Any pulsar axion key reviews?
- Thread starter Vance
- Start date
Sneakymedic
New member
I used one hunting last night . I can give you my initial review. I have been a NVG guy and this is a game changer. We did several stands, and the battery life was good. I was able to see (not really identify) deer 1/2 mile away. Very easy to use, controls were easy, and the focus worked well. It was very lightweight, easy to scan with and mine had a lanyard. When the yotes rolled in, all I had to do was drop it and get on the gun. I am in the same boat as you, looking for a thermal monocular. Id rather have video of the shot, so video on the monocular isnt that important to me. The guys I hunt with regularly say for the money, you cant beat it. They are steering me away form the lower end FLIR units. They said the Pulsar has much farther detection and clarity.
Last edited:
Rookietjx2
New member
I own one. For what it is and the price point, it's pretty good. My problem is that my scope is an IR Hunter MK3, so I constantly compare the two and the Pulsar, obviously, isn't close. It does it's job, I watched a coyote about 600 yards away last night. My only real complaint is that the batteries suck, and they're ridiculously expensive. I usually run it down to 25-30 percent, and then stick an Anker battery pack on the side. It works great, but it adds weight.
Kirsch
Active member
The Axion Key XM30 is good for what it is. A lower cost, very compact monocular. For those looking for a better image and more FOV, the Pulsar Helion XP units are fantastic.
Another option is the Hogster-R 25mm and 35mm. I have a comparison chart of the Axion Key XM30/Hogster-R 25mm below. The Hogster weighs more and is a little thicker and longer especially due to the eyecup, and QD mount. I commented because many wished the Axion Key had a wider FOV, and the Hogster has more than double the FOV. It can also be used as a weapon's site.
Another comment was it is hard on batteries. You can use 2-CR123 rechargeables with the Hogster. They run about 3.5 hrs from my in-house (warm) testing. However, you can get the 3.7 volt rechargables for under $4 a battery on Amazon. They charge fairly fast and last a decent amount even in cold temps. My hunting partner gets about 5 stands out of a set of batteries even in below freezing temps.
Another option is the Hogster-R 25mm and 35mm. I have a comparison chart of the Axion Key XM30/Hogster-R 25mm below. The Hogster weighs more and is a little thicker and longer especially due to the eyecup, and QD mount. I commented because many wished the Axion Key had a wider FOV, and the Hogster has more than double the FOV. It can also be used as a weapon's site.
Another comment was it is hard on batteries. You can use 2-CR123 rechargeables with the Hogster. They run about 3.5 hrs from my in-house (warm) testing. However, you can get the 3.7 volt rechargables for under $4 a battery on Amazon. They charge fairly fast and last a decent amount even in cold temps. My hunting partner gets about 5 stands out of a set of batteries even in below freezing temps.
Kirsch
Active member
Originally Posted By: VanceKorey,
What Micron is better the 12 or 17 and what does that do for you?
It isn't one is better than another. However, the lower the micron rating, delivers more magnification with the same lens size. This is why the Pulsar XM series has such high native magnification. This allows a manufacturer to use a smaller lens to get to a similar magnification at a lower price point (since the Germanium lenses are so expensive). However, smaller lens sizes typically struggle in higher humidity. I explain some of the thermal jargon on this old thread.
Most people would say the lower the micron rating the better and typically this is true, but not if you are sacrificing resolution as well as field of view.
The current models using the BAE cores (Trijicon and N-Vision) are 12 micron 640x480 resolution, but are also 3x the price of the units we are discussing.
What Micron is better the 12 or 17 and what does that do for you?
It isn't one is better than another. However, the lower the micron rating, delivers more magnification with the same lens size. This is why the Pulsar XM series has such high native magnification. This allows a manufacturer to use a smaller lens to get to a similar magnification at a lower price point (since the Germanium lenses are so expensive). However, smaller lens sizes typically struggle in higher humidity. I explain some of the thermal jargon on this old thread.
Most people would say the lower the micron rating the better and typically this is true, but not if you are sacrificing resolution as well as field of view.
The current models using the BAE cores (Trijicon and N-Vision) are 12 micron 640x480 resolution, but are also 3x the price of the units we are discussing.
Kirsch
Active member
I haven't used the Key XM30 or XM22 as the FOV is small on both for what I would use it for. When you start talking about that small of an objective, plus add it is a 320 core vs 384 or 640, I would have to assume it will struggle in humidity. Again, this is only a guess as I haven't used it personally. If all you are trying to do is see a hot object and switch to a gun, OK.
What I try to stress to people is as coyote hunters, this is what you are using 95% of the time. I want to do more than see a blurry picture for 8-12 hours of hunting during the night. Thermals are expensive and I realize it is all may can afford, but I prefer a good to very good image on my scanners.
What I try to stress to people is as coyote hunters, this is what you are using 95% of the time. I want to do more than see a blurry picture for 8-12 hours of hunting during the night. Thermals are expensive and I realize it is all may can afford, but I prefer a good to very good image on my scanners.