into the specs of the Habrok, they are not as superior to the Mergers, despite it saying so on paper, the Day channel was very laggy and seem to have a delay when scanning from left to right this was the same on the Thermal channel as well as giving a very cartoony image also, it almost seems like the habroks are running to hard by software or something and cant keep up with it, if you scan to quick, it would make you feel kind of sea sick. if you stood still looking over one area they work great. Whereas the Mergers XT50s, yes it is only a Thermal with LRF, which is a downside for most, but the thermal image is much shaprer and more of a life like image, over a cartoony slow image from HIK, I just don't understand that on paper the habroks are better than the Pulsar, but when you get them in you hands Pulsar still seem to have the edge in my opinion, id be interested to know where both Pulsar and Hik get there specs from, as something doesn't add up to me, can anyone else share any light?

[@thomasjacksltd]

@@Countryoutdoorsmankeith Great tip to test them out for yourself - we've loads of demo's planned, where you can talk to our experts too: thomasjacks.co.uk/events-calendar/#1707305968742-edef5ee3-4272

[@OSOK7]

Don't waste your money if you have the XL50's ... Pulsar are having us on , by reducing the base mag to 2x from 2.6x their giving you the same amount of pixels as the XL's ( 1024 sensor ) but on a wider area due to FOV ... each pixel on the XL & XT is 24mm !

[@thomasjacksltd]

The XT has 1.3 million pixels in its sensor. The XL has 786 thousand. The XT also has a much larger display, so it will deliver a better viewing experience. However, both are top end thermal binoculars, that out-perform the market in many regards, so choosing between them might be difficult until you try both for yourself, for whatever criteria you choose to prioritise (eg FOV, or Mag). I just want to add - hands up anyone who owned a Helion XP50 Pro and thought it couldn't be improved on? 🖐Keep on innovating Pulsar!

[@OSOK7]

@@thomasjacksltd Yes the XT has more pixels but their spread over a wider area making the pixel size the same The FOV on the Merger XL50 is 24.6m ( 2.6x ) at 100m so 24,600 divided by 1024 sensor size is 24.02mm per pixel The FOV on the Merger XT50 is 30.7m ( 2.0x ) at 100m so 30,700 divided by 1280 sensor size is 23.98mm per pixel It is obvious there is no gain with the XT's over the XL's even if you look at the detection distance .... It hasn't increased ! I would have bought the new Pulsar XT's and upgraded had they not tried to con us , Most people with see the 1280 sensor and be fooled ... The new Hik Habrok 1280 sensor has better pixel density with each pixel being only 20mm so a real advantage .... Only for them to put a 25hz refresh rate on their flagship unit ... Crazy !

[@OSOK7]

@@thomasjacksltd KZbin didn't post my reply ..... The FOV on the Merger XL50 is 24.6m ( 2.5x ) at 100m so 24,600 divided by 1024 sensor size is 24.02mm The FOV on the Merger XT50 is 30.7m ( 2.0x ) at 100m so 30,700 divided by 1280 sensor size is 23.98mm.... NO gain at all !

[@thomasjacksltd]

​@@OSOK7 That's the effective width of one pixel at 100m at the base mag. The main advantage of the XT is the overall extra width in FOV - so you see more on the periphery. Also if you digitally zoom the XT to 2.5x (so they're at the same magnification) you're looking at 1.05m pixels on the XT, versus 786k on the XL. If your XL is doing the job you need it to do, stick with it - It'll serve you well for years. For anyone in the market to buy - they have a choice and the extra FOV on the XT might be enough to seal it. (So we're both not doubling effort answering the same point - I'll remove the identical query on our TJ Focus channel)