Kirsch
Active member
I was recently asked to do a side by side comparison of the Pulsar Helion XP38 thermal scanner and the Bering Optics Hogster-R 35mm thermal scope/scanner, as I own both. The recorded video is never as good as what it looks like through the eyepiece. However, the Pulsar difference in quality of the view through the eyepiece and the resulting video was greater on the Helion (internal recording) than the Hogster (DVR) on this night. Also, the Pulsar brightness seemed fine in the eyepiece, but recorded a little on the dark side. In addition since the Hogster is a thermal weapon's sight, it was mounted on a rifle giving a little more stability, so a steadier video.
What this video should show is the Hogster-R is a very capable thermal. On most nights, I would say this very reasonably priced 384x288 thermal is almost as good image-wise as my Pulsar Helion XP38. It can spot and ID animals at least as far and at times at further distances.
New Comparison Video
Here is a chart comparing the two. To summarize the chart, the Pulsar has a slight edge in image quality, has a wider FOV, and has a longer battery life. The Bering Optics has a slight advantage in detection, is smaller, considerably less expensive, and can be a weapon's sight. Both are very good thermals and I own both.
What this video should show is the Hogster-R is a very capable thermal. On most nights, I would say this very reasonably priced 384x288 thermal is almost as good image-wise as my Pulsar Helion XP38. It can spot and ID animals at least as far and at times at further distances.
New Comparison Video
Here is a chart comparing the two. To summarize the chart, the Pulsar has a slight edge in image quality, has a wider FOV, and has a longer battery life. The Bering Optics has a slight advantage in detection, is smaller, considerably less expensive, and can be a weapon's sight. Both are very good thermals and I own both.